Final Election Predictions, Featuring Weekend Monkey

JoshuaPundit:

Well this is where the pedal hits the metal as they say. It's time for me to make my final election predictions, along with the able assistance of Joshua Pundit's political guru, ace handicapper and former Democrat presidential candidate Weekend Monkey.

RM: Hello Monkey, and thanks for joining us.

WM: Your pleasure, I'm sure Rob. Howdy Doody, primates!

RM: @##!#. Always the inflated ego...

WM: Hee hee hee! Lemme tell ya, I'm feeling good about tomorrow!

RM: Let me guess. I know you've been campaigning for Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts... I take it you favor her chances tomorrow.

WM: Oh, you betcha Rob. And that translates into a lot of shekels for yours truly in election action, plus a high level staff position in DC when she gets in.

RM: I should have known. Anyway, you want to do the Senate first or the presidential race?

WM: Let's start at the top and work down.

RM: OK, fire away.

WM: It's really too close to call, but I see it leaning towards President Obama narrowly winning a second term..probably after some controversy among the primates:

It's really pretty simple. I see Romney the Robot narrowly getting frozen out of Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. And I mean narrowly. If even one state changes, it could go the other way. Let's call it 5-3 Obama.

Ohio is gonna be the poop storm, with a lotta weirdness in Cuyoga and Mahoning Counties that could leave us hanging on the branch for a long time, but in the end it's gonna come down to Ohio. If that goes Obama's way, he wins.Otherwise, Romney the Robot gets in.

RM: So you don't see Romney taking either Pennsylvania or Wisconsin?

WM: Y'know, anything's possible, But if I gotta make a call, I say Obama takes it overall. Especially Ohio, because a lot of the primates have jobs still, unemployment's relatively low, you got the unions and the Cleavland Machine. And they're all organized because of Governor Kasich trying to pull a Scott Walker on the public employee unions and getting his pee pee slapped. (The RNC’s Reince Priebus, from Wisconsin, says the polls were showing Walker down by 7 in the recall election and he won in a cake walk.  He also said that the GOPS ground game for Wisconsin is double what it was in 2004 and 2008… so the Monkey maybe off here!).

RM: Speaking of governors, what did you think of Chris Christie cozying up to Obama and dissing Romney, essentially telling him he wasn't welcome in Jersey to tour the storm areas?

WM: Ah hee hee hee! I got a real laugh outta that! Look, it's simple. Lardass is ticked off because he didn't run, he's looking at 2016 and the only way that opens up for him is if Romney the Robot loses. Simple as that.

RM: Makes sense. I never liked him anyway. The House?

WM: I say it stays ReThug, with maybe 3-5 seats changing hands.

RM: The Senate?

WM: Hee hee! Worst case, my Democrats will probably lose Virginia, North Dakota, Nebraska, Montana. They'll make pickups in Massachusetts and Maine, where the indy guy King will caucus with us Donkeys.Maybe another pickup in Indiana, depending on turnout.And we'll keep Florida.Probably Missouri too.

Pennsylvania and Wisconsin are wild cards. If they go Democrat like I think they will, we get those too. They might end up splitting, one apiece.

The ReThugs make pickups in Virginia, North Dakota, Montana and Nebraska. They'll keep Arizona and Nevada, maybe Indiana.They lose Massachusetts and Maine. They might get either Wisconsin or Pennsylvania, depending.

Bottom line? Including two indies, my Democrats end up with 49 seats maybe 50-51 if we get Indiana and either Wisconsin or Pennsylvania. The ReThugs end up with 49, 48 if they lose Indiana.To get control of the senate, they'd have to hang on to Indiana somehow and get both Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, or maybe Missouri which I don't see happening at all.

RM: You predicted a divided Senate before.

WM: Yup. It could shake out that way. OK, whaddya got?

RM: I see Romney winning.

WM: Cheez, what a surprise!

RM: Hey now...

WM: Alright, alright.

RM: Here's how I see it, but just like with your map, mine is subject to some changes..it really is a pretty close race to predict.

With the economy the way it is, and the other issues of Obama's presidency, I see Romney taking Virginia, Florida, Colorado and North Carolina pretty decisively. I also think he's going to take two of the Big Four in the Midwest, most likely Ohio and Wisconsin, although the last polls I saw that meant anything show Pennsylvania and Michigan tied up. I think there's a very good chance that Ohio and Pennsylvania might switch columns, with Romney taking the Keystone State and Obama getting Ohio by a narrow margin because of the factors you mentioned.Especially with Obama's EPA already salivating publicly at crippling coal for good.

WM: You see Romney taking Iowa and New Hampshire?

RM: Yeah, but with this scenario if he loses them both he still wins.

WM: Yeah, I can see that.You better hope he takes Colorado then,,,,

RM: I think he will. For what it's worth I agree with you Monkey, it's going to come down to the Big Four in the Midwest.Obama has to take both Pennsylvania and Ohio to win.
WM: You see the Elephants keeping the House?

RM: Of course, Monkey. With a maximum loss of 3-5 seats. Which means that even if you're right and Obama does get re-elected, Darrel Issa still has subpoena powers and Obama might wish he lost tomorrow in a couple of years.

WM: Ouchie! You got a point there!

RM: Here's how I see the Senate. OK, the Dems lose Virginia, North Dakota, Montana and Nebraska. I personally think there's an excellent chance of one or two more GOP pickups in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Maybe Florida if Romney wins decisively enough. I think Tammy Baldwin's lunatic fringe lefty ideas don't play well in the Badger State anywhere outside Madison and Dane County, and there's also the Catholic vote to consider in both PA and Wisconsin. And with Paul Ryan on the ticket, Scott Walker surviving the recall and Wisconsin being RNC head Preibus' home state, I think it's looking pretty good for Romney and for Tommy Thompson.The GOP hangs on to Arizona and Nevada.

The Republicans probably lose Massachusetts and definitely lose Maine. And probably one of either Missouri or Indiana, although I think Mourdock has a shot at surviving in Indiana. So that puts us at between 49 and 52 seats for the GOP, depending on what happens in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, Missouri and Indiana.

I pretty much see the Democrats' scenario the same way you do, including the two indies. I'd like to think the people of Massachusetts have more brains than to put someone like Elizabeth Warren in the Senate -

WM: HEY!

RM: Nothing personal Monkey.

WM: Besides, it is Massachusetts....

RM: You got that right. Anyway, I also see a split senate as a real possibility. So there it is...

WM: I gotta tell you something Rob...you know that video of that little primate crying and saying she was tired of Bronco Bama and Mitt Romney? I feel the same way. I wanna get this thing over with.

RM: Me too Monkey. I think a lot of people feel that way. Two years for a political campaign is just to damned long, and I'll be relieved when it's over and done with. You ever think of running for something again?

WM: You know me Rob. I'm a political animal and I see my opportunities and take 'em. Hee hee!

RM: Spoken like a Democrat, Monkey. Thanks for swinging by.

WM: See ya later Rob. Smell Ya later, Primates.

Weekend Monkey was a Democratic candidate for president in 2008 and is JoshuaPundit's political Guru. He can be reached at wendmonkey@yahoo.com

Related:

Listening to the pundits, most say it is too close to call and it could go one of two ways… a landslide for Romney or a squeaker to the end, late into the night.  Dick Morris, Charles Krauthammer, Rush Limbaugh, and Karl Rove predict that it will be a Romney-Ryan win.  Dick Morris feels it will be a landslide for Romney because he claims pollsters are oversampling Democrats and says a poll that claims Obama is up 3, really means Romney is winning by 4. Claiming that "Ohio is overrated... Romney can lose the state and still win the election."

Charles Krauthammer Outlines Romney's Three Paths To Victory

Presidential paths: How Romney, Obama could win

Dick Morris Stands by Romney Landslide Prediction

Picking a U.S. President… in 2012… Now Just One Day Away From a New Start

‘Cooling Out’ the Voters

The Council Has Spoken!! Watcher’s Council Winners for 11.02.12

Have You Heard About ‘Spigot Cities’ That May Pump Votes to Obama?

The Choice

Krauthammer kicks Christie

Voter fraud complaints may be directed to any of the local U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, the local FBI offices or the Public Integrity Section (202-514-1412).

Technorati Tags: Election 2012,2012 Election,elections,Mitt Romney in 2012,Romney-Ryan,Chris Christy,Charles Krauthammer,Reince Priebus,swing states,battle ground states,Dick Morris,pols,Election 2012 predictions,Karl Rove,Rush Limbaugh,Obama vs. Romney,Romney vs. Obama

Best Political Commercial – Barry Hinckley

Am I right? is this campaign ad the best ever? who is the star? Senate candidate Barry Hinckley’s son…. He is 5 years old

Video:  Best Political Commercial – Barry Hinckley

Hinckley for US Senate - Economics for five year olds -  A Rhode Island economics lesson with 5 year old Hudson Hinckley, son of Barry Hinckley.

h/t to Greta Van Susteren  -  Greta says, I am not telling you to vote for or against Barry Hinckley… but this is a cute commercial!!

Senator Scott Brown Endorses Barry Hinckley

Glenn Beck Exposes Occupy Wall Street - Excellent Videos

Video:  OWS spontaneous?  Not so much…

Fully Organized Movement

http://web.gbtv.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=19944751&topic_id=24584158

Tea Party vs Occupy Wall Street

http://web.gbtv.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=19944759&topic_id=24584158

Soros Connection to OWS
http://web.gbtv.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=19944817&topic_id=24584158

Anti-Semitism in OWS movement
http://web.gbtv.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=19944829&topic_id=24584158

OWS global reach

http://web.gbtv.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=19944833&topic_id=24584158

Glenn has been onto them for ages. He is the bravest man in America. …IMO

Here is the the Steve Lerner video he's talking about.
[link to video.godlikeproductions.com]
http://video.godlikeproductions.com/video/SEIU_Planned_Destruction_of_Capitalism?id=c281a1503d524e1560c

Elizabeth Warren: I Created 'Occupy Wall Street'

Massachusetts Senate candidate, consumer activist, and Wall Street Enemy #1 Elizabeth Warren took credit for the Occupy Wall Street movement in a new interview with The Daily Beast.  (This is the radical women running against Scott Brown.)

“I created much of the intellectual foundation for what they do,” she told Samuel Jacobs. “I support what they do.”

Warren, who was once a registered Republican, said she decided to enter politics because she realized “I can’t just leave this to people who are going to wreck the lives of millions of American families if they get the chance."

Read the full interview here >

Source: Business Insider

CA – Need Your Help!! - Liberal California Senators Pass Universal Health Care Legislation

By George Runner - California State Senator representing the 17th Senate District

Fri, January 29th, 2010

Senate Bill 810 has unfortunately passed the Senate yesterday on a 22-14 party-line vote.

The measure would create a single-payer, government-controlled health care plan for Californians. The same government that has mismanaged your money now wants to control your health care.

Does anybody believe a state that bleeds red year-after-year could possibly control the costs of health care?

As I said on the Senate floor: This plan is to the Left and radical of ObamaCare. It’s this type of big-government idea that caused an earthquake of an election in Massachusetts in recent weeks. Yet, my liberal colleagues in Sacramento don’t seem to care about the needs or concerns of the people or the state of our economy.

Senator Runner on passage of CA Government Run Health Care Plan from CA Senate GOP on Vimeo.

The Orange County Register says the Senate Democrats are “tone deaf” to have revived “a $200-billion, government-run, universal health care scheme to outlaw private insurance and subsidize coverage for millions of Californians.”

The San Diego Union-Tribune calls the plan “appalling on one level and bizarre on another.”

The editorial goes on to say: “It is appalling because it amounts to an in-your-face display of contempt for public sentiment.”

And the Oakland Tribune wrote: “The bill would add a huge public cost and create considerable uncertainty at a time when both the state government and the private sector are struggling for survival.”

SB 810 will now be heard in the Assembly, where I hope the Democrats are in tune with the wishes of the people and in touch with the realities of our economy.

------

I called and faxed those listed below:

Liberal California Senators Pass Universal Health Care

CALL THEM AND SAY “NO” TO THIS BILL SB 810
CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY MEMBERS- DEMOCRATS- UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

Jared Huffman-Phone: 916-319-2006, Fax: 916-319-2106
Noreen Evans-Phone: 916-319-2007, Fax: 916-319-2107
Mariko Yamada-Phone: 916-319-2008, Fax: 916-319-2108
Dave Jones-Phone: 916-319-2009, Fax: 916-319-2109
Alyson Huber-Phone: 916-319-2010, Fax: 906-319-2110
Tom Torlakson-Phone: 916-319-2011, Fax: 916-319-2111
Fiona Ma-Phone: 916-319-2012, Fax: 916-319-2112
Tom Ammiano-Phone: 916-319-2013, Fax: 916-319-2113
Nancy Skinner-Phone: 916-319-2014, Fax: 916-319-2114
Joan Buchanan-Phone: 916-319-2015, Fax: 916-319-2115
Sandre' Swanson-Phone: 916-319-2016, Fax: 916-319-2116
Cathleen Galgiani-Phone: 916-319-2017, Fax: 916-319-2117
Mary Hayashi-Phone: 916-319-2018, Fax: 916-319-2118
Gerald Hill-Phone: 916-319-2019, Fax: 916-319-2119
Alberto Torrico-Phone: 916-319-2020, Fax: 916-319-2120
Ira Ruskin-Phone: 916-319-2021, Fax: 916-319-2121
Paul Fong-Phone: 916-319-2022, Fax: 916-319-2122
Joe Coto-Phone: 916-319-2023, Fax: 916-319-2123
James Beall Jr-Phone: 916-319-2024, Fax: 916-319-2124
Bill Monning-Phone: 916-319-2027, Fax: 916-319-2127
Anna Caballero-Phone: 916-319-2028, Fax: 916-319-2128
Juan Arambula-Phone: 916-319-2031, Fax: 916-319-2131
Felipe Fuentes-Phone: 916-319-2039, Fax: 916-319-2139
Bob Blumenfield-Phone: 916-319-2040, Fax: 916-319-2140
Julia Brownley-Phone: 916-319-2041, Fax: 916-319-2141
Mike Feuer-Phone: 916-319-2042, Fax: 916-319-2142
Paul Krekorian-Phone: 916-319-2043, Fax: 916-319-2143
Anthony Portantino, Jr.-Phone: 916-319-2044, Fax: 916-319-2144
Kevin de Leon-Phone: 916-319-2045, Fax: 916-319-2145
John Perez-Phone: 916-319-2046, Fax: 916-319-2146
Karen Bass-Phone: 916-319-2047, Fax: 916-319-2147
Mike Davis-Phone: 916-319-2048, Fax: 916-319-2148
Mike Eng-Phone: 916-319-2049, Fax: 916-319-2149
Hector de la Torre-Phone: 916-319-2050, Fax: 916-319-2150
Isadore Hall, III-Phone: 916-319-2052, Fax: 916-319-2152
Ted Lieu-Phone: 916-319-2053, Fax: 916-319-2153
Bonnie Lowenthal-Phone: 916-319-2054, Fax: 916-319-2154
Warren Furutani-Phone: 916-319-2055, Fax: 916-319-2155
Tony Mendoza-Phone: 916-319-2057, Fax: 916-319-2157
Edward Hernandez-Phone: 916-319-2057, Fax: 916-319-2157
Charles Calderon-Phone: 916-319-2058, Fax: 916-319-2158
-
Norma Torres-Phone: 916-319-2061, Fax: 916-319-2161
Lori Saldana-Phone: 916-319-2076, Fax: 916-319-2176
Martin Block-Phone: 916-319-2078, Fax: 916-319-2178
Mary Salas-Phone: 916-319-2079, Fax: 916-319-2179
Manuel Perez-Phone: 916-319-2080, Fax: 916-319-2180
Wesley Chesbro- Phone: 916-319-2001, Fax: 916-319-2101

You really have to shake your head, don’t you?? The majority of Americans do not want socialized single-payer healthcare, from the federal government or the state. California is bankrupt already, and if we pass this disaster we will be paying twice, like Massachusetts… who just elected Scott Brown to say no to government controlled HC of any kind and no to a public option, no to single payer and no to paying twice.

Please call, fax and visit your rep’s local and Sacramento offices and tell them NO, NO, NO. And when you are done please call your Federal Congressman and Boxer and Feinstein and tell them the same thing about ObamaCare.

Think about it, California can’t pay its bills and is threatening layoffs and reduction of services everywhere and now they are voting in socialized medicine??? This is the perfect example of what is wrong with liberal politics, the Progressive movement and what happens when you lose all Common Sense!!

About 17% of Californians are either unemployed or underemployed… just think about it?!?

Hosed by the Progressives Again… Senate OKs Debt Sealing hike to $14.3 Trillion

$45K owed by every man women and child in American and China now owes more of our debt than we do. How much more until we wake up or are Joe Klein from Time Magazine and the other Progressives right, the American people are too stupid and too disinterested to do anything about anything?

Senate Democrats passed a $1.9 trillion increase in the federal debt limit Thursday, seeking to push off another politically painful debt vote until after the midterm elections.

All 60 Democrats and no Republicans voted for the debt limit increase. The measure, which the House has yet to vote on, would put the debt ceiling at roughly $14.3 trillion.

Sen. Paul Kirk (D-Mass.) voted for the debt increase. Sen.-elect Scott Brown (R-Mass.), his replacement, has not been seated.

Democrats said the move is necessary because the debt is approaching its current ceiling of $12.4 trillion. If the debt breaches the limit, the government would lose its borrowing authority and risk default.

"We have gone to the restaurant, we have eaten the meal; now the only question is whether we pay the check," said Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) in urging his colleagues to increase the limit.
Republicans criticized Democrats for passing a massive increase, arguing that a smaller increase would have been more responsible.

"It's like the drunken sailor asking to have the bar open all night," said Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.).

If the House agrees to the $1.9 trillion debt ceiling hike, lawmakers won't have to make another debt vote until 2011.

Democrats won enough votes for passage only after the White House, Senate centrists and House Democratic leaders reached a deal on measures to tackle the rise in red ink.

A group of centrist Senate Democrats, led by Sens. Evan Bayh (Ind.) and Kent Conrad (N.D.), said that their votes depended on lawmakers committing to a special legislative process to come up with a package of fiscal reforms. President Barack Obama fulfilled that requirement in his State of the Union when he announced that he would create by executive order a fiscal reform commission.

Bayh, who opposed a short-term debt limit increase last month, praised the president for backing measures such as the fiscal commission and a three-year freeze on non-security discretionary spending to address the deficit, which hit a record $1.4 trillion last year and is expected to surpass $1 trillion in 2010.

"We can't allow the country to default on its debt. That would cause an economic calamity," Bayh said. "But we also need fiscal discipline, so I think [Obama has] struck a balance here that will enable us to do both."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had opposed the commission approach, fearing it would put the power over entitlements, taxes and spending in the hands of an appointed body. But she relented after Senate Democrats agreed to pass a pay-as-you-go measure that requires any new mandatory spending be offset by new taxes or spending cuts elsewhere.

The Senate passed the pay-go measure as an amendment to the debt limit increase Thursday. The pay-go amendment also passed on a party-line vote, 60-40.

The Senate pay-go legislation would not apply to costly items that are expiring that Democrats plan to extend — a host of middle-class tax cuts, Medicare doctor payments, current estate and gift tax rates and a patch to keep the Alternative Minimum Tax from hitting middle-income Americans. The exemptions, except the one for the middle-class tax cuts, would end in five years or less, meaning that lawmakers would have to pay for them eventually.

Conrad had opposed a version of the pay-go measure passed by the House because all of the exemptions would have been permanent.

But Gregg argued that the limits on exemptions did not go far enough, making a floor motion to call the Senate legislation "Swiss-cheese-go."

The debt limit debate revealed bipartisan support for discretionary spending limits, suggesting that Obama's call for a freeze on non-security discretionary spending has a chance of passing the upper chamber. An amendment offered by Sens. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) sought to cap yearly discretionary spending increases to about 2 percent for the next five years. The amendment didn't get the 60 votes it needed to be adopted, but most of the Senate — 16 Democrats, 39 Republicans and an independent — voted for it.

Senate Democrats passed a $1.9 trillion increase in the federal debt limit Thursday, seeking to push off another politically painful debt vote until after the midterm elections.

All 60 Democrats and no Republicans voted for the debt limit increase. The measure, which the House has yet to vote on, would put the debt ceiling at roughly $14.3 trillion.

Sen. Paul Kirk (D-Mass.) voted for the debt increase. Sen.-elect Scott Brown (R-Mass.), his replacement, has not been seated.

Democrats said the move is necessary because the debt is approaching its current ceiling of $12.4 trillion. If the debt breaches the limit, the government would lose its borrowing authority and risk default.

"We have gone to the restaurant, we have eaten the meal; now the only question is whether we pay the check," said Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) in urging his colleagues to increase the limit.
Republicans criticized Democrats for passing a massive increase, arguing that a smaller increase would have been more responsible.

"It's like the drunken sailor asking to have the bar open all night," said Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.).

If the House agrees to the $1.9 trillion debt ceiling hike, lawmakers won't have to make another debt vote until 2011.

Democrats won enough votes for passage only after the White House, Senate centrists and House Democratic leaders reached a deal on measures to tackle the rise in red ink.

A group of centrist Senate Democrats, led by Sens. Evan Bayh (Ind.) and Kent Conrad (N.D.), said that their votes depended on lawmakers committing to a special legislative process to come up with a package of fiscal reforms. President Barack Obama fulfilled that requirement in his State of the Union when he announced that he would create by executive order a fiscal reform commission.

Bayh, who opposed a short-term debt limit increase last month, praised the president for backing measures such as the fiscal commission and a three-year freeze on non-security discretionary spending to address the deficit, which hit a record $1.4 trillion last year and is expected to surpass $1 trillion in 2010.

"We can't allow the country to default on its debt. That would cause an economic calamity," Bayh said. "But we also need fiscal discipline, so I think [Obama has] struck a balance here that will enable us to do both."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had opposed the commission approach, fearing it would put the power over entitlements, taxes and spending in the hands of an appointed body. But she relented after Senate Democrats agreed to pass a pay-as-you-go measure that requires any new mandatory spending be offset by new taxes or spending cuts elsewhere.

The Senate passed the pay-go measure as an amendment to the debt limit increase Thursday. The pay-go amendment also passed on a party-line vote, 60-40.

The Senate pay-go legislation would not apply to costly items that are expiring that Democrats plan to extend — a host of middle-class tax cuts, Medicare doctor payments, current estate and gift tax rates and a patch to keep the Alternative Minimum Tax from hitting middle-income Americans. The exemptions, except the one for the middle-class tax cuts, would end in five years or less, meaning that lawmakers would have to pay for them eventually.

Conrad had opposed a version of the pay-go measure passed by the House because all of the exemptions would have been permanent.

But Gregg argued that the limits on exemptions did not go far enough, making a floor motion to call the Senate legislation "Swiss-cheese-go."

The debt limit debate revealed bipartisan support for discretionary spending limits, suggesting that Obama's call for a freeze on non-security discretionary spending has a chance of passing the upper chamber. An amendment offered by Sens. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) sought to cap yearly discretionary spending increases to about 2 percent for the next five years. The amendment didn't get the 60 votes it needed to be adopted, but most of the Senate — 16 Democrats, 39 Republicans and an independent — voted for it.

Instead of doing the right thing and either seating Scott Brown immediately or waiting to take this vote until he was seated, the Progressive Democrats (Obama’s) cronies forced this vote to strike another blow against the American people and especially the middle class, and to reinforce Obama’s State of the Union message, “We don’t care what you think and we will push through our agenda… no matter what you say or want!” To the tea party, town hall and Mom’s groups… “We don’t hear you now!!”

Obama’s First State of the Union… Disappointing and Surprisingly Disingenuous and Steadfast

Pres. Obama's State of the Union Address: What Did You Think?

PRESIDENT OBAMA'S STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS

Madame Speaker, Vice President Biden, Members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:

Our Constitution declares that from time to time, the President shall give to Congress information about the state of our union. For two hundred and twenty years, our leaders have fulfilled this duty. They have done so during periods of prosperity and tranquility. And they have done so in the midst of war and depression; at moments of great strife and great struggle.

It's tempting to look back on these moments and assume that our progress was inevitable - that America was always destined to succeed. But when the Union was turned back at Bull Run and the Allies first landed at Omaha Beach, victory was very much in doubt. When the market crashed on Black Tuesday and civil rights marchers were beaten on Bloody Sunday, the future was anything but certain. These were times that tested the courage of our convictions, and the strength of our union. And despite all our divisions and disagreements; our hesitations and our fears; America prevailed because we chose to move forward as one nation, and one people.

Again, we are tested. And again, we must answer history's call.
One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt. Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression. So we acted - immediately and aggressively. And one year later, the worst of the storm has passed.

But the devastation remains. One in ten Americans still cannot find work. Many businesses have shuttered. Home values have declined. Small towns and rural communities have been hit especially hard. For those who had already known poverty, life has become that much harder.

This recession has also compounded the burdens that America's families have been dealing with for decades - the burden of working harder and longer for less; of being unable to save enough to retire or help kids with college.

So I know the anxieties that are out there right now. They're not new. These struggles are the reason I ran for President. These struggles are what I've witnessed for years in places like Elkhart, Indiana and Galesburg, Illinois. I hear about them in the letters that I read each night. The toughest to read are those written by children - asking why they have to move from their home, or when their mom or dad will be able to go back to work.

For these Americans and so many others, change has not come fast enough. Some are frustrated; some are angry. They don't understand why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded but hard work on Main Street isn't; or why Washington has been unable or unwilling to solve any of our problems. They are tired of the partisanship and the shouting and the pettiness. They know we can't afford it. Not now.

So we face big and difficult challenges. And what the American people hope - what they deserve - is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences; to overcome the numbing weight of our politics. For while the people who sent us here have different backgrounds, different stories and different beliefs, the anxieties they face are the same. The aspirations they hold are shared. A job that pays the bills. A chance to get ahead. Most of all, the ability to give their children a better life.

You know what else they share? They share a stubborn resilience in the face of adversity. After one of the most difficult years in our history, they remain busy building cars and teaching kids; starting businesses and going back to school. They're coaching little league and helping their neighbors. As one woman wrote me, "We are strained but hopeful, struggling but encouraged."
It is because of this spirit - this great decency and great strength - that I have never been more hopeful about America's future than I am tonight. Despite our hardships, our union is strong. We do not give up. We do not quit. We do not allow fear or division to break our spirit. In this new decade, it's time the American people get a government that matches their decency; that embodies their strength.

And tonight, I'd like to talk about how together, we can deliver on that promise.

It begins with our economy.

Our most urgent task upon taking office was to shore up the same banks that helped cause this crisis. It was not easy to do. And if there's one thing that has unified Democrats and Republicans, it's that we all hated the bank bailout. I hated it. You hated it. It was about as popular as a root canal.

But when I ran for President, I promised I wouldn't just do what was popular - I would do what was necessary. And if we had allowed the meltdown of the financial system, unemployment might be double what it is today. More businesses would certainly have closed. More homes would have surely been lost.
So I supported the last administration's efforts to create the financial rescue program. And when we took the program over, we made it more transparent and accountable. As a result, the markets are now stabilized, and we have recovered most of the money we spent on the banks.

To recover the rest, I have proposed a fee on the biggest banks. I know Wall Street isn't keen on this idea, but if these firms can afford to hand out big bonuses again, they can afford a modest fee to pay back the taxpayers who rescued them in their time of need.
As we stabilized the financial system, we also took steps to get our economy growing again, save as many jobs as possible, and help Americans who had become unemployed.

That's why we extended or increased unemployment benefits for more than 18 million Americans; made health insurance 65% cheaper for families who get their coverage through COBRA; and passed 25 different tax cuts.

Let me repeat: we cut taxes. We cut taxes for 95% of working families. We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college. As a result, millions of Americans had more to spend on gas, and food, and other necessities, all of which helped businesses keep more workers. And we haven't raised income taxes by a single dime on a single person. Not a single dime.

Because of the steps we took, there are about two million Americans working right now who would otherwise be unemployed. 200,000 work in construction and clean energy. 300,000 are teachers and other education workers. Tens of thousands are cops, firefighters, correctional officers, and first responders. And we are on track to add another one and a half million jobs to this total by the end of the year.

The plan that has made all of this possible, from the tax cuts to the jobs, is the Recovery Act. That's right - the Recovery Act, also known as the Stimulus Bill. Economists on the left and the right say that this bill has helped saved jobs and avert disaster. But you don't have to take their word for it.

Talk to the small business in Phoenix that will triple its workforce because of the Recovery Act.

Talk to the window manufacturer in Philadelphia who said he used to be skeptical about the Recovery Act, until he had to add two more work shifts just because of the business it created.
Talk to the single teacher raising two kids who was told by her principal in the last week of school that because of the Recovery Act, she wouldn't be laid off after all.

There are stories like this all across America. And after two years of recession, the economy is growing again. Retirement funds have started to gain back some of their value. Businesses are beginning to invest again, and slowly some are starting to hire again. Read the rest of the complete speech HERE.

Obama’s speech was stunning in its arrogance, rhetoric, insults, scolding of Congress and blaming of everyone from the Supreme Court to George W. Bush.

Polled Reactions of Speech:

All words and no action… Talk is cheap but no results.

Speech was a recycle of his campaign.

Sounds good, but nothing behind it!

More of the same.

Lies, lies and more lies…

He takes no responsibility, blames everyone, and can’t top blaming Bush.

Amazingly arrogant…

I have never trusted that guy. He is a socialist with a socialistic agenda, and America just won’t wake up.

The Speech proved that he (Obama) is an arrogant ideologue~

If you don’t follow what is going on the speech sounded great, on the surface, but in reality it was all rhetoric and well written smoke and mirrors. He talked about focusing on jobs, jobs, jobs, but then everything he highlight was anti-job. He blamed everyone but himself, and unlike Clinton, he did not hear the warning shot (heard round the world); Scott Brown’s election. Clinton heard the people after his and Hillary’s socialized medicine push fell apart and moved to the center. Obama arrogantly yet often hidden in innuendos said he was pushing forward with Cap and Trade… renamed, pushing ahead with ObamaCare, and even insulted (interpreted by many as trying to manipulate) the Supreme Court seated in front of him. He also insulted the American people over and over again…

Obama said he would continue working to stop earmarks. In reality he has done nothing to stop earmarks. He talked about cutting spending, but in reality his freeze doesn’t start until after 2011 after he has raised the debt and spent us into oblivion and he and Congress will continue to spend and raise the debt unto 2011, all the while siphoning off funds as they have for the administrations pet projects. And finally Obama had the nerve to tell the American people that the worst of the economic storm was over and that ‘now’ he would be transparent. And let us remember that Obama has already increased spending (in just one year) by between 12% and 17%, depending on what you include. And Obama’s plan only freezes .58% for the next 3-years. (Obama’s Spending Freeze Announcement is Meaningless… And Why)

What Obama did not address was terrorism, the terrorist trial in New York, the bad decisions of the his DHS team over Christmas or the closure (or non-closure) of Gitmo.

The items highlighted in Obama’s speech were more of the same… more government interference; anti-personal freedom and America’s ‘global’ standing as he focused his gaze on his cabinet filled with Progressives, Marxists, and anything but Constitutionalists. Lucky for him they don’t march in the czars at these events: A Comprehensive List of O’s Czars and a brief description of each!

Reaction from both sides of the aisle to Obama’s speech was overall negative.

Frank Luntz Author of What Americans Really Want...Really and professional pollster, polled and in-house group as well as conducted a national poll of reactions to Obama’s State of the Union speech.

Results of Luntz Poll:

Good 8%

Fair 5%

Terrible 86%

GOP State of Union Response: We Can't Afford Dems' Spending

WASHINGTON -- The nation cannot afford the spending Democrats have enacted or the tax increases they propose, Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell said Wednesday in the Republican response to President Obama's State of the Union address.

McDonnell told a cheering crowd of supporters in Richmond, Va., that Democratic policies are resulting in an unsustainable level of debt. He said Americans want affordable health care, but they don't want the government to run it.

"Today, the federal government is simply trying to do too much," McDonnell said. "In the past year, more than 3 million Americans have lost their jobs, yet the Democratic Congress continues deficit spending, adding to the bureaucracy, and increasing the national debt on our children and grandchildren." Read more ...

ALSO: Text of GOP Response to State of the Union

'Not True': Alito Fires Back After Obama Jabs Supreme Court

Can this be considered the equivalent of a Supreme Court heckle? Close to an hour into his address tonight President Obama called out the Supreme Court’s recent decision to remove all limits on what corporations can spend on an election. And he did it to their faces.

“With all due deference to separation of powers, last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests – including foreign corporations – to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’d urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that corrects some of these problems.”
SNAP. The Supreme Court justices sit directly below the President and traditionally do not respond to anything the president says during his speech. Not this time. Obama’s remarks were clearly too much for Justice Alito, who could be seen rather emphatically shaking his head.

Yawn: Obama Puts Reid to Sleep

Harry Reid Yawns During Obama's State Of The Union

It is full speed ahead my fellow Americans… Cap and Trade; ObamaCare on the Dem’s terms; slight of hand economics; Amnesty; a jobs bill that will cost us money and won’t create jobs; indirect tax hikes… so Obama can say he isn’t raising taxes; continued attacks on personal freedom and the Constitution; promotion of fringe groups and the normalizing of Islam in our society while attacking Christians, Jews and American Traditions and the promotion of Globalism, the Progressive Green Agenda and World Government (through the United Nations) over Americans and American Sovereignty. It is Obama’s Progressive Agenda and although he threw the GOP and the American People a few bones, he backed and hinted at everyone of his beliefs in his speech and never really pivoted toward the center.

We are being had by a slick salesman. The question here is are the American People our Founding Fathers believed in and left their dream to? Or are we the idiots that Joe Klein of the Times and Obama’s cabinet and czars believe that we are???

Obama said in his speech, “One of the best anti-poverty programs is a world-class education!”, and interesting comment from the head of an administration that cancelled the voucher program in DC for primarily under-privileged black children. And when you hear stories like this past week of the re-writing of textbooks, including the suggestions of eliminating the mention of: Christmas, Thomas Payne, the religion of the Founding Fathers and their stand on God, etc and a government takeover of student loans… who can and will ultimately use that to direct people toward professions the government wants and then use enrollment in Obama Youth to payback those loans, you need to step back and think twice! (See: The Dumbing Down of America Series)

Remember: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.”, and those that steal freedom are always slick charismatic talkers!

Related:

VIDEOS: State of the Union Highlights

AP Fact Check: State of Union vs. Reality

Barack Obama is actually pulling a David Copperfield with this spending freeze

Can’t We At Least Get a Toaster?

Scott Brown… Future of the GOP? Liberal “Progressive” Onslaught Begins

The 'Scott Brown Strategy': New Recipe for GOP Success?

Parties Revise Their Campaign Playbooks to Include Brown Strategy

Republicans and Democrats alike were drawing lessons from Republican Scott Brown's win in Massachusetts even before it happened, in an attempt to replicate his success on one side and neutralize his potential imitators on the other

The dust settles. The smoke clears. And from the bottom of the pileup, Scott Brown emerges with ball in hand.

Brown's stunning upset victory in Tuesday's Massachusetts Senate election changed more than the "political math" on Capitol Hill, as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid acknowledged. The Republican candidate's capture of the Senate seat the late Ted Kennedy held for nearly five decades also changed the calculus for both parties as they look ahead to the November midterm elections.

Republicans and Democrats alike were drawing lessons from Brown's win even before it happened, with one side looking to replicate his success, and the other hoping to neutralize his potential imitators.

In the two days since Brown's victory, Republicans have rejoiced, citing his win as evidence that President Obama's ambitious government-centered agenda has failed. Democrats, meanwhile, have cowered, and are rethinking their approach to health care reform at levels all the way up to the White House.

Brown's victory is expected to reward the Republican Party with a windfall of fundraising and eager recruits. So far, the national party infrastructure is claiming a good measure of responsibility for his win, with the Republican National Committee touting its get-out-the-vote operation in the Bay State.

But Kevin Madden, former spokesman for Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, suggested the RNC -- and its controversial chairman, Michael Steele -- may want to learn some lessons as well.

"The people who deserve credit are, first, Scott Brown, and secondly the people on his campaign," Madden said. "It became a national election in the space of one week."

"I don't think Brown was following any of the 12 rules in Steele's new book," said Jeremy Mayer, public policy professor at George Mason University.

Mayer said both major parties need to be careful in how they read the race. He said Republicans cannot take it as a sign that they should oppose absolutely everything with a Democrat's name on it. And Democrats, he said, should not become "Reagan Democrats" in response.

"The Democrats are really in trouble if they panic," he said.

The immediate take-home point from Brown's win seems to be that economy- and jobs-based campaigns are successful, and strategists expect both parties to process that lesson quickly in the races ahead.

"The message of economic pragmatism trumps all right now when it comes to persuading voters," Madden said.

Soon after Brown's win, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Robert Menendez said Democrats "need to redouble our efforts on the economy." Other Democrats cited economic concerns foremost in their reaction to the Massachusetts results.

But the other lessons the parties draw will determine how effective their playbooks are in November.

Mayer said Democrats would be wise to "go populist" and focus on targeting Wall Street on one end -- something Obama did with his proposal to limit risk-taking on Thursday -- and targeting insurance companies on the other.

He said Democrats can craft a successful health care bill by homing in on the specific reforms that stop insurance companies from denying and cutting off coverage, and leaving out other proposals. From there, he said, Democrats can tout those achievements on the campaign trail.

But he said Republicans can "trump" that card by doing the same thing. He said the party would achieve a bigger win by working with Democrats and then taking "ownership" of a pared-down health bill. He said Republicans will lose their momentum if they take Brown's win as a sign that they should be the "Party of No."

But it's unclear which path GOP leaders want to take.

"This bill is dead," House Minority Leader John Boehner said Thursday, declaring that his members would not work with the other side of the aisle on a bill he called a "monstrosity." But he suggested Republicans still want to work on health care in a "bipartisan way."

Analysts said that as Democrats look at the vulnerable field before them, they likely will try hard not to repeat the obvious mistake Martha Coakley's Massachusetts campaign, and be aggressive and pro-active early on against their GOP opponents, no matter how blue the district.

Republicans should be prepared for that. But likewise, Democrats should be prepared for a tough message from the GOP on the Obama administration's agenda.

GOPAC Chairman Frank Donatelli said the lesson from last November's gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey and this week's Senate race in Massachusetts is that "there is no penalty to be paid for opposing the Obama agenda."

But he agreed with the assertion that Republicans can't just be anti-Obama all the time. The GOP needs to stand for something, he said.

Madden said Republicans can win if they keep the middle, by focusing on jobs and overspending.

"What this election tells us is Democrats have driven away independents from their party and into our hands," he said. "How we keep them is up to us."

FOXNews.com

Character Assassination Begins: Liberal State-Run Media Targets Scott Brown

Brown record doesn't always match everyman images - Progressive propaganda machine has begun

BOSTON -- As he campaigned for the U.S. Senate from the back of his green pickup, Scott Brown portrayed himself as an independent-minded everyman and moderate candidate fighting the Democratic "machine."

But as a Republican in Massachusetts, Brown sometimes found himself to the right of his own party.

He once proposed an amendment which would have allowed emergency room doctors to deny emergency contraception to rape victims based on the doctor's religious beliefs, which drew the ire of fellow Republicans. But, Brown voted for the final version of the bill without the amendment.

He has criticized the federal stimulus program as ineffective, but said he would not return the money.

And in the final weeks of the campaign, Brown benefited from the financial backing of conservative groups like the Tea Party movement which pumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into television ads for him.

Like former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and even Barack Obama in 2008, Brown is getting a boost from his own limited political resume, according to Julian Zelizer, professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. In the absence of a strong record or public profile, voters felt free to read into the candidates whatever they want.

"There is a virtue of not being a known commodity and not having tons of experience in the national spotlight," Zelizer said. "With Palin, people knew nothing about her when she was introduced ... and that was an asset at first."

Brown was able to craft his own image in the public mind in large part because of an initial lackluster response from Democrat Martha Coakley, the state's attorney general who was considered by many a shoo-in after double-digit leads in polls coming off a primary win last month.

Only after Brown picked up momentum and polls reflected a tight race did Coakley respond, but it was too little, too late.

In his acceptance speak Tuesday night, Brown again declared himself an independent thinker.

"I go to Washington as the representative of no faction or interest, answering only to my conscience and to the people," Brown said. "I've got a lot to learn in the Senate, but I know who I am and I know who I serve. I'm Scott Brown. I'm from Wrentham. I drive a truck, and I am nobody's senator but yours."

Key to Brown's campaign was his pledge to be the 41st vote to block Obama's health care initiative, but Brown himself voted in favor of the 2006 Massachusetts health care law that has been used as a blue print for the bill working its way through Congress.

On health care, Brown has said he supports providing health care to everyone, but would block the bill and send it "back to the drawing board." But Brown has also said that providing health care is best left up to the states.

"There should be a way for the states to go and do what we have here," Brown said in December. "They should have the ability to see what their needs are and what help they need, if any, from the federal government and tailor a plan that's good for their individual states."

Another key to his campaign was an strong anti-tax message. In his first television ad, he invoked President John F. Kennedy in calling for lower taxes. In the ad, Brown segued an old newsreel of Kennedy calling for tax cuts into a clip of Brown reading from the same speech.

But as a state senator Brown opposed a 2008 ballot initiative that would have eliminated the state income tax and saved the average taxpayer about $3,700 a year according to supporters.

He also supported hundreds of millions in higher fees and fines pushed by former Republican Gov. Mitt Romney during his first two years in office.

While he's portrayed himself as an independent-minded candidate on the campaign trail, Brown's campaign has pulled in support from deep-pocketed lobbying and interests groups, from U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Tea Party movement, and the Iowa-based conservative American Future Fund, which spent about $600,000 on an ad saying Coakley "supports the reckless spending by Washington politicians."

During the campaign, Brown portrayed himself as stronger on national security. He said terror suspects shouldn't have the same constitutional protections as U.S. citizens, and chastised Coakley for saying there were no al-Qaida terrorists left in Afghanistan.

He also campaigned alongside former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, but a month after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Brown was one of three Massachusetts representatives to vote against a bill that would have granted paid leave to state workers volunteering for disaster relief with the American Red Cross.

He's also positioned himself to the right of his party's 2008 presidential nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain, over the simulated drowning tactic known as waterboarding to gain information from suspected terrorists. McCain, who endorsed Brown, opposes waterboarding.

Brown said he doesn't believe waterboarding is torture.

Brown, one of just five Republicans in the 40-member Massachusetts Senate, found himself at odds with other members of his party on social issues.

In 2005, Brown sponsored an amendment to a bill requiring hospitals make emergency contraception available to rape victims. Brown's amendment would have created an exemption for doctors and nurses with "sincerely held religious beliefs" against abortion.

Coakley's campaign seized on the issue, pointing out that even Brown's Republican Senate colleagues criticized the proposal, saying the needs of rape victims should come first.

The criticism struck a nerve with Brown, who called it a "red herring." At one point during the campaign, Brown's two daughters - including a former "American Idol" contestant - met with reporters to vouch that their father cared about rape victims.

Although he touted the fact he'd put more than 200,000 miles on his truck, Brown earns a comfortable income and owns several properties, including his home in Wrentham, three apartments in Boston and a time share.

Besides his base Senate salary of $61,440, Brown also reported earning up to $20,000 from his National Guard service and between $80,000 and $100,000 from a law practice in 2008, according to his latest financial statement filed with the state.

Brown ran in part on a clean cut family image, touring the state dressed in a barn jacket, often with one or both of his daughters in tow. His wife, Gail Huff, a television reporter in Boston, was absent from the campaign until election night.

He's also served 30 years as a member Massachusetts Army National Guard and holds rank of Lieutenant Colonel.

But while he was a law student, Brown traded on his matinee good looks for work as a model, and while still in law school, he posed nude for Cosmopolitan magazine - in a photo spread with a strategically placed crease in the magazine.

