Putting Democrats in charge was a terribly bad idea. Auto bailouts, Health Care reform, takeover of massive segments of the private sector, Union-creep™ on otherwise successful businesses, and most recently the complete take down of the Financial industry under the boot of Uncle Barack. These things all have implications more far-reaching than we still fully understand. And we still don’t really know all the tricks the Democrats played on us in the shadowy nooks and crannies of the legislation most of them never even read.

Yes, progressivism has squarely planted its boot in our collective backsides to the tune of a monstrous national debt our children’s children will be paying into their golden years. But as bad as all these things may sound, the real punishment will be knocking on our doors on New year’s Day 2100:

[A]s of midnight Dec. 31, the death tax returns — at a rate of 55% on estates of $1 million or more. The effect this will have on hospital life-support systems is already a matter of conjecture.

Resurrection of the death tax, however, isn’t the only tax problem that will be ushered in Jan. 1. Many other cuts from the Bush administration are set to disappear and a new set of taxes will materialize. And it’s not just the rich who will pay.

The lowest bracket for the personal income tax, for instance, moves up 50% — to 15% from 10%. The next lowest bracket — 25% — will rise to 28%, and the old 28% bracket will be 31%. At the higher end, the 33% bracket is pushed to 36% and the 35% bracket becomes 39.6%.

But the damage doesn’t stop there.

The marriage penalty also makes a comeback, and the capital gains tax will jump 33% — to 20% from 15%. The tax on dividends will go all the way from 15% to 39.6% — a 164% increase.
[snip]
Letting the Bush cuts expire will cost taxpayers $115 billion next year alone, according to the Congressional Budget Office, and $2.6 trillion through 2020.

But even more tax headaches lie ahead. This “second wave” of hikes, as Americans for Tax Reform puts it, are designed to pay for ObamaCare and include:

Ok-I’m stopping here…I’ve had enough…read the bloody rest of it on your own. There’s 3 pages of pain and suffering awaiting us in that article, and this is our punishment for electing the Democrats into a Majority in both Houses of Congress in ‘08, and putting that Obama fellow in charge of something he has proven he was not qualified to run-the United States of America. All these clowns have to do now is…nothing…and monstrous tax hikes will snap the last thread of sanity in whatever’s left of the American economy.

Maybe, by November, the grown ups will get off the couch and actually GO to the polls and start undoing the damage their OWN inaction a couple years back helped create in the first place.

But a funny thing happened on the way to Charlie’s coronation. Marco worked tirelessly to build up a grassroots campaign, influential consevative leaders such as Erick Erickson at RedState endorsed his candidacy, and Charlie Crist was, well, Charlie Crist. The next thing you know, Marco’s leading Charlie by 30+ points in the polls, Charlie has left the party he ostensibly loved to run as an Independent, and the NRSC was left looking, well, rather sheepish.

Now, while Charlie Crist could charitably be described as a “moderate” Republican, Mike Castle is, quite simply, a liberal Republican as has been outlined here. But “conventional wisdom” has chanted in unison that a) Mike Castle must be the pre-ordained GOP nominee for Senate because, b) only a liberal Republican like Castle can win in Delaware (a fact someone should point out to conservatives Gov. Pete DuPont and Sen. William Roth).

Well, Mike Castle may have more in common with Charlie Crist than just his “presumed nomination” and left-of-center voting record. According to a poll released by Rasmussen on July 15, there are some interesting trends a brewin’ in the upcoming GOP Primary between Castle and his primary opponent Christine O’Donnell.

For the chart-viewing challenged, here are the highlights from the poll:

1) Castle’s 29 point lead over Democratic nominee Chris Coons has dwindled down to 9 points (causing Rasmussen to move this race from “Solid GOP” to “Leans GOP”);

2) The “unfavorable” ratings for Castle (31%), Coons (29%) and O’Donnell (33%) are roughly equivalent;

3) 25% of Likely Voters do not yet have an opinion of O’Donnell which leaves her with a lot of upside whereas only 9% of voters don’t have an opinion of Castle; and, finally (and the big one)

4) Rasmussen shows O’Donnell ahead of Coons 41% to 39%.

For the Castle camp who’s chief raison d’etre for supporting Mike is that he’s the only electable candidate, this news could not have been greeted with champagne, cavier and cigars all around. In fact, as we speak, I picture members of the Castle staff punching in the cell numbers of the Crist staff and asking in bewildered voices “How can this be?”

