... they will accomplish with cap-and-trade! I am referring to Obama's idea that healthcare reform is going to spur all sorts of new business and create all sorts of new jobs. Since we already know this won't be the case when it comes to healthcare reform, they most certainly will get their way with cap-and-trade legislation.

Last week, Barbara Boxer introduced her cap-and-trade bill. She, too, believes that cap-and-trade will lead to a jobs boom in the United States. She says that it would bring billions in private investment. Well - Barbara Boxer really isn't all that bright, so it's hard to take any jobs promise she makes seriously. It's far more likely that he taxing and regulatory schemes will be a jobs killer.

Assuming that Boxer's bill is somewhat similar to the Waxman-Markey climate bill that has been around for months, we can assume the following:

One independent analysis predicts our nation would lose 2 million jobs if the House plan is enacted. In Virginia, an estimated 15,500 jobs would be wiped out by 2015, and 72,000 jobs would be lost by 2030 under Waxman-Markey.

Even the Government Accountability Office (GAO) warned that a cap-and-trade climate bill could result in great economic pain for little environmental gain. The GAO noted that climate legislation could make American companies less able to compete internationally and drive American jobs overseas to nations that do not limit greenhouse gas emissions. This would increase international emissions enough to offset or overwhelm any reductions made by the United States.

I don't know about you, but that definitely sounds like a way to spur economic growth in our country. Don't ya think?

The Democrats have really taken this healthcare reform argument to a new level. First we had the switch from healthcare reform to health insurance reform. That one happened in a matter of one day. One press conference. The talking points went out and the Democrats received their new marching orders .. this is no longer a battle over healthcare. We now have a new enemy to contend with: the insurance industry. Easy to figure out why ... Obama's behavioral scientists told him that people liked their doctors. It was the insurance companies they hated ... so shift the focus and demonize insurance.

Then the Democrats returned home to their districts for the August recess. They expected parades. They expected praise and accolades from their constituents, thanking them for working to make healthcare reform a reality. But what did they really get? A bunch of angry citizens who are starting to wake up and smell the koolaid. They realize that this healthcare reform debate isn't about their healthcare at all. They don't have faith in their government officials to reform the system for the better. Heck, maybe some of these constituents realize that the government isn't always the solution to every problem.

So now we pull out the big guns. Waging war against the insurance company hasn't hit deep enough with voters. So now, we put it all on Barack Obama's shoulders. Yep. Anyone who opposes this healthcare reform is only doing it because they want to hurt Barack Obama. That is according to Barbara "Call me Senator" Boxer. She told MSNBC's "Hardball," "All of this is a diversion by the people who, frankly, want to hurt President Obama." Then we have Princess Pelosi telling the media that these people are showing up to protest government health care "carrying swastikas." Yup! We learning form the Democrats that all of these people showing up at the Townhall meetings are "thugs" paid by insurance companies and other special interest groups. Their true goal is to "hurt" Obama.

So now we're supposed to sit back and quietly accept a government takeover of almost 20% of our economy in order to avoid hurting Barack Obama? We're supposed to accept the idea of rationing healthcare so Barack Obama won't be damaged? You're going to accept the news that you can't get a hip replacement with "Well, at least Barack Obama wasn't hurt." Yeah .. that would be the thought going through my mind if I had to wait four or five months for an MRI. "You know, I can go ahead and wait for this MRI. We won't find out what's wrong for a couple of months, but at least I won't be hurting Barack Obama.

Isn't that just dandy? Right now the Democrats are pinning their takeover of health care on the need to avoid hurting their president. Yeah ... works for me.

Senator Barbara Boxer on "Hardball" also expressed her shock at how nicely dressed the protesters have been at these town hall meetings. Her next goal, besides linking healthcare to Barack Obama, is to compare these protesters to those back in 2000 during the presidential recount. She said, "By the way, I saw the clips of people storming these town hall meetings. The last time I saw well-dressed people doing this was when Al Gore asked me to go down to Florida, when they were recounting the ballots. I was confronted by the same type of people. They were there screaming and yelling 'Go back to California.'"

I've been telling you this for years, folks. This whole global warming scam is nothing more than a front for wealth distribution and anti-capitalist activism. Democrats have come up with a great way to do accomplish those goals .. carbon credits. Charge companies and/or people for their carbon output and then let the government use that money to redistribute as it likes.

Now, thanks to California Senator Barbara Boxer, we have a clearer picture of what that could mean very soon. Boxer released a letter detailing the basic principles that will be included into this absurd global warming legislation. Plans are for Congress to take this on soon. We are talking weeks, not months. Democrats know they need to move on this while a substantial portion of the American people still buy this man-made global warming nonsense. Some people actually think this is a crisis, and you need to remember that the Obama Administration believes that no crisis should be allowed to go to waste. So now let's all take a look at these principles for global warming legislation:

1. Reduce emissions to levels guided by science to avoid dangerous global warming. (The science, of course, will come from government-paid scientists who know that their funding depends on continued global warming alarmism.)

2. Set short and long term emissions targets that are certain and enforceable, with periodic review of the climate science and adjustments to targets and policies as necessary to meet emissions reduction targets.

3. Ensure that state and local entities continue pioneering efforts to address global warming.

4. Establish a transparent and accountable market-based system that efficiently reduces carbon emissions. (No .. establish a system that efficiently redistributes wealth and weakens capitalism.)

5. Use revenues from the carbon market to:

- Keep consumers whole as our nation transitions to clean energy;

- Invest in clean energy technologies and energy efficiency measures;

- Assist states, localities and tribes in addressing and adapting to global warming impacts;

- Assist workers, businesses and communities, including manufacturing states, in the transition to a clean energy economy;

- Support efforts to conserve wildlife and natural systems threatened by global warming; and

-Work with the international community, including faith leaders, to provide support to developing nations in responding and adapting to global warming. In addition to other benefits, these actions will help avoid the threats to international stability and national security posed by global warming.

6. Ensure a level global playing field, by providing incentives for emission reductions and effective deterrents so that countries contribute their fair share to the international effort to combat global warming.

Oh yeah ... just had to include that "fair share" phrase in there. A real favorite for Democrats. It means nothing, but the great unwashed really like it.

I hope that you noticed three particular parts of this letter. First of all, the fact that revenues from this government-created carbon market will go towards protecting species that are threatened by global warming. Why do you think the environmentalists were so insistent on declaring polar bears a threatened species due to global warming, even while their numbers are increasing? That would be because now they will have a steady source of income in which to fuel their efforts! Also, this government-created carbon market will be used to aid other countries. Here we go with the wealth redistribution - carbon revenues from companies in the United States would be collected and redistributed to "provide support" to developing nations. And if #6 on this list doesn't convince you .. then you don't know your head from a hole in the ground.