---

Associated Press Writer Glen Johnson in Boston contributed to this report

Related:

Brown’s Daughter Tells Critics to Mellow Out over Daughters Joke

Video: Brown’s Daughter Tells Critics to Mellow Out over Daughters Joke

Brown Storms the Hill

Brit Hume: Obama Spins Brown Victory

Brown Just Being a 'Guy' In a Centerfold

Brown Won Frank's District

Dad’s Embarassing Comment Brings Ayla Brown Dates

Scott Brown vs. Martha Coakley - the “vote heard around the world!” that could stop ObamaCare

As you may or may not have heard, the sure-shot way of ending this government takeover of healthcare and our lives begins with the emergency election to replace the late Ted Kennedy’s seat for Massachusetts US Senate. Scott Brown is the candidate for the job. To read more about this, see our article HERE.

Got this from some people who attended the rally and final Brown Coakley debate yesterday:

We attended the debate rally for Scott Brown. If you haven’t heard by now, it was a slam-dunk for the Brown campaign! What you might not hear, however, is what went on behind the scenes amongst the supporters of both major camps (Brown vs. Coakley). We arrived at University of Massachusetts, Boston to the sight of teamster trucks and union workers unloading massive signage for Martha Coakley at the entrance to the campus. As we approached the event location, the parkway was lined with giant men (all wearing their union shirts) holding Coakley signs.

We got there early and found a single gentleman holding a Brown sign: Marty Lamb, candidate for Congress in the 3rd District. We stopped and talked with him for a bit and were approached by Brad Mardston, candidate for Massachusetts State Senate, who gave us signs and a warm smile. Before we knew it, there was a large group of us of all ages, including Bill Hudak, candidate for Congress in the 7th District, and Robert Fortes for Boston City Council at large. There were young and old alike cheering joyfully in the bitter cold despite the looming unspoken hostility that surrounded us by the union workers with the giant Coakley sign.

Martha Coakley is a machine Democrat that will give Massachusetts and America more of the same. Scott Brown is a veteran who believes in America and real change and representation for the American people. 6-weeks ago, nobody thought Brown had a chance. Today it looks like he could win!

Scott Brown is a class act. He marched up the road to the debate with a banner and a group of supporters, stopping to shake everyone’s hand along the way. There were chants of “Go Scott, go!” the entire time.

Brown is a class-act. We’d like to mention, too, that yesterday Scott Brown’s campaign had a money bomb fundraiser with a goal of $500k. We’re proud to report that, by midnight, he had nearly TRIPLED his goal with $1.3M!!!

Coakley, per elitist fashion, whisked up in a stealthy and anonymous car. As she approached, the giant professional protestor union types holding signs (as if on cue) rushed up in the middle of the road to block off Scott Brown supporters, nearly unapologetically knocking people over. The union thugs had pushed themselves directly in front of the Brown supporters, who proceeded heckling them. One of the union workers actually turned around and said “I’m paid to be here, but I’m voting for Scott Brown. I just need the money, but don’t tell anyone.”

The rally dispersed as the debate was in preparation to begin, so we headed over to watch the televised broadcast at a local restaurant. The energy was typical Bostonian. You would’ve sworn we were watching the World Series the way people were screaming at the TV and refraining from conversation.

Moderator Gurgen asked, “Would you really be number 41 to stop HC from Ted Kennedy’s seat?”. Brown said, “This is not Ted Kennedy’s seat or the Democrat’s seat! It is the people’s seat!!!”

Coakley began talking about Bush and Chaney and trying to make a connection to Brown. Brown stopped her and said, “If you want to run against Bush or Chaney go ahead, but I am Scott Brown, not Bush or Chaney!”

Coakely vowed to vote for ObamaCare. Brown vowed to be the vote that stops it and will then fight for real HC reform.

Like we said, the debate was a slam-dunk. Once it was over, Scott Brown stopped by to thank us for the support.

Guess Who Hosted Coakley's DC Fundraiser Tonight?

The healthcare lobby rides to the rescue of the Massachusetts liberal, whose defeat in next weeks special Senate race could deny Democrats the 60th vote for Obamacare:

We've argued that the leading health industry CEOs will one day be exposed as the most short-sighted business leaders in history, but how to explain the gala fundraiser that their top lobbyists hosted for Martha Coakley last night?

Amid a Beltway panic, the health lobby is riding to the rescue of the Massachusetts liberal, whose defeat in the special Senate race next Tuesday could deny Democrats the 60th vote for ObamaCare and thus maybe spare the U.S. health system from the coming damage.
As first reported by Timothy Carney of the Washington Examiner, the host committee for the fundraiser at Pennsylvania Avenue's Sonoma Restaurant includes lobbyists for Pfizer, Merck, Eli Lilly, Novartis and sundry other drug companies that have been among the biggest of ObamaCare's corporate sponsors. Other hosts—who have raised at least $10,000 for Ms. Coakley—include representatives from UnitedHealthcare, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Humana and other insurers. As far as we can tell, the insurance industry claims to oppose ObamaCare's current incarnation.

Naturally, lobbyists from America's Health Insurance Plans and Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the major trade groups, were on hand too. Money follows power in Washington, obviously, though this example seems especially inexplicable given that Ms. Coakley's GOP opponent, state senator Scott Brown, may be the last chance to defuse the health-care doomsday machine. But maybe someone in the press corps will bother to mention this episode the next time President Obama takes aim at the "special interests" he claims are opposing his agenda.
Against overwhelming public opposition, the only things keeping ObamaCare alive at this point are power politics and the misguided corporate cease-fire that Democrats have either coerced or bought—or is homegrown at companies like Pfizer that are deeply invested in more government control of the economy. Ms. Coakley's election would make that outcome a certainty.

The people of Mass really need to think twice... because with their present Medical system, they will be paying twice for medical care... or that of others.

Then we have Kerry fighting to keep tea parties out of his state
And let us not forget the innocent guy Coakley made sure stayed in jail. - Dissident Voice: Martha Coakley's Chappaquiddick
Coakley is a machine Democrat... Brown is a breath of fresh air and an honest option. (Somebody needs to tell that Kennedy kid running as a Libertarian that since the race is so close... he needs to back out because his vote would got to Scott Brown. His small percentage could cost us the election, and if conservatives aren't careful, that is what will keep happening to us, if we run third party candidates.

If you know people in Mass, make sure they have this information~

The emergency election is January 19, 2010. We need to get as much support as possible...

This will, for sure, be the “vote heard around the world!”

Related:

Concerned About America’s Future???

U.S. Chanber Pledges to stop Obama Agenda’ Play Big Role in Nov Elections

Mass Brown-Coakley Race Within One Point… Election Threatened With…

Martha Coakley: The Voice for Fat Cats and Corruptcrats