It’s hard to imagine there could be anything more Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the “hair hero” of the New York Times, would have to say to undermine her credibility and make her look more foolish than she already has.

Recall, this is the woman who said Republicans are “anti-woman” and wish to bring back Jim Crow laws. She lied about a Republican Medicare proposal, and as the proud owner of a Japanese-made vehicle accused Republicans of wanting to eliminate all American-made cars. I could go on, but I will take neither the time nor the space to repeat what most of you have probably already heard or seen.

She was on “Meet the Press” with Norah O’Donnell last weekend, where she gave her take on Obama and on the Republican field. As usual, she did not fail to deliver.

I was unable to find a clip that I could embed, but you can see it here.

Her first claim, in defense of Obama, was that he “took on the health insurance industry.” This was in reference to the Obamacare legislation that the insurance industry, in large part, lobbied FOR. I’m sure giving them millions of new customers and taxpayer money (and waivers from the rules “favored” insurers did not like) really showed them!

Then she said Obama has helped “begin to get the economy turned around,” an assertion Norah O’Donnell challenged. Debbie’s response naturally was to whine about how Obama inherited it, and it was all Bush’s fault.

Yet just two months ago, she enthusiastically claimed responsibility for the economy on behalf of her party!

But that’s nothing compared to what came next. O’Donnell pointed out Obama’s declining approval ratings, and Debbie not surprisingly responded that Obama “is still in remarkably good shape,” while continuing to emphasize the recession “he inherited.” I’m not sure if she was aware she was saying this the same day Gallup came out with Obama’s lowest approval rating yet.

I’m not sure if she thinks her frequent use of the adverb “so” to describe Republicans really makes her case any stronger; it actually makes her seem even less serious to a general audience if that is at all possible. She concluded with her assessment of the Republican field so far, claiming “They are all so similar they might as well be Legos, they’re that interchangeable.” I’d be surprised if even most Democrats agreed with that, but given the Democrats’ definition of “diversity,” she makes the perfect case yet again that people in glass houses should not throw stones.

Some liberals were trying to get that message out to her at a speech she gave at the Iowa State Fair. One heckler called for her to “stop caving to Wall Street” and complained that “Obama put Medicare on the chopping block” among other rants I could not make out. She then shouted, “We have an example of a division in this country, and the division in this country needs to end.” Such a response would just prove that point, no? As this article from the American Spectator points out, it seems there was more than one liberal there ready to prove her wrong, again complaining of the debt ceiling deal that seems to have gotten quite a few Democrats’ panties in a wad.

I look forward to seeing and hearing more from her before the elections, and I hope more voters come to know her. As many other conservatives have said, she truly is the gift that keeps on giving.

I suppose the majority of people don’t really care, but I know I don’t want to eat anything or take any drugs made in China. I’m sure the reasons are obvious; it’s something I take quite seriously myself. It has not been easy. It requires a lot of research, and it requires avoiding many foods and medications; but it has been worth the efforts and sacrifices for me.

As I was recently looking around at different vitamin supplements, one in particular piqued my interest. It’s called Opurity, and it advertises itself as “China-free.” That was quite amazing considering China has a near monopoly on many or most vitamins.

The makers of the supplement, ProSynthesis Laboratories, sought to register their “China Free” logo with the US Patent Office; but they ran into a little problem when their application was denied. According to the PTO, the trademark was “disparaging” and “promoted a stereotype that all Chinese manufacturers make poor quality goods.”

It seems quite ironic for an agency charged with defending patents and trademarks to defend a country whose very culture is defined by counterfeiting and indeed “poor quality goods.” Of course with today’s “multiculturalism,” anything goes – except traditional American culture.

The feds seem to have warmed to China and its “economic wonders” more and more over the years.

They have legislated to that effect with the lobbying efforts of large corporations who simply move to China to avoid the very legislation for which they lobbied. It was under Clinton the US saw the permanent and so-called “normal” trade relations with the Communist regime. We’ve since seen the light bulb ban and other “energy-efficient” mandates throw yet more economic demand China’s way. What better way to “go green” than to outsource to manufacturers who don’t care about the environment and cannot breathe their own air!

Why should it be a surprise the FDA seemed more concerned about American-made Tylenol and peanut butter than they did the Chinese-made heparin a couple years earlier, the one that people actually had serious health problems and DIED from. And of course no one dare criticize the Chinese-made abortion pill pushed through by the Clinton administration that has injured and killed both women and children around the world. Tylenol is a rarity. Most OTC pain relievers, including Advil and Aspirin, are made in China.

And while Homeland Security was cooking up plans to virtually strip search innocent Americans, they totally ignore calls to monitor the Chinese-made fluoride that is tainting several city water supplies.

No doubt I could find countless ways the Democrats and elitists in Washington are ignoring or praising China while focusing criticism towards Americans who pose far less danger overall.

ProSynthesis Laboratories claimed that it will appeal the PTO decision. Given the political climate in the federal government and judiciary, I doubt that appeal will succeed. Better to protect a culture of counterfeit (along with the wealthy and ignorant Hollywood campaign supporters) than to protect the intellectual property of an American small business concerned with keeping people safe and healthy.

For now, at least we have a place to go for safe vitamin supplements.

I’ve commented about this a lot on this site, and it’s something that a lot of people appear to be unaware of. Quite honestly, I’m not sure if any members of Congress are aware of it. I saw brief mention on a few blogs back in December when the Senate passed the bill. However, it seems to have been largely forgotten or overlooked.

We’ve all heard that the new measure requires individuals to buy what Congress calls “health insurance” or pay a penalty. However, I don’t think many people are aware of or have thought much about what would happen to someone who failed to do either.

Starting on page 336 of the bill, Section 5000A(g)(1) says:

IN GENERAL.—The penalty provided by this section shall be paid upon notice and demand by the Secretary, and except as provided in paragraph (2), shall be assessed and collected in the same manner as an assessable penalty under subchapter B of 23 chapter 68.

So, except “as provided in paragraph (2),” it’s treated like someone’s failure to pay regular income taxes. So what is provided in paragraph (2):

SPECIAL RULES.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law—
‘‘(A) WAIVER OF CRIMINAL PENALTIES.— In the case of any failure by a taxpayer to timely pay any penalty imposed by this section, such taxpayer shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty with respect to such failure.
‘‘(B) LIMITATIONS ON LIENS AND LEVIES.—The Secretary shall not—
‘‘(i) file notice of lien with respect to any property of a taxpayer by reason of any failure to pay the penalty imposed by this section, or
‘‘(ii) levy on any such property with respect to such failure.

Did everyone get that? About the best they can do apparently is send you letters. That makes it quite easy for those who would prefer to not buy so-called “health insurance” until they need it or for those who, like me, simply object to being told to do it.

I wondered if perhaps we could not get this whole bill repealed if enough of us (every single opponent) simply refused to buy coverage or pay a penalty. It wouldn’t matter for those who had special medical needs that were covered and used more than they put in. However, I’m not sure that enough people are opposed enough to make the sacrifice; only a tiny percentage of objectors likely won’t make any difference to the “health insurance industry” or the ability of the bill to be implemented or willingness of Congress to continue it. Otherwise, it could perhaps be a means of defunding it and perhaps creating enough of a crisis to get it repealed.

On the downside, this would put an additional burden on those who wish to take this issue to court on claims of unconstitutionality. You are going to tell a judge that you don’t like getting letters from Kathleen Sebelius? Not that any court would find any problem if there were a real penalty, but this makes it beyond impossible.

So I’m happy to see as many people as possible, including employers, join me in a pledge to not buy or accept so-called “health insurance” coverage come 2014.

I guess it should come as no surprise that Democrats are afraid to explain their own proposals, especially given they don’t even want people reading them.

We all know that the vast majority of Americans are and have consistently been opposed to funding abortions. For nearly thirty years nonstop, this sentiment has been mostly respected at the federal level, if only directly, in the form of the Hyde Amendment.

Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) is apparently very aware of this fact. At the same time, she could not let down her $upporters at NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and EMILY’s List; she had to find a way to ensure that abortions would be covered in their new so-called “health” care plan.

So she puts forth an amendment that would mandate all insurance companies cover abortions. As she puts it, it would fund “women’s health clinics that provide comprehensive services.”

When Orrin Hatch (R-UT) asks her to explain it, the best she can do is, “It does not expand, um, uh, or mandate abortion service.” What a relief that she doesn’t want forced abortions like Obama’s “science czar.”

Here is a video of the exchange:

Other than the special interests whom she profits, I can’t help but wonder how anyone could be convinced to vote for this woman. She is worse than Pelosi.

Needless to say, the amendment passed 12-11 with all Republicans and Bob Casey opposing it and Democrats supporting it. Hatch offered an amendment to explicitly exclude abortion coverage that failed by the same margins.

Like all Democrats, it’s quite obvious the woman doesn’t want to come out and tell people what she really wants. However, they are rarely ever asked to do so. When they are, they duck the question and get more than ample cover by the media.

Note that Democrats are not going to include the word “abortion” in any of their so-called “health” care legislation, and Planned Parenthood would have it no other way. They know they could never get support if it did. However, unless an amendment is added, it will be funded by default. Thus far, numerous attempts to exclude taxpayer-funded abortion in the House and Senate have failed in all committees.

Make no mistake. If it passes, the current “health” care legislation proposals are FOCA in disguise. We saw a lot of strong opposition to FOCA during the election, and that opposition should be no less for their death care bill. There is plenty besides the cost and budget issues that should be of concern for opponents of this thing; and it will only add to the spending for groups like Planned Parenthood who need it least.

It seems ironic to write about two of the Senate’s most vocal advocates for defending the unborn, but the release of this statement has seriously eroded their credibility on the matter.

Obama recently nominated Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius to the office of “Health and Human Services.” This evil woman has time and time again provided cover for third trimester abortionist George Tiller. That it can even be called an “abortion” at that stage (or really even the second trimester) is reprehensible.

Tiller is a very active and vocal $upporter of hers, and she returns the favor. Sebelius was recently spotted hosting an extravagant dinner with him. She has vetoed legislation that would have required the reporting of reasons for third trimester abortions. She has also vetoed safety regulations for facilities that offer abortions. As people were reminded in her reelection campaign, the regulations would have kept cockroaches from infesting the abortion centers. Indeed Sebelius cares more about cockroaches than human beings.

These are not the kinds of things that reasonable people “disagree” over, as the media would have readers believe. It is common sense regulation! We should not expect that any Obama nominee would be pro-life, but Sebelius has a record of activism that is beyond the pale. At least the previous nominee, Tom Daschle, opposed partial birth abortion.

The office for which Obama has appointed Sebelius will be very influential in setting a big new “health care” agenda. As we know, Democrats like Obama and Sebelius promote abortion under the guise of “health care,” so this does not bode well, particularly with the radical new policies that are to be adopted. First we get rationing of health care to kill off the older generation; now we kill off the younger generation. In truth, this makes it about “death” rather than “health.”

Kansas Senator Sam Brownback has long been among the Senate’s strongest advocate for the unborn. Pat Roberts also has a strong pro-life record. However, that has now changed with the release of their statement of praise. It begins,

U.S. Senator Pat Roberts and U.S. Senator Sam Brownback today congratulated Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius on her nomination by President Obama to head the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Why? How can they be so congratulatory to someone this bent on killing and physically torturing innocent human beings?

It goes on:

It’s an honor for the State of Kansas to have an elected official appointed to the president’s cabinet. We are hopeful Governor Sebelius will be a voice for Kansas and rural America at the Department.

