<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title></title>
	<atom:link href="http://saywhatblog.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://saywhatblog.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 18:14:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>The Senate Layout</title>
		<link>http://saywhatblog.com/the-senate-layout-2/</link>
		<comments>http://saywhatblog.com/the-senate-layout-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 20:38:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Nassar Report</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Nassar Report]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saywhatblog.com/?p=192</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[August 11, 2010
A lot of talking heads have made it clear this year that the House has a significant chance of switching control while the Senate has essentially been ruled out. Being the optimist that I am, I have decided to jot down a brief rundown of the Senate seats in play.
Currently, Republicans control 41 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>August 11, 2010<br />
A lot of talking heads have made it clear this year that the House has a significant chance of switching control while the Senate has essentially been ruled out. Being the optimist that I am, I have decided to jot down a brief rundown of the Senate seats in play.</p>
<p>Currently, Republicans control 41 seats in the Senate and need to flip 10 Dem held seats, while losing none, to regain the majority.</p>
<p>Below are the seats needed to win a majority. (In parentheses, the most recent polling from <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/elections/" target="_blank">RCP</a>)</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #0000ff">Democrat Seats in Jeopardy:</span></strong><br />
1. North Dakota (<span style="color: #ff0000">Repub</span> leads by 47 points)<br />
2. Arkansas (<span style="color: #ff0000">Repub</span> leads by 25 points)<br />
3. Indiana (<span style="color: #ff0000">Repub</span> leads by 21 points)<br />
4. Delaware (<span style="color: #ff0000">Repub</span> leads by 13 points)<br />
5. Colorado (<span style="color: #ff0000">Repub</span> leads by 2 points)<br />
6. Illinois (<span style="color: #ff0000">Repub</span> leads by 2 points)<br />
7. Pennsylvania (<span style="color: #ff0000">R</span><span style="color: #ff0000">epub</span> leads by 2 points)</p>
<p>8. Nevada (<span style="color: #0000ff">Dem</span> leads by 2 points)<br />
9. Wisconsin (<span style="color: #0000ff">Dem</span> leads by 2 point)<br />
10. Washington (<span style="color: #0000ff">Dem </span>leads by 4 points)<br />
11. California (<span style="color: #0000ff">Dem</span> leads by 4 points)<br />
12. Connecticut (<span style="color: #0000ff">Dem</span> leads by 7 points)<br />
13. West Virginia (<span style="color: #0000ff">Dem</span> leads by 14)<br />
14. Oregon (<span style="color: #0000ff">D</span><span style="color: #0000ff"><span style="color: #0000ff">e</span>m</span> leads by 18 points)</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000">Republican Seats in Jeopardy:</span></strong><br />
1. Florida (<span style="color: #00ff00">Ind</span> leads by 4)<br />
2. Ohio (<span style="color: #ff0000">Repub</span> leads by 2 points)<br />
3. Missouri (<span style="color: #ff0000">Repub</span> leads by 5.3 points)<br />
4. Kentucky (<span style="color: #ff0000">Repub</span> leads by 7 points)<br />
5. New Hampshire (<span style="color: #ff0000">Repub </span>leads by 8 ponts)</p>
<p>Republicans are leading in 7 Democratic held seats and only losing in 1 Republican held seat. If Sharon Angle (NV), Ron Johnson(WI), and Dino Rossi(WA) or Carly Fiorina(CA) come out with a win, all of which have polled ahead at one point this cycle, AND Marco Rubio pulls out the big victory over party-switching-opportunist-moderate, Charlie Crist, a Republican majority will be a result.</p>
<p>Keep in mind, during wave elections, the toss up seats usually go to the party making the most gains. Mix this with a toxic political environment for Democrats and you have the recipe for a ripe Republican takeover.<br />
Bottom line: There is a definite path to victory in the Senate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://saywhatblog.com/the-senate-layout-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Perfect Storm</title>
		<link>http://saywhatblog.com/the-perfect-storm-2/</link>
		<comments>http://saywhatblog.com/the-perfect-storm-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2010 17:18:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Nassar Report</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Nassar Report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saywhatblog.com/?p=166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[August 5, 2010
With less than 100 days to go ‘til Election Day, a storm is brewing. A Republican wave is headed to shore and recent news and polling data don’t show any signs of the surge weakening. Political pundits are expecting a large number of Republican gains, but an even greater question still remains. Will [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>August 5, 2010</p>
<p>With less than 100 days to go ‘til Election Day, a storm is brewing. A Republican wave is headed to shore and recent news and polling data don’t show any signs of the surge weakening. Political pundits are expecting a large number of Republican gains, but an even greater question still remains. Will the wave making its way towards Washington subside enough in the next few months to salvage the Democrat’s majority?</p>
<p>As former Democratic Speaker of the House, Tip O’Neil, once said: “All politics is local.” He argued that politics on the local level is what matters in the minds of a district’s voters. Said another way, if a politician is viewed as being sensitive to the needs of his or her constituents, and has a record of advocating for those needs, the politician will cruise to victory. This may have been true in past elections, but the 2010 midterm elections are about one thing: the economy (and more specifically jobs). This is an issue on which, in the eyes of the public, the Obama Administration has failed to deliver.</p>
<p>The national political climate is extremely favorable for Republicans this cycle. Unemployment is expected to remain high, around 9% throughout the rest of 2010. Gross Domestic Product numbers for the second quarter missed the mark last week, rising only 2.4%. This news reiterated the fact that the economy is still in an extremely fragile state and putting the kibosh on any speculation of a better economic environment for Democrats as they head into November.</p>
<p>With no additional economic reports scheduled before Election Day, and the unemployment outlook looking to remain stagnant, the Democrats are stuck grasping at straws on the economy.</p>
<p>In a CBS poll conducted in July, 38% of Americans said that the economy is the country’s most important problem. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan came in at distant second at only 8%. When asked to specifically identify what the most important economic problem was, jobs and unemployment came in at 38% and deficits and spending at 10%.</p>
<p>Despite Obama’s massive legislative accomplishments with health care reform and financial reform in his first 2 years, both of which would be the envy of any first term president, he has seen surprisingly little return.</p>
<p>In fact, a majority of Americans support repealing the entire Health Care Reform bill and starting over from scratch. Financial reform proved to be a bit more popular, with 65% of Americans supporting it. Yet Obama received little bounce in his poll numbers as a result.</p>
<p>Additionally, the inability of the Obama Administration and those in the majority to focus on the most important issue of the American people, to create jobs, has lead to the dire straits in which the Democrats now find themselves. 74% of Americans think the $862 Billion stimulus package passed this past February had no impact or made our economic situation worse. 52% of Americans feel that Obama has spent too little time on the economy.</p>
<p>These are frightening numbers for Democrats who spent the better part of this summer attempting to highlight the successes of the stimulus package, coining it the “Recovery Summer”.</p>
<p>Obama has been teetering on the edge with respect to his job approval ratings, which just this month took a plunge into the red, with an approval rating at -5.3.</p>
<p>Congressional Democrats have had little to celebrate as well with Republicans leading them in the generic ballot by 6. The most significant warning sign of an incoming wave is the enthusiasm gap where Republicans enjoy a 22 point lead. If those who came out to vote for Obama in 2008 decide to stay home come November, John Boehner will be wielding the Speaker’s gavel over the 112th Congress.</p>
<p>It is safe to say the honeymoon phase for the Obama Administration is over. Since Election Day, Obama’s approval rating has plunged 30 points.</p>
<p>Although the political climate seems to be deteriorating under the Democrats feet, there may be a shred of hope as Democrats hold a significant advantage in the money race. The Democratic Campaign Committee holds nearly a 2 to 1 advantage in cash on hand over the NRCC, $33.8 Million to $17 Million.</p>
<p>In the 35 Democratic house seats that Charlie Cook, a trusted political analyst on both sides of the aisle, lists as pure toss up or leaning Republican, Democrats hold a 2 to 1 advantage, $860,000 to $440,000. Deeper pockets may help the vulnerable Democrats define their opponent early before he or she is even able to get on the air. In expensive media markets, such as CA-11 (San Francisco), where vulnerable freshman Democrat Jerry McNerney is in the fight for his political life against David Harmer, McNerney’s 5-1 cash advantage may be enough to hold onto his seat.</p>
<p>A wall of cash may not be enough to weather the storm for others, though. Freshman Democrat Travis Childers, in the relatively inexpensive MS-01 media market, holds a 4-1 cash advantage over State Senator Alan Nunnelee, yet recent polling has Nunnelee up by 8 points. With over 100 democratic seats classified as “in-play” by the Cook Political Report and only 39 needed for Republicans to reclaim the majority, an abundance of cash will only serve as a small bandage on the severely battered Democratic Party. The Democrats’ only hope to keeping their position of power is to take a play out of Tip O’Neil’s playbook and refocus the race to local issues. But you better believe that the Republicans will continue to tie vulnerable Democrats to Obama and Pelosi and make the election a referendum on the Obama Administration, Pelosi and Reid, a strategy that has thus far proved to be effective.</p>
