May 21, 2009

Why Don’t We Steele Away…

Filed under: Activism,Education,Life-Based News,Taxes & Government — Rose @ 4:30 pm

Or give him away or something…

Ya know, if Michael Steele thinks that those of us who once called ourselves Republicans are going to blindly follow him like the leftist robots follow their Obamessaih, then he’s in for a rude awakening.  This article by Carl Cameron proves that Steele is STILL following the same, tired, old strategy that has failed every time it’s tried (reaching out to the left before securing your own base namely by talking out both sides of your mouth).  Here are some excerpts…

Steele, in an interview with FOX News, said he’s calling on his party to unite around core values.

“We’ve got to coalesce around some core ideas and a core vision for this party, which is what I’m laying out this week, and we’re going to move forward,” he said. “And so, you know, I’ll either win you over or I won’t. I don’t have time to stop and really figure that out for you.”

Uh, which “core ideas” Michael?  Big government?  Advice:  A party who tries to pretend to be something it’s not (all things to all people) has no “core beliefs.”

And now the new RNC chairman is wading into the GOP debate over whether the party should moderate or remain ardently conservative.

“This is a no-brainer,” Steele told FOX News. “I’m a student of multiplication and addition, and not subtraction and division. My focus is on building a party that reaches across the board.”

Sigh.  Michael, read this v-e-r-y  s-l-o-w-l-y because obviously you people haven’t been paying attention: You will lose (and have lost) every time you try to pander for moderate/democrat votes as a Republican.

“I want a party that speaks to people. The idea that we only narrowly speak to one segment of the population is boneheaded and it’s not reflective of the history of this party,” Steele said. “How is kicking Colin Powell out or kicking Dick Cheney out or Rush Limbaugh in going to feed a child who’s hungry tonight?”

You’ve got to be kidding me…there’s only one bonehead in this scenario and you have to look at him everyday in the mirror.  I guess throwing your base under the bus is considered what?  Strategic?  Vogue?  So YOU want a moderate pile of mush (good luck accomlishing anything), let me tell you what most of us outside your precious beltway want…

WE want a party that actively works to secure the rights set forth in our founding documents.  (That would be Life, Lib- well, realistically, all the other rights are moot if we do not secure EVERY citizen’s right to Life (oops).

WE want a party that actively works to to get us away from income-based taxation.

WE want a party that actively works to obtain educational freedom (vouchers) for ALL of our children.

WE want a party that actively works to cut every bit of the ridiculous spending of our tax dollars on things NOT authorized by the Constitution.

WE want a party who actively works to LIMIT the structure and scope of government (Ibid.).

WE want a party who actively works to recognize and reward American exceptionalism.

WE want a party who attracts Independents & Zel Miller Democrats by simply and admirably standing on and fighting for these proven, successful, core beliefs.

YOU wanted to be the “leader” Michael and in light of the fact that the best, most effective leaders are at their core, true servants, it is time that you decide…decide exactly who it is that you will serve.  Will it be the current administration (“oh brother“) and its second cousins made up of progressive, unreliable Republicans?  Or will you serve those who continue to stand strong on the founding principles of the Republican Party and are SOLELY responsible for ANY success that it has enjoyed in the past (you know, the people who knock on your beloved moderates’ doors and drag them to the polls)?

Choose carefully, Michael…you cannot chase two rabbits and have Hossefeffer for dinner; and your decision will very likely decide the fate of the Republican Party:  It’s vibrant rebirth or continued free-fall into irrelevancy.

More Chrysler Bankruptcy News the National Media Won’t Use: Congressmen Demanding Documents From Company And White House

ObamaAndCarGuysChryslerBk0509On May 15, I posted (at NewsBusters; at BizzyBlog) on the Obama administration’s and government-run Chrysler’s blatant deception concerning whether plants would be closed as a result of the company’s bankruptcy filing.

Specifically, on April 29 and 30, Obama, the administration and Chrysler told senators, congressmen, state and local politicians, and local and regional union leaders that the bankruptcy (these are Obama’s words) “will not disrupt the lives of the people who work at Chrysler or the communities that depend on it.” Those who heard this and other reassurances reasonably concluded that no plants would be permanently closed. But on May 1, government-run Chrysler announced that it would close plants in Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Days later, hundreds of Chrysler dealers were terminated.

The national media establishment has treated all of this as a non-story, so I expect it will do the same with this update from the Cleveland Plain Dealer. It includes news that two Ohio congressmen, one Democrat and one Republican, are demanding documents relating to the who, what, where, when, and why of the plant-closing decisions:

WASHINGTON – Congressman Steve LaTourette today introduced legislation that demands the White House better explain why it painted a positive portrait of Chrysler’s future for all communities, only to be contradicted hours later with news of plant closings.

“Many people feel misled by this entire process,” said LaTourette, who with other Congress members, governors and mayors believed from President Barack Obama’s April 30 announcement that no permanent plant closings were planned.

Obama that day announced a short-term Chapter 11 bankruptcy for Chrysler in exchange for government aid, saying, “It will not disrupt the lives of the people who work at Chrysler or live in communities that depend on it.”

Obama, his automotive task force and Chrysler CEO Robert Nardelli that day separately described some temporary steps needed to restructure the automaker and help it merge with Italian car maker Fiat. None of the parties mentioned permanent plant closings. Twinsburg officials, as well as those in other locations, only learned a day later that the thick bankruptcy filing contained plans to permanently shutter five Chrysler factories, including the Twinsburg Stamping Plant.

Reacting to outrage from LaTourette and others, Nardelli soon apologized. But LaTourette is not satisfied.

Congressman Dennis Kucinich, a Cleveland Democrat, already has demanded further information from Chrysler, including any transcripts of conference calls between the company and public officials, and he left open the possibility of demanding the same from the White House. LaTourette, a Bainbridge Township Republican, is not waiting for that possibility.

He introduced legislation today demanding that the administration provide all information it has regarding the closing of Chrysler plants and 789 dealerships nationwide. If successful, his resolution would force the White House to provide all documents, records and communications regarding scheduled Chrysler plant closings that were not divulged by the administration or Chrysler until the plant names appeared in a bankruptcy filing, LaTourette’s office said.

…. Just days before the bankruptcy filing, the local United Auto Workers union had approved a new contract made in order to keep the 1,250-worker Twinsburg plant open. Union members approved it by an 88 percent margin, LaTourette noted.

“I don’t think it’s logical that you’d vote by an 88 percent margin to kill your job and close your plant,” LaTourette said. “There’s nothing more disruptive to a community than losing its largest employer. If this was the plan all along, fine, but I believe it was intentionally kept from key stakeholders and that’s not right.”

Plain Dealer Washington Bureau Stephen Koff, who has been virtually alone in covering this story, notes that LaTourette’s resolution has eight Republican co-sponsors.

The only reason that LaTourette’s move would not be considered newsworthy is that the congressman would appear to have little chance of success in getting anything out of Obama or the White House, despite the President’s all too familiar and now all too often broken promises of “transparency.” But the possibility of a resolution’s success has seldom stopped the national press from trumpeting such actions if taken by just about any Democrat or “growing in office” Republican if they happen to represent negative press for a conservative president or governor.

The fact remains that Obama really lied, and jobs really died — and union jobs to boot.

That is news, regardless of whether the national media establishment chooses to report it.

Cross-posted at

Latest Pajamas Media Post (‘Where Are the Cries of ‘Obama Lied, Jobs Died’?’) Is Up

Filed under: Economy,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 8:13 am

It’s here.

I will post it here at BizzyBlog on Saturday morning (link won’t work until then) when the blackout expires.


RELATED: The column deals with Obama’s certified, super-sized, honest-to-goodness lies and the Bush administration’s lack thereof.

Karl Rove enters a different frontier in his Wall Street Journal column today with a comparison of specific, unambiguous Obama campaign promises and presidential actions (except the third item, which is more current). Items he notes that represent undeniable betrayals of his far-left base include –

…..President Obama kept George W. Bush’s military tribunals for terror detainees after calling them an “enormous failure” and a “legal black hole.” His campaign claimed last summer that “court systems . . . are capable of convicting terrorists.” Upon entering office, he found out they aren’t.

He insisted in an interview with NBC in 2007 that Congress mandate “consequences” for “a failure to meet various benchmarks and milestones” on aid to Iraq. Earlier this month he fought off legislatively mandated benchmarks in the $97 billion funding bill for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr. Obama agreed on April 23 to American Civil Liberties Union demands to release investigative photos of detainee abuse. Now’s he reversed himself. Pentagon officials apparently convinced him that releasing the photos would increase the risk to U.S. troops and civilian personnel.

Throughout his presidential campaign, Mr. Obama excoriated Mr. Bush’s counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, insisting it could not succeed. Earlier this year, facing increasing violence in Afghanistan, Mr. Obama rejected warnings of a “quagmire” and ordered more troops to that country. He isn’t calling it a “surge” but that’s what it is. He is applying in Afghanistan the counterinsurgency strategy Mr. Bush used in Iraq.

As a candidate, Mr. Obama promised to end the Iraq war by withdrawing all troops by March 2009. As president, he set a slower pace of drawdown. He has also said he will leave as many as 50,000 Americans troops there.

Rove’s summary of the above is that:

…. Mr. Obama’s appealing campaign images turned out to have been fleeting. He ran hard to the left on national security to win the nomination, only to discover the campaign commitments he made were shallow and at odds with America’s security interests.

…. Mr. Obama either had very little grasp of what governing would involve or, if he did, he used words meant to mislead the public.

It’s quite a lot of both, Karl.

Positivity: Experimental drug helps infant beat odds, rare disease

Filed under: Positivity — Tom @ 7:28 am

From Greenland, Michigan and Marshfield, Wisconsin:

May 16, 2009

Brian and Shannon Kin had two choices. They could begin a risky pediatric drug trial with a new medication for their infant daughter or wait to see if little Hailee would be among the 50 percent of children with rare metabolic disorder who live past their first birthday.

Either way, their daughter could die.

Hailee was born a normal baby, but in her second month, her parents started to notice something wasn’t right. She had gained only about 12 ounces since birth, and she had trouble breathing, Shannon said.

“She didn’t seem to be growing,” she said. “I was nervous.”

The family, from Greenland, Mich., was referred to Marshfield Clinic to figure out what was wrong.

Numerous tests showed Hailee had a rare disease called infantile hypophosphatasia, a fatal disorder that made it extremely difficult for Hailee’s bones to grow. It has no known cure or treatment.

The doctor “said there’s nothing out there that you can do right now, and that 50 percent of kids die and 50 percent survive,” Shannon said. “So he left us with that and we were just hysterical. We couldn’t believe it.”

That was about five months ago. Today, Hailee has completed a clinical trial at St. Vincent Hospital for a new drug called Enobia. In Hailee’s case, it has proven to be a major breakthrough in treatment for the disease, said Dr. Terence Edgar, chairman of neurology at Prevea Health.

“It’s been highly successful,” he said. “It’s been beyond our wildest dreams. Six patients have been getting this treatment in the world, and Hailee is the most dramatic. She was probably the sickest of the bunch.”

Hailee is doing well today and is all smiles at her regular visits to St. Vincent. It’s a long way from where she started. …..

Go here for the rest of the story.