Well, here’s the bottom line. Voters, even in Delaware, are fed up with 2,000 page unread bills jammed through in secrecy and trillions of dollars in debt piled onto their kids and grandkids. They’re looking for someone who’s going to be part of the solution, not someone who’s been part of the problem for the last 44 years. They’re looking for a leader outside the political cesspool, not a politician who has spent his entire adult life going from one political office to another.

Christine O’Donnell has cultivated and garnered the support of the grassroots activists, just like Marco Rubio
did. Christine O’Donnell raised over $100,000 in the quarter just ended, not from PACs (like so much of Mike Castle’s donations) but from the same small donor base that catapulted Marco Rubio past Charlie Crist. Christine has been endorsed by Erick Erickson from RedState as well as the influential pro-life Susan B. Anthony List. Christine doesn’t need to match Mike dollar for dollar or anything close because she has something money can’t buy: the passionate energy of those who are fighting for a cause not for just another step on the political ladder.

Delaware has elected conservative leaders in the past and if there was ever an election cycle in which they will do so again, this is it. Christine can be that leader because Mike Castle’s coronation into the U.S. Senate is no more pre-ordained than Charlie Crist’s.

But wishing something doesn’t make it so. Our nation is in deperate need of a conservative choice not a liberal echo. Christine is that conservative choice but Christine needs our help now.

Let’s Roll!

Kent Wells, a BP PLC vice president, said at a news briefing that oil stopped flowing into the water at 2:25 p.m. CDT after engineers gradually dialed down the amount of crude escaping through the last of three valves in the 75-ton cap.

“I am very pleased that there’s no oil going into the Gulf of Mexico. In fact, I’m really excited there’s no oil going into the Gulf of Mexico,” Wells said.

The AP is reporting that all work has been suspended on the wells:

BP’s work on capping the Gulf of Mexico gusher was frozen Wednesday after the federal government raised concerns the operation could put damaging pressure on the busted well that could make the leak worse.

An administration official, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the talks with BP, said the government was acting out of “abundance of caution” and didn’t want potentially dangerous pressure tests on a tighter containment cap that has been placed over the well to go ahead until BP answers questions about possible risks.

At the same time, BP on its own halted the drilling of two relief wells that are designed to be a more permanent solution to plug the well.

The delays were a stunning setback after the oil giant finally seemed to be on track following nearly three months of failed attempts to stop the spill, which has sullied beaches from Florida to Texas and decimated the multibillion dollar fishing industry.

The administration official said Energy Secretary Steven Chu, U.S. Geological Survey chief Marcia McNutt and other government scientists met with BP Tuesday in Houston and had a number of questions about the plan to test the integrity of the well. Chu and other officials want to ensure that putting downward pressure on the well will not cause further leaks, the official said.

“Our basic position was, if you can give us the answers we need … then go ahead,” the official said. Until then, “they can’t go forward.”

Caution appears to be the main concern here.  Out team at 73wire will keep a close watch as this story develops.  Yes, I know the picture is of an on-shore oil well/drill; it’s a hint that on-shore drilling wouldn’t have these problems.

Obscene references to President Obama and African Americans were scrawled in black across backyard fences owned by five residents, according to Monroe Township Police Capt. John Cortesi. Two “crudely drawn swastikas” also appeared on the fences, which face heavily traveled Corkery Lane.

As expected, the NAACP chimed in as well:

Loretta Williams, president of the Gloucester County NAACP, said her organization wanted the incident treated as a bias crime and not a prank.

“This is something we won’t tolerate,” she said. “People have no right to spread their hate message, whether it’s on a fence, a wall, or over the Internet, and intimidate people.”

It’s interesting how the NAACP denounces hate speech when they are the target, but it’s free speech or is to be tolerated when one of their own spews the hate:

Samir: My job is to educate black people, whether they want to be educated or not. I don’t give a damn what they may think about white people, I hate white people. All of them. Every last iota of a cracker I hate him. Because we are still in this condition.

Samir: We didn’t come out here to play. There is to much serious business going on in your black community to be sliding through south street with white, dirty cracker whores on your arms. What’s a matter with you black man, you got a doomsday with a white woman on your arm.

“We keep begging white people for freedom. No wonder we’re not free. Your enemy can not make you free fool. You want freedom you’re going to have to kill some crackers. You’re going to have to kill some of their babies.

For the record, as the Inquirer reports, County Prosecutor Sean Dalton called the vandalism “extremely disturbing messages of hate.” He said his office was assisting police in identifying possible suspects.

To that end, we do know who the suspects are in the calls to kill whites, er “crackers” and their babies, so why are they not being arrested and prosecuted. Paging the Philadelphia Police and PA AG Tom Corbett.

