Democrats Push Health Care Access for Illegal Immigrants in Health Care Reform/Good Luck With That

Obama is losing ground in the polls. A majority of Americans oppose Obamacare and half disapprove of Obama's job performance overall. Earlier this month, Republicans have taken the lead over Democrats on the issues and generic ballot for the first time in a long time.

So, the Democrats think they have the solution to win over people's hearts. Give the public option to illegal immigrants, too:

Fearful that they're losing ground on immigration and health care, a group of House Democrats is pushing back and arguing that any health care bill should extend to all legal immigrants and allow illegal immigrants some access, The Washington Times reported on Monday.

The Democrats, trying to stiffen their party's spines on the contentious issue, say it's unfair to bar illegal immigrants from paying their own way in a government-sponsored exchange. Legal immigrants, they say, regardless of how long they've been in the United States, should be able to get government-subsidized health care if they meet the other eligibility requirements.

Considering that 83% of Americans are for requiring legal status to receive government health aid, and only 12% approve of giving the public option to illegals, you would think that pushing this would be a loser for the Democrats. Well, they'll find out shortly just how wrong they are when the GOP make a 1994-style comeback in 2010.

Germany: Continues Its Push Right, Re-Elects Merkel & Her Christian Democratic Party

While the United States have been moving to the left towards the old European socialist model of government, the major European powers have been moving back to the conservative right. England and France has joined Germany as the European powers that is moving away from the more socialist model that America seems to be running to with the election of Obama.

Many believed that Europe's move to the right was a fluke, but Germany's latest election we find out that it might not be a fluke, after all::

Germans were deciding Sunday whether to return the nation's first woman chancellor to a second term in office following a lackluster election campaign centered largely on economic issues and a rash of last-minute threats by Islamic extremists.

Chancellor Angela Merkel is hoping enough of the nation's 62.2 million eligible voters will support her conservative Christian Democratic Party to allow them to form a center-right coalition with their favored partners, the Free Democrats.

This has thrown the country's left in turmoil as they have seen their membership dwindle:

Despite its predicted status as the third-strongest party, both the Christian and Social Democrats have ruled out a coalition with the Left, which burst onto the political spectrum in 2005 after ex-Communists banded together with defectors from the Social Democrats, disenchanted by their party's swing to the center.

The Social Democrats, in power since 1998, are facing historical lows. Many analysts have argued they could benefit from a period in opposition that would let them regroup.

Will America follow suit? The popularity of the liberal, socialist policies have continued to fall throughout the summer and into the autumn months. Republicans have consistantly led in the major 2009 elections, New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial races, throughout the year. Most of the 2010 projections show gains for Republicans, as well. It doesn't look good for the Democrats.

I continue to hold hope in my heart that we will change back to our conservative roots.

Peaceful Muslim Prayer Meeting in Front of US Capitol Disrupted By Mostly Christian Hecklers//What's Up With Dat?

Yesterday, there was a huge religious rally in Washington DC in front of the Capitol building. It wasn't a Christian rally. It was a Muslim rally:

About 3,000 Muslims gathered Friday for a first-ever prayer service in the shadow of the U.S. Capitol in what turned out to be a peaceful assembly despite the taunts of Christian evangelists on the surrounding sidewalks.

This is what I don't understand. Some Christians complain about losing their religious freedom and rightfully so. Their rights are under attack from secular progressives all the time. Christians will keep fighting to keep those rights, but some of the same people won't give the same consideration for other religions.

As a Christian, I know how Christians' religious rights are being chipped away. We can't pray or even talk about God in school. We can't post anything remotely religious on government property. Christmas, "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and "In God We Trust" are both under constant attack.

We should be able to sympathize with them and let them be as long as they are peacefully assembling. They have the same rights of religion, religious expression, and peaceful assembly as the rest of us do. The Bill of Rights was written for everyone not just Protestant Americans. If we want them to respect our ways, we must, also, respect theirs.

"What we've done today, you couldn't do in any Muslim country," said Imam Abdul Malik, 42, of Brooklyn, N.Y., the rally organizer who made a 40-minute address to the crowd. "If you prayed on the palace lawn there, they'd lock you up."

That is really what makes this country great. We have freedoms that other people can only fantasize about having. This what our Founding Fathers fought for with their lives. They escaped religious persecution in England so that they may praise and worship as they pleased here in America. Anyone from any religion should be able to come to the United States and not feel restricted with regards to their religious beliefs and expression. We, Christians, must remember where we come from, so we don't make the same mistakes good ole King George made.

Palate Cleanser: ACORN Approval Plummets, Majority Believes Investigations Are Results of Illegal Activity

Here's a poll that came out earlier today that assess people's mindsets on ACORN and everything that has transpired over the past week:

ACORN Favorable            15% Unfavorable                      67%
No opinion                          19%  

By 3-1 margin (51% to 17%), voters favor cutting off all federal funds  By 6-1 margin (64% to 10%) voters agree with census bureau decision to cut ties  

Only 20% believe the investigations of ACORN are politically motivated…57% say they’re the result of illegal activity

This should convince even the most stubborn supporters of the criminal enterprise that is the rotten ACORN. It is time to put an end to the their crooked organization.

John Kerry: Health Care Bill's Too Complicated & Confusing To Post Online Before A Vote

Kerry tried to aim an attack on Republican senators, but it landed on the rest of the American public, instead.

Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, said during a Senate Finance Committee hearing Wednesday that the Republican push to start putting pieces of legislation online before they are put to a vote isn't as sincere at is might seem.

Republican senators on the committee were supporting a measure to put health care legislation on the Internet in a way that would be available to the public for three days before holding a vote on it, which upset Mr. Kerry. "

This is fundamentally a delay tactic," the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate said. "I mean, let's be honest about it. The legislative language, everybody knows, is relatively arcane, legalistic, and most people don't read the legislative language."

Apparently, the elitist liberal Democrat doesn't have much faith in the intelligence of the American people. Since the bill is in with "relatively arcane, legalistic" verbage, there is very little chance anyone can understand it. Therefore, most people won't even risk a migraine to try and read it. So why should we even bother reading it.

Don't forget, Kerry, one of Obama's main pledges during the campaign was transparency. In fact, Obama released a memo stating:

Government should be transparent.

Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing.  Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.

That means that you must "disclose (what's in the bill) rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use". After all, it's a "national asset". So, please, "harness new technologies (like the web) to put information about their operations and decisions (like any health care reform bill)online and readily available to the public.

Secondly, why are Democrats so afraid of the 72-hour wait that would give Americans time to decide whether they like it and tell their congressmen their thoughts on the legislation? It almost sounds like they're scared of what they might hear. After what they heard over the August break at the town halls, I guess I can't blame him too much for being scared, but it is against the policy of the Obama White House to do otherwise.

Besides, the public option won't go into effect for years, anyway. So, three extra days won't hurt anybody. In fact, during the campaign Obama promised five days of public viewing before the passage of any bill. So, if they only give us only three, they'll be getting off light.

Pelosi To Blue Dogs: FU! Heath Care Trigger Is Out

After totally dismissing any Republican idea and calling townhall protesters "Un-American", Nancy Pelosi has, now, flipped a double bird to all of the Blue Dog Democrats, as well:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday shot down a healthcare compromise that has been viewed as the best chance for getting a bipartisan bill through the Senate.

Pelosi (D-Calif.) rejected the idea of a “trigger” for a public
option. That means that the government-run healthcare plan would be a fallback option, enacted only if other reforms didn’t make healthcare more accessible.

She didn't just say that she doesn't favor the trigger, but will still respectfully debate those who do want it. No, she said that it's out. Why? Because Momma....er....Pelosi said so. That's why.

“I don't even want to talk about a trigger,” Pelosi said at her weekly press conference. She said the “attitude” of her fellow Democrats is that “a trigger is an excuse for not doing anything.”

By dismissing a trigger, she also risks further alienating Blue Dog Democrats, who are angry at Pelosi's handling of the bill, particularly her push to include a public option supported by the liberal wing of the caucus. Blue Dogs at times have threatened to block the bill.

Not listening to her Blue Dog Caucus could kill her chance of getting re-elected to Speaker come 2010. Unfortunately, she'll probably won't have to worry about losing her San Francisco based district.

Fortunately, a plan with a mandatory public option will never gain massive GOP support, if any, even with the RINO Caucus. In addition, the many of the Blue Dogs, fearing their chances at re-election in their conservative to moderate districts, won't vote for it, either. As a result, a bill including the public option is going to have a very hard time passing in the House, but if it does, it will be dead on arrival in the Senate.

Let's All Open the Hymnal & Sing Obama's Praises With NJ School Kids

Ah!!!! Aren't they cute? Praising Our Dear Leader's name. How precious!

Here are the lyrics. So, we can all sing the hymns along with the children:

Song 1

Mm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said that all must lend a hand
To make this country strong again
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said we must be fair today
Equal work means equal pay
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said that we must take a stand
To make sure everyone gets a chance
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said red, yellow, black or white
All are equal in his sight
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

Yes!
Mmm, mmm, mm
Barack Hussein Obama

Song 2

Hello, Mr. President we honor you today!
For all your great accomplishments, we all doth say "hooray!"

Hooray, Mr. President! You're number one!
The first black American to lead this great nation!

Hooray, Mr. President we honor your great plans
To make this country's economy number one again!

Hooray Mr. President, we're really proud of you!
And we stand for all Americans under the great Red, White, and Blue!

So continue ---- Mr. President we know you'll do the trick
So here's a hearty hip-hooray ----

Hip, hip hooray!
Hip, hip hooray!
Hip, hip hooray!

Wow, I thought they were going to break into a Naughty By Nature song for a minute. This is straight out of North Korea's playbook.

Hot Air's AP said that he wasn't that concerned about it "because they’re too young to understand and/or assimilate the agenda they’re singing about (and way too young to vote, natch)." I disagree with him on this point. While they might not catch the full grasp of what they're singing, it does seep in their minds subconsciously. How many kids that grew up in Sunday schools can recite "Jesus Loves Me" well into their adulthood, even if they haven't gone to church for years. We are the most impressionable when we are young. It is when we build a foundation of who we will become later in life.

Although, I do agree with him that it is totally out of line for the teacher to choose to adapt a "hymn about how much Jesus loves the little children" into one of the above hymns. It seems that they are comparing Obama to Jesus.

This line made me laugh until I fainted. (Figuratively speaking):

"Hello, Mr. President we honor you today!
For all your great accomplishments, we all doth say 'hooray!'"

He's been in office less than 1 year. What are these "great accomplishments". All they've done was drive the deficit up $1T this year. That's not so "great" in my book.

I heard another line that peaked my attention. "Equal work for equal pay" is straight out of the DNC talking points. How can this not be considered politicizing the classroom and indoctrination of our kids? In addition to this "quiz" and this other praise and worship session, the latest video is a prime example of liberal bias that many of our teachers hold. This bias is trickling down to the little sponges that they teach every day. Teachers must be very careful to keep that from happening, but may are overtly influencing their young minds with their liberal thinking.

Obama's Energy Secretary Wants to Be Your Daddy, Calls Americans "Unruly Teenagers"

Dr. Steven Chu, Secretary of Energy has, apparently, went from not knowing that his position is a part of the Obama administration or that oil was a part of his Energy Secretary domain to condescendingly describing Americans as teenagers:

“The American public…just like your teenage kids, aren’t acting in a way that they should act,” Dr. Chu said. “The American public has to really understand in their core how important this issue is.”

So, not only are we "unruly" teenagers not following our parents' (government) rules, but we aren't smart enough to understand the climate change debate and decide for ourselves whether it's bogus or not.

Here's Chu's spokesman extra-lame explanation for Chu's comment. Apparently, he is trying to do a Jedi mind trick on everyone. "You did not hear what you just heard.":

An update: Energy Department spokesman Dan Leistikow added: “Secretary Chu was not comparing the public to teenagers. He was saying that we need to educate teenagers about ways to save energy. He also recognized the need to educate the broader public about how important clean energy industries are to our competitive position in the global economy. He believes public officials do have an obligation to make their case to the American people on major legislation, and that’s what he’s doing.”

I didn't call Mr. Leistikow's explanation extra-lame or compare him to a Jedi. You believe me. Right?

As Ed Morrissey points out:

With that humbling experience in mind (the Energy Department and White House's own inadequacies at energy conservation), one might think that Chu and the Obama administration would approach energy policy with a little more humility.  Nope!  Instead, Chu talks about American citizens as if they cannot be trusted to make their own choices and the need to parent us rather than govern us with our consent.  Most of us have already had parents and don’t see the need to have our elected officials take their place.

This is the main problem with progressive liberals and the Nanny State that they want to implement here in the US. They want to be our parents. Most Americans are going to be so eager to have "Big Brother" act more and more like our parents.

Is Sen. Liebermann Running As a Republican in 2012?

Liebermann is still not sure if he will run as in 2012. Will it be as a Democrat? Independent? Republican?!?.

Lieberman, who had $1.4 million through June 30, said he was unsure whether he would run in 2012 as a Democrat or an independent.

“Or a Republican,” Lieberman jokingly added. “I have all sorts of options.”

He was, more than likely, joking, but it would be interesting.

Obama Continues to Drive Seniors Away As He Pushes Obamacare

Senior citizens used to lean towards the Democrats, but the Age of Obama has seen a shift of their allegience back to the Republicans:

While senior voters were nearly evenly split between Republicans and Democrats during the 2008 presidential election, there has been a "striking" shift toward the GOP in recent months, said Tom Jensen, communications director at Public Policy Polling in Raleigh, N.C.

A poll two weeks ago found Republicans winning on a generic ballot among seniors, after recent polling had found that 46 percent of seniors identify themselves as Republicans, 33 percent as Democrats and 22 percent as independents. "Almost every poll we do when we break it down by age, President Obama is least popular with seniors. That is definitely the age group that he is having the most problem with," Mr. Jensen said. "If not for those senior citizens, Democrats would have the lead on a generic ballot. But overall, American voters say 45 to 41 that they will vote Republican next year and it's the seniors who are making that happen.

What is fueling this shift? Obamacare has been turning off seniors for the past few months ever since Obama started pushing his health care plan, and the left-leaning AARP has been paying the price for the seniors' move to the GOP.

With 2010 inching closer, this will become a problem for Democrats, especially those in more moderate districts:

"What makes it even a bigger implication for the midterm elections is because seniors cast a much larger percentage of votes in midterms than they do in presidential years," he said. "Not only are they leaning more Republican these days but they are also likely to be a much bigger slice of the electorate in 2010 than they were in 2009."

Indeed, while seniors historically vote in full force in midterm elections, President Obama's administration will find itself struggling to deal with this class of voters in 2010, said Andrea Campbell, a professor of political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who has written about senior political engagement.

Oh My: FNC's Chris Wallace: This White House Is Full of Immature Crybabys

Wow! Considering Obama's obsession with dissing Fox News, this isn't surprising, nor is it a shock to hear that it is getting on Fox's corresponents nerves. He is paranoid, believing that Fox News is out to destroy his presidency.

Obama has totally snubbed Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallance's show. He will do 5 shows on 5 different stations. Guess what? Fox didn't make the cut, but Univision did.

Let's not for get the snub of FNC's Major Garrett from a few months ago that was "payback" for not showing Obama primetime press conference, a few months ago:

Genius: SF Mayor Newsom Thinks It's OK To Be Sued In Order to Raise Soda Fees While Running For Governor

Mayor Gavin Newsom of San Francisco has a brilliant idea: add new "fees" on sodas in the middle of a falling economy where California, as a whole, has seen unemployment reach 12.2%, East Bay and San Francisco/San Mateo regions has risen to11.9% and 9.5%, respectively.

Newsom would need voter approval to tax individual cans of soda and sugary juice, but only needs approval from the Board of Supervisors to levy a fee on retailers. His legislation would charge grocery stores like Safeway and big-box stores, but would not affect restaurants that serve sodas.

Newsom wouldn't say how much the stores would have to pay or how the city would spend the fees. When he first floated the idea in 2007, he said the money would go to his Shape Up San Francisco exercise program and for media campaigns to discourage soda drinking.

The mayor said the city attorney's office has warned him the city would probably be sued over the matter, but he said it is worth the risk to try to curb a leading cause of obesity and diabetes.

"We know we'll be sued," he said. "But I really believe this is important to do."

Let me get this straight, he's willing to waste millions of taxpayer dollars to fight a lawsuit in order to raise taxes that he will use to pay for healthcare. Why? Depending on how the court case goes, he could spend more on lawyers and court fees than he'll get in new tax revenue. Liberal math strikes again.

Another thing is that in California it is the law that voters must ok all taxes raises. So, Gavin must instead institute new "fees" to find a way around that law. In reality, "fees" are really taxes by another name. So, he is theoretically violating California law by not allowing voters to vote on whether they want their taxes raised or not.

Why would he do such a thing? He knows that no one in their right mind would vote for higher taxes, not even in ultra-liberal San Francisco. History has shown that to be true.

Liberal democracy in action?

He says that he's doing this for San Franciscans to "Shape Up San Francisco". Apparently, he thinks there are too many fat people that don't know what's good for them. So, he's going to decide what's good for them.

"It makes sense for the government to help people to make the right choices, and it makes sense to use dollars from charges on sweetened beverages on health programs," he said.

It doesn't make sense to me or to most Americans. They are very wary of nanny states and of federal interventions into their everyday lives. Where will it all stop? New taxes on doughnuts? Fried chicken? Pizza?

He is doing in the middle of his campaign to become the next governor of California. Is this really the best thing to do to win in 2010? Is raising taxes on people who have repeatedly voted down tax raises in a bad economy while trying to institute a "nanny state", interventionist policy a successful formula for a win next year? Probably not. Not even in the liberal state of California.

Obama Takes Credit For "Improving" Economy While Unemployment Rises to Just Below 10%

Obama is trying to take credit for an "improving" economy, according to the Washington Post, that is still struggling and far from out of the woods of recession:

President Obama on Saturday continued his administration's careful efforts to take credit for the slowly improving economy, using his radio address to tout the economic turnaround since world leaders met in London in April.

He goes on:

"Because of the steps taken by our nation and all nations, we can now say that we have stopped our economic freefall," the president said in the address, which is broadcast on the radio and the internet.

Now, unemployment keeps on creeping toward the dreaded 10% mark nationally (9.7% as of August), and states like California and Oregon reach the obscene number of 12.2% unemployed last month. Forty-two states have, also, lost jobs, since the end of July.

If this is "improving" according to the Washington Post, I would hate to see what the economy would look like for them to admit that it's declining under Obama..

Polish, Czech Newspapers: Obama Betrayed Us, Russia Declared Winner: Smart Diplomacy At Its Best

Barack Obama discontinued the plans for a Missile defense shield in eastern Europe. Now, there is a negative backlash against Obama and his decision in the region, especially in Poland and the Czech Republic:

"Betrayal! The U.S. sold us to Russia and stabbed us in the back," the Polish tabloid Fakt declared on its front page.

Polish President Lech Kaczynski said he was concerned that Obama's new strategy leaves Poland in a dangerous "gray zone" between Western Europe and the old Soviet sphere.

Recent events in the region have rattled nerves throughout central and eastern Europe, a region controlled by Moscow during the Cold War, including the war last summer between Russia and Georgia and ongoing efforts by Russia to regain influence in Ukraine. A Russian cutoff of gas to Ukraine last winter left many Europeans without heat.

Poland was the only country that Obama received such negative press:

An editorial in Hospodarske Novine, a respected pro-business Czech newspaper, said: "an ally we rely on has betrayed us, and exchanged us for its own, better relations with Russia, of which we are rightly afraid."

The move has raised fears in the two nations they are being marginalized by Washington even as a resurgent Russia leaves them longing for added American protection.

I see a theme running through these papers. Obama is seen as a traitor by people in the countries of Eastern Europe. I thought Obama was supposed to be the catalyst for change for the better. Wasn't he supposed to heal all wounds of Bush's "cowboy diplomacy"? Wasn't the world supposed to love us again?

"No Radar. Russia won," the largest Czech daily, Mlada Fronta Dnes, declared in a front-page headline.

It seems our allies see Obama as weak. If they think we're weak, imagine what our enemies think of us as a country because he's our leader.

Gibbs: Obama Not Really That Popular With Trial Lawyers (Just Don't Look Too Close at the Money Trail)

While being questioned about why the Democrats have not been challenging the lawyers, Gibbs not only dismissed the notion that Democrats are favoring their legal brethren but he denies that the trial lawyers has had a big place in their heart for the Jurist-in-Chief:

“Let me step in for one second,” Gibbs said.  “I think you can recall from the presidential campaign, I don't recall us being the preferred candidate of the trial lawyers that you mentioned.”

“Yes you were,” I said. “You got more money than any other candidate when it came to trial lawyers.”

Gibbs then qualified his remarks to only mean the primary.

