Bill Seubert

Yeah, yeah, I know.  Don’t worry about 2012 right now.  So sue me.

Rep. Paul Ryan is one of the most articulate, intelligent conservative voices in Washington, DC.  His voting record is impeccable.  His performance in the so-called “Health Care Summit” was superb.  And this past week, Congressman Ryan delivered an absolutelystunning speech to the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs.  This is not your normal, run-of-the-mill speech.  This address made Barack Obama sound like a seventh-grade speech student.

I’d have to republish the entire thing to capture the highlights. So here are some choice snippets, starting with this:

It raises a subtle but real threat to self-government when the few are paying more and more of the bill for government services and subsidies to the majority: “He who pays the piper calls the tune.” The next chapter is the rule of “crony capitalism,” where those who pay most taxes get the privileges, and government by and for the people is replaced by government by and for the few. The end of this story is soft despotism.

At this point, I’m not sure I would have used the adjective “soft”.  But the point is well-made.

A government that expands beyond its high but limited mission of securing our natural rights is not progressive, it’s regressive. It privileges the powerful at the expense of the people. It establishes the rule of class over class. The American Revolution and the Constitution replaced class rule with a better idea: equal opportunity for all. The promise of keeping the earnings of your work is central to justice, freedom, and the hope to improve your life.

“keeping the earnings of your work” – The Democrats are all for that, only it’s them who wish to keep our earnings.

But wait – there is much, much more…

The Constitution and the consent of the people are all that stand between limited and unlimited government power. Zealous ideologues with the best of intentions brush aside the limits on power in order to get whatever they believe is good for the people … no matter what the people believe. Our system of freedom can survive an assault, but it won’t survive if the people are frightened, or angry, or asleep at the switch. A great Democrat, President Andrew Jackson, once said: “eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty.” We can thank our current leaders at least for this: they have awakened the nation to the danger of taking self-government for granted.

Congress is not only enacting a social welfare state agenda over the objections of the people. It is failing to address the problems that threaten to engulf our country, principally economic decline and entitlement-driven debt crisis. The coming election will be a referendum on the agenda of our current leadership. Either it will give them a mandate that says “more of the same,” or it will end the abuse of power and put America back on the path of growth and freedom.

Paul Ryan obviously understands what is wrong with the current regime.  These two paragraphs encapsulate my feelings about the Democrats in power better than just about anything I’ve read in the past year.  Read those paragraphs again.  And again.

Furthermore, Ryan understands the REAL issue behind the financial crisis we are faced with:

The problem in a nutshell is this: Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, three giant entitlements, are out of control. Exploding costs will drive our federal government and national economy to collapse. And the recession plus this Congress’ spending spree have accelerated the day of reckoning.

Today, Medicare is $38 trillion short of its promised benefits. In five years, the hole will grow to $52 trillion. Your family’s share of this gap is $458,000. Medicaid will add trillions more in state and federal debt.

Social Security’s surplus is already gone, and its debt is mounting. Unless its finances are strengthened, the government will be forced to cut benefits nearly 25 percent or raise payroll taxes more than 30 percent.

Both Republicans and Democrats have failed to be candid about this. And we have only postponed the crisis by shaking a tin cup at China and Japan.

Amen, brother.

And Ryan finishes with a flourish:

My party challenges the whole basis of the Progressivist vision of this country’s future. We challenge their attack on American exceptionalism. We challenge their claim that bureaucratic centralization is the only way the US can meet the economic and social challenges of our time.

Those leaders have underestimated the good sense of the American people. They broke faith with independents, Republicans, and their own rank-and-file. They walked away from the foundational truths that made America the wonder and the envy of the world. The price of their infidelity will be high.

I pray that the price of their infidelity will be an overwhelming GOP victory in 2010.  That is indeed where we must be placing our emphasis for the rest of 2010.

But beyond 2010, we must think about how to re-take the White House from the primary culprit in this governmental hijacking of the Constitution: Barack Hussein Obama.  Congressman Ryan clearly understands the problem and the solution.

A speech like this is not the typical fare we hear from Congressional representatives.  Be sure to read the whole thing. Words like this are seldom heard today, in DC or anywhere else.  These are the kinds of words we hear from a statesman…the kind of words that come from a President.  Now I’ve heard the case from some of my friends and colleagues that we must elect someone with executive experience, or we’ll wind up with another disaster like Barack Obama.  But the problem with Obama has nothing to do with a lack of experience; it has everything to do with a neo-Communist ideology that has lurched this nation’s policy-making far, far to the left.  I am much more interested in a President who has the ideas that can move this country in the right direction.  And Congressman Ryan possesses these ideas.

