Update: Legal Challenges to Obama Eligibility Continue

Despite lengthy Deptartment of Justice pleas to dismiss the Barnett v Obama case earlier this month, US Federal District Court Judge David Carter decided to “take the matter under submission.” Talk about blowing the wind out of Obama’s sails.

Succintly countering the Obama legal team’s argument that no court has the jurisdiction to rule on Obama’s eligibility to serve as President, heretofore the dominating argument in all other cases challenging Obama’s eligibility, and that the only way to remove Obama is impeachment or to trigger the 25th Amendment, United States Justice Foundation attorney Gary Kreeps sagely and persuasively asserted that both the impeachment statutes and the 25th Amendment assumed a “sitting President”, but that if Obama is ineligible to serve as President, then “he could not be, and never was, a sitting President”, thus rendering those removal remedies inapplicable and clearly leaving jurisdiction to the courts. Lucidity and logic don’t get much better than that, and Judge Carter is listening.

Though technical issues of jurisdiction and standing have plagued eligibility cases in the past, for the first time, a case challenging Obama's eligibility may actually have a chance of a hearing on the merits of the suit itself. And during the hearing on October 5th, Judge Carter actually advised plaintiffs that "if I rule against you on standing, I would suggest ways to address that issue in the future", to me an amazingly constructive and encouraging comment from the bench.

If DOJ’s dismissal motion is overcome, discovery pleadings would follow seeking Obama’s birth certificate, college records, passport files, adoption papers and Selective Service files, etc. all in an effort to determine his eligibility once and for all. And if, in the coming days, plaintiffs can, in fact, defeat the DOJ motion to dismiss, Judge Carter has already set a January 26, 2010 trial date.

Another case well worth monitoring is Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress which is being brilliantly pled by attorney Mario Apuzzo. Too much to get into right now, but I will try to keep you posted of significant developments.

Why the serious and lingering doubts about Obama’s constitutional eligibility? In short, per Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, to be eligible to be President/Commander-in-Chief, Obama must be a “natural born citizen” within the context, meaning and intent of the Presidential Clause--not a “native born US Citizen”, not a “US Citizen”, not a “US National”, not a "Naturalized Citizen". (Take note, Bobby Jindal.) Demonstrably, Obama was born a British subject (dual citizenship), and, demonstrably, his father was not a US Citizen nor even an immigrant (Non-Immigrant Student Visa). Thus, by definition, Obama is NOT a “natural born citizen”. Pretty straightforward stuff, I'd say. But, the hot legal potato sizzles and only unencumbered and equitable judicial review can properly resolve this momentous Constititional issue for the country.

Keep your fingers crossed for a judicial breakthrough and timely adjudication.

Progressives, aka Democratic Socialists: the Enemy Within

Ever wonder just who’s behind the curtains pulling the levers of power in D.C.? Me too. So, I did a little checking and this, in a nutshell, is what I’ve come up with.

Too often we differentiate our so-called representatives as either Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative. But, that clearly misses the mark entirely. Afterall, there are liberal Republicans (RINOs) and conservative Democrats (Blue Dogs) proposing and voting for or against legislation affecting our lives. Then there are the self-described “moderates” on both sides of the aisle who represent…well...themselves and their political careers, not unlike the majority of their colleagues in congress as well.

But, political party labels aside, who are really the movers and shakers among them who effectively dominate the legislative agenda and, in turn, “we the people”?

The Progressives! To my way of thinking, Democrats in name only (DINOs), a party unto themselves and their own uniquely alien ideological agenda, are a power unto themselves.

Founded in 1991 by Reps Dellums (D-CA), Lane (D-IL), DeFazio (D-OR), Waters (D-CA) and Bernie Sanders (D-VT, the latter now a Senator and the only openly Socialist serving in Congress), and publicly feigning Democratic Party allegiance, the 82 members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, aka DINOs, at one time openly espoused Socialism and publicly advocated the agenda of the Democratic Socialists of America.

