I work with a diverse mix of people on a daily basis, and just this morning I was confronted by a co-worker of mine who was complaining that the Republicans don’t care about this country. President Obama is trying to help people by providing them affordable healthcare but the mean, evil, nasty Republicans are not coming to the table. They are instead voicing TOTAL opposition. This got me thinking: The vote on healthcare reform has been almost strictly divided by party lines which means that the Democrats are unbudging in their support (well not recenlty) and the Republicans are staunch in their opposition. There can be only two reasons for this.

• Reason 1: They both believe that their posisition as majority/minority party makes their vote a political tool for harming the other party and securing re-election. or,
• Reason 2: Each party believes that they are right.

It has become clear to me that the Democrats are using healthcare reform as a political tool. This has been one of the cheif political goals of the libs for well over 30 years, with multiple presidents and congresses trying unsuccessfully to achieve their coveted reform. Obama has made it clear that he is going to try and shake things up in Washington and has staked his reputation on this flagship program. With embarrassments like New Jersey, Virgina, the Chicago Olympics, the Nobel Prize, and now Massachusetts, Obama has no choice but to actually deliver on a promise instead of setting himself up to lose another battle.

Now Republicans on the other hand seem unwilling to negotiate for the most part because they have the exact oppostie viewpoint. We view this bill as not being a step in the right direction, but as ultimatly an extremely dangerous reform measure that threattenes to ruin the system entirely rather than fix it. The experiment with universal healthcare in Mass. has not been used as a shining example of success on this topic for one clear reason. It is not a success, the program has hiked taxes and is in danger of going bankrupt, the people of Massachusetts do not like this program and it does not provide quality affordable prompt healthcare. The people of Massachusetts told us this themselves by voting against Obama’s efforts to bring universal healthcare (or as close as Republicans would let him get) to the rest of the country by electing Scott Brown. There is no reason for Republicans to cooperate, because this is not just a political tool to use in 2010 and 2012, but it is a very real assault on our free market and our personal liberties. Staunch and total opposition is the only course of action and thats why we need to rid the party of the RINOs. People like John “lets make a deal” McCain, and Olympia Snowe, and up untill recently Arlen Spector value progress and openness, and cooperation more than they do the basic conservative principles of small government and minimal interference. It does us no good to achieve a Republican majority in congress if our Republicans are willing to shirk their beliefes in the name of consensus. Up-and-commers like Sarah Palin need to understand that in the war of ideas comprimise means that everyone loses and we should not back tained Republican encumbants for the sake of preserving a seat. We need to back true conservatives like Marco Rubio, and send a message to the country that says that we have ALWAYS been the party of ideas, we have ALWAYS been the party of fiscal responsability, and we WILL NOT be the party of comprimise that the people like my co-worker and the MSM want us to be. So in the political zoo the RINOs are one exhibit that i’m eager to skip.

From the beginning of Barack Obama’s campaign for the Presidency of the United States his approach to public relations and his tactics have relied heavily on misinterpretation of statistics, misrepresentation of economics, and outright lies. His representation of the catastrophic 1Trillion dollar stimulus plan is characteristic of the arrogance and total disregard for his charge as President of the United States. Tantamount to that representation was the Recovery Act under which his brilliant strategists came up with the plan to claim a fictional number of jobs saved by the bailout. This statistic struck a chord with the American public because most of us have had the utmost concern for rising unemployment rates. The plan was genius for two reasons, first of all it is a PR dream, you can have every employed person in America proud that their President has saved them from unemployment. It is also genius because it is a completely and utterly improvable statistic. The government doesn’t have the capability to accurately report jobs created (i.e. www.recovery.gov) so how do they proport to have the ability to track jobs not destroyed.

Why then does Robert Gibbs come out and make a statement like: “Well, Chris, let’s take for instance the example you just used of the stimulus package. We had four quarters of economic regression in terms of growth, right? Just last quarter, we finally saw the first positive economic job growth in more than a year. Largely as a result of the recovery plan that’s put money back into our economy, that saved or created 1.5 million jobs.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31914.html#ixzz0dfTyhsWe

Here comes the economic misrepresentation. The Obama administration has wrapped one of their greatest scams on the American people into one of their chief policy initiatives. Gibbs is looking at the economy like there are only two categories, lost or created. In his argument each saved job is counted twice. He claims that saved jobs add to the economy, but by definition jobs that are saved are already part of our economic output. To claim that they increase output is downright wrong, saved merely means that they are not subtracted, which is much different than jobs added. Saved jobs are accurately reflected in our current unemployment rate. So under this interpretation, Gibbs and Obama can take credit for %100 of the currently employed. Saving jobs will not EVER by themselves contribute to economic growth. Gibbs can lie about statistics all he wants, but pure numbers never lie. In order to contribute to economic growth you actually need to produce something. And production is not something that the Obama administration can claim with any credibility.

So when you crunch the numbers, Obama has cost the American people well over 1 Trillion Dollars and the return on our investment is not looking good.

The good news is that Republicans are finally responding the way we’ve been needing them to since the Clinton era.  In his speech about the stimulus bill Mike Pence hammered Obama, not on empty rhetoric, but on the truth.

“In February, this Democratic Congress passed a $1 trillion stimulus bill and the results are starting to come in. There have been 1.96 million jobs lost since the stimulus bill was signed. Unemployment was 12.4 million, it’s 14.7 million today. The unemployment rate was 7.5 percent; it’s 9.5 percent today, the highest in 26 years. And remarkably, the President last week said that the recovery bill had ‘done its job.’ Done its job?”

Eric Cantor echoed those sentiments in his speech during open debate on the stimulus bill, he noted that the governments efforts should be “focused like a laser” on job creation and protection, the same two categories that Robert Gibbs clams resounding success, but he goes on to say that on those two categories the stimulus bill represents “a fundamental dereliction of duty on the part of the majority [Democrats]”

Another and perhaps the most ludicrous claim by the press secretary (and Obama himself) is that the upset in Massachusetts was NOT a referendum on the healthcare bill and Obama’s tenure in office. Well… to that I say, go ahead and continue missing the point, like Napoleon said : Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.