But, you say, Ryan says he doesn’t want to run for President.  Well, maybe after another year or so of Barack Obama, he’ll be convinced.  I know I am.

(Also posted at Redstate.com)

I’ll be at the Conservative Political Action Conference in DC this week, writing on the events there.  I’ll be posting at Redstate, and here as well!

Watch Redstate.com for updates starting on Thursday.

Run, do not walk, to your computer (oh, right, you’re already there)… and read this article.  It is brilliant.  It captures the essence of leftist attitudes perfectly.   The author, Gerard Alexander (associate professor of politics at the University of Virginia) describes “four major narratives” that leftists (no, I won’t use “liberal”, just as I steadfastly refuse to use “progressives” – both terms are simply euphemisms for “leftist” … but, I digress) use in their arguments:

1. “The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy”
   

   a narrative made famous by Hillary Rodham Clinton but hardly limited to her. This vision maintains that conservatives win elections and policy debates not because they triumph in the open battle of ideas but because they deploy brilliant and sinister campaign tactics.

2. Conservatives are either manipulated or stupid:
   

   And speaking to a roomful of Democratic donors in 2008, then-presidential candidate Obama offered a similar (and infamous) analysis when he suggested that residents of Rust Belt towns “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations” about job losses. When his comments became public, Obama backed away from their tenor but insisted that “I said something that everybody knows is true.”

3. Conservatives are RACISTS!
   

   It is now an article of faith among many liberals that Republicans win elections because they tap into white prejudice against blacks and immigrants.

4. Conservatives are emotion-driven, liberals are logic- and evidence-driven.
   

   Former vice president Al Gore made this case in his 2007 book, “The Assault on Reason,” in which he expressed fear that American politics was under siege from a coalition of religious fundamentalists, foreign policy extremists and industry groups opposed to “any reasoning process that threatens their economic goals.” This right-wing politics involves a gradual “abandonment of concern for reason or evidence” and relies on propaganda to maintain public support, he wrote.

Alexander captures perfectly how Barack Obama exemplifies liberal condescension:

These four liberal narratives not only justify the dismissal of conservative thinking as biased or irrelevant — they insist on it. By no means do all liberals adhere to them, but they are mainstream in left-of-center thinking. Indeed, when the president met with House Republicans in Baltimore recently, he assured them that he considers their ideas, but he then rejected their motives in virtually the same breath.

“There may be other ideas that you guys have,” Obama said. “I am happy to look at them, and I’m happy to embrace them. . . . But the question I think we’re going to have to ask ourselves is, as we move forward, are we going to be examining each of these issues based on what’s good for the country, what the evidence tells us, or are we going to be trying to position ourselves so that come November, we’re able to say, ‘The other party, it’s their fault’?”

This article illustrates why the GOP has no business responding to Obama’s overtures to meet with him and the Dems to discuss healthcare socialization. Republican/conservative ideas will be disregarded and condescended, just as every other idea and thought from Republicans have been since his coronation.

READ the article.  Now.

From the Urban Dictionary:

pwned – A corruption of the word “Owned.” This originated in an online game called Warcraft, where a map designer misspelled “owned.” When the computer beat a player, it was supposed to say, so-and-so “has been owned.”

Instead, it said, so-and-so “has been pwned.”

This week, Missouri’s Senator Kit Bond massively pwned Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

Last week, Gibbs revealed in a press conference that the FBI had been receiving more cooperation from The Christmas Pantybomber (Umar Farouq) Abdulmutallab.  Senator Bond is the ranking Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee and received this information from FBI leadership.  According to Bond, the FBI instructed the committee to not disclose Abulmutallab’s cooperation.  But Gibbs did just that.

Yesterday, Bond discussed his exchange with Gibbs on St. Louis radio station KMOX.

Bond, on the Mark Reardon Show on KMOX, called Gibbs a “clown” and said it’s the White House that should apologize because the F.B.I. told everyone to keep the information quiet.

“They said it is absolutely critical that this information not come out because it will hamper our ability to follow up on all the leads the underpants man (Umar Abdulmutallab) gave us on the terror activity being planned in Yemen.” said Bond.

When asked where Bond thought the information originated he told KMOX it had to have come from the White House.

Bond has sent a letter to the President outlining his concerns.  He has not received a reply from the president.

Press Secretary Gibbs has proposed a debate with Senator Bond.  Bond told KMOX “I don’t debate Press Secretaries.”

That’s gonna leave a mark.