<p>Will the Republican wave begin to subside before washing ashore? Political Handicapper Stuart Rothenberg mentioned July 19th in his monthly Rothenberg Report “We reiterate our view that substantial gains are inevitable and are increasing our target for most likely GOP gains from 25-30 seats to 28-33 seats. However, it is important to note that considerably larger Republican gains in excess of 39 are quite possible.” Charlie Cook currently predicts a 32-42 seat pickup for Republicans. However, my advice to Democrats is to start practicing these words: “Speaker Boehner.”</p>
<p>George J. Nassar III</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://saywhatblog.com/the-perfect-storm-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Should America Bid Farewell to Exceptional Freedom?</title>
		<link>http://saywhatblog.com/should-america-bid-farewell-to-exceptional-freedom/</link>
		<comments>http://saywhatblog.com/should-america-bid-farewell-to-exceptional-freedom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 20:19:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Natasha Hazlett</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[On the Hill]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saywhatblog.com/?p=154</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Rep.  Paul Ryan

Last  week, on March 21st, Congress enacted a new Intolerable Act. Congress  passed the Health Care bill &#8211; or I should say, one political party  passed it &#8211; over a swelling revolt by the American people. The reform is  an atrocity. It mandates that every American must [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>By</strong> <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/authors/?author=Rep.+Paul+Ryan&amp;id=17604"><strong>Rep.  Paul Ryan</strong></a></p>
<div id="article_body">
<p>Last  week, on March 21st, Congress enacted a new Intolerable Act. Congress  passed the Health Care bill &#8211; or I should say, one political party  passed it &#8211; over a swelling revolt by the American people. The reform is  an atrocity. It mandates that every American must buy health insurance,  under IRS scrutiny. It sets up an army of federal bureaucrats who  ultimately decide for you how you should receive Health Care, what kind,  and how much&#8230;or whether you don&#8217;t qualify at all. Never has our  government claimed the power to decide when each of us has lived well  enough or long enough to be refused life-saving medical assistance.</p>
<p>This presumptuous reform has put this nation &#8230; once dedicated to  the life and freedom of every person &#8230; on a long decline toward the  same mediocrity that the social welfare states of Europe have become.</p>
<div>
<div id="article-box-ad"><script type="text/javascript">// <![CDATA[</p>
<p>									GA_googleFillSlot("RC_300_by_250_top");
// ]]&gt;</script><script src="http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/ads?correlator=1270497894350&amp;output=json_html&amp;callback=GA_googleSetAdContentsBySlotForSync&amp;impl=s&amp;a2ids=B31WQ&amp;cids=MmTFBk&amp;eid=,&amp;client=ca-pub-4560167926987914&amp;slotname=RC_300_by_250_top&amp;page_slots=RC_728_by_90_top%2CRC_300_by_250_top&amp;cust_params=SiteDomain%3Dpolitics%26SitePage%3Darticles&amp;cookie=ID%3D5b5e8dbb140dc2ea%3AT%3D1270497895%3AS%3DALNI_MbWnO2pMogQr8HEch9XuIbbay8Y_g&amp;cookie_enabled=1&amp;ga_vid=403544136.1270497895&amp;ga_sid=1270497895&amp;ga_hid=139375409&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.realclearpolitics.com%2Farticles%2F2010%2F04%2F02%2Fshould_america_bid_farewell_to_exceptional_freedom.html&amp;ref=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2FGeorgeNassar&amp;lmt=1270241733&amp;dt=1270497895735&amp;cc=100&amp;biw=1264&amp;bih=837&amp;ifi=2&amp;u_tz=-360&amp;u_his=1&amp;u_h=1024&amp;u_w=1280&amp;u_ah=994&amp;u_aw=1280&amp;u_cd=24&amp;u_nplug=9&amp;u_nmime=25&amp;flash=10.0.45"></script></p>
<div id="google_ads_div_RC_300_by_250_top"><!--- Here is the Open AdStream JX Code  for the Block position --> <script type="text/javascript">// <![CDATA[
OAS_version = 10;
OAS_rn = '001234567890'; OAS_rns = '1234567890';
OAS_rn = new String (Math.random()); OAS_rns = OAS_rn.substring (2, 11);
document.write("<SCR"+"IPT LANGUAGE='JavaScript1.1' SRC='http://ads.forbes.com/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/realclearpolitics.com/story" + OAS_rns +"@Block'>");
// ]]&gt;</script><script src="http://ads.forbes.com/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/realclearpolitics.com/story701080158@Block">// <![CDATA[
<script LANGUAGE="JavaScript"> </p>
<p>_version=10;
// ]]&gt;</script> &amp;amp;lt;SCRIPT language=&#8217;JavaScript1.1&#8242;  SRC=&#8221;http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/N4359.forbes.comOX2398/B4219497.27;abr=!ie;sz=300&#215;250;click0=http://www.forbes.com/ads/redirectpause.html?http://ads.forbes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/realclearpolitics.com/story701080158/L21/715977922/Block/OasDefault_v5/BofAFA589741_hpa_ros_100301/BofAFA589741_hpa_ros_100301.html/527951655955757a6366414143437032?;ord=715977922?&#8221;&amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;lt;/SCRIPT&amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;lt;NOSCRIPT&amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;lt;A   HREF=&#8221;http://www.forbes.com/ads/redirectpause.html?http://ads.forbes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/realclearpolitics.com/story701080158/L21/715977922/Block/OasDefault_v5/BofAFA589741_hpa_ros_100301/BofAFA589741_hpa_ros_100301.html/527951655955757a6366414143437032?http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/N4359.forbes.comOX2398/B4219497.27;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=300&#215;250;ord=715977922?&#8221;&amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;lt;IMG   SRC=&#8221;http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N4359.forbes.comOX2398/B4219497.27;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=300&#215;250;ord=715977922?&#8221;  BORDER=0 WIDTH=300 HEIGHT=250 ALT=&#8221;Click Here&#8221;&amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;lt;/A&amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;lt;/NOSCRIPT&amp;amp;gt;     <img src="http://ads.forbes.com/RealMedia/ads/adstream_lx.ads/realclearpolitics.com/story701080158/L21/715977922/Block/OasDefault_v5/BofAFA589741_hpa_ros_100301/BofAFA589741_hpa_ros_100301.html/527951655955757a6366414143437032?_RM_EMPTY_&amp;" alt="" width="1" height="1" /> <script type="text/javascript">// <![CDATA[
_version=11;
// ]]&gt;</script> <script type="text/javascript">// <![CDATA[
if (navigator.appVersion.indexOf('MSIE 3') != -1){
document.write("<IFRAME WIDTH=460 HEIGHT=120 MARGINWIDTH=0 MARGINHEIGHT=0 HSPACE=0 VSPACE=0 FRAMEBORDER=0 SCROLLING=no BORDERCOLOR='#000000' SRC='http://ads.forbes.com/RealMedia/ads/adstream_sx.ads/realclearpolitics.com/story" + OAS_rns +"@Block'></iframe>");
} else if (_version < 11) {
document.write ("<A HREF='http://ads.forbes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_nx.ads/realclearpolitics.com/story" + OAS_rns +"@Block'><IMG SRC='http://ads.forbes.com/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/realclearpolitics.com/story" + OAS_rns +"@Block'></A>");}
// ]]&gt;</script></div>
</div>
<p><!-- NEWS ALERTS --> <script src="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/js_incls/lists.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/js_incls/facebox/facebox.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <!-- 	#toolbox #alert .title { text-transform: uppercase; font-weight: bold; font-size: 11px; } --><br />
<form id="pending_subscriptions" title="solid" action="javascript:void('0');" method="post">
<div id="toolbox">
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td id="alert" colspan="3"><img src="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/images/icon_alert.gif" alt="" /> Receive news alerts</p>
<input id="list_email" name="list_email" size="30" type="text" value="Email Address" /> <button id="subscribe">Sign Up</button></p>
<div>
<input id="zelda" name="zelda" type="text" /></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3">
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><label><br />
<input name="list[]" type="checkbox" value="http://www1.realclearpolitics.com/authors/rss/?id=17604" />Rep. Paul Ryan</label></td>
<td><label><br />
<input name="list[]" type="checkbox" value="http://www1.realclearpolitics.com/publications/rss/?id=13362" />RealClearPolitics</label></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><label><br />
<input name="list[]" type="checkbox" value="http://www1.realclearpolitics.com/topic/rss/?id=5407" />budget</label></td>
<td><label><br />
<input name="list[]" type="checkbox" value="http://www1.realclearpolitics.com/topic/rss/?id=5196" />Health care</label></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><label><br />
<input name="list[]" type="checkbox" value="http://www1.realclearpolitics.com/topic/rss/?id=8733" />Paul Ryan</label></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><a id="more_topics" href="javascript:void('0');">[+] More</a></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</form>
</div>
<p>Americans are preparing to fight another American Revolution, this  time, a peaceful one with election ballots&#8230;but the &#8220;causes&#8221; of both  are the same:</p>
<p>Should unchecked centralized government be allowed to grow and grow  in power &#8230; or should its powers be limited and returned to the people?</p>
<p>Should irresponsible leaders in a distant capital be encouraged to  run up scandalous debts without limit that crush jobs and stall  prosperity &#8230; or should the reckless be turned out of office and a new  government elected to live within its means?</p>
<p>Should America bid farewell to exceptional freedom and follow the  retreat to European social welfare paternalism &#8230; or should we make a  new start, in the faith that boundless opportunities belong to the  workers, the builders, the industrious, and the free?</p>
<p>We are at the beginning of an election campaign like you&#8217;ve never  seen before!</p>
<p>We are challenged to answer again the momentous questions our  Founders raised when they launched mankind&#8217;s noblest experiment in human  freedom. They made a fundamental choice and changed history for the  better. Now it&#8217;s our high calling to make that choice: between managed  scarcity, or solid growth &#8230; between living in dependency on government  handouts, or taking responsibility for our lives &#8230; between  confiscating the earnings of some and spreading them around, or securing  everyone&#8217;s right to the rewards of their work &#8230; between bureaucratic  central government, or self-government &#8230; between the European social  welfare state or the American idea of free market democracy.</p>
<p>What kind of nation do we wish to be? What kind of society will we  hand down to our children and future generations? In the coming  watershed election, the nature of this unique and exceptional land is at  stake. We will choose one of two different paths. And once we make that  choice, there&#8217;s no going back.</p>
<p>This is not the kind of election I would prefer. But it was forced on  us by the leaders of our government.</p>
<p>These leaders are walking America down a new path &#8230; creating  entitlements and promising benefits that model the <a href="http://realclearworld.com/topic/around_the_world/united_states/?utm_source=rcw&amp;utm_medium=link&amp;utm_campaign=rcwautolink">United States</a> after the European Union: a  welfare state society where most people pay little or no taxes but  become dependent on government benefits &#8230; where tax reduction is  impossible because more people have a stake in the welfare state than in  free enterprise &#8230; where high unemployment is accepted as a way of  life, and the spirit of risk-taking is smothered by a tangle of red tape  from an all-providing centralized government.</p>
<p>True, the United States has been moving slowly toward this path a  long time. And Democrats and Republicans share the blame. Now we are  approaching a &#8220;tipping point.&#8221; Once we pass it, we will become a  different people. Before the &#8220;tipping point,&#8221; Americans remain  independent and take responsibility for their own well-being. Once we  have gone beyond the &#8220;tipping point,&#8221; that self-sufficient outlook will  be gradually transformed into a soft despotism a lot like Europe&#8217;s  social welfare states. Soft despotism isn&#8217;t cruel or mean, it&#8217;s kindly  and sympathetic. It doesn&#8217;t help anyone take charge of life, but it does  keep everyone in a happy state of childhood. A growing centralized  bureaucracy will provide for everyone&#8217;s needs, care for everyone&#8217;s  heath, direct everyone&#8217;s career, arrange everyone&#8217;s important private  affairs, and work for everyone&#8217;s pleasure.</p>
<p>The only hitch is, government must be the sole supplier of everyone&#8217;s  happiness &#8230; the shepherd over this flock of sheep.</p>
<p>Am I exaggerating? Are we really reaching this &#8220;tipping point&#8221;? Exact  and precise measures cannot be made, but an eye-opening study by the  Tax Foundation, a reliable and non-partisan research group, tells us  that in 2004, 20 percent of US households were getting about 75 percent  of their income from the federal government. In other words, one out of  five families in America is already government dependent. Another 20  percent were receiving almost 40 percent of their income from federal  programs, so another one in five has become government reliant for their  livelihood.</p>
<p>All told, 60 percent &#8211; three out of five households in America &#8211; were  receiving more government benefits and services (in dollar value) than  they were paying back in taxes. The Tax Foundation estimates that  President Obama&#8217;s budget last year will raise this &#8220;net government  inflow&#8221; from 60 to 70 percent. Look at it this way: three out of ten  American families are supporting themselves plus &#8211; through government &#8211;  supplying or supplementing the incomes of seven other households. As a  permanent arrangement, this is individually unfair, politically  inequitable, and economically dangerous.</p>
<p>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: &#8220;He who pays the piper calls the tune.&#8221; The  next chapter is the rule of &#8220;crony capitalism,&#8221; 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.</p>
<p>We already see enough of &#8220;crony capitalism.&#8221; When government sends  bailout money to Wall Street firms they label &#8220;too big to fail,&#8221; that&#8217;s  &#8220;crony capitalism.&#8221; When government buys shares in General Motors, names  their management, and dictates their salaries, that&#8217;s &#8220;crony  capitalism.&#8221; When big health insurance companies, instead of competing  for market, team up with Congressional Health Care writers to order  every individual to buy their products, that&#8217;s &#8220;crony capitalism.&#8221; When  thousands of small businesses have to meet bottom lines with no  government bailout, well, you&#8217;re too small to succeed&#8230;good luck!</p>
<p>The Democratic leaders of Congress and in the White House hold a view  they call &#8220;Progressivism.&#8221; Progressivism began in Wisconsin, where I  come from. It came into our schools from European universities under the  spell of intellectuals such as Hegel and Weber, and the German leader  Bismarck. The best known Wisconsin Progressive was actually a  Republican, Robert LaFollette.</p>
<p>Progressivism was a powerful strain in both political parties for  many years. Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican, and Woodrow Wilson, a  Democrat, both brought the Progressive movement to Washington.</p>
<p>Early Progressives wanted to empower and engage the people. They  fought for populist reforms like initiative and referendum, recalls,  judicial elections, the breakup of monopoly corporations, and the  elimination of vote buying and urban patronage. But Progressivism turned  away from popular control toward central government planning. It lost  most Americans and consumed itself in paternalism, arrogance, and  snobbish condescension. &#8220;Fighting Bob&#8221; LaFollette, Teddy Roosevelt, and  Woodrow Wilson would have scorned the self-proclaimed &#8220;Progressives&#8221; of  our day for handing out bailout checks to giant corporations, corrupting  the Congress to purchase votes for government controlled health care,  and funneling billions in Jobs Stimulus money to local politicians to  pay for make-work patronage. That&#8217;s not &#8220;Progressivism,&#8221; that&#8217;s what  real Progressives fought against!</p>
<p>Since America began, the timid have feared the Founding Fathers&#8217;  ideas of individual freedom, so they yearn for Old World class models.  Our Progressivists are the latest iteration of that same fear of the  people. In unprecedented numbers, Americans are speaking out against the  intolerable Health Care bill and irresponsible debt-ridden spending.</p>
<p>Does anyone recall Norman Rockwell&#8217;s famous &#8220;Freedom of Speech&#8221;  painting of an average working Joe standing and speaking his mind at a  town hall meeting? Today&#8217;s Progressivists ridicule average Americans  speaking out at tea parties across the nation and denounce their  criticisms as &#8220;un-American.&#8221; Millions of average Americans reject their  big government solutions, and that scares them.</p>
<p>Last January President Obama said: &#8220;There are simply philosophical  differences that will always cause us to part ways. These disagreements,  about the role of government in our lives, about our national  priorities and our national security, have been taking place for over  two hundred years.&#8221;</p>
<p>He was right. So let&#8217;s examine these &#8220;philosophical differences&#8221; of  government. Progressivists say there are no enduring ideas of right or  wrong. Everything is &#8220;relative&#8221; to history, so our ideas need to change.  Progressivists say the Founders&#8217; Constitution including its amendments,  with its principles of equal natural rights, limited government, and  popular consent is outdated. We should have a &#8220;living constitution&#8221; that  keeps up with the times. Progressivists invent new rights and enforce  them with a more powerful central government and more federal agencies  to direct society through the changes of history. And don&#8217;t worry, they  say. Bureaucrats can be controlled by Congressional oversight.</p>
<p>Would you like an example of how successful Congressional oversight  is? Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Government-Sponsored Enterprises (or  GSEs), underwrote trillions of dollars in junk mortgages. Year after  year their officials and others from HUD, Treasury, and other agencies  who supervise them marched up to Congress for hearings. Red flags were  raised. The oversight committees had other priorities and dismissed them  out of hand. With the housing market already tanking, Financial  Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank said: &#8220;This ability to provide  stability to the market is what, in my mind, makes the GSEs a  congressional success story.&#8221; Less than 18 months later, the  ‘market-stabilizing&#8217; GSEs went belly-up due to their shoddy business  practices, collapsing the mortgage credit industry and sparking the  worldwide financial meltdown. No one knows the ultimate cost to the  taxpayers but it will be gigantic.</p>
<p>If Congress can&#8217;t control what a few mortgage finance bureaucrats do  with your dollars, why would anyone trust Congress to control what tens  of thousands of bureaucrats will do with your health?</p>
<p>The Progressivist ideology embraced by today&#8217;s leaders is very  different from everything rank-and-file Democrats, independents, and  Republicans stand for. America stands for nothing if not for the fixed  truth that unalienable rights were granted to every human being not by  government but by &#8220;nature and nature&#8217;s God.&#8221; The truths of the American  founding can&#8217;t become obsolete because they are not timebound. They are  eternal. The practical consequence of these truths is free market  democracy, the American idea of free labor and free enterprise under  government by popular consent. The deepest case for free market  democracy is moral, rooted in human equality and the natural right to be  free.</p>
<p>A government that expands beyond its high but limited mission of  securing our natural rights is not progressive, it&#8217;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.</p>
<p>In their hearts Americans know this, but people were alarmed in 2008  by rising unemployment, falling home values, a credit crunch, and a  financial meltdown.</p>
<p>They voted for a change of parties in the White House, and elected  the largest Democratic Congressional majority in more than three  decades. So overwhelming was their majority that the opposition is  unable to do anything to stop them from running roughshod over our  foundations. Harry Reid had a supermajority in the Senate that could not  be filibustered. Still, the people&#8217;s mandate for Congress and the new  President was clear, simple, and unmistakable: get employment back on  track &#8230; get our economy growing again.</p>
<p>Americans have lost jobs nearly every month since these leaders took  over the federal government in January 2009, more than 4 million at last  count. The official unemployment rate hovers near 10 percent, but if we  add in folks who have stopped looking for work due to lack of job  prospects, the rate is a lot higher.</p>
<p>They began by passing the first Stimulus, a taxpayer giveaway to  their favorite special interests. The price tag was $862 billion. They  pushed through a second stimulus bill that cost you another $18 billion.  Let&#8217;s see: since 4 million Americans have been unemployed since they  passed these &#8220;stimuli,&#8221; that averages $220,000 per job lost. Think about  that. Democrats can&#8217;t even put people out of work without spending near  a trillion dollars!</p>
<p>Just to return to where we were at the end of 2007, 8.4 million jobs  have to be created. To reduce unemployment to its pre-crisis level of 5  per cent by the end of President Obama&#8217;s term, our economy needs to  create 247,000 new jobs per month. But we are headed in the wrong  direction &#8230; except in one field: the government is growing at  breakneck pace in expanding federal payrolls.</p>
<p>Although millions of private sector jobs have been lost since the  recession began, Washington is on track to add about 275,000 more people  to the public payrolls &#8211; a whopping 15 percent increase. And we aren&#8217;t  talking minimum wages here. More federal workers make over $100,000 than  those earning $40,000 or less. The average government worker&#8217;s salary  in 2009 was 21 percent higher than private sector salaries. The average  federal worker&#8217;s compensation package, including benefits, was nearly  $120,000 in 2008, twice the private sector at $60,000. One study shows  the private sector benefit package averages $9,900 while the federal  package averages almost $41,000. Now the Administration wants Congress  to privilege federal workers by writing off their unpaid student loans  after ten years. People in productive private sector jobs would keep  paying for twenty years. Progressivists would really like everyone to  work for the government.</p>
<p>Has any Congress in history enacted, or tried to enact, so many  foolish, squalid, and counterproductive programs?</p>
<p>It isn&#8217;t good news when anyone losses his job. But I&#8217;ll make an  exception when the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority Leader  lose theirs in November!</p>
<p>As their first major item of business last year, these leaders pushed  through a budget so bloated that it will double the federal debt in  five years, and triple it in ten.</p>
<p>Now the Administration has sent Congress a budget that&#8217;s far worse.  The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office [CBO] reports that 10 years  from now, this budget will drive the federal debt burden up to 90  percent of the nation&#8217;s entire economic production. It propels spending  to a new record of $3.8 trillion next year [FY 2011]. It widens the  annual deficit to a new record of $1.5 trillion this year [FY 2010], and  raises $1.8 trillion in new taxes through 2020.</p>
<p>Two and a half years after this recession started, and no new private  jobs? Think what these mind-boggling tax increases and mountain of debt  are signaling to people who want to open or expand job-creating  businesses. Congress keeps raising the barriers against work and  production &#8211; that&#8217;s your answer.</p>
<p>At a time when economic and job expansion should be Washington&#8217;s  highest priority &#8230; and as if the multi-trillion dollar Health Care  debacle were not enough, the Progressivist leadership in Congress are  adding insult to injury by promoting their energy and climate agenda  through their Cap and Trade plan. Put aside the fact that there is  growing disagreement among scientists about climate change and its  causes. This bill is a big mistake for other reasons.</p>
<p>CBO estimates that Cap and Trade&#8217;s total cost is another  near-trillion dollars. By one CBO estimate, the tax and energy cost  bills for the average American household may grow by $1,600 a year.  Other studies put this cost a lot higher.</p>
<p>If you don&#8217;t believe me, let me quote a key Democratic Senator:</p>
<p>Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would  necessarily skyrocket. Coal-powered plants&#8230;natural gas&#8230;whatever the  plants were, whatever the industry was&#8230;would have to retrofit their  operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to  consumers&#8230;So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they  can; it&#8217;s just that it will bankrupt them because they&#8217;re going to be  charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that&#8217;s being emitted.</p>
<p>That was Senator Barack Obama in January 2008, talking about what he  would do as President. Don&#8217;t say the man doesn&#8217;t work to keep his  promises!</p>
<p>Economists across the spectrum tell us that Cap and Trade would make  our long-term national economic production fall below potential, causing  higher unemployment. Federal spending is on an unsustainable path that  can only get worse if this happens. There is general agreement that the  environmental improvements from Cap and Trade are either nonexistent or  too small to measure.</p>
<p>Congressional leaders are also pushing an unprecedented expansion of  the Federal Reserve Board&#8217;s regulatory powers over financial  institutions under the belief that government must protect the people  from themselves. This measure will direct federal agents to inspect, and  at their pleasure object to, the wages and compensation which  businesses on Main Street as well as Wall Street wish to pay employees.  It puts bureaucracies in charge of deciding the type and line of credit  which consumers and businesses will have access to when they shop for  cars, homes, education, and expansion of facilities. The Fed has already  failed the twofold assignment it has &#8211; keeping the economy and jobs  growing, and keeping prices stable. It should return to its original  mission of guaranteeing the long-term value of our dollar. Instead the  same leaders who never knew the government mortgage giants were  supplying credit for worthless mortgages now want Fed bureaucrats to  regulate the businesses that supply personal and commercial credit? If  that happens, economic recovery will be a longer time coming.</p>
<p>And now I want to return to the Health Care Frankenstein. Most  Americans understand that government-run Health Care is not free, not  cheap, and not compassionate. I think most Americans believe Congress  has no idea of what the public demand will be for subsidized Health  Care. They are correct. When Medicare was enacted, Congress guessed it  would cost about 10 percent of what it turned out to be after 25 years.  Heck, Congress couldn&#8217;t even figure the cost of the 3-month long Cash  for Clunkers subsidy last year, underestimating it on the order of 1 to  9. Most Americans know the Congressional majority are clueless about  what their government-run Health Care system is going to cost.</p>
<p>The drama that brought this creature to life was unedifying &#8230; part  tragedy and part farce. Ethical categories went out the window. Never in  history have the deliberations of Congress been subverted on this  scale. The secrecy, the lack of transparency, the half-truths were  stunning. The votes called at midnight &#8230; the 2 and 3 thousand page  bills members of Congress had no time to read before the votes &#8230; the  sordid backroom deals, the Cornhusker Kickback that shamed Nebraska, the  Louisiana Purchase, the &#8220;Gator Aid&#8221; Medicare privilege for Florida, the  additional Medicare dollars for states whose wavering representatives  only yesterday were ferociously denouncing earmarks &#8230; the federal  judgeship dangled for one lawmaker&#8217;s brother &#8230; the raid on the  Medicare piggy bank &#8230; the lie that $250 billion for &#8220;doc fix&#8221;  shouldn&#8217;t count as a Health Care cost &#8230; the double-counted deficit  estimate scam that would land any accountant in jail &#8230; the proposed  Slaughter rule that Congressmen not record a vote on a bill their  constituents hate, just &#8220;deem&#8221; it passed and vote on the  amendments&#8230;and to complete the farce, the phony Executive Order  pretending not to fund abortions when the Health Care bill, as &#8220;the  supreme law of the land,&#8221; does fund abortions. The level of political  corruption to buy the votes for this debacle makes all past examples  look penny ante by comparison.</p>
<p>Self-government stands or falls on integrity, not only in those who  represent you but in the enactment of law. This indecency soiled our  freedom and embarrassed the democracy we promote in other nations. And  this may not be the last of it. To enact its transformative agenda, this  leadership employs the Machiavellian saying that the end justifies the  means. America was born in a revolution against that whole idea. Soon it  will be the norm.</p>