Unfortunately reality seems to always pop the Liberal/Progressive bubble. The bubble is not created exclusively by Democrats, by the way, but by Liberal/Progressives on both sides of the aisle. America is essentially a moderately conservative country, at least fiscally. Even to many conservatives who are focused on working and raising families each day, many of the platitudes of the Liberal/Progressives sound good. Lib/Progs are expert at controlling the dialogue and “wordsmithing” things to sound much better than they actually are or will be. Let’s face it, telling people that there really is no free lunch and that they have to work and fend for themselves because the government doesn’t really produce anything but can only take and redistribute, doesn’t sound very nice or good. It is just the Ugly Truth.

President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid’s main political enemy is not the Republicans but instead, the Ugly Truth. The Ugly Truth rears its head against Republicans too as we are seeing with the Tea Party backlash against many Republicans who have lost their way from the core beliefs of smaller government, lower taxes and less regulation. The Ugly Truth smacks down Liberal/Progressives particularly hard however, especially when Liberal/Progressive policies are actually passed into law (or executive order).

No matter how good the rhetorical sales pitch sounds, Ugly Truth demonstrates that government spending at quantum deficit levels doesn’t encourage entrepreneurs to take more risk and create more jobs. Liberal/Progressives are constantly in a battle to keep the Ugly Truth from being perceived by Americans. How does one hide the Ugly Truth? Through constant rhetoric, marketing, demonization and propaganda which costs a lot more in money and manpower than spreading the truth. This is why the Tea Party movement is so concerning to Obama, Pelosi and Reid. Enough Americans are “getting it” that more expansive government means less individual freedom and that massive government spending means money sucked out of the private sector economy. Sucking money out of the private sector economy hurts EVERYONE’s ability to earn a living and attain prosperity. Yes, unions, government workers and welfare recipients are also dependent on a strong private sector for the money they receive.

To all those who are starting to realize that the Liberal/Progressive pipe dream sold to us by Obama, Pelosi and Reid isn’t working and won’t work…welcome to the Real World.

An interesting observation made by Lib/Prog Bob Borosage is that “The remedy for the problems progressives face, lies in creating an equal and opposite force that can rival the enthusiasm of the tea party movement.” I think it is funny how Bob talks about “creating” an “Astroturf” movement to be equal and opposite to the Tea Party movement. Just as government cannot create productive private sector jobs, politicians and political operatives cannot create a meaningful organic movement. Movements come from large groups of people fed up with policies. The Tea Party movement is an organic and widespread reaction to the enormous growth of the Federal Government encroaching into virtually all aspects of daily life.

In large part the Tea Party movement involves many Americans who were never involved in political demonstration before. Most “Tea Partiers” are hard working main stream Americans who may have voted before but never really thought about government policy beyond that. Now with the very perceptible power grab by the Federal Government into the daily lives of average Americans and the unsustainable spending policies implemented by the Liberal/Progressive Democrats who are in charge, many regular Americans now think they have no choice but to become actively involved.

It is ironic that the Tea Party movement was derided by Lib/Progs as “Astroturf” in the beginning. “Astroturf” or artificial demonstration groups created by political action committees or unions was not a widely know term until people like Nancy Pelosi mainstreamed it. The irony is that the Lib/Prog politicians and operatives knew what “Astroturf” meant while the rest of us, including the derided Tea Partiers needed to have the term explained. Typically, what Lib/Progs accuse their political rivals of doing, they are doing themselves.

In politics, nothing is as powerful as a truly organic grassroots movement. Lib/Progs have a huge and I think unsolvable challenge in trying to manufacture “Astroturf” groups with pre-printed signs and t-shirts to create an “equal and opposite” movement to the Tea Partiers. Artificial, synthesized emotion is never as compelling as genuine, organic emotion. The failure of Lib/Progs to recognize that the Tea Party movement is populated by regular mainstream, work-a-day people who were previously uninvolved in politics will limit their ability to beat it. In trying to beat the Tea Party movement, Lib/Progs are trying to beat and disparage regular mainstream Americans to promote their Lib/Prog collectivist agenda in direct opposition to Americans’ desire for individual liberty. Lib/Progs are successful when they take incremental baby steps toward collectivism over individualism by cloaking their true agenda. When changes are made too aggressively or overtly large groups of previously silent Americans wake up to what is really happening. The Tea Party movement is a result of just such an awakening.

The biggest special interest that Harry Reid has served (in exchange for loot of course) is the Big Pharmaceutical Lobby. It is comical how many people equate “Big Corporations” with supporting Republicans while Democrats have become the party of supporting and empowering big corporate lobbies regardless of the detrimental effects on their constituents. Harry Reid in his role as Senate Majority Leader was invaluable to the Drug Lobby in squeezing Nationalized Healthcare through the Senate under the guise of “Healthcare Reform” and then “Health Insurance Reform”. No matter what the Liberal/Progressives call it, the drive to put the Federal Government in charge of healthcare was pushed and passed in direct contrast to the wishes of the American People.

Now as a reward for Harry Reid’s influence in getting Big Pharmaceutical their biggest and most lucrative government contract in history, the Drug Lobby is donating massive amounts of money to buy expensive television air time to blast Harry Reid’s Senate opponent Sharron Angle.

Every Drug Lobby commercial blasting Sharron Angle is a reminder of how Harry Reid is in bed with the Big Pharmaceutical Lobby. Every time Sharron Angle’s name is mentioned derogatorily by the Harry Reid campaign it is a reminder of how much a vote for Angle will help Nevadans and the entire country.

This post originated at AOL and posted here with authors permission.

(June 28) — President Barack Obama nominated Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, presumably because she shares his judicial philosophy.

Yet when Kagan’s confirmation begins, you can bet that she will sound more like Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

The reason is simple. Kagan, Obama and the senators who’ll vote on her confirmation all know that the American public won’t accept a judicial nominee who wants to rewrite the Constitution to reflect her personal view on important public policy issues. And the public generally takes a more conservative view on issues like the scope of the federal government’s authority, the Second Amendment or the brutal practice of partial-birth abortion.

So expect Kagan to try very hard to hide from positions she took on these issues in the past, based on documents released by the Clinton Library and the Department of Defense, which revealed that Kagan took typically liberal positions on each of those issues of constitutional importance during her career.

It wouldn’t be the first time this has happened.

During her confirmation hearings last year, Justice Sonia Sotomayor distanced herself from President Obama’s so-called “empathy standard” — a brazen mangling of jurisprudence that empowers judges to make decisions based on personal feelings and political views — even with a popular president and a Democratic majority poised to confirm her.

In fact, President Obama and his allies in the Senate twisted their tongues and talked as though they had abandoned the philosophy of judicial activism that liberals had proudly championed for decades. Instead, their rhetoric emphasized traditionally conservative judicial views, with the White House going so far as to describe Sotomayor as a “nonideological and restrained judge” in a memo to senators. But it put her on the side of the American people.

After Sotomayor went out of her way to testify that she was committed to the rule of law and judicial restraint, liberal law professor Mike Seidman said, “If she was not perjuring herself, she is intellectually unqualified to be on the Supreme Court.”

We called it a confirmation conversion.

Not surprisingly, it didn’t last. Since her confirmation, and despite her promise to base decisions on the Constitution and not the standards of bureaucrats in Europe, Justice Sotomayor recently joined an opinion stating that international opinion and a “global consensus” was relevant to deciding that juvenile criminals can never be sentenced to life without parole for non-homicidal crimes in this country. Just a few days ago, she joined the dissenting opinion of the liberal justices who believe a federal law prohibiting “material support” to terrorist organizations is unconstitutional.

Don’t expect anything different from Kagan.

There is nothing to examine with this nominee as a judge (she’s not been one), and even precious little as a practicing lawyer (she did a brief stint back in the day), but the script is familiar.

We are again hearing the White House praise the concept of judicial restraint.

We are told that Elena Kagan is qualified for the Supreme Court because she is a moderate dedicated to cooperation and restraint. (She even treated conservatives at Harvard Law School with respect!) The White House has been so committed to this narrative that some on the left fear that her confirmation would move the court to the right. We doubt it.

Does anyone believe that leading liberals like John Podesta and Rahm Emanuel — who have known Kagan since their days together in the Clinton administration and now help run the Obama administration — would vouch for a nominee who threatened to join the conservative justices in the controversial cases where the fifth vote matters?

More importantly, does anyone believe that Kagan was merely reflecting the views of her old boss when she expressed hostility to important cases limiting the national government’s power, a typical liberal view of the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms and support for a virtually unlimited right to partial-birth abortion?

Senators have the opportunity to ask Kagan about her background and the views she’s held. Whatever her record shows, if the White House, Senate Democrats and the nominee herself hide it behind the smokescreen of another confirmation conversion, don’t be surprised.

And don’t be fooled.

David McIntosh is a former Republican congressman from Indiana who held senior positions in both the Reagan and Bush administrations. Kellyanne Conway is president and CEO of the polling company. Both are lawyers.