Don’t Be Polite or Non-Ideological: Fight This Un-American Legislation!

now for their Christmas Eve at nine pm vote. And still Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey has to tell the Republicans stop listening to me, stop being ideological, ideological, which is all the Democrats are being here, pure ideology. I got a I got an email note from a friend today. Is it hopeless? Is it over? What do we do? I I'd like to go out and raise some money, but everybody's tapped out? Is it? Raising money is not what's necessary? Right now? We've had two rallies

in Washington. It's obvious that that that members of the Democrat Party in about the House and Senate don't care one way or another about what the public opinion of this is. That's been obvious for a long time. I still think, folks, what you ought to do is just pound these people with emails, phone calls, facts is whatever, Pound every damn one of them at their offices from now until health freeze is over, Before, during, and after

all of this. Just keep pounding them. Uh that it will make you feel better, and who knows, it may have some effect at some point down the road. But this is just outrageous. What is all happening. What we are learning there are unrepealable aspects of the bill, particularly a medical exchange plan that really sets the stage for the government takeover of health care. It cannot be repealed. There's no a rule has been violent, constitution has been violated.

There is so much of this that is illegal, and somebody is going to have to bring the charge. And I expect that if it's if it's if it's done, If somebody does challenge this, it's And I have to come from some of these states that are being left out of all the goodies. In New York, Bloomberg is fit to be tied, Patterson's fit to be tied. Uh, And in in a lot of Georgia, I mean they're being left out. A lot of states are being left out of this so a lot more detail in this

as the as the program unfolds. But ideology. The reason Menendez goes to the floor. The sent I says, do not listen to Rush Limbaugh is because ideology is the only way we're gonna beat this. Ideology is the only way people in mass numbers are gonna be made to understand just what this is and what it's about. Now, we can go through individual aspects of the bill, which we will do today, but that's been done at infinitum. Uh, and it just it ends up sounding like mishmash people

here it all runs together. Uh, the ideological approach, this is liberals. This is what liberalism is. Liberalism means the loss of economic prosperity and individual freedom and so forth. That's the message. Menendez knows it, and that's why he is asking people to to not listen to me. DINGI har Re invoked Rodney King on the Senate floor this morning.

There's a lot of tension in the Senate. I would hope that everyone would go back to their gentlemanly ways, and I would hope that I was trying to figure out how to say this gentlemanly ways. I've said to a number of people, Rodney King, let's just all try to get along. So we really need to do this is a very difficult time the next day or so, and let's try to work through this, which is a

which is a laugh. We're dealing with some of the most hand handed, hard handed ideologues, mean spirited extremists to come down the pike, and this is what they always do when the going gets tough. Can't we all just get along? Can't we just can't we just stop all this partisanship little Obama was going to handle. Let Mitch McConnell agreed with him. Let me just add to my good friend the majority later. He and I have an excellent relationship. We speak a number of times in the

course of every day and have no animosity whatsoever. And we are working on an agreement that will give certainty to the way to end this session, and hopefully the two of us together can be recommending something that makes sense for both sides in the not too distant future. All right, there's the Republican leader in the in the Senate. What Mr Snurdle, What well? I I played that not to just infuriate you. I played it to to inform you. Uh,

I'll go back to this email that I got. Um. In fact, you know, I want to print out the reply. I'm trying to remember to reply. The email I got was from somebody who has really been invested financially and trying to stop this, has been raising a lot of money and was asking me if if, if all is lost. And I'll find the reply to the email after the break and share it, share it with you. Um. Now, here's let's let's go ahead and stick with this. Let's go to soundbites four or five and six. Uh, this

is yesterday on this program. This is me. Now, certainly just send me. Violate the rules, violate the rules. They've just stood the Constitution upside. Don't you think I give a rat's rear end about violating a Senate rule on when reconciliation cannon can't be used here? Senator Jim Dement's

Republican South Carolina last night on the Senate floor. There's one provision that I found particularly troubling, and it's under a section see title limitation on changes to this subsection, and I quote it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection. This is not legislation. It's not law. This is a rule change. It's a pretty big deal.

We will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a Senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law. And this is not how Senate rules are made. Now, this is um You know, the language is tough, but this is how dictators operate. This is how people who know

that nobody wants what they're offering operate. People who have power and who do not, and who are very well aware that they're running against the wishes and against the grain of the people they supposedly governed, make it impossible for those people to do anything about it in any illegal way. This is not how you change the rules of the Senate. De Mint continued, I'm not even sure that it's constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a Senate rule. I don't see why the majority

party wouldn't put this in every bill. If you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future Senates. I mean, we want to bind future Congresses. This goes to the fundamental purpose of Senate rules to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future Congresses. Okay, that's gim de mint on the floor of the Senate last night. Now,

why are they making this provision unrepealable. It's what we're talking about here, is the Independent Medicare Advisory Board making it impossible or difficult for future congress is to legislate

in that area to to to change this. Because Bill Crystal points it out, the heart of the bill is the attempt to get control of health care permanently in the hands of federal bureaucrats who would allegedly know better than doctors and patients what's good for them, and who would cut access to care and the quality of care. So there's more money left over for various big government liberal social programs down the way. But this is just outrageous.

What is happening? I was I was telling Snargely this morning, usually on our last day of the last show of the of the year, we're not dealing with this kind of stuff. The Congress has gone home. Nobody's messing around with liberty or freedom and not there not passing new laws, and we yuck it up and we have some jollys, and it just doesn't seem the whole jolly time here, given what is at stake. But nevertheless, we're gonna try to combine elements in the in the program today. But

Jim demand Is is upset. But of course this doesn't get carried much outside the Senate floor by the state controlled media. So aside from people like you in this audience and UH and readers of various conservative blogs and so forth, vast majority of American people have no clue about this. Yet It's very simple. Folks win, Barack Obama and the Democrats win. America loses big time. Now here's the Here's the email that I that I received ere rush.

I still think with sufficient public outrage, we could stop the vote in the House, but it's proving an incredibly hard to raise the money we need to reach and mobilize the people who are not in your audience. Everybody's tapped out and resigned. Do you still think we will prevail? Here's what I wrote back, and it was a stream of consciousness reply. I said, dear such and such, I said yesterday that no amount of public outrage would matter. And I believe that we've never seen this before, We've

never been involved in anything like this before. The main reason public outrage won't work is not the public's fault. It's a combination of mainly a dictatorial frame of mind the Democrats all have now and the Republican Party just refuses to get emotionally engaged. Here are outraged by it.

Their responses are barely above a flat line. And I can point you to Mitch McConnell's a very gentlemanly remark and reply to Harry Reid who asked if we can all just be like Rodney King and just get along in the midst of the destruction of the US health care system. We're obsessed with being polite. And I know why.

It's because we don't want to anger the moderates. The moderates, you're afraid that if we start criticizing Democrats are Obama, that they'll run away to the Democrats when they're fleeing Democrats in droves. Now. Now, there have been two attempts to rally people at the Capitol in opposition to this, and the and the reason was that emails, phone calls

and faxes were not having an impact. It was theorized that bodies on the ground, boots on the ground, people in the faces of members of the House and Senate was what it would take to make a difference. But those two rallies failed because they essentially didn't happen. Who knew about it. The mainstream media didn't report them. Nancy Pelosi made sure that the vast majority of people showed up,

and these rallies never got anywhere near the capital. The Democrats knew that all these protesters are being asked and cajole to show up, so they were able to tell themselves it wasn't genuine and the and the numbers reported were not all that repressive. I mean that the peasants

didn't show up with any pitchforks. And so the Democrats they listened to all this and they hear all this hubbub, and they listened to all this opposition, and they know they're getting it, but they didn't see a whole lot of it in Washington. And it's it's because it wasn't permitted to get close to them. I'm not do not misunderstand me. The people showed up did a great thing. I'm just saying that the game was rigged before they even got there. And I told this person to send

me the email. I'm gonna urge people to day to continue to flood members offices, especially their local ones when they go home for the Christmas break. But we we're we're we're dealing here, essentially with people who have a dictatorial frame of mind. The public opinion is irrelevant, It doesn't matter. The election to them is still a year away. If this were next September October and all this is happening,

you'd have a entirely different dynamic going on. Uh. The inside the Beltway commentary it still doesn't see this as anything other than just another day at the political office.

I was watching the Fox News All Stars last night during the roundtable discussion, and you had you had uh uh Steve Hayes from the Weekly Standard, Charles Crowdhammer and Mara Liasson, and Hayes and Crowdhammer were involved in the guts and the gory details in the imdeology and they were spelling out exactly how atrocious all this deal making was, all this whorring, all the bribery, all the prostitution that was going on, all the buying of votes, all the

buying off states, all the buying of governors and so forth, and they are making, I mean, the scoring big time points. There's Mara Liasson, who I think I like her. I've met her a couple of times, but she's typical of the inside the Beltway media crowd. There's nothing special about this other than it's a huge piece of legislation for Obama. But there's nothing going on here that doesn't always happen.

This is what legislation is. Senators by votes, they trade votes, they do so this is It was perfectly understandable to her that legislation had nothing to do with constituents. It was perfectly understandable to her that legislation had nothing to do with the substance of it. Legislation was all about process. And the people studying this and reporting on this in the state control media, that's their obsession, the process of it. Will Obama in Ken Obama secure a victory, Ken Obama

reform health care. They haven't dug into the guts of this, and they ignore people who have. This will destroy the country as you and I know it. This will destroy the greatest health care system in the world. As you and I are aware, this will forever change the relationship that you and I have with our doctors because the government's going to be a very powerful middleman. There are death panels back in this bill, and that this is what Harry Reid says, cannot be repealed. We are going

to ration care. We're gonna make sure that's only the approved people get the kind of care that might prolonged life. It's all in there. None of this matters. It's all about the process. It's all about the political victory. Can Obama bring it home? Meanwhile, the country is undergoing one

of the most major transformations since its founding. I went and looked up a number of things, things that the founding fathers found outrageous, and there were the tipping point for them, and they weren't, I mean, the things that caused them to rebel and found this country. And they were nothing compared to what is happening in this piece of legislation alone. I know people think money fundraising is important,

and it always is. But if you have to raise and spend money right now, if you have to raise and spend money to raise temperatures on this after all this time and all this effort that it seems unnecessary, seems like money would would not be necessary. If you look at all the polling data, you don't need to make more people aware. There's not one poll that shows

a majority anywhere in favor of this. I've always thought pounding the individual provisions in the bill is okay, but it's the wrong way to go because it all becomes a blur. I hit this idiot logically at all times. H And what Harry read has done in limiting CEO salaries of insurance company exects limiting shareholder profits and operating expenses.

And if you're just joining us, you need to miss that. Yesterday, David Axelrod assuring the left that are that are upset that they're gonna be forced to buy insurance from a private sector insurance companies, don't worry about it, he said, we have running there and we've limited CEO salaries in this legislation. Or really that they didn't take TARP money. What gives you the right to do that. They're just doing it. They are going to limit shareholder profits and

police operating expenses. Eventually that drive them out of business, which is the ultimate aim here. Now that is there's no other definition for this than pure fascism, which is ideological, and it needs to be called as such. Harry Reid has has written language saying many of the provisions of the bill cannot be repealed. This whole thing is un American, it is unconstitutional, and it's not time to be polite with this. It's not time to be gentlemanly and let

the Democrats have their sway on this. There would have been people with pitchforks at the Capitol if elected officials had felt and expressed the same degree of outrage and

anger that their constituents feel and are expressing. In the end, however, I still think, I still think there's a chance for defectors somewhere along the line, and I think at some point they're going to have to resort to a mechanism whereby they get fifty one votes instead of sixty, because I think at some point and Senate they're not gonna be able to get sixty in the House is a whole another ballgame, But the fight is not over even if it does pass. Our guys ought to be leading

the protests carrying the pitchforks. Instead, they're saying things like they're concerned, disappointed, surprised. That doesn't cut it, because that doesn't provide leadership, and leadership is necessary. People need an outlet and a vessel for their anger in their own party. Not one Democrat senator with integrity or courage, not one. He would only take one Democrats senator out of sixty to object to all this, this horrendous piece of legislation,

and it would die. Just one Democrats senator out of sixty to show some integrity, show some courage, and nobody anywhere thinks it will happen. It's not even being discussed. Now. What does that tell you about Democrats? And yet it is always the Republicans who are portrayed. Is closed minded, walking in lockstep? What a laugh. We now see what walking in lockstep is really all about, and we see

what actually is important, and it's not the country. And this takes me into yet another fear that I have about all this. There are a lot of things that worry me about about the transformation of country with this health care, whether the relationship between uh US and our doctors and the relationship between US and our government. But there's also another aspect of this, and that is the relationship between US and us between citizens. We will from

now on be rivals. We will be competitors for federal money for health care for our children, uh permission from federal powers that be for each medical visit and procedure.

And this is going to destroy folks, the traditional American live and let live attitude towards everybody, because it will inevitably become me against you when services are fewer, when costs go higher, and it's your kid, You're going to become competitive with your neighbor when you have to go in and negotiate with some federal bureaucrat to see that it's your kid that gets treated. And that's where we're headed. This, this, this massive new entitlement, is going to obliterate tolerance, this

whole notion of live and let live. The way to summarize that as tolerance, and there isn't gonna be any more of that. Every American is gonna be looking at neighbors with jealousy, resentment, and anger at whatever medical care he or she receives. That cause not everybody's going to get the same. That's the way socialism works. It never ends up that way. There is never equality of outcome.

There is never sameness, even though that's the objective. There are going to be differences and it's gonna lead to big, big problems. Every American is gonna end up being very extremely judgmental about the behavior of fellow citizens that would in any way be considered risky, because the attitude will be, you're taking money from my family's future medical care.