No longer affirming their affiliation with or loyalty to the DSA, the caucus roster was scrubbed from the DSA website circa 2000. In their “Elections Statement 2000”, the DSA website noted that “DSA recognizes that some insurgent politicians representing labor, environmentalists, gays and lesbians, and communities of color may choose to run under Democratic auspices…” Love the term “insurgent”. It’s so…counter-revolutionary. So… frappe. So...in. And, hey, why expose your true ideology to public scrutiny, huh?

Unquestionably, the once venerable Democratic Party, of which I was once a proud member, has demonstrably moved very far left. For all practical purposes, its mainstream is now dominated by those whom the Dems themselves had once derisively labeled “fringe” and “extreme”.

The Progressive Caucus is comprised of well-positioned power brokers in DC whose essentially uncontested rule continues to influence the course of our republic. In shameless pursuit of socialist/collectivist goals, their legislative agenda is relentlessly aimed at effectively transforming the meaning and relevance of the Constitution itself. In short, folks, the Progressive Caucus is a clear and present danger to all Americans of every political stripe who value the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

In the Caucus statement of purpose, check for yourself some of the code words which reveal their real political ideology and purpose:

“The Progressive Caucus is organized around the principles of social and economic justice...which represent the interests of all people, not just the wealthy and powerful.

…Our people-based agenda extends from job creation to job training, to economic conversion, to single payer healthcare reform, to environmental reform and to women’s rights.

Now that the cold war is over, this nation’s budget and overall priorities must reflect that reality. We support further cuts in outdated and unnecessary military spending, a more progressive tax system in which wealthy taxpayers and corporations contribute their fair share, and a substantial increase in social programs for low and middle-income American families."

To accomplish their collectivist goals, their legislative initiatives are invariably aimed at media control (to achieve “fairness”, of course); controlled education (to shape a collective viewpoint); the watering down of free speech (to eliminate a free flow of opinions and to shut down debate); disarmament (to eliminate the possibility of armed revolt); legalization of same-sex marriage; living wage laws; increasing welfare spending (to buy votes and quell political resistance); and global governance. And this is but a smattering of the insanely sophomoric, elitist and dangerous ambitions of the Caucus and of both their minions and unwitting enablers on both sides of the aisle.

In 2005, the Caucus drafted its “Progressive Promise” document (I call it their “manifesto”) advocating, among other things, socialized medicine, radical environmentalism, redistribution of wealth, higher taxes, reductions in the government’s intelligence gathering capabilities, debt relief for poor countries, and, of course, the precipitous withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. The rationale for pursuing these socialist aims? “To re-build US alliances, restore international respect for American power and influence, and to reaffirm our nation’s constructive engagement in the United Nations and other multilateral organizations.” Sound eerily like Obama’s globalist and socialist pitch, huh? You betcha’ it does.

Just so you know who the enemy within really is, as of 10/11/2009, the following members of Congress were declared members of the congressional Progressive Caucus. “Former member” Nancy Pelosi is not a declared member. Also not included are Sen. Brown (D-FL), Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) who, by virtue of their now being Senators, are no longer members of the House Progressive Caucus:

Neil Abercrombie (D-HI)
Tammy Baldwin (D-WI)
Xavier Becerra (D-CA)
Earl Blumenauer (D-OR)
Bob Brady (D-PA) Chairman, House Administration Committee
Michael Capuano (D-MA)
Andre Carson (C-IN)
Donna Christensen (Virgin Islands)
Judy Chu (D-CA)
Yvette Clarke (D-NY)
William “Lacy” Clay (D-MO)
Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO)
Steve Cohen (D-TN)
John Conyers (D-MI) Chairman, House Judiciary Committee
Elijah Cummings (D-MD)
Danny Davis (D-IL)
Peter DeFazio (D-OR)
Rosa DeLauro
Donna Edwards (D-MD)
Keith Ellison (D-MN)
Sam Farr (D-CA)
Chaka Fattah (D-PA)
Bob Filner (D-CA)
Barney Frank (D-MA) Chairman, House Financial Services Committee
Marcia Fudge (D-OH)
Alan Grayson (D-FL)
Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) Co-Chair of Caucus
Luis Gutierrez (D-IL)
John Hall (D-NY)
Phil Hare (D-IL)
Alcee Hastings (D-FL)
Maurice Hinchey (D-NY)
Mazie Horono (D-HI)
Michael Honda (D-CA)
Jesse Jackson, Jr.
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX)
Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX)
Hank Johnson (D-GA)
Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)
Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-MI)
Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)
Dave Loebsack (D-IA)
Barbara Lee (D-CA), Chairwoman, Congressional Black Caucus
John Lewis (D-GA)
Ben Lujan (D_NM)
Carolyn Maloney (D-NY)
Ed Markey (D-MA)
Eric Massa (D-NY)
Jim McDermott (D-WA)
James P. McGovern (D-MA)
George Miller (D-CA) Chairman, House Education & Labor Committee
Glenn Moore (D-WI)
Jim Moran (D-VA)
Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)
Eleanor Holmes Norton (District of Columbia)
John Oliver (D-MA)
Frank Pallone (D-NJ)
Ed Pastor (D-AZ)
Donald Payne (D-NJ)
Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE (left caucus when elected
Minority Leader. Sure.)
Chellie Pingree (D-ME)
Jared Polis (D-CO)
Charles Rangel (D-NY) Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee
Laura Richardson (D-CA)
Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA)
Bobby Rush (D-IL)
Linda Sanchez (D-CA)
Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
Jan Schakowsky (D-IL)
Jose Serrano (D-NY)
Louise Slaughter (D-NY) Chairwoman, House Rules Committee
Pete Stark (D-CA)
Bennie Thompson (D-MS) Chairman, House Homeland Security Committee
John Tierney (D-MA)
Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) Chairwoman, House Small Business Committee
Maxine Waters (D-CA)
Diane Watson (D-CA)
Mel Watt (D-NC)
Henry Waxman (D-CA) Chairman, House Energy & Commerce Committee
Peter Welch (D-VT)
Robert Wexler (D-FL)
Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) Co-Chair Caucus

Supporting the efforts of the Progressive Caucus are such charming liberal organizations as the Institute for Policy Studies, MoveOn.org, ACLU, Peace Action, Americans for Democratic Action, Progressive Democrats of America, NAACP, League of United Latin American Citizens, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, National Council of La Raza, Hip Hop Caucus, etc. Don’t these names just positively ooze of patriotism and traditional American values? Just gives me goose bumps all over.

So, watch out, folks. These guys are in charge of 11 of twenty standing congressional committees. And they’re playing for keeps. Our opinions are absolutely irrelevant. And the list above doesn't even include a number of Senators, some of whom while not members, are most certainly cut from the same neo-Marxist cloth. You can name them faster than I can type them.

As Norman Thomas, Socialist Party of America, observed circa 1925, "The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing what happened."

LET'S NOT LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT. When the time comes, I urge you to volunteer to knock on doors to deny office to any Progressive politician. If they appear on the membership list of the Democratic Socialists of America, they DON'T belong in a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Commentary Snippets #3

As the Progressive elites hatch a compromise Senate healthcare "reform" bill behind closed doors, here are a few items to ponder: 1) contrary to White House assurances, Obamacare WILL fund abortions. In fact, each time the Republicans introduced an amendment to specifically prohibit federal funds for abortion in all five congressional healthcare bills, they were soundly defeated by the Democratic majority; 2) CBO’s estimate that Obamacare will reduce deficits by $81 billion over the next ten years does not take into account that while taxes and fees will begin in 2010, Obamacare itself will not be implemented until 2013. So, we can count on HUGE deficits after 2019. Yes, my friends, our Progressive overseers genuinely believe “we the people” are, in fact, insufferably stupid; 3) “employer mandates” will cost the economy up to $50 billion/year, and up to 9 million low-wage and part-time employees will lose their employer-based health insurance; 4) with a public option, millions of Americans who are satisfied with their current coverage will be forced out of their private health insurance plans and into the public option; 5) though the “individual mandate” provision in these bills is manifestly unconstitutional and will, therefore, likely be challenged in court, that won’t stop the Progressives. With Obamacare, individuals must either enroll or face onerous penalties of up to $1900; 6) Obamacare will mean the massive and costly expansion of the Medicaid program which will exacerbate state fiscal woes; 7) to reduce the deficit, all reform proposals will require billions in Medicare cuts which, if enacted, would adversely affect medical services to millions of seniors; but since no one really believes that such draconian Medicare cuts will happen, that illusory $81 billion in “savings” by 2019 will quickly balloon into a $300-$400 billion deficit; 8) the Price Waterhouse Coopers audit shows that Obamacare will drive up premiums ( vs making coverage more affordable) above what those costs would be without the reform: by 2016, the cost of coverage for the typical family will rise by $6,000 under current law and by $9,000 if Obamacare is adopted; 9) to placate generous trial lawyers, tort reform, which could save billions each year by reducing the need for defensive medicine, will not be part of any final Democratic bill; 10) reportedly, the White House is prepared to approve an increase in payments for doctors in return for their support for Obamacare, an estimated $250 billion cost not yet factored into the liberals’ rosey 10-year forecast; 11) despite the economic and healthcare carnage wrought by Obamacare, 25 million people would still be uninsured!

