taxes

Yesterday we posted a poll that asked Tea Party Activists whether or not they think Scott Ashjian, the third party “Tea Party” candidate for U.S. Senate should withdraw from the race. With more than 900 votes in, 95% say yes.

This morning, 20 grassroots tea party groups across the state of Nevada released a joint statement rebuking the candidacy of Scott Ashjian and the attempt to hijack the tea party brand through a third party filing.

Our group, The Patriot Caucus (we now have statewide operations in Nevada), is a proud signer of the statement.

For Immediate Release: March 10, 2010
From Nevada grassroots and tea party leaders
Subject: Unified Statement / Grassroots Nevada is United

We, the grassroots/tea party leaders of Nevada, speaking for the conservative activists in our communities, are united in issuing the following statement.

• We are united in denouncing the TPN (Tea Party of Nevada).
-o The TPN is not a conservative party who speaks for grassroots and tea party activists in Nevada.
-o The TPN is not now, has never been, and will never be affiliated with grassroots efforts in Nevada.
-o The term “Tea Party Candidate” will no longer be used to indicate grassroots support for a candidate or candidates.
-o The TPN will not be invited to or allowed to represent themselves at conservative grassroots events and functions across Nevada.
• We are united in our desire for fiscal responsibility, transparency, and accountability from legislators and in legislation from Carson City, NV and Washington, D.C.
• We are united in opposition of progressive leanings towards unfunded mandates as a solution to appeasing special interest and delivering ‘social justice’.
• We are united in the belief that our government should be inspiring pride and accountability, and personal strength and opportunity, not a path for us to follow to have our needs met as the government sees fit.

We, the tea party activists and grassroots organizers in Nevada, are united.

Signed on March 10, 2010:

-Anger is Brewing / Debbie Landis
-National Precinct Alliance / Tony Warren
-Citizens Awareness Network / Jesse Law
-Nevada Active Conservatives / Duane Smith
-Citizens in Action / Juanita Cox
-Nevada Families Eagle Forum / Janine Hanson
-Fallon Tea Party II / Bob Clifford
-Nevada Patriots / Diana Orrock
-Gardnerville Tea party / Ron Stevens
-NvRA / Travis Christensen
-Glenn Beck Meetup Group/ Sally Minster
-P.A.C.T. / Janice Baldwin
-Grassroots Nevada / Jamie Costello
-Reject Reid / Sheila Danish
-Las Vegas 9-12’ers / Jeff Waffle
-Nevada 9-12 Americans / Charlene Bybee
-Las Vegas Tea Party / Frank Ricotta
-Western Representation PAC / Dustin Stockton
-Patriot Caucus / Eric Odom
-Winnemucca Tea Party / Mike Myrhow

Share and Save

The Las Vegas Sun recently published a story about Scott Ashjian, the new “Tea Party” candidate in Nevada who apparently believes that if you say you’re the tea party candidate, you should be considered such. But as some in Nevada are pointing out, just because you say you are a tea party candidate doesn’t actually make it so.

For those of you unaware, a third party called the Tea Party of Nevada just registered with the SOS. I’ve been researching and emailing around ever since, and here is what I’ve come up with so far:

I cannot find any evidence that any of these principals have ever been involved in any Tea Party activities, until now. I’ve emailed a number of Tea Party organizer-activists in the state and so far, nobody has ever heard of any of the principals – except for Barry Levinson because he is a Las Vegas attorney.

I’ve now been living in Nevada for a week (I’ll be here for the rest of 2010) and I’ve already spoken with several tea party organizers across the state who believe Mr. Ashjian is in some way in this race to help Harry Reid keep his seat.

The Las Vegas Sun said the following:

One thing has become clear in the days since the mostly obscure political upstart Jon Scott Ashjian became a candidate for U.S. Senate: He’s no stooge of Sen. Harry Reid.

I’m not personally convinced that Ashjian is a “stooge” for Harry Reid, but I think it’s certainly safe to say that his agenda does not include what’s best for the movement. I say this because I believe that if Ashjian actually did care about doing what is best for the movement, he never would have gotten into the race to begin with.