However, he forgot about all of the love letters that Obama received from his various attorney-suitors that include a whole bunch of money:

In the “presidential campaign” to which Gibbs referred, President Obama received $43,071,129 from lawyers and law firms.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., received $9,930,296  from lawyers and law firms.

Granted, that wasn't a shocker, but here is the real proof about where the ambulance chasers' loyalties truly lie.:

Okay, but he quickly clarified that he’d meant the Democratic primary, when fellow trial lawyer and former Sen. John Edwards, D-NC, was in the race and was clearly the favorite of many top trial lawyers.

Edwards collected $7,588,701 from lawyers and law firms.

By January 30, the day Edwards dropped out of the race, “the Obama presidential campaign had raised $11,650,779 from lawyers and law firms,” Webber emails me.

Then-Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, dropped out of the race on June 7, 2008. She raised $15,497,787 from lawyers and law firms for her campaign.

By June 7, the Obama campaign had raised $19,133,487 from lawyers and law firms.

Gibbs was 0-for-3.

Here's a added bonus clip of Charles Krauthammer explaining that lawyer do indeed have the Democrats wrapped around their fingers.

Georgia Democrat Says Not Punishing Wilson For Outburst Will Result In People Donning "White Hoods"

Here is yet another Democrat jumping to racism to describe anyone who would dare to challenge the Great One's domestic agenda:

Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst last week is drawing new recriminations from his colleagues, with a member of the Congressional Black Caucus suggesting that a failure to rebuke the South Carolina Republican is tantamount to supporting the most blatant form of organized racism in American history.

In an obvious reference to the Ku Klux Klan, Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., said Tuesday that people will be putting on "white hoods and white uniforms again and riding through the countryside" if emerging racist attitudes, which he says were subtly supported by Wilson, are not rebuked. He said Wilson must be disciplined as an example.

This is one of the most ridiculous things I ever heard. As Mary Katherine Ham pointed out, TEA party protestors and blacks are not mortal enemies. Surprisingly, they can co-exist, converse, and get along side by side even if they may not see eye to eye on everything. No matter much the liberal media and many Democrats wish it were so, every white man that dares to question Obama's policies isn't a racist. One person can disagree with another person of another ethnicity withou being a racist.

Obama Kept Mum on Heathcare During Main School Speech, Before Speech Not So Much

Obama was getting chastised for using students for political gain or "liberal brainwashing". I have to give him credit. He's not that stupid to do it in front of a camera with millions watching, it would of been political suicide, if he had. However, while the Anointed One refrained from politicizing the main speech to school children, he couldn't resist from doing it altogether:

Although the president avoided controversial topics in his speech, he did promote health care reform in a face-to-face discussion at Wakefield High School. Asked by a student how he stays motivated to do his job, Obama replied that his staff gives him 10 letters every day from “ordinary folks.”

“Some of the stories are really depressing,” Obama told the 40 freshman, who were chosen to meet with the president during freshman orientation, according to school officials.

“You hear about people who are sick but don't have health care, and suddenly they get a bill for $100,000, and there's no way they can pay for it, and they're about to lose their house. And you’re just reminded that the country is full of really good people who sometimes are going through a hard time,” Obama said.  “They just need a break.  They need a little bit of help.  Maybe the way things are set up right now isn't always fair for people, and that motivates you, because you say, well, I can't make everything perfect, I can't prevent somebody from getting sick, but maybe I can make sure that they've got insurance so that when they do get sick, they're going to get some help.”

He answered a question that had nothing to do with healthcare at all by peddling his ideas to a bunch of kids. He had to have broken his back to stretch for that answer that would open the door for healthcare talk.

I'm not saying that he said anything in the main speech that was bad. In fact, it was quite good and inspiring. However, he should have kept quiet about policy to minors who can't even vote anyway.

Benedict Arlen Calls For Wilson Censure or Reprimand; Rahmbo's Tells the Fib to End All Fibs

Sen. Specter has once again mouthed off without thinking:

From: @SenArlenSpecter
Sent: Sep 10, 2009 9:36a

There ought to be a reprimand or censure of Rep. Joe Wilson to discourage that kind of conduct in the future.

Apparently, he has forgotten how George W. Bush was often treated over the last 8 years. Were there any calls for censures or reprimands for the Democrats that heckled Bush 43? No.

By the way, he another laughable quote from Rahmbo:

"No president has ever been treated like that. Ever"

Um, has he been hibernating the last 8 years?