No Pres. Obama didn’t draw a line in the sand about Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

  And no he didn’t tell the terrorist to,”bring it on”.

 But what he did do must have taken an immense amount of will.

  Today , on that stage in Missouri, our President had the courage to state without doubt the he is against waste and inefficiency in the government’s health care system. I only hope that someone in that audience began a chant of “hurrah,hurrah” for our brave courageous leader. 

 But wait, for this tale does not end there. Not only did our fearless President denounce waste and inefficiencies in the health care system, oh no not just that. He also, with a singal slash  of his executive pen , directed his Cabinet secretaries and agency heads to intensify their use of private auditors to root out fraud within the system.

  Does our brave leader not know the danger that he puts himself in by pitting himself against the axis of evil, waste, inefficiency and fraud.

  We can only hope that if he can survive this battle, that he has the strength to denounce people who kick puppies.

Less than one week ago, President Obama stood before an assembled audience of hand- picked sympathizers on healthcare reform at the White House and called on Congress to pass his healthcare reform package into law… again.

Having spent his entire year long presidency singularly focused on passing a massive, trillion dollar, federal government takeover of the healthcare industry in America, and failed — Obama had a couple of choices going forward. With an American public now solidly against his healthcare proposal, and his Democrat margins in both houses of Congress now a wee bit slimmer, Obama was forced to choose between either a) substantially altering his healthcare proposal to make it more palatable and bipartisan as he claims is his goal, or b) forging ahead with virtually the same heavy-handed government takeover package and hope to woo skeptical Americans and Democratic lawmakers by the sheer force of his personality.

In Obama’s speech – a rather short one for him of only 21 minutes – he made it clear that he is opting for Plan B. Obama stated: “No matter which approach you favor, I believe the U.S. Congress owes the American people a final vote on healthcare reform. We have debated this issue thoroughly. Not just for the past year, but for decades. Reform has already passed the House with a majority. It has already passed the Senate with a super-majority of 60 votes. And now it deserves the same kind of up-or-down vote that was cast on welfare reform, that was cast on the children’s health insurance program, that was used for cobra health coverage for the unemployed, and by the way for both Bush tax cuts, all of which had to pass Congress with nothing more than a simple majority.”

In other words, he plans to utilize budget reconciliation to pass ObamaCare, which requires only a simple majority in both chambers. And Obama appealed to history, citing five specific examples of major legislation that was passed using reconciliation.

Here’s the only problem with Obama’s appeal: every bill he cited was passed with bipartisan support. This is, of course, precisely the opposite of what is occurring on ObamaCare, where the minority party is unanimously opposed to the entire package. In fact, reconciliation has been used nearly 20 times since it’s origination in 1981, but never once in a completely partisan fashion to pass major social legislation. Not once.

A quick review of the actual legislation Obama cited shows example after example of bipartisan support. Both Bush tax cuts were passed with Democrat votes in both chambers. Cobra was enacted in 1986 with a Republican controlled White House and Senate and a Democrat controlled House. Landmark welfare reform was passed by a Republican controlled Congress (with 125 Democrat votes from both chambers) and signed into law by President Clinton, as was the Children’s Health Program in 1997 within the Balanced Budget Act.

Republican claims that Obama’s intended use of reconciliation to pass his version of healthcare reform is unprecedented (what the word really means, not how Obama uses it) and hyper partisan is absolutely true. It would be complimenting Obama to say he was being merely disingenuous in his stated reason for using reconciliation.

In the same speech noted above, Obama portended to take the high road by maintaining “I do not know how this plays politically, but I know it’s right” and saying he would “provide the leadership” the American people so desperately want on healthcare reform. Perhaps Obama is genuine in stating he does not know how this will play politically, but Americans seem to know instinctively, and they are not calling it leadership, they’re calling it a lie.

Derek Baker is a contributor to ALG News

The buzz afterward was enthusiastic among her supporters and friends.   Comments were to the effect that she struck the right tone.  If the faith in the room could be translated to the electorate, she would win in a landslide.  The problem is making the connection with the larger electorate.  Will her ability to connect with the faithful be enough to win over the good will earned by the Congressman over the years?   That is the question.

From The Citizen

At a March 1925 international birth control gathering in New York City, a speaker warned of the menace posed by the “black” and “yellow” peril. The man was not a Nazi or Klansman; he was Dr. S. Adolphus Knopf, a member of Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League (ABCL), which along with other groups eventually became known as Planned Parenthood.

Sanger’s other colleagues included avowed and sophisticated racists. One, Lothrop Stoddard, was a Harvard graduate and the author of The Rising Tide of Color against White Supremacy. Stoddard was something of a Nazi enthusiast who described the eugenic practices of the Third Reich as “scientific” and “humanitarian.” And Dr. Harry Laughlin, another Sanger associate and board member for her group, spoke of purifying America’s human “breeding stock” and purging America’s “bad strains.” These “strains” included the “shiftless, ignorant, and worthless class of antisocial whites of the South.”

Thanks in part to the leadership of Dr. Martin L. King Jr.’s niece, Dr. Alveda C. King, this bill may get passed. It would provide a most interesting test case to challenge Roe. I welcome it.

  Thanks to a lot of hard work on my part and that of two other hard-working drivers at my company we have been able to get caught  up, and with a minimum of out of gas calls.  Let me just say to those guys and they know who they are, thanks guys, it was a team effort.

  Now, let me get right to the point of this post. Since I have been so busy at work I have had little time to even keep up with much of what has been going on in the world of politics, local or national. What I was able to witness was a lot of snow and the effect that it had on our state.

  For those of you who live in Delaware and especially Sussex County, I’m sure I don’t have to tell you that the recent snow storms had a crippling effect . It has been described as being a once in thirty year event.

