By KARL ROVE

Last Friday, President Obama met with House Republicans in Baltimore. He took questions, parried criticisms, and allowed all of it to be put on television.

Framed as an opportunity for the president to hear from the other side, Mr. Obama’s real aim was to portray Republicans as obstructionist and boost his own public standing in the process.

Afterward, Gallup found that Mr. Obama’s approval hit 51%, up from 47% after the State of the Union address two days earlier. But in winning that small victory, Mr. Obama also further poisoned his relationship with Republicans by repeatedly saying things that are demonstrably not true.

For example, when Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling asked if the president’s new budget would, “like your old budget, triple the national debt” and increase “the cost of government to almost 25% of the economy,” Mr. Obama denied it. But that’s exactly what Mr. Obama proposed doing in his budget framework that Congress passed last April, according to both Congressional Budget Office and White House documents.

In Baltimore, Mr. Obama criticized the GOP’s response to last year’s $787 billion stimulus package saying, “I don’t understand . . . why we got opposition . . . before we had a chance to actually meet and exchange ideas.”

In truth, the president met with congressional Republicans to talk about the stimulus package the day before the press said Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey completed drafting the 1,073-page bill. What occurred was a photo-op, not an exchange of ideas. Democrats at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue were scornful of Republican input.

When Georgia Republican Rep. Tom Price complained in Baltimore that the president kept saying “that Republicans have offered no ideas and no solutions,” Mr. Obama shot back, “I don’t think I said that.”

But of course Mr. Obama and his people have said that repeatedly. They did so starting in April, when White House aides swarmed Sunday talk programs to label the GOP the “party of no” and say that the party lacked both constructive ideas and vision.

For the rest of this story please go here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704259304575043342489432552.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read

Face Forward Comments:

I really like Karl Rove.  This is the guy that was an advisor to Clinton.  He pulled him from the far left to a more centered political position.  From the point that Clinton began making his decisions based on the Karl Rove influence, he personally prospered and the country benefited. While there many things about Clinton that many people found offensive, he was widely applauded for his move to the center, politically.

On the other hand, we have a president now that has surrounded himself with yes men and those that are even further left of his own position.  This last week we began to see his heavily tilted, left leaning, position sway just a bit.  He is by no means making any effort to change any of his positions or policies he is however, making an effort to sound more centrist  If only he would actually  take the next step and do what is right for the people of the country.

ObamaCare endorsements: What the bribe was

 Dick Morris and Eileen McGann

As the suicidal Democratic congressmen proceed to rubber-stamp the Obama healthcare reform despite the drubbing their party took in the ’09 elections, the president trotted out the endorsements of the AMA and the AARP to stimulate support. But these — and the other endorsements — his package has received are all bought and paid for. Here are the deals:

· The American Medical Association (AMA) was facing a 21 percent cut in physicians’ reimbursements under the current law. Obama promised to kill the cut if they backed his bill. The cuts are the fruit of a law requiring annual 5-6 percent reductions in doctor reimbursements for treating Medicare patients. Bravely, each year Congress has rolled the cuts over, suspending them but not repealing them. So each year, the accumulated cuts threaten doctors. By now, they have risen to 21 percent. With this blackmail leverage, Obama compelled the AMA to support his bill … or else!

· The AARP got a financial windfall in return for its support of the healthcare bill. Over the past decade, the AARP has morphed from an advocacy group to an insurance company (through its subsidiary company). It is one of the main suppliers of Medi-gap insurance, a high-cost, privately purchased coverage that picks up where Medicare leaves off. But President Bush-43 passed the Medicare Advantage program, which offered a subsidized, lower-cost alternative to Medi-gap. Under Medicare Advantage, the elderly get all the extra coverage they need plus coordinated, well-managed care, usually by the same physician. So more than 10 million seniors went with Medicare Advantage, cutting into AARP Medi-gap revenues.

Rahm and Barack the right and left hand of political intimidation

Presto! Obama solved their problem. He eliminates subsidies for Medicare Advantage. The elderly will have to pay more for coverage under Medigap, but the AARP — which supposedly represents them — will make more money. (If this galls you, join the American Seniors Association, the alternative group; contact sbarton@americanseniors.org This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .)

· The drug industry backed ObamaCare and, in return, got a 10-year limit of $80 billion on cuts in prescription drug costs. (A drop in the bucket of their almost $3 trillion projected cost over the next decade.) They also got administration assurances that it will continue to bar lower-cost Canadian drugs from coming into the U.S. All it had to do was put its formidable advertising budget at the disposal of the administration.

· Insurance companies got access to 40 million potential new customers. But when the Senate Finance Committee lowered the fine that would be imposed on those who don’t buy insurance from $3,500 to $1,500, the insurance companies jumped ship and now oppose the bill, albeit for the worst of motives.

The only industry that refused to knuckle under was the medical device makers. They stood for principle and wouldn’t go along with Obama’s blackmail. So the Senate Finance Committee retaliated by imposing a tax on medical devices such as automated wheelchairs, pacemakers, arterial stents, prosthetic limbs, artificial knees and hips and other necessary accoutrements of healthcare.

So these endorsements are not freely given, but bought and paid for by an administration that is intent on passing its program at any cost.

Article taken From:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/healthcare/66717-obamacare-endorsements-what-the-bribe-was

Face Forward Comments:

I am an AARP member along with several people that I work with and know.  Except for me none are political and NONE are in favor of the bill.  It was so obvious that money did (or will exchnage hands).

When I first read HR 3200 in its entirety several months ago I was appalled at the blatant disregard in the bill of the basic tenets of our Constitutional form of government. However, I underestimated what is actually being done to us. The newest version of HR 3200 that has been labeled the Pelosi Bill is the original bill on steroids. It is the most “in your face” challenge to the American people as a whole that has ever occurred. While Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and President Obama continue to reassure the American people about what the bill will do, the proof is there in black and white.

We are about to lose our Republic because this latest version of HR 3200 takes away our freedom to make our own choices in areas such as what type of insurance we want to have, (if any), how much we are willing and able to pay for insurance, which doctors we choose to take care of us, and what type of treatment we can choose based on our doctor’s recommendations. All of these decisions will now be made by federal bureaucrats in Washington who don’t know us and don’t care about us as individuals.

These decisions will be made by the Secretary of Health and Human Services based on the recommendations of an advisory panel chaired by the Surgeon General, who is appointed by the President, and made up of nine members who are not Federal employees or officers that are also appointed by the President. There are nine more members who are not Federal employees or officers who are appointed by the Comptroller General of the United States and there will also be up to eight more members who are Federal employees or officers and are appointed by Obama. How’s that for a stacked deck? That’s like having a task force in the Justice Department dedicated to fighting organized crime made up of a majority of members of the Russian Mafia.

By the way, if you are wondering how many medical professionals are required to be members of this advisory panel that will decide on the type of healthcare you can get, the answer is none. The previous version of the bill required at least one, but apparently it was decided by Pelosi et.al. that this was one too many.  Section 223 of the Bill on page 111 lays it all out if you care to read it.

In addition, everything I mentioned in my first article on HR 3200 is still there although additional attempts have been made to hide them. For example, there will be rationing of health care, programs for seniors will be drastically cut, and there will be programs available for illegal aliens since all they have to show is that they are “residents” of the United States. There will also be instant access available to your medical and financial records under the provisions of Section 1173A on page 76.

There are also numerous new taxes being imposed to pay for all of this and of course there are the fines that are imposed on people who don’t get health either health insurance or government approved health insurance. (These are incorrectly called taxes in the bill because if they were labeled as fines people would be entitled to protection under the due process clause of the 5th Amendment to the Constitution. This is something that the Congress is seeking to avoid.)  Here is the link to the entire bill: http://health.burgess.house.gov/UploadedFiles/House_HCR_bill.pdf

There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution in Article 1, Section 9 that grants the Congress the right to strip the states and individuals of the United States of their rights and powers in this area. There are no Supreme Court decisions that authorize it either under the commerce clause or the General Welfare Clause of that article. Yet, when asked about the Constitutionality of the law Nancy Pelosi’s response was “Are you Serious?” In other words, we are all idiots and only the new aristocracy made up of the all the President’s appointees and the members of Congress is capable of knowing what I best for us.

The bottom line is that this alleged health care bill and a number of other bills in Congress are designed to establish a form of government that is even worse than the one the Constitution was designed to protect us from. I, for one, am getting fed up. This bill and others pending in Congress, as well as regulations being proposed by the “Czars”, will strip us of our Constitutional rights in a number of areas. We will no longer be “citizens” of the United States, but will be “subjects” of another nation entirely. It is time that the members of Congress are told in emphatic terms that if they won’t abide by their oath of office to “support the Constitution” we see no reason for them to keep their jobs.

Tell them now! We are free citizens of a Republic and will never stand for being anything less! I personally hereby re-affirm the Declaration of Independence from Tyranny made by my forefathers and for which members of my family have fought for in every war from the American Revolution to today. I can say it best by taking the same oath that was taken by the signers of the Declaration in 1776.

“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

Michael Connelly is a guest blogger on Facefwd.com.  For more of his excellent articles please go here

http://michaelconnelly.viviti.com/

Who is Michael Connelly?

 A U.S. Army veteran, a retired attorney, and published author, freelance writer, and teacher. He is the author of three books,  “”Riders in the Sky: The Ghosts and Legends of Philmont Scout Ranch”, “The Mortarmen”, and the just released novel, “Amayehli: A Story of America”.

He also teaches law courses via the Internet through colleges and universities worldwide. Here are links to the courses he teaches.

Constitutional Law: http://www.ed2go.com/courses/cl1

Winning Strategy For The Courtroom: http://www.ed2go.com/courses/wsc

Business Law For The Small Business Owner: http://www.ed2go.com/courses/law

Evidence Law: http://www.ed2go.com/courses/evl

WASHINGTON – The health care bill headed for a vote in the House this week costs $1.2 trillion or more over a decade, according to numerous Democratic officials and figures contained in an analysis by congressional budget experts, far higher than the $900 billion cited by President Barack Obama as a price tag for his reform plan.

While the Congressional Budget Office has put the cost of expanding coverage in the legislation at roughly $1 trillion, Democrats added billions more on higher spending for public health, a reinsurance program to hold down retiree health costs, payments for preventive services and more.

Many of the additions are designed to improve benefits or ease access to coverage in government programs. The officials who provided overall cost estimates did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss them.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has referred repeatedly to the bill’s net cost of $894 billion over a decade for coverage.

Asked about the higher estimate, Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said the measure not only insures 36 million more Americans, it provides critical health insurance reform in a way that is fiscally sound.

“It will not add one dime to the deficit. In fact, the CBO said last week that it will reduce the deficit both in the first 10 years and in the second 10 years,” Daly said.

Democrats have been intent on passing legislation this year to implement Obama’s call for expanded coverage for millions, curbs on industry abuses and provisions to slow the rate of growth of health care costs nationally.

“Now, add it all up, and the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years,” the president said in a nationally televised speech in early September.

Whatever the final cost of legislation, the calendar is working increasingly against the White House and Democrats. While a House vote is possible late this week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., may not be able to begin debate on the issue until the week before Thanksgiving. Additionally, the Republican leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, has hinted at efforts to extend the debate for weeks if not months, a timetable that could extend into 2010.

For the rest of the article:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091102/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul

Face Forward Comments:

Like we didn’t all see that coming.  Of course it’s going to cost more than was projected by the Democrats.  If they can figure out how to provide all of this while elimintating our debt, then go for it.  I have no problem with helping the “needy” it’s defining who the needy are and finding the money to pay for it is the problem.

Eliminate the Debt, Eliminate senselessTaxes, and return to the constitution.  I realize that’s  quite a bit to ask for from a socalistic/communist administration but If they can make outrages demands…..so can I.