In a recent guest appearance on Fox News, Ashjian is confronted with the fact that he has virtually zero support within the actual Tea Party Movement. In typical spin fashion, Ashjian deflects the question and repeats his talking points.

Several activists, bloggers and reporters are currently looking into the background of Ashjian as many are still convinced he’s an intentional spoiler. I have doubts on whether or not anything significant will be found. We have to remember that the “powers that be” have been at this for years and have millions of dollars at their disposal. If there is a coordinated effort happening, I imagine those pulling the strings have done their homework.

In other words, don’t expect to find any smoking gun on this.

But in my view, that isn’t as relevant as many are trying to make it. I believe the fact that Ashjian is even in the race is enough evidence of his blatant disregard for the wishes of the Tea Party Movement. Nevada activists, Nevada tea partiers, tea party organizers, and even national tea party related organizations (including ours) have all rebuked Ashjian and his candidacy, yet he continues on with his bid for the seat.

There is no doubt that Ashjian is the best hope Harry Reid has to keep his seat. I know it, you know it and Ashjian knows it. Ashjian will indeed pull votes away from the Republican candidate in the race, and in a race this big, those votes can and will make a world of difference.

With this in mind, our advisory committee is considering a protest in Nevada to demand that Ashjian withdraw from the race and immediately stop pretending to represent the wishes of the Tea Party Movement. We’ll have an announcement about this tomorrow, but in the meantime we would love to know how you feel.

Please vote in the poll and share your thoughts using the comment form below.

After you vote, please click here to spread the link/poll on Twitter.

For Liberty,
-Eric Odom

Share and Save

If the Tea Party movement is irrelevant, ineffective and out-of-touch – why does the left even bother with it? If the Tea Party movement is a small group of angry Republicans – why it is being treated as a huge threat to the liberal agenda and ideology? If the Tea Party movement is as insignificant as many liberals would like to believe – why spend the time to participate in smear campaigns against it?

The reality is the Tea Party movement has dramatically changed the political landscape of the 2010 election cycle. It was not too long ago that the only voices being heard across the nation were those of the politicians, but today we are hearing the voices of the American people. In many instances, people who once sat in their living rooms watching the evening news have now become the evening news themselves. What were once one-sided political speeches are now open dialogues between the politicians and the people.

Only someone in a state of complete denial would fail to recognize the voice of the American people has been restored (in great part) through the Tea Party movement. People, who used to look around the room before making political statements, are now making their statements in the public arena without regard for who may hear them.

Of course the liberals are angry with and in opposition to the Tea Party movement – it is not politically correct and it does not hide its head in the sand while allowing the world to go by in Washington, DC. And finally!….decisions that are made in Washington, must be made in light of the voices of the American people which have become too vocal to be ignored.

The Tea Party movement is being misrepresented and mischaracterized by the liberals, progressives and leftists – some of it intentional, some of it out of ignorance. One of the most blatant examples was a segment on the MSNBC program, “The Dylan Ratigan Show” in what was supposed to be an interview of Mark Williams from the Tea Party Express. Instead, it became a passionate and personal tirade from Ratigan manifesting his “anger”. Oddly enough, the left thrives in attaching the word “anger” to the Tea Party movement.

One of the most vivid illustrations of the recognizable force of the Tea Party movement is seen in Nancy Pelosi’s changing perception. It was not too long ago that she said the movement was not “grassroots” , but “astroturf” . In doing so, her purpose was to tie the Tea Party movement to the special interests of the wealthy by giving them tax cuts that would not be enjoyed by everyone else. Now she says, “we share some of the views of the Tea Partiers in terms of the role of special interest in Washington, D.C., as — it just has to stop. And that’s why I’ve fought the special interest, whether it’s on energy, whether it’s on health insurance, whether it’s on pharmaceuticals and the rest.”

It is not of importance as to what the liberal left paints the Tea Party movement to look like – they will paint what they will paint. What is important is that we know who we are and what we are about. Some in the Tea Party movement are trying to paint themselves as the “official leader or group within the movement” . The fact remains that there are thousands of freedom loving American people, with each individual “officially” making up what we know as the Tea Party movement. The day that fact changes, we will cease to be a movement and we will become an organization, with the power being transferred from the “many activists” across the country to the “few leaders” in the home office.

Movements are born in momentum, and right now, we must keep the momentum moving……..

Share and Save

Rick Perry won the Republican nomination to continue as governor of Texas by a wide margin. To the surprise of many people, he avoided a runoff with Kay Bailey Hutchinson in the process. The final vote tally is Rick Perry with 757,461 – 51.09%, Kay Bailey Hutchinson 449,632 – 30.33% and Debra Medina 275,604 18.59%.

Perry ran an anti-Washington campaign labeling Hutchinson as a Washington insider who would bring a Washington agenda to the state of Texas. This is a message that could resound throughout primary elections in other states. In the Texas governor’s race, the anti-Washington factor trumped the anti-incumbent fervor that is sweeping the nation. Perry is Texas’ longest serving governor, now in his 10th year.

In her concession speech, Hutchinson did not mention her political future; except to encourage her voters to throw their support behind Perry. Her third term in the Senate runs through 2012, but she said in a broadcast last month she would leave Congress before the November general election. Many Texas conservatives prefer she reconsider and finish her term, a desire shared by some of her colleagues. Sen. Judd Gregg said Hutchison is “one of our best” and should remain in her Senate seat. Sen. John Cornyn of Texas who serves as the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said Tuesday, “I’m not sure there will be a special election. . . . She could well decide to serve out the remainder of her term.”

Perry will face Democrat Bill White , the former Houston mayor, in a race that both Democrats and Republicans expect to be very competitive with close results. White won the Democratic nomination with 75.99% of the vote, even though he had six challengers. The Democratic Governors Association has exhibited their confidence in White’s ability to defeat Perry by giving him $500,000 with more expected to follow. White’s campaign is taking the “outsider” approach.

In the Republican primary, Perry was able to label Hutchison as the epitome of everything that’s wrong with Washington which was music to the ears of many people in the Tea Party movement. Even though this was just one primary and in a very conservative state at that, there are some observations that could play into other primaries as well.

1) Anything to that even “sounds or smells like a Washington insider” is suspect. Hutchison made the mistake of touting how many federal dollars she had brought to the state of Texas at a time when Pork Barrel spending and state funded favors are getting significant negative attention. Hutchinson said, “It definitely has made it more difficult for me. I didn’t think that anyone could turn my success in producing results for Texas into a negative.” That is exactly what Perry was able to do.

2) Anti-Washington Republicans, even if they are an incumbent, have an advantage with Tea Party movement voters. Perry had a non-incumbent challenger in Medina who identified with the Tea Party, yet he still pulled a large percentage of Tea Party votes. He was able to do so by effectively criticizing a big-government, big-spending Democratic agenda. He proved that Republicans who embrace anti-federal government views and policies can attract these voters without turning off the GOP base.

3) A solid Tea Party identity does not translate into automatic Tea Party votes. Medina – who many considered to be “the” Tea Party candidate — did not pull enough votes from Perry to force a runoff, let alone win the nomination.

4) In order to defeat an incumbent who has a favorable rating, the challengers must give the voters a clear reason to choose them rather than the incumbent. Hutchison gave reasons such as “coming home to Texas”, “I love the state of Texas” , or “Gov. Perry is trying to stay too long.” She never really gave a reason as to why Perry should not serve another term or why Texas Republicans should upset the status quo of two popular people in positions of power – one in Austin as the governor and the other in Washington as a senator. The status quo has been good for Texas in many ways where the recession has been less devastating than in other states, the unemployment rate is below the national average, and corporations are not being bailed out. Perry has received much of the credit for the state being in better shape than others.

In the final count, the voters rejected change — and Washington.

Though Tea Party “identified” candidates did not pull off of any major victories, Medina put up strong numbers at 18%, despite the fact she was running against two very strong challengers in Perry and Hutchinson. Phillip Dennis , who sits on the steering committee of the Dallas Tea Party said Tuesday morning, “Certainly, a lot of her (Medina) supporters in the Tea Party movement are very vocal and very motivated — and they will vote.” The question is, “will the traditional voters for Perry and Hutchison turn out in the numbers that they need.”

One incumbent who did lose to a Tea Party identified candidate was Republican State Rep. Tommy Merritt who lost to David Simpson . After the votes were counted, Merritt said of Simpson’s voters, “I’ve never seen these people before. They’re not the Chamber people. They’re not the normal contributors to the community….The Tea Party people were just out for a scalp on a stick.” In HD-83, Tea Party candidate Charles Perry is in a run-off against State Rep. Delwin Jones.

Where the Tea Party movement did play a huge role in the primary was in the number of people who voted. From all indications, many people who did not vote in 2006 did vote this year – for Medina. In 2006, total turnout was 655,919 but Tuesday’s primary drew over 1.4 million voters to the polls. When asked if credit goes to the Tea Party for huge increase in voters, Dennis said, “Absolutely.”

Share and Save

Whether or not February 27 marks the official beginning of the Tea Party Movement as we currently know it, will be left open for discussion and debate. This much we can be sure – it was on this date in 2009, that small groups of people met in cities across the country to protest the $786 billion Stimulus Bill. It was from those small events that the Tea Party became a mass movement garnering national attention and having a significant influence on the direction of our nation politically, fiscally and socially.

The message of those first Tea Party events was simply “enough is enough.” A year later, we have developed such political momentum that the Republicans “need our help and support” and the Democrats “must take into account our voice and conservative influence.” Neither party can now make major decisions without taking into account the power and influence of the Tea Party Movement.

Many people have tried to paint a picture of the Tea Party Movement as angry Republicans, religious right-wingers, obstructionists, out of touch conservatives, astro-turfers, tea baggers and a host of other descriptive names and/or phrases. The fact is, there are five general principles that define the Tea Party Movement: 1) Fiscal Responsibility, 2) Personal Responsibility, 3) Limited Government, 4) Rule of Law and 5) National Sovereignty.

Chuck Norris has written a masterpiece on the birthday of the Tea Party. In this article, Norris takes us on a brief journey through the last year, but more than that, he reminds us of our great heritage as a nation.

While we celebrate the journey of the Tea Party Movement to this point, we still have a ways to go. Enjoy the moment, but do not lose sight of the journey that remains. The Obama Administration is more determined than ever to rule with the rod of “progressive” iron regardless of the freedoms, desires and needs of the American people.

teablogger

Share and Save

Fellow Patriots,

Last week we posted a poll for our readers that asked a simple question.

Would you support J.D. Hayworth in his run against John McCain in 2010?

The results? Out of about 3,500 votes, 79% of you said you would indeed support Hayworth in his challenge to John McCain for the Arizona Senate Seat.

As I told our committee on our conference call with J.D. Hayworth this week, the overwhelming amount of emails coming in support of J.D. Hayworth makes this feel like the special election in MA for Scott Brown that took place earlier this year.

In that particular scenario, Scott Brown was the underdog just six weeks before the election. In fact, at the time, he trailed by 30 points! But once the movement unified and rallied behind him, he was able to overcome the special interest and big money behind progressive candidate Martha Coakley.

It is the opinion of our committee that John McCain has become a problem for our movement. His progressive positions in the Senate have been damaging to our efforts, and in many cases he appears to position himself against what we as a movement stand for.

Erika Franzi, organizer for the Asheville Tea Party sent us the following statement.

“John McCain, the man who was once the ‘maverick,’ is now the personification of the mushy-middle, establishment Republican. His memorable bipartisan efforts, including Campaign Finance Reform, Climate Stewardship, Amnesty, and TARP, demonstrate his lack of regard for the constitutional limitations of the federal government. Senator John McCain is not a liberty candidate. Asheville Tea Party supports J.D. Hayworth’s bid to replace Senator John McCain as the GOP candidate for Arizona Senate.”

Erika hit the nail on the head with her statement, and our committee fully agreed that it’s time to oppose John McCain in a public manner.

Many, MANY tea party organizers responded to our email earlier today asking about their thoughts on the matter. Those in support of Hayworth include Jason Carey (Tea Party Organizer – Sag Harbor, NY), Erika Franzi (Asheville Tea Party), Marlene Bonilla (Tea Party Organizer in Kansas), Jennifer West (9/12 Organizer from Hattiesburg), Laura Boatright (California based Tea Party Organizer), Allen Coniglio (Buffalo, NY Tea Party Organizer), Diane Benjamin (Illinois based Tea Party Organizer), Ralph Reagan (North Carolina based Tea Party Organizer), Joni Schmidt (Texas based Tea Party Organizer), and many others.

Arizona Tea Party Organizers like Easton Kelsey and Keith Sipmann have also thrown their support behind J.D. Hayworth, and other Arizona organizers are getting involved as well.

Liberty First PAC, including its projects TaxDayTeaParty.com, The Patriot Caucus and The American Liberty Alliance will all now fully support Hayworth and strongly oppose John McCain.

If we as a movement unify in this particular race, we can make a HUGE difference in the outcome.

We challenge each of you to do the following:

-Contribute to help us get as active as we can in the Arizona race. You can contribute online now via our main website or via Paypal here.

-Email everyone you know and ask them to get involved

-Share this information with your local tea party groups and activists

-Spread the message via Facebook, Twitter and other social networks

-Visit J.D. Hayworth’s website and sign up for his updates

It’s time to fire John McCain from office. Are you ready to help make it happen?

For Liberty,
-Eric Odom

Check out one of Hayworth’s latest web ads…

Share and Save

Recently, there have been numerous complaints about PACs, activists, bloggers and other politically minded individuals and groups becoming involved in elections outside of their own states. Blogs and posts have appeared, saying in effect, “stay out of our state, we can take care of our own election. What we do does not concern you.”

That is statement is simply not true, especially when a federal election is involved. There are 100 senators in Washington DC who are deciding US policy by writing bills and then voting on them. US policy applies to and affects every American in every state. If all 100 Senators vote on a measure, the US Senator from your state is 1% of every vote that affects both you and me. If less than 100 Senators vote, the percentage is even higher.

Each US Senator represents not only their state, but the United States. They is why they speak in terms such as, “I represent the American people”, or “This is what is best for the American people.” Your US Senator is voting on my taxes, my healthcare, my protection,…….etc.

The same is true of US Representatives. The primary difference is there are a greater number of them, leaving each one to represent a smaller percentage of the vote. However, your US Representative is also my representative. If he/she votes to pass a measure that includes pork barrel projects for your state, the people of my state will share in paying for it. The same is true in reverse.

What about state elections? The United States is a family of Americans. What affects one family member (state) affects all other family members (states). Your state assembly member may be our next US Senator or Representative. The success or failure of your state has a ripple up or down affect on my state. If your state is liberal and the people of your state move to my state, I have been affected by their liberal agenda. If your state has a conservative victory, it is motivation that my state can have a conservative victory as well. The Scott Brown victory in Massachusetts is the most recent example.

We are the United States of America, and as such, we are in this together.

Share and Save

I lot of people in the movement have danced around this issue. Some believe it’s a conversation we should stay away from. Others, most of our readers according to our own polls, believe the warnings should come as often as possible.

This post is going to be blunt… supporting third party efforts in 2010, in most cases, would be a complete disaster for the Tea Party Movement.

If you follow tea party news, you’ve probably seen the announcement that a third party “tea party” officially formed in Nevada and has its own candidate going on the ticket against Harry Reid. But as it turns out, the people behind this effort are strangers within the tea party movement. In fact, we haven’t been able to find anyone who knows them!

The Nevada News Bureau did some digging and found some questionable facts about the people running the “tea party” party.

I cannot find any evidence that any of these principals have ever been involved in any Tea Party activities, until now. I’ve emailed a number of Tea Party organizer-activists in the state and so far, nobody has ever heard of any of the principals – except for Barry Levinson because he is a Las Vegas attorney.

In Florida, a third party “Tea Party” was filed and the principles started threatening Florida Tea Party groups in an attempt to get them to stop using the tea party name. Florida tea party activists fired back with a lawsuit of their own.

A handful of conservative state activists filed a lawsuit last month against Doug Guetzloe, along with lawyer Fred O’Neal and another associate, after O’Neal filed papers last year with state officials registering the name “Tea Party” as an official political party — and then allegedly warned other tea party groups to stop using that name.

In both of these scenarios, there could be a candidate on the ballot with “tea party” next to his/her name. In both of these scenarios, the party of these candidates is considered by most to be a complete joke. But that likely won’t stop these third party candidates from siphoning votes from another candidate.

And it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out which party it will take votes from.

The reality is that in both of these scenarios, the third party will do far more damage than it will good. In Nevada, for example, Harry Reid stands to benefit the most.

Third Party Fantasy

Some tea party activists still think a third party is the right way to go. We get email every day that suggests the two party system has failed us and we should try a third party.

The problem is, however, the third party route has already been tried and failed. Not only has it failed, it has never really had any success at all!

We essentially have two paths to choose from. Both have flaws, both have areas that have caused damage to America. But we have a duty to weigh the advantages vs. disadvantages of each alternative and make an informed decision based on the path with the most potential.

The decision cannot be based on emotion or revenge. This is not the time to get back at anyone. This is not the time to take revenge against a party.

Instead, this is the time for us as a movement to choose the vessel most likely to carry new candidates into Washington. And more importantly, replace incumbents in Washington.

To put it bluntly, there are many, MANY incumbents who hope tea party activists take the third party pill.

In all honesty, that pill would spell complete disaster.

My two…

-Eric Odom

Share and Save

The last few days have yielded a ton of email coming in from tea party activists wanting to know if we’ll get involved in the GOP Primary battle for John McCain’s U.S. Senate seat.

Much to our surprise, there appears to be an overwhelming amount of support for Hayworth within the movement. A lot of activists are looking to oppose John McCain in some way, shape or form, and those who are following our political action committee are curious to see if we might get involved.

To be honest, we have indeed had a private conversation with Mr. Hayworth, and he has a lot of very good things to say. Hayworth is also no stranger to running tough campaigns, and his support base is extremely loyal.

John McCain, on the other hand, has a ton of money, a wealth of campaign experience and a well grounded campaign operation.

What McCain does not have, however, is the support of the grassroots movement that has dominated politics in the past year.

The question is, though, does JD Hayworth have this support?

You tell us.

Share and Save

In an interview with CBS News anchor Katie Couric just hours before the Super Bowl; President Barack Obama invited the Republicans to bring their best ideas on Healthcare Reform to a televised bipartisan meeting February 25th. Democrats hope the meeting will restart the stalled healthcare and get it moving again. The bill has been on hold since the Democrats lost their crucial 60th Senate vote last month with the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. The meeting which Obama wants televised on C-SPAN gives him another chance to sway public opinion on an issue the majority of the American people are not in favor of, but one that is critical to the president’s domestic agenda. Obama first suggested re-opening talks with Republicans during his State of the Union address last month, and repeated the call at a Democratic fundraiser Thursday, but the White House had kept details of his plan under wraps until Sunday.

The invitation is obviously political in nature. If not, President Obama would have made such an invitation to begin with. On the surface it effectively takes the ball out of Obama’s court and places it in that of the Republicans. Below the surface, it is an opportunity for Obama to answer the criticism that he has not been transparent, he has not engaged the Republicans and he negotiated backroom deals in an effort to get the necessary votes to pass the bill. Bob Blendon, a health policy and political analyst at Harvard University said, “The president is trying to turn around the sour mood on this issue and mitigate the criticism that he’s ramming this bill down people’s throats.”

Republicans are distrusting of Obama’s intentions and say they are not going to compromise on a bill that polls show is opposed by a majority of Americans and will drive the nation further into debt. Republican Representative Tom Price said, “Republicans welcome honest discussion, but this event reeks of political gamesmanship. The only constructive discussions will start with a blank sheet of paper.”

House Republican leader John Boehner said, “The best way to start on real, bipartisan reform would be to scrap those bills and focus on the kind of step-by-step improvements that will lower health care costs and expand access.” The White House has said the purpose of the meeting is not to start over with Healthcare Reform, but to pick up where it left off. White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said, “The president doesn’t think we should start over.” One White House official said “This is not starting over. Don’t make any mistake about that. We are coming with our plan. They can bring their plan.”

Some believe such a meeting will lead to more political point-making than actual compromise and progress. Representative Dave Camp, the top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, told Reuters, “I don’t think it’s possible to compromise on this bill. The structure of it is done in such a way that it is going to raise costs, raise taxes and empower government to get between people and their doctors.” The danger of opponents of the current Healthcare Reform Package is that a partisan gridlock could give Obama an excuse to move the bill through a budget process that requires only a simple majority of 51 votes in the 100-member Senate, bypassing Republican opposition.

Democrats are doing everything possible not to be at fault should Healthcare Reform fail to pass. What this strategy seems to miss is that the American people, by and large do not want the bill to pass. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said, “We have promoted the pursuit of a bipartisan approach to health reform from day one.” In other words, if the reform bill ends up in gridlock it is not because of the Democrats unwillingness to reach across the aisle. The first responsibility of any elected official is not to reach across the aisle, but to represent the desires and best interests of the American people within the perimeters of the Constitution. More often than not, reaching across the aisle is very expensive compromise. On a more positive note, the Presidents invitation is the recognition that he must have at least some Republican support to get the bill passed since Scott Brown, who campaigned against what he called the Democratic Party’s government takeover of the health-care system broke the Democrats hold on 60 seats.

The meeting is coming at a time when Democrats are expressing their confusion about how the White House plans to deliver a health care reform bill this year, after two weeks of inconsistent statements and little hands-on involvement by Obama. At the Thursday night fundraiser, Obama seemed to acknowledge for the first time that Congress may decide to scrap health care altogether — an admission that blunted his repeated and emphatic vows to finish the job. The White House said Obama’s remarks were misinterpreted and he intends to finish health reform. Obama said to Couric, “What we have to do is just make sure that it is a much more clear and transparent process. I’ve got to push Congress on that.”

Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said, “The President is adamant that we seize this historic moment to pass meaningful health insurance reform legislation. He began this process by inviting Republican and Democratic leaders to the White House on March 5 of last year, and he’s continued to work with both parties in crafting the best possible bill. He’s been very clear about his support for the House and Senate bills because of what they achieve for the American people: putting a stop to insurance company abuses, extending coverage to millions of hardworking Americans, getting control of rising premiums and out-of-pocket costs, and reducing the deficit.”

The debate about the meeting is whether it will be a summit to accomplish something together or a show trial to push the two sides further apart? Many people believe Health care is a dead issue and it best be left dead in the greater interest of the American people. Obama’s invitation appears to be a political setup! If the Republicans do not accept the invitation, Democrats know that the liberal media will condemn Republicans for being irresponsible and obstructionist. If the Republicans accept the invitation, this will turn into yet another debate resulting in more name and blame.

All in all, it is just more campaigning with no real leadership. As voters, we must continue to shout “enough is enough.” Our conservative leadership must do the same. House Minority Leader John Boehner and Republican Whip Eric Cantor posed a series of questions about the ground rules for the meeting writing. “Your answers to these critical questions will help determine whether this will be a truly open, bipartisan discussion or merely an intramural exercise before Democrats attempt to jam through a job-killing health care bill that the American people can’t afford and don’t support. Bipartisanship’ is not writing proposals of your own behind closed doors, then unveiling them and demanding Republican support.”

Share and Save