This shows once again how little conviction the President has. Days after announcing a spending freeze to help with the budget deficit, he makes exceptions for his favorite voting block. It also proves that the little he tries to do always has a political calculus. He has had a completely unsuccessful first year and is well on his way to another one.

Republicans are exited about their prospects for 2010. However, I’m praying for 2012 to get here faster before President Obama completely destroys the country.

It seems that the Democrat’s trouncing in Virginia and New Jersey did nothing to scare them. They are still delusional and believe that they will not be voted out for passing (or even trying to pass) a bill that is largely unnecessary and that is soundly rejected by the majority of voters. Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) voted with the other 59 Democrats to move the bill to full debate. He had been one of three Democrats that had considered stalling the bill. The other two were Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas. In this video, Senator Lieberman discusses his vote and his feelings on the health care reform issue:

It is not clear what was offered to Senator Lieberman to vote in the affirmative, but there is speculation that he was threatened with loss of his influential chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee if he did not vote with the majority.

Senator Mary Landrieu was given about $300 million for her state in the bill to assure her vote. Republicans have rightly called these provisions in the bill, the “Louisiana Purchase.” It is not clear what was offered to Senator Lincoln, but she also folded and voted for the bill. She faces reelection next year in Arkansas and will have to pay for her vote sooner than her other colleagues.

The good news is that there are still Democrats that say they will not vote for the final bill in the House or Senate if it doesn’t specifically exclude abortion funding. There are also Democrats who say they will not vote for the final bill if it contains the public option of a government run health insurance. There are also more radical leftist Democrats who say they will not vote for it if it does not include abortion coverage and a public option. This discord amongst themselves gives Republicans and people with common sense hope that the socialist takeover of our health care system may yet go away like it did during Clinton’s term. Let’s hope so.

* One Republican did not vote. His name is Senator George V. Voinovich (R-OH).

The Senate Finance Committee voted on Wednesday in two separate 13-10 votes to defeat Senator Orin Hatch’s (R-UT) amendments. One amendment would have stated that the current ban on federal funding of abortions except in cases of rape, incest or the mother’s health would apply to any new health care plan. The second amendment would have prohibited the government at any level from forcing health care providers to provide abortions. It is unconscionable to force someone who has moral objections against abortion to perform them. Yet this is exactly what could happen without this amendment.

Only one Democrat; Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND), voted with the Republicans in favor of the bills. Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME) voted with the Democrats in opposition of both bills. Republicans in Maine may want to reconsider voting for her in future elections.

The Democrats also blocked an amendment that would have required having a photo ID to use any new health plan. Republicans hoped that a photo ID would prevent illegal aliens from using government health care. They argued that it is possible to have a valid social security number that does not really belong to the person using it.

On Thursday, Republicans tried to add an amendment that would have prevented any new taxes or fees for individuals making less than $200,000 or for families making under $250,000. This would have codified President Obama’s campaign pledge not to raise taxes for individuals making less than $250,000 a year.  The losing vote was 12-11 with one Democrat voting with Republicans; Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR).

Democrats are poised to force major changes to the health care system of this country against the wishes of the majority of Americans. We must fight this. Send letters, sign petitions, and attend rallies. The future of a great America stands in the balance.

The high point of the speech was provided by Representative Joe Wilson (D-SC) when he spontaneously yelled, “You lie!” after President Obama said that is was not true that Democrats wanted to provide health care benefits for illegal immigrants.

I thought it was disrespectful for Representative Wilson to address a president of this country in such a way, but could see how President Obama’s arrogant speech would get someone so frustrated that they could not hold back. Representative Wilson later apologized for the outburst and the apology was accepted.

People are frustrated at the incessant lies about of the health care plan. President Obama has said, for example, that the plan does not pay for abortions. In his speech he said, “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions." New Jersey Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ) in a speech for the Family Research Council Action, said that the plan would pay for abortions under the public plan and would subsidize them in the private plans. He said, “For a man who argues he wants to see a reduction of abortions, nothing could be further from the truth.”