Again, folks, this has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with improving healthcare quality or reducing healthcare costs for Americans. It’s ALL about the expansion of government power over our lives. To bring down healthcare costs without jeopardizing the quality of care, no intelligent person on the Hill can honestly believe that throwing the baby out with the bath water is the solution to our healthcare problems. So, there must be an ulterior motive. The short of it is that the Progressives well understand Lenin’s assertion that providing universal healthcare is a surefire stepping stone to socialist domination. (See previous healthcare posts where more sensible and market-based approaches to reforming healthcare are discussed.)

If the Obama-run Census Bureau has its way, and there's every reason to believe that it will, Fox News could be barred from airing bureau ads aimed at instructing and encouraging public participation in the census. On its website, the bureau asserts that media with “controversial talk” formats will be denied ad deals. No matter. Given the White House’s open war with Fox News, I’m sure a commercially fluorishing Fox isn’t banking on any ad money anyway.

Despite Obama’s gift of $900 million for Palestinian “humanitarian aid”, meaning Swiss bank accounts, Fatah remains extremely upset with Obama for failing to more aggressively push Israel to abandon its settlements on the West Bank. Tch, tch, tch. Poor misunderstood, victimized Fatah. As far as I’m concerned, let this shamelessly unrepentant terrorist horde which so callously celebrated the death of 3000 innocents on 9/11 eat…..cake.

The much maligned “birthers” may yet be vindicated--and none too soon for these United States of America. Seems one Judge Carter may actually allow Barnett v Obama to go forward, this despite the feverish Obama legal team’s attempts to block any such attempt. Stay tuned.

While the recent District of Columbia v. Heller case upheld the individual right to keep and bear arms in federally administered areas, it did not settle the question of Second Amendment rights for individuals in areas outside direct federal jurisdiction. Thus, this winter the Supreme Court will hear the McDonald v City of Chicago case which will decide whether Second Amendment rights are protected from state and municipal government encroachments as well. While it seems academic that one’s right to bear arms for self-defense is constitutionally unassailable, nevertheless Chicago’s handgun ban has remained in effect for the last 27 years, effectively denying law-abiding citizens from possessing firearms to defend themselves, their families, and their homes. The suit was brought by four Chicago residents, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Illinois State Rifle Association. Obviously, Americans shouldn’t have to choose between violating unconstitutional gun ban laws or protecting themselves and their loved ones. (Lest we forget where Obama's heart is in all this, in 2004 State Senator Obama voted against Illinois Senate Bill 2165 which would have allowed citizens the right to possess and to protect themselves with handguns. In short, this administration remains viscerally opposed to protecting individual Second Amendment rights.)

The Heritage Foundation calculates that cap-and-trade, if passed, will result in 1.9 million fewer jobs in 2012, $9.4 TRILLION lost in economic growth by 2030 and nearly a 90% increase in energy costs for all Americans by 2030. Yes, incredibly, the Progressives are still pushing very, very hard for cap-and-trade. What better way to weaken our economy and to advance their Marxist agenda for America. Remain vigilant, folks. Forewarned is forearmed. Be prepared to push back aggressively.

Money speaks louder than words. Currently, Iran is China’s biggest trading partner and supplies 14% of China’s oil imports! Awash in foreign currency estimated at $2 trillion, and with a burgeoning need for Iranian oil to fuel it’s red-hot economic growth, China plans to increase its investments in Iran by $120 billion over the next several years. Combining those stats with the fact that America is relying on Beijing to help fund Obama’s $9 trillion deficit over the next ten years, is it really any wonder why meaningful economic sanctions against Iran have been impossible? But, fear not. My bet is that Israel, free of Chinese economic pressures, will soon pull the plug on Iranian nuclear development. Like my T-shirt proclaims, “Don’t Worry America. Israel is Behind You”. And thank God for that!

The redoubtable Mark Steyn warns that one of every eight workers in New York State—or 1.2 million—is a unionized government employee, and thus a reliable vote for the Democrats, the Party of Big Government. He aptly describes this public sector growth as a debilitating “matastasization” which is fast becoming an “existential threat to democracy”. No kidding, huh? Whatever happened to the lofty principle of “public service”? And to add insult to injury, these so-called “public servants” are also unionized! We’re quickly approaching a crossroads, folks: either we meekly adopt a Socialist Republic of America or we return to the small government free enterprise sytem that built this country. And while fending off the Progressive onslaught, I hope we’ve learned that there can be no worthwhile compromise with Progressives, Statists, Marxists and Socialists.

The Nobel Peace Prize? For What?

By nominating Barack Obama for the Nobel Peace Prize just 12 short days into his presidency, the left-wing Nobel Committee was clearly projecting great Obama accomplishments which simply have not materialized. Not even close.

The only other explanation for the Committte’s having awarded the prize to Obama this morning is that its members too have been seduced by Obama’s glamor and soaring rhetoric, but, more importantly, by his promise to fundamentally transform America into a Euro-style basketcase more in line with insipid Norwegian socialist standards of excellence. And, unfortunately, that’s probably the case.

To Obama’s credit, however, during his speech this morning acknowledging and thanking the Committee for the honor, for the first time I can remember he sounded humble and actually said nice things about America. A silver lining afterall.

My only concern is that this ideologically motivated award of notoriously questionable value may do little more than encourage Obama’s appeasement as well as his globalist and socialist predilections.

Call me a poor sport or a blindly right-wing partisan hack, but this is a monumental farce. I'm actually chuckling as I write this. But, hey, in these perilous times we all need a sense of humor.

So, for what it's worth, congratulations, Mr. President........I guess.

Commentary Snippets #2

With all the political posturing, blather and prevarication on the Hill these days, let’s not forget how we can best significantly reduce healthcare costs without adversely affecting the quality of care or adding to the deficit: 1) reject Obamacare and all its awful fed-centric permutations; 2) implement tort reform to reduce cost of malpractice insurance and to eliminate costly defensive medicine; 3) encourage the health care industry to create a low cost plan for low income people to cover routine doctor visits vs costly emergency room care; 4) encourage less costly private sector operated walk-in clinics/properly staffed drugstores for routine medical care; 5) incentivize private whistleblowers to reduce fraud and waste; 6) eliminate arbitrary interstate barriers to healthcare insurance competition; 7) create a special fund to either subsidize catastrophic and pre-existing health treatments or to subsidize the private purchase of catastrophic and pre-existing health coverage. And these are but a smattering of the mulitiplicity of commonsense ways to reduce costs and ensure quality care without a government takeover.

On the heels of an IAEA leak over the weekend that Iran was much further along with its nuclear program than had been previously opined and that Iran now has all the necessary scientific know-how to design a nuclear weapon, the threat of an Israeli pre-emptive attack is unambiguous. Add to this the involvement of Russian scientists and engineers in Iran’s nuclear program, then the reason for Iran’s rapid development shouldn’t be all that surprising. Who did the leaking and the tactical reasons for doing so, while interesting, underscores why Tehran and, yes, both Russia and China, need to more fully grapple with how dangerously close we ALL are to a catastrophy in the Middle East. To prevent a disaster, Moscow and Beiping must constructively cooperate to neutralize the Iranian nuclear threat—now. Sadly, Iranian perceptions of Obama as weak and vascillating does nothing to encourage constructive Russian and Chinese engagement or Iranian compliance. Another avoidable perfect storm is now brewing.

