What's the Worst That Could Happen?

Now that we are officially in the beginnings of an election year, the Democrats are hyperventilating over abysmal poll numbers. Approval ratings for their beloved messiah have tanked, and many Democratic politicians are in danger of losing their jobs as the American people continue to voice their concerns over the slow encroachment of government into their personal lives.

In November, all seats of the House of Representatives and approximately half of the Senate seats are up for grabs. Pelosi, Reid, Specter, and many other Dems are going to spend the majority of their time until then interviewing for their jobs in the media, trying to convince Americans that they are best-suited for the position.

The question of the day for Americans who may be mulling over their political ideologies is simple. What's the worst that can happen if we elect a fiscally-conservative, constitutionally-savvy Congress? Let's see...

1. The ultimate death of socialized medicine in this country
2. Americans keeping more of their own money in the form of tax cuts or, possibly, tax cuts for businesses (large and small) that eventually help individuals prosper. Reagan and JFK were both supply-siders.
3. A movement back to the ideals set forth in the Constitution by the Founding Fathers
4. A push to secure this nation and its borders. Gee...we didn't hear of underwear bombers between 2001 and 2008. Wonder why?
5. A sense of personal responsibility and personal liberty
6. A government whose representatives remember just who is in charge. WE THE PEOPLE!
7. Returning to a time when it wasn't politically incorrect to invoke the name of Jesus Christ or say that America is the greatest nation in the history of mankind
8. A renewed respect for our fighting forces and the sacrifices they make
9. A sense of charity among the private sector to care for the elderly, disabled, and needy. That is NOT the job of those in government.
10. Blessing of this country from God. "Blessed is the Nation Whose God is the Lord." -- Psalm 33:12

Consider all the events that have transpired over the past year. Now ask yourself "How many of these ten items have been brought to fruition by the current administration?" [B & G Warning: Don't blow a blood vessel trying to think of one let alone ten.]

Now that it's been pondered, I ask one last question: What's the worst that can happen?

Libertarian Conservative to Challenge Pelosi

John Dennis, a business owner and real-estate investor in California's 8th District, has decided to put the electoral smackdown on Nancy "I Love Botox" Pelosi and challenge her for the seat she has held since 1987. She has become a shining example of why congressional officials should have term limits.

Dennis, a libertarian conservative, graduated from Fordham University with a degree in business and went on to co-found Humanscale, one of the top 10 design firms that specializes in office ergonomics. In 2008, he served as Phonebank and Get Out the Vote director for Ron Paul's presidential campaign in San Francisco.

Dennis told Worldnetdaily.com:

"I became actively involved in politics about two years ago," he said. "I was frustrated with everything – even my own party and the lost opportunities we had to put a cap on spending and the growth of government. I was looking for good candidates to support, and I just finally decided to be a candidate myself."

Dennis is founder of the San Francisco chapter of the Republican Liberty Caucus, board member of the Republican Liberty Caucus of California and has served as an alternate on the San Francisco Republican Central Committee.

Here are some statements John Dennis has made on various issues. I think you're going to like what you read.

• Energy and the free market -- "The first step is to see what we can do to improve our relationships so we feel more comfortable with other countries as trading partners for our energy needs. The second thing to do is let the free market do its job. If we allow the market to do what it does best, much better than any managed economy could ever do, then, ultimately, we'll find the appropriate sources for our energy needs that'll make everybody feel comfortable and drive our economy."
• Cap and Trade -- "I'm very leery of the government," he said. "When I read the Constitution, I see our founders writing the document when they are very concerned about the potential abuse of power from the federal government. Every time I hear of a new scheme like cap and trade, it makes me ask, where's the constitutional authorization to do this? Of course, it's not there."
  
• Educational Credits for Homeschoolers -- Dennis proposes education credits for children enrolled in private, parochial and home schools.

  "It's very simple," he said. "Make a tax credit available to those folks and give them the option to take their money and go wherever they want."

• Healthcare -- "I wonder if there's a relationship there," Dennis said. "The government got involved in a particular industry, and the costs went up."

  He said free markets must be able to solve these problems, and government-run health care would seriously worsen an already overregulated system. Dennis proposes making all out-of-pocket medical expenses and insurance premiums tax deductible and using the Constitution's commerce clause to enable all insurers to compete anywhere in the United States.

• Illegal Immigration -- Dennis proposes an end to birthright citizenship, amnesty and government services for illegal immigrants.

  "People come here and use services mandated by the federal government that help bankrupt states and put hospitals out of business in border towns," he said. "To the extent that those illegal immigrants weaken the dollar and usher in the demise of the dollar, I am very opposed to illegal immigration."


• Second Amenment -- A member of the NRA, Dennis said, "The Second Amendment is fine by me, and I don't even need a Second Amendment to tell me that I have the right to defend myself."
• States' Rights -- Dennis said he is a "big fan" of the 10th Amendment and advocates a complete repeal of the 17th Amendment, the 1913 constitutional amendment that calls for direct election of senators.
• Income and Capital Gains Taxes --
  

  "Think about everything it implies," he said. "It implies that the government owns things that you work for. It owns you, and it lets you keep a portion of it."

  When he suggests ending the income tax and cutting government spending, Dennis said some people ask him, "How are we going to finance our government?"

  "My first question is, 'Why don't you want your money back?!'" he said, laughing. "Why are you making excuses for people taking away your money to spend it the way they see fit? Why don't you work to keep your money and spend it the way you see fit?"

• The Federal Reserve -- Dennis proposes an abolition of the Federal Reserve. "Central banking is an interesting thing," he said. "It's a key plank in the Communist Manifesto. It's another form of central economic planning, just like they did in Moscow during the Soviet Union era. Look what it's wrought."
• Gay Marriage and Abortion -- "I don't think the government has any business being involved in marriage in the first place. As much as I don't have anything against gays by any stretch of the imagination – as someone seeking federal office – I can't find a way to support gay marriage."

  Asked whether he believes the issue should be left to the states, he replied, "I'm running for federal office, and the states can decide what they want to do. But it's definitely not a federal issue."

  Dennis also said he's strongly opposed to federal funding of abortion.

  "I'm strongly opposed to the federal government getting involved in stem-cell research as well," he said. "That's just not its business. It shouldn't have anything to do with it. It's a really complex issue, and it's not in the Constitution that we should be subsidizing any kind of research, especially stem cell."

And there you have it. To read more about John Dennis, visit his webiste, http://www.johndennis2010.com. I urge everyone to give this guy every form of support you can possibly give.

I, for one, would HOPE to see this kind of CHANGE come to Washington.

Murtha Was Warned!!!

As many of you know, I've vowed to do everything I can to see that John Murtha loses his job next year. The man is a disgrace to not only the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (I HATE the word "commonwealth!"), but to decent human beings in general.

I found a blog called Conservative Common Sense, and clicked on it. It's the official blog of Tim Burns, the conservative businessman challenging the man who defines the word corruption.

PLEASE stop and read Tim's blog. I promise you won't be disappointed!

Tim Burns: A Video

I posted today about Tim Burns challenging John Murtha for his congressional seat, and I found a video that I think exposes Murtha for what he is: a crook. Take a look and let me know what yinz think!

Murtha Being Challenged by Burns

I just found this out and am excited to announce that Tim Burns is challenging John "Our marines are murderers" Murtha for the 12th District Congressional seat in Pennsylvania. Holy crap, the good news just keeps coming!!!

As many of you know, I am ashamed to say that Murtha is my representative, and I've stated before that I will do what I can to see that he is ousted from office. That time has come. First step: Letting EVERYONE know that I plan on fully supporting Tim Burns.

The following is a statement from timburnsforcongress.com.

How $10 Dollars and Two Minutes can Change the World

If you are like me, you are concerned about the direction our elected officials are taking this country. With a $1.8 trillion dollar deficit, the bailouts and now government interference in many of America’s industries such as the auto industry, banking industry, and insurance industry, you are probably asking yourself, when is the spending going to stop? Our current elected officials don’t seem to mind spending away our children’s future. They don’t seem to care what happens to America once they leave office, but instead only care about fooling their constituents so that they can get reelected. Well, enough is enough. It’s time to put an end to this nonsense. My name is Tim Burns and I have decided to run for Congress against John Murtha. As you know, John Murtha is responsible for more wasteful earmark spending than any other sitting Congressman. Some have called Murtha the most corrupt Congressman in Washington. I’m not a politician, I am a businessman. I’ve never secured pork-barrel spending and I don’t spend more than I have. And I can no longer sit on the sidelines and watch what is happening to this great country. I am fighting to ensure our children inherit a strong America not a bankrupt one. But I need your help.

John Murtha can be defeated. He is in serious trouble and his lobbying firms and friends are being investigated by the FBI. This campaign to defeat John Murtha will cost over $2 million dollars. So, I need your help. But I’m not asking for much; just $10 dollars. If I could get all who read this to contribute just $10 dollars, we will easily reach our goal. But if you and others simply read this and move on, we don’t stand a chance. So, please take just two minutes and contribute $10 to this cause and together we can take back this country. Yes, I am concerned about this country and am willing to contribute $10.
If you can give $50, $100, $200, or more, please do. If not, that’s okay, just please don’t move on without contributing. John Murtha has damaged this entire country by taking your taxpayer money and wasting it in his district with pork barrel projects. Ask yourself, how do you want to be remembered? Do you want to be remembered as being part of a generation of Americans who stood by and watched the destruction of this once great nation? Or, do you want to be remembered as one of those who stood up to rescue this country from bankruptcy; securing freedom and liberty in America for future generations. Trust me, the $10 you contribute will be well worth your while. You will feel good knowing you have made a difference. I refuse to stand by and watch this great country be destroyed. I’m ready to contribute.

I will not only be contributing, but I will be asking Mr. Burns if I can work the polls for him or do anything else that my schedule will permit.

Murtha: YOU GOIN' DOWN!!!

[h/t to Teresa]

Obamacare: Screw This!!! I'm Pissed!!!

This article was put up on cnsnews.com on July 30, and I somehow missed it. This hits close to home, and it scares the hell out of me.

House Health-Care Bill Would Establish 'Medical Homes' for the Elderly and Disabled
Thursday, July 30, 2009
By Marie Magleby

A copy of H.R. 3200, America Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 sits on the desk of House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., after the markup on the health care bill was postponed on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, July 29, 2009. (AP photo/Susan Walsh)

(CNSNews.com) - The House health-care reform bill proposes to decrease hospital visits by establishing a “medical home pilot program” for elderly and disabled Americans.

Such a medical home would not require a physician to be on the staff, and therefore could be run solely by nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Medical homes also would practice “evidence-based” medicine, which advocates only the use of medical treatments that are supported by effectiveness research.

But physicians’ groups say the legislation could lead to restrictions on which treatments may be used for certain conditions, despite the fact that some patients might require a unique or unconventional approach. It also may lead to dumping Medicare/Medicaid patients in facilities that are not required to have physicians on staff.

The Center for Medicine in the Public Interest (CMPI) expressed its concerns in a report that explains why statistical evidence does not always reflect reality of effective medicine.

“‘One size fits all’ rarely does,” the report said. “From clothes to shoes to hats, few people find that items carrying that label work with their individual bodies. So why do we entrust the health of our bodies -- one of the most important assets we have -- to a one-size-fits-all mentality?”

According to CMPI and individual physicians, however, this one-size-fits-all mentality is just what congressional health-care reform suggests.

“Unfortunately, policies being advanced under the guise of ‘evidence-based medicine’ (EBM) could do just that,” the CMPI report said. “The idea behind EBM, empowering physicians with sound evidence to incorporate into their treatment decisions for individual patients, is a good one.

“Unfortunately, EBM now is being distorted by government bureaucrats and HMOs in ways that impose top-down, one-size-fits-all restrictions on patients and their healthcare providers.”

Rather than enforcing a formulaic approach to medicine based on statistical and clinical research, CMPI says health-care reform should preserve physicians’ autonomy to use the research in conjunction with their experience and knowledge of the patient.

”It is so critically important for the physician to maintain his or her ability to combine study findings with their expertise and knowledge of the individual in order to make the optimal treatment decisions. Evidence-based medicine in its present, distorted form emphasizes just one aspect of the clinical pie over all the others,” the report found.

Kathryn Serkes of the American Association for Physicians and Surgeons echoed the observation.

“There is no typical patient,” Serkes told CNSNews.com. “Every patient is different from a medical perspective. If we have evidence-based medicine that basically says ‘well, we start at treatment one, which leads you to treatment two, to treatment three to treatment four. In practice, that doesn’t work for the patient. That’s the ‘art’ part of the art and science of medicine. That’s what we still need doctors to do, is to figure out what’s right for the patient.”

In the long run, according to CMPI, evidence-based medicine may not even cut costs as Congress suggests it would.

“Evidence-based medicine may provide transitory savings in the short term, but the same patient who takes the cheapest available statin today may very well be the patient costing you -- the taxpayer, the policymaker, the thought-leader, the sister, the spouse -- big bucks when that patient ends up in the hospital because of improperly treated cardiovascular disease,” .

“The repercussions of choosing short-term thinking over long-term results and cost-based medicine over patient-based are pernicious to both the public purse and the public health,” the CMPI report said.

Provisions for the medical home pilot program are an amendment to the Social Security Act, which governs the administration of Medicare and Medicaid services.

The medical home is an approach to medical practice that “facilitates partnerships” between patients and physicians, according to the proposed bill.

The pilot program targets Medicare beneficiaries who have a high medical “risk score” or who require regular monitoring, advising or treatment. This currently applies to more than 22 million Americans, according to Kaiser Family Foundation statistics.

At least $1.5 billion would be redirected from the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund to fund the medical homes, “in addition to funds otherwise available,” according to the bill.

The Senate health-care reform bill also includes provisions for medical homes, although to lesser detail than the House bill.

If this portion of the legislation passes through Congress, medical homes will be part of the greater health-care reform experiment known as "the public (health insurance) option."

According to the committee, the provisions for medical homes will make the public option a stronger competitor against private health insurance companies.

“The public health insurance option will be empowered to implement innovative delivery reform initiatives so that it is a nimble purchaser of health care and gets more value for each health care dollar,” the House Committee on Energy and Commerce’s summary says about the bill.

Medical homes are tied to “comparative effectiveness research” via something called “evidence-based medicine.”

“It will expand upon the experiments put forth in Medicare and be provided the flexibility to implement value-based purchasing, accountable care organizations, medical homes, and bundled payments. These features will ensure the public option is a leader in efficient delivery of quality care, spurring competition with private plans,” the committee’s summary also said.

A statement by the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) said that the effectiveness of the medical home model should be carefully evaluated before applying the model far and wide.

“There should be more research to demonstrate the benefits and continuing costs associated with implementation of the full (patient-centered medical home) model,” the ACEP statement said.

“Demonstration projects being conducted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services must be carefully evaluated. There should be proven value in healthcare outcomes for patients and reduced costs to the healthcare system before there is widespread implementation of this model.”

The proposal, meanwhile, specifically allows for facilities to be run by staff who do not possess medical degrees – including nurses and nurse practitioners.

More caring from the compassionate left. Hear me when I say this; I WILL DIE before letting my kids get put in one of these homes. Anyone with disabled or elderly loved ones needs to heed the warning we've just gotten.

*crying*

Cash for Clunkers: IT'S ALIVE!!!

Newsmax.com is reporting that today, the House of Representatives has voted to extend an extra $2 billion to rescue their joint government/captialism experiment that failed within a week.

Aren't you glad that you're making cuts in your life for this?

House Votes $2 Billion to Rescue 'Cash for Clunkers' Program

Friday, July 31, 2009 1:05 PM Article Font Size

WASHINGTON -- The House has voted to rush an additional $2 billion into the popular but financially strapped "cash for clunkers" car purchase program. The bill was approved on a vote of 316-109. House members acted within hours of learning from Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood that the program was running out of money. Called the Car Allowance Rebate System, or CARS, the program is designed to help the economy and the environment by spurring new car sales. Car owners can receive federal subsidies of up to $4,500 for trading in their old cars for new ones that achieve significantly higher gas mileage. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said the new money for the program would come from funds approved earlier in the year as part of an economic stimulus bill. THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below. WASHINGTON -- The House rushed Friday to pump $2 billion into a popular cash-for-clunkers program running near empty, with a leading Democrat saying "consumers have spoken with their wallets." A floor vote was under way at midday on the bill to refuel the car-purchase program. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer had said earlier that the additional money would come from funds Congress approved earlier in the year as part of a $787 billion economic stimulus bill. Hoyer, D-Md., said that at the request of House Republicans _ whose approval was required for swift passage _ the bill would include provisions for government auditors to make sure the money was being spent as intended. Republicans argued that Democrats were trying to jam the legislation through. House Minority Leader John Boehner said it was unclear how many Republicans would support on the plan. "There are a lot of questions about how the administration administered this program. If they can't handle something as simple as this, how would we handle health care?" the Ohio Republican told The Associated Press. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the cars purchased under the program were much more fuel-efficient than what the bill requires. But some lawmakers complained that many dealers were left to contend with a chaotic government-run program. "The federal government can't process a simple rebate. I've got dealers who have submitted the paperwork three times and have gotten three rejections," said Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich. "What is a dealer supposed to do?" There had been a $1 billion budget for rebates for new car sales in the program that was officially launched last week and has been heavily publicized by automakers and dealers. Called the Car Allowance Rebate System, or CARS, the program offers owners of old cars and trucks $3,500 or $4,500 toward a new, more fuel-efficient vehicle, in exchange for scrapping their old vehicle. Congress last month approved the plan to boost auto sales and remove some inefficient cars and trucks from the roads. The Senate was not scheduled to vote on Friday but lawmakers hoped to win approval for additional funding next week. Senate action is likely next week, making sure the program would not be affected by the sudden shortage of cash. "Consumers have spoken with their wallets and they've said they like this program," said Rep. David Obey, D-Wis. House members acted within hours of learning from Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood that the program - designed to help the economy as well as the environment - was out of funds. Under the program, car owners can receive federal subsidies of as much as $4,500 if they trade in their old car for a new one that achieves significantly higher gas mileage. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said the administration assured lawmakers that "deals will be honored until otherwise noted by the White House." But he suggested that "people ought to get in and buy their cars." At the White House, press secretary Robert Gibbs sought to assure consumers that the program is still running and will be alive "this weekend. If you were planning on going to buy a car this weekend, using this program, this program continues to run." Gibbs would not commit to any timeframe beyond that. It was unclear how many cars had been sold under the program. Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., said about 40,000 vehicle sales had been completed through the program but dealers estimated they were trying to complete transactions on another 200,000 vehicles, putting the amount of remaining funding in doubt. John McEleney, chairman of the National Automobile Dealers Association, said many dealers have been confused about whether the program will be extended and for how long. Many had stopped offering the deals Thursday after word came out that the funds available for the refunds had been exhausted. The clunkers program was set up to boost U.S. auto sales and help struggling automakers through the worst sales slump in more than a quarter-century. Sales for the first half of the year were down 35 percent from the same period in 2008, and analysts are predicting only a modest recovery during the second half of the year. With so much uncertainty surrounding the program, North Palm Beach, Fla., dealer Earl Stewart said he planned to continue to sell cars under the program but would delay delivering the new vehicles and scrapping the trade-ins. "It's been a total panic with my customers and my sales staff. We are running in one direction and then we are running in another direction," he said. © 2009 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.