Following now-Senator Scott Brown’s supermajority-busting win of TedKennedy’sSeat™ in Massachusetts, the Democrat rats are quickly leaping from the Obama sinking ship. The latest “run away” moment comes on the heels of the Obama FY2011 budget proposal. Unsurprisingly, the POTUS continues his trillion dollar deficit extravaganza, even after his laughable attempt to feign fiscal responsibility by recommending a so-called “spending freeze.” as part of his proposal.  This week, it was revealed that one of the rats abandoning the Good Ship Barry is none other than Missouri’s Democrat Secretary of State and presumptive Dem candidate for Kit Bond’s U.S. Senate seat, Robin Carnahan.

It’s been fun to watch the leftist bloggers lament about how their man-god has betrayed them.  Earlier this week, Robin Carnahan expressed her “disappointment” in Obama’s “lack of fiscal discipline”, and the Huffington Post was right there to document it.  HuffPo quotes Robin:

“From where I stand here in Missouri, I’m disappointed in the President’s budget recommendation. Budgets are about setting priorities and it’s time Washington started making fiscal discipline and tackling the long-term budget deficit higher priorities.

As you might expect, the HuffPo blogger was none too pleased with her newfound opposition to their Fearless Leader

But for an Obama White House that is touting the deficit reducing measures it has thrown into the budget (from spending caps, to prospective cuts in defense programs, to “restoring some balance to the tax code”) comments like Carnahan’s don’t help.

Now you might think that we fiscal conservatives might welcome statements of this kind.  If it came from someone we could trust, that might be the case.  But those of us in Missouri are accustomed to politicians who try to talk a good game, yet plant themselves firmly in Barack Obama’s lap.  Senator Claire McCaskill is a pro at trying to sound tough but she always returns to her leftist voting ways.  Claire makes statements that pretend to be “independent” or “moderate”, yet always manages to vote with the Left, displayed by her none-too-stellar 14% lifetime rating from the ACU.  And Robin Carnahan seems to be following suit – trying to sound moderate…but who believes it?  Surely not those who witnessed her speaking under the Obama Logo

Ms. Carnahan’s rebellion begs the question:  ”what exactly do you oppose from President Obama’s budget?”  She is very nondescript in her opposition. Can she identify specific areas of the budget where she’d like Obama to cut back? What does she find objectionable?  She has yet to oppose any of Obama’s initiatives, such as the failed “stimulus” spending or the near-deceased ObamaCare initiative.  And Robin, have you talked to your bro, Missouri Rep. Russ Carnahan, about this?  I fully expect Robin would be as “low maintenance” as Russ, and certainly she’ll be persuaded to change her tune once Rahm, Robert and the gang hear how she’s wandered off the ranch.

I don’t think that HuffPo’s Stein has much to worry about with respect to Robin Carnahan.  Despite her tough talk, she’ll be back in the fold eventually.  She’s terrified to tell Missourians what she believes because she knows they won’t like it.  That’s why she chooses not to talk about health care or terrorism or any of the policy positions that sunk Martha Coakley in Massachusetts.  She knows that Roy Blunt is far closer to Missourians’ attitudes about fiscal responsibility, with his support for bills such as 2005’s Deficit Reduction Act and his opposition to bloated budgets even during the Bush administration.

But most importantly, we must keep in mind this worth-a-1000-words picture:

It’s a reminder:  the $1.85T deficit is OBAMA’S DEFICIT and Robin Carnahan will support every major Obama program that is generating these massive deficits that are going to bankrupt the United States and burden your children, your grandchildren and their grandchildren for decades to come.

Teh Twitter is abuzz with posts on the rumor that Barack Obama will be announcing a “spending freeze” on discretionary spending during the State of the Union address.  Pay close attention to the words:  discretionary spending.  The word on the street is that his request will exempt “the Pentagon, veterans programs, foreign aid and homeland security” from this so-called “freeze.”  There are a couple of key items to consider:

1. What exactly does he mean by “freeze?”  Does it mean “freeze the level of spending at the bloated 2009 numbers”?  Or does it mean “don’t increase these programs any more in 2010 than we did in 2009?  Or does it mean “stick to historic growth levels, rather than Obama-caliber spending increases”?  Inquiring minds want to know.
2. Discretionary spending means non-entitlement spending.  When you subtract out entitlements:  Medicare & Social Security, and then you subtract defense-related spending, there is precious little left.  In fact, it comes out to less than fifteen percent of the federal budget.*  Barack Obama’s so-called “stimulus” program totaled around $750B – that’s almost 50% greater than the entire non-defense discretionary budget for 2009. Freezing 15% of the federal budget is a drop in the bucket.  (see page 8 of this PDF)

Note one other key item in that Federal Budget PDF document.  As of the year 2017, “Net Interest” – the interest paid on the national debt – exceeds ALL non-military discretionary federal spending.  If Barack Obama wanted to have a real impact on the federal budget, both now and in the future, he would cease and desist from these so-called “stimuli” that are doing little or nothing to fix the Obama Recession.

To propose a spending freeze of any sort is good political theater for Obama, but it will have virtually no impact on the financial standing of the United States of America.

To admit that I voted for a guy who has to do this:

He needs the TOTUS to talk to SIXTH GRADERS???

By the end of next year, the entire country will be wondering how he ever got elected, because no one will admit voting for him.

This past Thursday morning, St. Louis NPR station KWMU reported that Republican Scott Brown’s victory in the Massachusetts Senate race could be “a shot across the bow for Robin Carnahan”, the Democrat competing with Missouri Congressman Roy Blunt (MO-7) for retiring Senator Kit Bond’s seat.  The station said:

Speaking in St. Louis Republican Senator Kit Bond said Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts is further proof that voters do not support the President’s agenda, from bailouts, to cash-for clunkers and most of all the healthcare overhaul. “It should be a wake-up call,” said Bond. “People are tired of government takeover, government takeover, of government taxation. Anybody who is on the wrong side of this issue might want to consider it again.”

It now appears that the polls are agreeing with Senator Bond.  The Missouri Senate race is starting to move strongly in Roy Blunt’s favor, no doubt due in large part to a gradual increase in unease with the Obama/Pelosi/Reid agenda.  Today’s numbers from Scott Rasmussen shows that Blunt has gained eight points on Carnahan, with Blunt leading 49%-43%. Last month, he trailed Carnahan by just two points.

Policy positions are critical in a campaign, and name recognition is a key component of success.  Both the Blunt and Carnahan names are well-known around Missouri. But there is one name that’s known more around Washington DC than the other, and you may be surprised to know whose name that is.  Let’s take a peek…

Robin Carnahan’s grandfather, Albert Sidney Johnson (A. S. J.) Carnahan, was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from 1944-1946, and again from 1948-1960. He lost in 1960, and was appointed as Ambassador to Sierra Leone by JFK. So A.S.J. Carnahan spent over 16 years as a DC resident and significant player in DC Democrat party politics.

A.S.J. Carnahan’s son, Mel Carnahan, was a prominent Missouri politician, serving as MO’s Lt. Governor and Governor. In 2000, Mel ran for Senate against then-MO Att’y General John Ashcroft. Carnahan was tragically killed in a plane crash weeks before the election, but won anyway, as MO law did not allow his name to be removed from the ballot. Then-Lt. Gov Roger Wilson appointed Carnahan’s wife Jean to serve in his place until a special election in 2002. Jean Carnahan lost to Jim Talent, who served the remaining four years of Jean/Mel’s term.  Mel obviously spent quite a bit of time in DC even prior to his Senatorial run, as he was a graduate of GWU, where he met Jean.

Mel and Jean Carnahan’s son Russ Carnahan is currently serving in the U.S. House of Representatives, representing MO-3 (south portion of the St. Louis area, through Jefferson Co, to Ste. Genevieve.  This is the same seat that Russ’s Grandpa A.S.J. held (and he also serves as the vice chair of the International Organizations, Human Rights and Oversight subcommittee – his grandpa’s subcommittee).  Russ is known as a reliable left-wing vote in Congress, and one of Russ’s “Town Hall” meetings were the site of the notorious SEIU union thug beating of Kenneth Gladney.  Russ’s biggest accomplishment appears to be his nomination as “Porker of the Year” by CAGW.  His tenure in the House has shown him to be rather hapless.  He’s earned the title “Low Maintenance Russ,” a name supported by none other than Nancy Pelosi herself, based upon her comments that Russ is “not a high-maintenance type”.  Russ has a pretty solid reputation as one who blindly supports pretty much anything that Pelosi throws at him.

And that brings us to Russ’s sister – Missouri’s current Secretary of State, Robin Carnahan, the latest member of the Carnahan dynasty to seek office in DC.  Some might think that Robin has no background in DC politics, but they would be wrong.  Ms. Carnahan served as an “executive” with the Export-Import Bank of the United States and did work with the National Democratic Institute…both Washington, DC entities.  In fact, she joined the Ex-Im Bank in 1993 – four years before her Senate competitor Blunt was elected to the House.  We have a list of her addresses where she lived in DC, so she has had extensive presence there in the past.  So while Robin Carnahan is currently a Missouri state official, she is no stranger to the DC world and culture.