  During the storms and after I heard a lot of people, both inside government and ordinary citizens giving high praise to Del DOT and the guys driving the plow trucks.

  Let me join in with my praise for the plow drivers. They worked long hours, in difficult conditions. I can relate to this , as my job requires the same of me. As for the way Del DOT handled the event , well let me just say that in my opinion, it was lacking. This is no reflection on the individual employees. I feel that there is a systemic flaw in the planning for , and the implementation of the states snow emergency strategy .

  Now some may ask, why must we plan for an event that may only happen once in thirty years ? Well your house may only catch fire once in thirty years, but you don’t wait until it is on fire to go out and buy a fire extinguisher. And personally as someone who drives for a living I have to say that Delaware falls short in removing snow , no matter the amount.

  I have been driving for the same company for over twenty-nine years, both in Delaware and Maryland. The difference in the way that the two states are able to handle an event such as we experienced is dramatic.

  Let me relate to you what I experienced three days after the storm that brought close to two feet of snow to the Bridgeville and Seaford areas.  I had to make a delivery over the Maryland state line out past Reliance. I had been fighting conditions on the Delaware side that ranged from solid packed snow and ice , to what can only be described as a washboard of ice and bare road. In some spots the road was a single lane. In many places there was no shoulder for an emergency such as a flat tire or a break down. Either of which could have completely choked up the road. Let me be clear, I am not talking about some back county road, but Rt. 20 out of Seaford. This was typical of most of the main routes that I had been driving on during this same day, such as Rt.24 between Millsboro and Rehoboth, Rt.9 between Bridgeville and Georgetown, Rt.113 a dual highway no less from Georgetown to Millsboro. Again, this was two to three days after the storm.

  Now some have defended Del DOT by saying that no one could have anticipated such a storm. Well apparently someone in Maryland did. That night as I drove from Seaford on what I describe as dangerous Delaware roads I passed into Maryland. What I experienced was shocking. The road was cleared from shoulder to shoulder, down to bare pavement, not a spot of snow or ice . Now, so no one thinks this was some sort of anomaly, let me tell you that I also drove from Reliance over to Federalsburge and then back into Delaware on Rt.18 in Delaware. All together I drove around twenty miles in Maryland. Every road I was on was the same, completely clear. But as soon as I crossed the Delaware state line , again the difference was shocking. I was back to a washboard surface , no shoulders and often a single snow-covered lane of travel.

  I voiced my disappointment with the way Delaware handled the situation as compared to our regional neighbor. One notable person who responded, was 41st Dist. Representative John Atkins. Mr. Atkins stated that he felt that Maryland was able to do a better job of clearing the roads because the citizens of Maryland pay higher taxes. That because of the way that Maryland breaks down the job by county and state, give them an advantage . I also heard a news spot with 35th Dist. Representative Dave Wilson giving praise for the way Del DOT handled the situation.

  I won’t argue that Maryland pays higher taxes, I do contend that Maryland pays higher taxes and does a better job of clearing the roads after a snow event for the same reason that Delaware pays lower taxes and does a lousy job of clearing the roads. Because government has lost it’s focus of what it’s role is supposed to be.

  Now I’m not sure whether Del DOT needs to purchase more equipment or if they need better training in plowing, or maybe think of contracting more outside help when the need arrives. I do know that we need to look at our strategy and work at being prepared for such events.

  As for the need of paying higher taxes to accomplish this, well I don’t think that is necessary. The problem isn’t that government needs more money to do that which is the purpose of government, the question is , is government spending our tax dollars in the manner that best serves the people of the state?

  I contend that until the state and local governments are able to accomplish the basic obligations of their offices, then we should see no spending on things best left to the private sector. If our state cannot afford to clear our roads after a snow event, then tell me why we are paying for needles for junkies? Maybe the counties should take on the responsibility of clearing the back county roads, but of course this might mean that the county council would be unable to donate thousands of dollars to Little League organizations and other private groups.

  Government should have a narrowly defined role in our lives. This should not include government funding of programs that can only encourage drug use. It should not include the funding of groups that can raise funds privately. It should not include mandated health care. Why do our state Representatives and Senators have funds for discretionary spending ? Could these funds not be put to better use clearing roads after snow events, rather than being used to buy votes ?

  Our state can’t adequately clear the snow from the roads, yet we spend millions to increase the role of government through ever-expanding government programs.

 Let us get back to basics, clear the roads and keep the peace.

Leaving aside her grandeur, what attorney did not explain to her that the High Court has ruled that parody is a free speech. People are allowed to poke fun at you without paying off to you.

E-trade is laughing this off. It just revives the buzz around the commercial.

The larger issue of frivolous lawsuits is not laughing matter. They are estimated to cost the American business community $865 billion. That is like taking away 6% of our economy from productive uses such as research and development, new energy investments, plant investment, expansion, marketing, and new product launches. It is money that could be used to help make America more competitive in the global economy. Instead, it is like a tying ankle weights to a runner who is ready to compete in a big race. Look at the lawsuits against Toyota. Are they to force the car maker to take safety precautions? No, they are already doing it themselves. It is for alleged devaluing of the resale value of the cars. Since when was that an entitlement?

I support the right to sue for injury and damages. I support the right to get paid well and the attorneys to get paid handsomely. I do not support nonsense multibillion dollar class action suits designed to get consumers coupons and make lawyer’s billionaires. I do not support the sword of Damocles hanging over every business for every decision. Every ad, every label, every recall to protect their costumers should not be a potential pitfall. Peanuts should not have to carry labels which say warning contains nuts.

Let’s restore a culture of common sense by no longer winking at frivolity.

That is my opinion. I welcome yours.