VIDEO: DEMINT RESPONDS TO CONSTITUTIONALITY OF REID LANGAUGE

Ed Morissey over at Hot Air does the leg work on this one along with the Weekly Standard (link below). On page 1020 of Reid's health care bill is verbiage that Republican senator Jim DeMint seems to imply may be strongly unconstitutional. First, check out the verbiage.

From page 1020
SUBSECTION.—It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.

DeMint seems to be pointing to this language as wording that will unconstitutionally prevent future any future congress from repealing this monstrosity.

Morrissey points to this section of the Constitution:

Article I, Section 5:
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.

Be sure to watch this entire video of DeMint...



Anyone think this had anything to do with why the bill was crafted behind closed doors without any Republicans present?

Read all about it at HOT AIR

ALABAMA REP JUMPS SHIP, BECOMES REPUBLICAN

Too early to call this a trend but a 46% strong disapproval number for Obama, this health care monstrosity about to pass despite the will of the people, and now an Alabama Democrat turning Republican, it'd be a good start. POLTICO has the story:

POLITICO has learned that Rep. Parker Griffith, a freshman Democrat from Alabama, will announce today that he’s switching parties to become a Republican.

According to two senior GOP aides familiar with the decision, the announcement will take place this afternoon in Griffith's district in northern Alabama.

Griffith’s party switch comes on the eve of a pivotal congressional health care vote and will send a jolt through a Democratic House Caucus that has already been unnerved by the recent retirements of a handful of members who, like Griffith, hail from districts that offer prime pickup opportunities for the GOP in 2010.

The switch represents a coup for the House Republican leadership, which had been courting Griffith since he publicly criticized the Democratic leadership in the wake of raucous town halls during the summer.

Let's see how blue those blue dogs really are.

h/t to MM

FORT HOOD SHOOTER'S ATTORNEY CRYING FOUL

We had Nidal Malik Hasan's attorney, John Galligan in studio L for the Lynn Woolley Show recently and his response to questions about how he could defend Hasan always came back to the Constitution (ok) and Galligan's desire for a fair trial (ok).

So why is he doing this?

According to the SF CHRONICLE:

An attorney for the man charged in the deadly shootings at Fort Hood says the Army has prohibited his client from praying in Arabic with his family.

Attorney John P. Galligan said police stopped a phone conversation between Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan and his brother on Friday because it was not in English. Galligan told the San Antonio Express-News that police at Brooke Army Medical Center refused to let Hasan pray in Arabic.

Considering how Hasan committed an act of war in full view of hundreds of people, I fail to see how denying him from speaking in arabic puts a fair trial in jeopardy. Innocent people wrongfully jailed who can't post bail are denied rights legally. The same should apply here.

h/t to WND

OBAMA AT ALL TIME LOW ON PASSION INDEX

Not entirely sure what this means but for the far lefties to be the cause of this one, they'd have to move from the SA to SD overnight. That would be unlikely. I have long maintained that the Strongly Disapprove number is far more important than the Strongly Approve number.

46% Strongly Disapprove is by far a new high.

When you look at the Overall Approve / Disapprove numbers, the former is at 44%, which is not a new low. The latter is at 56% which IS a new high. Neither is the Strongly Approve number a new low.

My money is on a two-part shift happening. At face value it would seem that a contingent of those who approve of Obama's performance moved into the "disapprove" and another contingent migrated from "disapprove" to "strongly disapprove".

VIDEO: OMG - TREE HUGGER WORSHIP

I must admit, the first time I watched this I was convinced it was something from the Onion or some other source of scornful satire directed at the Eco-wackos. But alas, it appears to be the real deal. These people have actually gathered together in a forest, called it a "cathedral", and wailed to the trees.

If the trees have even a modicum of awareness, they are laughing. However, if they don't (a conventional assumption), I'm sure they appreciated the extra CO2.

WOW.......No, I seriously mean, WOW!



If you still doubt this is real, here is Earth First's WEBSITE

Money quote....
"Bring me to this rock that has the most incredible life."

h/t to RS

VIDEO: IS THIS WHY DODD GOT $100 MILLION?

I must admit, upon seeing that Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd got $100 million in the latest version of the health care bill, I thought about this angle because there was no need for bribery to get his vote. However, he definitely could use some help getting re-elected. The $100 million is earmarked for a hospital in Dodd's state but is it possible that Federal taxpayer dollars could end up funding a portion of his re-election campaign?

Come on, in light of the political climate these days is that really a stretch? The reporter making the claim is NOT a conservative.



It's no secret Dodd is IN TROUBLE in 2010. This could be a small sampling of what we can expect in terms of election strategy all across the country in the tight races.

h/t to GP

ACORN FUNDED THROUGH OBAMACARE?

John McCormack at the Weekly Standard Blog points out that squirrelly Illinois Senator Roland Burris vowed not to vote for the Reid health care bill unless it had a public option. The bill does not have a public option yet Burris still voted for it. Did something in the bill sufficiently alleviate Burris' concerns? Perhaps it was in the Manager's Amendment of the bill, which addresses something called - are you ready for this - the "Office of Minority Health". Sounds a little discriminatory, doesn't it?

Burris, according to WS, pointed to the MANAGER'S AMENDMENT when asked why he voted in support of a bill without a public option:

The provision he cites, found on pages 240 through 248 of the manager's amendment, requires that six different agencies each establish an “Office of Minority Health.” The agencies are the “Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Health Resources and Services Administration, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.”

Potentially, the most disturbing part of this is that while the most recent ruling on whether ACORN can receive federal funds was that withholding funds is unconstitutional. That may still be overturned but the Manager's amendment appears to have insulated ACORN should they be ruled ineligible for those federal funds:

Earlier this year, Congress passed and the president signed into law a ban on federal funding for ACORN, but a judge ruled that that law was unconstitutional. If a higher court reverses that ruling, ACORN may be prohibited from receiving funds through the Office of Minority Health earmark. But according to the Senate legislative aide, ACORN would still "absolutely" qualify for federal funding through the provision in the underlying Reid bill because the anti-ACORN appropriations amendment would not apply to funds provided through the health care exchanges.

This would mean that a United States senator is in support of protecting an organization exposed as an enabler of, among other things, a child prostitution ring.

h/t to BG