It’s surprising to hear accusations of Roy Blunt’s family as any kind of “dynasty” when Congressman Blunt is the first of the family to spend significant time in DC, beginning with his election to the House in 1996.  Contrast with the Carnahan family, who has significant DC presence back into the 1940s.  Now who is the dynasty?

Robin Carnahan has yet to reveal much in the way of positions on key national issues.  However, she’s already been endorsed by unions and groups such as Emily’s List, a pro-abortion political advocacy group.  While she (unsurprisingly) has not explicitly stated her position on the bills in the Senate and House, she spoke out in praise of the bill passed in the Senate in December.  She DID state earlier this year that we need to “get past Guantanamo” – a veiled approval of Obama’s generally unpopular policy of moving prisoners and treating them as criminals rather than terrorists.  She has held no campaign news conferences, issued no policy position statements, and has generally sequestered herself in the safety of her Jefferson City office.  No one knows where she is or what she thinks.  But based on her background, it is a pretty sure bet that she will continue to be an unfailing supporter of Barack Obama and his policies.  If elected, Robin Carnahan would soon become known as “Rubber Stamp Robin” – as much of a lapdog to Barack Obama as brother Russ has been in the House to Nancy Pelosi and Obama.

Judging from the outcome of the Massachusetts Senate election, Robin’s close ties to Obama policies and ideas during the election campaign will be a very bad thing for her.  To characterize Robin Carnahan as some sort of “DC outsider” who will bring a “fresh view” to the seat is ludicrous.  She is fully saturated with the DC mindset.  She’s lived it throughout her life.  But the Carnahan DC Dynasty is about to come to an end.

(originally posted at Redstate.com)

News broke this weekend that a forthcoming book on the 2008 election will report Harry Reid making some incendiary remarks about Barack Obama. Specifically, Harry Reid said Obama has “no Negro dialect, unless he wants to have one.”

So now let’s take the Wayback Machine to 2002, shall we?  We’ll take a look at the Democrats’ responses to Trent Lott’s statements (and subsequent apology) about Strom Thurmond, which were widely condemned as “racist.” Lott had said “we wouldn’t be in the mess we were in today” had Thurmond won the Presidency way back when Thurmond ran as a Dixiecrat.

• ‘His apology does not take away the sting of his divisive words…‘ – Barbara Boxer
• ‘I can tell you if a Democratic leader said such a thing, they would not be allowed to keep their position,’ – Mary Landrieu
• ‘What he said was insensitive as hell; it’s very offensive,’ … ‘Race is serious stuff. It’s not something you kid about.’ – Joe Biden
• ‘…the GOP must decide whether Lott ‘represents the views of the majority of Republicans in the Senate and in our country.‘ – Hillary Clinton
• ‘We need political leaders who are healers, not dividers,’ … ‘I hope that Senator Lott’s apology will translate into action and that he will advance policies that bring us together as a nation rather than pull us apart.‘ – Dick Durbin
• ‘When connected to past comments and votes, this statement casts a dark shadow over Sen. Lott’s ability to be a credible party leader‘ – Diane Feinstein
• ‘Sen. Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat, described Lott’s comments as ‘outrageous’ and ‘completely inexcusable.’ ‘Those kinds of comments have no place in our society and should be repudiated by every American,’ Stabenow said in a statement. ‘At this point, the Republican caucus in the U.S. Senate needs to think long and hard about the kind of values they want their leadership to represent.‘ – Debbie Stabenow

(and there are many other classics from Senate and House Democrites at “Blogs for Victory“)

Climate cultist Algore and (surprise, surprise ) Jesse Jackson demanded that Lott resign:

But some Democrats were angry. Civil rights activist Jesse Jackson called for Lott to resign, and former Vice President Al Gore told CNN that the comment was “racist.”

Funny, Jesse has been strangely silent the last couple of days.

Then we have the pièce de résistance from The O himself:

Illinois Senator Barack Obama (D-13th), who hosted WVON’s Cliff Kelley Show, challenged the Republican Party to repudiate Lott’s remarks and to call for his resignation as senate leader.

“It seems to be that we can forgive a 100-year-old senator for some of the indiscretion of his youth, but, what is more difficult to forgive is the current president of the U.S. Senate (Lott) suggesting we had been better off if we had followed a segregationist path in this country after all of the battles and fights for civil rights and all the work that we still have to do,” said Obama.

He said: “The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott. If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party.”

If Democrat hypocrisy was jobs, the Obama economic mess would be over tomorrow.

President Obama, I’m waiting patiently for your demands that Harry Reid resign.  Something tells me that I have a long wait ahead of me.

This is amazing:

More info can be found in this story:

“Snow Covers Britain From Head to Toe”

If Algore showed up in London today, they’d probably boot him out of the country permanently.