Oberstar Announces He Will Vote for ObamaCare Without Abortion Language -- Time to Get to Work!

Jim Oberstar said in an interview reported by the Associated Press this morning that he will vote "yes" for ObamaCare, after starting out as one of the ever-shrinking "Stupak 12" pro-life Democrats who opposed this bill because it would force the use of federal money to pay for abortions.

"Absolutist positions on one issue are not useful," Oberstar said,noting that discussions are still under way on adjusting the abortion language in the final bill that will follow the House passage of the Senate bill.

The first thought I have upon reading this is: the quote, "Absolutist positions on one issue are not useful," is the most robotic quote I may have ever heard.

Think about it. You can hear a robot saying those words, can't you?

The robot says in his non-human, nasal, scripted monotone containing just a hint of a programmed echo, "Absolutist..postions...on...one...issue...are...not...useful."

What did they do to this guy?

This is not just your average issue, Jim. It's abortion. It's about human life. It's about saving those lives. It's about not forcing your fellow American citizens to pay for killing human beings. It's about not having the blood of the innocent on your hands.

The second thought I have is: It's time to pick up the telephone!

So, if you are so inclined (and please be so inclined) here's his phone number:

Rep. James L. Oberstar (D-MN-08)

Call: 202-225-6211

Even if you're not in his district, you are a Minnesotan. Minnesotans have relatives. I personally have dozens of them who live in the 8th District, which Oberstar represents. Minnesotans have cabins "up north." We have friends there. Call your relatives and friends and ask them to call Jim. Time is closing in, and we can't possibly fight too hard for this.

I remember my cousin pointing out Oberstar's house to me when I was a kid on a bike. I'm a grandmother now. Probably time to retire this guy, huh?

Well, if you're on Facebook, you can join the "James Oberstar Retirement Task Force" page.

Now, after you've done all that, Facebook your relatives or friends who vote in the 8th District, and ask them to join the "James Oberstar Retirement Task Force" page. Then ask them to campaign and vote for for whomever goes up against him.

Then get off the phone, get off your computer, and live your life. Thanks. Ya done good.




(You can also read a very similar article in my column on Examiner.com. I love the photo--and the timliness of the photo--so much I can't stand it.)

The scariest video I've ever seen--starring Nancy Pelosi as the tyrannical lunatic

Please check out my article on Examiner.com. It was written in honor of the 4,000 Minnesotans who stood in the gloom of a damp March day for the "Kill the Bill" rally today in St. Paul.

(AP Photo Manuel/Balce Ceneta)

Nancy Pelosi speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill Friday, March 12, 2010.

Party of "No" Vol. 1: Anti-Health Care Reform

Part of the left's trying to label the Republican party the party of "no" is by saying we are "anti-health care reform." Not so. Most Conservatives believe health care should be private and not a government entity. Conservatives have come up with a lot of effective ideas for improving health care in America, such as allowing coverage for pre-existing conditions, enacting tort reform, allowing people to purchase insurance across state lines or allowing small businesses and independent contractors to form purchasing pools with which to purchase health insurance. We believe government should provide a safety net for those who need it, not overhall what works for most people because a relative few don't have what they need. Most of all, we believe in educating people about what Obamacare really is. We are pro-health care reform, just not the reform progressives want.

Many conservatives would like to see changes in the current system, such as insurance companies allowing coverage for pre-existing conditions, which can bankrupt a family if one of their family members has a chronic health condition, such as diabetes, high blood pressure or a chronic pain condition.

Insurance companies have to realize that pre-existing conditions are not like injuries incurred in a car accident or on the job. Those injuries and everything relating to them need to be paid by the auto insurance company or workers compensation. I understand an insurance company not wanting to pay for injuries for which the person has other insurance coverage and that insurance will pay those bills. In those cases, the auto insurance or workers compensation will follow that person wherever they go and whatever health insurance they have.

But a pre-existing condition is different. If someone develops high blood pressure while they are covered by Insurance Company A, and they, for whatever reason, must switch to Insurance Company B, Insurance Company A isn't responsible for the high blood pressure and will not pay for anything associated with it. It doesn't follow the patient anywhere. The practice of disallowing pre-existing conditions needs to stop, and I think insurance companies can afford it. Their executives are some of the highest paid professionals in the country.

Putting caps on malpractice awards would also help. The most these awards do is to line the pockets of trial lawyers. We have to stop being a "blame game" society. For example, the average cost of malpractice insurance for an OBGYN is $100,000 annually. The cost is passed directly to the consumer. The premiums are so high primarily because people have decided they have a "right" to a perfect baby. I can find no document giving people this right, but people still insist they have it. It stems, I think, from the lack of respect for the sanctity of life in our country. The most disgusting example of this is the "wrongful life" suit. This is when a woman or couple sue a doctor because he or she failed to diagnose a birth defect before birth, when the baby could have been aborted. Since the birth defect isn't detected until after the birth when, dang it, it is too late to legally kill the baby, the doctor is sued for the "wrongful life" of that child. If we were inject some common sense (or common decency) into malpractice lawsuits and have real tort reform, which most Conservatives believe in, we could considerably bring down the cost of health care in America.

Most Conservatives would like to allow people to shop for health insurance across state lines, just like any other service. For example, people who have adult children and live in a state that offers poor coverage for them might like to purchase health care in Minnesota, where insurance companies are mandated to cover adult children until age 26 regardless of student status. They aren't taking anything away from anyone by doing this because they are paying premiums for the privilege of buying this out-of-state health insurance. This will also stimulate the free market capitalist system because insurance companies or states will be forced to offer better products and services. This will improve health insurance, thus improving health care.

Most people who aren't politically affiliated or who are progressives think that if the health care bill passes on March 18, (the day Obama has declared as the deadline for voting on this bill), that they will magically have "free" health insurance. That's not how it works.

I think the best thing Conservatives could do would be to pour money into creating public service announcements (PSAs) to educate the public about what government-run health care is really like. They could teach people that they will be paying high taxes for health care while not receiving care for four years. On top of that tax money, they will have to continue paying their regular insurance premiums, which will skyrocket because they are anticipating huge losses once Obamacare is in place.

They could have PSAs that show how the "free" health care systems in Canada and the UK are doing. They could show the statistics of how many people die from certain cancers here and compare them to countries with socialized medicine. Guess what--when your health care is rationed, more people die. When you have extremely long waits for health care, more people die. Americans are historically a generous people. We give more money to charitable organizations than any country in the world. What good does it do to give your money to the American Cancer Society to discover new life-saving treatments only to have them go unused because they're too expensive? Patients could also die waiting for life-saving treatments because of long waiting lists or a lack of early detection.

The citizens also need to know about the government's actions regarding mandated health care. If you lose your job, you can't just get another job and get that corporation's health care; you are required to buy government health care. If you are young and healthy and don't want health care, the government will make you buy it. If you don't, you could be fined or imprisoned. Gee, that sounds like a free society to me: buy what the government wants you to buy or we throw you in jail. That's not America.

Conservatives believe that by turning over our health care to the government (a system which is failing in nearly every country that has enacted it), is to give up our inalienable right to liberty.

Do we think there are problems with health care as it stands? Yes. But we believe we can fix those problems without overhauling what is widely considered to be the best health care system in the world. President Obama has said that the American people deserve a final vote on health care reform. He means the current health care reform monstrosity they call a "bill." We want that vote to be a resounding "no."

But we are not anti-health care reform. We are pro-health care reform, if it complies with and doesn't endanger our constitutional rights.

Coming next: Party of "No" Vol. 2: Anti-Government

The Party of "No?"

Apparently most Democrats have gotten the talking points memo from the powers that be telling them to call Republicans the party of "no" and accuse them of being obstructionists.

Two people had these same remarks about an article I wrote for my Examiner.com column about Erik Paulsen. The posts were so similar that one might think they were written by the same person, but one of the posters assures us that they are two different people.

I find this happens so often it's funny. I'll be watching the Sunday morning shows or something on Fox, and the Democrats or progressives will all, without exception, use the same words, phrases, insults, etc. Then I say to my husband, "Well, it looks like everyone got the memo."

I know both political parties have their talking points, but I think the conservatives must know how to shake it up a little and make the words or ideas their own. They don't appear to be robots repeating what was programmed into their microchips.

The progressive's identical words and phrases will be used for about a week, and then new ones will replace them; unless there is a really good one they want to trot out all the time, like the allegation that the Republican party is the party of "no."

The party of "no." We're starting to hear it everywhere now. From conversations with progressives in our communities or families, to almost every progressive pundit on T.V. or radio saying the Republican party is the party of "no."

That couldn't be farther from the truth.

Progressives would say, "How can you say that? Let's enumerate everything you say no to. You're:

1. against health care reform;
2. anti-government;
3. anti-choice;
4. against business regulations;
5. against the government's saving essential industries like banks and automobile manufacturers;
6. anti-gay marriage;
7. anti-gun control;
8. against the separation of church and state;
9. anti-environmentalist
10. against teachers and public schools;
11. anti-welfare and social safety nets.

You are the party of "no."

Every day, I will be writing a new column addressing each of the 11 things listed above and what I believe Conservatives should answer to the allegation of being the party of "no" in each case.

I look forward to exploring these issues in depth and slogging through the muck of accusations, lies and misunderstandings.

Exclusive Interivew with Senator David Hann about Seifert Endorsement

I was honored to be the first and only person to speak to Senator David Hann about his endorsement of Marty Seifert for governor or Minnesota. After Hann's dropping out of the race this week, many of his supporters where left wondering whom to support? Read about Senator Hann's personal endorsement of Seifert in my article at Hennepin County Conservative Examiner on Examiner.com.

Chinese Hackers Hit Government, Corporate Systems in U.S.

If you haven't yet heard about this, here's a good link to the Wall Street Journal article about it.

Why does anyone still think it's a good idea to have government-run socialized medicine with centralized databases filled with the medical histories of every American? Just asking.

Conservatives, it's time to find each other!

I had a thought the other day when I was describing my neighbor to a friend. I was going to invite this neighbor to an event, and I was e-mailing my friend about it.

It suddenly struck me as I was writing the e-mail how completely different my neighbor is from me. She's about as old as my mother--maybe a few years younger. She has five very grown children and grandchildren that number into the 20's now. I still have children at home, but I am a grandmother as well. She is very frugal by nature, and she doesn't like animals. I don't think anyone would call me frugal, and I practically went crazy with grief last year when I had to put my two beloved poodles down. She is a very devout Catholic, and, while I am a Christian, I am far from being Catholic.

You wouldn't think we had anything in common, would you? Even so, she has been a rock for me to lean on when I need it most, and I go to her often with questions about morality, life and God.

Why?

We have one thing that binds us together: conservatism. When I moved into this neighborhood about ten years ago, I noticed she had a pro-life bumper sticker on her car. I don't even remember what was on it. We were checking our mail at the same time one day shortly after George Bush was elected. One of his first acts as president was to block U.S. funds to international family-planning groups that offer abortion and abortion counseling, which reversed a Clinton administration policy. I said to her, "Isn't it nice to finally have a pro-life president?" She agreed and we began to talk about the sanctity of life.

Most of our early conversations were about just that, and we have delved very deep into the subject. We don't agree on every little thing, but we agree on the vast majority of the issues that surround respect for human life.

Then I began to find that she had other conservative ideals, if I remember correctly, around the time we went to war in Iraq. We have tiptoed carefully through the minefield that is political conversation with someone you don't know well, and we came out the other side unscathed. Not only unscathed, but as friends.

Now we trade conservative e-mails, talk about the issues when we run into each other, and I have invited her to come along to many conservative events, including events for candidates we both support. She'll let me know if someone stole my lawn sign, and she has even had one replaced before I knew it was gone.

Though we are different, we are very much the same. We have the same worldview, the same value system, similar opinions. We are conservatives.

If we conservatives had the guts to reveal our true selves more often, we could find more friends. In Minnesota (the land of ten thousand liberals), we are often reluctant to say we are conservative. Liberals seem to have a talent for thinking everyone around them thinks like they do, and we just nod and smile while the they spout their rhetoric at parties and family gatherings. We are polite people by nature, so we don't like to rock the boat.

We need to stop hiding behind our polite smiles and our silence and speak up. Especially now, when our freedom is at very real risk, we must say who we are and be proud of it. I don't advocate rudeness; we should always talk about our conservative opinions in a respectful manner. We can reveal ourselves in other ways as well.

We can wear clothing, like the shirts made by Cool Conservative, an Eden Prairie company. You could drink your coffee out of a Cool Conservative mug. This company has made conservative wear you can be proud to own and that isn't offensive to anyone.

Or you can put a bumper sticker on your car. If you don't want to mess up your bumper, put it in your window. I have one that reads, "Women deserve better than abortion" from Feminists for Life. A liberal I know declared that a car bumper is no place for a discussion about abortion. But until we can just come out and talk about it, I think a bumper is a place to start--and anyway, I don't take orders from anyone.

We have to start somewhere. We need to find each other. We need to band together. We need to be strong, now more than ever, and there is strength in numbers.

Open your mouth. Put on a T-shirt. Put a Sarah Palin book on your coffee table. As for me, I think I'll put that bumper sticker on my car.

Sunday's Vikings vs. Saints game unbelievable

I was listening to the radio last week after the Vikings victory over Dallas. One caller said he had just been listening to Dallas radio on the internet, and that rather than talking about the particulars of the game, the callers were talking about how one of their players should have just sucked it up, taken the punishment, gone after Favre on the sidelines, taken him out at the knees, and destroyed them.

I was in the car alone, and I shouted to no one, "That's just evil!" I'm sure I looked like one of those women who practically botoxes herself to death, I was so surprised. I didn't use the word "evil" lightly, either. How could someone advocate doing that to another human being over a game? I truly felt that even talking about potentially ruining not only a man's career, but his life (if you have bad knees, you know it can be hell to live with the pain), was truly an evil thought that should have never made it out of someone's mouth, let alone into their brain.

I guess I'm naive.

I have to admit I didn't watch most of yesterday's game between the Vikes and the Saints--just the last 45 minutes or so. But when I came into the room and asked my family what had been happening, they all told me the other team was hitting Favre "hard" and that they had hurt his ankle.

"You mean they're actually doing it?" I said to my husband, who had to listen to me rant about how evil I thought the radio caller's account was earlier in the week.

"Oh, you should see Favre's wife. They keep showing her every time he gets hit below the belt and she has her hands over her face."

"That's because she knows that at any moment, their lives could be ruined," I said. "Chronic pain's a bitch. It's hard to live with and sometimes even harder on the family. I'm sure he has some [chronic pain] already, but to watch people purposely trying to make life worse for your husband for the sake of a game has got to be horrible."

My husband then educated me on Brett Favre's previous struggle with chronic back pain and painkillers. I had no idea. I just haven't followed football much since before I had children. The knowledge of his past made the whole thing even worse.

Isn't there some rule against this?" I asked.

"Yeah, I suppose they would have been more strict about it if it had been earlier in the season, but it's so close to the Super Bowl they're letting it slide."

"You know--it happens. It's just hard to watch," he said.

Hard to watch? Hard to believe.

Minnesota DFL gubernatorial candidate Dayton promises to tax rich; no spending cuts

Mark Dayton stepped right in to the Minnesota Gubernatorial race at a press conference held at the State Capitol. I don't think there was any speculation that he wouldn't run; he's just made it official.

During his speech, former U.S. Senator Dayton spoke about his background as a Minnesotan and public servant, criticized former Governors and their policies, and introduced his theme, "A Better Minnesota."

The thing that stood out most about his speech was his dedication to--if he becomes Governor--taxing the rich. I guess it's safer for him to say it than it is for other candidates; after all, Dayton is rich. He is an heir to the Dayton's department store fortune and spends millions of his own dollars on his various political campaigns. I suppose it's kind of like the unwritten rule in which a comedian can tell jokes or disparage people of his own race or creed and not get into trouble for it, whereas if you don't belong to a certain group but disparage it, you could be in big trouble. Dayton is talking about taxing himself and his peers, the people he grew up with and went to school with at Blake, isn't he?

Well, he called for taxing the wealthiest 10 percent of Minnesotans. But the definition, as published in the table on page 58 of the Minnesota 2009 Tax Incidence Study, of the wealthiest 10 percent shows their household income for 2011 is projected to begin at $136, 955. Does that figure fit your mental picture of a family rolling in so much excess dough that they should pay disproportionately high taxes to fund Dayton's programs? Not so much.

Besides taxing the rich, his other plans for Minnesota include throwing a lot of money at K-12 education, pre-school and lowering college tuition; retrofitting state buildings with heating and cooling methods using alternative energy to reduce "their carbon footprints;" highway construction and transit improvements; "affordable health care for all Minnesotans;" and several job creation programs.

He implied these spending increases and new spending projects will all pay for themselves. Oh, and the money from taxing the rich will help as well.

But what stands out most glaringly about his speech is that in the midst of all his ideas for "A Better Minnesota," he spoke not one word about cutting spending, eliminating wasteful spending, or saving money in any way. Just spending it. Spend, spend, spend. Because we all know that throwing money at things always fixes problems.

Completely ignoring spending cuts reveals an interesting difference about Mark Dayton, Gubernatorial candidate, as compared to his fellow candidates. As I said before, he's rich. So he thinks like a rich person. If something's broken, buy a new one. If there aren't enough staff to do the job, just hire more. There's no need to think about saving, because money is always abundant.

Which begs the question: Can Minnesota afford to have a rich man in the Governor's office during a deep recession?

Will the Left Finally Get It?

So Scott Brown, a Republican, is to be the new Senator from Massachusetts. A Republican hasn't been elected to the Senate in Massachusetts since the 70's. This is big.

There were a lot of factors that went into Martha Coakley's stunning defeat. She was inherently unlikable, for one thing. She couldn't seem to open her mouth without offending someone. She offended Catholics in a radio interview by saying if they object to certain medical procedures on moral grounds then they shouldn't work in emergency rooms. Great move--insult Catholics in probably the most Catholic state in the country.

But there was more. This was a litmus test, if you will, on the left and its entire existence. It was a referendum on Obama, Peloci, Reid and Emanuel. It was a decisive opinion on socialized medicine, government takeovers of private businesses, and big government in general.

So, will the left finally get it? Will they understand that they're shoving socialized medicine down American's throats and we don't like how it tastes?

I doubt it.

They are so wrapped up in their own elitist bubble that they are, I believe, incapable of seeing what's beyond it. They have their ideas about what's best for the American people, and they don't really care if the people like it or not. In the typical liberal elitist fashion, they think they know what's best for the "little people."

They have their agenda, and I think they'll stick to it no matter what America thinks. If they do anything that seems logical to help Americans (like Senators Franken and Kerry's proposed amendment to the health care bill that would delay taxes in medical devices until 2013--after the next round of elections) it will be for personal gain. They didn't care about the consequences of the tax on medical device companies and their employees; they just cared about Democrats getting re-elected before the companies were furious about the effects of being slammed with another huge tax. Typical.

So, in my humble opinion, the left will not get it, they will never get it, and we have to stop thinking they will. We just have to vote as many of them out of office as we can at every opportunity we have to do it. That started tonight with the election of Republican Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate.