The Democrats in the Senate managed to release their healthcare bill, topping out at 2,074 pages. Should be easy, quick reading ... considering the fact that Harry Reid wants to open up debate on the bill tomorrow. Yes tomorrow, as in Saturday.

Here are a few notes on this bill.

The Democrats have decided to re-label the bill the "Community Health Insurance Option." The latest focus group must have signaled that people like it when politicians talk about "communities." (People also love the word "security" ... but that's a different rant). The people also like the idea of having "options." Interesting, considering this bill would eventually lead to less options and more government.

Harry Reid and the Democrats have managed to Barack Obama in quite a pickle. Obama has pledged that he will not raise taxes on anyone earning more than $200,000 a year. That was a lie when The Chosen One first uttered it ... and it's a lie today. And t the lie continues ... In order to pay for their healthcare dreams and schemes, Harry Reid's community plan would include raising taxes on individuals making more than $200,000 a year. In other words .. let's tax the achievers to pay for a government redistribution scheme of healthcare resources.

And one other point ... for all you ladies (or men) thinking of giving the girls a facelift or the schnauz a new do, the bill calls for a 5% tax on elective plastic surgery.

Bottom line .. more government, more taxes on the achievers, less freedom. That's the Democrat Party way. That's the change you voted for ... right?

God help us.

We will have Jamie Dupree explain this one to us, but it seems as though Harry Reid is gearing up to use the reconciliation tactic to get his healthcare bill passed in the Senate. This is the tactic that would require only a simple majority - fifty votes plus one - for final passage. Actually ... I'll take a stab here. This means that Harry Reid wants to attach the health care takeover to some budget bill. Budget bills can't be filibustered ... so they can pass on a majority vote.

This should show you how desperate the Democrats are to gain control over your health care. They'll break the rules .. they'll bend the rules. They'll lie. They'll mislead. They'll twist arms, bribe, lie cheat and steal. Whatever it takes. Democrats know that control over your health care is essential to preventing another voter revolution like the one that kicked their butts out of office in 1994. They reason that if they control your health care, they control your vote. All they have to do is tell you that if you vote for the evil Republicans you will be on your own when it comes to your next hospital visit.

Now, let me remind you of a video from 2007. In this video you will hear Barack Obama say that we cannot pass healthcare reform using this reconciliation tactic. You would think that this should settle things ... so much for Harry's big idea, right? Sorry ... but wrong. We could fill a feature-length motion picture with video and audio clips of The Community Organizer making campaign promises that he had no intention of keeping.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cdharrison/ CC BY-SA 2.0

Okay, you already know ... the Senate Finance Committee got their Baucus bill passed. Sadly even though much of the bill wasn't even written when these Senators decided to vote on it. Yup .. you head me right.

Now just how in the world do you pass a bill that isn't even written yet? Well, you have these little goodies called "place holders." These place holders figuratively say "When the bill is written, we will fill in this blank ." Wow! I feel so much better about the legislative process now.

Well .. it's hard to comment on the parts of this bill that haven't even been written yet; but we can sure say something about a line that showed up on the "Plain English" version of the bill which the Senators did have. Right there, in black and white, it said that we would be offered the "convenience" of getting their health insurance at the Department of Motor Vehicles.

What? Yep you read that correctly. You will be able to go to the DMV in order to get health insurance.

Remember just a last week, I played a video for you from BigGovernment.com. It was a parody of a video by some Hollywood actors about health insurance and their evil profits. Well this parody video used the phrase "DMV-style healthcare." Did they know something that we didn't when they produced that video? Seems so. That's exactly what we're going to have! You think renewing your driver's license is a pain now, just wait until you have to wait for some welfare brood mare to sign up her and her litter for health insurance! And it looks like that is closer to reality than we would hope.

According to CNS News, it will be the duty of the Health and Human Services Secretary or the state governments to make sure that you have access to health insurance at the DMV. You would also be able to get government health insurance at .... government schools!


Don't believe me? Page 19 of the committee's "plain English" text says: "The Secretary and/or states would do the following: ... Enable customers to enroll in health care plans in local hospitals, schools, Departments of Motor Vehicles, local Social Security offices, and other offices designated by the state."

I suspect that this is just the first of many wonderful surprises to come from the looters.

So funny-guy Al Franken has officially been declared the winner of the Minnesota Senate race. Eight months later. Why is this a big deal? Well, the Democrats finally get their coveted 60-seat filibuster proof majority. Just in time for them to pass global warming and healthcare legislation.

By the way ... two points.

First ... I know Al Franken. He is quite possibly one of the biggest world-class jerks I have ever encountered in my life. A true void surrounded by a sphincter muscle. The people of Minnesota are in for a real treat on this one. Even Cynthia McKinney doesn't come close. She's actually charming.

Second ... The election was stolen by going to counties where Franken was strong and creating extra votes from absentee and rejected ballots. How can you have confidence in an election where the rules on how to count the votes change from district to district.

You can't.

Do you think that Arlen Specter has had his "oh crap .. what have I done" moment yet? Considering the fact that he has lost all seniority in the Senate, I would say that moment is coming soon if it hasn't already. The amazing part of the story is that Senator Harry Reid apparently promised Specter that he would retain his seniority if he jumped parties. Angry Arlen trusted the cadaver? He didn't take into consideration the fact that government is all about power, and his fellow Democrats weren't about to give up any of their precious power just so they could claim another desk on their side of the aisle. Either way, Specter is confident that Harry is going to "work it out" and that his assurances on seniority "will be fulfilled." Keep dreamin, Arlen.

So what may have done it for the Democrats? Debbie Stabenow says that many of her colleagues were irritated when Specter told The New York Times that the Minnesota courts should "do justice" by declaring Norm Coleman to be the winner of the Senate race against Al Franken.

Here's why this seniority issue is a big deal for Arlen Specter .. it limits his ability to get pork projects, money and jobs for his state. See, Specter was a senior ranking member on the all-powerful Appropriations Committee. He says, "My senior position on Appropriations has enabled me to bring a lot of jobs and a lot of federal funding to this state." Without this, Arlen believes that he doesn't have the "power" he has accumulated during his 29 years in the Senate. Without power, he probably won't be re-elected.

Wouldn't that be wonderful?

In the meantime ... does anyone see a Republican leader on the horizon? Yeah, I thought so.

I am honestly not sure if Kent Conrad is referring to God or Barack Obama. Seriously, folks. Here's the scenario: the House and Senate passed Obama's $3.5 trillion spending blueprint. This included language to pass national healthcare through the process of reconciliation, which would allow the Democrats to bypass any Republican filibuster. However, the Democrats in the Senate told Americans that they were against using this process to achieve healthcare reform. So when Kent Conrad was asked about this change, he said that he was pushed into reconciliation by a "higher power."

Now does my question make a little more sense?

So I guess this means I can't refer to him as RINO Arlen Specter anymore or highlight his status as one of the Three Stooges. You have to be a member of the Republican Party in order to be a RINO, but now that is moot. The guy decided that he is switching teams ... no not like Barney Frank ... well kinda like Barney Frank ... he is going to go bat for the Democrats.

Did anyone see this coming? Judging by the reaction yesterday, I would say no. Maybe that was because just one month ago Specter was saying that he valued the two party system of checks and balances and that he was NOT going to switch parties again. (That's right, again. He switched from Democrat to Republican in 1966.) I think that Senator Jim DeMint put it well: "I would rather have 30 Republicans in the Senate who really believe in principles of limited government, free markets, free people, than to have 60 that don't have a set of beliefs."

The Democrats seem happy to take him. Obama says that the Democrats are "thrilled" to have him and will throw their "full support" behind Specter. In fact, Obama says that he will campaign and raise money for Specter's reelection campaign in 2010.. more on that in a minute. "Full support" also means that the teacher's and other unions will fall in lockstep behind Specter's reelection effort.

So why is this important? Well ... with Al "the jerk" Franken pretty much set to become the Senator from Minnesota, this would essentially give the Democrats their 60 seats. They would have a filibuster-proof majority. Do you remember how crucial it was for Saxby Chambliss to hang on to his seat in Georgia, preventing the Democrats from getting their 60 seats? All of that is now completely out the window. There are many reasons why the Democrats are thrilled to have him, but there is one particular piece of legislation on which Specter's vote could be crucial: the card check bill. As a Republican from Pennsylvania, Specter decided that he did not support the card check bill. Now that he is a Democrat, will that vote change? I would likely say yes. Remember .. there's all that union support for Specter now.

So now to address the big question: why the heck did he do it? The answer is very simple. Power. Arlen Specter knew that there was a distinct possibility that he would lose his reelection campaign in 2010. His poll numbers in Pennsylvania have been rapidly slipping, and he was going to be pitted against Pat Toomey in the Republican primary. How embarrassing would it be, not only for Arlen Specter to lose his seat, but to lose his party's nomination for his own seat? So the solution: don't run as a Republican. Instead, jump onto the Barack Obama bandwagon and hope that the coattails are long enough to carry him to 2010. After all, Obama has said that he will campaign and raise money for the guy. If there is one thing that Obama is good at doing, it is campaigning. So Specter gets to stand side-by-side with THE Barack Obama and run for reelection. In the meantime, Arlen Specter has gone from a joke of a Republican to an extremely powerful player in Congress. Think about how much power this guy suddenly wields when vote time rolls around. He will caucus with the Democrats, but does that really mean he is an assured Democrat vote? Will the Republicans spend their time trying to "win him back"? If that is the case, this will certainly deflect their attention from actually getting anything done in Congress. Like that was much of an issue anyway. But I really believe that this all about Arlen Specter's ability to seize a powerful position in Congress and to keep it for a long, long time.

Reader's Digest version? Power over principle. Simple as that.

Senator Arlen Specter releases a statement that he is switching to the Democrat Party. Discuss.

Is Al Franken on the verge of being sworn in as the new Senator from Minnesota? His lead now is 312 votes out of 2.9 million cast. Incumbent Norm Coleman is going to probably need a court miracle to retain his seat.

You folks in Minnesota are beyond belief. How in the hell could you possibly vote for this footstool to be your Senator? I know this guy. I've seen him in action. I know of no bigger jackass in public life. Al Franken is a world-class purified jerk. You'll soon discover this if he is actually sworn in .. but it will take six years for you to correct your moronic actions.

He's going to be your burden and your embarrassment. Hope that works out for you.

As you can see, I'm really having trouble saying what I truly feel here.

On Friday night we got a "compromise" stimulus plan in the Senate. For those of you who are brave, Jamie Dupree has the entirety of this Senate stimulus bill for you to peruse. I read somewhere that the bill is something like 778 pages long .. which means that it is costing us over $1 billion per page. That's just a bit more than Congressman John Linder and I earned with The FairTax Book. As expected, the two Maine RINOS, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe are saying yes to this monstrosity. Arlen Specter is joining in .. not to anyone's real surprise.

Part of this Senate compromise bill (thanks to Sen. Ben Nelson and Sen. Susan Collins) includes the elimination of pork-barrel projects that are not considered "stimulative." Now, we will leave it up to you to decide whether or not they accomplished that goal. After all, this Senate compromise bill is still $7 billion more than the House version.

If things go according to plan today, the Senate could end debate on the bill and pass the thing tomorrow. Then the Senate and House would have to caucus to come up with a compromise bill .. remember that the Senate and House versions of this bill are very different. The Democrats are insistent on this bill being on Obama's desk and ready to sign by President's Day. That's in one week, folks. One week to rush this thing through the Senate, noodle it out between the House and Senate, and have it ready for Obama to sign.

Do any of you find this just a bit disconcerting? Our economy is in trouble. Arguably some sort of government action might be necessary to speed up recovery .. and we have these people we would hope would take this thing seriously rushing to pass an $800 billion bill that will profoundly affect generations to come .. and to pass it in time for it to be signed by some holiday. Do these people want to be taken seriously or not?

I just want you to stop for a second and think back to the November election. There was a point in time when the Democrats had a serious shot at getting 60 senators for their party. Imagine if we had given the Democrats an absolute free pass on the largest spending bill in history. No need for all this "bipartisanship" and "compromise" .. although I think we can hardly call all of this "bipartisanship."

This bill is going to harm our country. It is going to harm your children and grandchildren. Barack Obama clearly does not know what he is doing - no surprise considering his lack of experience - and has turned our economy over to people like Nancy Pelosi who want nothing more than to grow their own power. The "change we can believe in" turns out to be a transition from a market economy to a government controlled economy. You're not going to like how this turns out.

Barack Obama says that we should not let "very modest differences" get in the way of the Democrats massive spending bill, otherwise known as the economic stimulus bill. It's funny that Obama would consider the differences between government spending a tax cuts "very modest." Do I really need to explain the fundamental differences between the plans the Democrats have proposed and those supported by Republicans? I didn't think so.

Jamie Dupree has done a top notch job of combing through this Senate economic stimulus bill .. I'll give you a little taste of what he found, and you can check out his blog for a lot more details. But this, according to Democrats, constitutes economic stimulus:

• $350 million to develop and maintain a "broadband inventory map" at the Department of Commerce (that's Jamie's favorite)
• $1.375 billion for "Rural Water and Waste Disposal"
• $1 billion for the 2010 Census
• $150 million for the Office of the Federal Detention Trustee
• $50 million in aid to combat Internet Crimes Against Children
• $1.4 billion for water projects for Indian tribes
• $10 million to inspect canals in urban areas
• $2.1 billion on energy efficiency in government buildings
• $600 million to buy high fuel economy vehicles for the federal government
• $240 million for "Alteration of Bridges"
• $55 million for Historic Preservation in Park System
• $150 million for facilities at the Smithsonian
• $100 million in Aging nutrition services
• $400 million for screening and prevention of STD's, including HIV
• $1.5 billion for "Homelessness Prevention Fund"

Keeping all of these pork barrel projects in mind .. and by the way, that doesn't even scratch the surface of what is actually in this bill .. Obama says that he would be willing to scale back some of his spending plans in order to win Republican support. He said that he would remove any proposals which were not directly aimed at job creation.

OK ... let's parse that a second. Job creation? Most of Obama's stimulus plan is "work" creation, not job creation. These temporary construction and infrastructure projects don't create jobs, they create work. When you're finished sprucing up those government offices at the Department of Agriculture that work disappears. Ditto for landscaping around the National Mall. Also - where Obama's spending plan does create jobs they're generally government jobs, not private sector jobs.

Just a few weeks ago I told you about a hearing with the chairman of the joint committee on taxation. He was there to testify on behalf of the economic stimulus package. And when he is asked how many jobs this plan is expected to create, the guy didn't have an answer. Amazing.

How do you modify the stimulus plan? Start with each of the projects above. Then move on to every project that focuses on government work instead of private sector jobs. How do you do that? Pretty easy, actually. You put more money into the hands of the private sector - businesses large to small - to create jobs. The way to do that is through tax cuts. Not phony welfare checks you call tax cuts, but actual tax cuts. Right now the corporate tax rate in the U.S. is the second highest in the industrialized world. Do you think that is how to work toward business and job growth? If you do, you're a Democrat.

This week the Senate will be debating this $900 billion economic stimulus package. At least, that is what they call it. It reads more like a Christmas list for Democrat supporters, constituents and donors. Last week, not one Republican in the House voted to support the bill. And the way things are shaping up, we could possibly see the same happen in the Senate. Over the weekend, senior Republican senators warned that Republicans would be unlikely to support the bill without major changes. Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona says that Republican support for the stimulus is eroding and that "major structural changes" are needed in order to win support. He says, "You have to start from scratch and reconstruct this." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell doubts that the bill would be able to pass the Senate in its current form.

Still -- Democrats want this thing passed and waiting for Obama to sign no later than mid-February. It's already February 2nd, folks. Are you going to get in the game and start putting some pressure on your Senators? Jamie Dupree says that Congress isn't getting the type of groundswell opposition that they have seen in the past. This is no time for apathy. This is your children's and grandchildren's future we are talking about. This trillion-dollar-plus Democrat dream fulfillment bill will hamstring what's left of our free market economy for decades to come. Do you think this incredible level of spending is going to end after just one or two years? Well sit forward on your rent-to-own furniture and try to think about this. How in the world do these free-spending Democrats tell their voters two years from now that the handouts are going to stop? How do they tell all the workers on their temporary "raking leaves in National Forests" jobs have ended and now they have to actually go get a real job in the private sector? Hint: They won't. They will want to keep power .. and power comes from votes ... and votes come from government largesse. There will be more spending bills like this one to follow. More debt. Larger government and a economy limping along on low-grade corrosive government fuel.

I just hope I can remember most of them......

• Israel fighting back against Hamas ... and the world's reaction.
• That idiot attorney who used to represent the PLO and her insane observations on the Middle East situation.
• What is in store for our country with leaders elected by the less-educated and poorly informed?
• Al Franken will probably be named the winner of that Senatorial race in Minnesota. How many of you really doubt that there was some funny business in the counting of the ballots. Franken, by the way, is a jerk.
• Obama is dead set against the idea of school choice ... for you. Today his spawn start school at an exclusive private institution in Washington DC. Choice for the Obamas. No choice for you.

Come on, you have to be kidding me. Yeah ... I've heard all of this nonsense over the weekend about the Democrats blocking the door to the U.S. Senate to prevent Roland Burris from being seated. Yeah ... sure.

So what if Governor Blago appointed Burris while he was under a rather dense cloud of suspicion. Are you forgetting the most important point here? Burris, in case you haven't noticed, is black. When he is seated he will be the only black in the Senate. Now you tell me that the Democrats are going to prevent the swearing-in of the only black in the Senate. Don't hold your breath. Political correctness will rule; just as in the forthcoming appointment of Caroline "you know" Kennedy.

Fact is, since Blago hasn't stepped down, he still has the legal right to appoint Obama's replacement. And he did .. despite his own party's wishes. He appointed former state attorney general Roland Burris. As far as Burris goes.. we'll get into him another time. Like the fact that he is an advocate for a national handgun ban. But again .. I digress.

So Harry Reid decides that he isn't going to allow Burris to be seated. Reid says that he has the "legal authority" under the Constitution to bar anyone that is selected by Rod Blagojevich. He points to Article I, Section 5 which says that "Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members..." Reid's interpretation of this is, "We determine who sits in the Senate. And the House (of Representatives) determines who sits in the House. So there's clearly legal authority for us to do whatever we want to do. This goes back for generations."

You'll be interested to read this piece in the Wall Street Journal about a legal precedent for cases like this, set by the Supreme Court back in 1969. Like it or not, the only way Harry can get rid of Burris legally would be to allow him to be sworn in and then get two-thirds of the Senate to vote for his expulsion.

Enter the race card. Yep, so Roland Burris is black. As we have been reminded many times .. Obama's seat was supposed to be filled by a black man. I guess that's some sort of a law. Blagojevich held up that end of the bargain. But aides for Burris are now saying that Harry Reid won't allow Burris to be seated because of his race. Who didn't see that coming? A senior consultant to Burris told Politico, "It's interesting that all those who are viable are white women and the ones who are unacceptable are black men." Oh, you didn't hear about that? Apparently Harry Reid talked to Blagojevich about who should fill the Senate seat just six days before Blagojevich was arrested. During that conversation, Reid didn't want any of Blagojevich's suggestions (which all happened to black men) and favored two women who happen to be white. So there's that ..

We operate under a rule of law here ... Seat Burris. Uphold the Constitution.

I mean, what can you say, folks? Yesterday we found out that Jesse Jackson Jr. is "Senate Candidate 5" in the criminal complaint of Blagojevich. Senate Candidate 5 is the one that would be considered for the senate seat, but only if he could raise $1 million in campaign contributions for Blagojevich.

So Jesse Jackson Jr. had a little press conference. He says that he hasn't done anything wrong. And maybe that is true. But will this be enough to ensure that he will NOT be the next Senator from Illinois.

I will give Jesse Jr. credit for knowing that there is no Constitutional right to vote in a presidential election in this country. He has introduced a resolution calling for a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing that right. That puts him way ahead of most of the elected representatives and people in this country.

Yesterday during the program we were graced with the news that Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich (a Democrat) was arrested. The very short story is that the guy is a complete corrupt footstool. I mean, seriously .. the FBI says it has phone call recordings of this guy - a sitting governor - trying to sell of Barack Obama's senate seat. And that is just the first page! There are 76 pages full of different schemes this guy had going .. like telling the Chicago Tribune that he would give the paper financial help if it agreed to fire some of its editorial writers that were critical of him.

So there are a couple of issues at stake here. Let's start out slow.

First of all, what do you do about Barak Obama's senate seat? The seat still has to be filled. Clearly this creep isn't going to be appointing anyone, so now what? There are talks of the Senate taking over the process. Either way, we know the rules .. It's a black seat now ... a historical black seat ... so at least we know that whoever is appointed or selected or chosen or whatever to fill that seat is going to absolutely, positively, without question have to be black. And no ... there no discrimination here, is there now?

But on to far juicier things .. did Barack Obama's transition team know this was going on? Heck, did Barack Obama himself know this was going on? That question is already getting testy. Yesterday Obama said that he hasn't had any contact with the governor or his office. But there is a statement out there from David Axelrod that he made on November 23, 2008 saying, "I know he's talked to the governor and there are a whole range of names many of which have surfaced, and I think he has a fondness for a lot of them." Of course now the Obama transition team has come out and said that Axelrod "misspoke" back in November. Don't you just like this "misspoke" angle? I think "screwed up" is more appropriate. But that is about all we will get for now until the FBI releases more information about the recorded phone calls.

So the next step is .. let's try to figure out how close was Barack Obama to this guy. Even if they weren't close, shouldn't this say SOMETHING about the political culture that produced Barack Obama? From what I can tell, Obama endorsed Blagojevich for governor in 2002 and 2006. He also happened to serve as a top advisor to him during his 2002 run. Guess who was also in the picture? Rahm Emanuel. It can be said that Obama and Emanuel were among Blagojevich's top strategists when he won in 2002.

In 2002, on a Chicago TV show, Obama had the following exchange:

Obama: "Right now, my main focus is to make sure that we elect Rod Blagojevich as Governor, we..."
Host: "You working hard for Rod?"
Obama: "You betcha"
Host: "Hot Rod?"
Obama: "That's exactly right"

And more recently, in 2006, Obama spoke at the Illinois State Fair on behalf of Blagojevich.

Bottom line .. you need to remember that our next president came from the same political culture as did this corrupt governor. Most of Obama's myrmidons don't realize it, but Obama won his first race for office not by getting more votes than the other folks, but by arranging to have his opponents - ALL of them - kicked off the ballot. Now if that doesn't carry the stench of Chicago-style politics ...

All eyes on Georgia tomorrow.  There is one more election where the voters still have an actual say ... and that would be right here.  Republican incumbent Saxby Chambliss is facing Democrat Jim Martin in a runoff.  The vote is tomorrow; and it's all about turnout.

Yeah, I know.  They're still counting votes in Minnesota, and Norm Coleman may still prevail against Democrat funny guy Al Franken.  But this one is in the hands of the politicians, lawyers and judges.  Georgia is in the hands of the voters - it this may be the last stand before a 60-vote filibuster proof Democrat majority in the Senate. 

There is voter anger against Chambliss in Georgia.  This I understand.  Saxby's vote in favor of the bailout bill has a lot of people fuming .. but there's a lot of second-guessing here.  We now know that that the $700 billion bailout essentially amounts to a slush fund .. and hundreds of billions may be saved for Obama to spend.  This is not what the people wanted and not what the Republicans in the Senate voted for.  But now it is what it is, and letting the Democrats have their 60 seats isn't going to change anything.  This is about votes to come.  Votes to raise taxes, votes to redistribute wealth, votes to expand the power of government, votes to confirm anti-Constitutional Supreme Court justices and to pass the unionization-by-intimidation bill.  In a worse-case scenario this election tomorrow in Georgia could be about votes on whether or not the government will seize all or a portion of our 401Ks and pension plans, and a vote on whether or not to remove the cap on Social Security taxes.  Would you like to see means-testing for your Social Security benefits?  Would you like for the government to come to you when you reach retirement age and tell you that you have simply been too successful to collect your Social Security -- that the money is needed for people who didn't work quite so hard?

It's all about turnout.  The polls show it too close to call.  You can bet that those who vote for a living will be at the polls.  The unions will be sending their vans out, driven by union volunteers, to collect as many Democrat voters and deliver them to the polls as possible.  Hey ... they have the card check bill to protect.  Churchgoers across Atlanta were admonished to go to the polls and vote for Martin on Tuesday.  The Democrats are running ads of Saxby Chambliss pictured next to a multi-million dollar yacht cursing the seas - the wealth envy card being played to the hilt.  Those with no job - those who vote for their living - will have no trouble leaving work (yeah, right) to vote.  Will you? 

Check this out. Click here and take a look at this one ballot in Minnesota. Minnesota, in case you don't know, is where the Democrats are busy stealing a Senate seat. Just 150 or so votes separate the incumbent Republican Norm Coleman and ultra-leftist Democrat Al Franken. Al Franken is actually taking this one particular ballot to the courts saying that the voter was obviously voting against Norm Coleman. Again ...just look at the ballot to get a clear idea what is going on here.

Are we going to allow the Democrats to use tactics like this to get their filibuster-proof majority in the Senate? Well, that depends on the voters in Georgia. On December 2nd Georgia voters can prevent that 60-vote majority, no matter what Al Franken manages to pull off in Minnesota. The Minnesota Senate race will be determined by politicians ... the Georgia Senate runoff between Republican incumbent Saxby Chambliss and Democrat Jim Martin will be decided by the voters ... and it's all going to rest on just who heads to the polls.

There is going to be much gnashing of teeth of the last roadblock - the possibility of a Republican filibuster - is removed from the path of Obama, Pelosi and Reid. There is absolutely nothing in Martin's past that indicates he would be anything other than Obama's dog washer and Reid's sock puppet in Washington.

Weeks ago I was saying that the political focus was going to be on Georgia after the general election. Finally I get something right. We need something to slow down the big-government goals of the Democrats. Georgia voters are that something.

Well, for better or for worse, the Boortz Show really has to be on its game the next couple of weeks ... just when I'm feeling a bit lazy. (So, what else is new?) The nation will be tuning in to see Georgians Saxby Chambliss and that anti-FairTax liar Jim Martin battle it out for the Senate. We still have one county counting its votes, but it looks like it's going to be a runoff to be held December 2nd. Yesterday CNN was reporting that Chambliss had the 50%. Finally, when it came down to it, Chambliss missed it by 0.1% ... he ended up with 49.9% when he needed to get 50% of the popular vote.

The good news is that with Alan Buckley (also an anti-FairTax candidate) out of the race, we will have to see how many of those Libertarians will defect to the Republicans versus the Democrats.

We'll see if Jim Martin has the onions to abandon this "Saxby Chambliss will add 23% to the price of everything that you buy" line and campaign on the truth. This is one of the big problems with the FairTax, it is easy to demagogue. Martin proved that in this Senate race. Let's see how many informed voters there are out there.

Unions in this country just can't wait for Barack Obama to move into the White House and Nancy and Harry to assume their thrones in Congress. If the unions get this card check bill, you can kiss Wal-Mart goodbye. Here's the latest report:

"Mike Asensio, a attorney who heads the labor relations practice team at the law firm of Baker Hostetler, said there probably will be enough votes in the Senate to withstand a filibuster and get some form of the legislation passed. 'Labor has been fighting for 14 years through political contributions to have a voice ...They now have a Democrat in the White House who will sign labor reform,' he said. House Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, a California Democrat, said on Wednesday that Democrats in the next Congress 'will fight to restore workers' rights.'"

Here we go, folks. The real danger may not lie in a Barack Obama presidency. It lies in a filibuster-proof Democrat Senate and a Democrat House majority.

How long will it be before the union organizers show up at your workplace? Answer: Days after the "card check" bill is passed. I wonder how many people voted themselves out of a job this week?

It is still hard to tell for sure the full extent of the damage in the Congress. But it basically went as expected. The Democrats won't get their magical 60 seats in the Senate, but they will have enough. Already with a majority in the Senate, Republican Sens. Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina and John Sununu of New Hampshire lost their seats to Democrats. Also, Virginia and New Mexico picked up seats from retiring GOP Senators. Some races (like in Minnesota) are still too close to call.

In the House, the Democrats were able to knock out at least 12 Republicans so far and gain 9 open GOP seats. There were a few Republicans who were able to win over Democrat incumbents (four, to be exact). But a lot of these races are still going. The last we heard, Democrats had over 250 seats in the House and at this rate, they are expected to gain 20 seats in total. That would put their somewhere around 255 seats.

Oh and let's not even get started on Governor's races.

The Democrats are now saying that they don't need the 60 seats in the Senate ... they only need to get 57 because there are certain Republican Senators that they can count on to vote with them a majority of the time (those are called RINOs folks).