A nice catch of a video for all my friendly neighborhood bloggers and the public at large. The MSM is barred from watching cuz they steal my talking points, as do the scum politicians.
A brave man, the only sane commentator on the left side of American politics, Alan Dershowitz, is once again pointing out some of the most open and obvious and completely illogical tendencies of the totalitarian left. Today’s lecture by Alan involves the alleged “safe spaces” thing that the extreme left wing “youth” have come up with on American campuses. And of course, the entire focus of the “safe spaces” movement is to make it impossible to support the State of Israel on an American college campus, but make it also impossible to oppose radical left wing extremist activism such communist, nazi and other socialist thought on American college campuses. This is a travesty for American democracy and the whole system of long term governance as college is supposed to be a place of the free flow of ideas, to create a marketplace of ideas – not a place where one extremist ideology, such as the communist/nazi/socialist ideology that current holds sway in the Democratic Party, bullies everyone who dares not submit to such Orwellian tactics. Here’s a sampling of Dershowitz’s brave essay, which is of course being attacked by vitriolic left wingers as “insensitive” or whatever the PC police are whining about today:
One of the central demands repeated by protesters at campuses across the country has been for university administrators to transform campuses into “safe spaces,” where students are protected not only from physical violence but also from ideas that they find threatening or offensive. However, the “safe spaces” envisioned by these protesters seem to matter only when the interests of those who share their political persuasions are affected.
There has been conspicuously little attention paid to incidents of anti-Semitism reported, for example, at Hunter College, where students supportive of Israel were chased away from a rally blaming high tuition fees on “Zionist administrators,” and where protestors shouted “Zionists out of CUNY” (the City University of New York), by which they meant Jews.
Another problem with this is that the “youth” on American campuses do not actually believe in communism, nazism or other socialist thought – they are instead being manipulated by the same people who lost the Cold War – the Communists, led by followers of admitted Marxist Bill Ayers (like President Obama) and followers of Frank Marshall Davis like President Obama), the followers of Mao Se Tung in the Democratic Party like White House Communications Director Anita Dunn, followers of Che Ghevara, followers of Hugo Chavez (like Hollywood and President Obama) and followers of many genocidal dictators who utilized communist ideals to murder, rape and pillage throughout the last 200-odd years.
The extreme left in America simply cannot put down the sauce of dictatorship, tyranny and absolute government control over economic activity. Even the supposed intelligentsia, like the New York Times, the alleged paper of record in America, actually supports and runs columns in its pages wishing on a star that America was more like the current dictatorship set up in mainland China, known as the People’s Republic of China. The worst offender, of course, is Thomas Friedman, who actually said he’s more in favor of dictatorial, one party rule in America than the present Constitutional system of checks and balances between the three branches of the American government.
Simply put, the extreme left has taken over the Democratic party in America, and I wonder where the fuck the conservative Democrats are. How could they allow the youth of America to be brainwashed by political correctness and “safe spaces” to become totalitarian socialists? Maybe Hillary Clinton can finally step up and set the record straight, and once and for all disclaim her allegiance to Saul Alinsky and hard left socialist ideology. Of course, as few Americans apparently know, Hilldawg and Bill rolled over the Soviet Union in the 1960’s, and let’s just say it wasn’t all for vacation time.
America 2015 – better or worse than the America in the Watchmen series? You decide, American people.
Update #2 August 31 2016 – QUESTIONS FOR TRUMP AND CLINTON: WHY IS HASAN STILL ALIVE and WHY WASNT HE CHARGED WITH TERRORISM? Charles Allen said it best:
I find it difficult to understand why an Army major would be in repeated contact with an Islamic extremist like Anwar al-Awlaki, who preaches a hateful ideology directed at inciting violence against the United States and the West… It is hard to see how repeated contact would in any legitimate way further his research as a psychiatrist.
Sadly, the “team of rivals” from 2008, Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. and Hillary Rodham Clinton and DNC boss hog Donna Brazile (after 10 years at CNN, no bias there right lol) refuse to label Psychiatrist “Solider of Allah on his US Military Business Card” Hassan a terrorist but instead call him a “workplace violence participant” or some such bullshit which is demeaning to the victims of Hassan’s terror assault and murderous ramage and the families and friends of such victims. Why is “Captain” Hassan still alive, President Obama? Is a dozen dead US Military personnel by one murderous shrink not enough to get the death penalty under the “Obama Regime”???????
Blast from the past – draft written in 2010, still applies some today, perhaps the GOP candidates should man up and condemn the lack of labeling of the Islamic fundamentalist attacks on US Servicepeople on American soil and abroad as actual terrorism. It is not workplace violence, President Obama and DHS.
In an amazing display of the power of ideology to trump facts in federal policy-making, President Barack Obama has decided to remove references to Islamic fundamentalism from the key national security planning documents used by the military. Of course, just a few months ago, 12 unarmed US soldiers were murdered by an evil Islamic terrorist, Major Malik Nadal Hassan. Many noted at the time that the ideology of political correctness regarding the Muslim faith in US Army bureaucracy was a significant cause of the terrorist attack, as Hassan had literally dozens of red flags about his jihadist ways in his files yet was allowed to continue on as a US Army Major until he murdered his unarmed fellow soldiers.
What Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CN) says below will now be apparently verboten in the Age of Obama’s military planning department:
“If Hasan was showing signs, saying to people that he had become an Islamist extremist, the U.S. Army has to have a zero tolerance,” Lieberman told Fox News Sunday.
Army Chief of Staff
A fellow Army doctor who studied with Hasan, Val Finell, told ABC News, “He would frequently say he was a Muslim first and an American second. And that came out in just about everything he did at the University.”
Finell said he and other Army doctors complained to superiors about Hasan’s statements.
“And we questioned how somebody could take an oath of office…be an officer in the military and swear allegiance to the constitution and to defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic and have that type of conflict,” Finell told ABC News.
Lieberman is going to catch a nasty email from Obama’s folks if he uses the term “Islamist” again it appears. Indeed, President Obama has decided to take the present level of political correctness in the US military, the one that was perhaps a primary cause of Hassan being able to stay undercover until he murdered the unarmed America soldiers, and jack it up to a whole new level by literally refusing to identify the enemy that is murdering US soldiers around the globe: Jihadists. It truly defies belief, for a logical person, that Obama would go this way, at this time, especially considering the very report Obama was given about the Hassan terror attack pointed towards the refusal of Army bureaucrats to act upon red flags because of fear of being called discriminatory.
Now, as the concepts and terms related to Islamic fundamentalism and the jihadists who practice it worldwide fade into non-use in the military under Obama, the same political correctness ideology that helped murder those brave, unarmed US soldiers at Ft. Hood will push even deeper into both military and civilian federal bureaucracies. Sadly, this type of insane wordsmithing by Obama, in service of political correctness, will not have pleasant effects upon operational units in the war on terror, as folks are even more likely to be simply watching their back for an Obama DOJ bureaucrat instead of trying to kill a jihadist who’s set on murdering Americans.
Reasonable folks can differ on whether political correctness as a whole has played a positive or negative role in the American military. However, it defies belief, in April of 2010, that the American President would change military planning policy to increase emphasis on political correctness by eliminating the identification of the primary threat to American lives, Islamic fundamentalism. Obama has continued the Bush policy of rolling Predator strikes in Pakistan and elsewhere, and even broadened its scope by approving strikes on an American citizen for the first time. At the same time, starting in his Cairo speech, Obama has been trying to sweet-talk the Muslim world, the most recent example of which is Obama’s humiliation of Israeli PM Netanyahu at the White House.
Perhaps this censoring of talk of America’s primary military threat, Islamic fundamentalism, is just another way for Obama to try to sweet-talk the Muslim world and will make little difference in light of Obama’s actions of continued and widening Predator strikes. Or maybe its purely an ideological thing, the final result of years of hard left attacks on anyone, anywhere who mentioned that the terrorists who are killing Americans are Islamic. Either way, it is poor policy from the Obama Administration to move the US military away from focusing on the primary threat to American lives, and it appears that it has only political reasons for doing so. Such conduct is inappropriate and Congress should investigate the basis for this policy decision by Obama, and attempt to reverse it.
Despite oft-repeated claims by many economists in the establishment media that 50,000 private jobs would be added this month, the American private sector lost 23,000 jobs in March 2010, again throwing cold water on the Obama Administration’s repeated claims that their policies are creating jobs. Bloomberg has the story:
Companies in the U.S. unexpectedly cut payrolls in March, according to data from a private report based on payrolls.
The 23,000 decline was the smallest in two years and followed a revised 24,000 drop the prior month, data from ADP Employer Services showed today.
Apparently America’s companies, both big business and small business, simply do not believe that the Obama economic recovery is any more than “just words” and accordingly they are not hiring:
Companies are still hesitant to add workers until they see sustained sales gains and are convinced the economic recovery has taken hold. Economists surveyed by Bloomberg News anticipate the government’s report April 2 will show payrolls increased by 184,000, in part due to temporary hiring by the federal government to conduct the 2010 census and because of better weather compared with February.
“The economic recovery has not been long enough or strong enough along the way yet to produce the kind of rapid employment that people are hoping for,” Joel Prakken, chairman of Macroeconomic Advisers LLC in St. Louis, which produces the figures with ADP, said in a conference call with reporters after the report.
The ADP figures were forecast to show a gain of 40,000 jobs, according to the median estimate of 35 economists surveyed by Bloomberg. Projections ranged from a loss of 20,000 to a 100,000 gain.
Economists also predicted job creation in February 2010, and were wrong, but, amazingly, blamed the weather. The Obama Administration picked up on that weather excuse and has run with it for the entirety of March while claiming that March 2010 would see very substantial job creation. Now that ADP, the nation’s largest private payroll processor and premier private jobs data source, has “unexpectedly” shown yet more private job loss, it will be interesting to see what type of spin or excuse the Obama Administration creates to explain away the latest evidence of the failure of their economic policies.
Sadly, Americans can expect the Obama Administration to hail the coming Labor Department March 2010 jobs report as evidence of the success of their job creation policies, despite the fact that any gain there will be the result of the massive short-term (three month) hiring of census workers, not actual job creation:
Stock fell early Wednesday after a payroll company’s report provided a sobering reminder that the job market remains weak.
ADP said employers slashed 23,000 jobs in March. Economists surveyed by Thomson Reuters had forecast the report would show employers added 40,000 jobs during the month.
The ADP report is seen as an early indicator of the Labor Department’s employment report due out Friday. However, there can be wide variations because ADP only accounts for private-sector jobs.
Economists expect the Labor Department’s report to show employers added 190,000 jobs in March. It would be only the second monthly increase in jobs since the recession began in late 2007. The number could be somewhat inflated because the government hired temporary workers to conduct the 2010 census.
UPDATE: Ed at Hotair points to a WSJ story also using the well-worn “unexpectedly” framing for yet another piece of evidence that private sector job creation just is not occurring. Further, just yesterday Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner claimed “sustained job creation” is here as a result of Obama policies, which today’s report of private sector job loss in March 2010 unequivocally disproves:
During an interview yesterday with CNBC, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said, “I think you can say generally that as the economy is getting stronger — and the economy is getting stronger. You know, we’re probably just on the verge now, of what we think to be a sustained period of job creation, finally.”
The Obama administration will keep up its efforts to “reinforce that recovery” and also preserve recent gains in financial stability, Geithner also said.
As it is almost certain the hundreds of thousands of three-month temporary Census worker jobs will result in an overall jobs report that shows job creation in March 2010 on Friday (the DOL release), it is clear from the ADP data today that sustainable, private sector job creation has not been spurred by 14 months of Obama economic policies, notwithstanding Obama Administration commentary from Geithner and others. Even CNBC, well-known Obama Administration cheerleaders, admits this:
ADP said employers slashed 23,000 jobs from payrolls in March, which came as a surprise to economists, who had expected to 50,000 jobs were added last month.
The ADP report is closely watched ahead of the government’s jobs report on Friday. Economists currently expect that report to show 200,000 jobs were added to nonfarm payrolls in March. And, that report could still show job growth, largely due to heavy hiring of government workers to conduct the Census.
The bottom line is that the establishment media will ignore the ADP private sector jobs report from today, and herald Friday’s DOL report as evidence that the Obama Administration jobs policies have succeeded, despite the clear evidence to contrary that only temporary Census workers will artificially push up the jobs numbers. The key question now is whether the American people, who feel the pain of continued private sector job loss every day, will buy what the Administration and establishment media are selling.
As the dust settles after the passage of the historic comprehensive health care reform package known as Obamacare, the American public appears to favor its immediate repeal as 54% support such a repeal while 42% oppose repeal:
One week after the House of Representatives passed the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats, 54% of the nation’s likely voters still favor repealing the new law. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 42% oppose repeal.
Those figures are virtually unchanged from last week. They include 44% who Strongly Favor repeal and 34% who Strongly Oppose it.
Repeal is favored by 84% of Republicans and 59% of unaffiliated voters. Among white Democrats, 25% favor repeal, but only one percent (1%) of black Democrats share that view.
Americans also simply do not believe the Obama health care talking points, strongly repudiating the main claims made by Obama about the benefits of Obamacare by a wide margin:
Only 17% of all voters believe the plan will achieve one of its primary goals and reduce the cost of health care. Most (55%) believe it will have the opposite affect and increase the cost of care.
Forty-nine percent (49%) believe the new law will reduce the quality of care. Sixty percent (60%) believe it will increase the federal budget deficit. Those numbers are consistent with expectations before the bill was passed.
Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, notes that “the overriding tone of the data is that passage of the legislation has not changed anything. Those who opposed the bill before it passed now want to repeal it. Those who supported the legislation oppose repealing it.”
As noted by Scott Rasmussen above, little has changed regarding public opinion Obamacare since its passage, repudiating the media’s “conventional wisdom” that the Democrats would see a surge in public support after its passage. The ABC/Washington Post poll confirms Rasmussen’s findings that few Americans believe Obama’s health care talking points and that majority opposition continues that is “virtually identical to the pre-vote split” regarding Obamacare:
More people see the changes as making things worse, rather than better, for the country’s health-care system, for the quality of their care and, among the insured, for their coverage. Majorities in the new poll also see the changes as resulting in higher costs for themselves and for the country.
Most respondents said reform will require everyone to make changes, whether they want to or not; only about a third said they believe the Democrats’ contention that people who have coverage will be able to keep it without alterations. And nearly two-thirds see the changes as increasing the federal budget deficit, with few thinking the deficit will shrink as a result. The Congressional Budget Office said the measure will reduce the deficit.
About half of all poll respondents said the plan creates “too much government involvement” in the health-care system, a concern that is especially pronounced among Republicans.
Senior citizens, who typically make up about one in five midterm voters, represent a particularly valuable but tough audience on this issue. More than six in 10 of those 65 or older see a weaker Medicare system as a result of the changes to the health-care system. Overall, seniors tilt heavily against the changes, with 58 percent opposed and strong opponents outnumbering strong supporters by a 2-to-1 ratio.
Considering these numbers, President Obama has a steep uphill climb to convince Americans that this broad claims that Obamacare will be a “historic” deficit reduction plan, that Americans can keep their doctor and plan if they like it, and that Obamacare will reduce costs and increase the quality of American health care. Key Democrats are not making the President’s job easier by explicitly stating that the true intent of Obamacare is to redistribute wealth in America, something that went unmentioned by Democrats prior to the passage of Obamacare.
Indeed, such wealth redistribution policies are strongly rejected by Americans, with 84% rejecting that approach according to Gallup:
When given a choice about how government should address the numerous economic difficulties facing today’s consumer, Americans overwhelmingly — by 84% to 13% — prefer that the government focus on improving overall economic conditions and the jobs situation in the United States as opposed to taking steps to distribute wealth more evenly among Americans.
First, Democratic Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) announced that Obamacare is intended to redistribute wealth:
It seems Senator Max Baucus let slip the real purpose of health care reform efforts – the redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. Baucus said of the health care bill, “This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America.” According to the influential Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, “The last couple three years, the mal-distribution of income in American is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy and the middle income class is left behind.”
Former DNC Chairman Howard Dean then chipped in on Thursday March 25, 2010 by admitting that “this is a form of redistribution” and Obamacare is intended to cause wealth redistribution in the American economy because the economy is “like a machine. You always got to tune it right.” Of course, as the establishment media is well aware such explicit Democratic admissions that Obamacare is intended to tinker with the economy to bring about wealth redistribution would be damaging to Obamacare’s popularity, so the claims of Dean and Baucus have gone virtually unreported in the media. However, Americans continue to oppose the Obamacare package, as evidenced by today’s poll showing 54% favor its repeal.
The unemployment crisis in the United States continued unabated in February 2010, as new statistics compiled by the Department of Labor show that unemployment rose in over half of the states in America last month:
March 26 (Bloomberg) — Unemployment increased in 27 U.S. states in February and dropped in seven, a sign the labor market needs to pick up across more regions to spur consumer spending and sustain the economic recovery.
Mississippi showed the biggest jump in joblessness with a 0.4 percentage point rise to 11.4 percent, according to figures issued today by the Labor Department in Washington. Nationally, unemployment held at 9.7 percent in February for a second month and employers cut fewer jobs than anticipated, figures from the Labor Department showed on March 5.
Today’s report indicates broad-based hiring is yet to develop following the loss of 8.4 million jobs since the recession began in December 2007. Florida, Nevada, Georgia, and North Carolina set record levels of joblessness last month.
“Until we see improvement in employment in a fair number of U.S. states, it’s not going to do a heck of a lot for the recovery,” said Jennifer Lee, senior economist at BMO Capital Markets in Toronto. “The worst seems to be over, but there’s a huge amount of work to be done to create jobs. It’s going to be a long, winding road.”
Payrolls dropped in 27 states, led by Virginia. The state’s loss of 32,600 jobs last month, the largest in records going back to 1983, was also the biggest decline among states. California, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Texas also reported large decreases in employment, the report said.
These results, over a year into the Obama Administration’s reign and its vaunted Stimulus plan, provide yet another piece of evidence that the Obama economic program is failing to turn this country’s economy around. After all, the Obama Administration did predict that the passage of its Stimulus legislation would result in a steady decline in unemployment from the Summer of 2009 onward – a prediction that is proven false by every unemployment release since then. Indeed, the newly announced Obama initiative to order banks to reduce or waive monthly mortgage payments due from the unemployed will only exasperate the ongoing unemployment crisis, creating another incentive for the individual to become or remain unemployed so as to qualify for the new federal mortgage payment reduction/waiver program.
By a vote of 56-43, with three Democrats, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Sen. Mark Pryor and Mary Landrieu (D-LA), joined by all 41 Republicans, failing to put the breaks on a large package of changes to the existing law known as Obamacare. Every vote taken on Obamacare in the past few weeks has had the same character: bipartisan opposition failing to stop the remaining majority of Democrats from passing the legislation – hardly what the average American would expect on the signature legislation of President Obama, as the media-created Obama Brand is one of a “bipartisan” “pragmatic” “centrist” leader. Indeed, the only thing bipartisan about the legislation is the opposition to it from centrist Democrats and the entire Republican Party.
Obama and the Democrats had tried to avoid making any changes to the House reconciliation package, but the Senate Parliamentarian ruled some parts of it out of order under reconciliation rules, forcing the Senate Democrats to make some changes and sending the entire reconciliation Obamacare package back to the House for a final, final vote tonight. The Dems and GOP House members are going back and forth with short speeches in the House now.
The Senate approved a package of fixes to the health care reform law Thursday, drawing to a close the chamber’s year-long effort to overhaul the nation’s insurance system.
But the work isn’t done quite yet.
The bill passed 56 to 43, with Vice President Joe Biden presiding over the chamber. Senate Republicans forced a pair of changes to the reconciliation bill overnight, sending it back to the House for a final vote later Thursday.
Democrats believe the minor changes – to language regarding Pell Grants for low-income students – won’t derail House passage, meaning that Democrats are set to finally conclude the legislative struggle needed to make health reform a reality.
As you can see from the prose above from Politico,the establishment media is in a state of near orgasm over the imminent final passage of the Obamacare package, as the average left wing journalist is overjoyed to “finally conclude the legislative struggle needed to make health reform a reality.” That is actually fairly tame compared to the NYT, who declares just now that
The NYT, in a moment of candor, admits that the procedural trickery engaged in by Senate Democrats was successful in avoiding the will of the American people as embodied by the election of Senator Scott Brown (D-MA) in January 2010 on a platform of explicit opposition to Obamacare and a promise to be the “41st vote” to stop Obamacare in the Senate.
The Senate action appeared to be the penultimate step in a series of intricate legislation maneuvers that Democrats were forced to undertake after a Republican, Scott Brown, won a special Senate election in Massachusetts on Jan. 19, stripping Senate Democrats of the 60th vote that they needed to surmount Republican filibusters.
In a sane world, the “paper of record” in the United States would be troubled by Congress’s manipulation of its procedural rules to avoid the electoral will of the American people, but alas, the NYT has no such concerns, as in the very next paragraph the Times slips into its well-worn role as fawning Obama cheerleader, praising him for engineering the entire process of “intricate legislative maneuvers that the Democrats were forced to take” to subvert the will of the American people as expressed by the election of Scott Brown:
Many Democrats credited the president with having saved the legislation from the brink of collapse. He held a remarkable, day-long televised forum with Congressional leaders of both parties, lobbied for the overhaul in campaign-style rallies around the country, attacked abuses by private insurance companies, and repeatedly told the stories of everyday Americans who had suffered in the existing health system.
The Times appears to be a cheap date regarding the lavish praise it tosses out above for Obama, as everything they list as Obama’s “remarkable” actions are just standard, scripted political events that require little by way of unique or “unprecedented” skill sets to accomplish. It is odd for the “paper of record” to so explicitly celebrate the use of “intricate legislative maneuvers” and staged, scripted political events by DC officials to avoid the logical result of recent election results.
Indeed, the fact that the Democrats did indeed manage to make history by switching, midstream, from a bill passed via regular order to a reconciliation bill, would have merited a mention from the “paper of record”. However, the NYT fails to note this “unprecedented” legislative trickery by Obama and the Demcrats, but it was noted by ardently ideological leftist Lawrence O’Donnell. The entire uncut O’Donnell appearance on Morning Joe on March 12, 2010 can be seen here. O’Donnell notes the “unprecedented” nature of the Democrats’ plan to switch gears after Scott Brown’s Senate victory and pursue reconciliation to pass Obamacare:
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Will Democrats get health care passed?
LAWRENCE O’DONNELL: I’m going to say what I’ve said all along in my humble approach to this subject. I, having worked on this kind of legislation on the Senate floor, trying to get it passed, and in committee. I do not see how they can do this. Now, and part of that is because it’s never been done before. And they have moved into a legislative territory that has never previously existed. The Republicans have not been very smart about trying to describe this. It’s difficult to describe. But this is unprecedented, using reconciliation this way. Because what they’ve done, is that they’ve abandoned a bill in mid-conference. The Senate passed a bill, the House passed a bill. They were in mid-conference negotiating this bill, in conference, and they said it’s going to be impossible for us to pass it now because of Scott Brown, so we’re going to abandon conferencing this bill and move over to another legislative vehicle, called reconciliation. To handle something you’ve already been legislating another way, now, that’s never occurred before.
SCARBOROUGH: That’s never happened?
O’DONNELL: Never, never, never.
When the history books are written about the passage of Obamacare, perhaps this unprecedented legislative trickery, now completed, by Democrats to accomplish a nullification of the election of Scott Brown (R-MA) will garner more attention. For now, the establishment media is sure to continue in near orgasm mode, with lavish praise for media hero Obama and his merry band of Democrats.
In a Senate Obamacare vote that is certain to end up in 2010 GOP campaign commercials, Senate Democrats rejected a GOP amendment to Obamacare that would have banned the use of federal money to pay for Viagra for sex offenders:
Democrats killed an amendment by Republican Sen. Tom Coburn to prevent the newly created insurance exchanges from using federal money to cover Viagra and other erectile dysfunction drugs for rapists, pedophiles and other sex offenders. The amendment failed 57-42
“The vast majority of Americans don’t want their taxpayer dollars paying for this kind of drug for those kind of people,” Coburn said.
Democratic Sen. Max Baucus urged his colleagues to defeat the amendment.
“This is a serious bill. This is a serious debate. The amendment offered by the senator from Oklahoma makes a mockery of the Senate, the debate and the American people. It is not a serious amendment. It is a crass political stunt aimed at making 30-second commercials, not public policy,” he said.
The Democrats appear intent upon ramming through the entirety of the separate House reconciliation amendment to Obamacare without any changes, including the maintenance of the use of federal funds to pay for Viagra or other erectile dysfunction drugs for sex offenders. Considering the fact that a substantial majority of Americans, at least 62%, agree that the GOP should continue to fight Obama and the Democrats to obtain changes to the Obamacare package, the present Democratic strategy of “no amendments” may end up backfiring.