Lawrence O’Donnell on MSNBC’s Morning Joe Dec 22 on the Senate version of the bill facing a vote this week: “The biggest surprise for people will be to find out that 40% of them will have their benefits cut because of the Senate tax on health care plans.  The CBO says that the money will come, not from the health care plans, but from cuts on the plans so that providers can avoid the tax.  How will you explain this to….. Read the rest of this entry…

“5 things conservatives hate” and “5 things liberals hate” about Senate health care bill: click here to see video

Last week, the President warned in his speech, “If we don’t pass this health care bill, here is the guarantee:

1. your premiums will go up;
2. Your employer put more cost on you and potentially drop you because they cannot afford increases;
3. The U.S. will be bankrupt because Medicare and Medicaid are unsustainable.”

BUT….THE 2,000 PAGE BILL WON’T CHANGE THIS!!  The proposed bill gives us higher taxes, medicare cuts and higher premiums!  This is NOT MEANINGFUL REFORM!  Go to NCN’s first post to see how we think fiscal conseratives want Congress to SOLVE this health care problem: http://newconservativenetwork.org/2009/10/what-we-support/ and http://newconservativenetwork.org/2009/10/healthcare-reform-falls-short/

Speaking of “bankrupt”, does it help that (instead of paying down the deficit) the House passed another bill last week to use money that was repaid from TARP to extend unemployment benefits AGAIN?

Host Mike WALLACE: President Obama is just back from Copenhagen with a climate deal that he called an unprecedented breakthrough. How meaningful do you think it is?

MCCAIN: I think that the fact it has no binding provisions to it whatsoever is a rhetorical attempt to cover up what was obviously a serious failure.  But again, the American people right now are not interested in giving $100 billion to other countries, not when we have 10 percent unemployment, and we have people who can’t stay in their homes and the serious economic situation that prevails in the United States today.

From December 20, 2009 “Fox News Sunday”

Olympia Snowe rightly commented that she could not see the big need to rush when the benefits don’t go into effect for 3 years (even though Congress starts taxing us right away so they can save up a pool of money so they can say that “over 10 years, it’s deficit-neutral” even though it really ISN’T—-note the CBO concerns and click here for a great article by American Spectator called “CBO Finds Revised Bill Raises Taxes and Spending More than Original One” which includes a link where….. Read the rest of this entry…

Congress has been on a massive spending binge this week and hope you are shopping and don’t notice the $2 trillion worth of spending….

1.  Spending Bill = $1.1 trillion that the President just signed to fund Defense Spending (click here to see good recap by nasdaq.com) 

2.  “job” bill = $154 billion.  It does NOT CREATE “jobs” of course, but rather extends unemployment (again) and extra Social Security payments (remember that bankrupt program?) and ….. Read the rest of this entry…

The UK’s Telegraph (click here to see their Dec 20 article) points out that Dr Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the UN Climate Change panel is invested in all kinds of carbon-trading industries, ones that are relying on policies that he is helping to make with the IPCC (UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)!  Not only will he financially benefit from the policies he is trying to push through the IPCC, but also Pachauri is not the “leading scientist” that the BBC touts him to be, rather he is a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics.  This sham and conflict of interest was all exposed last Tuesday when two key people confronted his data in an open letter which …… Read the rest of this entry…

“It was five years before the turn of the century and major media were warning of disastrous climate change.  Page six of The New York Times was headlined with the serious concerns of ‘geologists’”  Only the president at the time wasn’t Bill Clinton; it was Grover Cleveland. And the Times wasn’t warning about global warming – it was telling readers the looming dangers of a new ice age.   

“The year was 1895 (click here to see New York Times article), and it was just one of four different time periods in the last 100 years when major print media predicted an impending climate crisis. Each prediction carried its own elements of doom, saying Canada could be ‘wiped out’ or lower crop yields would mean ‘billions will die.’  

“Just three decades ago, in 1975, the paper reported: ‘A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable.’  (click here to see a great Forbes article) That trend, too, cooled off and ….. Read the rest of this entry…

Warren Buffet agrees that the average consumer will see increased energy costs: click here to see a CNBC interview.  

Q: Why would the government be willing to increase costs to Americans? 

A: Perhaps to generate funds for its other projects!  (Government-regulated healthcare, anyone?)

This hidden tax, called an “energy bill”,  will raise utility bills for the average family by $1,300 per year (90% increase) by some estimates, while others say it will be more in the range of an extra $3,000 per year according to  Heritage article ”The Economic Impact of the Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade Bill” by Ben Lieberman, Senior Policy Analyst, Energy and Environment, Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies:   Testimony before the Senate Republication Conference June 22, 2009:  “….the bottom line is that cap and trade works by raising the cost of energy high enough so that Read the rest of this entry…