Looking for a Contender

Despite all the doomsday predictions foretelling the death of the Republican Party, the GOP actually has a good shot at reclaiming several important congressional seats next year. That is if it recruits credible contenders rather than embracing whomever shows up or letting weak Democrats go unchallenged.

Take the Nevada U.S. Senate seat, for instance. Harry Reid, Senate majority leader and, thus, titular head of all Senate Democrats, is asking to be taken out as he is no longer seen as the champion of Nevada. The Las Vegas Review-Journal reports his favorable rating in the state is at 32 percent and his unfavorable rating at 51 percent. According to the newspaper's poll, Reid has fewer fans in Nevada than President Bush and even Rush Limbaugh!

But despite this news, no Republican has stepped forward yet to challenge Reid's Senate seat. Why? The most likely candidates have their eyes on the governor's mansion. And no one is eager to battle Reid who is infamous for his no-holds-barred campaign tactics.

Even though Reid is in no shape for a well-fought campaign, the most prominent Nevadan Republicans have jaws of glass. A few of them have actually contributed to Reid. Some of the problems they face? Criminal charges of recruiting and hiring undocumented workers. Accusations of pocketing money intended for nonprofit projects. Conflicts of interest, including a state senator whose day job is as a paid lobbyist to the Legislature.

But Nevada is not without its contenders. Tim Cushman, the third generation of a family that helped punch Nevada out of the dessert, is pro-business, understands the challenges facing Nevada and has kept his nose out of politics. He could be formidable in the ring if he could be persuaded to don the Repulican mantle.

Or there's state Sen. Barbara Cegavske, a small business owner who entered the political arena on the school board level when she became concerned about the education her sons weren't getting. Her family is grown now, and Barbara, from all reports, has proved she can go toe-to-toe with the meanest without becoming a closet bone collector.

If the Republicans are to regain seats in Nevada or elsewhere, the local and national committees have to do some scouting, start recruiting the brightest and best, and then dig into their pockets to give these candidates a fighting chance. Only then will they hush the naysayers and start building the excitement they will need to retake the White House in 2012.

Joey's Take on the GOP Dog Show

(Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog are mine and mine alone. Mom and Dad taught me to think for myself; it's a lesson they think I've learned too well -- especially when it comes to trying to chase the Metro down I-66 or bark at metal deer sculptures.)

Since Bo has been lying low at the White House this past week, I thought I'd do some sniffing around at what's shaping up to be the GOP Dog Show. Hey, I may be a pound puppy, but my bloodlines are show quality all the way, so I think I'm at least as qualified as Meghan McCain to dish about the potential contestants.

First, with the big competition still more than three years off, it's a bit early to give the Best of Show trophy to anyone. Secondly, all the wanna-bes need to stop rubbing up against the legs of the media pitbulls. They're not the judges who count. The winner of this dog show will be the one who wins the People's Choice award.

A third thing to keep in mind is that just because someone was best of show or a runnerup last time out doesn't mean squat. It's a quick trip from best of show to the doghouse.

As for the possible contestants -- we've got the usual mix of frou frous, yappers, old American standards and a few exotic breeds. There are those who compete in whichever class is the most popular -- or the most convenient -- at the time. We've got the ones who are so excited about getting to the show that they haven't thought about what they would do if they win. And there are those who know they don't have a shot at the big trophy, but they want to get some experience in the ring.

Me, I'd like to see the judges get behind a working dog who can outsniff the bloodhounds, has better vision than the sighthounds and can outdistance the greyhounds.

(If you have any ideas you'd like to have me chew on in a future blog -- or if you just want to tell me I'm adorable and brilliant, you can write to me at JoeyPortie@gmail.com.)

Forget the Obituary

A lot of media, driven by liberal wishful thinkers, have been busy writing an obituary for the Republican Party. They would have you believe that the party has boxed itself into a corner of the Deep South and today only appeals to a handful of intolerant, vindictive, religious, anti-immigrant, anti-intellectual, women-hating, gun-toting elderly nuts.

But to paraphrase Mark Twain, the reports of the party's death have been greatly exaggerated -- as has the death mask the Democrats have tried to plaster on Republicans.

We were at a rally this weekend in which a Republican announced his candidacy for governor of Virginia. What was amazing was who was at the Saturday morning rally. Yes, there were white guys -- and women -- and plenty of retired military. There also were Hispanics, African Americans, Vietnamese, Chinese, South Koreans and Philippinos. There were little kids, teenagers, college students, yuppies, families, "middlers" and retirees. There were people whose roots went back to the founding of the country and those who had recently arrived here. There were blue-collar workers, housewives, homeschoolers, lawyers, small business owners, scientists and other professionals.

The talk that morning wasn't hateful or spiteful. Instead, it was full of hope, of bringing back fiscal responsibility, of restoring faith in the future for all Virginians, of honoring life, of recognizing personal responsibility. The energy and promise in that room was testimony that conservatism is very much alive and well in America.

Change We Don't Need

Obama the candidate promised change. And Obama the president has delivered on that promise.

Under Bush, we were fighting a global war on terror. Under Obama, we are engaged in an “Overseas Contingency Operation.” (Washington Post)

Under Bush, hundreds of suspected terrorists, including some of the masterminds of 9/11, were detained on an isolated island prison 90 miles from Florida. Obama is considering moving many of them to Manhattan and the federal courthouse in Alexandria, Va., in a neighborhood brimming with residents, thousands of federal employees and a booming business district 190 feet from the courthouse door. Alexandria officials and some legislators say that terror trials would take years, shut down roads and cost millions of dollars and could invite attacks from terrorist sympathizers. Business owners in the area surrounding the courthouse -- newly filled with hotels, restaurants and luxury apartments -- fear disruptions amid a declining economy. (Washington Post)

Under Bush, we had hard-core partisanship. Obama won the election partly on his appeal to bipartisanship and unity. But his idea of bipartisanship is not a meeting of the minds, of meaningful dialogue that results in compromise. Unity to him is unifying around his preordained agenda. Any disagreement is not PC. That’s why New Hampshire’s Republican Sen. Gregg withdrew his name from nomination as the Commerce Secretary.

Bush believed in trickle-down economics. Obama is practicing trickle-down government.

In the aftermath of 9/11, Katrina and two final years of a Congress controlled by spend-happy Democrats, Bush left us with a $1 trillion-plus deficit. In the aftermath of unprecedented bailouts, government takeovers of private businesses, stimulus packages and a Congress controlled by spend-happy Democrats, Obama promises to leave us with a deficit that could grow by $1 trillion every year he’s in office.

Bush was blamed for harming the global reputation of the United States. Consider what the world is saying after just two months of Obama change:

--In China – which is our largest creditor, having bought more than $1 trillion of our debt – Premier Wen Jiabao is expressing concerns about Obama's economic plan. “To be honest, I'm a little bit worried,” Wen said at a recent news conference. “I would like for you [a western reporter] to call on the United States to honor its word and stay a credible nation and ensure the safety of Chinese assets." (CNN)

--The head of the EU called Obama's recovery plan "the road to hell" that European governments must avoid. The comments by Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek to the European Parliament today highlighted European differences with Washington on how to fix the world economy. (AP)

--And of course, the Ayatollah scoffed at Obama’s Iranian New Year greeting.

This kind of change we could live without.

For more on the contrasts of where we’ve been and where we’re headed, check out http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/25/castellanos.obama/index.html.

Trust Me

Tim Geithner, Obama's choice for Treasury secretary -- yea, the one who couldn't figure out he owed income taxes until he was nominated -- lobbied in Congress today, asking a House committee to trust him with unprecedented new regulatory powers to seize financial institutions whose failure would pose serious risks to the U.S. financial system.

There was some media coverage of this, but it quickly got drowned out by Obama's appeal to the masses tonight to support his massive budget. But here's what you probably didn't hear about Geithner:

Companies that had their hands out for the first go-round of taxpayer handouts had to sign a contract certifying that they didn't owe any back taxes. Geithner and the gang at Treasury were supposed to check out those statements, but they just took them at face value. Even though the IRS is part of Treasury, no one thought to check out the records.

As it would turn out, according to an Associated Press story, several of those companies lied. In a small sampling of the companies receiving the most money, at least 13 companies owe a total of more than $220 million in unpaid federal taxes. Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., chairman of a House subcommittee overseeing the bailout, said two companies owe more than $100 million apiece.

The House Ways and Means subcommittee on oversight discovered the unpaid taxes in a review of tax records from 23 companies receiving the most money -- nearly 500 companies have received bailout funds. One company had almost $113 million in unpaid federal income taxes from 2005 and 2006. A second one owed almost $102 million dating to before 2004 -- before the bubble burst. And a third was behind $1.1 million in federal income taxes and $223,000 in employment taxes.

The committee asked someone from Treasury to testify on the matter in a private hearing last week, but the committee was told that no one was available.

Yet here we are today with Geithner saying "trust me." I don't think so.

Wall of Shame

I have to make up for lost time these last few days as our router was down, and I had to suffer through days of no connectivity. We got reconnected today, so here goes.

I'm instituting a Wall of Shame -- an amorphous memorial of infamy for public officials, and countries, who disgrace themselves by abusing the public trust, usually for self-profit or to further a sell-out agenda. If this were a physical memorial, I'm sure it would dwarf all the other monuments in D.C., and it would be inscribed with the names of both Republicans and Democrats who have shamed themselves. Rather than focusing on past offenders, I think we need to "memorilize" those who are still actively abusing our trust.

Inductee #1: U.S. District Judge Edward Korman of New York who today ordered the FDA to rethink its position on Plan B, the "morning-after" pill. Korman has decided that there's no scientific reason for the FDA to prohibit 17-year-old girls from buying this drug over the counter. And, given Obama's orders on abortion, pharmacists who don't agree with this will be forced to sell the drug to underage girls or be shut down. If this is changed, girls will not be carded, which means girls of all ages, without parental consent, could buy this drug, which can have some serious side effects. Check out http://www.optionline.org/map.html?gclid=CJqBq9y6upkCFQw9Ggodrl7G6A for a list of some of its complications.

Inductee #2: The South African government, which denied a visa to the Dalai Lama who had been invited to attend a big peace shindig to coincide with the 2010 World Cup soccer match in South Africa. The conference also was to feature South Africa's surviving Nobel Peace Prize winners -- Archbishop Desmond Tutu and former Presidents Nelson Mandela and FW De Klerk. The government claimed it denied the Dalai Lama's visa because his presence would detract from the soccer tournament. However, Thabo Masebe, spokesman for President Kgalema Motlanthe, told AFP, "We in the South African government have not invited the Dalai Lama to visit South Africa, because it would not be in the interests of South Africa."

A spoksman for the Tibetan-government-in-exile said, "African states are vulnerable to Chinese pressure because of huge Chinese investments there and so this is a case of business winning over human rights and good behaviour."

As a result of the government's action, Tutu and De Klerk have said they will not attend the conference. And "the Norwegian Nobel Committee will in no way participate in the conference alongside Nobel peace prize laureates if South African authorities do not revise their refusal to give the Dalai Lama a visa," Geir Lundestad, the head of the Nobel Institute, told AFP.

Inductee #3: Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., longtime chairman of the House defense appropriations subcommittee. More than a decade ago, Murtha created the Electro-Optics Center under the auspices of Pennsylvania State University supposedly to spur a new high-tech industry and create jobs in economically depressed western Pennsylvania. Every budget cycle, Murtha has directed millions of earmarks to the center and then allegedly, through staff members and lobbyists, told the center which defense companies it had to award contracts to. Coincidentally, the contractors that got hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts donated millions of dollars to Murtha's campaign and PACs. After 35 years of dirty dealings in Congress, Murtha is now under federal investigation. (Source: Washington Post)

Inductee #4: Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn. Yes, he's the guy who lied about ensuring that the AIG bonuses were protected in the stimulus bill, and when he finally came clean about it, he said he protected the bonuses at the bidding of the Obama administration. He, like Obama, also got a sweetheart deal on his home mortgage. But what lands him on the Wall of Shame is a cottage deal in Ireland that recently came to light. He apparently co-owns an Irish cottage. The other owner was in business with someone who had been convicted of some serious tax charges. Dodd arranged a full pardon under President Clinton.

I'm sure you have nominees for the Wall of Shame. Feel free to share.

Too Opinionated!

Mom and I have been doing this blog for a month and a half now, and I've found the two biggest problems are trying to get other people to share their opinions -- yea, you -- and focusing on just one thing to write about each time. There's so much out there that it's hard to choose THE topic for the day. Of course, it doesn't help that we have opinions to spare!

Take today, for instance. I could write about:

• The conflicts of interest of some of President Obama's trusted advisers -- not the ones who need Senate confirmation, but the ones who have his ear in the White House. Two of them shaping his policy on embryonic stem cell research stand to profit from a lifting of the funding ban.
• State efforts to limit embryonic stem cell research.
• Protests in Spain against efforts to ease that country's abortion restrictions.
• A North Carolina judge who says he knows better than a mother what's best for her homeschooled kids -- whom he's never met. Even though they are testing above their grade level and are involved in community sports and academic programs, he thinks the kids need to go to public school so what their mother has taught them can be challenged.
• China's demand that the rest of the world pay for its manufacturing pollution because, hey, we use the stuff. Meanwhile, China is spending all the money it's making through its cheap, polluting manufacturing business to buy influence worldwide and to secure oil and other resources in Australia, Brazil, France, Russia, Venezuela, etc. It made an $11 billion loan to Russia, for instance, to secure long-term oil rights there and a $4 billion loan to Venezuela for the same thing.
• Liberal media efforts to appoint the spokesperson for the conservatives. By saddling us, in the public eye, with anyone who comes across as hateful, vindictive and intolerant, they can paint all of us with the same brush and ensure that we will not have the strength of numbers to defeat them in future elections.
• Suppression of freedom of the press -- not from the right, but from the left. Politico ran a piece recently in which it revealed that a small group of liberals headed by an old Clintonite has organized to dictate the daily media agenda and to target -- through intimidation, threats, etc. -- those who are critical of their pet projects. While the White House doesn't participate in the daily conference call this group has, it apparently is involved with setting the agenda.
• The administration's payback to labor unions by pushing for all kinds of concessions. These range from government contract preferences for union shops to efforts to do away with the necessity of secret ballots for a union vote. Their plan is to allow a simple majority of workers to sign a card and, voila!, the workplace is unionized. Of course, there would be no intimidiation or dirty tricks to get workers to sign those cards!
• The fuzzy math being used to calculate all the "new" jobs the stimulus bill is creating. My brother-in-law, for instance, may get one of those new jobs in Virginia. But in chalking up the "new" jobs added to the economy, the White House will ignore the fact that he lost his old job because Sen. Harry Reid killed the Yucca Mountain project in Nevada.

Yep, with Obama in the White House, Pelosi holding court in the other House and Reid setting up shop in the Senate, Mom and I will always have plenty to write about. But we'll try not to bore you with too many opinions. Meanwhile, we'd love to hear some of your opinions.

Time for Congress to Hit the Books

Doctors do it. Lawyers do it. Congress should do it too. Hit the books, that is, for Continuing Consitutional Education.

Doctors and lawyers are required to take x number of continuing legal or medical education courses every year to keep their knowledge and their licenses up-to-date. Teachers have to attend in-service meetings for the latest in educational requirements and trends. Since Congress is no longer a stent of public service but a professional career, senators and representatives should be required to take annual ethics courses and a refresher course in the Constitution -- at their own expense.

The first lecture in that course should be on the role of Congress and the separation of powers between our three branches of government. I have the perfect case study for them -- one starring Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), chair of Energy and Commerce's Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. The stated purpose of this committee is to have oversight of government agencies that fall under "Energy and Commerce."

A seasoned congressman elected in 1992, Bart has turned his subcommittee into his own "cops and robbers" show. With no regard for the limited powers the Constitution gives Congress, Bart has set his subcommittee up to act as investigator, prosecutor, grand jury and judge all rolled into one. And it's not just federal agencies he's investigating. He's set his sights on private businesses and individuals.

Recently, Detective Bart instructed the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which answers solely to Congress, to set up an elaborate, unprecedented, undercover sting operation with sham medical clinical trials to trip up the private review boards that manage such trials. Now, Prosecutor Bart and his gumshoes are hauling these boards into congressional court to face -- you guessed it -- Judge Bart on charges along the line of abuse of public trust. (I think he should have to recuse himself on this one!)

Bart and the gang are trying to keep this quiet. When a reporter asked Bart's office when the PUBLIC hearings are supposed to be held, staff wouldn't say, implying that a date hadn't been set yet. The subcommittee's schedule wasn't much help either. All it shows is a Feb. 11 hearing on the salmonella outbreak. However, GAO staff informed the reporter that the hearing would be held March 26.

Bart definitely needs a lesson on the limits of Congress. And while he's hitting the books, he should read up on the definition of "PUBLIC hearings."

Perhaps we should create a whole curriculum for this course. Any suggestions?

Coming Back to Bite Us

A few days ago, President Obama surrounded himself with grinning "scientists" and activists flashing gestures of victory as he signed away Bush's ban on spending our money to pay for research using the stem cells of aborted babies.

Compare that image to his signing today of the earmark-littered omnibus bill that will put us another $410 billion into debt. There were no cameras, no adoring throngs, no signs of victory. Instead, the president was basically in hiding -- perhaps a bit shamefaced at his inability to deliver on his campaign promises to do away with earmarks, to control a Democratic Congress and to bring real change to Washington. He admitted it was an imperfect bill, basically saying that he's still trying to clean up after Bush.

It's time for the truth brigade. The economic crisis we find ourselves in began -- not with the Iraq War -- but when the housing industry collapsed like a house of cards. And the roots of that crisis pre-date Bush.

"In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders. ... Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stockholders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits," according to a Sept. 30, 1999, New York Times article.

That's right -- 1999. Ten years ago when Bill Clinton was focusing on crafting his presidential legacy.

"In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times," the article says. "But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980s."

A bit of an understatement given the hundreds of billions Congress is shelling out in bailouts and stimulus. In this instance, it took 10 years for an ill-advised policy to come back to bite us. I wonder how long it will be before we start feeling the bite of Washington's current over-the-top deficit spending spree?

Separation of Church & State

I'm sure you've heard by now that President Obama, on his 51st day in office, will OK spending another $410 billion of our money. And, if you've been watching Fox, you've seen that Nancy Pelosi is throwing a temper tantrum because she can't have a specific military plane for her little Memorial Day party. Someone ought to file an FOIA request to see how much she's costing us just in her personal travels and vacations.

Because the omnibus spending bill is all you're going to be hearing about on the news tomorrow, I wanted to point out something else. With Obama lifting the ban on embryonic stem cell research and providing more public money for abortions, there's growing concern about whether doctors who view abortion as murder will be forced to do them. Saying public health trumps a person's right to stand by his or her convictions, a number of federal lawmakers want to force doctors -- and pharmacists -- to do abortions and dispense morning-after pills. Oh yeah, those misguided lawmakers also cite separation of church and state.

Now that argument gets me. The First Amednment says nothing about separation of church and state. What it does is forbid Congress from establishing a church. To understand the intent of our Founding Fathers on this issue, we must think about the context.

Before the birth of our country, many of the colonies had an established church paid for by the colonial government -- i.e., the taxpayers of that colony. Take Virginia, for instance. Colonial Virginians were forced to pay a tithe to the Church of England. That meant my Swiss Mennonite and staunch Scottish Covenanter ancestors who settled in Virginia in the 1600s and 1700s had to pay money to the Church of England in addition to supporting their own churches, which did not receive public money. Robert Ewing, one of my first ancestors in this country, wrote a letter to the Virginia legislators that he sent along with his tithe, thanking them for allowing the Ewings and others in Peaks of Otter, Va., to worship at a Presbyterian church.

This was what Thomas Jefferson had in mind when he wrote his famous letter describing his OPINION about the "wall" he perceived between church and state. None of our Founding Fathers would have denied anyone the strength of his or her personal convictions. In fact, it was because of their personal convictions that the likes of George Washington, John Adams, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Francis Marion, etc., stood up and told King George what he could do with his misplaced power. Our Founding Fathers were willing to sacrifice their lives to establish a country where people would be free to worship and follow their convictions in every aspect of their lives.

The question we now face is: What are we willing to do to protect that freedom?

The Agenda of 'Science'

In what's being hailed as a victory for "science," President Obame today put another nail in the coffin of unborn children and widened the divide that separates much of this nation.

"Our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values," Obama said as he signed documents changing Bush's policy against embryonic stem cell research. "It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda — and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology."

Some researchers have said that lifting the ban removed the shackles from their work. What everyone is ignoring is that science itself is divided on the effectiveness of embryonic stem cells. Many respected scientists have demonstrated that cord stem cells and a person's own stem cells may be more therapeutic and safer than embryonic cells. And they don't require the sacrifice of a premature life.

The researchers who downplay these facts and the media who ignore them have as much of an agenda as those of us who are pro-life. It's just that they won't admit it. Cloaking their agenda in the jargon of "science" and claiming that their stance is the only enlightened one, they try to portray anyone who disagrees with them as idealogues who ignore facts and put politics before the welfare of others. Does anyone else see the irony in this?

No Driver on a Rough Road

Tomorrow (March 5), the president is revving up the engine on his much talked-about healthcare reform summit. Has anyone noticed that we don't have any drivers yet?

Obama's second nomination for HHS secretary has yet to be confirmed. (The first one ran out of gas before he got started because of a tax issue.) We also don't have anyone nominated to head up the FDA, NIH, CMS, CDC -- all that alphabet soup that regulates and dictates our national health issues. Hmmmm, I wonder who's going to do the driving on this one.

We definitely need healthcare reform. Mom spoke to that a bit yesterday in her blog. But we don't need any more excuses for Congress to jump into the driver's seat. And we don't need another reform that's an accident waiting to happen. Remember the Clinton healthcare plan that never got off the starting line?

We do need to keep our leaders in prayer. They're bumping along on some rough roads without a reliable GPS system and not much in the way of emergency equipment.

Deficit too Big to Cut?

With his big budget debut just a day away, President Obama is starting to sound the alarms about out-of-control spending and is promising to cut our national deficit in half by the end of his first term. (His notes on the urgency of fixing Social Security sound like echoes of President Bush.) To deliver on any of his economizing promises, Obama is going to have to do an awful lot of arm-twisting with the big-spenders in Congress.

Just today, the House Democrats unveiled an ominous -- oops! omnibus -- spending bill that would add $410 billion to the fiscal 2009 federal budget. (Fiscal 2009 ends Sept. 30.) That's 8 percent more than they tried to pass last fall but gave up because they knew Bush would veto it. House Speaker Pelosi calls it "unfinished business."

We see all these tickers out there about how much the Iraq war is costing. But is anyone tracking how much the 111th Congress is costing us? According to one ticker (http://gooznews.com/), we've spent more than $599 billion on the war as of 8 p.m. EST Monday. The war has been going on for about seven years. The 111th Congress, which hasn't been in session yet for two months, is starting to make that look like a drop in the bucket with its unending bailouts, stimulus, omnibus, junkets, etc.

Oh, and remember, these overzealous overspenders who know just what to do with your money have been in the majority for more than four years now. A lot of what's wrong with the economy falls at their feet.

Put the Money Where the Need Is

Getting to and from work today was an exercise in patience and grace -- two virtues I often run short on when I'm stuck in wall-to-wall traffic on Interstate-66. The highway, notorious even at its best as being more of a parking lot than a throughway, was at its worst this morning. It took us an hour to travel nine miles, and that was with the advantage of being in the HOV (express) lane.

What made 66 the poster child today for the need for mass transit was D.C.'s ailing mass transit system. A Metro train had derailed, crippling one of the major train lines linking northern Virginia to the government center of D.C. After snarling commuter and highway traffic for morning drive time, the disabled train finally was removed from the track and the system got back on schedule. Until it was time to go home tonight, that is. Another train derailed on the same line, again snarling commuter and highway traffic just in time for the evening drive.

On the best of days, getting around the D.C. area takes major effort as the designers of the Metro system and the designers of the highways didn't talk to each other when they laid the two out years ago, and neither did a great job of planning for the future. So today, the Metro ends far short of where most commuters can afford to live, and the highways beyond the infamous "beltway" just can't handle the resulting traffic.

You'd think this would be the perfect target for stimulus money -- especially as so many government workers rely on the Metro for their commute and D.C. is so full of people giving lip service to the need to go green. But investing money in existing infrastructure is something conservatives do. It's not so popular with the people currently spending our money in Washington.

The stimulus package, which is supposed to be filled with projects that can generate jobs over the next two years, calls for spending more than $8 billion on high-speed rail. According to a White House news release, "The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act makes an unprecedented investment in ... innovative high-speed rail initiatives to bring new, efficient transportation alternatives to millions of Americans across the country and finally start breaking the grip of foreign oil on our nation’s economy." (See http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/Recovery_Act_Infrastructure_2-17.pdf, and yes, I know the grammar in that sentence is awful. But, hey, I'm just quoting from "greater minds than mine.")

The $8 billion far surpasses anything before attempted in this country — and more is coming, according to Minnesota's twincities.com. "Administration officials told Politico that when Obama outlines his 2010 budget next week, it will ask for $1 billion more for high-speed rail in each of the next five years," the paper reported today. (http://www.twincities.com/politics/ci_11722742)

While some people are praising this initiative, others are groaning about the expense. But what few are discussing is the fact that there's no way a fast rail system will move from drawing board to rail lines in the two years required by the rationale for a stimulus package. There are too many environmental impact statements that will have to be researched, too many public hearings that will be have to be held, too many endangered species to look out for, too many state and federal agencies that will have to be consulted. Maybe that's what will generate all the jobs!

Other infrastructure needs mostly overlooked by our overzealous overspenders are those that still bear the mark of Hurricane Katrina. The Democrats rallied around the banner of "FEMA's failures" after Katrina and raised the specter of Katrina victims whenever it made for a good sound bite. But last week when they were tossing a few billion here and a few billion there, they all but ignored the needs of the towns and cities still struggling to regain their footing after being wiped out by the hurricane. And when it comes to creating jobs, the White House estimates that the stimulus package will create about 50,000 jobs in Louisiana and 30,000 jobs in Mississippi, both "red states" that are still trying to recover from Katrina. Compare that with the nearly 400,000 jobs that are expected to be created in Nancy Pelosi's blue state of California. So much for bipartisanship.

How Much Is Your Health Worth?

One of the many earmarks in the stimulus package that isn't getting much play outside the healthcare industry is $1.1 billion for comparative effectiveness research. What the government is saying this money will be used for is to compare various medical treatments to determine which ones are the most effective for most people with a specific ailment. To get the medical community onboard, several senators have promised that this will ignore cost. But will it? Can it?

The UK uses a comparative-effectiveness approach that basically comes down to cost effectiveness. Essentially, this means the UK-sponsored health system will cover whichever drug, biologic or medical device or procedure has been "proven" to be the most effective for a particular problem. There is a catch. It's known as "QALY." The British system has determined that the Quality Adjusted Life Year is $55,000. In plain English, the British healthcare system is basically saying a year of life is worth $55,000. If your healthcare costs more than your QALY, you're out of luck.

This one-size-fits-all approach doesn't mesh with the advances being made in medical research that show what works for one person may kill or seriously injure another person. But, if we are to have equal access to healthcare, which seems to be the goal of most reformers, we will have to do away with personalized medicine and accept government-imposed caps on the value of our life.

Is this really what we want?

Your Share of the Stimulus

They did it. The congressional Democrats and President Obama have made the so-called stimulus package the law of the land. In other words, they've committed themselves to spending $787 billion on an 1,100-page shopping list that none of them had the time to read.

To make it sit better with the public, they're touting the fact that the average American will get a $400 tax cut this year -- about $13 a week. Applause, applause.

Before you waste much time making your own list of how you might spend that money, think about this: In reality, they're just letting you keep $400 that you already earned. And if the stimulus pricetag were evenly divvied up among 200 million people who were working, we'd each be "contributing" $4,000 to the cause. In other words, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Obama are giving us a 10 percent kickback of what they're dunning us for.

There's more to come. A lot of the favorite earmarks that didn't make it into this package will find their way into future legislation. And Congress isn't even discussing the budget yet. The bottom line? They'll find a way to get that $13 a week back and then some. So hang onto your wallets. We're in for a ride!

Rare Show of Courage

It's refreshing to see a politician withdraw from a presidential nomination -- not because of a tax scandal or because he's being indicted or because he hired undocumented domestic "help" (otherwise known as servants) -- but because he's standing by his convictions.

Today, New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg withdrew his name from consideration as Commerce Secretary because he couldn't go along with President Obama's bloated stimulus package or his plans to take over the Census Bureau. Keep in mind that the 2010 Census will dictate representation in Congress, state lgislatures and judicial districts for the next 10 years. It also will be used to determine allocation of federal funds (in other words, our tax dollars). While some members of Congress have gotten behind a bill to make the Census Bureau an independent agency, Obama is trying to make it so the Census director answers directly to the White House. This could politicize what should be an objective counting of the people.

This took a lot of courage on Gregg's part. His Senate term ends in two years, and he's not expected to retain his seat because New Hampshire is becoming more liberal.

If you'd like to thank him for sticking by his beliefs, you can do it through his Senate website at http://gregg.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.ContactForm

What's Your Stimulus Solution?

By now I'm sure you've all heard that the Senate Democrats, aided by three Republicans, have passed their version of an $800 billion plus "stimulus" bill to keep our economic "crisis from turning into a catastrophe," in the words of our president. Of course, this is on top of the $700 billion plus bailout for the banks and automakers and in addition to the federal budget that Congress will be passing later this year. Yes, another golden opportunity for Congress to spend our money and our children's money and our children's children's money and our children's children's children's ... you know where this is heading.

Just out of curiosity, if you were in Congress, how would you stimulate the economy?

I think one of the first things I would do is limit congressional travel on the public dime. This would include tax-funded "fact-finding" missions to exotic locales as well as working sessions outside Washington or their home state. Just last week, the Democrats held their caucus -- not in Washington where they all work -- but in Williamsburg, Va. That meant the president, instead of being able to travel a few blocks in his armored limo, had to get in his helicopter and then on Air Force One to fly to Williamsburg. And of course, all the congressmen and women had to stay at hotels, eat and play at our expense. To be fair, the Republicans had their own caucus that we paid for. These are the same people who self-righteously screamed about companies, on the public dole, holding expensive retreats for their workers.

Such a travel restriction could save millions of dollars -- a drop in the bucket these days. But I think it would be a good starting point. And it would send the message that Congress is more about taking care of business than taking care of itself.

Self-Reliance or Washington-Reliance?

In rolling out his Economic Recovery Advisory Board today, President Obama rightfully called for an end to the partisan bickering that has made government inept since before Bill Clinton came to town. But how quickly he forgets that until just a few weeks ago, he was a big part of the problem. His voting record in the Senate was among the most partisan of the Democrats -- even worse than Harry Reid's and Hillary Clinton's (according to the Washington Post's voting records for the 110th Congress). When moderate Democrats and Republicans came together to find a meeting place for agreement on troubling issues, Sen. Obama was never in the room.

But back to his speech today: "It is time to pass an Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Plan to get our economy moving again. This is not some abstract debate. It is an urgent and growing crisis that can only be fully understood through the unseen stories that lie underneath each and every one of those lost jobs. Somewhere in America, a small business has shut its doors; a family has said goodbye to their home; a young parent has lost their livelihood, and doesn’t know what’s going to take its place.

"These Americans are counting on us," Obama told Congress.

Perhaps that's the problem. Instead of counting on government to take care of our every problem, we should be relying on ourselves. Had our forefathers counted on government to take care of them, we'd still be part of England, we'd be huddled on the Eastern Seaboard and our national anthem would be "God Save the Queen."

Life isn't easy right now. But times have been tougher for our country and for many of us individually. It wasn't that many years ago that I was a single mom taking care of two kids on $17,000 a year. I lived in a trailer, chopped my own firewood, got up to stoke the fire a couple times a night because I couldn't afford for the furnace to kick on and came up with a lot of fun, free entertainment so my kids wouldn't realize what they were doing without. Recognizing I would never get ahead if I stayed put, I gave up the "security" of that job and my family support system to move with my kids across the country so I could go back to school. Relying on ourselves and God, we survived in student family housing on my 20-hour-a-week, minimum-wage student workstudy and what I could save from my school loan. In all that time, I didn't take any government aid -- no free lunches for the kids, no state health insurance, no food stamps, no welfare.

Had I counted on government, I'd still be back in Idaho living in a trailer, chopping my own firewood and scratching to make ends meet on poverty wages.

I freely admit I was blessed in that I had only to look to my mother for an example. The mother of three, she was widowed and homeless on her 30th birthday. Mom lived on faith in God -- not welfare. The sacrifices she made and the strength she exhibited helped me stand on my own two feet when I needed to.

America was built by generations of people who looked inward and upward to overcome adversity. If, in these difficult economic times, we trade our self-reliance for Washington-reliance, what role models will our children have when they need the strength to struggle through a crisis?

How Much Is A Trillion?

Sorry about the sushi thing, Mari. I don't know enough about sushi to realize it's not vegetarian! But I do know about politicians and their attempts to get their hands in our pockets!

A billion here, a billion there; sooner or later you're talking real money. And now with the Democrats in charge of the House, Senate, and White House, we've morfed the federal budget into the trillions. I think Nancy Pelosi discovered the power of zero—add a couple of zeroes here and a couple of zeroes there, and viola! Congress has  more of our money to spend..

The concept of numbers has increased exponentially since I was a kid. Back then, two bits was a quarter; a buck could buy three gallons of gas; and if I ever got my hands on a fiver, I was rich indeed. All I knew about millions was that the sun was 93 million miles from the earth, just far enough away to keep us warm without burning us up.

Congress has taken full advantage of  the fact that the computer has conditioned us into thinking in terms of billions and trillions—even my old G5 Mac can store over 10 million bytes of information and is cable of processing 80 billion units of info at two billion cycles per second. Compare that to my first Apple II, which came equipped with 64K of memory. Wasn't it Bill Gates who said that was all anybody would ever need?

The new bailout package, or Christmas wish list, is just another example of why it's getting harder and harder to support the government in the style to which it has become accustomed. They should change your zip code out there in D.C. to 00000, since nothing there adds up anyway.

Think about it—a billion is a thousand millions; a trillion is a million millions. With the national debt already in the trillions of dollars and our total population around 250 million, how much does each of us owe? You do the math; my brain stopped several gigabytes back.