Politico:Bart Stupak D-MI has announced he will not seek reelection in 2010. Since changing his Health Care Reconciliation Act NO vote to Yes, under pressure and deals (bribes) from the Obama Administration, Stupak's chances of reelection in the Michigan 1st Congressional district have dwindled. Stupak initially refused to support the Reform Bill over language allowing for Federally funded abortions, and later changed his mind when Barack Obama signed an executive order (which is not a law)stating federal funds would not be available for abortion under his health reform act.
Stupak was under pressure from both the left and the right, before and after the health care reform votes. Apparently, he received calls at both his office and home.
A general surgeon Dan Benishek had announced his intent to run against Stupak. Visit Dan Benishek's website here at: danbenishekforcongress.com.
Friday, April 09, 2010
Speculation Rife on 2012 GOP Nominee – 2006 Eerily Revisited
The American media is at it again. All sources, from mainstream to blogs, are speculating on who will run and who will receive the 2012 GOP nomination. One can find a daily prediction via the airwaves and internet, on who is leading who in polls for the GOP nomination, who is attending what Conservative conference, and who is likely to pull ahead as the eventual GOP Presidential candidate. The obvious choices in 2012 are consistently in the limelight as evidenced by the articles on Sarah Palin in the Los Angeles Timesregarding Palin’s attendance at the Southern Conservative Leadership Conference being held in New Orleans. The gist of the article is that Palin has not “ruled out a run” for the GOP 2012 ticket. The The Boston Globe offers: “GOP Gathers, gets Look at Possible Picks for 2012” with Palin and Gingrich highlighted in the opening paragraph. (Interesting side note: That article speaks to the futility of any GOP candidate as it touts the current President:
Note to the Globe: Comparison between Carter and Obama have been made since last February)
Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee are also featured in a barrage of news articles, citing the fact that they are leading the pack of potential picks. The GOP sends out poll/fundraising packets listing those aforementioned as possible choices for the 2012 nomination, but again, that’s in a fundraising effort and using familiar and popular names insures a decent return on the investment.
Take a look back at 2006 to gain some perspective. In March and April of that year, a similar Memphis GOP meeting was held. At that time, the names being bandied about were Rudy Giuliani Los Angeles Times, Haley Barbour, John McCain, Sam Brownback (with a quote from Mike Huckabee, then Governor of Arkansas, Fox Newsincluded Romney, George Allen and Bill Frist in the fray – with Rudy Giuliani as the favorite.
Although several of those attending this similar conference did emerge to run for office, the “favorite”, Rudy Giuliani did not fare well, while the battle emerged as being between Romney, Huckabee and McCain (who was considered by pundits to be anathema to the GOP “TO SOME IN GOP, MCCAIN NOT QUITE RIGHT, SENATOR LEADING IN POLLS, BUT MANY CONSERVATIVES IN S.C. DON'T TRUST HIM”, Charlotte Observer
An interesting pattern appears to have developed – the pundits may be onto something – historically, individuals who have familiar names offer comfort and controversy. In the 2006 scenario, McCain who’s media attention was very positive until he began to move to the right (with exception of Conservative Pundits who preferred a Giuliani), eventually obtained the nomination in a three-way contest between Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee. Huckabee, appeared to come out of nowhere, and on a shoestring budget upended both McCain and Romney in the early Iowa Caucus. Of course, the early pundits championing McCain (even as he moved to the right), were on the money.
Today, the pundits are focused primarily on Romney, Huckabee (either ruling him in or ruling him out) and above all Sarah Palin. Palin has generated more speculation, the majority of it in the negative (or positive depending upon political bent of the media) that the other two mentioned. She is hardly a media darling, yet draws huge grassroots support (see Huckabee 2007), while Romney and Huckabee are given polite mention. There are other names in the fray, one of which is the Senator from South Dakota, John Thune. The New York Times article in November of 2009 takes a critical look at Thune as a possible 2012 nominee, noting that his “name keeps popping up” at no place other than “deep in the bowels of the GOP”.
In other words, it’s a not necessarily too early to be calling any frontrunners in the race, although pundits picks of the frontrunners, specifically Palin, is interesting. Should history repeat itself, then Palin, one would assume, would be the eventual nominee, a later day “Maggie Thatcher”, who was at first belittled by the UK Press as being less than worthy, and given time, came roaring back on what amounted to a stunning grassroots victory. Although maligned in the media, for the most part, Palin fits the 2006 John McCain mold perfectly, that is unless of course, John Thune does emerge from the “bowels of the GOP” to be a serious contender. One would expect, however, that Thune would be present at any of the given “conferences” held this year. Not necessarily, he is making 2012 headlines as evidenced by the AP’s, ”GOP Hopefuls Edge Right at Tea Party Watches”, including Thune in a list of contenders.
Therefore, as of now, it’s anyone’s best guess, and nothing more. Thune could emerge as the next “Mike Huckabee”, Mitt Romney is almost a given to be on the ticket, and Palin, although not having announced her intention to run (or not run), may actually sit this one out (see Maggie Thatcher). What one should watch is the following months, going into 2011, especially after the 2010 mid-terms – should the focus remain on two to three names above, one can bet that one of those will eventually be at the top (or bottom) of the 2012 ticket. Ron Paul, of course, will run and win every internet straw poll available. As it stands now, the two most likely to take the nomination (based on media predictions) Palin and Romney. No matter which would emerge as the nominee, one can bet that should the angst against Obama continue unabated through the following year (going into 2011), he will, like Jimmy Carter, be a one term President, and the next President could be more of an “historical” choice than the later. From a feminist point of view, should Palin emerge as the frontrunner, regardless of naysayers, then she would be the first women to sit in the Oval office. One has to remember that women were last to gain the right to vote in this country. Of course, one cannot count out a Clinton (Hillary) run in 2012.
“Only five times in the last century has an incumbent president lost reelection; the most recent were Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1980 and Republican George H.W. Bush in 1992.”
Note to the Globe: Comparison between Carter and Obama have been made since last February)
Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee are also featured in a barrage of news articles, citing the fact that they are leading the pack of potential picks. The GOP sends out poll/fundraising packets listing those aforementioned as possible choices for the 2012 nomination, but again, that’s in a fundraising effort and using familiar and popular names insures a decent return on the investment.
Take a look back at 2006 to gain some perspective. In March and April of that year, a similar Memphis GOP meeting was held. At that time, the names being bandied about were Rudy Giuliani Los Angeles Times, Haley Barbour, John McCain, Sam Brownback (with a quote from Mike Huckabee, then Governor of Arkansas, Fox Newsincluded Romney, George Allen and Bill Frist in the fray – with Rudy Giuliani as the favorite.
Although several of those attending this similar conference did emerge to run for office, the “favorite”, Rudy Giuliani did not fare well, while the battle emerged as being between Romney, Huckabee and McCain (who was considered by pundits to be anathema to the GOP “TO SOME IN GOP, MCCAIN NOT QUITE RIGHT, SENATOR LEADING IN POLLS, BUT MANY CONSERVATIVES IN S.C. DON'T TRUST HIM”, Charlotte Observer
An interesting pattern appears to have developed – the pundits may be onto something – historically, individuals who have familiar names offer comfort and controversy. In the 2006 scenario, McCain who’s media attention was very positive until he began to move to the right (with exception of Conservative Pundits who preferred a Giuliani), eventually obtained the nomination in a three-way contest between Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee. Huckabee, appeared to come out of nowhere, and on a shoestring budget upended both McCain and Romney in the early Iowa Caucus. Of course, the early pundits championing McCain (even as he moved to the right), were on the money.
Today, the pundits are focused primarily on Romney, Huckabee (either ruling him in or ruling him out) and above all Sarah Palin. Palin has generated more speculation, the majority of it in the negative (or positive depending upon political bent of the media) that the other two mentioned. She is hardly a media darling, yet draws huge grassroots support (see Huckabee 2007), while Romney and Huckabee are given polite mention. There are other names in the fray, one of which is the Senator from South Dakota, John Thune. The New York Times article in November of 2009 takes a critical look at Thune as a possible 2012 nominee, noting that his “name keeps popping up” at no place other than “deep in the bowels of the GOP”.
In other words, it’s a not necessarily too early to be calling any frontrunners in the race, although pundits picks of the frontrunners, specifically Palin, is interesting. Should history repeat itself, then Palin, one would assume, would be the eventual nominee, a later day “Maggie Thatcher”, who was at first belittled by the UK Press as being less than worthy, and given time, came roaring back on what amounted to a stunning grassroots victory. Although maligned in the media, for the most part, Palin fits the 2006 John McCain mold perfectly, that is unless of course, John Thune does emerge from the “bowels of the GOP” to be a serious contender. One would expect, however, that Thune would be present at any of the given “conferences” held this year. Not necessarily, he is making 2012 headlines as evidenced by the AP’s, ”GOP Hopefuls Edge Right at Tea Party Watches”, including Thune in a list of contenders.
Therefore, as of now, it’s anyone’s best guess, and nothing more. Thune could emerge as the next “Mike Huckabee”, Mitt Romney is almost a given to be on the ticket, and Palin, although not having announced her intention to run (or not run), may actually sit this one out (see Maggie Thatcher). What one should watch is the following months, going into 2011, especially after the 2010 mid-terms – should the focus remain on two to three names above, one can bet that one of those will eventually be at the top (or bottom) of the 2012 ticket. Ron Paul, of course, will run and win every internet straw poll available. As it stands now, the two most likely to take the nomination (based on media predictions) Palin and Romney. No matter which would emerge as the nominee, one can bet that should the angst against Obama continue unabated through the following year (going into 2011), he will, like Jimmy Carter, be a one term President, and the next President could be more of an “historical” choice than the later. From a feminist point of view, should Palin emerge as the frontrunner, regardless of naysayers, then she would be the first women to sit in the Oval office. One has to remember that women were last to gain the right to vote in this country. Of course, one cannot count out a Clinton (Hillary) run in 2012.
Thursday, April 08, 2010
Democrats on Spring Break – Avoiding Constituents if they voted For Health Care Vote and Increased Taxes
Markey(D-CO)at Town Hall - Not this Trip! image: Life
During the Spring Recess, as Democrats head home to their districts, theyare studiously avoiding “larger crowds”, sticking to letters to local newspapers instead. The AP article headlined: ”Vulnerable Democrats are tiptoeing on health care” describes several Democrats from Colorado to Michigan who are concerned about meeting constituents due to their vote on Health Care – in addition, they are “convinced” that once the public understands what is in the bill, that surely they will be re-elected. Who’s to blame – according to the AP: Republicans! Apparently, it is the Republican’s who are continuing to fuel discontent among Tea Party members over the reform. The problem with this article are two-fold – one, if the bill were so great, these Democrats (Rep. Betsy Markey (D-CO), Dina Titus (D-NV), Harry Mitchell (D-AZ) and Mark Schauer (D-MI), would be out holding sessions informing their constituents about what the bill includes that makes it work for American’s. Not so, it is the rhetoric, rather than the meat and potatoes (so to speak) of the bill that they endlessly proclaim. The reason may be that these representatives either hold their constituents in contempt (i.e. – being Progressives there is a definite difference between someone who is “elite” (i.e. member of Congress, or someone who holds a four year degree and is a Progressive) or the “masses” (i.e. your average American) – The masses certainly cannot understand something so complicated, so therefore, they are incapable of knowing what’s good for them. (See standard reply from any Congressional email and/or letter re: Health Care Reform, or any other topic and it begins (Paraphrasing): “This is a complicated matter….” - as if to say, “You, the constituent, cannot possibly understand this or that”. One: arrogance or brainwashed stupidity – take your pick. Two, they have no clue as to what is actually in the bill they signed, but darn it, those Tea Party people do – therein lays the crux of the matter. First, the elite would consider those media maligned “Tea Party” members as uneducated masses – and secondly they must be Republican.
Due to the fact that the Congressional Reps, isolated through either ideology or arrogance, are truly ignorant of what they are dealing with, the public, hiding out seems the most logical step to take. Those in the Tea Party Movement (mainly, funny enough, women outnumber men and are mainly the organizers – see skewed poll with marginals from Quinnipiac here), have actually read the bill, gone through all the amendments and fully comprehend what this (and other bills on the table) contain.
The Reconciliation Act, aside from taking over one of the last profitable businesses a bank had (student loan industry), has a bevy of taxes attached to the Health Reform portion of the bill.
The Los Angeles Times has a partial list:
Tax hikes related to healthcare
Medicare taxes, effective 2013 ($210.2 billion) Payroll tax increases from 1.45% to 2.35% on wage income over $200,000 for individuals; over $250,000 for couples.
For taxpayers in that bracket, a new surtax of 3.8% on investment income.
High-cost healthcare plans, effective 2018 ($32 billion) 40% excise tax on health benefits that exceed $10,200 for individuals, $27,500 for couples.
Tanning tax, effective July 1, 2010 ($2.7 billion) 10% excise tax on indoor tanning services.
Flexible health spending accounts, effective 2013 ($13 billion) Limit to $2,500 a year contributions to tax-free health savings accounts.
Itemized medical-expense deductions, effective 2013 ($15.2 billion) Allow itemized deductions only for medical expenses that exceed 10% of income, up from the current 7.5% threshold.
To get an idea of the scope of the taxes associated with Health Care Reform, The Joint Committee on Taxation has the list and explanation in downloadable format here www.jct.gov. The download (PDF) file is under Recent Publications, JCX-18-10.
Therefore, according to those Democrats who feel “average Americans” will really like this bill once they get to know it, are in for a surprise. For example, the download includes a tax credit for anyone who is involved in an “exchange” (i.e. government run health care plan”, the rest of the nation – not so much as a dime. The Tanning Tax: those on the Hill most likely feel tanning salons are reserved for “people like them” and actors, actresses or the fabulously wealthy – while the average American who has a teenager, or who is planning on an evening out, understands that their daughter will now be paying a tax for that tan for the prom. Understanding that tanning sounds ridiculous – it is the point of how those members of Congress are so clueless as to take something so very minor and with an air of “better than though”, or “the taxpayer has no use for a tanning salon” . They should also be concerned about how those 16 to 19 year old prom goers are going to feel about this zinger. The limit to Flexible Spending accounts is interesting as it discourages people from paying for their own medical benefits – and of course, the rise in the percentage of dollars in deductions for medical expenses, affects many families earning far less than $100,000.
The best line in the article from AP via Yahoo Business News: in speaking about the 2010 mid-term elections: “There's even a chance the party could lose control of one or both houses in the midterm elections.” The House, historically, will turn over 25 seats in an off-year, however, with people (those pesky masses) paying more attention by the day, even the Senate is in play.
The Democrats, who appear to be isolated, or smoking something at the very least, have no idea of what the public is thinking, or who those Tea Party people are (mainly women, who are supposed to be in lockstep with the DNC), for that matter – and they show absolutely no sign of changing their approach to governing or, unlike their Republican counterparts, taking the time to get to know exactly what this Tea Party is all about – it will be their undoing.
Interesting Palin Video (Embed disabled) YouTube.com Feminist Unleashed.
Video below
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