<p>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 &#8230; no matter what the  people believe. Our system of freedom can survive an assault, but it  won&#8217;t survive if the people are frightened, or angry, or asleep at the  switch. A great Democrat, President Andrew Jackson, once said: &#8220;eternal  vigilance by the people is the price of liberty.&#8221; We can thank our  current leaders at least for this: they have awakened the nation to the  danger of taking self-government for granted.</p>
<p>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 &#8220;more of the same,&#8221; or it will end the abuse of power  and put America back on the path of growth and freedom.</p>
<p>Supposing the American people use their referendum in November to  elect a new majority, what would the next Congress do?</p>
<p>The first order of business will be &#8220;repeal and replace.&#8221; We will  work to repeal federalized Health Care and replace it with a robust,  competitive open market in health care that puts patients and their  doctors at the center &#8211; not employers, not insurers, and not government  agents. This takes at least two elections, and we must show our  perseverance.</p>
<p>A new Congress will then turn to the great problem of our stagnant  economy and the debt tsunami bearing down on us. The days of pretending  not to notice are over. The next Congress will understand this threat  and act after transparent deliberation and real debate.</p>
<p>I have put forward my specific solution, called &#8220;A Roadmap for  America&#8217;s Future,&#8221; to meet this challenge. The CBO confirms that this  plan achieves the goal of paying off government debt in the long run &#8211;  while securing the social safety net and starting up future economic  growth.</p>
<p>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&#8217; spending spree have accelerated the  day of reckoning.</p>
<p>Today, Medicare is $38 trillion short of its promised benefits. In  five years, the hole will grow to $52 trillion. Your family&#8217;s share of  this gap is $458,000. Medicaid will add trillions more in state and  federal debt.</p>
<p>Social Security&#8217;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.</p>
<p>Both Republicans and Democrats have failed to be candid about this.  And we have only postponed the crisis by shaking a tin cup at <a href="http://realclearworld.com/topic/around_the_world/china/?utm_source=rcw&amp;utm_medium=link&amp;utm_campaign=rcwautolink">China</a> and <a href="http://realclearworld.com/topic/around_the_world/japan/?utm_source=rcw&amp;utm_medium=link&amp;utm_campaign=rcwautolink">Japan</a>.</p>
<p>A new Congress could start by making you the owner of your health  plan. Under my Roadmap reform, a tax break that now benefits only those  with job-based health insurance will be replaced by tax credits that  benefit every American. And it secures universal access to quality,  affordable health coverage with incentives that hold down health-care  cost increases.</p>
<p>Everyone 55 and over will remain in the current Medicare program. For  those now under 55, Medicare will be like the health-care program we in  Congress enjoy.</p>
<p>Future seniors will receive a payment and pick an insurance plan from  a diverse list of Medicare-certified plans &#8211; with more support for  those with low incomes and higher health costs. To reform Medicaid, low  income people will receive the means to buy private health insurance  like everyone else.</p>
<p>Under the Roadmap&#8217;s Social Security proposal, everyone 55 and older  will remain in the existing program with no change. Those under 55 will  choose either to stay with traditional Social Security, or to join a  retirement system like Congress&#8217;s own plan. They will be able to invest  more than a third of their payroll taxes in their own savings account,  guaranteed and managed by the federal government. For both Social  Security and Medicare, eligibility ages will gradually increase, and the  wealthy will receive smaller benefit increases.</p>
<p>And we need to get this economy moving again, so the Roadmap offers  taxpayers an option: either use the tax code we have today, or use a  simple, low-rate, two-tier personal income tax that gets rid of  loopholes and the double taxation of savings and investment. And let&#8217;s  replace corporate income taxes with a simple, competitive 8.5 percent  business consumption tax. These low-rate and simple tax reforms would  provide the certainty and the incentives for investors to open new  enterprises and for workers to find a marketplace expanding in new jobs.</p>
<p>The Roadmap plan shifts power to individuals at the expense of  government control. It rejects cradle-to-grave welfare state ideas  because they drain individuals of their self-reliance. And it still  honors our historic commitment to strengthening the social safety net  for those who need it most.</p>
<p>I would welcome honest debate in the next Congress on how to tackle  our fiscal crisis &#8211; and the larger debate on the proper role of  government. It&#8217;s time politicians in Washington stopped patronizing the  American people as if they were children &#8211; deferring tough decisions and  promising fiscal fantasies. Tell Americans the truth, offer them a  choice, and count on them to do what&#8217;s right.</p>
<p>A political realignment is on the way. Democratic leaders are staking  their party&#8217;s future on their ideological agenda. Financial Services  Committee Chairman Frank candidly admits that his party &#8220;are trying on  every front to increase the role of government.&#8221; Former President  Clinton told a Netroots convention last year that &#8220;We have entered a new  era of progressive politics, which if we do it right could last 30 or  40 years.&#8221;</p>
<p>The question is, do we realign with the vision of a European-style  social welfare state, or do we realign with the American idea?</p>
<p>My party challenges the whole basis of the Progressivist vision of  this country&#8217;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.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>I hope you won&#8217;t mind an aside. I absolutely love Oklahoma! As you  may know, I married Janna Little, daughter of Dan and Prudence Little,  from Madill. Well, Janna and I are planning on spending half of our year  here in retirement. And I can tell you it won&#8217;t be Summer&#8230;it&#8217;s just  gets too hot here for a Wisconsinite. We will be spending the Fall and  Winter here. You see, I love to hunt and fish. Each year we come for  deer, duck, and <a href="http://realclearworld.com/topic/around_the_world/turkey/?utm_source=rcw&amp;utm_medium=link&amp;utm_campaign=rcwautolink">turkey</a> season. Janna refers to these times as  Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Easter. There&#8217;s something about Oklahoma  that is truly captivating. It&#8217;s a beautiful, big, unconstrained country  with great-hearted people who know what it is to live like free men and  women.</p>
<p>Some of my friends in Marshall County have on occasion called me  &#8220;yankee,&#8221; which I find particularly disturbing. I have always thought a  yankee is someone from the Northeast, not the upper Midwest. Needless to  say, I am told this can be fixed if I include among my life&#8217;s  achievements the high and noble accomplishment of noodling a giant  catfish from the banks of Lake Texoma. And so, I will be returning in  early June, otherwise known as noodling season, to gain this rite of  passage so that I may never be called yankee again, and also hoping I  keep my ten fingers intact.</p>
<p>Knowing America, and Oklahoma as I have come to know it, I am  confident that the American character is up to every challenge. America  is not over. This exceptional nation will not go down the way of  mediocrity. Ronald Reagan used to say: &#8220;Freedom is never more than one  generation away from extinction &#8230; It must be fought for, protected,  and handed on for [our children] to do the same.&#8221; We are that  generation. The fight is our fight, and it begins now! The time is at  hand to reclaim America for freedom.</p>
<p>Thank you very much.</p>
<p><em>Note: Congressman Paul Ryan delivered this speech to the Oklahoma  Council of Public Affairs in Oklahoma City on March 31, 2010.</em></p>
</div>
<p><script type="text/javascript">// <![CDATA[
						checkTextResizerCookie('article_body');
// ]]&gt;</script></p>
<div id="article-author">
<p>Paul Ryan represents  Wisconsin&#8217;s First Congressional District. He serves as ranking member of  the House Budget Committee and senior member of the House Ways and  Means Committee.</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://saywhatblog.com/should-america-bid-farewell-to-exceptional-freedom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Deja Vu</title>
		<link>http://saywhatblog.com/deja-vu/</link>
		<comments>http://saywhatblog.com/deja-vu/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:52:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Nassar Report</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Nassar Report]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saywhatblog.com/?p=149</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[March 20, 2010
The GOP appears to be picking up steam as they head into this year’s midterm elections. Public resistance towards Obama’s major policy initiatives, disapproval of Congress, and corruption have added fuel to the pending Republican surge. Looking back at what has unfolded over the past two years, many are beginning to reminisce about [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>March 20, 2010</p>
<p>The GOP appears to be picking up steam as they head into this year’s midterm elections. Public resistance towards Obama’s major policy initiatives, disapproval of Congress, and corruption have added fuel to the pending Republican surge. Looking back at what has unfolded over the past two years, many are beginning to reminisce about a previous midterm election.</p>
<p>On November 6th, 2006, media outlets were buzzing. Polls for the midterm elections would be opening the next morning and analysts flooded the news channels handicapping each race in order to make their final predictions of just how many seats the Democrats would pick up. It was common knowledge that Republicans would lose a good amount of seats; the big question was will it be enough to take the majority?</p>
