Conservative Rumblings

The healthcare bill passed by Congress and signed by Obama has continued to be a source of surprises for most people, as sections dealing with everything from death panels to civilian military forces have been found. In a stunning development, another previously undiscovered section, entitled “Section 6660: Ban on Consumption of Food and Food-like substances,” was located just this morning.

This addition to the bill essentially makes it illegal to consume any sort of food, a ground-breaking provision that experts say was likely inserted into the bill at the 11th hour by Democratic insiders.

Like most provisions in the bill, this one also does not take full effect for many years. The first section will start immediately, which includes a tax on all foods. A 10% tax starts this year, moves to 25% next year and finally 75% by 2014. The actual banning on food will take effect in 2015.

The bill requires all residents in the country to abide by it, but does include an exemption for White House residents, staff and their families.

At a press conference early Thursday, press secretary Robert Gibbs attempted to explain the provision, but after making four analogies related to bears and repeatedly giggling at a drawing of a rabbit he had taped to his podium, Obama himself came out to explain to bill.

“Let me be clear: Americans wanted change,” he said, “What bigger change can we have than this? With the banning of food, most of our obesity and healthcare concerns will likely vanish, easing the burden on middle-class families whose healthcare costs have skyrocketed due to the evil and greedy insurance companies.”

“Just last week,” Obama continued, “I met a man named Jules, living in L.A, who said, ‘Barack, I wish it was illegal for me to eat all these tasty burgers. I wish someone would stop me.’ Well, America, I am here and I am stopping you. This banning of food will signal an end to the age of American food arrogance.”

When questioned on the exemption that allowed the White House to continue eating food, Obama dismissed the claims of tyranny. “Let me be clear,” he said. “We have brought fundamental change to America. But no one can expect me to do it on an empty stomach.”

Obama also cited Michelle Obama as a reason for the White House exemption, as he said he was “deathly afraid” of what she would do to him if she wasn’t allowed to have her arugula.

“Besides,” Obama added, “One of my main adversaries, the so-called ‘tea parties,’ utilize food in their name. If we ban tea, that should be the end of them, right?”

While most reporters continued to nod in agreement, one correspondent from Fox News did ask how this provision could possibly benefit America, since without food or water “we’d all die.”

Obama glowered at the reporter for several moments, before angrily swirling his cape behind him and proclaiming that people should stop listening to “Republican fear tactics.”

At least 40,000 lawsuits have already been filed by everyone from ordinary citizens to food manufacturing companies, and experts predict nearly any suit or Constitutional challenge to the bill will likely succeed given the gross destruction of freedom it promotes.

Obama was undaunted by such threats, however, repeatedly mumbling “I…AM…America” while carefully examining the jeweled scepter he began carrying with him earlier this week.

At least one Democrat, however, seems to not be on board with this bill. Sources reported that independent film maker and left-wing venom-spitter Michael Moore, upon hearing of the provision, renounced his membership in the Democratic Party and changed his voter registration to “non-partisan.”

Unconfirmed reports place Moore in Mexico City, where he was seen hording double cheeseburgers in a downtown apartment.

Never fear, loyal readers. I will be back posting regularly on this blog soon. Unfortunately my website domain, despite the fact you can easily see it online, is actually stuck in a weird sort of purgatory between hosting companies.

Think of it as Keanu Reeves from the epochally bad third Matrix movie when he was stuck in that bizarre ‘train station’ place, only my website probably displays more emotion than he did.

The Illinois primary is TODAY! If you live in the Land of Lincoln, please get out and vote! There are a number of EXTREMELY important Republican races that require your attention, including:

U.S. Senate
Conservative Patrick Hughes is challenging pro-abortion, cap’n'trade voter Mark Kirk, who is a little RINO weasel trying to sneak into the Senate. Hughes has a very strong conservative platform, grassroots endorsements and the support of conservatives around the country. Kirk has an office that refuses to take comments from anyone not living in his district (10th Illinois), even though he is running for a statewide office.

I endorse Hughes, obviously.

Illinois Governor
A wide open GOP field is unfortunately filled with landmines. Former IL GOP party chair Andy McKenna ran us into the ground statewide and is a useless candidate, Kirk Dillard appeared in a pro-Obama campaign commercial and sees no problem with tax hikes, Jim Ryan is a member of the currently corrupt IL government and Bill Brady is just a moderate.

What’s left are Human Events contributor and former Jack Ryan campaign manager Dan Proft and businessman Adam Andrzejewski. Both are solid candidates for the general election in my book. I’m endorsing Proft but would support Andrzejewski just the same in the general election.

Locally, I also have to plug my district:

Illinois 14th. Congressional District
In order to challenge Democrat Bill Foster in November, we need a solid candidate. That makes the primary race a simple choice: Randy Hultgren, a State Senator with an excellent record in Springfield, is a far superior choice to Ethan Hastert, son of former 14th. mainstay Denny Hastert. Hastert is a pureblood member of the entitlement brigade. He has little experience, and is running simply on the “Hastert seat” mantra, that he’s entitled to it because of his father’s long (but albeit tainted) tenure in the district. Now, should Hastert win, I’ll support him in the general, because his views are very similar to Hultgren’s. I just think he lacks the experience and skills necessary to mount a successful challenge to Foster.

I endorse Randy Hultgren for the 14th Congressional District.

Other local Illinois endorsements:
Chris Lauzen, 25th. Illinois Senatorial
Kay Hatcher, 50th. Illinois Representative District
Jim Dodge, Illinois Comptroller
David Rickert, Kane County Treasurer
L. Robert Russell, Kane County Sheriff
Mary Schostok, Judge of the Appellate Court (2nd Judicial)

VOTE!!!!

February 2nd is an important day in Illinois politics. The impending primary elections are a chance for Illinoisans to do something right and try to prevent another horrible Senator from being sent to Washington in our name.

Considering we’re the state responsible for Carol Mosley Braun, Dick Durbin and Barack Obama going to D.C., I’d say we have some significant penance to pay to the country.

We have a chance during primary season to take the first step toward fixing that problem by voting a real conservative as our Republican nominee. This is a contest between squishy political opportunist Mark Kirk and some lesser-known candidates, such as conservative businessman Patrick Hughes.

The political establishment will tell you the “safe” thing to do is pick Mark Kirk as the Republican nominee, because he has “the best chance to win.” We’ve been fed this line for years; vote for the moderate, as long as he has an ‘R’ next to his name, because they have a better chance to win.

That’s what they said about presidential nominee John McCain. A year and a half later, we’ve lost millions of jobs and our national debt is piling up faster than a caviar bill at a Democrat fundraising party, because we have a radical president who is taking the country in a direction that anyone who understands it is completely against. Why? Because we sacrificed convictions for political expediency and chose McCain as our nominee, as he had “the best chance to win.” (I voted for someone else in the primary, in fact, but Illinois did overwhelmingly vote for McCain). Obviously, he lost handily to the Obama Machine.

Mark Kirk is no conservative and should be ashamed to claim that title; he does not deserve our vote. Let me give you a few examples of Kirk’s travesties as a representative in Congress.

Kirk’s pro-life credentials are non-existent. He has a lifetime rating of 100% from NARAL, a radical pro-abortion organization. Kirk shares this rating with other prime examples of liberal politicians, including Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton and, yes, Barack Obama. To give you some comparison, liberal Harry Reid, the Democrat Senate majority leader, is MORE pro-life than Mark Kirk. Kirk has twice voted NO on making it a crime to harm an unborn child during another crime and voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions.

When it comes to the economy, Kirk is similarly wrong with his votes. He voted to give MORE money to Obama’s useless stimulus package AND the equally ineffective Cash for Clunkers program. He also was one of just EIGHT Republicans to vote FOR the economy-destroying Cap’n’Trade bill, which will levy unprecedented taxes on businesses and massacre jobs, especially in manufacturing and agricultural industries that are the lifeblood of our state.

Kirk is also radically anti-2nd Amendment, proving repeatedly that he does not have any respect for gun owners or their rights. Kirk wants trigger locks and to enforce the restrictive Brady Bill, and the National Rifle Association gives him a lifetime rating of D, indicating a very anti-gun voting record. With gun control likely on the horizon for the Democrats in Washington (please Google “new gun bill” and read about H.R. 45), we need a conservative who will stand up for our rights.

On social issues, Kirk once again sides with Democrats. He voted with Democrats to override President Bush’s vetoes of the SCHIP program and an expansion to Medicare (both expansions of government control of healthcare and severely fiscally irresponsible bills). He also is a member of the global warming alarmist community, and has voted repeatedly against bills that would improve our energy independence, including the Bush/Cheney energy policies and voting against drilling in ANWR. He also has stated his belief in supporting the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (which is complicated but suffice it to say, the UN is running it so it’s very bad for the USA).

Kirk is out of touch will Illinois and out of touch with Republicans. He does not understand who we are or what we need. His representation of the wishes of the 10th Congressional District has been bad enough; let’s not make the mistake of giving him a chance to represent the whole state.

We need to stop listening to the pundits who tell us certain races aren’t winnable. Patrick Hughes can absolutely beat whatever Democrat nominee is put forward. As I write this, the Democrats are still reeling from the defeat they suffered in the Massachusetts special election for Teddy Kennedy’s old seat, which was won in a stunning upset by Republican Scott Brown last week. If Massachusetts, the bluest of the blue states, can elect a conservative Republican, so can we.

When you vote for a Representative or a Senator, you expect them to carry out your wishes. Nothing is worse than watching someone you voted for doing the exact opposite of what you want to see them do.

That’s the problem with Kirk. He’ll take your vote, sure, but he’s not listening to you. He’s going to do whatever is politically expedient, because he’ll know he doesn’t have to answer for anything for six years.

We need principled leadership in Washington, leadership that will stand up to the Democrats’ radical agenda and not be another pawn in Harry Reid’s army. I want a Senator I can count on.

I cannot count on Mark Kirk, and neither should you. Please vote Patrick Hughes on Feb 2. Show America Illinois still has some dignity; if Massachusetts can do it, we can do it

Barack Obama’s 2010 State of the Union promises to be more of the same: high soaring rhetoric, heavy teleprompter reliance and Nancy Pelosi most likely clapping like a seal. In order to squeeze at least some entertainment out of this campaign-speech-on-steroids, I’ve developed a nice little list of things Barack is likely to say tonight.

Below are my current odds for these catchphrases/statements. Variations count if they are very close, and I’m also giving 5000/1 odds that the teleprompter breaks and he goes off script talking about breathalysers.

In that vein, if you want to turn this into a drinking game, it’s very easy: longer odds, stiffer drink.

I’ll also be live tweeting commentary from http://www.twitter.com/ianessling. It’ll be epic.

2/1 “Pre existing conditions”
2/1 “Spending freeze”
2/1 “Inherited”
3/1 “Last eight years”
3/1 “Let me be clear”
4/1 “People are angry”
5/1 “I’m fighting for you”
5/1 “Excessive profits”
5/1 “It’s not about me” or “This isn’t about me.”
7/1 “Wall Street Bankers”
10/1 “George W. Bush” or “last administration”
10/1 “I’m fired up.”
10/1 “And that is why…”
10/1 “I have asked”
10/1 “Mess we inherited”
12/1 “Spending freeze” more than 10 times
15/1 “Fatcat”
20/1 “Get this economy moving again.”
20/1 “Ted Kennedy” or any variation
25/1 “Rising deficit”
25/1 “I” more than 100 times
30/1 “War in Iraq”
35/1 “Eric Holder”
35/1 “Stimulus package”
50/1 “Closing Guantanamo Bay”
50/1 “2010 election” or “midterm election”
50/1 “George W. Bush” or “last administration” more than 10 times
50/1 “I don’t want to hear”
50/1 “We’re going to pass healthcare reform”
50/1 “Yes we can.”
60/1 “Janet Napolitano”
75/1 “Campaign”
100/1 “Underwear bomber”
150/1 “Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid” (in the same sentence, any order)
175/1 “Czar”
200/1 “Budget reconciliation”
250/1 “Joe Wilson”
350/1 “Hope” and “Change” in the same sentence
500/1 “My record-breaking deficit”
500/1 “I won”
500/1 “It’s bleeping golden!”
500/1 “I have a dream.”
1000/1 “I hereby resign the presidency”

I’m currently working on moving my site to a new server, so there may be some downtime over the next couple weeks. Rest assured, the Feds haven’t locked me up for being a political dissident (yet) and I’ll be back online soon.

Just days before a Nigerian man tried to blow up a U.S. airliner as it descended into Detroit, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security released its “2009 Accomplishments & Reforms” fact sheet, touting its “Secure Flight” passenger vetting program.

The Obama administration has confirmed that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was on the U.S. government terrorist watch list, but the 23-year-old man was still able to board a Northwest plane in Amsterdam bound for Michigan.

On the DHS fact sheet, issued on Dec. 15, the “Secure Flight” program is second on the list and is described as a program that “prescreens name, date of birth and gender against government watch lists for domestic and international flights.”

As if we didn’t already know that the Department of Homeland Security was the most incompetent Federal agency in existence (especially with ‘we’re not calling it terrorism anymore‘ at the helm), now they are bragging about secure flight programs just prior to allowing a Nigerian terrorist to board a flight bound for America. The DHS has been a piece of garbage since Bush created it and it’s continuing to get worse. This is the same DHS that thinks it’s more important to pursue ‘dangerous right-wing extremism from folks who have anti-abortion stickers on their cars’ than it is to fight terrorism and close the border.

Janet Napolitano is completely inept and incompetent, and like most of the Obama administration, beyond naive when it comes to national security. It was an extremely lucky break that the detonator this guy was carrying didn’t go off. She can’t even figure out if the “system worked” or “didn’t work,” changing her mind within 24 hours of each statement. (It didn’t work, in case you are wondering what the correct answer is).

With the Department of Insecurity still failing in its feeble attempts to protect the country from EXTERNAL threats, we may not be so lucky next time.

Yep, those good, upstanding people in Guantanamo Bay that the liberals want released since they’ve “done nothing wrong” are actually terrorists who, once released, will GO BACK TO BEING TERRORISTS. Amazing! Shocking!

Two of the four leaders allegedly behind the al Qaeda plot to blow up a Northwest Airlines passenger jet over Detroit were released by the U.S. from the Guantanamo prison in November, 2007, according to American officials and Department of Defense documents. Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the Northwest bombing in a Monday statement that vowed more attacks on Americans.

American officials agreed to send the two terrorists from Guantanamo to Saudi Arabia where they entered into an “art therapy rehabilitation program” and were set free, according to U.S. and Saudi officials.

Guantanamo prisoner #333, Muhamad Attik al-Harbi, and prisoner #372, Said Ali Shari, were sent to Saudi Arabia on Nov. 9, 2007, according to the Defense Department log of detainees who were released from American custody. Al-Harbi has since changed his name to Muhamad al-Awfi.

An art therapy rehabilitation program? Are you kidding me? We released terrorists and it came back to bite us. Hmm, I swear I predicted something like that would happen and I swear we already went through this song and dance.

This is ridiculous. Once we have a terrorist in our custody, he should stay there. Oh, yes, good idea, let’s send terrorists overseas to a terrorist country to be “rehabilitated.”

Finally he makes a statement…and not surprisingly, it’s nearly as bloodless as his mind-boggling Fort Hood speech.

Here’s what we know so far: On Christmas Day, Northwest Airlines Flight 253 was en route from Amsterdam, Netherlands, to Detroit. As the plane made its final approach to Detroit Metropolitan Airport, a passenger allegedly tried to ignite an explosive device on his body, setting off a fire.

Thanks to the quick and heroic actions of passengers and crew, the suspect was immediately subdued, the fire was put out, and the plane landed safely. The suspect is now in custody and has been charged with attempting to destroy an aircraft.
[…]
This incident, like several that have preceded it, demonstrates that an alert and courageous citizenry are far more resilient than an isolated extremist.

Emphasis added. Is this guy for real? I mean, does he even listen to the words coming out of his mouth? To call this attempted terrorist attack an “isolated extremist” is grossly incompetent and naive. Al Qaeda has already claimed credit for the attack and promises that there are others in Yemen waiting for their chance.

And what does the Great Obama, the all-knowing sage of Hope and Change have to say? It’s an “isolated extremist” and he’s “ordering a review.”

How about we review your qualifications to be commander in chief, sir. I think they are lacking.

Completely expected, of course. Silly things like the Constitution won’t stand in the way of the Progressive agenda. After all, it’s just an outdated piece of paper anyway in the Left’s eyes. The Democrats know they have an avowed Constitution-hater in the Oval Office prepared to do whatever is necessary to pass a takeover of 1/6 of our economy by the Federal government and they’ve mounted a bullet train headed to progressive/totalitarian hell. Unfortunately for us, we’re all in the passenger cars, with armed guards standing between us and the conductor.

From 1 AM votes to insane manager’s amendments that force a 2/3 vote to repeal Obamacare to bribing and threatening senators, this Congress and president have taken massively illegal and unconstitutional steps to ensure that this monstrously destructive bill is voted into law and forced upon an unwilling American public that would rather the government scrap the entire plan than pass ANY ‘reform’ this year.

During a series of seven votes wrapping up the health care debate, Senate Republicans failed in their last-ditch efforts to derail the bill.

The Senate voted 60-39 to reject Sen. John Ensign’s call to examine the constitutionality of a health care mandate central to the overhaul bill.

The Nevada Republican wanted to determine whether it was constitutional for the federal government to require Americans to purchase health insurance.

The Senate also rejected an amendment by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, by a vote of 60-39.

I give kudos to the Repbulicans in the Senate for forcing the Democrats to go on record saying that the unconstitutional individual mandate in the bill is not worthy of being challenged on Constitutional grounds. Obviously, forcing Americans to buy a product (in this case, healthcare coverage) is illegal, unconstitutional and reprehensible. Basically, it’s the embodiment of this Congress and administration’s motto.

The government cannot force someone to buy something. Not only is that not a power listed in the Constitution, it’s also completely against our whole founding principle of freedom from tyranny. One of my illustrious Senators from Illinois, Roland Burris, made the idiotic argument a few weeks ago that it was the same as requiring people to buy auto insurance.

It’s not. I can choose not to drive. Under Obamacare, I cannot choose not to buy an “approved” healthcare plan. The heavy hand of the government rests on my shoulder and orders me to buy something I may or may not want.

If I don’t want to buy health insurance, THAT IS MY RIGHT as a free citizen in the United States of America. No government, be it Federal, State or Local can step up to me and order me to spend my money on a product. I have the CHOICE to not buy it.

Well, technically I DO have that choice…but if Nancy Pelosi has her way, I would end up in jail for not buying a government approved plan.

Hey Congress, you lying pack of socialists: tell me again this bill is Constitutional.