The most eloquent portion of Obama’s speech called for action. He said, “The time for bickering is over. The time for games has passed. Now is the season for action.” This, however, was overshadowed by his saying that he would not waste time with those who are opposed to the plan for political reasons, an obvious reference to Republicans.

What President Obama is failing to recognize is that this is not a Republican vs. Democrat issue. It is a grass-root issue for the people of this country who are sick and tired of politicians throwing away their hard earned money on capricious and grandiose projects of all kinds. It is a movement of the people saying, “Enough is enough. We do not want the government owning our car companies, our banks and our  doctors.”

President Obama also used the sympathy card. He deployed the late Senator Kennedy’s widow in the visitor’s section of the House of Representatives and said that Senator Kennedy had written him a letter in May saying that health care reform was a moral issue. This was the sort theatrics that many presidents of both parties have used in the past. It also has the same effect. It alienates those who oppose you and does nothing for your cause.

If Kennedy wrote that letter, I agree with him. This is a moral issue. We deserve to keep a health care system that provides the best care in the world and that saves lives on a daily basis. We do not need an iffy government program that no one has asked for. If Obama were serious about health care reform, he would be calling for tort reform and for lowering the requirements for Medicaid to cover indigents who have no health coverage. Those two changes would not drastically reshape our system in Obama’s image, but would certainly take care of the only two systemic problems with our existing system.

How about it President Obama? I know that lawyers support your party with huge donations, but if you really care about health care, what we need is tort reform. Will you have the audacity to pursue that? I hope so.  I think it is a moral imperative.

I am angry that Republicans do not know how to play the game as well as Democrats. Democrats have mastered the skill of painting any qualified Republican nominee to the Supreme Court as too right wing—almost worse than Attila the Hun. Republicans, however, are afraid of going after an unqualified Hispanic woman who recently had one of her cases overturned by the same court that she wants to serve on. I think it is time to forget whether someone is black, white, pink, male or female or whatever other classification you want to give someone and judge them on their merits. Is this too much to ask?

If we called Judge Sonia Sotomayor, nominee “Y” and only allowed nominee “Y” to answer from behind a wall with a computer to distort the voice would everyone be comfortable with nominee “Y”’s record? Would there be serious questions as to whether the nominee was judicially sound and impartial? That is the real question that the nomination process should try to answer.

I have been very quiet on this nomination because I wanted to give the process and Judge Sotomayor a chance to explain herself as well. So far, all I have seen are token questions and evasive answers. The toughest line of questioning was from Senator Cornyn today and even his questions were sugar coated and seemed timid by Democrat standards.

The Democrats would have fifty (or more) special interest groups actively campaigning against a Republican nominee and would badger the nominee to the point where the nominee would want to say “No more. I give up.” I do not like it when Democrats do this, but at least they are fighting the fight that their constituents voted them in to do. I expect the Republicans to do the same. The future of this great country is at stake.

Pelosi is obviously confused. She has even fabricated a theological defense for her position saying, “…I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins. As I say, the Catholic Church for centuries has been discussing this, and there are those who’ve decided…” When confronted with the fact that the Catholic Church is unequivocal on the issue she finally conceded, ”I understand that.” Unfortunately, she continued her prevarication.

The meeting between her and the Pope was private and no details were disclosed. Let’s hope the Pope told her to stop being such a hypocrite or face excommunication.

A majority of United States citizens are opposed to abortion. We are also facing the most desperate economic conditions in almost a century. Despite these facts, President Obama chose to send our tax dollars overseas to fund the slaughter of babies. It reinforces my belief that voting for McCain-Palin was the right choice.

These two issues will not make Obama popular with the religious majority of the country, nor will it make him look as someone who wants to heal and unite the country. Unfortunately, the majority was bamboozled into voting for Obama and now we are all stuck with his supporter’s priorities.