<p>Fast forward two days later and policy in America would take a completely different course. 31 seats went from red to blue and Nancy Pelosi was now Speaker of the House. Republicans were dumbfounded- their 12 year majority had vanished. Liberals cheered as they now held 51 seats in districts Bush had won in 2004. The exit polls told the story&#8230; There were three major factors affecting the outcome of the race.</p>
<p>Topping the list was the war in Iraq. According to exit polls, 41 percent said they disapproved of the war, and of that 41 percent 4 out of 5 voted for the Democrat on the ballot. Disapproval with the Republican Congress was the second most determining factor. On Election Day, Republicans had a mere 39 percent approval rating. Of the 61 percent that disapproved, 7 out of 10 voted for the Democrat. Because of the disapproval with the leaders in Washington and the policies they were pushing, the public punished those in power by voting them out.</p>
<p>Lastly, corruption in Congress was a leading issue at the polls. Republican incumbents were tainted by scandals during this term. The Ambroff Indian Lobbying Scandal forced Congressman Kolbe and Ney to retire and resign respectively. Congressman Duke Cunningham was ousted after he plead guilty to federal charges of bribery. Later, Congressman Mark Foley resigned when it was discovered he acted inappropriately with some young congressional pages. Many Democrats ran their campaigns on their leader’s promise “to drain the swamp” in Washington. They successfully painted the Republican Party with a “Culture of Corruption.” The public no longer trusted the GOP and this was reflected in the election results.</p>
<p>Midterm elections have a history of low voter turnout, 2006 was an exception to the rules due in part to two key factors, resentment and motivation. The public resented those in power, motivating people to flock to the polls to vote against the majority. The shift was more than anyone could have ever expected. Independent voters, who in 2004 were divided 50/50 on party lines, now overwhelmingly supported the Democrats by 20 points. With the largest bloc of voters, independents, being motivated to head to the polls to send a message to the GOP.</p>
<p>Four years later, it seems like déjà vu. But, this time, the shoe is on the other foot. One day is left before a vote on the Senate’s health care bill takes place on the House floor. A bill that 53 percent of American’s oppose and would like to see scrapped. Public opposition is 11 points higher than the war in Iraq on Election Day. Comparing Iraq and Health Care is a lot like comparing apples to oranges but they do have one key similarity. The war in Iraq was the main issue heading into the 2006 midterm election and Health Care will be the leading issue going into this year’s midterm elections. Although the election is still seven months away, health care will continue to be the key talking point. Taking up the first year and a half of Obama’s first term, Obamacare will not be easily swept under the rug.</p>
<p>Also mirroring the 2006 election is the public’s opinion of Congress. A remarkably low 19 percent of Americans approve of the Democratic controlled Congress. A full 20 points lower than the Republicans had when they controlled both Houses. Going hand in hand with this unpopularity, are new allegations of corruption in Congress but this time, it&#8217;s the Democrats. </p>
<p>Last month Charlie Rangel (D-NY) lost his gavel as Chairman of the powerful Ways and Means committee. Ousted for his ethics woes, Rangel came under scrutiny after it was found that he failed to pay taxes on an apartment in the Caribbean as well as other accounting discrepancies. The list goes on with allegations stemming from the purchase of his Mercedes to using House stationary to solicit money for his PAC, an illegal practice. Rangel, a tax cheat, was largely responsible for writing the U.S. tax code and bills pertaining to social security and Medicare. Democrats chose not to distance themselves from the corrupt Chairman. This was made evident in 2008, when even after these allegations came to light, House Democrats voted unanimously to keep Rangel as Chairman of the Ways and Means committee. </p>
<p>Most recently, Eric Massa (D-NY) resigned in disgrace as it was discovered that he had acted inappropriately with some young male staffers. Although this story is still developing and little is known about the extent of the so-called “tickle fights” and “Massa Massages”, the story has become a political snowball as House Minority Leader, John Boehner, sponsored and passed a privileged resolution to further investigate the Massa scandal and to find out “which House Democratic leaders and members of their respective staffs had knowledge prior to March 3, 2010 of the aforementioned allegations concerning Mr. Massa, and what actions each leader and staffer having any such knowledge took after learning of the allegations.” The resolution is similar to what former Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi passed regarding the Foley scandal in 2006. Democratic Leadership would like nothing more than to be able to have Massa’s scandal put to rest, but with the passing of Boehner’s resolution, this corruption is sure to drag out even closer to the November election.</p>
<p>November 2006 was a rude awakening for House and Senate Republicans, as their majority literally disappeared overnight. Unpopular policies, an unpopular Congress, and corruption brought American’s together as they marched to the polls to send a loud and clear message to Washington. History may repeat itself this November as similar problems now plague the Democrats. Many questions remain unanswered. The resentment among voters is apparent, but is there enough motivation to bring them to the polls? Can Democrats recover from their shortcomings or are they bogged down in the same swamp they once promised to drain? Only time will tell but the future is looking grim for the Democratic Party.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://saywhatblog.com/deja-vu/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Democrats are on a Destructive Mission</title>
		<link>http://saywhatblog.com/democrats-are-on-a-destructive-mission/</link>
		<comments>http://saywhatblog.com/democrats-are-on-a-destructive-mission/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 02:48:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Natasha Hazlett</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Donkeys & Elephants]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saywhatblog.com/?p=144</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Despite the fact that the majority of Americans have made it abundantly clear that they want nothing to do with the Democrats version of Health Care Reform, the Obama, Pelosi and Reid regime are at it again&#8230;  I knew it was too good to be true that Health Care reform was dead&#8230;  Now that Scott [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Despite the fact that the majority of Americans have made it abundantly clear that they want nothing to do with the Democrats version of Health Care Reform, the Obama, Pelosi and Reid regime are at it again&#8230;  I knew it was too good to be true that Health Care reform was dead&#8230;  Now that Scott Brown took away their Super Majority, the Democrats are going to use the procedural tactic known as &#8220;Reconciliation&#8221; to shove their Health Care down our throats.  I am appalled and outraged. You should be too.  The fact of the matter is that the Liberals are arrogant, out-of touch suicide bombers of sorts.</p>
<p>Of course I don&#8217;t mean that they are literal suicide bombers- what I mean is that the Democrats have a suicide bomber mentality.  They are willing to give up their career, and sink America deeper into debt just to pass their  Health Care bill, even though most Americans don&#8217;t want it. This tactic is eerily similar to suicide bombers giving up their lives for their &#8220;cause&#8221; and they don&#8217;t care what casualties occur as a result of their actions.</p>
<p>Democrat retirements and defeats in November 2010 are the most minor &#8220;casualties&#8221; of this dangerous mission&#8230;  Our nation is like a sinking ship.  It is sinking deeper and deeper in debt.  I still haven&#8217;t quite figured out how the Democrats think that putting us into more debt is going to help us at this pivotal time.  The only rational answer I&#8217;ve found is disturbingly sinister.  But I&#8217;m going to throw it out there&#8230;</p>
<p>Back in the 1960&#8217;s there was a radical pair of folks named Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, who were sociologists and political activists at the Columbia University School of Social Work.  In a 1966, this dangerous duo published an article in <em>The Nation</em> entitled &#8220;The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty.&#8221;</p>
<p>In a future post, I will discuss this horrifying article in depth.  For now, the gist of the article was that if you dump enough people on the government dole, it will cause an economic collapse, which would then allow the Democrats to &#8220;reset the system.&#8221;</p>
<p>Wait a second&#8230;that sounds  a little like this, doesn&#8217;t it?</p>
<p><object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" width="425" height="344" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xvJJP9AYgqU&amp;color1=0xb1b1b1&amp;color2=0xcfcfcf&amp;hl=en_US&amp;feature=player_embedded&amp;fs=1" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xvJJP9AYgqU&amp;color1=0xb1b1b1&amp;color2=0xcfcfcf&amp;hl=en_US&amp;feature=player_embedded&amp;fs=1" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></embed></object></p>
<p>Not only are the Democrats going to shove health care through, now theyare apparently going to include the Public Option.  This is absolutely insane.  I&#8217;m afraid that the Democrats are going to turn this Recession into a Depression.  We must stand up now.   We can&#8217;t give up the fight.  So to all of my fellow Conservatives, please continue to write, call and speak out against Health Care reform. Our country can&#8217;t afford for us not to put up a good fight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://saywhatblog.com/democrats-are-on-a-destructive-mission/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Politics By the Numbers</title>
		<link>http://saywhatblog.com/politics-by-the-numbers/</link>
		<comments>http://saywhatblog.com/politics-by-the-numbers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 01:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Nassar Report</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Nassar Report]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saywhatblog.com/?p=132</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ These days, it seems politics is all about the numbers. Over the last year, you could not watch a news channel without hearing the number 60, or most recently “Mr. 41”. 12 trillion, the amount of our nation’s debt, seems to be a common theme for politicians on both sides of the aisle.  Now, spurring off of the anger over the out of control debt, a new number is becoming the topic of discussion in 2010—218.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>February 21, 2010</p>
<p> These days, it seems politics is all about the numbers. Over the last year, you could not watch a news channel without hearing the number 60, or most recently “Mr. 41”. 12 trillion, the amount of our nation’s debt, seems to be a common theme for politicians on both sides of the aisle.  Now, spurring off of the anger over the out of control debt, a new number is becoming the topic of discussion in 2010—218.</p>
<p>On the Hill, 218 is a crucial number.  It is the number required to maintain a majority in the House of Representatives. That is something Democrats have enjoyed for the last four years, but time may be running out for them as they head into this year’s midterm elections. To reach the coveted 218 House seats, several numbers come into play: Poll numbers, the number of competitive races, cash on hand numbers, and the number of retirements.  All of these numbers must be in a party’s favor if to reach a majority in the House.</p>
<p>In the race to 218 seats, the biggest indicator of which party will be making the gains in an election year is the political landscape. As the Democrats attempted to jam through their tax and spend agendas against their constituents will, they immediately witnessed the consequences… a loss in Virginia and New Jersey. The liberal media argued that these upsets were not a referendum on the current administration and its policies, but rather the fault of weak candidates (<a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/04/election.analysis/index.html">case in point</a>) but this theory was blown wide open after Scott Brown’s victory two and a half months later in deep blue Massachusetts.(<a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/20/analysis.massachusetts.election/index.html">case in point</a>) Mark Preston, the author of both articles, shows just how deep the liberal media’s hypocrisy can go and in the end, there is no one left to point fingers at other than those who pushed the unpopular policies. These three historic elections serve as proof that the political landscape that swept the Democrats into the majority in 2006 is deteriorating right beneath their feet. With the political environment in the GOP’s favor, the numbers begin to come into play.</p>
<p><strong>Poll Numbers</strong></p>
<p>With the majority of citizens disapproving of the Obama, Pelosi, and Reid regime’s health care reform and the other tax and spend agendas, the congressional Generic Ballot is a great political thermometer for the strength of the National parties. <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/generic_congressional_vote-901.html">You can find it here</a>. The Generic Ballot is measured by party labels. A sample question would be, “If the elections for Congress were being held today, who would you vote for, Republican or Democrat?” Since Obama has taken office, the generic ballot has swung 9 points in favor of the GOP. It is quite shocking that a little over a year ago the Democrats were able to pickup 21 seats and now are at risk of giving all if not more of their pickups back to the GOP. It seems the numbers in the polls are in favor of Republicans, but are there enough seats up for grabs to gain the 40 needed for a Republican majority?</p>
<p><strong>Number of Competitive Races</strong></p>
<p>Charlie Cook is one of the top political handicappers in the nation. His <em>Cook Political Report</em> has been used by journalists, strategists, and politicians alike and is considered “the bible of the political community.” Used on both sides of the aisle, the report is a valuable tool for understanding the vulnerability of a congressional district.</p>
<p>Cook places the races into four categories</p>
<ol>
<li>Solid: The incumbent has a clear advantage and there is little to no likelihood that the race will become competitive.</li>
<li>Likely: These seats are not considered competitive at this point but have the potential to become engaged.</li>
<li>Lean: These are considered competitive races but one party has an advantage.</li>
<li>Toss-up: These are the most competitive; either party has a good chance of winning.</li>
</ol>
<p>According to Cook’s Competitive House Race Chart, the Democrats have 95 seats in play with 54 seats listed as lean, toss up, or takeovers. Republicans have 18 seats in play and only 6 listed as lean, toss-up, or takeover. <a href="http://www.cookpolitical.com/charts/house/competitive_2010-02-18_13-58-05.php">Click here to see the full report</a>.</p>
<p>There is no way to spin these numbers. Tim Kaine, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, commented this past Wednesday on CNBC’s “Morning Joe,” “Presidential midterms since Teddy Roosevelt have been very tough. The average president loses 28 seats, four Senate seats and governors’ races. And we’re not living in average times. We’re living in times of significant economic anxiety.” Even the head of the Democratic committee acknowledge that the Democrats are in deep trouble going into the elections this November. With 48 Democrats serving in districts McCain won, and with the political landscape shaping up the way it currently is, Republicans are at a distinct advantage, but do Republicans have the resources necessary to win back the House?</p>
<p><strong>Cash on Hand Numbers</strong></p>
<p>For Republicans to capitalize on the large number of seats that are possible takeovers, the challengers must have the resources needed to get their message out. Historically, incumbents have an overwhelming advantage in their cash on hand which can pose as a hurdle to those who wish to challenge them. Incumbents average about $350,000 in their war chest compared to $150,000 of challengers.</p>
<p>According to end of year FEC numbers, 52 Republican challengers have at least $150,000 cash on hand.  22 Republicans have reported $300,000 or more cash on hand. This is good news for the Republican Party, as many of the well funded challengers have forced several long-term incumbents, such as Bart Gordon (D-TN) and John Tanner (D-TN) to retire. With nine months to go until the elections, there is still plenty of time to increase the challenger’s cash on hands. Being well-funded going into the coming months will be key to major gains in the House. It appears there are enough well funded challengers, but incumbents have a significant advantage in the cash on hand game.  Retirements are the next key factor in the analysis.</p>
<p><strong>Number of Retirements</strong></p>
<p>Proponents of term limits definitely have the numbers on their side. In 2008, 94 percent of incumbents were reelected in the House of Representatives. What is even more disappointing is that this number has not fluctuated all that much. Since 1964, the lowest incumbent retention rate in the House was in 1970 when “only” 85 percent of incumbents were reelected. Nothing is more disheartening to a potential challenger than having to face a well funded incumbent who has the name recognition in the district, no matter how unpopular their voting record may be.</p>
<p>Taking these facts into account, thus far, there have been 13 Democrat retirements and 18 Republican retirements. The liberal media will be quick to point out that Republican retirements outnumber the Democrats, and will claim that this is proof that our own incumbents don’t believe we can take the majority. (<a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_01/021783.php">case in point</a>) On the surface, this seems to be a valid observation.  However, as Pete Sessions (R-TX),  Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said: “All retirements are not created equal.”  Of the 13 Democratic open seats, 6 are running for higher office. Of the 18 Republican seats, 12 are running for higher office. The large number of Republican retirements only serves as proof that Republicans are taking advantage of the toxic political environment for Democrats and feel comfortable seeking higher office.</p>
<p>Further disproving the media’s claims, of the 13 open Democratic seats, 10 are considered lean or toss up for the Democrats and only 2 for the Republicans. It seems Republicans have a significant edge over Democrats in the retirement count. Although this is not quite the Democratic exodus we saw in 1994 when 32 Democrats ran for the hills, more retirements are sure to come.</p>
<p>After reviewing the numbers, it seems Republicans are in prime position for a takeover of the House. To ensure victory at the polls, Republicans will need to increase their cash numbers and keep the number of retirements of incumbents not seeking higher office to a minimum while forcing out more Democrat incumbents. If they are able to achieve these goals, we will see a tidal wave of Republican victories and the map will be painted red once more.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://saywhatblog.com/politics-by-the-numbers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don&#8217;t Believe in Global Warming? Better Be Quiet&#8230;Or Else&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://saywhatblog.com/dont-believe-in-global-warming/</link>
		<comments>http://saywhatblog.com/dont-believe-in-global-warming/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 20:27:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Natasha Hazlett</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[On the Hill]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saywhatblog.com/?p=126</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Do you believe that global warming is a hoax?  Have you joked about global warming with your friends?  Well, you might be surprised to learn that President Obama&#8217;s Regulatory Czar argues that such speech should be banned. 
