The “Slaugherhouse” Rules

Drafting and crafting the “Ramming procedure”!


The latest on the “Health Care” bill has revealed that for the talk of the Democrats plans to ram this bill through to the President’s desk by using the “reconciliation” (or as the Democrats have renamed it the “simple majority”) process it was learned that the “Chairman of the House Rules Committee” has a more sinister plan in mind.

Louise Slaughter (aptly named) is busy crafting new rules that will allow the bill to circumvent the reconciliation process altogether. The Democrats are calling this latest power grab “the Slaughter Solution”.

It goes like this – “"House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday.

"Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version.

"Slaughter has not taken the plan to Speaker Pelosi as Democrats await CBO scores on the corrections bill. 'Once the CBO gives us the score, we'll spring right on it,' she said."

Each bill that comes before the House for a vote on final passage must be given a rule that determines things like whether the minority would be able to offer amendments to it from the floor.

In the Slaughter Solution, the rule would declare that the House "deems" the Senate version of Obamacare to have been passed by the House. House members would still have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but House members would be able to say they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself.”

On the same day that this revelation came to public light the President was busy traveling the country in campaign mode to “educate the masses on why the healthcare bill is more important than jobs creation”. It is interesting that as the President was on approach to his latest speaking venue his motorcade had to wind its way through throngs of who took time out of their day to educate the President, yet again, that we don’t want his stinking bill. To be fair, there were also pro-healthcare supporters in the crowd. Yet in Obama socialist fashion he told the crowd in Missouri that “the time for talk is over” – he has decided.

Why not, his ally in the House has been busy finding the way to circumvent the “talking/debating” process and it is time for a little “force feeding”.

If you think that I am being overtly dramatic and taking a little literary license here with the facts by drawing this conclusion, well maybe I am but consider the “author” of the rule change (Slaughter).

There are a number of pot holes in this road to passage and one of the biggest in the House was those members who opposed the Senate version because it contained the “government funded abortion provision”. If you remember when the House was going through its gyration in getting this narrowly passed bill completed Pelosi and company had to allow the Stupak-Pitts amendment into the bill which stripped the abortion language from the bill.

The Stupak–Pitts Amendment, an amendment to the Affordable Health Care for America Act, was introduced by Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan. It prohibits use of Federal funds "to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion" except in cases of rape, incest or danger to the life of the mother,[5] and was included in the bill as passed by the House of Representatives on November 7, 2009. – wikipedia

As a result, Slaughter went before her collegues on the floor to lament the necessity of the government funding for abortion to prevent “back alley” procedures, a favorite visual argument of the pro-choice groups (see video below).

Never mind that there is already established legislation on the books, since 1976 that bars federal tax dollars that fund abortion.



This feminazi isn’t just an abortion fanatic she is also an anti first amendment zealot. I use this term not because she is the author of this new House rule that circumvents the democratic process of debate over healthcare by imposing a rule that kills that notion. I say this because “In early 2005, she authored the Fairness and Accountability in Broadcasting Act, or FAB Act, which would reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, which has been criticized as an attempt to silence religious and conservative broadcasters”


Representative Slaughter has single-handedly devised methods in which to squelch opposition to her radical views. In the fairness doctrine legislation she crafted a way to silence religious opposition (which is one of the largest anti-abortion lobby groups) as well as conservative talk radio which Democrats have not been able to compete with, thus the failure of Air America. If it wasn’t for the federal dole that provides funding for “Public Broadcasting”, PBS would have gone the same route.

So, the President say’s the “talk is over” and Slaughter is ensuring that it is! Can you say sinking poll numbers, angry Americans and a House cleaning in 2010!  The Democrats are seriously misguided if they think that this rule change will provide incumbents with political cover by being able to say to angry constituents that "hey, I didn't vote for the Healthcare bill I voted for a rule change"!  The Democrats are still of the belief that we (the American public) are too stupid to connect these dots.

Well, the Democrats do not seem to care because their behavior screams “damn the torpedo’s, full steam ahead!”

It must be rough for “poll watching Democrats”!

The “One” just doesn’t have what he thought it takes!


The “One” who swept into office on a tidal wave of “Rock Star-like” fashion leaving a wake of fainting females in his path is now considered a “One hit wonder”!

If you recall, the “O” gave an inauguration speech that was described as great as “Martin Luther King’s I have a Dream” speech. He was in office a mere two weeks when he was nominated and then subsequently won the Nobel Peace Prize. The term “fast track” to fame is an understatement to those who try to explain his meteoric rise in greatness.

The honeymoon was short by anyone’s standard. It must be extremely painful for those in the Democrat ranks who follow polls like adherents follow the Pope. At a time when the “One” hit the campaign trail to try to convince the American public, yeah those same fainting and swooning crowds that his “health care bill” is what ails us his poll numbers have taken a big hit on many fronts.

You know the Democrats are “illing” when a “pro-military” war movie wins Oscars for best Film & Director awards in Hollywood.

The latest poll (Democracy Corps) that bills itself, cough,,,, cough…., as an “Independent non-profit organization dedicated to making the government more responsive to the American people” has release the following (please keep in mind that Democracy Corp was founded by James Carville):

“51 percent to 41 percent -- Americans think the standing of the U.S. dropped during the first 13 months of Mr. Obama's presidency.”

On the national security front, a massive gap has emerged, with 50 percent of likely voters saying Republicans would likely do a better job than Democrats, a 14-point swing since May. Thirty-three percent favored Democrats.

"The erosion since May is especially strong among women, and among independents, who now favor Republicans on this question by a 56 to 20 percent margin," the pollsters said in their findings.

A May 2009 survey by the pollsters found the public saw the Democratic and Republican parties as equally able to handle national security (41 percent trusted Democrats more, and 43 percent trusted Republicans more.) On conducting the war on terrorism, the two parties were tied at 41 percent.

The Democrats' gap on national security has widened on several other fronts:

• "Keeping America safe": Democrats now trail by 13 points (34 percent to 47 percent.) The gap was just 5 points in July 2008.

• "Ensuring a strong military": Democrats trail by 31 points (27 percent to 58 percent.)

• "Making America safer from nuclear threats": Democrats trail by 11 points (34 percent to 45 percent,) "despite the president's strong actions and speeches on steps to reduce nuclear dangers," the pollsters said.

The poll, conducted late last month, found "the administration's response to the Christmas Day terrorist attempt has contributed to the erosion."

"While public polling showed that initial approval of Obama's response was above 50 percent, two months of Republican criticism have taken a toll. Now a narrow 46 to 42 percent plurality of likely voters say they feel less confident about the administration's handling of national security because of how it responded to the incident," the pollsters said.

In addition, the detention of terrorist suspects and the Obama proposal to prosecute suspects in civil trials in New York City, which was later abandoned, also have taken a toll on the president's approval ratings.

"Whereas a majority of the public approves of the job President Obama is doing in most aspects of national security, a 51 to 44 percent majority of likely voters disapproves of his efforts on the prosecution and interrogation of terrorism suspects," the pollsters found.

Of course it doesn’t help the Democrats cause any when in the throws of losing their identity and popularity they are seeking to ban fishing in this country. I guess the “O”, or his fellow travelers never had their father (or fathers) take them fishing as lad’s!

The Dahmer Democrats are “eating their own”!

The wheels are coming off the Democrat bus!

Democrats go from “Bush’s fault to “Rahm’s fault”!

Michael Moore v. Obama and the Democrat Congress

"Each morning you and I will do 100 jumping jacks and you will repeat after me: THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ELECTED ME, NOT THE REPUBLICANS, TO RUN THE COUNTRY! I AM IN CHARGE! I WILL ORDER ALL OBSTRUCTIONISTS OUTTA MY WAY! IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DON'T LIKE WHAT I'M DOING THEY CAN THROW MY ASS OUT IN 2012. IN THE MEANTIME, I CALL THE SHOTS ON THEIR BEHALF! NOW, CONGRESS, DROP AND GIVE ME 50!!"

Rep. Eric Massa (D) v. Democrats

“The freshman upstate Democrat departed Congress on Monday after leveling lurid charges that fellow Democrats conspired to do him in. He even accused the President's chief of staff of threatening him - in the nude.”

ACLU v. White House

The ACLU placed a full page add in the NY Times calling on President Obama to stay the course in trying the “alleged 9/11” conspirators in civilian courts and not to reverse the Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision.

“Letter from Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director, American Civil Liberties Union, to President Barack Obama urging him to uphold the decision of Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice to charge and try in federal criminal court those Guantanamo detainees alleged to have had a role in the attacks of September 11, 2001.”

Democrat Party v. Rahm Emanuel

“Some of those efforts to weaken Emanuel are coming from inside the building at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, one Democrat strategist said.

"There are people in the White House who are trying to get rid of Rahm, and they are leaking everything they can," said the strategist, who is close to Emanuel. "Some of its personal, some of its professional[ly] judgmental, but there is no doubt there's an effort."

Those critics think Emanuel is "too close to the Blue Dogs in the House and too ready to compromise."

“Democrats in Congress are holding White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel accountable for his part in the collapse of healthcare reform.

The emerging consensus among critics in both chambers is that Emanuel’s lack of Senate experience slowed President Barack Obama’s top domestic priority.

The share of the blame comes as cracks are beginning to show in Emanuel’s once-impregnable political armor. Last week he had to apologize after a report surfaced that he called liberal groups “retarded” in a private meeting.”

Rahm Emmanuel v. David Axelrod

“In the days of the old Pravda, one could determine who was winning secret Politburo power struggles by just looking at the official Soviet newspaper. Those winning simply got better press.

Perhaps it may be no different here in the United States.

This week two of the heaviest guns in American media, The Washington Post and The New York Times, unloaded their missiles at Obama adviser David Axelrod while heralding White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel as a centrist and pragmatist.”

Martha Coakley v. White House and DNC for Massachusetts loss


“They took the summer off.”

That didn’t take long; before all of the ballots have been counted certain democrats are blaming the White House and not Martha Coakley for the devastating loss in Massachusetts today.  Mary Ann Marsh blames Obama and not Coakley for the loss.”




Howard Dean v. Senate Democrats


“Passing the healthcare proposals before Congress will "hang out to dry" every Democratic incumbent running for reelection this fall, Howard Dean said Thursday.

"The plan, as it comes from the Senate, hangs out every Democrat who's running for office to dry -- including the president, in 2012, because it makes him defend a plan that isn't in effect essentially yet."

Dan Rather v. Obama’s watermelon selling abilities

“Dan Rather says President Obama is articulate but "couldn't sell watermelons if you gave him the state troopers to flag down the traffic." - (video)

Majority of Americans v. Obama

As the majority takes to the streets for tea party protests and town halls the Democrats are now giving us something to be proud of, the complete annihilation of the far left nut jobs who have hijacked the party of centrist Democrats. The resulting cannibalistic behavior that is increasing by the day is a direct result of the frustration that the Statist’s are failing in their effort to “fundamentally transform America”!

A funny thing happened on the way to a resignation.

Eric Massa angry town hall meeting

Eric Massa informs he intends to un-resign.


Eric Massa has come out in front of the cameras yesterday to tell the world that he resigned because he was being forced out by his own party due to his intentions to vote “no” on the health care bill.

Hmmmmmmm

The press conference was interesting on many levels and I decided to investigate his claims a little further (you know, I just don’t trust them Democrats at their word).

The decision of mine is based on a couple of reasons:

1.  Eric Massa had prior announcements that his decision to retire/resign was due to health reasons (he stated he has end stage cancer). If this is true and you couple it with his statement that he now intends to vote NO it could be because the bill would be a death sentence for those in similar circumstances.

2.  I wanted to piece together the framework of how the Democrats “eat one of their own before they threw him under the bus”.

The first thing I did was research his vote on HR3200 (House version of Health Care bill that passed on 11/9/09 by a margin of 5 votes 220-215). Eric Massa voted YES.

So, now we are to believe that he will vote NO. There is some plausibility to this as the House is being asked to pass the Senate version, which differed from the House version so I drilled down some of the differences between the two. Here are the differences:

Abortion: The Senate bill has the provision that funds abortion from tax payer money, the House version did not. Eric Massa is for abortion.

Public Option: Per ABC news – “The House health care bill, however, includes a public option in what becomes one of the biggest health care policy differences between the two bills. Under the House's public option plan, the government would negotiate rates with insurance companies instead of setting fees, as it does in Medicare.

At least 50 Democrats in the House are on the record as saying they will not vote for a bill without this option while Nelson and Lieberman have refused to support a bill that does include a public option.”

Eric Massa is for the Public Option.

Cadillac Tax Plan: The Senate version has a “curb to cost” by imposing a 40 percent tax increase on “Cadillac Health Care Insurance Plans”. The House did not have this provision.

Note: This tax was universally opposed by the Unions as most of the plans for their workers would fall into the “Cadillac” category.

As a result of the Union opposition to the Senate version the White House struck a deal with Unions to “carve out” their plans from the bill and delay their taxation until 2018. So, the question is, is Massa for the taxation of the Union plans or against it. If he is against it, the President has covered this opposition by the “carve out”. If Massa is for the 40% increase and against the “carve out” the Unions received then perhaps Massa has some credibility for his reversed decision on his resignation.

Analysis: Since the House version did not have the “Cadillac” provision and the White House “carved” it out of the Senate version then Massa has no reason to vote NO on this issue.

In the end, all information/fact on the record has Massa wanting to impose government run health care for all Americans and his YES vote bears this out. Massa wants us to believe that he resigned due to pressure from Democrat leadership insiders who were about to “throw him under the bus” because he always intended to vote NO.

Massa is a disgrace to his family, his party and as a public official who has always shown to be a “progressive Socialist” intent on imposing oppressive government over the people. The town hall meeting shown above is enough proof that his own constituents loath his stance on this particular issue, which by the way is the complete opposite of the majority of all Americans.

Can you trust someone who has repeatedly lied?

Obama asks House Democrats to trust him, now!


In a desperate move the President has asked Democrats (behind closed doors) to trust him and pass the Healthcare bill.

It brings out a good question – can anyone trust a habitual liar when they ask for your faith in them?

The Obama Administration has not told the American public the truth what-so-ever in every pledge, promise and statement he has made since his campaign.

He told his party that he would end the War in Iraq, he hasn’t.
He told his party that he would close Guantanamo within one year, he hasn’t.
He told his party that he would not tax anyone who makes less than $250,000 per year, he has and intends to do some more.
He has told his party that he would not employ a single lobbyist in his Administration; his administration is full of them.

In the end, every poll, town hall, tea party protest and letter campaign is overwhelmingly against this legislation. In spite of the Democrat march towards a suicidal cliff jumping ceremony, en mass their arrogance is undiminished.

According to the AP, Senior Democrats are telling their nervous members -- “its better, these party leaders say, to pass the health care bill and spend the last few months of the 2010 campaign telling voters about the ways it will help them.

"You've got to go out and sell that product and stop worrying about the process," said Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. "And the president is a very powerful salesman for that product."

Representative Miller has been drinking a little too much of the cool-aid because if, as he says, Obama is a powerful salesman for the product, then why is the product still on the shelf?

As the lies continue to pile up like stacked cordwood in the backyard he has the audacity to ask his party to slit their collective political throat’s on the alter of propaganda that would have made Goebbels proud. The question is do they trust his word enough to ensure their political survival or will they take another “leap of faith” for their Dear Leader?

I would have to weigh my opinion here and say yes they will. The Democrats have never shown any “self preservation” skills in any of the policies that deal with our borders, national security or safety so why should they now?

Obama to bring up path to citizenship now!

Democrats are desperate for votes!


The White House had planned to wait until 2011 to spring the amnesty of illegals to bolster his own candidacy for 2012 by making himself look good to Hispanics. The problem with that strategy is the House and Senate midterms need it now. In a move that many on the right were waiting for, Obama has held a closed door session with Senators Graham and Schumer to introduce legislation before the 2010 election to clear a path for the 10 million illegal aliens who are about to hold a rally in Washington DC on March 21.

The Democrats need a wedge issue to make Republicans look bad to blunt the anticipated losses that are on the immediate horizon.

According to the LA Times – “Nick Shapiro, a White House spokesman, said the president's support for an immigration bill, which would also include improved border security, was "unwavering."

Participants in the White House gathering also pointed to an immigration rally set for March 21 in Washington as a way to spotlight the issue and build needed momentum.

Though proponents of an immigration overhaul were pleased that the White House wasn't abandoning the effort, they also wanted Obama to take on a more assertive role, rather than leave it to Congress to work out a compromise.

Immigration is a delicate issue for the White House. After promising to revamp in his first year of office what many see as a fractured system, Obama risks angering a growing, politically potent Latino constituency if he defers the goal until 2011.”

The White house says that the “support for an immigration bill will also include improved border security that is unwavering” yet his proposed 2011 budget reduces funding for the “border security” apparatus.

According to the Examiner – “This is only the beginning," said political strategist Mike Baker. "There will be more cuts made to Immigration and Customs Enforcement since President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others have been critical of agents going after illegal workers. This budget is going to be all smoke and mirrors."

The other win-win for Obama and the sudden push for amnesty is his promise that his healthcare bill would not include coverage for illegal immigrants. This way he can keep a promise and is desperate to keep at least one. The topic, at a time when the White House should be working on jobs, is a powder keg of division. When you mix the two subjects (amnesty & Healthcare bill) you end up with situations like the one that happened at a Texas town hall meeting in August 2009 when a La Raza member who was protesting the anti-Obama healthcare crowd while wrapped in a Mexican flag became violent and assaulted another protestor. It was captured on You Tube video, but has been removed from the site. You can read about here.

You know when the Democrats are agitated on the upcoming elections when their own, Howard Dean is complaining that the Health Care bill is “hanging out Democrat incumbents to dry”!

The “Shining City on the Hill”

American democracy, the shining example of freedom!


Tea Party expands across the “Pond”!

Liberal UK Media attacks the idea with fervor!

It is a unique time in America. There have been times in our history where the uniqueness of our freedom that many here have taken for granted over time, faced down tyranny. These tests have normally resulted in American intervention overseas at pivotal moments when no others had the resources, courage or fortitude to confront the evils.

We have had moments where we had to fight these evils internally, at great sacrifice and as such were able to stand on the shoulders of those who were strong and determined.

The world watched as a historical moment in the American experiment elected its first black President and like us began to realize that internal forces are ripping apart the fabric that once made us great.

The world has watched and they have asked aloud – “how could America allow a Marxist tear down all that has been achieved”?

In the first year of the Obama administration we have witnessed the rise of tyranny in the policy decisions and political appointments and the general anti-business climate that has torn away massive chunks of our free market system. The world has watched while some applauded our decline and others have reacted in disbelief and horror of the swift decline.

There is one thing that the world has also watched, in fascination and wonder during this tumultuous period and that is – the power of the people over government. While Obama and his Marxist fellow travelers are busy doing their dirty work of destroying America, the people have risen (in the form of tea party’s and town hall protests) and have planted themselves between the tyrannical aspirations of Obama and the ruling elites that represent us.

It was only a matter of time before the idea of freedom from a tyrannical government hopped a tramp steamer and arrived in Europe to spread the ideals and hopes of a grassroots movement.

In order to deflect the effects that the will of the people, the true spirit of the tea party movement has managed to convey, the article has found every single negative connotation used in the American media as well as the left leaning politicians to try to suppress the growing support.

The article focuses on a single political race in Texas that has largely been between the incumbent Rick Perry and another Republican Kay Bailey-Hutchinson. The most interesting aspect that did not get mentioned in this race is that it is taking place between Republicans. This aspect is worth noting as it will undoubtedly show what level of “conservatism” this party is striving for. We know, for instance, the races in Virginia New Jersey and Massachusetts were a direct result of the tea party movements disfavor with the Democrats and their policies of higher taxes and oppressive rule. Those races had a distinct difference than the race in Texas because the candidates as well as the incumbent are republicans.

As Republicans go, both Perry and Hutchinson are considered conservatives. Rick Perry recently made headlines when he talked about Texas succession from the Federal Government. The problem that plagues Governor Perry is his continued support of “eminent Domain” regarding the Texas Corridor Project to build a highway that will stretch from Mexico to Canada. While “slick Rick” says he is for protecting landowner rights against the forced takeover of private property from Government he masks his words in such a way to make it look good while the truth is it only codifies the Governments ability to grab private land if it is deemed for “public use”. His website shows the slick nature of his words:

“Next, we need to pass further legislation that protects landowners from other abuses of eminent domain.

Government shouldn’t use eminent domain to take someone’s land without trying to buy it from them first. It is wrong for any government to make a lowball offer, then respond to an owner’s righteous refusal by taking the land.

The government owes land owners a genuine good-faith negotiation, not a land grab. I am pleased that Representative Orr and Senator Duncan are working on legislation that will better protect our landowners.

We should also implement Representative Jackson’s constitutional amendment that the voters have already adopted. It allows a landowner to buy back land when it isn’t used for the project it was taken for…and buy it for the price the government paid for it, not its value on today’s market.”

Rick Perry tries to hide his support for the willful grabbing of private land in fluffy sounding language.

“Government shouldn’t use eminent domain to take someone’s land without trying to buy it from them first. It is wrong for any government to make a lowball offer, then respond to an owner’s righteous refusal by taking the land.”

So, according to this philosophy it is OK for the government as long as they try to buy it first.

Further, he states:

“That increase in value belongs to the landowner, not the government, and the landowner shouldn’t have to pay extra to get it back.

Without action on these additional protections, private property rights will be eroded, and undermine the very character of our state.”

Bottom line: the government has no right to take anyone’s land for non-public uses and no amount of arguing will change that fact.”

In his “bottom line” analogy he uses the wording “for non-public uses” so in essence his support for the land grab for his Texas Corridor Project is a “public use” nature and therefore eligible for eminent domain. The big question here and one that echo’s in the “Supreme Court Kelo decision” is who decides what “public use” is? In Kelo, the “public use” argument was the city’s tax coffers would be greater than a private home therefore it was in the “publics best interest”, through taxation that forced Kelo from her home and gave the property to a private company for development. In case anyone is interested, the company that ultimately received Kelo’s land never developed it into the “tax” generated purpose for which the land was proposed and to this day the property is vacant and blighted (yet Kelo’s home was bulldozed into oblivion first).

Per the Associated Press -- ” Kelo and six other homeowners fought for years, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. In 2005, justices voted 5-4 against them, giving cities across the country the right to use eminent domain to take property for private development.

The decision was sharply criticized and created grassroots backlash. Forty states quickly passed new, protective rules and regulations, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Some protesters even tried to turn the tables on now-retired Justice David Souter, trying unsuccessfully in 2006 to take his New Hampshire home by eminent domain to build an inn.

In New London the city's prized economic development plan has fallen apart as the economy crumbled.

Notice the terminology “grassroots backlash”! The Kelo decision was one piece of the “tea party” birth dynamic.

The new kid on the block Debra Medina is running her campaign much like Brown did in Massachusetts on the tea party platform of ideas as well as the tireless ground she is covering meeting Texans face to face, door to door and as a result -- She is surging in the polls.

The world has witnessed the decline of power of a Democrat majority in the US Senate and House in spite of the superior numbers they hold over Republicans. The reason for this toothless Democrat majority is not lost on those in other countries around the globe and that is the “power of the will of the people”. They are watching in fascination and watching closely at how it is being done here and it is only a matter of time before people throw the “yoke” of socialism off their necks to achieve the individual freedom that we have laid out as the example. Though America has been weakened financially, militarily and politically she has maintained her strength of freedom to keep tyranny at bay. The world is watching as Obama fails in his quest because the people are smart and they are now engaged. The world wants what we have and now the UK is following our example by organizing their first tea party. Freedom is contagious and once started it will be hard to stop because it is the individual that has the power over the elites.