Why are Democrats resorting wedge issues?

Liberals are always accusing Republicans of promoting divisiveness and campaigning on wedge issues. But this election cycle it is Democrats appear to be doing the dividing and fear mongering; two Sacramento area Democrats in particular.

Assemblyman Dave Jones who is a candidate for insurance commissioner and Dr. Richard Pan have chosen to inject the controversial issue of abortion into the heart of their campaigns. One has to wonder why they have chosen to focus on an issue that has consistently ranked outside the top five issues concerning voters, especially during these trying economic times.

In this campaign speech, Asm. Jones is talking about how he plans to use the office of insurance commissioner to fight for government funding of abortions, an item that was so controversial it was removed from the national health care bill.

Dr. Pan has purchased millions on TV, radio and mail to emphasize the fact that his opponent, Andy Pugno is pro-life. This commercial is just one small example of how Pan is attacking his opponent on the issue of abortion.

So, one has to wonder why these Democrats are so focused on such a divisive issue that voters seem less concerned about than job creation and the economy? I believe it’s because they know that they are on the wrong side of the issues that voters are truly concerned about.

Voters don’t want higher taxes. Both Jones and Pan support higher taxes on Californian’s. Voters want to see government spending reduced. Both Jones and Pan support increased government spending. Voters want to see stranglehold that public employees have on our elected officials ended. Meanwhile, both Jones and Pan are running campaigns that are largely funded by these very same unions.

Dave Jones and Richard Pan are hoping that voters won’t recognize the fact that their campaigns do not speak to the issues Californians are really concerned about. This is because democrats cannot win on the issues. They can only win by demonizing Republicans.

Democrat consultants know that were they to campaign on the Stimulus Bill, Obama Care or tax increases they would lose most swing voters and many of their supporters. So instead, they are focusing on wedge issues and demonization of Republicans. This just goes to show how desperate they really are.

Expectations dwindle from "Change we can believe in" to "It could be worse"

As the 2010 midterm election approaches, President Barak Obama is no longer talking about change we can believe in. Instead, his rhetoric has shifted back to blaming Bush and the Republicans and declaring that things would be much worse if he wasn't in charge.

 A recent Associated Press article made note of the significant change in messaging:

President Barack Obama, who rocketed to the White House promising "change you can believe in," is now telling voters they shouldn't change a thing.

His message for the fall elections, which are looking ominous for his Democrats, is that Republicans caused the nation's economic troubles, but he and the Democrats are starting to fix them. So stick with the Democrats and don't go back to the GOP.

"This is a choice between the policies that led us into the mess or the policies that are leading out of the mess," Obama said recently in Las Vegas.

Trouble is, it's a tough sell to voters who've seen little progress.

Unemployment is stuck near double digits and polls show many voters have decided Obama's policies are to blame, not his predecessor's.

This is despite the President's attempts to continue to blame the previous administration that has been gone for over a year and half as well as congressional Republicans who haven't been in the majority in either house since 2006. The voters recognize that this is his  mess and he needs to own it. But, we all know that is not going to happen.

Obama often frames the argument by saying that Republicans had their chance to drive, then drove the car into a ditch and shouldn't get the keys back. But voters may be concluding that Democrats, who control the White House and both chambers of Congress, have had their chance at the wheel, too, and haven't gotten very far.

"From the American public's point of view, the people in charge at this point are the people who own the problem," said Andrew Kohut, head of the nonpartisan Pew Research Center.  

The truth is that the Obama Campaign created a level of expectation that the Obama Administration would never be able to live up to. And now that reality has set in for the voters, the blame game is al the Democrats have left. 

But Obama's pickings were slim when it came to campaign themes.

The narrative that worked so well when Obama was a presidential candidate offering himself as a transformational figure who could change Washington is no longer at his disposal. He can hardly claim to have delivered on that promise because he hasn't changed Washington, at least not much, as he's acknowledged.

House Dems Declare, “Budget? We don’t need no stinking budget!”

In 2006 Rep. John Spratt(D) declared of Republicans, “If you can’t budget, you can’t govern.” Well now that he is in charge of the budget, he has changed his tune!

House Democrats have chosen not to even pass a budget this year. Instead, they will pass a “Budget Alternative” which will continue spending at last year’s level. So what’s the big deal?

Well this alternative budget leaves out some very important facts; like a projected annual budget deficit averaging over $1 Trillion a year for the next 10 years!  As reported by The Hill:

House Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt (D-S.C.) said the alternative would be the “functional equivalent” of a full-fledged budget. But because it won't be a traditional budget resolution, it will be silent on future deficits, which are expected to average nearly $1 trillion for the next decade.

Democrats have expressed concern about voting for a document showing lots of red ink in an election year.

Even those who are fond of comparing the spending during the Bush years to that of our current President are silent. The truth is that the highest deficit under President Bush was $450 billion. Back in 2009 The Heritage Foundation Reported”

It is true that, between 2002 and 2009, the budgets largely shaped by President George Bush will have run cumulative budget deficits of $3.35 trillion. This calculation credits the entire 2009 budget deficit and TARP costs to Bush, even though Obama will have signed most of the discretionary spending bills and overseen much of the TARP spending.

But Obama does not have much high ground. The “stimulus” bill alone will create more debt (approximately $1 trillion including interest costs), than Bush’s first three years of budget deficits combined ($948 billion).

So, if the numbers are already out there, what are Democrats trying to hide? One has to wonder if the projected deficits are even greater that we know. And if President Obama signs this "Budget Alternative", what does that say about his commitment to "Transparency"?

California Democrats Support Tax Cuts for Business! Well...Sort of…

That’s right! Democrats are once again proposing significant tax incentives to encourage employers to do business right here in California… that is if they happen to be a green technology company. All other employers… you can go take a hike!... a tax hike that is!

Right on the heals of proposing over $12 billion in new taxes on Californians, Assembly Democrats (specifically Assemblymember Joan Buchanan) are proposing an increase in the research and development tax credit for companies that specialize in the development of alternative energy and green technologies. Buchanan states,
 

“Assembly Bill 1565 creates targeted Research and Development Tax Credit Areas with attractive R&D credits to motivate green technology businesses to stay in and move to California.”

In theory, this sounds like something Republicans should support – making it more cost-effective for businesses to come to and stay in California, thus providing much needed jobs. In fact, legislative Republicans have gotten behind such targeted efforts in the past. In 2009, they supported Assembly Speaker Karen Bass’ bill that provided tax credits for movie and television productions to studios that film here in the golden state. And a few months ago, they supported a manufacturer’s tax credit for green tech companies. So, why shouldn’t they get behind this most recent effort to provide much needed tax relief to at least some California companies? One word – Hypocrisy!

The California Legislature should not be in the business of picking winners and losers during these tough economic times. There is a basic hypocrisy in the liberal mindset that says, California is such and attractive place to do business that employers will stay here no matter how much we increase taxes and regulation; then at the same time arguing that we need to provide tax incentives to certain industries (the ones they happen to like) in order to bring and keep them in California. But wait…I thought those incentives didn’t make a difference?

Assemblyman Tom Amiano once lamented in a committee hearing that he was tired of people saying that our anti-business climate was chasing business out of the state. He stated that he just didn’t see the dire emergency. Apparently he forgot that in just a few short years, California went from the world’s fifth largest economy to the world’s eighth largest economy. And that was before the legislature passed the largest tax increase in state history. It is only a matter of time before having the highest sales tax, highest gas tax and second highest corporate tax rate drive us even further down the economic rankings.

It is important to note that is fact is not lost on Democrats. In fact Buchanan herself discusses the vital role that tax incentives can play in keeping businesses in California as she declares,

“This incentive will encourage business to remain in California and motivate new businesses to locate here, retaining and creating permanent jobs and helping to spur California’s economy.”

So what’s with the Jekyll and Hyde impression that Democrats seem to be doing on taxes? They know that tax cuts attract businesses and create jobs. But at the same time they are offering tax cuts to only a few select businesses, they are increasing taxes on the rest of California. What effect do they honestly believe that these tax increases will actually have?

Or maybe a better question is, do they even care?

South Carolina Democrats Nominate a Brain Surgeon for Senate... NOT!!!

I cannot decide if this story is funny or just plain sad.

In South Carolina, Democrats nominated Alvin Greene to be their candidate for US Senate against Sen. Jim DeMint. They funny part is that now their party leadership is crying foul and accusing Mr. Greene of being a plant by the Republican Party.

They claim that someone else paid his filing fees and put him up to run because his being black would garner a good chunk of the democratic vote, since much of the electorate in South Carolina also happens to be black. Little did they suspect how right they would be.

After raising no money and doing no campaigning, Alvin Greene garnered almost 60% of the Democratic vote in their primary, making him their nominee. And as you can tell from the above video, he is eminently qualified.

Credentials:

• Unemployed
• Facing felony pornography charges
• Involuntarily discharged from the military
•  Doesn't own a computer or cell phone 
• His name was first on the ballot

 Heck, he should run for President!

Waste In the Stimulus Bill? Democrat Author Says 'So What?

And My brother David wonders why Republicans are scoffing at this pork barrel spending bill, that is only meant to stimulate the money out of the pockets of hard working Americans and into the pockets of liberal special interest groups like Planned Parenthood and Acorn.

David, please read what Michael Obrien with The Hill wrote about the bill's author who, when asked about wasteful spending in the bill said "So what?":

Waste In the Stimulus Bill? Democrat Author Says 'So What?'

How money is spent should be far from the biggest concern about the stimulus package, its chief author, House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wisc.) said Friday.

"So what?" Obey asked in response to a question on NPR's "Morning Edition" about the perceived lack of direction from Congress as to how money in the stimulus should be spent. "This is an emergency. We've got to simply find a way to get this done as fast as possible and as well as possible, and that's what we're doing."

Obey said that Congress is not responsible if money is misspent, but rather, whoever spends the money poorly.

"We simply made a decision, which took about three seconds, not to have earmarks in the bill," Obey told NPR. "And with all due respect, that's the least important
question facing us on putting together this package."

As Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Obey had chief oversight in crafting the $825 billion package as passed by the House. The provisions in the bill have been
criticized by Republicans and some centrist Democrats for not being as directly related to stimulating the economy as it should be.

"We have more oversight built into this package than any package in the history of man. If money is spent badly, we want to know about it so we can hold accountable the people who made that choice," the chairman said. "And guess what? Regardless of what we do, there will be some stupid decisions made."

Political Change is Getting Dirty in California

It appears that the party is over for Democrats in California. With the Assembly District Election Meetings (ADEM) coming up this weekend, it appears the gloves have come off.

Some are saying that old-liners in the party are running a scorched earth campaign to defeat the progressive candidates that have emerged from the Dean and Obama campaigns. Its a battle for the soul of the party, folks, and its going to get heated!

Check out the DailyKos for more... and check back here on Monday for results from this weekend's meetings.