(Cue the record scratch)
That&#8217;s right&#8230;.a crazy kook in the Obama White House thinks that discussion of conspiracy theories (and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you believe that global warming is a hoax?  Have you joked about global warming with your friends?  Well, you might be surprised to learn that President Obama&#8217;s Regulatory Czar argues that such speech should be banned. </p>
<p>(Cue the record scratch)</p>
<p>That&#8217;s right&#8230;.a crazy kook in the Obama White House thinks that discussion of conspiracy theories (and by the way, if you don&#8217;t believe in Global Warming, according to Sunstein, YOU are a conspiracy theorist) should be banned. </p>
<p>While I&#8217;m far from a conspiracy theorist, I am a firm believer in that little thing called the First Amendment.  I don&#8217;t think the government should be picking and choosing what ideas and beliefs I hold.  The founding fathers certainly did not view the Federal Government as the idea police, in fact, Thomas Jefferson once said:</p>
<blockquote><p>Any government which can not stand up to published criticism deserves to fall</p></blockquote>
<p>Jefferson must be rolling over in his grave right now&#8230;</p>
<p>Sunstein, in a <a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585" target="_blank">2008 academic paper </a> makes such asinine statements as:</p>
<blockquote><p>Our focus throughout [this paper] is on false conspiracy theories, not true ones.</p></blockquote>
<p>You may recall one conspiracy theory back in the 1970s- the Watergate scandal.  Turns out, the big wacky &#8220;conspiracy theory&#8221; was true. &#8230;  so how does Sunstein suggest that we sort out the true conspiracy theories from the false ones?</p>
<blockquote><p>Our ultimate goal is to explore how public officials might undermine such theories, and as a general rule, true accounts should not be undermined.</p></blockquote>
<p>Ok, so essentially we should have some Theory Czar like Sunstein who sits upon a throne and decides what conspiracy theories are true and false.  Hmmm&#8230;.how would that one have worked in, say, the Nixon White House?  I think I&#8217;ll stick with the  &#8221;marketplace of ideas&#8221; philosophy.   As <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Milton" target="_blank">John Milton </a>said:</p>
<blockquote><p>Let all with something to say be free to express themselves. The true and sound will survive. The false and unsound will be vanquished. Government should keep out of the battle and not weigh the odds in favor of one side or the other.</p></blockquote>
<p> If you have time, I would suggest that you read Sunstein&#8217;s wacky socialist paper to see what may be in store for us in the not so distant future if Sunstein gets his way. It&#8217;s pretty crazy stuff!</p>
<p>World Net Daily published an article on this subject- below is a portion of that article:</p>
<blockquote><p><a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585">In a lengthy academic paper</a>, President Obama&#8217;s regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, argued the U.S. government should ban &#8220;conspiracy theorizing.&#8221;</p>
<div>
<p>Among the beliefs Sunstein would ban is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud.</p>
<p>Sunstein also recommended the government send agents to infiltrate &#8220;extremists who supply conspiracy theories&#8221; to disrupt the efforts of the &#8220;extremists&#8221; to propagate their theories.</p>
<p>In a 2008 Harvard law paper, &#8220;Conspiracy Theories,&#8221; Sunstein and co-author Adrian Vermeule, a Harvard law professor, ask, &#8220;What can government do about conspiracy theories?&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;We can readily imagine a series of possible responses. (1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, <a id="KonaLink0" onclick="adlinkMouseClick(event,this,0);" onmouseover="adlinkMouseOver(event,this,0);" onmouseout="adlinkMouseOut(event,this,0);" href="http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&amp;pageId=121884#" target="_top"><span style="color: #0000ff;">financial</span></a> or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories.&#8221;</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Read the full story <a href="http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&amp;pageId=121884">here</a>:</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://saywhatblog.com/dont-believe-in-global-warming/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Snowed In</title>
		<link>http://saywhatblog.com/snowed-in/</link>
		<comments>http://saywhatblog.com/snowed-in/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:14:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Nassar Report</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Nassar Report]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saywhatblog.com/?p=123</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[February 12, 2010
Because Al Gore hates everything The Nassar Report stands for, he has decided to dump 50 inches of white fluffy stuff called global warming on DC in protest. Due to this inconvenient truth, The Nassar Report will be delayed for the week. Regular service will resume next week. Thanks for your patience.
 
On another [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>February 12, 2010</div>
<div>Because Al Gore hates everything The Nassar Report stands for, he has decided to dump 50 inches of white fluffy stuff called global warming on DC in protest. Due to this inconvenient truth, The Nassar Report will be delayed for the week. Regular service will resume next week. Thanks for your patience.<br />
 <br />
On another note, my sister&#8217;s new blog Say What?!?  is up. You can find it by going to <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.saywhatblog.com/" target="_blank">www.saywhatblog.com</a>. The Nassar Report will have its own section on the Blog so make sure to subscribe to the feed.  Between the two of us, you&#8217;ll be kept up to date on the latest happenings on the Hill (without the liberal filter of the drive-by media).<br />
 <br />
&#8216;Til next time keep it on the right side.<br />
 <br />
- George</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://saywhatblog.com/snowed-in/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://saywhatblog.com/february-7-2010/</link>
		<comments>http://saywhatblog.com/february-7-2010/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 04:07:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saywhatblog.com/?p=107</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Obama&#8217;s not giving up on Health Care.
GOP recruiting candidates with no political backgrounds for 2010 election.
Palin&#8217;s Electifying Tea Party Speech.

Climate-Gate Professor Thought of Killing Himself
RFK Jr.&#8217;s Prediction 15 Months Ago: No Snow in D.C. due to Global Warming
The Death of Global Warming
Obama Organizing in Schools
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.eeac7f78d2b167aedda59104fadde298.b81&amp;show_article=1" target="_blank"><strong>Obama&#8217;s not giving up on Health Care.</strong></a></p>
<p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703894304575047241446787622.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsTop" target="_blank"><strong>GOP recruiting candidates with no political backgrounds for 2010 election.</strong></a></p>
<p><strong>Palin&#8217;s Electifying Tea Party Speech.</strong></p>
<p><object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" width="425" height="344" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/E7gVp3diPbI&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1&amp;" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/E7gVp3diPbI&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1&amp;" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></embed></object></p>
<p><a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7017922.ece" target="_blank"><strong>Climate-Gate Professor Thought of Killing Himself</strong></a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/RFK-79834057.html" target="_blank"><strong>RFK Jr.&#8217;s Prediction 15 Months Ago: No Snow in D.C. due to Global Warming</strong></a></p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2010/02/01/the-death-of-global-warming/" target="_blank"><strong>The Death of Global Warming</strong></a></p>
<p><a href="http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/01/atlas-exclusive-obama-organizing-for-communism-and-youth-corps-in-the-public-school-1.html" target="_blank"><strong>Obama Organizing in Schools</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://saywhatblog.com/february-7-2010/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://saywhatblog.com/february-9-2010/</link>
		<comments>http://saywhatblog.com/february-9-2010/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 04:06:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saywhatblog.com/?p=105</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Senate Hearing on Global Warming Cancelled Due to&#8230;Snow?!? (I can&#8217;t make this stuff up!)
Sen. Jim DeMint: &#8220;It&#8217;s going to keep snowing in DC until Al Gore cries &#8220;uncle&#8221; &#8221; 
Obama Hits Lowest Approval Mark
And the Spending Continues- Next Up..$80B Job Bill
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&amp;ContentRecord_id=b3e826ad-802a-23ad-45b8-8fa00c661d62" target="_blank"><strong>Senate Hearing on Global Warming Cancelled Due to&#8230;Snow?!?</strong></a> (I can&#8217;t make this stuff up!)</p>
<p><a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/twitter-room/other-news/80395-demint-dc-snow-will-continue-until-al-gore-cries-uncle"><strong>Sen. Jim DeMint: &#8220;It&#8217;s going to keep snowing in DC until Al Gore cries &#8220;uncle&#8221; &#8221; </strong></a></p>
<p><a href="http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/02/obama_hits_lowe.php" target="_blank"><strong>Obama Hits Lowest Approval Mark</strong></a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0910187920100210" target="_blank"><strong>And the Spending Continues- Next Up..$80B Job Bill</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://saywhatblog.com/february-9-2010/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
