Yes Nancy, we are quite serious! VA judge rules ObamaCare’s individual mandate unconstitutional

Do you remember when Nancy Pelosi got on her high horse when asked about the constitutionality of the individual mandate?

I guess Nancy is taking things a little more seriously now.

The New York Times: A federal judge in Virginia ruled on Monday that the keystone provision in the Obama health care law is unconstitutional, becoming the first judge to invalidate any part of the sprawling act and ensuring that appellate courts will receive contradictory opinions from below.

The judge, Henry E. Hudson of Federal District Court in Richmond, said the law’s requirement that most Americans obtain insurance exceeded the regulatory authority granted to Congress under the Commerce Clause.[…]

 In a 42-page opinion, Judge Hudson wrote: “Neither theSupreme Court nor any federal circuit court of appeals has extended Commerce Clause powers to compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market.”

Allowing Congress to exert such authority, he said, “would invite unbridled exercise of federal police powers.”

Ah, and there in lies the heart of the matter.  If government can force you to buy health insurance, then what other products can they force you to buy.  Electric cars?  Fresh fruit and vegetables?  

From the comments at the NY Times, it seems that many are convinced that the Feds already have this power because they make you buy auto insurance.  This is erroneous, because one can easily opt out of buying auto insurance by simply choosing not to drive.  There is no way to opt out of choosing to buy health insurance.  It is this clear lack of choice that puts ObamaCare on unconstitutional grounds.

In an editorial over at the Wall Street Journal, the Journal notes that some liberals are saying that mandate or no mandate, ObamaCare will stay:

The Wall Street Journal: Yesterday liberals were crowing that even if the mandate is eventually declared illegal, it's no big deal because the rest of ObamaCare's new system would remain intact. Yet they've argued for years that the mandate is essential to health reform, because the mandate is at the heart of the regulatory machine. ObamaCare without a mandate would mean individuals wouldn't have to pay into a system until they were sick, driving up costs even faster and ruining what's left of health insurance markets.

And destroying the health insurance market was the real goal of ObamaCare from the get go.

Now comes the big push to get the Supreme Court to hear this case. There was a time where the outcome could have been pretty much guaranteed.  Now a day with so many judges doing their own thing, it is hard to say with absolute certainty whether or not the individual mandate will stand.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The New York Times

Via: The Wall Street Journal

Video h/t: Michelle Malkin

McClatchy – Marist Poll: Obama hits new low

McClatchy: WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's approval ratings have sunk to the lowest level of his presidency, so low that he'd lose the White House to Republican Mitt Romney if the election were held today, according to a new McClatchy-Marist poll.

The biggest reason for Obama's fall: a sharp drop in approval among Democrats and liberals, apparently unhappy with his moves toward the center since he led the party to landslide losses in November's midterm elections. At the same time, he's gained nothing among independents.[…]

Overall, just 42 percent of registered voters approve of how he's doing his job, while 50 percent disapprove.

Obama's standing among Democrats dropped from a month ago, with his approval rating falling to 74 percent from 83 percent, and his disapproval rating almost doubling, from 11 percent to 21 percent.

Among liberals, his approval rating dropped from 78 percent to 69 percent and his disapproval rating jumped from 14 percent to 22 percent.

His position among independents remained virtually the same, with 39 percent approving and 52 percent disapproving. A month ago, it was 38-54.

The president's continued failure to rally independents could ruin his bid for re-election. A hypothetical 2012 matchup showed him getting the support of 44 percent of registered voters and Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, getting 46 percent.

I would not jump for glee over this poll.  Yes, the left is quite angry at Obama today, but the very same people who are wetting the bed over maintaining the tax rates for the wealthy, will be flocking to the polls in 2012 to make sure those tax rates do not become permanent under a Republican president.

I also severely doubt Romney can beat Obama.  Whoever wins the Republican nomination is going to get exactly what Sarah Palin has gotten over the last two years.  I just don’t see Mitt Romney being capable of withstanding that kind of assault. Check out this video as an example.  I think this is why the very left leaning McClatchy decided to highlight Romney beating Obama.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: McClatchy

Back to the Future, the Presidential Edition

I have said it many times before, Image Counts!  I just cannot believe how badly this administration handles optics.  During the campaign, they were so slick with optics and now it is Amateur Night at the Apollo.

Turning over a presser to a limelight loving ham like Bill Clinton is just plain foolish, but when that the limelight loving ham is VERY good at stealing the show, it becomes a first class brain dead maneuver.  I think the worst part of the episode had to be Obama’s excuse for leaving. He needed to attend Christmas Parties with Michelle, seriously?  It would have been far better to say something like; he had a meeting with Republicans, Ben Bernanke, a foreign dignitary or anything that sounded he was doing important work for the people.

Also did you notice how Bill Clinton did not even waste five seconds sending Obama on his way? It was almost like Obama was merely Clinton’s errand boy and not the POTUS.  I think this presser is going to be Obama’s Pet Goat moment.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Mediaite       

VIDEO: Nigel Farage MEP “The Euro Game Is Up! Just who the hell do you think you are?”

This video was on Lucianne yesterday and I just had to share it with you.  Like Daniel Hannan, Nigel Farge drops a mega dose of truth on the EU elites.  Once again I am left wondering where are the American version of Hannan and Farge? 

Something tells me though, that Allen West might pull one of these scenes pretty soon.

Via: Lucianne

More smoke and mirrors: Obama announces government employee pay freeze

New York Times: WASHINGTON — President Obama on Monday announced a two-year pay freeze for civilian federal workers as he sought to address concerns over high annual deficits and appealed to Republicans to find a common approach to restoring the nation’s economic and fiscal health.

“The hard truth is that getting this deficit under control is going to require some broad sacrifice, and that sacrifice must be shared by employees of the federal government,” Mr. Obama told reporters. He called federal workers “patriots who love their country” but added, “I’m asking civil servants to do what they’ve always done” for the nation.

The pay freeze amounted to an opening bid as the president and Republican Congressional leaders begin jousting in earnest over tax and spending policy. It also illustrated how Mr. Obama can use his office on occasion to get ahead of newly elected Republicans; they had been talking about making such a move when they assume control of the House and additional Senate seats in January.

But while the move represents a gesture toward public anger over the anemic economic recovery and rising national debt, the $5 billion to be saved over two years will barely dent a deficit that has exceeded $1 trillion for the past two years.[…] [MORE]

This all sounds so lovely on paper, but there are a few problems that are going unnoticed.  First of all, we are at a record number of federal employees. As of February 2010 the Federal employee workforce was an astounding 2.15 million people, the highest ever. Second, we also have a record number of Federal employees making over $150,000.00.

What we have here is your typical game of political smoke and mirrors. For the casual follower of politics and government, a pay freeze sounds like a responsible move.  However, when you realize the facts above, you understand that all Obama is doing is locking in big and expensive government for the next two years.

What is truly needed is for the Federal workforce to take some serious PAY CUTS and undergo some serious DOWNSIZING.  Pay for Federal employees must be taken out the private sector and the high number of employees making record salaries is a drag on the economy we can no longer afford.

Sorry Obama, but you will have to do better than that.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The New York Times

Via: The Washington Times

Via: USA Today

Another day, another WikiLeaks document dump

This is becoming beyond embarrassing. A global superpower is incapable of preventing a rag tag organization from publishing national secrets. Yet, this is exactly what we are dealing with now that Wikileaks has dumped a third set of classified documents.

This time the documents are of a diplomatic flavor.  Some of the juicy items released are:

• What America things of various world leaders like Putin, Berlusconi and Sarkozy.
• Hillary ordering diplomats to spy on UN leaders.
• Saudis urging America to attack Iran over nukes.

The video below helps to detail more of the information that was released.

The frustrating thing about these Wikileaks document dumps is that Wikileaks openly stated they were going to release more documents after they first dump, yet nothing was really done about it. Sarah Palin was quick to pick up on this fact and was one of the first to ask why nothing has been done so far.

Sarah Palin’s Facebook Page: We all applaud the successful thwarting of the Christmas-Tree Bomber and hope our government continues to do all it can to keep us safe. However, the latest round of publications of leaked classified U.S. documents through the shady organization called Wikileaks raises serious questions about the Obama administration’s incompetent handling of this whole fiasco. 

First and foremost, what steps were taken to stop Wikileaks director Julian Assange from distributing this highly sensitive classified material especially after he had already published material not once but twice in the previous months? Assange is not a “journalist,” any more than the “editor” of al Qaeda’s new English-language magazine Inspire is a “journalist.” He is an anti-American operative with blood on his hands. His past posting of classified documents revealed the identity of more than 100 Afghan sources to the Taliban. Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders? 

What if any diplomatic pressure was brought to bear on NATO, EU, and other allies to disrupt Wikileaks’ technical infrastructure? Did we use all the cyber tools at our disposal to permanently dismantle Wikileaks? Were individuals working for Wikileaks on these document leaks investigated? Shouldn’t they at least have had their financial assets frozen just as we do to individuals who provide material support for terrorist organizations? 

Most importantly, serious questions must also be asked of the U.S. intelligence system. How was it possible that a 22-year-old Private First Class could get unrestricted access to so much highly sensitive information? And how was it possible that he could copy and distribute these files without anyone noticing that security was compromised? 

The White House has now issued orders to federal departments and agencies asking them to take immediate steps to ensure that no more leaks like this happen again. It’s of course important that we do all we can to prevent similar massive document leaks in the future. But why did the White House not publish these orders after the first leak back in July? What explains this strange lack of urgency on their part? 

We are at war. American soldiers are in Afghanistan fighting to protect our freedoms. They are serious about keeping America safe. It would be great if they could count on their government being equally serious about that vital task. 

- Sarah Palin 

This is the question everyone (especially the media) should have been asking after the second Wikileaks dump. By not aggressively going after Wikileaks the Obama administration does look weak and as Will Jacobson from Legal Insurrection suggests a lot like the Carter administration.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The New York Times

Via: UK Mail Online

Via: Spiegel Online

Via: UK Mail Online

Video h/t: The Right Scoop

Via: Sarah Palin’s Facebook Page

Via: Legal Insurrection

Sarah Palin shows all "57 states" Obama’s verbal gaffes

You all have no doubt heard that the left (and some on the right) got all wee weed up the other day when Sarah Palin made a slip of the tongue when referring to North and South Korea.  Today Sarah Palin posts on her Facebook page funny examples of Obama’s verbal gaffes that never really got the attention they deserve.

Sarah Palin Facebook: My fellow Americans in all 57 states, the time has changed for come. With our country founded more than 20 centuries ago, we have much to celebrate – fromthe FBI’s 100 days to the reforms that bring greater inefficiencies to our health care system. We know that countries like Europe are willing to stand with us in our fight to halt the rise of privacy, and Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s. And let’s face it, everybody knows that it makes no sense that you send a kid to the emergency room for a treatable illness like asthma and they end up taking up a hospital bed. It costs, when, if you, they just gave, you gave them treatment early, and they got some treatment, and ah, a breathalyzer, or an inhalator. I mean, not a breathalyzer, ah, I don’t know what the term is in Austrian for that…  

Each of the links above are links to YouTube clips of Obama’s gaffes.  Palin goes on in the post to point out the media’s bias when reporting on her vs. Obama.  She even throws in some examples of the media making a few verbal gaffes (I cannot believe I missed Shepard Smith saying this).

It is refreshing to see at least one conservative political figure willing to consistently stand and call out media bias.  Perhaps if more conservative candidates put their foot down we would not have to suffer though crap like the CNN/YouTube debates from 2008.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Left Coast Rebel

Via: The Right Scoop

Via: Sarah Palin’s Facebook page

Happy Thanksgiving from Another Black Conservative

Please take time today to really contemplate all that you are thankful for.  Some of the things I am truly thankful for today are;

• Another year I have been able to financially stay afloat. 
• My family enjoying another year of good health. 
• Still being able to optimistically look towards the future. 
• So many fellow Americans who are waking up and speaking up.
• Each and every last one of you who have stopped by this blog over the years.

What are you thankful for today?

Embarrassing: Peace talks with Taliban imposter

The New York Times: KABUL, Afghanistan — For months, the secret talks unfolding between Taliban and Afghan leaders to end the war appeared to be showing promise, if only because of the appearance of a certain insurgent leader at one end of the table: Mullah Akhtar Muhammad Mansour, one of the most senior commanders in the Taliban movement.

But now, it turns out, Mr. Mansour was apparently not Mr. Mansour at all. In an episode that could have been lifted from a spy novel, United States and Afghan officials now say the Afghan man was an impostor, and high-level discussions conducted with the assistance ofNATO appear to have achieved little.

“It’s not him,” said a Western diplomat in Kabul intimately involved in the discussions. “And we gave him a lot of money.”

American officials confirmed Monday that they had given up hope that the Afghan was Mr. Mansour, or even a member of the Taliban leadership.

NATO and Afghan officials said they held three meetings with the man, who traveled from in Pakistan, where Taliban leaders have taken refuge.

The fake Taliban leader even met with President Hamid Karzai, having been flown to Kabul on a NATO aircraft and ushered into the presidential palace, officials said. [MORE] 

Try as I could, I never understood the logic of negotiating with the Taliban.  It isn’t like the Taliban is an official nation, with an official leadership.  I think the reason why this happened was twofold. First, I don’t think the Bush administration thought this whole thing through. While talking out the Taliban was the right thing to do, I don’t think the Bush administration thought about what to do after the Taliban was removed. This mistake was further enhanced by the Obama administration’s political need to please the left’s desire to cut and run.

I can only imagine how ridiculous the west must look to the Taliban after this.  Considering how much money this guy got away with, I would not be the least bit surprise if someone tries to punk us again.

How embarrassing!

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The New York Times

Turning up the crazy: North Korea fires on South Korea

The New York Times: SEOUL, South Korea — The South Korean military went to “crisis status” on Tuesday and threatened military strikes after the North fired dozens of shells at a South Korean island, killing two of the South’s soldiers and setting off an exchange of fire in one of the most serious clashes between the two sides in decades.

President Lee Myung-bak met with security-related ministers and senior aides in the underground situation room at the Blue House, the presidential office and residence, and ordered strikes on North Korea’s missile base if the North made any “indication of further provocation,” The Korea Herald quoted a presidential spokesman, Hong Sang-pyo, as saying.

The North blamed the South for starting the exchange; the South acknowledged firing test shots in the area but denied that any had fallen in the North’s territory. It was in the same area that a South Korean naval vessel, the Cheonan, was sunk in March, killing 46 sailors. Seoul blamed a North Korean torpedo attack; the North has denied any role.

The United States, Britain and Japan on Tuesday condemned the latest attack. The United States called on North Korea to “halt its belligerent action.” American officials tracking the episode said that a total of 175 artillery shells were exchanged by the two sides.

The South Korean Defense Ministry said that in addition to the two soldiers who were killed, 15 soldiers and 3 civilians were wounded. Television footage showed large plumes of black smoke spiraling from the island, and news reports said dozens of houses were on fire. The South put its fighter planes on alert but they did not take off. [MORE]

Man this could get very ugly really quick.  North Korea is looking to transition power from Kim Jong Il to his son, so these crazy shows of strength will no doubt continue.  I suspect that North Korea is turning these shows of strength up a notch, because they know America is in no shape financial or politically to do much about it.

Via: Memeoranudm

Via: The New York Times

“Exhausted” Obama supporter Velma Hart has a “new reality” … unemployment

I sure you remember Velma Hart.  She was that eloquent sister who told Obama she was exhausted from defending him and wonder if her new reality was a return to hot dogs and beans dinners.

Unfortunately, Velma’s new reality is here, she lost her job.

Washington Post: Nobody is safe.

Velma Hart, who burst onto the media scene after telling President Obama she was scared about her financial future, has been laid off. Hart was let go as the chief financial officer for Am Vets, a nonprofit Maryland-based veteran services organization.

Hart has become another casualty of the tough economy in which so many people have lost their jobs.

"It's not anything she did," said Jim King, the national executive director of Am Vets. "She got bit by the same snake that has bit a lot of people. It was a move to cut our bottom line. Most not-for-profits are seeing their money pinched."

King would not say whether the organization had had other layoffs.

"Velma was a good employee," he said. "It was just a matter of looking at the bottom line and where could we make the best cuts and survive."

King hadn't seen the irony in Hart being fired just two months after she emotionally told Obama about her fears for her own financial well-being during a town hall meeting in Washington. [MORE]

Velma Hart declined to be interviewed about her layoff.  I would have loved to have heard Velma’s thoughts today.  Does she still support Obama or has the Hopey Changey stuff worn off? At any rate, I pity Velma.  She voted for an empty suit and now must learn from her mistake the hard way.


Some are saying this is payback for embarrassing Obama.  They point to the facts that the DC area thus far has been immune to the economic downturn and that laying off a CFO is rather unusual. I am not too sure about that.  Many of my clients are non profits and they have been devastated by the recession (soaking the rich tends to do that to groups that rely on charity).


Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Washington Post 

Zogby: Obama hits new low, now at 39%

Zogby: UTICA, New York - President Barack Obama's job approval rating has dropped to the lowest point of his Presidency at 39%, and in potential match-ups with Republicans in 2012, he trails Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush and Newt Gingrich and is just one point ahead of Sarah Palin.

The percentage of likely voters saying the U.S. is on the wrong track is now the highest since Obama took office at 69%.

The President continues to lose the job approval of Democrats, going from 78% on Nov. 15 to 72% in this Nov. 19-22, 2010 interactive poll. His approval among independents stayed at 39%, and is 6% among Republicans.

Overall, do you approve or disapprove of Barack Obama's job as President?

Obama Job Performance	Nov 22	Nov 15	Nov. 10	Nov. 1	Oct 27	Oct 25	Oct. 18	Oct 14	Oct 11	Oct 4	Sept 27	Sept 20	Sept 14	Aug 30
Approve	39%	42%	42%	45%	43%	47%	46%	44%	49%	46%	45%	49%	46%	44%
Disapprove	60%	58%	57%	54%	56%	53%	54%	56%	51%	53%	54%	51%	54%	56%
Not sure	1%	<1%	1%	<1%	<1%	<1%	<1%	<1%	<1%	1%	<1%	<1%	<1%	1%

If the 2012 Presidential election were held today, for whom would you vote?

Candidate	Mitt Romney	Newt Gingrich	Jeb Bush	Sarah Palin	Donald Trump	Mike Bloomberg
Obama	38%	39%	38%	41%	39%	32%
Opponent	44%	43%	40%	40%	29%	13%
Neither	15%	16%	19%	19%	19%	47%
Not Sure	3%	3%	3%	1%	1%	9%

Good news if true, but I am going to wait and see what both Rasmussen and Gallup have to say.

Since the elections, Obama hasn’t really shown any course corrections or even a basic understanding of the message that was sent. Perhaps these numbers reflect people realizing that nothing may change after the election. Time will tell.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Zogby