Considering the move of KSM to New York City for a civilian trial, lawmakers in Washington are heading down a slippery slope in terms of who should be afforded Constitutional rights. For example ... Nancy Pelosi was asked whether Osama bin Laden, when he is captured, should be told that he has the right to remain silent and be given a lawyer.

Nancy's response: "Well, let's see, how many years has it been? Nine, eight years. Let's worry about capturing Bin Laden and not worry about your, your question."

That one is up there with her answer to the question of whether or not an individual healthcare mandate was Constitutional, and she replied, "Are you serious? Are you serious?"

ONLY San Francisco could put someone like that into our congress.

God help us.

Princess Nancy is trying hard to convince you that government knows what is best.  So far, I haven't seen ANY evidence that would lead me to believe that this is true.  But she continues to believe that the government is perfectly justified in forcing you, at the point of a gun, to purchase health insurance.  She was asked by a reporter whether or not she thinks it is fair to send people to jail who don't buy health insurance.  And her response was that she believes "the legislation is very fair in this respect."

 

Care to guess who the pundits are calling the most powerful politician in Washington?  That would be Nancy Pelosi ... the woman who thinks it's just fine for the government to slam you into a jail cell if you don't buy stuff the government wants you to buy ... is the most powerful person in this country.

 

It's too early for a drink ... but what the hell. 

Princess Nancy has decided that she wants to have a vote on her PelosiCare bill this weekend. That's right. This Saturday, the House is going to vote on a piece of legislation that could potentially turn over 18% of our economy to the government ... to bureaucrats, actually. Timing is far more important than getting it right. Now if you want to know the details of the vote, be sure to follow my guy Jamie Dupree. He is sticking around Washington DC to follow this historic vote.

Did you know that Nancy Pelosi thinks that she and her fellow Democrats are ready to vote on a bill even though they don't know the price tag? The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services does not believe that it can come up with a cost estimate for the bill before Saturday's vote. Eh .. not surprising. That's not what this is really about anyway, is it? This is about the government takeover of healthcare .. making you more dependent on government .. power. The price tag for your children and grandchildren isn't important.

Speaking of your children and grandchildren. The Cato Institute has done the research and it has determined that Obamacare could as much as double premium costs for young Americans (25-year-olds). And you thought this was all about making healthcare more affordable?

What have the Democrats managed to tuck into this 1,900 page healthcare bill? Well how about goodies like this ... uncovered by BigGovernment.com:

Section 2531, entitled "Medical Liability Alternatives," establishes an incentive program for states to adopt and implement alternatives to medical liability litigation. [But]...... a state is not eligible for the incentive payments if that state puts a law on the books that limits attorneys' fees or imposes caps on damages.

Well that's rather obvious, isn't it? Just what in the hell does this have to do with health care reform? How does protecting trial lawyer's contingency fees improve the delivery and quality of health care to the American people? It is a gift from Nancy Pelosi directly to trial lawyers ... trial lawyers who contribute tens of millions of dollars to Democrats in every election year. Any changes made on medical liability lawsuits will not be allowed to affect the livelihood for her beloved trial lawyers.

What else appears in Nancy's healthcare bill? Well I talked to Jamie Dupree last week about the fact that the world "shall" appears 3,425 times. Here are a few more .. how about the fact that the bill requires at least 42 studies. The word "report" also appears 364 times and "tax" is used 214 times.

By the way, with 1,900 and a cost of $894 billion, that comes out to about $2.24 million per word.

Princess Nancy is going to unveil her healthcare bill today. I'm absolutely giddy with excitement. Just what we need ... another competing blue-print for a government takeover of healthcare and 18% of our economy. It also represents a huge shift in government entitlements ... a shift that will be impossible to reverse. Once you get the people hooked on government, there is no way to end it. This may the strongest and most addicition we have in this country .. and unfortunately it's legal. In fact, addiction to government could very well be the most dangerous addiction America has to deal with. Give me a good old fashioned coke addict any time. What's more, this is an addiction that is openly promoted by many politicians ... politicians who generally, an with inexplicable pride, call themselves Democrats.

The Aging Hollow-eyed Hippy from Haight-Ashbury says her government takeover of health care will cost over $1 trillion over the next ten years. That's a lie. She knows it's a lie. Our government has never introduced an entitlement program that didn't cost at least twice as much as the politicians who forced it on us said it would cost. And just how will this monstrosity be paid for? Taxes, that's how. Taxes levied by the looters on the producers to buy votes from the moochers. That's the recipe for government growth. Pelosi also plans to cut payments to Medicare providers. Medicare providers are, in case you haven't figured this out, are doctors. Under Nancy's plan more and more doctors will certainly decide to opt out of treating Medicare patients. Then the government will come along to tell them they can't. Then the doctors will tell the government to go pound sand and will simply retire. This will mean a shortage of doctors that will come at the exact same time demand for services will increase. This will mean waiting lines. This will mean rationing. And all of this will come along because the Democrats steadfastly and absolutely refuse to consider any private sector options in their health care reform plan. Why not private sector options? Simple ....

... because this has everything to do with controlling you and nothing to do with improving your health care.

So what exactly is she proposing to do with your tax dollars?

Employers would be required to offer health insurance to workers
Employers will pay fines for not offering health insurance
Americans will be fined for not purchasing insurance coverage (no word yet on enforcement)
Subsidies will be provided to poor people who can't afford health insurance
Insurance companies will not be able to discriminate against older people or pre-existing conditions
A government option will be available to "compete" with the private sector

(Can any of you figure out just where these actions are authorized in our Constitution? Oh, wait. I'm sorry. Our Constitution doesn't count anymore. K bye!)

Now these are all of the things that Nancy and the Democrats want us to know right now about Nancy's bill. But like any piece of legislation, there are hidden gems that are impossible to decipher without two lawyers, a psychic and the 3rd floor ward of your local mental institution to help make sense of it all.

Maybe the Democrats are hoping that third time is a charm?  What I mean by that is that the Democrats are trying anything and everything they can to make you people like their plans to take over our healthcare system.  In the past, they have relied on simple tricks to sway public option ... like buzz words and focus groups.  But something has gone awry lately.  No matter what the Democrats call their government takeover of healthcare, people aren't liking it. 

 

Oh, no!  What is a Democrat to do?

 

So first we had "public healthcare reform."  Then it was "insurance reform."  There was also the "public option."  Some say that the original name for the "public option" was the "government option."  I can't verify that, and it seems unlikely our political class would be that honest.  Well ... it's time to rename "the public option" and  Princess Nancy has come up with a new moniker .... "the consumer option."  If you don't like that one, she suggests another name:  "the competitive option."  This is how Nancy Pelosi would like to refer to the government takeover of healthcare.  Now you good Democrat myrmidons remember -- if you are unfortunate enough to get into a conversation with a liberal today, remember to use the new phrase "competitive option" so as to not offend him or her.

 

You will love this explanation from Princess Nancy as to why the name needs to be changed.  Listen to this: "You'll hear everyone say, 'There's got to be a better name for this ... When people think of the public option, public is being misrepresented, that this is being paid for with their public dollars."  Oh right, Nancy.  No taxpayer dollars involved, right?  And by the way ... the proper phrase is "taxpayer dollars," not "public dollars."  Do we see another change in terminology coming here?

Nancy Pelosi had an interview yesterday with CNBC's Maria Bartiromo, and Maria actually asked a good question! She challenged Nancy Pelosi on the Bush tax cuts, suggesting to Princess Nancy that allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire would be the same thing as a tax increase.

So here's the question: "Does the expiration of the Bush tax cuts mean that there will be tax increases?"

This could have been answered in one word: Yes.

But Nancy couldn't bring herself to admit it. Instead. Here is what she had to say via The Swamp:

"That wasn't a tax increase,'' Pelosi said. "It is.. eliminating a tax decrease that was there... It was controversial to begin with. It is... a boon to those who have had it for now. But I think that you will see that happen.

"That affects, what? The upper two percent of our population. What we're trying to do is lower... taxes for the middle class, relieve burdens... on business. So that we can be competitive in job creation. And I think you'll see some interesting things emerge-- from the conversations we're having now. ''

What about allowing those tax breaks to expire at a fragile time in an economic recovery, the speaker was asked.

"I don't think many people here see, nor do the American people see those tax cuts at the high end as being job-creating,'' she said. "They don't... think that that's part of the reason we're in the fiscal, the budgetary situation that we're in, because those tax cuts cost money. And... they were... a cost to our budget, without any commensurate impact on the economy for job creation. To return money to the treasury. So, nobody sees those as a job-creator.

"Return money to the treasury?" Did you get that? Tanking earned income away from a small businessman --- and make no mistake, the vast majority of people who will suffer these tax increases are small businessmen and women --- so taking their money is "returning money to the treasury!"

If the voters of this country were (a) not government-educated; and (b) not so focused on their Hollywood celebrity news; they would run this barking moonbat out of office.

Democrats in the House know that they can't tax Cadillac insurance plans because the unions have those Cadillac insurance plans. Just what do you think you have been paying for every time you buy an American-made automobile! That means the unions don't particularly like this Democrat idea ... and if the unions don't like it, the idea is all but dead. Democrats would throw kittens into chipper-shredders before they would ever do anything to really upset their precious unions. So now, Princess Nancy and her minions are scrounging to find other ideas to generate revenue. The latest one in the works is a windfall tax on insurance company profits. There you go ... a "windfall tax." Whenever the looters want to legitimize an extra tax on a private sector business they just say "windfall" and their myrmidons fall right into place. After all ... don't we all truly understand that anything not-government is intrinsically evil? And don't we all know that the very quest for profit is a pure and evil manifestation of greed? Let's face it; this money doesn't belong to these businesses anyway, it belongs to the people! Money to the people! So it's perfectly logical to seize it to take care of the people's health care.

Nancy says that the idea is in its very early stages, but it is definitely being considered. That's bull. When it comes to seizing money from the private sector, no Democrat idea is in the early stages. This is a staple of looter politics. Princess Pelosi says, "I believe that all of the participants, whether it is insurance companies or the pharmaceutical industry, have much more they can put on the table to help reduce cost and take us in a downward direction in terms of spending on this health care bill." Well isn't that special? Nancy Pelosi believes that these private companies have more money to put on the table, therefore she will use the force of government to make sure they do so? That's what our imperial federal government has come to.

This is just part of the Democrat plan to demonize the private health insurance companies. Later this week, House looters have called for health insurance executives to testify before Congress to "defend their business practices."

By the way, this week is a big week for healthcare legislation in the Senate. The Senate Finance Committee is going to take a final vote on the Baucus healthcare bill and then send it to the full chamber.

The fun never stops.

I've been telling you for a while now that the Value Added Tax (VAT) was a distinct possibility. Just last week I linked to an article outlining all of the signs that pointed to the fact that the VAT is coming.

So here it is. Princess Nancy has now asserted that a VAT is "on the table." And what table might that be? The table at which the people who have the power to change our tax code .. that's what table. So you certainly don't want to lose any sleep over this. There's looters at the table and producers propping it up. Then there's the moochers who are more than ready to give their loyalty to the looters. Where does that put you?

Soon the Democrats will realize what happens when you cut the legs out from under them. Why is that? Because the VAT would be in ADDITION to all of our current taxes. It's not reform, it's just more taxes (with some minor adjustments). We are not talking about an overhaul like the FairTax would achieve - complete abolishment of our current tax system. We are talking about MORE taxes.

But somehow, we are supposed to magically believe that this would not increase taxes on the middle class. At least, that is what Princess Nancy promises. Remember, though ... it's all in the meaning of the word "tax." If it was at one point in your pocket, and it then, without coercion and without your consent, ends of in the hands of government, it's a tax.

Hey! I think I just came up with a new definition of "tax!" Let's try to refine it:

"Money or property owned by a private entity that is transferred by force to the government."

I'm sure Obama would love it!

This week, Nancy Pelosi and her myrmidons will work on their plans to pay for healthcare reform ... and you know they're just busting their guts to throw out some good old Democrat tax increases. Keep in mind that these are tax increases ON TOP of the increases that will come into effect when the Bush tax cuts expire.

But Nancy Pelosi has found herself trying to balance the egos of her Democrat Caucus and her union supporters. She has done this by suggesting a tax increase on "Cadillac" insurance plans. This type of tax is more popular in the Senate. In fact, the Baucus bill includes a 40% tax on insurers for plans worth more than $8,000 for individuals and $21,000 for families.

As of right now, none of the plans include an income surtax on the wealthy to pay the difference for these Democrat dreams and schemes. But who knows what she will propose this week. She may propose a tax on the evil, disgusting, vile rich people who dare to earn more than $500,000.

All we can be sure of is the fact that wealth envy is going to rear its ugly head again. I hope you are ready for it.

Is Nancy Pelosi losing it? Or is she after an Oscar? You saw here, didn't you? There she was yesterday during her weekly press avail getting all weepy-eyed over the harsh rhetoric aimed at her party's attempt to take over our health care. She says that she's afraid that all of this rhetoric is going to lead to violence. Here's her statement:

"I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw ... I saw this myself in the late '70s in San Francisco. This kind of rhetoric is just, is really frightening and it created a climate in which we, violence took place and ... I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made." Some of the people hearing the message "are not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume."

So what is she referring to? The murder of gay rights activist Harvey Milk.

The Republicans aren't taking too kindly to this comparison. Rep. Jeff Sessions called Pelosi's comment a "verbal assault on voters." He says, "Voters are justifiably frustrated with Washington, and the Speaker's verbal assault on voters accomplishes nothing other than furthering her reputation for being wildly out of touch with the American people."

You'll remember yesterday that I told you the left was engaged in a mental and emotional breakdown. Here they are almost nine months into the hopey-changey thing, and they've done nothing. Card check, nationalized health care, cap-and-tax ... all losers so far. Democrats are beside themselves. Earlier this week they were telling us that all of their wonderful ideas for America are being rejected because the people just don't like a black man in the White House. Now they're telling us that all of this opposition to these wonderful leftist programs are going to lead to violence and political assassinations.

Can't wait to see what's next.

Earlier in the week, Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer wrote an op-ed in USA Today essentially calling these town hall protestors "un-American." Well Michelle Malkin did a little bit of research and she came up with a video of Nancy Pelosi from 2006. In this video, Nancy is conducting a town hall meeting on the war in Iraq. The town hall took place in her home district of San Francisco so you can only imagine what she faced: protestors. We are not talking "Brooks Brothers" protestors .. we are talking more like Code Pink protestors. Yup the hairy leg and braided armpit brigade was out in full force. Anyway, click on the link and take a look at how Nancy not only lets these protestors have their say, chanting "no more war" but allows them to come up front with all of their anti-war signs and even applauds them!

I wonder if Princess Nancy would dare to call these people in her own district "un-American." They were vocal too .. only they were saying the things that a left-wing politician would like to hear.

Princess Nancy Pelosi and one of her Knights, Sir Steny Hoyer, have written an opinion piece for today's USA Today. Guess what? Thanks to Pelosi and Hoyer we now know that the protestors that are showing up at these townhall meetings are "un-American." Their angle is that these people are showing up at the meetings not to express their concerns, but to "drown out" opposing views. They're not concerned with crushing debt and horrifying budget deficits. They're not concerned with the inaccessibility or possible rationing of healthcare. They just don't like Barack Obama or his health care plan, so this makes them "un-American." I guess Democrats feel that to be an American you have to timidly accept any controls your government wishes to inflict on you. To protest government is, to Pelosi et al, is to be "un-American." This pretty much goes along with what I've been saying about Democrats for quite a while. These people think that America's greatness comes from government; certainly not from the dynamic of free people working together under the rule of law in an economy based on liberty. So ... to protest government is to protest America. This makes you "un-American." Oh yeah ... makes perfect sense to me.

I love some of the comments that appeared in USA Today after the Pelosi/Hoyer column:

• "Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American" As any conservative who has ever tried to give a speech on an American university campus could attest.
• The obvious thing for Pelosi to do is to create a committee to investigate the protestors--call it the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
• Oh contrare Oh mighty Democratic leaders. It's un-American not to allow a proper debate. It's also irresponsible and a dereliction of your duties to attempt to ram through (and not read) these bills.
• This is precious. Dissent isn't the highest form of patriotism after all. It's unamerican!

This is what is bothers Democrats so ... the people are standing up to them. This shouldn't happen in their version of a democrat society.

You do know that Barack Obama and the Democrats have changed the game on us, don't you? We are no longer debating about healthcare reform. We are now talking about health INSURANCE reform. Why is that? Well it is simple .. it is a lot easier to demonize the big, bad insurance industry. People generally like their doctors. It's the insurance companies they hate. They want every penny they spend on health care covered by insurance, and the insurance companies don't go along. Evidently the Obama crowd consulted their focus groups and behavioral experts .. and they've been reminded that playing off of people's fears and wealth envy is a great way to gain support for your political causes.

So Nancy Pelosi has taken her marching orders to heart. She has officially declared that, "The glory days are coming to an end for the health insurance industry in our country." Isn't that nice of Nancy Pelosi to decide? She also says, "We all want bipartisanship...but you're either with the insurance companies or you're for something new." This is the same type of "either you are with us, or against us" comments that the Democrats used to complain about with George W. Bush. When a looter uses that phraseology, it's OK. The point to be made here is that the insurance companies are evil and making profit off of your misfortune. They must be stopped.

Remember, these are the same insurance companies that Princess Nancy already declared to be "immoral." Last week she accused them of unethical behavior and working to try and kill a government-run healthcare plan. She said, "It's almost immoral what they are doing ... Of course they've been immoral all along in how they have treated the people that they insure ... They are the villains. They have been part of the problem in a major way. They are doing everything in their power to stop a public option from happening." Villains? Immoral? Gee, Nancy, don't you think you are coming on a bit strong?

But she wasn't the only one. Senator Harry Reid did his part to ramp up the wealth envy side of the argument against the evil insurance companies. He says, "I don't think we should be crying great big tears about the insurance industry ... There is no business in America that makes more money than the insurance industry--over the last 10 years their profits have been increased by 450 percent ... So I'm not really in very much of a mood to worry about the insurance industry."

This is as old as civilization: You have a despot who wants to expand his power, and he finds someone or something to demonize. Here it's the insurance companies. Make them the focus of all that is evil in the world. You get the people so worked up about the evil insurance companies, you don't even see the greater evil of government health care sneaking up on you.

Is there any real difference between Hitler's treatment of Jews and Pelosi's treatment of insurance companies? For Hitler, the Jews were the focus of all evil in Germany. Now it's the insurance companies in the United States. What's next? Concentration camps for insurance executives? Maybe Princess Nancy building ovens somewhere.

(Ohhhhh ... I'm going to pay for that one.)

It happened last night. There was debate on the floor of the House over some amendments to a spending bill. The amendments were offered by Republicans and concerned funding for ACORN and an investigation into Nancy Pelosi's problems with the CIA.

As I understand the story, the Democrats announced that there would be no more votes that evening, and Republicans started heading home. When enough Republicans were gone the Democrats headed back to the House floor and called for a vote to end debate on all amendments to the spending bill. Republicans scrambled to get back into the House, but it was too late. Democrats saved Pelosi and ACORN with their little chicanery. For now.

Nancy Pelosi is offering a little bit of advice for Republicans. Considering Arlen Specter is now batting for the other team, Nancy says that Republicans should "take back" their party ... and by that, she means that they should become more like Democrats.

Here's Nancy's sound advice, "I say to Republicans in America, take back your party ... The party of protecting the environment, the party of individual rights, the party of fairness."

So is that what a Republican is supposed to be to Nancy Pelosi? Boy does this explain a lot about why these buffoons can't get anything done in Washington. How about the party of smaller government? The party of lower taxes? The party of self sufficiency?

Pelosi is so tiresome.

The budget resolution passed the House with absolutely zero Republican support. Point: If it had been Bush's budget the Republicans would have supported it ... so don't sing Republican praises too loud. A more amazing fact is that 17 Democrats voted against the budget. You'll enjoy Nancy Pelosi's reaction to the passage of this budget resolution. She says, "Today, for the first time in many, many years, we have a president's budget ... that is a statement of our national values."

Did you catch that? This is a "statement of our national values." What values would those be, Nancy? Bigger government ... redistribution of wealth ... government dependency ... government control of the private economic sector ...funding "green" industries based on the global warming hoax ... replacing the free market system with government controls and regulations ....

This is a big government, anti-individualism budget. BOHICA

Are you as pumped as I am? About Earth Day, that is. This is like Christmas Day to OwlGore. Princess Pelosi wants to make sure that this time next year, America is celebrating the expansion of our imperial federal government. But don't worry ...it will all be in the name of climate change!

Barack Obama and the Democrats are determined to make people more dependent on the government. This is how they retain power. I've been telling you this was on the way for ten years .. and here we are. There really isn't enough bandwidth to cover all of the grand government expansion plans the Democrats have right now. One, of course, is government healthcare. Another is creating a massive government system to regulate climate change. With "global warming" legislation comes the promise of new welfare programs. After all, it is a proven fact that climate change legislation is going to increase the cost of energy in this country. But this isn't a concern to Democrats for two reasons. One .. because ignorant voters will continue to vote for them based on the fact that they brought real change to our government and are trying to prevent the world from a total meltdown! The other is because the Democrats will create entitlement programs to ensure that the poor, poor pitiful poor and the parasite (Democrat) class do not see any energy cost increases.

Pretty clever, huh? But Nancy and her minions are determined to pass climate change legislation this year.

Meanwhile, our government schools are ensuring that we are raising a generation completely brainwashed into believing in this man-made global warming hoax. A new survey shows that one out of every three American children between the ages of six and 11 fear that our planet will not exist when they grow up. Guess who is the most anxious about an Al Gore-scripted apocalypse? Minority children. 75% of black children and 65% of Hispanic children believe that the earth will be "irrevocably damaged" by the time they are adults. Your government at work.

I guess South Carolina's James Clyburn is right ... global warming does seem to affect minorities more than whites.

The left most certainly didn't like the spectacle of the tea parties and FairTax rallies on tax day. Liberals would much prefer that you just file your tax return and shut the hell up. After all .. this protesting government thing is something that rightwing extremists do, right? I think that we all knew that the left would try to find ways to denigrate the protests ... and here you go.

Princess Nancy has come forward with her own theory as to how these rightwing extremists came to be protesting our government spending habits and our tax code. You'll love this. Nancy Pelosi actually believes that these tea parties are supported by ... ready for the class-warfare card? ... "the high-end." That's just another way of saying the evil, filthy, disgusting rich. Here's her quote:

"This initiative is funded by the high-end. We call it 'astroturf'; it's not really a grassroots movement. It's astroturfed by some of the wealthiest people in America to keep the focus on tax cuts for the rich instead of for the great middle class."

So there you have it, folks. Rich people were behind this. They're somehow using the masses to protest taxes so that the evil rich won't have to pay their "fair share" of taxes. Why is it only the "great" middle class that is deserving of a tax cut? Is Princess Nancy implying that the evil rich don't actually work to earn any of that money? Hmmmm. You know, of course, that she actually does believe that. Oh .. by the way, Nancy and her husband are worth in the tens of millions.

Why the "Astroturf" word? Well ... and let's see if we can follow this: The tea party movement is not true grassroots. It's fake. Fake because it's promoted and financed by some rich people .. and Fox News, of course. Fake grass = Astroturf. Get it? Unusually clever for liberals, I'd say.

Oh and by the way, guess who happens to be known as the master of "astroturfing" in Washington? Obama's chief strategist David Axelrod. Basically what it happens is a corporation or political party creates the impression of something being caused by spontaneous "grassroots" behavior .. when in fact it is very much manufactured.

So this is what Nancy Pelosi believes the tea party movement to be all about. And therefore, your anger and your frustration is not worthy of her time because it is coming from an artificial source.

I don't think there was anything false or manufactured about what happened on April 15th. Do you? But that's how the Democrats are going to get around this ... by pretending that your actions aren't fueled by genuine concern for your children's future.

Wouldn't you like to see Pelosi just reduced to another one of the 435 members of the House of Representatives? What a day that would be ... and that day only comes around when the actual productive people get off their duffs and actually vote when the next election comes around.

Here's a general rule of thumb with the politicians in charge of Washington today: most believe that the Constitution is a document that prevents them from doing what they think government ought to do. And when it comes to our Second Amendment, Nancy Pelosi and Eric Holder aren't going to let that silly little document get in the way of cracking down on gun trafficking to Mexico.

You may remember the other day; our Attorney General Eric Holder was asked if the administration would encounter constitutional issues as it tries to crack down on gun trafficking. His response was: "I don't think our Second Amendment will stand in the way of efforts we have begun and will expand upon."

Stand in our way? Since when has our Constitution or our Bill of Rights been something that is considered an obstacle or a barrier? Our Bill of Rights outlines the freedoms we hold that the government cannot infringe upon. That includes the right to bear arms. But to a Democrat like Eric Holder, this is a limitation of the boundless powers provided by government.

And Nancy Pelosi is right there by Eric Holder's side, saying that gun registration is at the top of her agenda. If you don't believe that registration precedes seizure, then you just aren't paying attention.

I feel like I have been asking this question a lot more lately. But honestly .. read this quote from Nancy Pelosi. It is about health-care legislation that will include an option for a government-run program that would compete with private insurers.

"This is not only about the health of individuals in our country, which will be justification enough ... It's about the competitiveness of our businesses to make them globally competitive because they are competing with companies and countries where the federal government -- their governments -- pay for health care. They don't have to bear those health care costs."

Hey .. Nancy .. newsflash. It is not the government that will be paying for this healthcare. The government does not generate an income to pay for healthcare. It seizes money from its taxpayers. Money that was earned by the taxpayers. So if the taxpayers have earned the money, and the government seizes it to pay for Democrat dreams and schemes like healthcare .. then the taxpayers are really the ones "bearing those healthcare costs" now aren't then?

Yesterday's vote in the House was completely expected. Overwhelmingly, your representatives in Washington voted huge taxes on bonuses for AIG employees. Nancy Pelosi said, "We want our money back and we want our money back now for the taxpayers." Funny .. after recently passing a bill with more than 8,000 earmarks worth over $400 billion, the hollow-eyed hippy from Haight-Ashbury and her flying monkeys are suddenly worried about the taxpayers.

First point. It is not "their" money. The money, whether you like it or not, belongs to the people to whom they were paid. Those bonuses were paid pursuant to a valid contract and are now the rightful and legal property of the payees. Let's us also remember that the amount paid in those bonuses was less than one-tenth of one percent of the bailout money received by AIG. Remember, though ... politicians believe that ever penny you earn actually belongs to the government. In the official language of Washington any money from your paycheck that these political hacks allow you to keep is a "tax expenditure." You earned it ... but if you're allowed to keep it they treat it as a government expenditure. To the Democrat mind, and in the mind of all too many Republicans, all wealth is owned by government. Produced by the people, but owned by government.

Second point. This is absolutely unconstitutional. Con su permisio I'll explain.

So the House succeeded in passing a 90% tax on bonuses given to employees of AIG and any company receiving at least $5 billion in bailout money. But only with those evil rich employees whose family income is above $250,000 a year will have to pay this 90% tax.

You just cannot like what you're seeing here. These politicians are targeting specific individuals out there who have received some money that the politicians, for political purposes, just do not want them to have. So they pass a law allowing the government to seize that money. Can you imagine where this goes from here? How about Ann Coulter? She delights in writing books that just irritate the ever-luvin' puddin' out of Democrats and liberals. Let's say that one of Nancy Pelosi's flying monkeys reports to the Princess that Coulter made $1.5 million from her last book. This money was legally paid to Coulter pursuant to a contract. Sound familiar? But Pelosi feels that Coulter has made this money by promoting divisiveness in the population, so she decides that punishment is in order. She then has her minions pass a bill establishing a 90% tax on the royalties from all books and writings that promote political dissention and defame public servants in the Congress of the United States. Come on now, you tell me the big huge difference between a confiscatory tax on legally earned bonuses and one on legally received book royalties.

This is going nowhere folks. It will never make it through the Senate. If the members of the House had any appreciation at all for the Constitution it wouldn't have gone this far. And why, pray tell, would that be? That would be because of one pesky little clause found in our (once) supreme law of the land.

Article 1, Section 9, Clause 5 - United States Constitution

"No bill of Attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed."

Do you know what that means? The key is the word "attainder." Let's go to Websters: It's a 15th century word meaning "extinction of the civil rights and capacities of a person upon sentence of death or outlawry usually after a conviction of treason." A definition, this one from the Catholic Encyclopedia, describes "bill of attainder" thusly: "A bill of attainder may be defined to be an Act of Parliament for putting a man to death or for otherwise punishing him without trial in the usual form. Thus by a legislative act a man is put in the same position as if he had been convicted after a regular trial."

Well, in this case the Congress isn't trying to put anyone to death ... they're just trying to steal some money. They are trying to deprive some individuals of property that is rightfully and lawfully theirs without accusing them of a crime and without the benefit of any trial ... except, that is, for this trial that has been taking place in the media for the last week. Well, there's that pesky little Constitution again. A man cannot be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process, and in our country due process means a trial before a jury of one's peers. Barney Frank et al are trying to take these people's money through legislative action without a trial. I would truly hope there isn't a federal judge in this country that wouldn't smack this idiocy down at the earliest opportunity.

This isn't about whether or not those people deserved those bonuses. Perhaps not. But the bonuses were paid pursuant to a legally enforceable contract. The property is theirs. Now we have politicians who are trying to take it away just because they're unhappy and embarrassed because they didn't take care of this little problem before the bailout money was paid.

On to the Senate. Let's hope someone over there has read the Constitution.

I've been telling you about this for some weeks now ... ever since our wonderful Democrat congress started demonizing anyone who uses a private jet in their business.

Nancy Pelosi's business is running the U.S. House of Representatives, and Nancy not only has one private jet at her disposal; she has a fleet. That's right, a fleet of private jets, paid for by the taxpayers, that shuttle her and her friends and family where they please. Nancy's fleet is operated by the Pentagon. According to a report from Judicial Watch, Nancy repeatedly requested military aircraft and treated the Air Force as her "personal airline." Based on e-mails and other documents, Nancy regularly made special demands for high-end aircraft, often canceled at the last minute and racked up some serious expenses for the military .. and ultimately the taxpayers. What's more (and this is no surprise) Princess Nancy and her staff would be just a wee bit abusive when they couldn't get their way. In one email recovered with a FOIA request, Pelosi's aid Kay King wrote "It is my understanding there are NO G5s available for the House during the Memorial Day recess. This is totally unacceptable ... The Speaker will want to know where the planes are." In other words ... if you can't cough up a G5 for the Speaker, you had better tell her were your G5s are and who is using them so she can make a determination as to whether or not she is being slighted.

In another case Pelosi wanted her husband to tag along on a congressional trip to Iraq. The Pentagon had to remind Madam Speaker that spouses are not allowed to go along on military trips.

Public servant? Yeah right .. these people are our RULERS, folks. We are here to provide for them ...to provide a basis for their power. What good is a ruler without someone to rule? That would be us.

While we are on the subject of incompetent politicians. Nancy Pelosi actually said that Republicans should not be upset with Obama for raising taxes on the wealthy in order to pay for government healthcare. In fact, the Republicans should be thanking Obama, according to Nancy, because if it were up to her .. she would have raised taxes a lot faster.

And then if that wasn't bad enough, Nancy uses this line .. which is just so typical for Democrats: "It's not about raising taxes ... It's about ending a tax cut."

Are you buying this, folks?

My real approach to the government growth bill this morning is "What the hell, they're going to do what they want to do, and we have no power to stop them." Yeah ... a big shout-out and thank you to our ignoranus voters who thought it would be a good idea to put the big-government, Social-Democrat Party in complete control in Washington DC. Way to go. Thanks a pant-load.

Somehow Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the Democrats in Congress have managed to make this government growth package go from bad to worse. It seems as though their main goal was not in the details, but in making sure that they got the total number under $800 billion ... they assume that $789 billion is an easier number for the public to stomach. Yeah, right. It sure feels a lot better to me. Trouble is, with debt service this is still well over one trillion dollars. That's alottazeros.

What we got in the end was a bill that is two-thirds spending and the rest are "tax cuts". The "tax cuts," of course, are government handout checks. Welfare. For the most part, these spending projects are funding the Democrat platform: green energy, universal healthcare, "tax cuts" for the middle class and poor. Obama's signature "Making Work Pay" tax credit is going to provide an extra $13 a week in take-home pay. $13 whole dollars! What are you going to buy with that?? That's $1.86 a day! Now you get out there and spend that extra two bucks (almost) a day to get our economy moving again, you hear?

Meanwhile, tax credits for new home purchases and cars has been wiped off the map. But don't worry, those people who aren't paying income taxes are going to have an extra $13 in their pockets!

It's really pretty easy. Let's go through the process step-by-step:

1. Obama, the first YouTube, People Magazine, American Idol, Entertainment Tonight president is elected by a celebrity-worshiping mob.
2. Rahm Emanuel tells the PEBO that there's an economic crisis and reminds him that it is a political crime to let a good crisis go to waste. Let's get busy and take advantage of this mess.
3. Obama wants to get off on the right foot with Congress, so he makes a call to Nancy Pelosi and tells her to come up with an economic stimulus bill and to let it all out because this is the era of anything goes. There's a crisis to be taken advantage of here.
4. Pelosi spreads the word to the House Democrat Caucus: "The new president has given us a green light. Get me a list of all of the spending dreams and schemes you've had over the last decade by noon Thursday. You snooze, you lose.
5. A Texas Congressman comes up with a true economic stimulus plan; a tax holiday. Just suspend the collection of all personal federal income taxes and payroll taxes for five months. Let the people who earned the money spend it. Democrats aren't interested in this plan because it does not enhance their power, and they don't particularly like the idea of people knowing how much they actually make.
6. Pelosi and her flying monkeys assemble the Democrat spending dreams into one 700+ page $800 billion monstrosity that not one member of the congress will ever read and presents it to the nation as an "economic stimulus bill."
7. Obama tells the nation that we face economic catastrophe and the possible destruction of our country if Pelosi's government-expansion bill isn't passed. The sky is falling. We're doomed!
8. People show up at Obama rallies in Elkhart, Indiana and Ft. Myers, Florida thinking that Obama is going to be handing out checks and jobs.
9. Three Republican Senators, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter surprise not one single person in the free world by climbing all over each other to sign on with the Democrats ... again ... in support of the bill.
10. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office issues a report which essentially says that the so-called "stimulus plan" is a fraud and will not work. Nobody listens.
11. The mainstream media generally ignores the CBO report because their investment in Obama is so overwhelming that they simply cannot allow him to fail. Their credibility is at stake.
12. Our children and grandchildren are saddled with a debt and future inflation that will insure a standard of living for them that will never match the standard their parents enjoyed.
13. So many people are removed from the federal tax roles by Obama's phony "tax cuts," (which are really government handouts) that Democrats are confident that they'll remain in power for ever more.
14. The enemies of America throw a party.
15. Those who love America hold a wake.

I've been saying this for a while, folks .. the Democrats are slowly working on implementing their universal healthcare plans. And this is probably how it is going to be this time around .. you see, they did learn something from Hillarycare in 1994 - you can't bite off more than you can chew. But if you do it gradually ... maybe the people just won't notice! (Reference the old frog in the frying pan story).

Yep, that is exactly what is currently happening, and even Nancy Pelosi's office has admitted it. Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly says, "There are some incremental steps that we are taking -- first we did SCHIP, then in our economic recovery package, we have money to help stem the tide of people losing health insurance -- coverage for Medicaid and COBRA. There is also money for quality, Health IT, comparative effectiveness and wellness, and money for prevention." Do you hear that, folks? They are using the economic stimulus package in order to gradually implement their dreams and schemes of universal healthcare.

How long do you think it is going to be before you, or one of your elderly relatives, hears from some government hack that they can't get some needed medical care because there are younger, more vital people who need the help more. Rationing of medical care - it's on the way.

Lordy, all this talk about the economic stimulus bill is dull. Sorry about that. Discussions about prostate or breast cancer can be dull as well, but sometimes you just need to listen a bit in hopes that you'll learn something that just might save your life.

It's taking a long time for this thing to sink in to a lot of Americans, but this Obama spending bill is not a stimulus bill. It's nothing more than good old-fashioned Democrat big-government spending on steroids.

If Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid had delivered their instructions to the Democrat members of Congress I suspect the memo would have read something like this:

You're not going to read the bill. They know this. None of them will read the entire bill either. They'll read long enough to see that their own spending proposals are included ... but no further. This monstrosity is over 400 pages long, and just stuffed with pork spending.

• Swimming Pools
• Arts funding
• Contraception programs
• Sports stadiums
• Parking garages

If any special interest group favored by Democrat supporters has a spending wish, that wish is probably included in this so-called "stimulus" plan. Jamie Dupree has a more complete list of spending in his blog.

It's a fraud, folks. You need to understand that.

The quickest way to stimulate our economy right now would be to allow the people who earn the money to keep it and spend it on what they want, not what politicians want. That means tax cuts.

Democrats want nothing but spending ... no tax cuts. Pelosi says she'll judge ideas by ability to create jobs. Horsesqueeze. She'll judge the ideas base on their ability to grow government

Let's take the birth control bit. There's about hundreds of millions in the "stimulus bill" for birth control funding. The aging hollow-eyed hippie has an explanation. We are supposed to stop having children in order to reduce costs. Stopping women from having children will "help states meet their financial needs." Yeah .. they have all those expenses from health care and education. New human beings are bad for the economy.

Wake up, my friends.

• Obama doesn't need to wait until the end of his administration to issue pardons. I think he should start immediately. First on the list would be that inane poet who hogged endless moments of TV time during the inauguration to deliver a ridiculous and painful poem at the inauguration. What drivel. But in the spirit of the new administration we should forgive her.
   
• Nancy Pelosi said that when Bush left Washington it felt like a 10-pound anvil being lifted off her head. So ... that's been the problem all along. That anvil on her head. Explains a lot. By the way, anvils generally weigh well over 100 pounds. Some weigh over to 1000.
   
• Caroline Kennedy has a tax problem. Well, isn't that special. One thing we all know for certain .. since she is a liberal Democrat you can rest assured that whatever Kennedy did to either avoid or evade (if you're government educated, there is a difference) taxes ... it was most certainly an innocent mistake. Right?
   
• Did I hear Brian Kilmeade use the phrase "ass backwards" on Fox this morning? Why yes, I do believe I did. Way to go, Brian? Americans are prudes. Time to shock them out of their pacifiers.
   
• Speaking of Fox & Friends .. .I like these guys. I really do. But this childish vendetta against Soledad O'Brien over at CNN needs to stop. You don't want to get her Irish up.

If Nancy Pelosi had it her way .. we would increase taxes on the evil rich and give welfare checks to the parasite class. What is scary folks is the distinct possibility of Nancy actually making that happen. Ok, so Nancy agrees with Obama's plans for a so-called "tax cut" (welfare) included in his economic stimulus plan. But on top of that, Nancy is "urging" Obama to repeal the Bush tax cuts immediately. Don't let them expire in 2010, do it now. And remember, repealing the Bush tax cuts is just the Democrat way of saying "increase taxes on the evil rich." It's a way for them to pander to the wealth envy crowd. Joining in the hatred of high-achievers has always been a winner for the left.

So we have yet to capture Osama bin Laden. Nancy Pelosi and her liberal compadres will tell you that this is one of the great failings of the Bush administration. Well even if Bush didn't catch him, his administration did do something ... they made the guy obsolete. He doesn't matter. He is just another turban hiding somewhere in the mountains of Pakistan. This isn't just me blowing smoke, folks. This is coming from a senior US counterterrorism official. He says that "Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and his second-in-command have been rendered ineffective by international anti-terrorist efforts."

But don't worry. If he is caught under the Obama administration, he will have full access to the US court system. Yep, remember when he pledged that during the campaign? I wonder if that will be another one of those promises he can't keep once he realizes the realities of the situation.

The 111th Congress convenes today. Oh joy. It will be a Congress led by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Nancy Pelosi, by the way, is trying to re-write the House rules, reversing Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America." The purpose behind the new rules promulgated by the aging hollow eyed hippie from Haight-Ashbury is to completely emasculate the Republicans - somehow I think she has a lot of experience along these lines. The new rules say no alternative bills from GOP members, no amendments to Democrat bills and no guarantee of open debate. This will be the Congress that will allow funnyman Al Franken to take a seat but deny entry to Roland Burris. The fact that Al Franken has been declared the winner is, by the way, an atrocity. You remember, I hope, the details of that "recount" in Minnesota I shared with you yesterday. Anyway .. the game is on. BOHICA.

Environmentalists cannot wait to have Barack Obama in the White House so they can begin to "right the wrongs of the past" and enact a liberal agenda. So here is what we are looking forward to under an Obama administration ... considering that there won't be much to stop the Democrats who have control.

• Capping gasses and emissions that are "blamed for global warming" (remember Obama's bit about bankrupting the coal industry?)
• Basing environmental decisions on "sound science" (because man-made global warming is 100% proven scientific fact)
• More cautious approach to energy production on federal lands
• Cutting funds for nuclear energy
• Banning all offshore drilling

What is stopping Nancy Pelosi's crusade to "save the planet"? It will be interesting to see how far Obama is willing to take this man-made global warming horsesqueeze and allow it to dictate legislation.

... and 70% of the American people do not.

Democrats are insisting on bringing an auto bailout to the table, even though the Bush administration says that the $700 billion bailout was not intended for this purpose ... and even though it is going to be a very tough fight for Harry Reid in the Senate. But fight they will and this week on Capitol Hill we will hear from auto executives and the United Auto Workers.

Nancy Pelosi came up with a plan that she believes will be enticing enough to get enough Republican support. This plan includes adding certain strings to the auto bailout: new fuel-efficiency standards, development of new technology "to compete in the domestic and global market" and restructuring company finances. The Democrats also want to include limiting executive pay. In other words ... the Democrats feel that they, rather than the consumers, are the ones who know just what kind of cars the manufacturers build. All this is going to do is force the automakers to build cars that the American people have already shown that they just do not want to buy.

The Democrats also want to limit executive pay ... but what about the over-inflated pay of the workers at these auto companies, thanks to union contracts. I've told you this statistic before, but $1,600 of every GM car you buy goes toward the healthcare costs of union workers. For companies like Toyota that aren't unionized - that cost is only $200 per car. GM also spends another $1,000 per vehicle on holiday pay, work rules, plant-shutdown-pay and line-relief to UAW workers. Those are costs that auto makers such as Toyota don't have to worry about. The average Ford, GM or Chrysler union worker makes about $71.00 or more per hour. For Toyota, Nissan and the rest ... about $48.00 per year. Do you detect a small problem here?

If the Democrats are truly concerned about "restructuring company finances" they should start with union contracts. What is clear from this situation is that these companies can no longer handle the burden of unionization ... so why should the Democrats allow this practice to continue if they succeed with their bailout? It will be the taxpayers funding the system that broke these auto companies to begin with.

Of course, this is not how United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger see things. He said over the weekend that union contracts are not the problem. He says the problem is out of his control because these auto makers are suffering from the housing slump, credit crisis, etc. He says, "The focus has to be on the economy as a whole as opposed to a UAW contract ... We're here not because of what the auto industry has done ... We're here because of what has happened to the economy."

Nonsense. The bailout would only delay the inevitable.. and unless something is done right now about the union stranglehold on the auto industry the inevitable is bankruptcy. Let them go bankrupt. That doesn't mean they go out of business ... it means that union contracts can be voided unilaterally by the auto manufacturers and they can then get about restructuring their businesses based on consumer wants rather than political mandates.

By the way ... have you heard of the auto worker's "Job Banks Program?" Well, click here, read this, and then tell me how much you support a bailout.

Speaking of stepping up to the trough .. Congress is gearing up to bailout the auto industry. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to "review the feasibility . . . of providing temporary assistance to the automobile industry during the current financial crisis." Temporary? Yeah, sure. Check back with us in a year or two. The Pelosi/Reid part of the Troyka They want Paulson to use the bailout money for the auto industry because "a healthy automobile manufacturing sector is essential to the restoration of financial market security." Sorry, don't buy that one either.

The newly empowered Democrats seem eager to comply. If the request is granted, it would expand the federal government's role in private enterprise far beyond what we have seen in the financial sector. Obama's transition team says they are working on "policy options to help the auto industry adjust, weather the financial crisis and succeed in producing fuel-efficient cars." They will do this under existing laws or by passing "additional legislation."

And you'll love this ... don't forget that Congress has already voted to give $25 billion in low-interest loans to the auto industry to help them produce fuel-efficient cars and meet emissions standards. But in typical government fashion, this money "has been hung up by red tape."