One piece of legislation that Obama vowed to sign if he was elected was the so called, “Freedom of Choice Act.” This act would codify the right to abortion under any circumstance, would eliminate all state laws that restrict the procedure, including parental notification, and would force all health providers to perform the surgery, even when it is against their morals.

Catholic hospitals might be forced to close their obstetrics units, or even close a hospital completely to avoid being forced by President-elect Obama to murder babies. This could be a real tragedy for many communities that rely on these hospitals.

Let’s hope that cooler heads prevail and President-elect Obama does not try to fulfill this campaign promise.

You can sign an on-line petition against this onerous law at:

http://www.FightFOCA.com

Please provide your signature and if your circumstances allow, donate. Lives depend on it.

If Senator Obama wins the presidency, we will have established two rings of hell and we will be well on our way to an inferno that Dante could never have imagined. The first ring will be a Congress that is dominated by liberal Democrats and run by Senator Harry Reid and Representative Nancy Pelosi. As if this were not hell enough, we will also have an ultra-liberal president who wants to redistribute our income and change the entire country to more liberal, secular views. Now for the third ring–the one that will bring on the suffering. That ring, the Supreme Court, is the last viable check and balance against Democrat hegemony. 

Obama will be able to appoint two or three Supreme Court justices in his first term. Even worse than that, he could get to appoint two more by the end of a second term. That is five Supreme Court justices that he could appoint with no opposition from Congress. He could appoint the most liberal judges that he can find and establish liberal control of the Supreme Court for decades. Who knows what could happen then? Perhaps infanticide and assisted suicide would become the uncontested law of the land. Keep in mind that five Supreme Court justices would constitute a majority.

Liberal control of the Supreme Court could shape our society more than any other branch of government. The justices do not need to be reelected and are installed for life. They can do whatever they want. If you do not believe it, then go back to January 22, 1973 when the Supreme Court made it legal to have abortions with the Roe vs. Wade decision. It is estimated that over 50 million children have been killed because of that decision. It is reasonable to estimate that if these children had been born, at least 1% would be geniuses or high achievers. Think about how much more advanced the United States would be with an additional 500,000 intelligent, high achievers. What a waste of human potential and loss of human advancement.

If you are angered by the idea of homosexual marriage, the removal of any mention of religion from our school systems, the removal of “In God We Trust,” and the promotion of other liberal causes, then you should be very concerned about an Obama victory. An Obama presidency will guarantee liberal control of the country for the foreseeable future. It is an incredible inferno full of suffering for all and justice for none.

If you are not interested in social issues or religious issues, but instead are worried about your bottom line, then consider a president who wants you to “share the wealth” coupled with a Congress that also wants to tax you into the ground and then couple that with a liberal and activist Supreme Court and what do you have? You end up with a socialist country modeled after many of the countries in the European Union. Is that the path that the United States should take or should it continue to create a path that other countries envy and want to emulate?

What country is feared, envied and respected at the same time? What country has established an empire greater than has ever been seen on the face of the planet before? What country has achieved this sort of global domination in history? Only the United States has done this. Why throw it away to pursue a political and social theory that has been proven a failure repeatedly?

You know the answers to these questions. There is no reason to abandon our supremacy, or to change our way of life. I have written it before in this site, but here it is again, “Don’t drink the Kool-Aid.” We do not need a liberal, inexperienced president or Supreme Court. Let’s stay away from the suffering, vote intelligently and vote often (the often is just to offset Acorn).

Vote McCain-Palin on September 4th and donate to The National Republican Trust so that they can air anti-Obama ads.

You can watch the video in either English or Spanish at this web address: http://obamamustsee.com/

I must warn you that the video is graphic, but it is something that we should all watch so that the issue is not abstracted by clean, meaningless words like “choice.”

As a follow up, you might want to see Obama speaking about the issue during the Democratic primaries: