Tag Archives: Scott Brown

INVESCO II Healthcare Summit

President Obama has scheduled a health care summit for later this month. The purpose? To offer the public promised transparency after refusal to do so until pesky Scott Brown put the kibosh on the Democratic health care overthrow.

Obama desires to, “resolve remaining differences between the House and Senate versions of their own legislation in advance of the meeting.”  Which translated means Obama, through persuasive rhetoric, will attempt to convince “uncooperative” Republicans to accept a “final bill” they were supposedly called there to discuss.

Obama will host a “Lights, camera action” thrashing out of a bill, but the whole scenario will lack genuine, productive debate.  Sort of like Obama employing fruitless tea and crumpet negotiation techniques to convince Mahmoud Ahmadinejad relinquish the march toward nuclear weapons.

Beforehand Barry, Harry and Nancy will decide what and how it’s going to go.  The trio will shuffle the Senate and Congressional bill like a deck of cards into an unbending, final version.  Then a transparent Obama will summon Republicans to Summit House, offer them the limited choice of accepting what has already been decided upon, or be portrayed as “uncooperative” and lacking concern for the struggles of the American people.

Collaborative Democrats contend, “Starting from scratch is not an option.”  Republicans [thank God] refuse to budge because they say they, the House and Senate Democratic bill is not a launching off point because both bills include tax increases, which economically would be a disastrous thing to do.

While the master of Greek column special effects positions himself as being open to discussion.  The real goal will be to present a conciliatory President strapped with the burden of immature politicians.  The hope is to again “turn the tide” and convince the public obstinate Republicans need to, “participate like mature adults, and not just say ‘no’ to everything.”

The Summit holds zero promise of compromise based on the numerous proposals Republican’s have presented to the health care debate, all have which have been ignored. Reading the teleprompter as Republicans wave varying proposals in his face Obama looks right and left purposely ignoring suggestions like those offered by Jim DeMint.

Obama discounts the smart kid in the first row raising his hand to answer every question and than penalizes the child for lacking class participation.

At the Republican retreat a frustrated Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) challenged the President saying, “Mr. President, multiple times from your administration there have come statements that Republicans have no ideas and no solutions, in spite of the fact that we’ve offered, as demonstrated today, positive solutions to all of the challenges we face.”  Security, oh security could you see this guy to the door please?

The Summit ruse has the potential to be nothing more than “political theatre” with Obama luring Republicans into a trap.  Once at Blair House Obama will present a bad and worse finalized health care bill. Republicans will be asked to concur, as to whether America should be tied to the tracks in the path of an oncoming train, hurled over a cliff or immolated?  When Republicans refuse to accept any of the three a teary-eyed Obama can turn to the camera, amidst soaring violins, and confirm the opposing party uncaring contrarians and Democrats tireless workers on behalf of the American people.

One problem Obama may also be overlooking. The nation is tuned into Obama’s INVESCO field theatrics and are sick of smoke and mirror subterfuge that benefits only Barack and hurts the American people—let’s hope Obama’s wily Summit stunt backfires.

Obvious Opacity – American Thinker – January 25, 2010

Originally posted at American Thinker

According to Nancy Pelosi campaign promises have one purpose—getting a candidate elected.  After voting, a candidate’s word can be shelved like a magician’s prop.  If the Speaker is to be taken seriously nothing Barack Obama said during the presidential campaign holds weight and should be disregarded as roadside rhetoric.

If Pelosi’s ruling versus rhetoric conjecture is correct it explains the last twelve months. Nancy Pelosi insisting on defining clandestine conferences as transparency brings clarity to what America deals with every time Obama speaks. Since January of 2009 black is white, right is wrong and open is shut.  Overarching debt is economic stimulus, job loss is growth, socialists are capitalists, enemies are friends and despair and despotism is defined as hope and change.

Lest America forget, before the Democrats lost a filibuster proof Senate, though unsolicited, Obama repeatedly volunteered to “broadcast [health care] negotiations on C-Span.” Lofty promises were made because Barack Obama was falsely convinced the country would kowtow to every policy whim he proposed.  Obama thought wrong.  What the President didn’t anticipate was 49% of the American public being against socialized health care reform, as well as a united Republican Party standing in opposition to overhauling the entire system. Above all, this imperious president didn’t expect an unknown Republican from Massachusetts to wrest the Teddy Kennedy Memorial scepter from the late liberal icon’s  hand.

Yet in a distorted way, transparency truly does exist on Capitol Hill because liberals have been crystal clear about the desire to “fundamentally transform” America. For instance, Obama, together with the Democrat-controlled House and Senate, made no secret the intention to singlehandedly revamp 1/6th of the American economy.  Before health care expired, “guiding an honest process,” meant holding surreptitious negotiations, in the dead of night, sans public or opposition party participation.  Democrats are likely unaware of it, but skulking around in the shadows accomplished the opposite and made underhanded motives more transparent.

While debating Hillary Clinton during the 2008 presidential race Obama said he would broadcast health care negotiations on C-Span, “bringing all parties together, not negotiating behind closed doors.” After taking office, “broadcast,” “bringing” and “behind” were redefined Obama-style and backdoor negotiations and dishonest agreements became common practice. America patiently observed a non-transparent health care reform process abounding with “hidden agendas” where over the last year, deliberations became, “a breeding ground for more of the kickbacks, shady deals and special-interest provision that have become business as usual in Washington.”

Its no wonder Scott Brown, who seemed to appear out of thin air, won the special senatorial election. Obama’s repeated campaign pledge to “enlist the American people in the [health care] process,” and then doing the opposite was the final nail in the one-party-rule coffin.  With an election for Teddy’s seat on the horizon, America watched as C-Span CEO Brian Lamb sent correspondence to Pelosi and Reid beseeching Congress to open up health care reform deliberations to the public. The frustrated CEO’s requests were met with a half-hearted concession to open the negotiations to the public for one hour–a much shorter period than most Americans would be waiting for a throat culture if health care passed.

For weeks the nation, including voters heading for the polls in Massachusetts, observed Nancy Pelosi responding to C-Span’s request like a critical care nurse tightly pulling closed the privacy curtain. Pelosi’s contention that, “[t]here has never been a more open process for any legislation in anyone who’s served here’s experience,” prompts the question as to whether the Speaker should be rushed to the top slot in a psychological triage.

Brian Lamb spoke for American when he “urged Congress in his letter to fling open the doors in the final stretch of negotiations.”  Instead, the CEO was met with a sign above the double doors of the health care debate, which read, “Restricted Beyond This Area Authorized Personnel Only!” Denying C-Span right of entry to the health care dialogue put the Senate majority in hospice care.

Yet the left forged ahead with a plan to circumvent the usual Conference Committee procedure to reconcile the two chamber’s versions of the bill.  In the process, Democratic doctors Barry, Harry and Nancy, failed to take the pulse of the American electorate. The tragic trio made the fatal mistake of continuing on with the ruse allowing access to only a “few negotiators concocting the final version out of sight, without formal rules governing the process.” The Democrat leadership was convinced socialistic purposes would be better served without C-Span cameras in the room documenting the organ harvest.

Democrats pushed for secret deliberations to thwart “having to cut deals with problematic House Democrats like Michigan’s Bart Stupak, who promised to do what he could to scuttle the final bill if it provided for federal funding of abortion.” Aware an audience desiring the bill’s demise seeing one “party working on behalf of constituents,” would be detrimental to the left’s righteous cause, Democrats continued to connive behind closed doors, and while they did, America watched.

The nation obviously viewed the conduct as fraudulent and undeniably voiced a reproving opinion on a snowy Tuesday in Massachusetts.  The Speaker of the House, as well as America’s lucent President, were reminded by Blue State voters that, “[m]inimum disclosure to which agreements, dealings, practices, and transactions are open to all for verification,” is defined as lack of transparency.

If something is transparent it lacks hidden agendas and conditions.  Transparency is accompanied by the availability of full information required for collaboration, cooperation, and collective decision-making.  Essential to transparency is the condition for a free and open exchange whereby the rules and reasons behind regulatory measures are fair and clear to all participants.

So, in light of the constant barrage of mixed messages coming from power elites like Pelosi and Obama, its good to know that before entering the voting booth, Massachusetts voters brushed up on the literal meaning of transparency casting a vote for and sending a message from the entire nation.

Truth is, the people of this country are patient and forgiving.  But as Obama is finding out, messing around with the American psyche results in political ramifications like being flattened by a GMC Canyon . Little did Pelosi, Reid and company know, but  unabashed lack of transparency not only ensured the election of Scott Brown, but it also sealed a Stupak condemned, rare late term, political abortion of Democrat rule in Obama’s fourth trimester.

Welcome to the Political Pissfest

Territory is defined as an area, which an animal will defend against intruders of the same species. According to Robert Ardrey, “A territorial species of animals, therefore, is one in which all males, and sometimes females too, bear an inherent drive to gain and defend an exclusive property.”  As it is for animals, so it is for politicians, especially Barack Obama whose words and aggressive actions indicate an “inherent drive to gain and defend,” what the President perceives to be, “exclusive property.”

For twelve months, Barack Obama has acted like a male alpha dog rhetorically spraying every past, present and future policy issue he comes in contact with.    The President sycophantically practices placing socialist scents at nose level to alert conservative and moderate dogs, looking to claim a portion of the political prefecture, to back off.

Incessantly reiterating a liberal schema for America, the President may as well get it over with and mandate Obamaroma be crop dusted  over North America, and while he’s at it, if possible, spritz the whole planet.

Canines and other mammals mark territory for one purpose, to “limit competition within a niche or habitat,” for Obama that niche includes totalitarian power exercised, without obstruction, within Washington DC’s halls of power.  The yard Obama guards includes a liberal pack of canids from a Democratic carnivorous pit bull family.

In order to claim as much land mass as possible, African wild dogs are known to “…scramble as high up the trunk of a tree before squirting their message,” which is–step over the boundary and the area will be ruthlessly defended.

In Barack Obama’s case, not only are other politicians considered interlopers, but also based on the President’s blatant disregard for the electorate, apparently so are the American people.  If the voices of a representative democracy speak out in opposition to Obama’s policies, the President swiftly responds with a well-positioned leg lift followed by a prime time uncovering of saliva dripping premolars, issuing a bone-crushing warning to the defiant.

Although a president cannot literally mark large swatches of political territory by employing the “natural method,” pushing back against critics flouting Obama’s edicts and sanctions, in essence, is Barack marking territory.

Take for example, the majority of Americans opposing health care reform.    Alpha-Obama lifted his left-leg and “pushed back against opponents of his health care initiatives…again target[ing] insurance companies in the second of three town hall meetings aimed at winning support for legislation.”

Dogs sneaking through the barbed wire fence into Obama’s yard were met at a Joint Session of Congress by Obama spraying his critics, as well as, witnessing the President spew all over the entire chamber.  Once again, Obama pushed back–bared teeth and snarling, “The time for games has passed. Now is the season for action.” No discussion, no compromise.  Obama laid territorial claims and might as well have put a sign out saying, “Stay off the grounds this country belongs to me!”

Obama, together with the pack, have growled and marked the boundaries around the health care issue. Every time the opposition drew near Obama and his leftist minions charged the opposition imposing a health care bill on a nation that roundly rejects governmental kibble.

Hey, Republican Rover don’t you know well-trained pit bulls don’t back down and let what they consider scruffy stray dogs mark territory where top dogs rule?

Shockingly, unlikely cat lovers in liberal Massachusetts snapped the choke chain and took control of the situation by wresting control from trash heap dogs. Realizing the tail was wagging the dog, Americans rose up and sent the message, “Dogs don’t run the yard – owners do!”

Massachusetts voters targeted tail wagging hounds like Nancy Pelosi who mists Capitol Hill with left-wing political pheromones, bats her bitchy eyelashes and gnarrs, “Democrats will charge ahead with health care reform regardless of what happens in the Massachusetts Senate race.” Or, tyke’s like Charlie Rangel who mocked the Bay State’s attempt to claim territory as a non-starter, yipping out the retort “We will have health reform regardless of what happens in Massachusetts… We have alternatives to this cockamamie 60 votes in the Senate.”

Either way, Scott Brown’s election to the US Senate is a liberal electorate’s stunning message to the 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue alpha dog commanding him to back off. As a result, the whole situation holds potential to become a national piss-off.  Because “When one male detects the scent of another, (particularly an unknown male), it could cause a perhaps low-level stress reaction, which would then increase the need to urinate.”  Scott Brown representing “We the people” in a seat vacated by liquored-up liberal paladin is sure to have alpha Obama’s bladder over stimulated to the point where a territory-marking flood is forthcoming like water crashing through a dam.

America can expect a public hydrant drenching in the days immediately following the election – just to remind everyone who’s in charge because,

Male dogs, on reaching a previously urine-marked landmark, will often attempt to cover over the urine marks of previous canine visitors with their own urine.  In so doing, they sometimes engage in some quite amusing acrobatics, including the reverse handstand sometimes displayed by little dogs when attempting to over-mark lofty scent marks left by larger dogs.”

After Scott Brown’s win Obama, a toy poodle believing he’s a pit bull, will exhibit political gymnastics to win back ground lost spinning a loss into a win like Jonathan Horton working the high bar.

As America has witnessed over the last year, some dogs have an obsession about marking territory. The best way to prevent a male dog from urine marking is to neuter the canine before territorial behavior is exhibited, with Obama already in office, its too late for that.   However, if the animal is already established, neutering may not help and wherever the male canid sprays the odor needs to be neutralized, which is what Massachusetts voters did tonight.

Truth is, Obama fancies himself an alpha male.  “The alpha makes and enforces the rules. Alpha dogs enforce their authority by the use of stern eye contact, growling, dominant body postures and if that fails, biting and fighting. If you watch your dogs closely, you’ll see examples of this eye contact and posture in their daily activities.”  Since day one, dominant body posture, lack of sincere eye contact and haughty posture has been on full display from the occupant of the Oval Office.

The President’s “bark may be in equal proportion to his bite,” and Obama can drench the political landscape all he likes with the stench of socialistic policy.  In the meantime, while an out-of-control Obama circles the fire hydrant continuing to believe “no leash can hold him and his tail wags for no one,”  in one day, Massachusetts voters neutralized and counteracted the leader of the pack and in the process set about retraining the unruly horde of junkyard dogs he runs with.

Hey, Obama, “Sit, roll over and beg,” the American people own you!

Studly Super-Hero Scott Brown

Why should angry liberal women have all the eye candy in Chuckie Schumer (D-NY) and Dickie Durbin of Illinois? For middle-aged women Massachusetts is becoming the go-to state when it comes to good-looking politicians.

What could be better than a Conservative man winning a senate seat in a liberal state?  Why, it’s having that Conservative man be a hunk, and that hunky man is Scott Brown (R-Ma).

For starters what woman, besides Janet Napolitano, would dare argue Mitt Romney is hard on the eyes?  Mitt is strong, self confident, self-assured, articulate, a loving husband and father, a dyed in the wool Conservative and an amazingly gorgeous man from the home state of besotted blimp Teddy Kennedy.

Following in Romney’s elegant  footsteps, America now has comely Scott Brown about to trounce Democrat Attorney General, Martha Coakley and Independent, Joe Kennedy for the U.S. Senate seat formerly occupied by a recently expired, end-stage blow fish.

It is undeniable — Scott is a looker and more than that Brown is not wishy-washy about Conservative convictions (be still my beating heart).  As a result, and in the words of another great Massachusetts politician John Hancock, “[d]espite the Democrats’ rhetoric and money, they have been unable to gain ground.”

During a recent debate, Scott Brown’s opponent Martha Coakley looked a tad uncomfortable.  It seems the beads of sweat along her upper lip were not from hot lights, a rapt audience or  moderator David Gergen – it was Scott Brown. The menopausal nightmare couldn’t keep her eyes off the poor guy.  Don’t be fooled by the turtleneck and pearls, Coakley kept leaning back, pretending to cough, checking her opponent from the rear. No wonder Martha [Not Going to] Washington, spelled Massachusetts wrong and is shaky on facts, believing all the terrorists in Afghanistan have left the premises–the woman is smitten and is having trouble stringing together a coherent thought.

During the Brown/Coakley debate Scott, like a knight in shining armor, responded to David Gergen’s pugnacious question about blocking health care by saying,”With all due respect, it’s not the Kennedy’s seat, it’s not the Democrats’ seat, it’s the people’s seat.

A stunned Coakley struggled to maintain composure and successfully avoided swooning behind the podium.  If the debate had gone on any longer the Attorney General would have come dangerously close to losing all dignified restraint and in front of the audience reduced herself to re-enacting the V-J Day kiss in Times Square by ravishing Scott Brown.

Let’s face it, Scott Brown would be quite a change from a bloated, drunken philanderer like  late Teddy Kennedy.  I’m not sure, but I don’t remember Teddy K. ever appearing as a centerfold in Cosmo. If I recall correctly neither has Congressmen Anthony Weiner (D-NY),  another ruggedly handsome liberal stud muffin.

If American women had been unfortunate enough to have Kennedy grace Cosmo’s centerfold,  the  porcine politician edition would have been relegated to the annals as a non-starter, and promptly sent to Fulton Fish market fish mongers as high-end wrapping for blue fish.

Scott Brown, on the other hand, has hardly changed in twenty-eight years.  In a Senate filled with the likes of (G_d bless) Joe Lieberman and Harry Reid– Scott Brown, who identified himself way back then as “a bit of a patriot,” could be a Mel Gibson movie double in Patriot II: The Obama Years.

Hopefully, stunning Scott will stay in politics.  The antithesis of  Kennedy, Scott Brown deplores wasteful government spending and higher taxes – What?  The man is pro-family and opposes federal funding for abortion — Gulp.  Scott believes in the free-market and the strength of the American people to drive prosperity in the country – Something is terribly wrong here!

Scott believes in small government, low taxes and has commented that Obama’s fiscal debt is “immoral.”  The Massachusetts State Senator is opposed to one-party rule and government run health care.  Scott Brown believes in a strong military to ensure national security here and abroad. And we’re supposed to believe this man is from Massachusetts?

Senator Brown is a member of the National Guard  serving in the rank of Lt. Colonel in the JAG Corps for thirty years.  He won the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service following September 11th and served 3 terms as a State Senator.

Brown has steadily closed the gap in the polls and is in a statistical tie with Martha Coakley.  In response, the Attorney General has comported herself like a spurned teenage girl by running attack ads against Brown.  Martha is behaving like Tracy Flick in the movie Election. It seems the AG is under the impression Kennedy’s  senate seat was rightfully bequeathed to a Democrat and the thought of losing the election has Coakley stamping her feet and tearing down Scott Brown posters all over Boston.

Coakley misspelled Massachusetts – “Massachusettes” but might as well have written REDRUM inside Brown’s locker after study hall.  The Attorney General of Massachusetts is flummoxed, while the fetching captain of the football team remains cool as a cucumber.

Presently, our nation  is  a tied-up damsel in distress, anticipating being run over by the liberal, health care train making its way down the tracks.  Not to worry,  our very own Dudley Do-Right is on the way.  On January 19th  it looks as if Scott Brown may be called on to save the nation by wresting Snidley Whiplash power from the policy villain abiding in the White House.

Scott Brown could be the super-hero America needs to administer the final death knell to Teddy’s policy legacy.  Residents of the “Bay State” are on the precipice of driving the Teddy Kennedy health care memorial off a bridge in Chappaquiddick and letting a murderous memory  expire under the frigid water as Teddy did the late Mary Jo Kopechne.

The election in Massachusetts presents voters with an opportunity to rescue America from Teddy Kennedy’s liberalism influencing our lives from beyond the grave.  Brown winning the election would give new meaning to the Massachusetts mottoEnse petit placidam sub libertate quietem,” which means, “By the sword we seek peace, but peace only under liberty.”

If the polls are correct and Massachusetts Conservatives turn out en masse to vote, a wholesome Conservative will replace the corpulent-debauchee socialized-medicine mascot.  In the process, the  “we the people” Scott Brown also appears to have the will to prevent a band of left-wingers in Washington DC from forcing on America what even most liberal Massachusetts voters vehemently reject.

If Scott Brown wins next Tuesday and acquires a seat in the U.S. Senate the victory result will be a referendum on the forthcoming 2010 election.  And, as an added bonus, Scott Brown will provide America with a handsome hero that liberal babe magnet  Stuart Smalley aka,  Al Franken (D-Minn), wouldn’t dare prevent from speaking on the Senate floor, or prohibit singing of  All Hail Massachusetts.

%d bloggers like this: