Thus begins the anger of the states. Starting with Idaho and soon to be joined by 37 other states weary of the over-reach of federal power:

Idaho Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter is the first state chief executive to sign a measure requiring his attorney general to sue the federal government if Congress passes health care reform.

Legal experts say the measure, signed today, will likely be struck down. But Idaho’s new law reflects growing frustration with President Barack Obama’s health-care proposal.

If Federal courts strike down 38 state lawsuits, listen for the sound of Gabriel’s horn, as the overt evidence of federal contempt for the people and the states would be impossible to conceal. The feeling of déjà vu, burned into our cultural identity, so palpable even from a distant time, is summated by a single word – liberty.

The distant land of a sovereign parliament, transported to our shores centuries later, is now centralized in DC. The overlords have returned in a different guise; the mask slips, and they are revealed.

We recognize and reject the tyrants – as is our duty.

Related:

Landmark Legal Foundation to Slaughter House butchers: Not without a fight; Update: The states’ revolt

I hope they have the spine or their electoral gains will evaporate. The GOP must shut down the Senate starting early next week. Not just on healthcare, but everything. Grind it to a halt. This is from Senate insiders with knowledge of the battle to come in the next couple of weeks. As one strategist emailed me:

…the only viable strategy I can see is for the Republicans to begin the process of shutting down the U.S. Senate until the Democrats agree to MOVE ON — move off healthcare until the 112th Congress convenes.

The Democrats are ready to rip off the band-aid:

The advice went out to freshman and sophomore House Democrats, blunt talk to help them through a tricky vote on health reform.

“At this point, we have to just rip the band-aid off and have a vote — up or down; yes or no?” the memo said. “Things like reconciliation and what the rules committee does is INSIDE BASEBALL.”

As Pelosi is now looking for Senate assurances before the House healthcare vote, it is clear that not only the House but the Senate as well requires our immediate attention:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Friday said she will need “certain assurances” from Senate Democrats before the House votes on healthcare reform as early as next week.

Pelosi did not say what those assurances would be, but acknowledged that extracting them would be necessary to counter lingering concerns from within her caucus that the Senate will not be able to pass a reconciliation bill.

“With reconciliation, a simple majority, a constitutional majority, I think members are much more comfortable with the fact that this reconciliation will happen,” Pelosi said at her weekly press conference. “Nonetheless, there are certain assurances that they want, and that we will get from [Senate Democrats] before I ask them to take the vote.”

The Democrats have lost the Mandate from Heaven they once enjoyed and are attempting to literally enact a bill that will destroy our healthcare system, raise taxes, stifle economic growth during a deep recession, and nationalize over 1/6 of our economy. We should not take this lying down. Neither should GOP members of Congress. This was never about Stupak or abortion. Any government takeover of healthcare will result in the use of taxpayer dollars at some point in the future to federally fund abortions. A vote to improve ObamaCare with any Stupak-like language is a vote for ObamaCare. But the real reality is at this time it just does not matter. What matters now is derailing this bill.

The Senate GOP should not make us go through a repeat of the embarrassing display of spineless behavior displayed last year. Next week shut down the Senate. We are counting on you.

It’s time to go into campaign mode and draw this out until the Easter recess. No more need to think about parliamentarian tricks. Such worries have no impact whatsoever on the current situation. After the Senate GOP began to obstruct is exactly the time when they began to win over the electorate.

Nobody wants this bill, so I repeat the GOP must stand up and shut down the Senate. Regardless of what the legislation is, shut down the Senate. Don’t wait for healthcare abortion side bills and reconciliation to come barreling down on your heads and then obstruct. Start doing it now and don’t stop until Senator Reid promises to drop ObamaCare until the following Congress. There is no excuse for waiting and the American people are counting on the Senate GOP to stand up for us.

The Democrats lack a mandate on healthcare. This issue must dominate every nook and cranny of network and cable news, in every blog, and in every opinion piece and editorial. Take the healthcare dominance of the news cycle now and increase it exponentially. Make this a referendum on the Democratic party and its contempt for the governed.

Obstruct. Obstruct. Obstruct.

Related:

Shut down the Senate or we are looking at this: Welcome to Martial Law: House Democrats Will Rule They Voted on Health Care Bill Without Actually Voting On It

Constitution Butchers: Stop Pelosi’s Slaughter House. If Pelosi tries this, she will have provided us with the greatest of gifts. The death of a strong national government – nullification will becomes a household word, and the death of the progressive agenda as it exists today as well as the rolling back of federal powers, which includes as a bonus the rolling back of current progressive policies. Please do it!

Steamed does not begin to describe my reaction to this piece by Politico:

It is not clear how effective DeMint’s flamboyant brand of politics will be in the long term. For now, however, he is the most vivid example of how, in a new-media age of cable television and the Web, a politician willing to step on toes and play to ideological crowds can jump the line of older colleagues in establishing a national profile.

In an earlier age, a politician like DeMint — a former House member and businessman whose fiery views coexist with a surprisingly mild personality — could have expected to languish for years in relative obscurity.

By becoming for practical purposes the Washington leader of the tea party movement, DeMint also illustrates the degree to which energy on the right is now flowing to the capital and not from it. Congressional GOP leaders like House Minority Leader John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell derive their power from the inside, by virtue of the support of their colleagues. DeMint is the model now for how a rank-and-file member otherwise consigned to the back bench can be relevant without any title. It may not make him popular at the weekly caucus lunches, but it will get him on Sean Hannity’s show…

…On politics, it means offering only a deafening silence toward senators facing primary challenges he views as insufficiently conservative — Arizona’s John McCain and Utah’s Bob Bennett — and backing more ideologically pure candidates than his party’s leadership prefers in the Senate primaries in Florida and California.

Further rankling his colleagues, DeMint is using his political action committee, the Senate Conservatives Fund, to rate senators on just how conservative they are. Several who were given relatively low marks by DeMint — based on their votes in the last Congress — are dismissive of the ratings.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said his 89 percent lifetime ranking from the American Conservative Union is “what counts” — not the 76 percent rating from DeMint, who, not surprisingly, is the only senator to receive a 100 percent rating on his website.

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, vice chairwoman of the GOP Conference, who got a 50 percent score for her votes in 2008, said that DeMint’s ratings were “assuming his standard of conservatism.”

And Bennett, a close ally of McConnell’s who received a 60 percent score from DeMint’s PAC, said he had “no idea [on] what basis people make these kinds of calculations.”

“I can show you surveys that show you I’m one of the most conservative members and another survey that shows me that I’m not,” said Bennett, who is facing multiple GOP candidates running on his right flank. “It all depends on who is picking the votes to come to the conclusion he wants.”

Asked to respond to DeMint’s decision not to endorse him in the race, Bennett said: “I have no comment.”

McCain said he wasn’t bothered by DeMint’s decision not to endorse him in his primary contest with former Rep. J.D. Hayworth, pointing out his support from other conservative figures, such as his 2008 running mate, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, and Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.).

What is clearly bothering others in the caucus, though, is DeMint’s seeming preference for being pure and in the minority than having a squishy majority.

His new stump speech mantra: “I’d rather have 30 Marco Rubios than 60 Arlen Specters.

Read the whole thing and remember the names of establishment GOP whose habitual dismissive behavior of DeMint is disingenuous as the reader will soon see.

Looks like DC needs to break some bad habits, like identifying effectiveness and then attempting to squash it. Not on my watch. A little history is in order.

Why would leaders such as Senator McConnell squirm at the mention of Senator DeMint? That requires a trip down memory lane.

Last year, two events happened during the fight against ObamaCare that, had the Senator from South Carolina not stood on principle for the people of this country and championed fiscal responsibility, we would already have ObamaCare, Scott Brown win or not.

Senator DeMint understood the need to obstruct and use the tools of obstruction to block the passage of the liberty stealing behemoth that is ObamaCare. Erick Erickson picked up on this process in December and wrote an excellent piece titled Fight:

The Senate, unlike the House of Representatives, has parliamentary rules and procedures that give the minority the ability to stall legislation. In fact, unlike the House, the minority have the ability to virtually paralyze the Senate. Doing so is not something we would want or expect for every bad bill that comes through Congress, but the proposed healthcare legislation is probably the worst piece of legislation ever considered by the United States Congress. It is the most intrusive, most damaging, most costly, most dangerous bill to the economic and personal freedom and liberty of individual Americans that Congress has ever considered. If there is any bill that deserves being stopped by shutting down the Senate, it is this one.

There are a whole series of parliamentary maneuvers that could be used by Republican senators to stop this bill. There is a hard backstop to the current process (Christmas). The Republicans’ goal should be to prevent Reid from passing the bill before that time. If he goes past Christmas and is forced to adjourn or recess, the momentum will shift in favor of those opposing the bill.

How could this be done?

To start with, they should stop constantly agreeing to “unanimous consent” requests from the Democrats. Senate Republicans, to date, have allowed Democrats, by unanimous consent, to process 10 amendments. The amendments that have been accepted – Democrat amendments – did not make the over 2000-page atrocity any better. The Republican strategy of trying to pass their own “message” amendments carries no message unless you consider “no strategy to kill the bill” a message.

When DeMint removed unanimous consent, there existed an expectation that other GOP members join the fight. When Democrats threatened to retaliate against the GOP for this obstructive tactic, done on behalf of the American people, the GOP backed down. What ominous threat could possibly cause such a mass defection from standing up for the rights of the American people in fighting an unpopular bill? The GOP was told they would be kept in the Senate until and even beyond Christmas break. God forbid such a horror happen.

This prompted a campaign by a number of organizations to expose the lack of starch in the spine of many GOP members. I was honored to be a part of this campaign and work with the likes of such luminaries as Dr. Larry Hunter, former policy advisor to President Ronald Reagan. This campaign, titled I Object, sent out an email blast, some of which follows:

Just say “I Object” to Stop ObamaCare

Shame on Republican Senators!

They are paving the way for ObamaCare to be enacted into law this year because they want to go on Christmas Vacation.

Yes, that’s right, REPUBLICAN Senators are going to be responsible for the impending government takeover of healthcare. They have the power to prevent the Reid Health Bill from passing the Senate this year but they are not doing what needs to be done to stop the socialization of one-sixth of the American economy before the New Year arrives.

I know it sounds unbelievable that REPUBLICANS are the ones who will be responsible for a government takeover of healthcare but that is the sad and outrageous truth.

Don’t Let Republican Senators Put Their Christmas Break Ahead of Their Country. Tell Republican Senators: “Just Object to Harry Reid’s Fast-Track Rush on ObamaCare”…

…Our Capitol-Hill operatives have learned that the Senate Republican Leadership is working hand-in-glove behind the scenes with the Democratic Leadership to move one amendment after another through the Senate without adequate time for debate and deliberation. In exchange for this collaboration with the enemy, the Democratic Leadership is assuring Republicans they will be allowed to offer their own “message amendments” and that Republicans will not be forced to work long hours through the night during this holiday season.

These “message amendments” are not intended to be adopted in order to improve the bill—this bill is so horrible it cannot be improved by amendments—they are designed simply to put Senators on the record and hoodwink voters into believing Republicans are fighting the good fight against ObamaCare.

Republican Senators, with a few exceptions such as Senator Jim DeMint (SC), ARE NOT fighting the good fight. They are collapsing like cheap suits all over Capitol Hill. If they don’t reverse course immediately and stiffen their spine, it will be the REPUBLICANS who are responsible for enacting ObamaCare into law.

Republican Senator Jon Kyl let the cat out of the bag on Bill Bennett’s radio show last week. When guest host Rick Santorum asked Kyl, “What is your strategy, to the extent you can share it,” Kyl said, “Actually, I think we can be fairly upfront about it. Our strategy is not actually to delay and not take votes.” Kyl went on, “Our strategy is to have a lot of good amendments and highlight the problems in the bill. It is not our strategy to somehow slow things down.”

This complicity by Republican Senators is despicable, and it is illustrative of how your representatives in Washington say one thing and do exactly the opposite.

For example, last week Democratic Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado offered a do-nothing amendment that purported to protect Medicare from cuts. It was a classic congressional fig-leaf amendment for ObamaCare supporters to hide behind.

The amendment was carefully and narrowly crafted with much hortatory language about not cutting guaranteed Medicare benefits but the amendment actually does NOTHING to change provisions in the bill that WILL cut Medicare by hundreds of billions of dollars. Behind the cover of this Senate fig-leaf amendment—political cover for the Democrats, which all 40 Republicans voted in favor of—the Reid bill will undermine Medicare Advantage plans and squeeze the life out of Medicare by putting doctors, hospitals and other medical providers in a reimbursement vice that fixes prices and leads to Medicare rationing.

Rather than filibustering this amendment to expose the duplicity and deception behind it; rather than insisting on unlimited debate on the amendment and forcing Harry Reid to file a cloture petition to shut off debate, which would have guaranteed two days of debate, deliberation and sunshine on the amendment; rather than voting against the amendment to expose the shenanigans behind it; the Republican Leadership instead agreed to wrap up the amendment with only a few hours debate.

In exchange for this Republican complicity in providing Democrats political cover, the Democratic Leadership graciously allowed Republicans an amendment to be offered by Arizona Senator John McCain that would recommit the Reid Bill to committee and strip out provisions that actually DO cut Medicare. Republicans knew 20 Democrats/Independents would never vote with them to recommit the bill (it would have taken 60 votes to do so). Yet, Republicans traded off two days worth of debate and voted for a fig-leaf amendment to provide ObamaCare supporters political cover in order to be allowed to offer a “message amendment” of their own, which misled the public into believing Republicans are trying to fight the bill when in fact they are facilitating its ultimate passage before the New Year.

The Bennet amendment passed with only hours of debate by a vote of 100 to zero. Then, the McCain amendment to recommit the Reid Bill to Committee in order to actually strip out provisions of the bill that DO cut Medicare—think of it as an amendment to actually implement the do-nothing amendment that just passed by 100 votes—was defeated on a virtual party-line vote. Only two Democrats (Jim Webb-Va. and Ben Nelson-Neb.) were given free passes from the Democratic Leadership to vote in favor of it. Message sent: “Republicans are allowing themselves to be played as the Democrats’ useful idiots.”

All of this was little Medicare drama was precooked by the Republican and Democratic Senate Leadership in what is called a “Unanimous Consent Agreement,” which lays out the terms and conditions under which amendments are offered, debated and voted upon.

What is a Unanimous Consent Agreement?

A Senator may request unanimous consent on the floor to set aside a specified rule of procedure so as to expedite proceedings. If no Senator objects, the Senate permits the action, but if any one Senator objects, the request is rejected.

The Republican Senators have been protesting vehemently in the media about how much they oppose ObamaCare and the Reid Health bill, and despite their constant reassurances to grass-roots activists that they are doing everything humanly possible to defeat the bill, Republicans in fact are quietly stepping aside and allowing the ObamaCare Express loaded down with the Reid Bill and tons of amendments to barrel through the U.S. Senate so they can go home for Christmas Vacation without delay and not have to work long hours in the meantime.

The ONLY exception is Senator Jim DeMint (SC).

He is the lone Senator willing to stand in the gap and do what it takes to defeat socialism, defeat ObamaCare. But he cannot do it alone. He cannot be on the floor 24/7, which is what it takes to stop these unanimous consent agreements. He needs his fellow Republicans assist him by standing sentinel on the Senate Floor against unanimous consent agreements when he cannot be there.

Republicans need to follow Senator DeMint’s brave example and just Object to Harry Reid’s Fast-Track Rush on ObamaCare.

If you have a U.S. Senator who is OPPOSED to the Reid plan for a Washington takeover of healthcare, you have a huge opportunity right now to take action—action that could stop ObamaCare from being rushed into law this year. Let Republican Senators know that if the Reid Bill passes the Senate this year, you will hold them personally responsible for ObamaCare being enacted into law and despite anything else they say or do in the interim, you will vote against them they next time they stand for reelection, yes even if that means voting for a Democrat because it will be clear by their INACTION that they are nothing but tools of the Democrats anyway.

Republicans have the power; all it takes is one Senator to object to each Unanimous Consent Agreement every time Reid tries to ram another amendment through the fast-track process. Republicans must take turns following Senator Jim DeMint’s example when he objected to the use of a Unanimous Consent Agreement to ram the very first amendment to the Reid Bill—the Mikulski Amendment—through the Senate on the “Fast Track.” DeMint demanded that Reid get 60 votes on a cloture motion, thus guaranteeing two days of sunshine and scrutiny on the amendment. Republican Senators MUST STAND WITH DEMINT AND DEMAND at least two days debate and public scrutiny of EVERY amendment proposed to the Reid Bill.

The GOP holds only 40 seats in the U.S. Senate but that is enough to stop ObamaCare from passing this year if Republicans man up to the situation and play their cards right—even if that means casting some difficult votes, taking heat for dilatory tactics, staying up late at night and yes perhaps even working Christmas Eve and the week after Christmas. Republicans must not put their Christmas Break ahead of their country. Republicans must not put their personal political careers ahead of the general welfare.

If ObamaCare is enacted into law this year, IT WILL BE THE FAULT OF REPUBLICAN SENATORS because they refused to suffer a little bit of personal inconvenience and political risk to defend their country against another government takeover. Make no mistake, all Republican Senators must do to stop ObamaCare this year is object to the Democrats fast-track scheme to jam one amendment after another through the Senate with limited debate and restricted public scrutiny.

It doesn’t take 40 Republicans to succeed in stopping the Reid Bill; it doesn’t take 20; it only takes ONE Republican to object each time Harry Reid propounds a unanimous consent agreement to rush another amendment through the process.

Let me say that again: It takes ONLY ONE Republican to object each time Harry Reid tries to jam another amendment through the process with limited debate and little public scrutiny. With 40 Republicans in the Senate, that means even if Harry Reid kept the Senate in session 24 hours a day (as the Democratic Whip has threatened), each Republican Senator would have to spend no more than 36 minutes a day doing floor duty as a sentinel against the Majority Leader jamming another amendment through the Senate process under a rigged unanimous consent agreement.

All year we’ve been trying to convince senators who support government health care to change their minds and senators on the fence to come out against it. That’s still vitally important. But given the way the Senate works, it is more important right now to make sure Republican Senators who claim to oppose the Reid Bill have the courage and perspicacity to use the enormous leverage they possess to prevent the bill from passing this year. Remember, there is no way the Reid Bill can pass the Senate as it is currently written. Therefore, it must be amended to pass. But those amendments will be highly controversial, even among Democrats. That is why it is vitally important that each and every amendment be given close public scrutiny and at least two days’ debate.

If the Democrats want to play brinksmanship by holding the Senate in session long hours, seven days a week until Christmas Day, so be it. If the Democrats drag Senators back to Washington between Christmas and New Years for marathon sessions, so be it. Giving up Christmas Vacation is the least Republican Senators can do to stop a socialist government takeover of healthcare this year.

Our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq don’t get to take time off from combat to celebrate Christmas, and they are putting their lives on the line every hour of every day. No U.S. Senator fit to serve in that august body would even think about shirking his or her duty to defend America against a government takeover of healthcare just so he or she can work bankers’ hours and enjoy college-student vacation time.

Millions of Americans across America don’t even have a job this Holiday Season and they are demanding that Senators do their jobs to protect and defend America against another government takeover.

If one or both of your Senators are opposed to the Reid Bill, contact them and make a very simple request: “Do not help Harry Reid rush any aspect of this outrageous legislation through the Senate by giving him your consent to proceed along the fast track. Use your power to object to any unanimous consent agreement limiting debate and restricting time for deliberation; demand that every amendment be given at least two-days’ debate and public scrutiny so that everyone has time to understand and comment on each one of them. ”

Right now, the Senate Democratic Leadership with the complicity of the Republican Leadership is preparing to propound one unanimous consent agreement after another to circumvent regular Senate procedure. Tell your Senator to JUST OBJECT.

Not only could these amendments pave the way for the bill to be enacted into law but the amendments themselves contain huge policy changes that directly effect our health care and our economic future. They need to be analyzed carefully and thoroughly—Two Days Minimum.

Fortunately, under Senate rules the Democratic leadership can rush these amendments through ONLY if they get what’s called “unanimous consent.” That means all 100 senators have to agree to rush the amendments through by consenting to a unanimous consent agreement, which severely limits debate and restricts the time available for experts to analyze the amendments. It’s the old bum’s rush.

Even ONE senator objecting would be enough to slow the rush of amendments down and give the American people at least two days of debate on each amendment. Two days is the minimum we should have to analyze amendments and to allow Senators an opportunity to comment on and debate them.

Please contact your senators TODAY and demand that they NOT CONSENT to rushing amendments through.

The American people deserve the right to know what the Congress is preparing to do to our healthcare. The American people deserve to be represented by Senators who have the courage and the dedication to put the good of the country ahead of their own convenience and political expediency.

Just say “I OBJECT.”

This should have caused a GOP about-face. It did not. Instead, the Sunday news shows, talk radio, and press releases were filled with GOP leadership and other Senate GOP members defending their position. The only exception was Michael Steele, who shot a memo over to the Senate GOP telling them to obstruct. The memo was ignored until another, more egregious incident caused a seismic shift in the GOP strategy. This piece was also cross-posted at Politico and was written by Dr. Larry Hunter, CEO of the Social Security Institute and Lewis Uhler, CEO of the National Tax Limitation Committee:

After weeks of refusing to embrace the “obstructionist” label as a virtue, Senate Republicans finally saw the light and late last week began to use the parliamentary tools at their disposal to delay a final vote on health care.

Until then, with the exception of South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, Republican lawmakers had refused to use Senate rules and procedures to obstruct the passage of the health care bill being pushed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and run out the clock on Obamacare. Some prominent Republican senators and members of their staffs had even let it be known they actually believed passage of the Reid health care bill and enactment of Obamacare would benefit GOP candidates in the November midterm elections.

This GOP strategy of expedient complicity enraged the conservative base, roused talk radio show hosts and bloggers and even provoked a backlash from the chairman of the Republican National Committee. The Social Security Institute and the National Tax Limitation Committee joined with Tea Party Support and Gun Owners of America to convey this outrage to the Senate Republican leadership through letters, e-mails and telephone calls from the grass roots to GOP senators’ offices.

Paraphrasing Barry Goldwater, we argued, “Obstructionism in defense of liberty is no vice; cooperation in pursuit of tyranny is no virtue.”

Rush Limbaugh waded in to the fray: “I’m not a parliamentary expert. But I know a disaster when I see it. And I know that [Obamacare has to] be stopped, and whatever parliamentary steps are available to people who do know … should be taken — every blocking tactic.”

Even RNC Chairman Michael Steele opposed Senate Republicans’ “messaging strategy,” which was designed not to kill the bill but simply to use message amendments to put senators on record in a manner that could be used to good political effect in campaigns next November. Steele urged Republican senators to rise above politics and do whatever is necessary to “delay, stall, slow down and stop the Reid bill.”

Thomas Jefferson is quoted as saying, “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.” Senator DeMint of South Carolina is not a silent man. To the establishment GOP, this is a character flaw. If not for the Senator and a few other patriots like Dr. Larry Hunter, Lewis Uhler, and many others who worked with them, ObamaCare would be law – right now. Instead we are able to live on to fight another day.

Jim DeMint is a friend of liberty, an ally of Tea Parties everywhere, and a man of real character who stuck his neck out only to be abandoned and embarrassed by his own party. The fact he is still willing to pick up the gauntlet is a testament to his qualities. What almost happened last year could be characterized with a small change to Jefferson’s quote: “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to want to go on Christmas vacation.”

To its credit, the establishment GOP is now on board with the will of the American people. I leave it to the reader to guess their motivations. It is telling that while one man lead the way, others were hauled, kicking and screaming, to stand up for this country and reject political expediency and the self-serving strategies of those who do not have a grip on power but rather find themselves in power’s grip.

Who truly represents the views of fiscal conservatives? The leftovers from the George Bush era of Republican big government spending that lead to Obama’s victory, or a single Senator from South Carolina who stood up when nobody else would follow him?

It would do the establishment GOP a great deal of good to pay attention. We ordinary folk out here have long memories. I would consider a strong alliance with Jim DeMint to be in the best interests of a party badly in need of a spine transplant.

The following quoted piece below is from Dr. Hunter, CEO of the Social Security Institute. If Republicans refuse to vote strategically as indicated in the referenced post, say goodbye to electoral gains for the GOP in November. A vote for any Stupak language effectively ushers in the end of any budding alliance between Tea Parties and the GOP. In short, lean and lean hard on the GOP to think carefully about any vote that expedites the passage of ObamaCare. Any vote for strengthening anti-abortion language in the healthcare bill is a vote for ObamaCare. To the point, anything that assists in the passage of ObamaCare is a tacit approval of ObamaCare. Excuses will not extricate the GOP from a blatant strategical failure and the subsequent loss of any goodwill by the electorate. There are many of us who will not rest until the public is completely aware of any betrayal of the Republican party concerning this matter. Obstruction and strategic voting is the only way to ensure the GOP maintains electoral gains. If the GOP had voted present in the first House vote, ObamaCare would be dead today. You can blame political expediency and the pro-life advocacy groups for this. I personally am pro-life, but do not appreciate the pro-life movement hijacking the fight against ObamaCare and pushing for votes that made it easier to pass this liberty stealing behemoth of a bill, knowing full well the language for federally funded abortion will make it into government run healthcare at some point in the future. The only solution is to kill the bill and they know it. If ObamaCare passes, they will be as much to blame as the Democrats.

As for Senator Stupak and those who claim to strongly resist federal funding of abortions, the game is up. Insult our intelligence and look for another job. It does not take a PhD to understand that once government controls healthcare, federal funding of abortions is a soon-to-be foregone conclusion. Just a little legislative fix down the road and say hello to your tax dollars being used to kill the unborn. Stupak knows it, the GOP knows it, and the pro-life groups know it. To use the combination of a social issue and the powder keg that is healthcare reform as a fundraiser knowing full well protection for the unborn is only temporary is pathetic. I hope the Tea Parties and other concerned citizens will inform pro-life groups that if they support ObamaCare in any way, they are supporting the use of federal funds for abortion regardless of what the language says or will soon say regarding this issue. They will pay and pay dearly for their worship of the dollar over the lives of the innocent.

If the tactic is to hang one’s hat on the Senate reconciliation process, Stupak knows better unless he is a complete idiot. Once the House bill is passed, ObamaCare is law, and the Democrats will pivot to jobs and off the issue in an effort to save their collective electoral butts. In either case neither Stupak or any who claim to be in his camp that subsequently votes for ObamaCare with the sorry excuse it now prohibits federal funding of abortion would expose themselves in all their glorious hypocrisy and contempt. A Representative who is disingenuous or a half-wit is no choice at all – unless the choice is to shove them out the door.

The following two posts, dated last year, still apply to the degree that strategic voting is discussed. It is shameful we must include the likes of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops as opponents to the public will but also as opponents to the protection of the unborn. This left-wing organization’s only issue with ObamaCare is federally funded abortion. Fix that in the legislative language and they are quite happy with ObamaCare, even with the knowledge that federally funded abortion is all but guaranteed if ObamaCare passes. Hypocrisy, political expediency, and just plain stupidity are on the lunch menu today. We have met the enemy and he is us. The time of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is nigh.

Although the following posts are dated, much of the information is pertinent to the current situation:
Killing ObamaCare In The Senate – The Need For Strategic Voting and The Endgame Strategy To Kill ObamaCare – Lessons From The House Bill

From Dr. Hunter (italicized emphasis mine):

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops already has instant messaged their willingness not just to acquiesce in such shenanigans but also to actually mobilize the faithful to oppose any point of order in the Senate in order to lubricate passage of ObamaCare through the Senate:

The Roman Catholic bishops signaled Thursday that if agreement is reached with House leaders on anti-abortion language, the church would work to get the votes needed to protect the provisions in the Senate — and thereby advance the shared goal with Democrats of health care reform.

Now is the time for opponents of ObamaCare to focus, focus, focus on preventing Hoyer from maneuvering them into this corner. The only way for opponents of a government takeover of healthcare to prevent getting mouse trapped by a Separate Stupak is to recognize that the Stupak language and all Stupak lookalikes are a snare and a delusion.

NO legislative language will prevent ObamaCare once enacted into law from transforming very quickly into a federal abortion mill that provides abortion on demand. Given the obscure language inserted into the Senate Bill by Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), which is being totally ignored by anti-abortion groups, even the strongest Stupak-like language will fail to stem a tide of transformative interpretations of bureaucrats and judges, which are sure to produce federally subsidized abortion on demand.

The Mikulski language gives plenary authority to the Secretary of Health and Human Services to require every public and private healthcare plan in the nation to include “preventative services,” which is defined to include “abortion care.” Even without the Mikulski provision, both the House and Senate bills are shot through with provisions that will lead inevitably to federally subsidized abortion on demand.

There is simply no way cleanse the final bill of this authority without starting over. Hence, what anti-abortion Members of Congress and the pro-life groups must understand is that the only route to protecting the unborn from the effects of this bill is to defeat the entire bill. As long as Members of Congress and pro-life groups labor under the delusion that they can make ObamaCare safe for the unborn, they will actually serve as the President’s useful idiots and facilitate federal abortion on demand.

The political problem is there are many libertarians and moderate Republicans who oppose anti-abortion laws. This fact unnerves many Republican Members of Congress who therefore attempt to straddle the abortion issue so as not to offend moderate Republicans who agree with their libertarian constituents on abortion.

Stupak is a perfect straddle, which has the unfortunate by product of removing the last remaining block preventing enactment of ObamaCare into law. Unless Republicans refuse to take a pass on Stupak-like language, i.e., vote present on any Stupak vehicle however it is presented to them in the parliamentary chaos likely to ensue once the legislative bum’s rush begins—they will actually set the stage for enactment of ObamaCare into law.

The reluctance of Republican Members of Congress to help defeat Stupak language on strategic grounds is a huge political miscalculation. This miscalculation results from failing to comprehend the coincidence of interests on ObamaCare among libertarians/moderate Republicans and anti-abortion conservatives. Because of this blind spot, Senate Republicans are poised to make the same fatal mistake they made the first time around when they failed to comprehend the necessity of strategic voting on abortion language.

Read the whole thing.

Call pro-life groups, your Representative and Senator now. Tell them to resist strengthening ObamaCare and facilitating its passage. Let them know you are aware that if ObamaCare passes it is only a matter of time before federally funded abortion is a reality and that you will hold them personally responsible.

Michelle Malkin provides Stupak’s contact information:

Stupak’s contact info:

2268 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225 4735
(202) 225 4744 – Fax

Related:

Will Stupak be bought on Demcare?

AP: Stupak “more optimistic” on ObamaCare deal

Is Stupak Preparing to Cave?

Catholic bishops send message to faithful: We oppose ObamaCare

Major Update:

Very worrisome and beyond the pale: Dump Demcare: 2,000 protest in St. Louis; keep the no-mentum going; Dems push “Slaughter Solution;”:

Under Slaughter’s scheme, Democratic leaders will overcome this problem by simply “deeming” the Senate bill passed in the House – without an actual vote by members of the House.

More at Redstate: House Dems Try to Pass Obamacare Without a Vote

If the House pulls this stunt and the Supreme Court does not quickly strike down the entire bill, dodging the entire issue with the dismissive excuse the highest federal court in the land does not address Congressional parliamentary procedures even when those procedures clearly violate the Constitution, then nullification is the only solution left available to us. So egregious would this action be, that if there ever was a case for outright nullification by a multitude of states this is it. If this does not pass the muster for whipping up the fight for nullification, then nothing ever will.

One of the two main criteria for nullification to work is passion and the sheer number of states involved. If 20 or more states nullify ObamaCare there would be no way to enforce it. Read on.

Original Post—————–

The time to step up is now. We fight not just for our country, but for our families and for those not yet born. The information below is voluminous and it is merely a primer. Taking back our country requires understanding the power of the states in contrast to federal power. It requires we grasp the historical context of how the federal government absconded with powers the founders clearly never intended it to possess. The answer is clear – a lack of understanding and apathy. If you find you are too busy to take the time to understand your role in taking back this country and ending the fiscal insanity, then your contribution to this country’s demise is a forgone conclusion. If you say, “I am too busy with my job” or “I have children”, know that if you fail to act quickly that job may not exist in a year. Know that you will watch in dismay your children and their children’s future abandoned to those whose very existence is to take from you and continue taking from you, leaving nothing but small remnants of a once great spirit of independence, until that too is gone. If you are prone to apathy, leave this page. If you are ready to begin the fight towards your freedom, continue reading.

Michelle Malkin makes an excellent implicit case for why nullification is the only way back to federalism and the Tenth Amendment Center provides extensive education and commentary on the subject itself. Let us start with Michelle as she questions the ability of Republicans to lead us out of the sinkhole:

Now, I want you to read every word of what Andy McCarthy has to say about the GOP leadership’s abandonment of Jim Bunning — and what it says about the lack of Republican fortitude in the war against the permanent, ever-growing Nanny State.

Andy speaks the truth. Hard truths. And fiscal conservatives/Tea Party activists need to shout them from the rooftops. I’ve invoked Phyllis Schlafly many times over the past year in urging the GOP to provide true choices instead of echoes. Actions speak louder than words. So, alas, does feckless inaction.

Maine’s Susan Collins took to the Senate floor to assure Americans that Bunning’s radical views about Congress’s not spending yet more billions it doesn’t have “do not represent a majority of the Republican caucus.” And sure enough, they didn’t. Once Bunning backed down, the measure passed by a whopping 78-19.

Think about that. We are talking about $10 billion in a year when Leviathan is slated to spend a total of $3.6 trillion. The majority of Senate Republicans joined Democrats in concluding that the allocation of every one of these 3.6 thousand billion dollars is so vital that not one of them could be sacrificed in favor of unemployment insurance. So another $10 billion just gets heaped on the already unfathomable trillion-dollar deficits stacking year upon year.

Read the entire post. The realization that salvation exits with neither political party is an a priori and tacit argument the federal government is responsible for creating this mess and cannot, by design, be the architect of solutions to restoring fiscal responsibility and individual freedom. This is not to say principled politicians do not exist in Washington – I can think of a few – but most politicians are just that…politicians. Self-interested, disconnected, contemptuous elitists. For those in the Tea Party, it is a calculated risk that your candidate somehow is cut from a different cloth. In reality, you will fare no better than the average citizen. As I write these words, salivating, power hungry impostors wait to prey on the wishes and dreams of Tea Party members everywhere. I am your candidate, they will say. Even those with honest designs are not immune to the corrupting influence of Washington, for the system is fundamentally broken and it is impossible to remove a sitting U.S. Congress member. It is not, however, impossible to recall a governor or a state legislator and it is here that Tea Parties, nullification, and real power collide in the perfect storm of the restoration of constitutional governance.

Those of you who follow this blog recall that a group of organizations successfully changed Senate GOP healthcare policy. The history of those efforts are here and cross-posted at Politico. Be forewarned, you will not like the narrative. If you find yourself surprised you are out of touch with the political reality we find ourselves in today:

After weeks of refusing to embrace the “obstructionist” label as a virtue, Senate Republicans finally saw the light and late last week began to use the parliamentary tools at their disposal to delay a final vote on health care.

Until then, with the exception of South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, Republican lawmakers had refused to use Senate rules and procedures to obstruct the passage of the health care bill being pushed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and run out the clock on Obamacare. Some prominent Republican senators and members of their staffs had even let it be known they actually believed passage of the Reid health care bill and enactment of Obamacare would benefit GOP candidates in the November midterm elections.

This GOP strategy of expedient complicity enraged the conservative base, roused talk radio show hosts and bloggers and even provoked a backlash from the chairman of the Republican National Committee. The Social Security Institute and the National Tax Limitation Committee joined with Tea Party Support and Gun Owners of America to convey this outrage to the Senate Republican leadership through letters, e-mails and telephone calls from the grass roots to GOP senators’ offices.

It took a figurative gun to the collective head of the GOP to add a little starch to collapsing spines. Had the switch occurred just a smidgen later, Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts may well have occurred after the passage of ObamaCare.

To the GOPs credit, they continue to stick to obstruction and the promise of obstruction regarding ObamaCare. Their performance at the bipartisan healthcare “summit” was nothing short of amazing. However, the same tendencies against fiscal restraint still exist for many in the party, as outlined by Michelle in her post.

So what is one to do? The answer – nullification. No, nullification is not secession and no, nullification is not a violent act. The Tenth Amendment Center describes nullification as follows:

First, nullification has, in fact, been somewhat successful in the past and more recently as well. Second, as President Obama loves to say, “Let me be clear”: “Official” nullification has ALREADY HAPPENED.

Before I explain why “official” nullification has already happened, let me briefly give some examples of what nullification is NOT

Nullification is not secession or insurrection, but neither is it unconditional or unlimited submission. Nullification is not something that requires any decision, statement or action from any branch of the federal government. Nullification is not the result of obtaining a favorable court ruling. Nullification is not the petitioning of the federal government to start doing or to stop doing anything. Nullification doesn’t depend on any federal law being repealed. Nullification does not require permission from any person or institution outside of one’s own state.

So just what IS “official” nullification you might be asking?

Nullification begins with a decision made in your state legislature to resist a federal law deemed to be unconstitutional. It usually involves a bill, which is passed by both houses and is signed by your governor. In some cases, it might be approved by the voters of your state directly, in a referendum. It may change your state’s statutory law or it might even amend your state constitution. It is a refusal on the part of your state government to cooperate with, or enforce any federal law it deems to be unconstitutional.

Nullification carries with it the force of state law. It cannot be legally repealed by Congress without amending the US Constitution. It cannot be lawfully abolished by an executive order. It cannot be overruled by the Supreme Court. It is the people of a state asserting their constitutional rights by acting as a political society in their highest sovereign capacity. It is the moderate, middle way that wisely avoids harsh remedies like secession on the one hand and slavish, unlimited submission on the other. It is the constitutional remedy for unconstitutional federal laws.

With the exception of a Constitutional amendment, the federal government cannot oppose (except perhaps rhetorically), a state’s decision to nullify an unconstitutional federal law without resorting to extra-legal measures. But such measures would more than likely backfire, since most Americans still affirm that might does not make right.

There is no question as to whether or when “official” nullification will happen: It has ALREADY HAPPENED. In fact, not only has it happened recently, it has been a success! Perhaps this is why the federal government hopes you will never hear about it. According to the Tenth Amendment Center:

25 states over the past 2 years have passed resolutions and binding laws denouncing and refusing to implement the Bush-era law [REAL ID Act]..While the law is still on the books in D.C., its implementation has been “delayed” numerous times in response to this massive state resistance, and in practice, is virtually null and void…

…There are a whole host of peaceful actions that a state government can adopt if that day comes or appears to be just over the horizon. These measures range from county sheriffs requiring that federal agents receive written permission from the sheriff before acting in their county, to setting up a Federal Tax escrow account, which could potentially de-fund unconstitutional federal activities by requiring that all federal taxes come first to the state’s Department of Revenue.

Besides state interposition, the other thing Washington would have to consider, is whether enough of their agents would actually obey orders to punish people for exercising their constitutional rights. There is a significant chance that enough of them would either publicly or privately decide in advance to ignore such orders. As the probability of this increases, it becomes more likely that Washington will not risk overplaying its hand. The reality is that Washington just doesn’t have the manpower to enforce all their unconstitutional laws if enough states choose to defy them.

More on federal tax escrow accounts and the willingness of federal agents to execute orders deemed unconstitutional below.

For more information about nullification I strongly encourage the reader to visit the Tenth Amendment Center (TAC) and type in nullification in the search bar. Lots of very interesting reading. Additional information can be found at the Social Security Institute.

The TAC also writes Our Goal is Federalism, not “States’ Rights”:

Foundationally, states don’t have rights as a government, states have power. Power at the federal and state level is derived from the consent of the governed, the people, who do have rights our governing agreements were designed to protect. Inspired by careful historical study, years of debate, considerations, and the declarations of colonies, towns, and associations (prior to July of 1776) the fundamental rights of the people were articulated in the preamble of our Declaration of Independence…

…Let every member of every organization supporting state sovereignty and federalism cleanse the language so our opponents cannot easily attack the wrong target. Should they target federalism and the original meaning we can defeat them with truth. Freedom is not outdated, federal government is an agreement among the people of different sovereign states, the 10th Amendment has never been repealed, and virtue is still necessary for securing our posterity’s future rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

So if I were to ask you to identify the final arbiter of the U.S. Constitution, the correct answer is not the U.S. Supreme Court, but rather the states themselves. Allowing the U.S. Supreme Court – part of the judicial branch of the federal government – to rule on federal powers presents a problem. Dr. Larry Hunter informs us (emphasis mine):

The resolution explicitly disclaimed that the national government was the judge of its own powers. Allowing it to judge its own powers would be akin to permitting an agent, rather than the principal, to determine the breadth of the agent’s authority. The law of agency at its most basic level recognizes that an agent can act as such only subject to the consent and control of the principal to whom the agent owes a fiduciary duty (see Restatement [Second] of Agency, sec. 1). Just as A, B, and C, the partners in a business firm, decide what authority to give their agent Z, so the parties to the Constitution decide the powers of the national government. In light of such logic, Jefferson proclaimed in the resolution that “each party [to the federal compact] has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measures of redress” (Virginia Commission 1964, 144). For Jefferson, the people acting through their states — the authentic organs of government — were the final arbiters of constitutional interpretation. Jefferson feared that giving the federal government the exclusive power to interpret the Constitution through the Supreme Court would lead to arbitrary government. As John Taylor later wrote in his Construction Construed and Constitutions Vindicated, “a jurisdiction, limited by its own will, is an unlimited jurisdiction” ([1820] 1970, 131). With the states stripped of the power to construe the Constitution, the enforcement of constitutional limitations on the central government would be chimerical. Thus, it is not surprising that none of the convictions under the Sedition Act were appealed to the Federalist-dominated Supreme Court. The Republicans did not want to give the Court an opportunity to set a dangerous precedent.

If we remain sheep, apathy lays the foundation for us and our descendants of a people enslaved to the whims of a capricious few. Nullification begins with the state legislative and executive bodies, when the previously lorded over sheep transform into self-reliant wolves. It requires of us and our state leaders great strength of character and leadership. If they are not up to the task – we can replace them. At times, we must be prepared to stand with them shoulder-to-shoulder – literally and figuratively. The goal of any nullification movement is critical mass. Using ObamaCare as an example – assuming it passes, if enough states nullify the law and governors coordinate the effort with the will and strength of the people at their backs, ObamaCare will collapse. Federal repercussions will be swift:

When I talk to people about these principles – most agree, like Martin Luther King Jr. said in his famous “Letter from Birmingham jail,” that there is a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. But, they’ll often ask, even if states pass laws to nullify unjust and unconstitutional federal acts, the feds will still continue to tax us and punish our states financially for not complying – so what can we REALLY do?

One idea, which will take a great deal of courage on the part of the People and their state governments, is to establish what’s being called a “Federal Tax Escrow Account” or a “State Authority and Federal Tax Funds Act.”

Already introduced in Georgia (HB877), Oklahoma (HB2810), and Washington (HB2712), such laws would require that all federal taxes come first to the state’s Department of Revenue. A panel of legislators would assay the Constitutional appropriateness of the Federal Budget, and then forward to the federal government a percentage of the federal tax dollars that are delineated as legal and Constitutionally justified. The remainder of those dollars would be assigned to budgetary items that are currently funded through federal allocations and grants or returned to the people.

Naturally, the U.S. Supreme Court would label such an act unconstitutional, but as stated above, such an action by the Supreme Court amounts to empty words and rhetoric. The natural progression of such actions, given enough states and a determined populace, will be the nonviolent return of federalism. While it is possible events unfold in such a manner leading to a showdown between, for example, national guard troops and/or civilians and the U.S. military, it is highly unlikely the U.S. Military will follow orders that are obviously unconstitutional. After the forceful removal of guns from citizens in the aftermath of Katrina, many in law enforcement and the military began a serious a deliberate debate on the issue. Oath Keepers states the following on their site:

The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their Houses, and Farms, are to be pillaged and destroyed, and they consigned to a State of Wretchedness from which no human efforts will probably deliver them. The fate of unborn Millions will now depend, under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this army” — Gen. George Washington, to his troops before the battle of Long Island

Such a time is near at hand again. The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this Army — and this Marine Corps, This Air Force, This Navy and the National Guard and police units of these sovereign states.

Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of currently serving military, reserves, National Guard, peace officers, fire-fighters, and veterans who swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic … and meant it. We won’t “just follow orders.

Included in the link is a list of orders member will not obey.

We can take great lessons from Martin Luther King, Jr. and his approach to the civil rights movement, as well as Gandhi and the issue of British colonialism in India. A passive-aggressive approach can work if executed correctly.

It is no longer the case that most of us sacrifice for our freedoms. We know of those who did so in the past and do so even today. We honor them on special holidays and then go about our business. Lately, some find themselves prone to attend rallies, send faxes, call and email their federal representatives, only to sit back and watch Washington arrogance ignore our calls for sanity.

It is now clear to many the way forward – the only way forward – is through the states. We may slow our slide into fiscal disaster and European style socialism with leveraged federal pressure, but inaction at the state level – read nullification – we only delay the inevitable. So now is the time to begin. Now is the time to transform.

The sovereignty of the British at the time of the War of Independence was in the Parliament. The founders knew this and ensured the constitution would not allow for concentration in a centralized power for a few to lord over the many. The final arbiter of the constitution is not the Supreme Court, but rather the states. This is something rarely taught in law school and constitutional courses concentrate on case law and not on the historical context of the founding document itself. When the historical context is reviewed, it is clear, as Jefferson warned, that allowing a federal judicial system to check the federal powers was patently absurd.

The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798, written in secret by Jefferson and Madison in response to the Alien and Sedition Act, which would have jailed them for speaking out against the government, clearly made the above case and the case for nullification. Nullification is not secession – it is a state saying the federal powers have no right to execute a law within the borders of that state. Now look back to the context of the War of Independence. A tiny island off the coast of France has now been replaced by a city in DC. We are back where we started.

Perish as sheep, or thrive as a wolves.

Highly Recommended Reading:

The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to the Constitution (Politically Incorrect Guides)

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History

The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Founding Fathers (The Politically Incorrect Guides)

Related:

Listen to Judge Napolitano as he talks about nullification and secession. Personally, I don’t believe secession is necessary nor really an option. The very thought of it conjures images of violent battles. Nullification is the peaceful means to taking back our liberties under the Constitution.

More reason to start now: New House Dem strategy on ObamaCare: hostaging

How do you spell “tone-deaf?”; Update: Obama joins the cheerleading squad

State Sovereignty is About You!

The Obama way: Bluster, bully, bribe

Health Care Nullification: Things have just gotten underway

Nullification: The states have a “nuclear option,” too

Federal Law is Always Supreme. Right?

Hoyer: We could totally draft an anti-abortion bill that will get considered … by Democrats

Note To GOP: Our Freedoms Are No Longer Negotiable

Will Stupak be bought on Demcare?

So… What Next?

The answer is simple as I indicate above. Forget the courts. Lawsuits are a band-aid that will work and only if the process is expedited and the courts take the case up now and place an injunction on all aspects of ObamaCare so that Obama is unable to construct the scaffolding of his takeover with newly instantiated and collected taxes, or impact existing healthcare in any way. The entire bill must hover in limbo until resolution. As Americans have a short memory, my worry here is, if the end result is not in our favor, then we will just accept this until the impact of the law itself makes it impossible to ignore the consequences. By then, it will too late.

My question to the reader is, if the three branches of government all agree, which now amounts to rule by tyranny, we will have no additional redress other than acceptance, revolution – which I reject as a necessary solution but realize it may become necessary, or an attempt at non-violent nullification. It would seem to me the later is the best choice if done correctly on a massive scale. The reason for the urgency is that passions are now high and it is such times that are ripe for a solution such as nullification. Later, it would be almost impossible and would only occur when we are subject to such a level of tyranny that very likely our country will be near ruination; that taking our country back would be like taking your car back after it is stolen, smashed around, and then set on fire. Not much really worth taking back.

My level of confidence the federal courts will do anything is low. First, an injunction against major parts of the bill would be necessary so that taxes are not collected, and any other immediate impact to state budgets are blocked until resolution of the lawsuit. Is your confidence level high this would happen? If
this does not happen, we will rapidly slide down the slope to bankruptcy at the state level and then the national level. At what point is it appropriate to admit the court route is not working and stronger action is needed? If we wait too long, the opportunity will have passed or, if it still exists, it does so because we are in such a dire situation the outcome will still leave us in shambles as I indicate above.

I honestly do not believe, and history bears me out on this, that the federal courts are going to get involved in the legislative process (they have in only a few cases) and they rarely limit federal power. Our saving grace may be Obama putting his foot in his mouth and insulting the court in public during the SOTU.
I can just see Justice Roberts rubbing his hands together in anticipation of this making it to his court.

Still, a court solution is a band-aid. Under both parties we have seen the growth of government. It is time to remove the purse-stings from DC and spit out the tyrants. We are the power in this country. We have been lulled over the centuries into believing otherwise, but as indicated in the essay above, it is clear what our founding fathers meant.

Control the narrative on Senate reconciliation and leveraged pressure against wavering House members is yours. Public knowledge of Byrd’s strong feelings against using reconciliation for healthcare as outlined here and here. This knowledge alone kills the meme that reconciliation is a harmless little fuzzy bunny that has been used before by Republicans and therefore it is perfectly acceptable to use it to overhaul 1/6 of the U.S. economy.

Ubiquitous public awareness the architect of Senate reconciliation is against using the procedural tactic to pass ObamaCare will cause vulnerable House members to reach for the Maalox and lose trust in both the process and the end result in terms of the blowback by their constituents and the unceremonious end of said Representative’s political career. Pelosi would find it even harder to garner support for ObamaCare; nobody is willing to fall on a sword for the queen of contempt. In short, House members will be tainted by the Senate procedure.

To state it another way, the Senate procedural maneuver will effectively scare away votes in the House. This will work if the GOP starts talking – and talking a great deal. Wide exposure on Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, talk radio, and in the blogosphere will only aid our cause and the goal to kill ObamaCare for good. There will be an argument that reconciliation will only be used to pass “fixes” to the bill. However, if the bill will not pass without reconciliation, then it is clear that reconciliation is the means by which the entire healthcare system will be overhauled. The argument falls apart and reconciliation is once again front-and-center as the means by which ObamaCare will be passed.

I don’t believe Pelosi will ever have the votes, but this beast of a bill won’t die, which requires an extraordinary effort on ObamaCare opponents to kill the bill for good. Right now the Democrats are controlling the reconciliation PR messaging within some of their ranks and it’s the fence sitters that worry me. The public knows something is wrong with using reconciliation to subvert the will of the electorate, but let them know the architect of the process is against it and watch public opinion push the Democratic fence sitters into the correct field of opinion. We need to control the narrative about the process and make it very painful for any Senator, Representative, or the President to even bring up the subject.

We need the birth of a new meme, one so powerful that it cannot be countered by anyone advocating quashing of minority rights in the Senate while concurrently ignoring the will of a majority of the electorate without looking ridiculous, partisan, contemptuous, and thoroughly out of touch.

Words have meaning and memes can carry far and wide. Tie in Senator Byrd’s statement’s on reconciliation with the idea of rule by tyranny. The GOP talking heads should be screaming Byrd’s views from the mountaintops and I have yet to hear a single reference to Byrd’s feelings on the matter of using reconciliation to shove healthcare down our throats.

His words are powerful. The fact that they come from him is PR gold.

Also, let us not forget that many Democratic Senators are on the record stating they are against using reconciliation to pass healthcare. This is a little know fact and tied in with the Budget Resolution last year. The fact that Senator Kent Conrad ignored the will of the Senate during the Budget Conference does not erase the fact those votes were taken. This can and will be used against those Senators who show themselves to be hypocrites.

Update: Welcome Michelle Malkin readers. It is an honor to be mentioned by the First Lady of blogging.

Related:

Abortion still the stumbling block for ObamaCare

GOP rep: Obama’s “bipartisan” bill has less substance than … “Jersey Shore”; Confirmed: Obama to endorse reconciliation tomorrow

Here comes the reconciliation “nobody” is talking about. Now if Michelle will only bring up Byrd we would be on a roll.

Harkin: It’s Reconciliation Time

The Cynicism of Reconciliation

Let the avalanche begin: Oh my: Two House yes votes on ObamaCare may flip to no

Update: Plan C: Obama set to introduce “much smaller” health-care bill on Wednesday. If true, we need to stay on top of this and ensure we don’t get railroaded into RINOCare (government backed insurance cartels) or any other unsavory legislation. RINOCare would be the Republican’s Waterloo. Watch your GOP Senator and Representative like a hawk. If you want my advice, visit the Social Security Institute every single day to find out if your GOP Senator or Representative is about to row you down the creek and throw away the paddle. SSI is run by Dr. Larry Hunter, former policy advisor to President Ronald Reagan. Watch for Trojan Horses to single-payer and public option. This is not over yet.

Upon further thought, this may be, as Hot Air is reporting, nothing more than Obama’s plan with a few Republican ideas in it. If so, it is still a government takeover of healthcare and the fight will continue to kill the bill. Contact your Representative and Senators and ensure they do not support any bill that does not start over from a clean slate.

—————–Original Post

If ever a narrative needed to make it far and wide, it is the following one. When the main architect of reconciliation comes out against it so strongly, I would consider that quite newsworthy.

The Democrat talking heads have a new talking point – the Republicans have used reconciliation before so we can too. They fail to mention the differences between the use of reconciliation in the past and the intent to use it today to shove an unpopular bill down an unwilling public’s throat, and in the process fundamentally impact over 1/6 of the U.S. economy while inserting monumental government bureaucracies between you and your doctor, in the end creating rationing, higher taxes, killing innovation, and reducing our quality of care. While other solutions exist which avoid destroying the best medical system in the world, the Democratic leadership and the President of United States show little interest in pursuing free market solutions and instead are prepared to play the role of tyrants by simultaneously ignoring the will of the minority in the Senate and the majority in the country.

Senator Byrd best expresses why using Reconciliation to jam ObamaCare down America’s throat degrades the U.S. Senate and violates the spirit of our system of checks and balances. Why is Senator Byrd’s opinion so important in the matter? Because the Senator from West Virginia is one of the authors of the reconciliation process and a current serving U.S. Senator. He is also a Democrat. Let’s see what the Senator says about reconciliation and healthcare:

Using reconciliation to ram through complicated, far-reaching legislation is an abuse of the budget process. The writers of the Budget Act, and I am one, never intended for its reconciliation’s expedited procedures to be used this way. These procedures were narrowly tailored for deficit reduction. They were never intended to be used to pass tax cuts, or to create new Federal regimes. Additionally, reconciliation measures must comply with Section 313 of the Budget Act, known as the Byrd Rule, which means that whatever health legislation is reported from the Finance Committee or legislation from any other Committee that is shoe-horned into reconciliation will sunset after five years. Additionally, numerous other non-budgetary provisions of any such legislation will have to be omitted under reconciliation. This is a very messy way to achieve a goal like health care reform, and one that will make crafting the legislation more difficult…

…It is the one place in all of government where the rights of the numerical minority are protected. As long as the Senate preserves the right to debate and the right to amend we hold true to our role as the Framers envisioned. We were to be the cooling off place where proposals could be examined carefully and debated extensively, so that flaws might be discovered and changes might be made. Remember, Democrats will not always control this chamber, the House of Representatives or the White House. The worm will turn. Some day the other party will again be in the majority, and we will want minority rights to be shielded from the bear trap of the reconciliation process…

…While I support the admirable budget priorities outlined in this resolution, I cannot and will not condone legislation that puts political expediency ahead of the time-honored purpose of this institution.

Newsmax also reports the Senator as stating that using reconciliation in this manner is

an outrage that must be resisted.

Why Republican rebuttals do not include the opinion of the architect of reconciliation is beyond me. I have yet to hear a single talking head speak of the Senator Byrd’s opinion of using reconciliation. Reconciliation has never been used in such an abusive manner for such far reaching legislation. To do so amounts to nothing short of rule by tyranny, and it is the moral responsibility of level-headed leaders to recognize and identify it as such. Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and any legislator who supports the use of such a tactic to expedite unpopular and liberty stealing legislation is acting the tyrant.

During the summit, President Obama stated:

The American people are not all that interested in procedures inside the Senate.

With this statement Obama is either outright lying, completely out of touch with the American people, or believes we lack the necessary intelligence to understand the procedure. None of these options should provide the reader with much comfort. The first is inexcusable, the second shows a lack of competency, and the third is patently insulting. As Michelle Malkin reported:

Oh, really? A new USAToday/Gallup poll reports that 52 percent of Americans oppose using the procedural maneuver to pass the health care bill in the Senate on 51 votes rather than the 60 votes required to end any filibuster.

In the end, it is clear the word tyrant must be used to described anyone who supports using reconciliation in the manner currently under consideration for healthcare. It is also clear the statements and opinion of Senator Robert Byrd be repeated and repeated often. The American people must know the architect of the process is strongly against using it to pass healthcare and that doing so is a tyrannical act. The meme must spread and spread far.

Going farther, passage in the House of the Senate bill is also a tyrannical act. The people of this country have made it very, very, clear, this bill is not wanted, it is not liked, and Congress should start over. No amount of spin by empty Democratic talking heads is going to change this reality.

Pass this bill by reconciliation – or pass it at all – and all bets are off. When the GOP retakes Congress, it will be clear – and expected of them – to invent rules to kill ObamaCare by any means possible. The traditions and comity of the Senate will already be destroyed, the Democrats in the House will have demonstrated both their severe intellectual myopia and ideological clinging, so why not continue the tradition and just de-fund ObamaCare or pull some other bit of trickery. While repealing ObamaCare at the federal level sounds good, I would much rather watch a blanket of ObamaCare nullification legislation fall across this country. If the Democrats feel like opening Pandora’s box, don’t come crying to me when the law of unintended consequences rears its head. The Democrats will have shown the country that you can pretty much do whatever the hell you want.

Let me be clear (my God, I sound like Obama): I still think ObamaCare is dead, reconciliation is a deflective strategy, the votes do not exist in the House, and the current Democratic posturing is to placate the base as the Dem leadership looks for an exit strategy.

However, the fact remains many Democrats were willing to cram a government take over of healthcare legislation through regardless of the consequences. It is the our job to ensure the country does not forget. Obama, Reid, and Pelosi are Socialists at best and Marxists at worse. Their willingness to use every questionable trick possible to achieve their power grab regardless of the wishes of a clear majority in this country is the very definition of rule by tyranny. Many of their colleagues are just as duplicitous and come November they must and will pay very dearly for their condescending and contemptuousness attitude towards America and its people.

The moderate base of the Democratic party must ensure Pelosi and Reid pay for their arrogance and willingness to sacrifice the political careers of their colleagues in pursuit of an ideological goal – a pursuit characterized by the obsessive-compulsive tendencies of the neurotic. Obama, the ideological brother of Reid and Pelosi, is recognized less for his skills as a leader and oratorical genius; his tendency to prevaricate is now legendary as he loses credibility at a pace only a NASCAR driver could appreciate. The shine is off the shoes – and we see the dirt, the obfuscation, and the real intent of this President. The fig leaf is gone and there is no rock to crawl back under.

As the Chines proverb says: May you live in interesting times.

Related:

Still want ObamaCare? UK health care horror: 1,200 die needlessly in filthy, blood-splattered hospital. The bad part is, this is not a joke or a parody.

Kyl: Republicans do not want to stall health bill with unlimited amendments:

Forcing amendments (although I don’t think we will even get to this point) is a good strategy as one can force the Democrats to take difficult votes. I certainly hope McConnell is paying attention.

It would be in the Senator Kyl’s best interest to recall the GOP was exposed as wanting to put up a lackluster fight against ObamaCare so its passage would guarantee GOP gains in November. The Senator would also be best served to remember when a team of organizations exposed not only this GOP tactic but the betrayal of Senator DeMint by many in the Senate GOP when he tried to slow down ObamaCare by removing unanimous consent.

Roll over on reconciliation and see where that gets you in November. The American people do not want ObamaCare so you had BETTER OBSTRUCT and use a little strategical thinking here or face the consequences. The gains in the electorate can disappear as quickly as they appeared. The narrative of GOP weakness is not an animal that needs feeding, especially given the excellent performance at the healthcare summit. Now is not the time to remove the spine.

Precious: The Day ObamaCare Died – American Pie Parody

Dems: Screw bipartisanship, full steam ahead on Obamacare hara-kiri

Is Obamacare doomed?

Pelosi’s challenge

“Reconciliation is a dodge” and more Monday morning reads

Pelosi And The “Bullet In The Head” Factor

Are Democrats choosing to run off a cliff with ObamaCare?

CNN: We need a radical procedure to save the ObamaCare patient

Challenges of the two bill strategy.

Update: Rush Limbaugh just admitted he was wrong about stating the Republicans should not attend the summit. Republicans are knocking Obama around like a lightweight.

Watching the sob stories from the Dems in Kabuki theater is making me sick.

I come from Canada – single payer. My wife was born in Britain – public option. So a Canadian premier comes to US for heart surgery to repair a valve. In Canada he would have required a full on cracking on the sternum, in the U.S. they came in through his armpit. In Britain, a breast cancer saving drug was denied to millions on the public plan by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) – a real cruel acronym if ever one existed.

A drug which can give women with advanced breast cancer extra weeks or months of life has been turned down by a government watchdog body for use in the NHS.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) says it proposes to reject Tyverb (lapatinib) in spite of changes in the rules brought in specifically to allow people at the end of their lives to have the chance of new and often expensive treatments.

Tyverb is the only drug licensed for women with advanced breast cancer whose tumours test positive for a protein called HER2 and for whom Herceptin, a Nice-approved drug, is no longer working. In much of the rest of Europe, Tyverb is then given, in combination with a standard chemotherapy drug called capecitabine.

Herceptin was denied until the NHS was sued.

Let’s see – Kennedy had brain cancer and he went to…hmmm….Britain? No. Germany? No. Canada? No. Mexico? No. China? No. Oh, that’s right – he stayed here in America. I wonder why?

And Bill Clinton loves American health care too:

With President Obama hoping this week’s “bipartisan summit” will move his health-care bill out of the ICU, it’s worth taking a look at a recent high-profile operation — the heart work done on former President Bill Clinton.

Clinton, of course, got the best of care — a cardiac stent (a tiny metal cylinder) coated with a drug to help keep his artery open. Recent studies in the New England Journal of Medicine and elsewhere have shown that these drug-eluting stents are more effective than bare metal ones.

But they cost two-to-four times more — and the technology is relatively new. That combination has left government-run health-care systems slow to adopt them. The disparity between the US and Canada is striking.

Per capita, our neighbors to the north receive only half as many coronary interventions. And only 30 percent of the stents placed in Canada are drug eluting, compared with a whopping 80 percent in the United States.

So a Canadian cardiac patient is less than a quarter as likely as an American to be outfitted with the kind of state-of-the-art stent that Clinton had.

In Canada, land of single-payer health insurance, you’re also less likely to get the stent as soon as the need is clear — especially in western provinces where resources are extremely limited and access is spotty. In Edmonton, Alberta, the wait for a cardiac procedure is routinely three to four months. In many areas of western Canada, less than half of angioplasties and stents are done at the same time as the original angiogram, a big waste of time and resources.

Canada has been attempting to deal with this problem of excess delay and inefficiency by introducing a database-driven system that assigns scores based on urgency. But many American cardiologists shudder at exactly this kind of solution — a federal system for deciding who needs an urgent procedure and who doesn’t. And if you were to think that rationing cardiac care is a way of saving money, you’d be dead wrong. An Austrian study just published found that the cost of waiting dramatically increases the average cost of treatment per patient.

The record of the last half-century is unmistakable: Government-dominated health sectors don’t innovate as fast, and they resist the latest discoveries because they “see” the costs up-front, and are slow to accept the benefits.

Any of the ObamaCare bills would push us in Canada’s direction, with policymakers looking hard to find overly simplistic solutions to justify lower costs for cheaper technologies. Indeed, some US “experts” are already brandishing a single 2008 study, known as the COURAGE trial, that seems to undermine the value of stents.

But ask any of the one million US patients who have received a stent over the last year if they think the capital investment that companies have made on evolving stent technology has been worth it. Perhaps even the former president would agree to the cost/benefit of stenting, even as he’s championing a form of health care that could take that routine option away.

I got sob stories for you. If ObamaCare passes, I will have millions of them. A lot more than the dems are regurgitating now.

Related:

More Vote Scoring of the GOP At Healthcare Summit

The House Goes First or ObamaCare Dies

Watch out Republicans: Obama Readies a Fallback Health-Care Proposal. Read more here.

GOP, do NOT agree to anything from this manipulative trickster. Hold your ground and review anything thoroughly. If you stick it to us on this, you will pay a dear price. They have LOST. Do not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Blowhard-a-thon at Blair House: Health care summit open thread

The original post is here, to which I would like to add some thoughts related to Karl Rove’s suggestions:

The congressional Republicans at today’s televised health-care “summit” at the White House naturally want to prevent the president from turning it into a PR stunt. This is no easy task. They’ll not only have to point out problems with his plan and offer their own ideas, but correct the president when he makes statements that are not true.

The GOP participants appear ready for the first two tasks. In an unusual approach, House and Senate members prepped together the way a candidate preps for a presidential debates—by pulling together debate books and conducting mock sessions. But the third task is the most critical and the most difficult.

President Obama has a habit of making false statements, and getting away with them. At a Republican conference in Baltimore last month, for example, he denied that his budget nearly triples the national debt over 10 years. He got away with it because he didn’t face follow-up questions or objections.

I disagree with him on one point made later in the article- this President does not deserve any respect. Obama is a socialist at best and a Marxist at worst. Do not be frightened of a man who is attempting to tear down this country. If the GOP does not correct the president during attempts to lie or mislead the American people the action will be scored as a vote for ObamaCare. All the gains by the GOP with the electorate will evaporate if ObamaCare passes because the GOP left its collective spine at home this morning.

Also, if reconciliation occurs in the Senate, as hard as it will be, DeMint’s tactic of using hundreds and, if necessary, thousands of amendments to slow down the process all the way to November if necessary must be done by the GOP or it will be scored as a vote for ObamaCare with all the accompanying consequences.

The GOP better head into the summit with every intention of killing ObamaCare. They had better head out of the summit with the same attitude. No excuses.

Also read from Dr. Hunter: Stop the Raid on Medicare before it begins.

Related: Update: Watch out Republicans: Obama Readies a Fallback Health-Care Proposal. Read more here.

GOP, do NOT agree to anything from this manipulative trickster. Hold your ground and review anything thoroughly. If you stick it to us on this, you will pay a dear price. They have LOST. Do not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Blowhard-a-thon at Blair House: Health care summit open thread

Update: Hot Air believes VP Biden can shut down the amendment bomb process. However, Robert Dove, former Senate parliamentarian, disagrees:

Senators are also entitled to offer as many amendments as they choose during reconciliation. Though Democrats have a large enough majority to beat back GOP attempts to alter the bill, neither they nor the parliamentarian can limit the number of amendments introduced, Dove said.

A Senate insider agrees. The Vice President as President of the Senate can overrule the parliamentarian, but if the parliamentarian is not in a position to rule, the Vice President has nothing to overrule. What the Senate can do is invoke the Byrd Option, also known as the constitution option. This would effectively kill the filibuster period. Try getting 50 votes for healthcare after that. Such a move for sweeping legislation would have far reaching and disastrous consequences.

Whatever Dove said on MSNBC, it does not jive with his previous statements. Of course, being fired by Republicans in the Senate during the GWB years cause one to question anything Robert Dove says. However, note below what is NOT being said. Regardless of the process, the end result is to kill the filibuster. This would be a disaster for the country, and the Democrats are counting on the GOP to go spineless on this one. As I indicate below, that strategy may be working. Instead of buckling, the GOP needs to call their bluff or face the wrath of the public and watch electorate gains turn to losses.

Assume even for a moment that I and many others are wrong, the consequences for the VP pulling this stunt would also be disastrous. However, if the reader thinks about it, if the VP can do this, he IS effectively killing the filibuster – there is no difference. So the reality is the Senate can stop reconciliation by killing the filibuster. How they do that is of no matter, the end result and consequences will be the same and when we are in power the Democrats will face the same treatment. Just remember the gang of 14 and Senator McCain. He created that gang for a reason. Killing the filibuster would be a disaster and the Democrats know it. It won’t happen. Right now, my biggest concern is everyone is getting so worked up that Republicans will sense fear from their constituents and fold. Senator Kyl has already stated Republicans will not stall ObamaCare reconciliation with unlimited amendments. If we go weak, they go weak.

Forcing amendments (although I don’t think we will even get to this point) is a good strategy as one can force the Democrats to take difficult votes. I certainly hope McConnell is paying attention.

It would be in the Senator Kyl’s best interest to recall the GOP was exposed as wanting to put up a lackluster fight against ObamaCare so its passage would guarantee GOP gains in November. The Senator would also be best served to remember when a team of organizations exposed not only this GOP tactic but the betrayal of Senator DeMint by many in the Senate GOP when he tried to slow down ObamaCare by removing unanimous consent.

Roll over on reconciliation and see where that gets the GOP in November. The American people do not want ObamaCare so the Senate GOP had BETTER OBSTRUCT and use a little strategical thinking here or face the consequences. The gains in the electorate can disappear as quickly as they appeared. The narrative of GOP weakness is not an animal that needs feeding, especially given the excellent performance at the healthcare summit. Now is not the time to remove the spine. The same is true for us. It is time to present the facts and stand tall. If we lose this fight in the Congress, it is on to nullification and possible repeal (although the later will be difficult in the near term and even in 2013). That is not to say nullification is easy, but as a solution it offers the best long term survival of our country. If Washington is unwilling to listen, the states need to remove the purse strings except for those aspects of the federal government that require funding PER the constitution.

Also via Politico: The problem with reconciliation.

Also read Rule By Tyranny. Senator Byrd’s (D-WV) Thoughts on Reconciliation. If the architect of the process is vehemently against using it to pass sweeping legislation, don’t you think this needs national exposure? Why are the GOP talking heads so silent on this? Even the blogosphere, with few exceptions, is not reporting this. From a public relations perspective the words of Senator Byrd are pure gold.

Need to contact your Republican Senator to ensure they are on board with this process, or would you like to contact your Democratic Senator and tell them to say no to reconciliation? If so, look them up here.

——————–Original Post

Folks are getting pretty fired up over both the Redstate post concerning VP Joe Biden overruling the Senate parliamentarian during reconciliation and then this post from Hot Air stating that the Democrats are near a deal on ObamaCare ahead of the healthcare summit this month:

In other words, instead of bargaining with the GOP from scratch — as Boehner and Cantor initially insisted and as 57 percent of the public wants, per yesterday’s Zogby poll — The One’s going to do the opposite by walking in, pushing a fake deal in front of the GOP, and declaring before the cameras that America’s health-care problems can now be solved unless the “party of no” insists on further obstructionism. And if they do, of course, he’ll have no choice but to save America by ramming the bill through in reconciliation.

The thinking is that Democrats are going to use either standard reconciliation or what I like to call the nuclear option reconciliation described in the Redstate post. What many are forgetting is that even with a nuclear option reconciliation, the Republicans still have a trick up their sleeve. It is for this reason that I believe the threat of reconciliation is a bluff with the intent of getting the GOP to agree to something at the summit.

Falling for this trap would be foolish indeed. The GOP better hold its ground during this farcical summit and remain the party of no when it comes to ObamaCare, thereby implicitly daring the Democrats to attempt reconciliation.

The country demands it of them.

I doubt the Democrats have the guts or temerity to attempt a parliamentary trick if the end result is in doubt and the increased cost to their party come November beyond their ability to comprehend. The biggest mistake the GOP could make is to enable the Democrats to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by delivering any overtures of bi-partisanship towards a bill which is blatantly partisan. The cost to the GOP in the mid-terms would be incalculable and any gains in the electorate erased before their eyes.

The GOP must follow up on the threat of using amendments to slow down reconciliation.

Both VP Joe Biden and the parliamentarian would be unable to stop this process:

Senators are also entitled to offer as many amendments as they choose during reconciliation. Though Democrats have a large enough majority to beat back GOP attempts to alter the bill, neither they nor the parliamentarian can limit the number of amendments introduced”, Dove said.

The Dove referred to in the quote is Bob Dove, Senate Parliamentarian until 2001.

As there is no limit to the amount of amendments that could be offered, the bill would be delayed and obstructed until it died the death of a thousand cuts.

Recently, the Tea Party polled better than both Republicans and Democrats in a generic ballot. Why? Because they are the party of no – no to ObamaCare, no to bailouts, no to fiscal lucre – no, no, no. Obstructionism in defense of liberty is no vice and cooperation in pursuit of tyranny is no virtue. Republicans better get the message.

Some good advice from Dr. Hunter:

Hey, Republicans, heads up, ears open, eyes on the prize: Object, Obstruct and Delay any effort by the White House and congressional Democrats to revive the death march toward nationalization of healthcare. And most importantly, don’t do anything to allow RhinoCare to be resurrected from the dead.

So throw up those amendments such as tort reform, buying insurance across state lines, and anything else painful for Democrats to vote on. Make them go on the record as being against common-sense reform as the GOP continues to amend, amend, amend until the bill is dead.

If the GOP plays its cards right, the Democrats not only do not get to shove their precious bill down our unwilling throats, but face an even greater slaughter in November for daring to usurp the will of the American public and trample on minority rights in the Senate. Get the popcorn.

Related: Does The Public Want A Public Option – No It Does Not

Of course, if all goes wrong, there is always nullification!. Actually, the only way to really stop the amendment bomb would be to invoke the constitution option (once known as the Byrd option), which would effectively kill the filibuster. While I don’t think the Democrats have enough votes even for reconciliation, a part of me hopes that, in the end, they go the filibuster killing route (highly unlikely). That would be a perfect start to begin nullification with a bang instead of a whimper and bring us back to constitutional governance where the states hold the power as opposed to a centralized federal government. What many do not realize is that the Supreme Court is not the final arbiter of the constitution – it is the states. What fun!

Reconciliation, the public option, and Demcare revival

A Tortured History of ObamaCare. Dan Perrin has been a real rock during this entire debate. This is just one of many posts where he once again reassures us that ObamaCare is dead. However, just to be sure, keep up the pressure; Cut off its head, dismember it, scatter the body parts, and set them on fire before blasting them individually off into deep space.

It Lives!

Love it: NYT Admits Conservatives Are Right About Government Healthcare