Do Brownback and Roberts not know whom they are dealing with?! How can it be an “honor” to have this sadist in such a position where she will be able to advance her radical pro-abortion and pro-infanticide agenda? Their “hope” is as unrealistic and delusional as the zombies who voted for Obama for that reason alone.

But just when you think it couldn’t get worse:

Obviously we will have different viewpoints than the Administration on many issues including health care reform especially given the huge price tag. We have real concerns about the president’s budget which includes an additional $634 billion for a health care ‘reserve fund’ which is made up of tax increases and major cuts to programs critical to Kansas seniors.

So those are the only “different viewpoints” worth noting? No mention of her support for Tiller and her opposition to any limits on any abortion at any stage, even if it is to protect the women seeking them? No mention of the attempts she will make to insert it into the new “health care” plan? No mention of a dead baby in every pot and a cockroach in every abortion facility?

This should be a major disappointment to any pro-life supporter of Brownback or Roberts, and I hope Kansans will take note and call their offices. This kind of support is simply unacceptable for anyone who considers himself or herself to be pro-life. There is no reason ANY Republican in the Senate (other than Specolsnowe) to praise, let alone vote to confirm, this woman. In the office where they are perhaps the most relevant, her positions on human life are not only unacceptable but radical and out of the mainstream.

With Sebelius at the helm, this office will respect neither health nor humans and will become that of Death and Cockroach Services.

Who would think that Texas Republicans weren’t really all that different from those in Massachusetts, Connecticut, or New Jersey?

I must admit I haven’t kept up with politics, especially at the state level, for very long. With a session of about four months every other year with little media attention, it can be easy to miss. It wasn’t until 2007 that I tried to keep up with what went on, a difficult task for a conservative far from Austin.

I see relatively little discussion of the Texas legislature relative to those in other states, and I can’t figure out why that is. Forget ANY up-to-date conservative perspectives, publications, or discussion web sites. Even the mainstream media is more focused on city politics. By the looks of things, I’m guessing that the vast majority of Texans, particularly Texas Republicans, are paying NO attention and could likely not even name their state representative or senator. Texas voters need to realize NOW that they cannot continue to do so if they don’t wish to be overtaken by the left.

My representative spoke last year at a small gathering, and he said that most Republicans in the state legislature were quite liberal. The truth is that voters don’t pay much attention to these races. Incumbents win primaries, though they rarely face any challenges; and general elections are based on party ID. It makes sense. I know that the house Republicans cannot possibly be reflecting the views of the people who elected them. If they were, people would have voted for the Democrat.

This year, former house Speaker Tom Craddick, who apparently was a conservative, was thought to be “too divisive” by certain Republicans. In particular, it was a “gang of 11″ who sought his defeat. From everything I heard and read, it was only because of him that conservatives ever stood a chance at having any legislation voted on.

So these eleven RINOs teamed up with the Democrats to unite against Tom Craddick in support of one of the eleven, Joe Straus.

Joe Straus appears to be a NIGHTMARE for Texas and for the Republican party. You know it’s a problem when he is supported by the most liberal Democrats and praised by the media as one who will end the “divisiveness” and bring “diversity” to the legislature (apparently because he is Jewish). For those who didn’t know, politics is SUPPOSED to be “divisive” by nature. That’s why the legislature still exists. Anyway, there is a sickening similarity between the press’s depictions of Straus and Obama. It literally makes me want to vomit.

It seems Craddick was opposed for not allowing for debate of matters he did not agree with. It’s hard to confirm because there is so little unbiased information available. Yet that is exactly why Democrats and liberals were so supportive of Straus. When you lack votes for your own legislation, your best bet is to stop the majority from bringing up and debating their legislation. So now rather than opening debate to both sides, as the Dallas Morning News would have us believe, the new speaker will shut off debate for anything conservatives might support. Time will tell if Texas voters fall for the media’s lies.

So if you are a Texan with a Republican representative, I urge you to examine his record and positions. As believers in federalism, we must set the bar higher and be a lot more picky when it comes to state-level officials. Unfortunately, people all too often seem to do just the polar opposite.

So if your representative is one of the eleven RINOs listed below, I urge you to vote against him in 2010:

Charlie Geren
Rob Eissler

Brian McCall

Burt Solomons

Jim Pitts

Tommy Merritt

Delwin Jones
Byron Cook

Jim Keffer

Joe Straus

Edmund Kuempel

Those eleven MUST be defeated.

As many have pointed out here, it’s fine to welcome Republicans into the party who disagree on some fundamental issues. However, such people should not be placed in any sort of leadership position to represent the party, especially when their goal is to “end divisiveness” (aka silence debate on matters where they are in the party minority).

Of course now we’ve got Kay Barely Republican to worry about. I’ll save that discussion for another day except to say that it may come to illustrate my point quite well.

As if the Obama campaign wasn’t doing enough in Missouri with its “Truth Squad,” it is now threatening Texans with Secret Service agents.

Jessica Hughes of Lufkin, TX got a call from the Obama campaign wanting her support. Her reply:

No, I don’t support him. Your guy is a socialist who voted four times in the state Senate to let little babies die in hospital closets; I think you should find something better to do with your time.

I don’t know if I could have been that polite. While I ordinarily wouldn’t take a call from someone I didn’t know, it’s a different story when you’ve got a child in the emergency room recovering from a concussion. Anyway, we all know the Obama campaign has zero tolerance for negative feelings about their idol. At best, it’s deemed racism or hate, though some “interpret” any unfavorability or negative revelations as death threats or defamation. The lady on the phone obviously couldn’t bear hearing the truth about what a miserable excuse for a human being Obama is. So what does she do but lie to police, rearranging Mrs. Hughes’s words to:

“I will never support Obama, and he will wind up dead on a hospital floor.”

So Mrs. Hughes got a visit from the Secret Service! Despite her husband’s verification of her actual words and no evidence but the lies spewed by the campaign caller, they have questioned and done a thorough investigation of this woman; and it seems they aren’t through with her yet. After wondering why the caller would lie (hmm…I wonder), the agents had the gall to tell this woman she was “rude!” Excuse me, but who is the rude one here? Besides, what business of theirs is it if she is?! As she told them, being rude is not a crime. I would have told the agents about Obama’s support for the murder of infants and asked how they could support Obama after that. What would they have said about such a despicable man?

The agents threatened to question neighbors and to “embarrass” her, and she welcomed them to do so. I would too; let more people become aware of Obama’s police state tactics. People certainly won’t hear about it from ABC, See BS, MessNBC, or CNN.

I’m sure people who haven’t already can see the pattern. This is quite frightening. I continue to see suppression of everything negative about Obama. It would seem the “I’m rubber, you’re glue” mentality the Obama campaign has recently adopted towards McCain would lead them to welcome such attacks.

It’s enough when privately-owned media chooses to filter negative information. The state of Missouri then crossed the line. This recent incident goes beyond the pale even more.

Meanwhile, the federal government is nowhere to be found in Florida where there has clearly been a violation of this very law Obama opposed. Instead, inept and incompetent officials at the local level have been investigating the matter well over two years now and seem to somehow be under the mistaken notion that “viability” might somehow play a role in its enforcement of the law. The federal government apparently chooses which federal laws it will and will not enforce. If it’s this selective now under Bush, I shudder to think how much worse it will be under Obama.

I do hope and pray that there is some justice here. The secret service should not be allowed to get away with this, and the Obama campaign caller needs to be legally penalized! She should at least be investigated. I would say the same thing if it had happened on the other side; but of course it never would. Nonetheless, I get the feeling nothing will be said or done regarding this grave injustice. Most people will never know until Obama’s police agents come for them.