The House introduces two bills which would prohibit the federal funding of abortion through Obamacare
As we all know earlier this week the House voted to repeal Obamacare, and while this repeal is not going to go anywhere it has kept the debate over Obamacare in the spotlight as the Obama regime looks to look beyond the controversial legislation it passed against the will of the people last year.
In defending this repeal vote my representative–Republican Frank Guinta–promised in this article that the repeal vote was just one of many angles the Republicans would be using while attempting to repeal Obamacare piece by piece if necessary. He claimed that the House would also be moving to repeal various aspects of the bill which are considered the most controversial parts of this insidious legislation.
We are now starting to see the beginning of that plan being set in motion: First came the news that the House Republicans have introduced legislation that would trim $2.5 trillion from the federal government over the next ten years, including the defunding of Obamacare; and now we are learning that a bipartisan effort is underway which would ban the federal funding of abortion, which is currently not specifically disallowed under Obamacare.
Two Republicans and one Democrat have introduced two separate bills–the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” and the “Protect Life Act”–which are designed to repeal what these legislators call “the largest expansion of abortion funding since Roe v. Wade.”
These two pieces of legislation have the support of House leaders and as of right now over 150 House members have signed on as co-sponsors of this bill, so it seems likely to me that the House will be able to pass these two bills. There is no doubt in my mind that Obamacare is unconstitutional, exceeds the authority granted to the federal government in the constitution, and tramples on the rights of the states, but even so, there is nothing about Obamacare that I find more despicable, disgusting, reprehensible, insidious, and immoral than the fact that taxpayers may be required to fund the taking of innocent lives through abortion simply because we currently have the most radical pro-abortion president in the history of the United States.
I can only hope that this is one of the first aspects of Obamacare–along with the unconstitutional mandates–that will be repealed. I have to say that so far I like what the House is doing in regards to repealing Obamacare, and it will be interesting to see where the Senate stands on these issues. In a way I like the fact that Obamacare many have to be repealed one piece at a time because this will afford us the opportunity to see where our legislators stand on every single issue; they will not be able to hide.
The Republicans who ran for seats in the House of Representatives campaigned on two main issues–repealing Obamacare and cutting the spending of the federal government.
With yesterday’s vote on Obamacare, the Republicans made good on their first campaign promise as the first steps were taken in the repealing of Obamacare. This was a first step, and this is going to be long battle, but the Republicans in the House did do what they said they would do.With the repeal of Obamacare moving forward, and with the follow up to the repeal–an alternative replacement for Obamacare–now in the works the Republicans were able to set their sights on their second major campaign promise–spending cuts.
And that is exactly what they did, as the House Republicans have introduced the Spending Reduction Act of 2011, which aims to cut $2.5 trillion in federal spending over the next ten years. When a politician runs on the promise of cutting spending he or she is usually ridiculed by the opposition who claims something to the effect of, “you claim you are going to cut spending, yet you do not offer any specific programs which you are willing to cut.”
Ward Bird’s pardon hearing set for February 1st
Yesterday the New Hampshire Executive Council decided by a vote of 5-0 to grant Ward Bird his pardon hearing request and the governor decided not to block the move–which he could have done under the state law. Last night the Executive Council announced the date of the hearing and it has been set for February 1st.
Governor John Lynch is urging Ward Bird to be at his hearing in order to “explain himself” because Bird refused to take the stand in his original trial, and he would like to hear Ward Bird describe what happened that day in his own words, while the Executive Council is debating whether or not to subpoena Christina Harris–the woman that Ward Bird allegedly threatened–to testify at the hearing because as Executive Council member David Wheeler said, “her credibility has to be part of the hearing because the case is a total ‘He said, she said.”
And that is what is at the crux of this case, it is one man’s word against one woman’s and I am mot sure how there was ever enough evidence in this case to convict Ward Bird. As it stands right now it looks to me as if a complete pardon isn’t going to happen, but rather a commutation of Ward Bird’s sentence. While this will return Ward Bird to his family he will still lose his constitutional right to keep and bear arms, so here is hoping that a full pardon is still not out of the question.
We will know soon enough, the Executive Council will vote on February 2nd–one day after the hearing–and the recommendation will be sent to the governor’s desk for his decision.
House votes to repeal Obamacare
In what is seen as a largely symbolic gesture, the House today voted to repeal Obamacare. The bill will now head over to the Senate for a vote…..or will it? Harry Reid has vowed to block this bill and will not allow it to go to the floor for a vote. The Republican leaders in the House have challenged Harry Reid to let this bill go to the floor for a vote–after all, if the bill is going to fail anyway why is Harry Reid afraid to vote on it?
The answer is simple: Harry Reid and the Democrats in the Senate know how unpopular this legislation is and they are unwilling to go on the record in support of this legislation for fear of repercussions in 2012. That is not exactly a vote of confidence if you ask me. Harry Reid would rather block the bill than do the will of the people and vote on it because he is trying to perform a juggling act. He is trying to keep the far left base happy, while not offending the center and the right, while at the same time trying to spare the president the embarrassment of his signature legislation facing even the remote possibility of repeal. In other words, he and the other Democrats in the Senate are nothing but cowards.
Today the newly elected Republicans delivered on one of their biggest campaign promises and while this is a symbolic victory for the American people, I do not believe in symbolic victories–you either win or you lose–I am only interested in real victories. So now that the House Republicans have made their statement, it is time to get back to the task at hand: they must now start to dismantle the healthcare bill one piece at a time, starting with the most controversial issues involved. This must be coupled with a defunding of the legislation so that they can buy enough time to dismantle this bill before it becomes law.
This delaying tactic must be used until the American people have the chance to send pro-repeal politicians to the Senate in 2012–then and only then will we be able to repeal this trillion dollar tragedy once and for all. We are in a war of attrition, we are under siege and we can only hope that we can survive this battle until the reinforcements come in 2012 to relieve us. (For those of you who are offended by the hate-filled vitriol and the references to war in the last sentence, I would remind you that it was a Democrat on the House floor today that called people like me Nazis, the gloves are now off!)
Tennessee Democrat compares the Republicans to Nazis because of their opposition to Obamacare: What happened to civility?
In the aftermath of the Arizona shooting the media, as well as the Prima County Sheriff, blamed the vitriolic, over the top, hateful and violent rhetoric for the atmosphere which drove Jared Loughner to murder. Everyone from Sarah Palin to Glenn Beck to Rush Limbaugh to the Tea Party itself were blamed for Jared Loughner’s actions as the media and the left tried to apply a political angle to this tragedy rather than blaming the shooter himself and holding him alone as being accountable for his actions.
Many on the left called for a more civil, less hate filled debate as we moved forward in the future–even Barack Obama said that this was the time to come together and tone down the rhetoric–but apparently Tennessee Democrat Congressman Steve Cohen didn’t get the message, as he ignored the propaganda arm of the Democrat party as well as the president himself on the House floor today when he compared the Republicans to Nazis. Read more…
New Hampshire Executive Council grants Ward Bird a pardon hearing
Earlier today the New Hampshire Executive Council heard the case regarding Ward Bird’s pardon request and he was granted a pardon hearing, and the Democrat governor of New Hampshire, John Lynch–who could have overridden the unanimous decision by the Executive Council–declined to do so. This means that Ward Bird’s pardon request will move forward.
This is great news for Ward Bird, and here is what the governor had to say regarding a pardon in this case:
I do have some concerns as to an unconditional pardon, given the facts of the case, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have a hearing
As of yet there has been no date set for his hearing, and the governor is still not committing one way or the other in this case, but it seems as if it is very likely that Ward Bird may win a commutation of his sentence, rather than the full pardon he had hoped for, as even members of the all Republican Executive Council still have some concerns about Ward Bird, most likely because of new information which I wrote about yesterday.
Some on the Executive Council said today they want to explore a commutation of Bird’s sentence, rather than an outright pardon.
Executive Councilor Dan St. Hilaire, R-Concord, said “It’s just a matter of looking at whether the punishment fits the crime.”
Governor John Lynch has not granted a single pardon during his time in office because he believes that a pardon should only be granted in cases with extenuating circumstances, and I feel that he most likely will not grant a full pardon here either. This case now seems to be more of a look at mandatory sentencing (which I had always supported until I heard about this case) and whether or not judges should be allowed to take into account a person’s history when sentencing the culprit to jail time. Even the judge who sentenced Ward Bird admitted that he would not have given Ward Bird any jail time if it weren’t for mandatory sentences.
If Ward Bird is granted a commutation of his sentence instead of a full pardon, it will still be a partial victory for second amendment advocates and for those that believe the New Hampshire constitution means what it says, when it states that a person has the right to bear arms in defense of himself, his family, and his property. While Ward Bird may finally be freed if indeed the governor agrees to commute his sentence, it will only be a partial victory because the felony conviction will stand and Ward Bird will lose his right to keep and bear arms.
In that regard this decision will be a mixed one at best, but at least Ward Bird will finally be going home.
New Hampshire Representative Frank Guinta named Vice Chairman of the subcommittee which will investigate the bailouts
It was learned earlier today that my representative–Republican Frank Guinta–has been named the Vice Chairman of the House Subcommittee on TARP, Financial Services and Bailouts of Public and Private Programs. This committee is part of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform run by Darrell Issa, and its role is described as follows:
Guinta’s subcommittee is charged with investigating financial and monetary policy, banking, housing and insurance regulation, as well as financial crises, rescues and tax policy
Here is what Darrell Issa had to say about my congressman, the reason why he chose him, and what he expects of him:
Issa said Guinta’s experience as Manchester’s mayor “and his commitment to accountability in government convinced me he was the right candidate” for the post.
Issa said Guinta “will play a leading role in sorting out still unanswered questions about the financial meltdown and federal programs that are failing to achieve measurable goals to help the economy while wasting taxpayer dollars.”
Representative Guinta will be involved with investigating the various bailout bills and their failings; identifying where money was wasted and stopping more taxpayer money from being spent on programs which do not work.
Here is what Representative Guinta had to say:
Guinta said voters are opposed to “billions of dollars spent on bailouts. They want to know where all that money went, what it produced, and cases where it was wasted. When waste is identified, they want it stopped immediately.
“My goal is to do everything I can to keep the money paid by hardworking taxpayers from being needlessly squandered
After so many years of New Hampshire and her representatives being in bed with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barack Obama, and all of their ilk; and after two years of watching the Congress flounder about trying to spend their way out of this recession it feels so damn good to hear a New Hampshire representative talk like this. I am so proud of my new congressman and I hope that he lives up to my expectations, but the mere fact that Darrell Issa has entrusted him with such a position makes me feel that he will not let me, my state, or my country down.
My Representative–Frank Guinta–has decided to write a biweekly column which he will be sending to all of New Hampshire’s media outlets in an attempt to keep his constituents up to date on what is going on in the House as well as what he is doing about the issues as they come before him. I happen to think that this is a great idea and I am looking forward to reading Congressman Guinta’s columns as they come out.
Today he released the first edition of “Frankly Speaking” and it deals with the House’s attempt to repeal Obamacare. In this article he admits that while repealing Obamacare has a great chance of passing the House, it will be tough to get a repeal through the Senate. But he claims the effort is still worth it because this battle is being fought on several fronts.
In addition to nearly half of the states challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare, he notes that the House is also working on picking apart the healthcare law one controversial piece at a time.
I have decided to post his column as it appeared in today’s New Hampshire Union leader in its entirety, here it is:
Ward Bird’s pardon request to be heard by the New Hampshire Executive Council tomorrow
I have written several posts on Ward Bird–the New Hampshire man who was sentenced to three years in jail for defending his property–in the past and tomorrow it will be decided whether or not Ward Bird is granted a pardon hearing. I am not going to go into the details which I have already covered–because there is new information that I feel I must write about today–so for those of you unfamiliar with the case, you can read more here, here, and here.
Unfortunately, the New Hampshire Union Leader article which this post is based on was only available in the print edition, so I will not be able to link to the article that I am quoting.
Tomorrow Ward Bird’s case will be heard and from there it will be decided whether or not his pardon request is allowed to move forward. Ward Bird is fighting for a complete pardon which would exonerate him and clear his record of the felony for which he is currently serving. Claiming that “I can’t stress enough that this is a matter of my innocence” he declared, “I have no prior history. I have not committed what I have been accused of. Period.”
During the trail the jury was not allowed to hear about Ward Bird’s accuser’s past–which included a criminal record. And as Ward Bird claims in the article, “I don’t believe the evidence shows that I ever committed a crime. It’s her word against mine.” And he is right about this; the jury heard testimony from his accuser–Christine Harris–who claimed that Ward Bird came out of his house brandishing a weapon and swearing at her. She has called him a bully who was only trying to intimidate her from buying a property in the area.
As we head into the 2012 election cycle it would seem to me that the Republicans have one very large problem that needs to be addressed if they have any hope of beating Barack Obama. The Republicans need to nominate a good, solid conservative candidate with no baggage, but as of yet it doesn’t appear as if there is a great candidate out there–certainly nobody with the name recognition which will be needed if Barack Obama is to be a one-termer.
A name that has been bandied about is the former governor of Minnesota, Tim Pawlenty, and make no mistake about it–he is running for president. Being from the state with the first in the nation primary I can tell you that those who are almost obsessively interested in politics–as I am–watch potential candidates very closely to see whether of not they seem to be paying special attention to New Hampshire all of a sudden, and Tim Pawlenty has made it a habit to visit New Hampshire (five times to be exact, while visiting Iowa seven times), so everything points towards a Tim Pawlenty run at the White House.
America's Watchtower 