Dr. Ben Carson: 'Gifted Hands' and a gifted mind

Dr. Benjamin Carson was the featured speaker at the Americans for Prosperity rally last Thursday night at the Waukesha Expo. Though Dr. Carson made quite the media splash at the National Prayer Breakfast in February 2013, his visit to Waukesha went largely unnoticed by local mainstream media.

Senator Ron Johnson was also invited by AFP, and he spoke prior to Dr. Carson about the dysfunction of Washington D.C.  Then he gave an interesting intro about his first impressions of Dr. Carson at the prayer breakfast, which is included in the video clip below. (Sometimes being wrong is good!)

When it was Dr. Carson's turn to speak, the crowd of 2,500-3,000 at the Waukesha Expo gave him a very warm welcome. He spoke about the greatness of America and personal responsibility. He also compared our bloated, inefficient governmental bureaucracy to an overly obese person who would become more fit--more productive if his calorie intake was reduced. That illustration brought him to his discussion of a fair or flat tax and the concept of tithing 10%--that all would pay the same percentage. Who could be more fair than God?, he asked.  The crowd applauded enthusiastically. 

He touched on how Americans are a unique people where the wealthy give of their wealth and the churches and other independent groups care for the needy--we don't need government to do this, he stressed. Then added as government gets bigger, people's rights get smaller. Freedom: Not a Democrat or Republican thing--it is an American people thing!  He spoke out against the divisiveness of our President.

This brought him to the topic of healthcare. He warned, when government is in charge of health care, the government controls you!  In light of the recent IRS scandals, this warning was far more ominous than it would have been a few weeks ago.  As a physician, Dr. Carson is very familiar with the problems of providing health care and the high cost of having a middleman who dictates what coverage will cost. This is why he favors a system of health savings accounts for every individual.

Dr. Carson mentioned his 5th book that he wrote with his wife Candy: "America the Beautiful"- rediscovering this great nation. Then Dr. Carson stated in his quiet but pointed way, "We need not be ashamed of the fact we believe in God."  The crowd jumped to their feet and applauded; it was the most enthusiastic standing ovation of the evening.

Once the audience settled, he added, One of the reasons we [as a nation] rose the way we did was because God was looking out for us.  He explained that was the reason he and Candy put in so many quotes in America the Beautiful about God. Their next book will be titled, "Saving Our Future."

No doubt about it, Dr. Benjamin Carson is a fascinating man. He is soft spoken but not afraid to speak out about what is right, even in front of the President.  If you ever have a chance to see him in person, go!

I became aware of his amazing life story at Christmas when I was given a DVD entitled, Gifted Hands. (It is based on his book of the same title.) Thomas Sowell of National Review says this,
"A remarkable book titled “Gifted Hands” tells the personal story of Benjamin Carson, a black kid from the Detroit ghetto who went on to become a renowned neurosurgeon. At one time young Ben Carson had the lowest grades in his middle-school class and was the butt of teasing by his white classmates. ...Fortunately for him, his mother, whose own education went no further than the third grade, insisted that he was smart. She cut off the television set and made him and his brother hit the books — books that she herself could scarcely read."  I haven't read the book yet but the DVD was outstanding--Cuba Gooding Jr. plays Dr. Carson.  The DVD also includes interviews with the real Dr. Carson, his mother and wife. (The Waukesha library system has it in their collection.)

Benjamin Carson has a truly inspirational life story. Now that he has entered the arena of politics, it would seem there are more chapters to be added to his story.

More Reading:
MacIver Institute: Dr. Ben Carson Calls for Smaller Government and Flat, Fair Tax
Dr. Ben Carson to Deliver Message of Fiscal Conservatism on Thursday in Wisconsin

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, VoteWatchWI, The Way <><

Obama on Sequester for Low Information Voters and other updates

Saturday Night Live aired a very clever parody last week, featuring President Obama (Jay Pharoah) holding a press conference to explain the consequences of sequester.  True to form, Obama brings in individuals negatively affected by the crisis-of-the-moment to illustrate his point.

If you could use a good laugh, watch. My favorite budget cut solution was offered by the air traffic controller.



As for President Obama's take on the dire consequences of cutting $45 billion from future growth this year, maybe he could fund the essential services by cutting back on his perpetual campaign mode travels, which burn $180,000 / hour for Air Force One services and numerous multimillion dollar vacation schedule? Another option would be to "fire Obama's $100,000 a year dog trainer"? After all, the Presidential pooch is no longer a puppy.

Obama could also search the couch cushions in his Oval Office, as Secretary of State John Kerry must have done to give Egypt $250 million (a quarter of a billion dollars) just 2 days after sequester took effect! Pretty good searching for a country that is flat broke.

We have plenty of money. The government's own CBO just revealed Federal Revenue to Set Record in 2013, "In fact, the $2.7 trillion in revenue will be the most money the federal government has collected in history."  Keep this in mind when the President insists we still need to increase tax revenue as a solution to our deficit.  (Been there, done that, in January.)

Clearly, we don't have a revenue problem; we have a spending problem.

UPDATES: Another example of unnecessary spending, considering our financial flat-broke status: TSA Sealed $50-Million Sequester-Eve Deal to Buy New Uniforms.

And this would be an example of cutting the music program so to speak: More sequester pain: White House cancels tours. Guess they had to do this since the Washington Monument already was closed for repairs.

As for our we are so broke we will have to furlough TSA agents, etc., how is it we have the money to post 400 Help Wanted ads for new government workers right after sequester, to do important work such as grow insects for the Agriculture Department or recreation aids for the Forest Service? Maybe they found some new couch cushions to search or started looking through the Presidents pants pockets for loose change?

More Reading:
SNL mocks Obama for sequester, lack of budgeting skills
Forbes: Sequester This! President Obama's Colossal Media Blunder
Kerry Praises Egypt's 'Version of the Democracy' 
CBO: Federal Revenue to Set Record in 2013 

Recent Post: Obama's Sequester Spending Cut Disaster Charade Continues

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, VoteWatchWI, The Way <><

Obama's Sequester Spending Cut Disaster Charade Continues

We've known it was coming. The very idea came from the White House. He approved it a year and a half ago, and in November 2011, insisted it be done. What is it? Why the Sequester, of course.

What is a sequester? Automatic spending cuts triggered to go off in 2013, after the 2012 presidential campaign. Sequester was a gimme the money now, I'll economize later deal.

And here is a graph of that Sequestration deal. Nothing cut from present levels of spending, just $85 billion cut from 2 years of* FUTURE spending! Take a look here. (Put your reading glasses on or you might not notice the change.) *Correction: About $44 billion cut from this year, remaining cuts spread out over the next 7 years.

Now our Spender in Chief doesn't want to go through with Sequester cuts and threatens the sky will fall if we don't increase the increase in government spending on Friday. So much for his famous last words from November of 2011 regarding welching on the deal: “Already, some in Congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts. My message to them is simple: No. I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts – domestic and defense spending. There will be no easy off-ramps on this one.”

But then our President seems to enjoy running our government in sky-is-falling-crisis mode, or as Peggy Noonan just wrote, "Government by Freakout". And to make sure you freakout, Obama's Federal Immigration officials just approved 100s of illegal convicted criminal detainees released from prison for emphasis on how these budget increase cuts will affect us. Now the President could easily find $85 billion savings by eliminating redundant programs, fraud, and wasteful pork spending but instead chose this avenue to make his point.

Refreshingly, for once Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner is not negotiating this one in advance but is challenging the Senate to 'Get off its [posterior]' to propose other cuts if those in the Sequester deal are unacceptable. Reason being, the House has come up with 2 proposals thus far with no response from the President or Senate. Hope the Republicans stand firm on this.

One reason the president might be balking is that he again is talking about increasing revenues in any substitute sequester deal: "So when the president asks that a substitute for the sequester include not just spending cuts but also new revenue, he is moving the goal posts." 

Increasing revenues could be the real reason for Obama's flip-flop. Incidentally, $85 billion in sequester cuts funds the government for about a week and a half--hardly worth freaking out about.


And here is another heads-up: The debt ceiling/government shut down could come at the end of March, so I would avoid planning any extensive vacations touring our National Historic Sites and Parks until later in the spring. Like a school district facing a budget cut with the threat the cut will eliminate the music program, government threatens to close the Washington Monument* or Grand Canyon, etc. (We had an extensive National Park trip tour planned for the last debt ceiling crisis in April 2011! Rangers told us they put up barricades to block park entrances the eve of the debt ceiling agreement--just in case. That agreement was reached at the 11th hour, 11pm our time.) 
*Washington Monument is presently closed for repairs.


More Reading:
Bob Woodward: Obama's sequester deal-changer
President Obama in 2011: 'No Easy Off-Ramps' on Sequester
Noonan: Government by Freakout
Federal Spending Without and With Sequester Cuts
Boehner tells Senate to 'Get off its [posterior]
Immigrants Released Ahead of Automatic Budget Cuts

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, VoteWatchWI, The Way <><

Can we please talk 'Debt Control'? It's For the Kids

Congress is poised to kick our debt ceiling crisis down the road to May, but instead of using this breathing room as an opportunity for getting our message out, we are still distracted by the topic of the day--gun control and now amnesty.

Debt Limit USA crafted this easy to understand 3 minute piece that explains what our government is doing--borrowing more money than it takes in. They call it Debt Limit - A Guide to American Federal Debt  Made Easy, or as I call it, The Debt Crisis in Terms Even a Low Information Voter Can Understand!
 
It doesn't get much easier than this; watch the whole thing. The ending is applicable to our unsustainable debt problem.

In case you didn't catch the last slides from the clip, the dad's annual household budget had $140,000 household debt, income of $21,700, $38,200 in spending, $16,500 in new bank to loan (debt), budget cuts $385--about 1% of their total household budget. Sound familiar?

Our Federal Budget Deal to Raise Debt Limit was: $14 Trillion total debt (obliviously, this was from the last 2011 debt crisis because we are well over $16T now!), $2.17 T federal income, $3.82 T in Fed. spending, $1.65 T in new debt, and the amount "cut" (from future spending)? A measly $38.5 Billion, about 1% of the total budget.

No matter, our children, grand children and great, great grandchildren will be picking up this tab.

Unlike other It's for the kids pleas, this one IS for the kids! Us too.

More reading:
House Votes to Temporarily Suspend U.S. Debt Ceiling 
Obama's Now Borrowed More Than All Presidents from Washington to W
US Debt Headed Toward 200% of GDP Even After 'Fiscal Cliff' Deal
Speaker: Fitch: Cut Spending or Risk Credit Rating Downgrade
Morning Bell: Don't Raise Debt Ceiling Without Balancing the Budget

I urge you to contact your legislators and tell them to talk about our spending crisis and then stand firm on more debt. We don't have much time.
Contact your Representatives and Senators
Find your  U.S. Senators by last name
Wisconsin's  U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (202) 224-5323
Wisconsin's   U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (202) 224-5653

Find your  U.S. House of Representatives member by state
House Representative James Sensenbrenner Washington D.C. (202) 225-5101, Brookfield (262) 784-1111

House Speaker Boehner phone line (513) 779-5400

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Republicans stuck between a Barack and hard place must unite, stand firm, and go on offense

We averted the so-called fiscal cliff this week with mixed results: some say Republicans caved on raising taxes, some say Republicans protected most taxpayers, some Democrats thought Obama lost. I was surprised that Conservative Senator Ron Johnson voted for it and pleased that Senator Marco Rubio and our Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner didn't. But honestly, under the no floor debate, lame duck, back room negotiating circumstances, I don't know how this could have been resolved in a positive way. If Republicans had voted it down, Obama would just have come back later to play the role of hero by enacting a middle tax cut, knowing he had already turned up the tax heat on all those evil rich. We would have needed more proactive leadership in Congress and have been discussing this all year long, not just in the eleventh hour to achieve a better outcome.

The only positive thing to come out of the deal was that the Bush tax rates were made permanent for 98% of American earners. (Permanent as long as Republicans hold the majority in the House, that is.) But even this is Kabuki theater because our tax burden is still going up with other tax increases already in place as of Jan. 1st and new revenue increases via eliminating some deductions that were part of the fiscal cliff deal as well.

With the Bush tax rates now at least set for the 113th Congress, Republicans could for once in their lives go on the offense and get the message out that our out of control spending cannot, cannot continue. Republicans could redeem themselves by presenting a united front in the House and Senate and standing firm against increasing the debt ceiling by another 3 trillion dollars as the president wants.

But this will only work if they start talking about it now and are willing to draw the line in the debt ceiling sand and say, no further.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Sen. Pat Toomey talked about this on Jan. 2nd. McConnell said, "'We have an immediate opportunity to act: the debt ceiling,' McConnell said. 'Washington’s credit card has reached its limit again, and the Senate majority must act on legislation early in February—rather than waiting until the last minute, abdicating responsibility and hoping someone else will step in once again to craft a last-minute solution for them.'”

Toomey was more emphatic, “'[Obama] got a $2 trillion debt limit increase just 17 months ago — blew through all that,' Toomey said on Morning Joe. 'We will only solve this problem when we finally get the spending under control. And the debt ceiling, and after that, the continuing resolution expiration — those are the vehicles that give us the opportunity to insist on making progress on the real problem.'”  He "suggested" a "partial government shutdown" may be necessary to make the point, where truly necessary spending is continued and funded via tax revenue income, and non-essential spending is stopped.

Getting the Republican message out is a problem with the pro Obama Praetorian press ruling the media markets. Maybe Republicans could hire the same people who created Senator Ron Johnson's ads for his senate campaign. Johnson's ads were short, concise, and explained just what was at stake with our out of control spending. We really need messaging like that in the GOP.  RNC, are you listening?

I urge you to contact your legislators and tell them to stand firm on the debt ceiling. We have less than a month to do this.
Contact your Representatives and Senators
Find your  U.S. Senators by last name
Wisconsin's  U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (202) 224-5323
Wisconsin's   U.S. Senator Herb Kohl (202) 224-5653

Find your  U.S. House of Representatives member by state
House Representative James Sensenbrenner Washington D.C. (202) 225-5101, Brookfield (262) 784-1111

House Speaker Boehner phone line (513) 779-5400

More Reading: 
Norquist: Take 'fiscal cliff' deal
Morning Bell: Fiscal Cliff and Tax Hikes to Start the New Year
Mitch McConnell: Debt ceiling offers opportunity to cut spending
Strassel: The Debt-Ceiling Fight Will Be Dirty h/t Jay Weber

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Taxing rich will hurt already employed, at all pay levels

President Obama, the champion of class warfare rhetoric*, has been chanting the mantra: tax the rich, as a solution to our deficit, poverty, and social class disparity for as long as I can remember. Obama also throws around the phrase fair share to justify tax rates that take more than half their income. And we really should call his attack what it is: tax the successful. Republicans and economists counter with how taxing the successful (rich ) will harm small businesses, who are the majority of job creators in America. Being a Conservative, I side with the Republicans, I view fairness as taxing all income at the same rate.

But one consequence of taxing the rich I have yet to hear anyone mention, who will be the consumers if they have less income once their taxes are paid? Who will be building a new home or hiring the local remodeler? Who will be purchasing that new car or new furniture? Who will be dining out every weekend? Or having their hair and nails done, stopping for a latte, or hiring the yard and cleaning help? Who will be able to afford vacationing in Wisconsin or at popular tourist attractions across America?

American tourism already seems down in the U.S., at least from what I have observed. Hearing a foreign language or accent at Yellowstone or Grand Canyon National Parks is the norm. Last fall, my sister and I observed that Disney World would really be hurting if it weren't for the Brazilians spending their dollars at the Kingdom of the Mouse. An American accent was in the minority at all locations.

But it isn't just the business owners' ledger that takes the hit when tourists cut back, its all the employees at these businesses that feel it too. If Disney, the largest employer in the U.S., the National Parks or even Wisconsin Dells, for that matter, experience a downturn, then area hotels don't need as many housekeepers. Restaurants cut hours or move employees to part time. Peripheral tourist attractions such as raft rides or water parks lose business.

If consumers cut back, because they don't have as much disposable income as they used to, the carpet, furniture, clothing, and tech. stores suffer a loss. That loss is passed on to the employees; the management cuts hours, sometimes pay, sometimes benefits, and often terminates employees.

Of course the truly wealthy will still do and buy these things or just move out of the country, but the $200,000 - $250,000 earners, who file their business taxes on their personal tax returns, will be hurting.

And if you think you aren't one of those upper 2% earners, so your paycheck will be untouched, think again: ObamaCare taxes are coming our way in 2013. More than likely the Payroll Tax Cut will expire, resulting in less take home pay.

So if all of us have less money in our pockets, who will be the purchasers? How will that effect your job?

Contact your Representatives and Senators
Find your U.S. Senators by last name
Wisconsin's U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (202) 224-5323
Wisconsin's U.S. Senator Herb Kohl (202) 224-5653

Find your U.S. House of Representatives member by state
House Representative James Sensenbrenner Washington D.C. (202) 225-5101, Brookfield (262) 784-1111

House Speaker Boehner phone line (513) 779-5400

*Class warfare and even the term middle class are Marxist terms

Past Post: Tax the rich? Every job I had was because of richer person!

More Reading:
Taxing the Rick More Will Backfire on the Middle Class
French star Depardieu moves to lower-tax Belgium
Heritage: Chart: Obamacare's Barrage of Tax Hikes Coming in 2013
Top Five Worst Obamacare Taxes Coming in 2013

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Tell Republicans to stand firm: No New Taxes

They call it the Fiscal Cliff. Falling off it is seen as disastrous to the U.S. economy and will cause us to fall back into recession. (Did we ever leave it?) If we do nothing to avert the cliff, we fall off on New Year's Eve.

But what is the Fiscal Cliff? Primarily, it is the end to the Bush Tax Cuts they band-aided back into law in December of 2010. It also includes expiration of the Payroll Tax Cut, which has little support from either side of the aisle. If you remember, it reduced the Social Security payroll deduction from 6.2% to 4.2% so workers would have a bit more take home pay. (Did you even notice?) However, it also reduced the amount of money flowing into the Social Security coffers--a bad idea for an entitlement already facing solvency issues. The $700 billion or so Doc Fix, military reductions, and some token spending cuts also part of the mix.

Our Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner wrote, Don't trade a cliff for an iceberg.  In it he points out,

Currently, the US debt is on track to reach 187 percent of GDP by 2035. But unlike Greece, there is no "Germany" to bail us out. If our debt reaches this level, an international economic crisis would ensue. 

The President and Congressional Democrats have called for a “balanced” approach to reducing the deficit. 

But their approach has been anything but balanced. The President’s “offer” included $1.6 trillion dollars in taxes and $400 billion in spending cuts. That’s neither balanced nor helpful for our economy. When spending on entitlements is 62 percent of our budget, the President’s focus on tax increases is not going to cut it.

We can’t solve our debt problem without economic growth, and tax hikes could cost 710,000 jobs according to an independent Ernst &Young study.

Simply put, the President wants no cuts in spending, in fact wants even more increases including another Stimulus! Obama wants to increase taxes on the "rich" that will raise only around $85 billion, enough to run our country for 8 and a half days. So losing over 700,000 jobs in exchange for running the government for 8.5 days is a good deal?

House Speaker John Boehner has been offering up plans, even more generous than last time, to President Obama. They include increases in tax revenue by closing loopholes. But on whose authority? Boehner certainly doesn't have the backing of his party. By the way, Obama rejected his offers.

So at this point, if you don't want America to increase tax rates, spending, and debt, I think your representatives need to hear from you.  I would like to see the House pass an extension of the Bush Tax Cuts for all income levels, then see what the President offers. Don't forget we have a debt ceiling deadline coming and Obama will need Republican votes then.

Contact your Representatives and Senators
Find your U.S. Senators by last name
Wisconsin's U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (202) 224-5323
Wisconsin's U.S. Senator Herb Kohl (202) 224-5653

Find your U.S. House of Representatives member by state
House Representative James Sensenbrenner Washington D.C. (202) 225-5101, Brookfield (262) 784-1111

House Speaker Boehner phone line (513) 779-5400

More Reading:
The Social Security payroll tax cut: Let it die
Don't trade a cliff for an iceberg

Boehner tax increase sparks conservative backlash

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Gov. Walker says he will NOT set up exchanges

This just in, Gov. Scott Walker officially notified the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services "that Wisconsin will not build a state-based health insurance exchange and will defer to the federal Government's insurance exchange."

Yesterday afternoon, talk show host Mark Belling talked about this, that the word was, Wisconsin would be joining with 19 other states opting out of creating their own exchanges.

The Governor's letter restates the dilemma: "No matter which option is chosen, Wisconsin taxpayers will not have meaningful control over the health care policies and services sold to Wisconsin residents. If the state option is chosen; however, Wisconsinites face risk from a federal mandate lacking long-term guaranteed funding."

And if you called the Governor, you are mentioned in the letter: "...after much consideration and outreach with citizens across the state [that's you!], and in the best interest of the taxpayers of Wisconsin, we have determined Wisconsin will not develop a partnership or state-based exchange."

State Senator Leah Vukmir is on Vicki McKenna right now talking about this. I urge you to listen to the podcast when it becomes available: Hour 1, Part 1 11-16-12. Vukmir says there could be more states doing the same, and some Democrat governors have joined in the opt-out. She also mentioned a few mandates we would be spared from.


Illinois, Minnesota, and Michigan are said to be setting up the exchanges, so if you are a mid-west business, where would you rather locate?

In a related issue,  HHS Secretary Kathleen Sibelius just announced she is "granting them [governors] an extension to Dec. 14 on the decision." Hmm, I wonder why she is doing that? I am sure they are hoping to peel off a few of those 20 resistant governors.

The 10th Amendment might be finally getting its day in the sun: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people."

Here is another thought: If a state spends its own taxpayer money to fund their own exchange, aren't we still required to pay our federal taxes, a portion of which go to funding the federal health care exchanges? It's a variation of spreading the wealth around in my opinion. In effect, it would mean states with exchanges are paying twice.

If the 20 states stay united, thus not funding the government mandate, where is the federal government going to get the money to fund their mandate? (Republicans hold the majority in the House, where all funding bills originate.)

I am sure we will know more as time goes on, but at least we have dodged this first bullet. And taking a page from the Democrats, any measure to slow down the process is progress. This push-back could lead to more.


Gov. Scott Walker's letter to Secretary Sebelius
HHS Extends Exchange Deadline a Month 
Analysis: 20 states will run their health-law exchanges 

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Gov. Walker, please, no exchange, take backdoor to escape ObamaCare

In the wake of Tuesday's election results, the grim realization that we are not going to be able to escape ObamaCare started to sink in. But Vicki McKenna floated the idea last week that there was a backdoor way to prevent ObamaCare from taking root in Wisconsin--don't set up the state-run exchange.

Also last week, National Review posted an article by the CATO Institute informing us that Obamacare Is Still Vulnerable.  The Obama "administration has asked state officials to decide by Friday, November 16, whether their state will create one of Obamacare's health-insurance 'exchanges.' States also have to decide whether to implement the law's massive expansion of Medicaid. The correct answer to both questions remains a resounding no." (My emphasis)  Unfortunately, we don't have the luxury of time to think about this.

So we need to act fast by contacting Governor Walker and our State Legislators, asking them to NOT set up these ObamaCare health-insurance exchanges. Calling has more impact than email and please be polite. I emailed last night, "I urge you to stand against creating a Wisconsin ObamaCare health insurance exchange. It is our only hope of sparing us from the oppression and expense of ObamaCare. Please stand with all of us who stood by you. Sincerely..." 

Call Governor Walker  (608) 266-1212, if you cannot get through, email: govgeneral@wisconsin.gov and then call later. I called this morning and they said they were getting a lot of calls against creating exchanges.

Look up your legislators here: Assembly   Senate

I also called my State Senator Leah Vukmir (608) 266-2512. Her aid said she is against setting up the exchanges, but call her anyway. Your calls supporting her stance are very important.  Email: Sen.Vukmir@legis.wisconsin.gov

Assembly Representatives: Paul Farrow  (608) 266-5120 Email: Rep.Farrow@legis.wi.gov, Dale Kooyenga   (608) 266-9180  Email: Rep.Kooyenga@legis.wi.gov   Rob Hutton  (Takes office in 2013, but you can share your opinion anyway.) (414) 380-9665 Email: rob@rob-hutton.com

In addition to your calls, 20 Wisconsin Tea Party groups sent an open letter to Governor Scott Walker, urging him to declare "NO!" in regard to creating a Wisconsin Obamacare exchange. Why not create the exchange? Michael Cannon at CATO writes, "State-created exchanges mean higher taxes, fewer jobs, and less protection of religious freedom. States are better off defaulting to a federal exchange. The Medicaid expansion is likewise too costly and risky a proposition. Republican Governors Association chairman Bob McDonnell (R.,Va.) agrees, and has announced that Virginia will implement neither provision." The article lists 12 reasons to reject creating ObamaCare exchanges taken from CATO: 1. states are under no obligation to create one. 2. operating an Obamacare exchange would be illegal in 14 states...who enacted either statutes or amendments forbidding state employees to participate in an essential exchange function... 3. each exchange would cost its state an estimated $10 million to $100 million per year, necessitating tax increases. 4. the November 16 deadline is no more real than the "deadlines" for implementing REAL ID, which have been pushed back repeatedly since 2008. 5.  states can always create an exchange later if they choose. 6.  a state-created exchange is not a state-controlled exchange. All exchanges will be controlled by Washington. 7. Congress authorized no funds for federal "fallback" exchanges. So Washington may not be able to impose Exchanges on states at all. 8.  the Obama administration has yet to provide crucial information that states need before they can make an informed decision. 9. creating an exchange sets state officials up to take the blame when Obamacare increases insurance premiums and denies care to the sick... 10. creating an exchange would be assisting in the creation of a "public option" that would drive domestic health-insurance carriers out of business through unfair competition. 11.  Obamacare remains unpopular. The latest Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that only 38 percent of the public supports it. 12.  defaulting to a federal exchange exempts a state's employers from the employer mandate — a tax of $2,000 per worker per year... "Finally, rejecting an exchange reduces the federal deficit. Obamacare offers its deficit-financed subsidies to private health insurers only through state-created exchanges. If all states declined, federal deficits would fall by roughly $700 billion over ten years." Exit polls revealed the majority of voters, even including those who voted for President Obama, are against ObamaCare, "Forty-nine percent of voters said they think the 2010 law should be either fully [26%] or partially repealed [23%], compared with 44 percent...[who support] "Those numbers come amid a growing belief that government is overstepping its role: the exit polls found that 53 percent of those surveyed said the government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals - a figure that’s risen 10 points since the 2008 election." So this is our last stand against ObamaCare. Let's take it. Make those calls. The CATO Institute: Obamacare Is Still Vulnerable Politico: Exit Polls 2012: Split on Obamacare  An Open Letter to Governor Scott Walker against creating ObamaCare exchange Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

An Open Letter to Governor Scott Walker: No Obamacare Exchange

An Open Letter to Governor Scott Walker

Hand delivered, November 12th, 2012

Governor Walker:

Last January, Wisconsinites cheered when you sent back to the federal government a $38 million Early Innovator Grant that had bound the State of Wisconsin to establish an Obamacare exchange, along with an additional $11 million intended for integration of the state’s Medicaid system into that planned exchange.

We weren’t the only ones.

You earned the respect and gratitude of citizens across the United States and garnered the status of national hero for your principled courage in telling the Federal Department of Health and Human Services that Wisconsin would not move ahead with an exchange that compromised, in numerous respects, our state and its people. It made us want to fight that much harder to get you through the recall debacle and keep you in office.

Moreover, your actions provided valuable impetus to other state governments in standing against federal overreach, protecting their own sovereignty, and continuing to guarantee the liberty of their own citizens. Unquestionably, our nation would be far better off had the states not forgotten these clear duties for so long. Fortunately, with the help of leaders such as yourself, they have started to remember them.

Today, in the struggle against Obamacare, we have reached an even more critical juncture than that of last January. Wisconsin must remain in the vanguard of states declaring “NO!” and moving toward nullification.

The numbers alone demonstrate that there is no good reason to comply. The unfunded liabilities that an Obamacare exchange would force Wisconsin to absorb – estimated between $70 and $100 million dollars per year for our state – along with the costs to business, together quickly cancel out any and all of the gains you have thus far achieved via Act 10 and other economic steps taken over the past two years. The blow to businesses and families would be devastating in an already bleak economy.

Worse still, it would obliterate the constitutional liberties that you, as governor, are sworn to uphold and defend. If the sovereignty of the State of Wisconsin is sacrificed, the personal liberty of every single one of its citizens will likewise disappear. Such an outcome is unthinkable. It must not be permitted.

Wisconsin must stand.

As a significant and highly active portion of your base, we have defended you tirelessly through all of the battles of the last year and a half. We also came to the aid of legislators who stood with you on Act 10. We have done right by you. We now urge you to once again do right by us.

You are unquestionably being pressured by powerful lobbying firms and by the federal government alike as you make this decision. Undoubtedly, you face great temptation to take the path of least resistance. This is the moment of truth. What will you do?

The sovereignty of this state and the personal liberty of every single Wisconsinite is at stake – including the lives of the unborn, on whose behalf you have, to date, always advocated. No other considerations can compare to life and liberty.

As noted, a yes to Obamacare is not an option. We will not accept it. We are therefore waiting for you to issue an unequivocal, “NO!” When you do, we expect all Republican state legislators to stand with you, as will we.

Sincerely, the Undersigned:

Kim Mork Beloit Patriots Beloit, WI
Brian Garrow The Group Appleton, WI
Jayne Gohr Mayville TEA Party Mayville, WI
Joanne Terry Ozaukee Patriots Mequon, WI
Jeff Horn Prairie Patriots Sun Prairie, WI
Georgia Janisch Rock County Voter Education Forum Janesville, WI
Dan Horvatin Rock River Patriots Fort Atkinson, WI
John Meegan Sauk County Tea Party Baraboo, WI
Oriannah Paul Sheboygan Liberty Coalition Sheboygan, WI
Paul Lembrick Southern Wisconsin Alliance of Taxpayers Janesville, WI
Paul Bruno Tea Party Perspective Racine, WI
Charles Brey United in Freedom Beaver Dam, WI
Meg Ellefson Wausau TEA Party Wausau, WI
Kirsten Lombard  The Wisconsin 9/12 Project  Madison, WI
Seth Cowan Wolf River Area Patriots New London, WI
Ed Perkins and John Pierce Fox Valley Initiative  Appleton, WI
James Murphy Green Bay Tea Party Green Bay, WI
Ed Willing Founders Intent Caledonia, WI
Greg Luce La Crosse Tea Party La Crosse, WI
Darin Danelski Lake Country Area Defenders of Liberty Oconomowoc, WI

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Tommy Thompson, Wisconsin & all of U.S. need you to stop Obamacare

It may sound dramatic, but it is true: America must have a Republican majority in the U.S. Senate, if we have any hope of repealing ObamaCare, reducing the size of government, and just plain getting anything done in Washington D.C. Though I supported another candidate in the primary, I wholeheartedly support Wisconsin's Tommy Thompson for U.S. Senate now. Most importantly, Thompson is a social conservative: pro-life, pro traditional marriage, and pro family. He has a record of being able to get things done, even with a Democrat controlled legislature.

In addition, Thompson pledged to be the "51st vote" to repeal "ObamaCare," something the majority of Americans consider to be a #1 priority. From his website: "The law isn’t even close to being fully implemented, but its flaws are already so clearly obvious and the threat to our economy so real that we must start completely over."

The economic threat Thompson referred to is the $716 billion Obama removed from Medicare to pay for ObamaCare, the $800+ billion in new ObamaCare taxes that will kick in on Jan. 1 2013, our rising insurance premiums to cover all the people included in ObamaCare, and my personal favorite, the IRS' latest intrusion coming into your life (and wallet) by adding a new tax form. It will require you to report what qualifying insurance plan you have, or pay the penalty tax--2.5% of adjusted gross income--for not being insured. (That is the fine; it doesn't purchase insurance!)

And Gov. Tommy Thompson's opponent? That would be Madison's extreme liberal, Democrat Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin, a self-identified lesbian, favoring gay marriage and abortion on demand up until birth. She ranks so far to the left, Thompson quips, "Nancy Pelosi has to turn left to talk to her," and that isn't just campaign speak. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported, Baldwin's voting record places her among top liberals: Baldwin scored 19th most liberal; Pelosi was the 43rd most liberal.

The Journal also stated, "Baldwin voted in favor of... No Child Left Behind; the $787 billion stimulus bill (now estimated to cost $831 billion); and was a backer of the Affordable Care Act [ObamaCare]" She was so liberal, though she voted for ObamaCare, she didn't think it went far enough--Baldwin really wanted "a single-payer system" a government takeover of our healthcare system that would pay for all healthcare costs.

During her 14 years in Congress, she voted against the Bush tax cuts, which means, she was in favor of raising taxes on the middle class, which is most of us. Baldwin also voted against "tougher sanctions against Iran four times" before she became a U.S. Senate candidate. Now that she is running for Senate, she voted 2 times in favor. Uh-huh.

"What about the claim that Baldwin has accomplished little as a legislator?" Well, the Journal mentioned she renamed a post office, expanded screenings for breast and cervical cancer and also helped visually impaired veterans get disability benefits in 2007. Last year, she introduced the Safe Cosmetics Act, a law that if enacted would put small personal care/cosmetic companies and beauty salons out of business. 

And it is on her lack of accomplishment that her own district's paper, Madison's Wisconsin State Journal endorsed Tommy Thompson! Amazing. They wrote:"Tommy Thompson has a long record of getting things done, often through compromise.His likeable but very liberal opponent, Tammy Baldwin, does not. ...Thompson still shows promise as a leader who will demand action [such as fixing "America's fiscal mess" and "jobs"] in Washington, rather than sticking to partisan games."

The LaCrosse Tribune, a pretty liberal area of the state, also endorses Tommy: Our view: Thompson best choice for Senate  It's clear, they admire Baldwin's passion but support Thompson because "[he] runs on a rich record of accomplishment in leading our state during a period when the governor and Legislature were on different sides of the political fence for 12½ of those 14 years. ...We think that ability is needed in Washington, too."

The Beloit Daily News echos the same sentiments in Thompson for US Senate: "Thompson has a proven track record as a deal-maker and problem-solver. Considering the magnitude of the issues facing the nation, and the get-nothing-done partisanship which has hogtied Congress, we believe Washington could use someone who knows how to get to the handshake." And there are others.

And so it seems, in light of the dire straits we find our nation in, even liberals see the need for common sense measures. We really must start addressing and solving some of our country's problems. Tommy Thompson is the man to do just that. 

Sadly, Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has stated he will not work with President Romney, should he win, and so, the gridlock in Washington will continue unless Republicans gain a majority in the Senate.

This is why Sen.Jim DeMint recently wrote: Why is electing conservatives to the U.S. Senate so important? "Without a conservative Senate, we won't repeal Obamacare... won't balance the budget.... won't secure our borders... we won't stop the bailouts... we won't enact the pro-growth policies needed to get America back to work."

I would add we won't be able to appoint Supreme Court Justices who favor judicial restraint or achieve energy independence by drilling here.

So you see, much is at stake here. We cannot do anything about the out of state senate races except donate to their cause, but in state, we can vote for Tommy Thompson for US Senate and the Mitt Romney / Paul Ryan ticket, 2 races even Madison's Wisconsin State Journal supports: Wisconsin State Journal Flips for Romney 


Side note: Don't forget your Republican Congressmen. If you live in Paul Ryan's Congressional District 1, you vote for him there as well. In Tammy Baldwin's District 2, vote for Chad Lee, a Republican businessman.

More Reading & Link List: 
Tommyforwisconsin
New ObamaCare Tax Form Mandates Americans Report Personal Health ID Info to IRS.
Five More ObamaCare Taxes Hitting in 60 Days  
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Baldwin's voting record places her among top liberals
Tammy Baldwin Sets Benchmark for Far-Left Ideologues

Madison's Wisconsin State Journal: Tommy best to tackle Washington  gridlock 
La Cross Tribune: Our view: Thompson best choice for Senate  
Beloit Daily News: EDITORIAL: Thompson for US Senate
Reid: We Won't Work With Romney
Do you want to repeal Obamacare?
Madison's Wisconsin State Journal: Wisconsin State Journal Flips for Romney "'This is not an easy endorsement to make,' the paper’s editorial board wrote. 'We endorsed Obama for change last time around. Now we’re endorsing change again: Mitt Romney.'"
21 Newspapers Switch to Romney

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Ryan/Biden 'debate': What in the world was that?

Joe Biden and Paul Ryan faced off in their only debate for the 2012 campaign last night. Calling it a debate is a bit of a stretch though, because Biden was combative, rude, arrogant, dismissive, inappropriate, condescending ...you pick your adjective.

Biden interrupted Paul Ryan some 80+ times and the moderator, Martha Raddatz, who did little to moderate, and in fact often helped Biden by cutting Ryan short as he was making a point, did nothing to structure the conversation. It was a very one sided free for all (Biden and Raddatz, that is). The whole thing disgusted me.

Ben Shapiro summarized it this way, "Biden interrupted Ryan repeatedly. He would not allow Ryan to finish an answer; where he stopped interrupting for even a few moments, his moderator ally, Martha Raddatz, jumped in to help him cut Ryan short."

Paul Ryan kept a cool head and stuck to the facts.

Most disturbing to me was Biden's smirks, and almost laughter, while Ryan was talking about serious issues such as Iran getting nuclear weapons or the embassy deaths. It was bizarre. What? he thinks a nuclear Iran is funny?

Biden was totally inappropriate in his responses and in his demeanor, hardly Vice Presidential, not to mention Presidential, should the need ever arise. All I could think of was this was the man Barack Obama picked as his running mate, to give his ticket some gravitas--especially on foreign policy. (Biden still insisted they weren't aware that more security was needed in Libya.)

Maybe the debate should have begun with the familiar campaign ad intro: I am Barack Obama, and I approve this Vice President.




CNN Poll: Ryan 48%, Biden 44%

Chris Wallace: I've never seen a candidate as disrespectful as Biden...
Borger: Biden Came Off As Condescending...
Hume: Biden Came Off As Rude And A 'Cranky Old Man'...
Noonan: Confusing Strength With Aggression
AP: Body Language:..it was all Joe 'Laugh, chuckle, grimace, grin, smirk, goofy face'...
CNN: Who won? Martha Raddatz...

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><