Creeping EPA regulation of carbon-emitting power plants, factories and oil refineries will lead to painful spikes in energy costs for all consumers, both rich and poor. The Heritage Foundation estimates that the Waxman-Markey bill (HR 2454) will increase energy costs for the typical family by $3,000/year, and gasoline and electric prices by 58% and 90% respectively. However, what Cap ‘n Trade can’t yet do to stifle economic growth, the imperious EPA bureaucracy is hard at work doing just that.

WARNING: Americans should carefully vet Cap‘n Trade and Healthcare bills, among others, for what could be a $trillion+ “global tax” add-on which will affect American taxpayers. In a recent G-20 communique from Pittsburg, the IMF was tasked with studying the implementation of a global tax (aka “fair and substantial contribution”, “innovative sources of finance” and “solidarity levies”) on unsuspecting Americans and taxpayers of other developed countries. The idea is to levy transactional fees of up to 0.5% on the trillions of dollars exchanged daily on the global market to meet UN foreign aid demands. Of course, the cost would be passed on to consumers. Since passage of the Global Poverty Act which would have involved the transfer of $845 billion directly from US taxpayers to meet UN “millennium development” goals failed, the IMF Global Tax now appears to be the fallback approach for American progressives and their transnational socialist allies in the world to facilitate the global redistribution of wealth. Forewarned is forearmed. Their menacing assault on free enterprise and liberty remains ruthless and unrelenting.

A sobering stat from the Alliance Defense Fund: 55 million people were killed during war years 1939 – 1945. Since 1967 in Britain and the USA alone, 57 million unborn babies have been killed. When a civilization so cavalierly destroys its children in such gigantean numbers, can that civilization long endure? Nope.

Without legislative language to work with, the CBO yesterday tempered its favorable scoring of the currently "conceptual" Baucus Bill by describing it as a "preliminary analysis" only. But, of course, hardpressed Democratic cheerleaders will do all they can to convince the public that the CBO scoring is anything but preliminary; that it proves the deficit neutrality of the Senate's healthcare bill. The shameless charade and obfuscation continues.

Commentary Snippets #1

Sponsored by Rep. Boehner (R-OH), the House’s Defund Acorn Bill would prohibit funding for not only ACORN but any organization which has “filed fraudulent paperwork with the government or violated campaign finance laws”. This is precisely the language which Project on Government Oversight (POGO) had been hoping for. According to POGO, about 62 contractors inclusive of universities, defense and health companies would be affected. Attached as an amendment to a student aid bill, it passed in the House 345-75, with all opposing votes coming from the Democratic side. (Tactically absent was ACORN apologist Barney Frank.) On the Senate side (Amendment #2355 of S 3288), it passed 83-7, again with all opposing votes coming from Democrats. Neither the House nor Senate versions will take effect until the bills to which they were attached have been signed by the Community Organizer-in-Chief.

Israeli Strike Expected Spring 2010.Though US Jews currently support a US military strike against Iran 56%-36%, a unilateral military strike by Israel is supported 66%-28%. Foreseeing no resolution of the Iranian nuclear threat by year’s end, Yaakov Katz of the Jerusalem Post predicts that Israel will strike in the Spring of 2010. The London Times reported in July that Saudi Arabia granted IAF overflights of their kingdom during any strike on Iran. Also, Amb. Bolton confirmed that during his tour of Middle East capitals this summer Arab leaders quietly indicated they “would acquiesce in [Israeli] overflights” so long as Israel doesn’t trumpet the arrangement. (Note: the Israeli, German and French intelligence services all disagree with the US 2007 Nat’l Intelligence Estimate which claimed Iran had halted their work on a nuclear bomb. So, appears their intelligence is less politicized and more objective than our own, and Israel has long been preparing for the inevitable strike.)

The Heritage Foundation reports that if a public option is ever made law 103.4 million Americans would end up on the public plan, 88.1 million of whom would first lose their existing private coverage. Even without a public option, the Foundation reports that everyone would be required to have health insurance by 2013. Those who fail to comply would be forced to pay an annual tax of $750-$3,800/yr. Noncompliance would be a punishable offense which I dealt with in a previous post. Also, to avoid penalties, employers of more than 50 not offering health coverage would simply reduce their work force. More unemployment, of course. (Note: More than a dozen states are moving to pass state constitutional amendments that would outlaw Obamacare’s individual mandate. In the final analysis, perhaps that is the only thing which will persuade the libs from foolishly adopting a public option. Who would have guessed Obama would have been so divisive, tearing at the very heart of Americans' constitutional sensibilities.)

GOP Incompetence. Larry Elder, an Afro-American of keen intellect, solid conservative cred and a renowned talk radio host, was asked by the NRSC not to run against the insufferably screechy Barbara Boxer in 2010. And their… reasoning? Already committed to one Carly Fiorina who, with a string of embarrassing missteps and revelations under her belt already, is, according to Rasmussen, a sure loser, NRSC advised Elder that though Fiorina will lose, she will, at least, “tie up Democratic resources in the meantime”. Duh! Boxer couldn’t be more vulnerable right now, and Elder could easily whip her. But, nope, the squirrels at NRSC have decided to all but assure Boxer’s win in 2010. Insane! It is said that Elder is frustrated and fuming still. Let’s hope he runs as an Independent and circumvents GOP incompetence. Republicans are their own worst enemies. The Dems are pushovers if we'd only stop aping them.

Obama’s sophomoric eagerness to assuage our opponents since his inauguration brings America to a critical crossroads with Iran and Afghanistan. Ahmadinejad must surely perceive Obama as weak. Similarly, Kabul must surely be very concerned about what they perceive as Obama’s dithering over Gen. McChrystal’s recommendation regarding troop strength in Afghanistan. Despite Obama’s “apology tour”, our enemies perceive America as weak which, I believe, has caused a decline in America’s credibility in the Middle East and elsewhere around the world. In turn, and if history is our guide, this will further increase the likelihood of dangerous miscalculations and confrontations. Right now, Obama's making no significant decision on either front is extremely foolhardy. With regard to the growing threat of Iran, my bet is that by our inaction and the hollowness of further sanctions Israel will feel compelled to strike Iran. And to protect shipping lanes in the Straits of Hormuz, we will inevitably be dragged in to the fight. Fine by me. Let’s get it done and let’s hasten regime change in Teheran. As for Afghanistan, send the additional troops, demand rigid Afghan cooperation and clear benchmarks for success, i.e. Afghan military self-sufficiency and a serious reduction in corruption. After two years, or less, if insufficient progress has been made, pull out our regular troops, but maintain an advisory capability and aggressive special forces component so long as they are not exposed to unreasonable risk. But, my God, step off the dime, Barack, and get a crash course in history under your belt while you're at it. Perhaps then the Presidency won't be so far above your pay grade.

Recap of Some Notable Developments This Week

• Valiant Georgia, The Mouse that Keeps on Roaring: In what could be a desperate attempt on the part of Georgia, a chastened ally of the US, to draw America's attention to the tenuousness of Georgian security, in August the Georgian navy seized a Turkish tanker delivering fuel to Georgia's breakaway republic, Abkhazia. Moscow quickly warned Tbilisi that the Russian coastguard would guarantee the unencumbered flow of commerce to its client state in the future. Undeterred, Georgian President Saakashvili boldly declared a blockade of Abkhazia which is still in effect. Of course, in view Washington's detente with Moscow and an increasingly hollow NATO military capability, credible NATO or American backing of Georgia is unlikely should another Russian-Georgian clash occur. While Georgia's gamble to strengthen ties with the West to ensure its survival as an independent state is most likely doomed, in an extraordinarily intrepid act of solidarity with Georgia, the Ukraine, also a former republic of the now defunct USSR, has threatened to both blockade the Russian Black Sea fleet at Savastopol and to bar the return of Russian ships to that base if Moscow takes any military action against Georgia. A country of 47 million and a key transit point for lucrative Russian gas supplies to Europe, Ukraine wouldn't be a cakewalk for the Russians should a confrontation occur. So, though bereft of American and NATO support, lilliputian Georgia, with Ukraine's resolute backing, may yet be able to avert its being swallowed up by an emboldened and adventurist Russian bear.
• Obama Eligibility: Obama's legal Team, Perkins Coie, has, to date, been paid by Obama's "Organizing for America" lobbyists $1,352,378.50 to block from public scrutiny BHO's birth certificate in Hawaii. Despite the Obama team's criticizing concerned citizens for harboring misgivings about his presidential eligibility by virtue of lingering constitutional questions about his natural born citizenship status, one must still logically ask why Obama has felt the burning need to spend so much money to impede public access to his original birth certificate. Inescapably, one can only rationally suspect that the Community Organizer-in-Chief remains determined to hide the truth about his birth and his eligibility.
• Healthcare Reform's "Individual Mandate" Provision For Real. Though clearly unconstitutional as explained in my previous post entitled "Federal Healthcare Reform Poses Serious Constitutional Questions", it has been confirmed that those uninsured citizens unwilling to purchase healthcare coverage will be subject to a $1,300 - $1,900 fine! Refusal to pay the fine would result in a jail sentence of up to one year and/or a $25,000 fine. So much for the rule of law. Adoption in the final bill of this invasive provision would manifestly illustrate that the once venerable Constitution is, indeed, dead in Washington. Another march on Washington anyone? But this time with pitch forks or something perhaps more...persuasive?
• Doctor Shortage Looms: A recent survey by Investor's Business Daily indicates that if any single-payer semblance of Obamacare passes 45% of all doctors will likely "consider retiring or closing their practice". The resulting scarcity in medical services would quickly render meaningless Obama's oft-repeated assurances of quality care, no rationing and no waiting lines. It's amazing how dismissive of "we the people" our so-called representatives have become.
• A recent Zogby poll of 4,420 Medicaid, Medicare and Tricare voters indicates that a majority are opposed to a single-payer system. Perhaps they know something the politicians don't know or are deliberately ignoring?
• Healthcare Transparency a la Obama? The Heritage Foundation reported that Rep. Bunning (R-KY) offered an amendment that would have required "the actual text" and "the CBO estimate of costs" of any bill be posted for 72 hours on the Senate Finance Committee website for public review before the Committee could vote on its final passage. Obviously, a rational and responsible amendment, no? Sadly, with the exception of Sen. Lincoln (D-KY), the amendment was defeated along party lines. Can anyone any longer be truly surprised by what has become a shameless litany of liberal heavy-handedness and obfuscation?
• Coverage for Illegals Still Possible: Despite indignant denials to the contrary, Human Events reports that provisions among various Obamacare bills still floating around on Capitol Hill these days would entitle upwards of 6.6 million ILLEGAL ALIENS to free health care at gov't-run clinics. Cost to American taxpayers: $31 billion/year. Though still elusive, proper vetting and adequate enforcement of ID requirements is essential if we are to prevent this costly travesty.
• Israel Poised to Attack: With respect to the disclosure of a secret nuclear facility in Iran this week, during an interview with FOX's Bill Hemmer on Thursday, Israel's former Ambassador to the US ominously asserted that "the game is over". When queried about Israel's possible military response, and parroting Obama's campaign sloganeering, the Ambassador affirmed "yes we can, and yes we will". So, it looks like the jig is up for the mendacious Mullahs in Tehran and the weak-kneed appeasers in the West. And judging from the uncharacteristically bellicose posturing of Obama, Brown and Sarkozy this week, it appears the US, Great Britain and France are finally beginning to rationally deal with the near-certainty of an Israeli pre-emptive stike if Iran "lies again". If and when the attack comes, given that Americans remain shackled by an infuriatingly shortsighted Administration energy policy which effectively impedes domestic drilling and the achievement of energy independence, it looks like we will all soon face painful spikes in fuel prices in the coming months. But, on balance, this temporary economic hardship is but a small price to pay to eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat.