We must turn this around – conservative supporters can use the same list to urge advertisers to return to Glenn Beck.  Those unconvinced to return can be placed on a boycott list.  Given that only 14% of nation’s workforce is unionized, and even less of those support the radical progressive agenda of their leadership, why would a company side with unpopular unions over a popular leader of the tea party, which recently polled at 48% approval, higher than President Obama and unions. 

In fact, according to Gallup, union popularity has plummeted in recent years to it’s lowest point since Gallup started polling this issue in the 1930s. 

If such a site (to pressure Beck advertisers to return or be boycotted) does not exist already, I will do it myself.  Like any war, there are certain battles that must be won and defending Beck’s right to free speech is one of the most important – we must fight back.

In the meantime, I wanted to share an email SEIU sent out today – apparently, they smell blood in the water, after 120+ advertisers dropped their support for Glen Beck, so they’re going after the rest, including the Ad Council – see below:

Dear     ,

At least 120 advertisers have reportedly dropped their ads from Glenn Beck’s Fox News program since he called President Obama a "racist" who has a "deep-seated hatred for white people" last summer.

Since that time, Beck has not slowed his demonizing on-air rampages. Recently, he suggested that the progressive movement and the Democratic leadership are "wielding a gun [that] they’re ready to use against the American people."

Over 6,000 people joined you in petitioning Beck’s sponsors last week. Now, we need to send a message to Fox’s remaining advertisers: Put your money where your mouth is.

The Ad Council is one of several dozen brands that has recently advertised on The Glenn Beck Show. In fact, on Wednesday they ran a PSA on behalf of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s campaign for child seat safety.

Will you call The Ad Council at 212-984-1923 and ask them to stop supporting Glenn Beck’s brand of hate? (You’ll be connected with the Manager of Corporate Communications). Report how the call went:  http://action.seiu.org/page/s/stopbeckads4

In  Solidarity,

Michelle Ringuette
SEIU

In the letter, they mention that “6000 people” joined their effort get advertisers to drop Glenn Beck.  Wow – 6000.  So, should companies, like the Ad Council, listen to the millions that watch Beck’s show or to the 6000 that do not?

These folks are small in number but can be effective unless conservatives respond.  We must let these same advertisers know that they’ll lose millions of customers if they cave to the hard left.

PLEASE CALL THE AD COUNCIL and let them know you support Glenn Beck and you oppose SEIU’s attempt to shut down free speech in America.

as put a catch in our breath

and wings on our hearts;

we praise you for this joy

too great for words.

For this world unleashed in us, and us in it,

with no dead ends to growing;

for this resurrection wonder,

which is wiser than we are

and in which we see

how great you are,

how full of grace.

Alleluia!

Believe it or not, that video has had over 2.5 million views. Like Reagan, Bush, Cheney and other conservative leaders, Palin is attacked constantly and the comments left at this video were no exception:

• "This woman is as dumb as they come and an embarrassment to the United States presidency."
• "beauty doesn’t count if ur dumb as a rock"
• "Recent MRI images show in fact that sarah palin is the 2nd person in history to succeed in politics with a brain the size of a mouse. The first was of course former president GWB".

You get the idea? Occasionally, I like to weigh in to offer some balance and defend one of my political heroes. Here’s two of my responses:

1 – "So, just so I understand…Obama tells his supporters he’ll pull ‘all Iraq troops out by March, 2009′ and close Gitmo ‘by end of 2009 – you believed him but…Palin’s dumb as a rock?

Obama says ‘you’ll have 5 days to read a bill before I sign it’, ‘My church is like every other Christian church’ and that massive deficit spending will keep unemployment below 8% – you believed him but…Palin’s an idiot?

You may not agree with her, but at least she wasn’t dumb enough to believe Obama."

2 – "I urge my friends on the left to think this through just a little bit.
Palin went through this embarrassment of competing in a swimsuit competition so she could pay her own way through college – rather than suck off the Federal teat like most of us.

It’s noble.

She doesn’t just talk about self-reliance, she pays her own way. She doesn’t just make speeches about choosing life, she chose life even when she knew the child had down-syndrome.

She walks the walk.  Who else does that?

Long ago, I gave up trying to change the hearts, or minds, of those on the left – most are too far gone.  That’s OK because, with over 40% of the country (120 million people) self-identified as “conservative” we’ll be fine just turning out the vote.  120 million people, voting together, can get anyone elected at anytime.  But, while I’m hunting for elephants, it’s fun to stop every once in a while and make fun of the lost donkeys. 

Author Andrew M. Allison, in Part I of The Real Thomas Jefferson, says some  contemporaneous critics of The Declaration of Independence claimed it’s ideas were borrowed from other writers.  Thomas Jefferson readily admits this and explained that:

"The object of the Declaration of Independence was not to find out new principles or new arguments never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before; but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we [were] compelled to take.

Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular or previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give to that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion."

Likewise, I do not see it as my charge, nor within my ability, to put forward ideas not already described somewhere else in human history, but to attempt to describe the "common sense of the subject" and to provide "an expression of the American mind" regarding the challenges facing 21st century America.

Please let know your thoughts on my thoughts. I hope to spawn debate, not end it, to engage my readers and to help advance our founder’s ideals.

Congress Voting Independence – Robert Edge Pine

Here’s the campaign and letter:

“Add your name asking Glenn Beck’s advertisers to stop sponsoring hate.

Sign your name and leave a comment for Glenn Beck’s remaining advertisers letting them know that as long as they support his show, they are inextricably linked to the threatening calls, racist taunts and dangerous behavior being displayed by "Tea Party" Republicans across the country.

We’ll be sure to deliver the following letter to Beck’s sponsors

To President/CEO & Board:

I want to alert you to the fact that Glenn Beck – whose show you sponsor on FOX – is using his platform to make outlandish accusations about the President and Democrats and to advance baseless theories that prey on race-based fears.

His kind of rhetoric can instigate unbalanced individuals into committing rash and violent acts. 

I presume your company does not want to enable such rhetoric, nor have your products or services associated with the kind of views and tactics espoused by Beck. I urge you to immediately cease all advertising on the Glenn Beck Program on the FOX News Channel.”

Like many other “personal lobbying” tools, it provides a form to add your name (I use one of our founders), email (I use one they can’t trace) and additional content in a comments box – here’s what I wrote in mine: 

This is the ‘Astroturf’ Speaker Pelosi warned about – from the left! Please ignore these pleas from the Progressive fascists from SEIU. 

"First of all, the charges are baseless. There’s nothing ‘race-based’ about fearing, for the first time in history, America’s loss of a AAA credit rating because the President and Congressional Democrats are bankrupting U.S. and leaving our children a debt they cannot repay simply to help their union buddies ride out Obama’s economic storm. 

Second, only 14% of US is a member of unions like SEIU. Even if their membership agreed with their leadership’s Progressive agenda (most don’t), a 14% membership means that for every union member who stops watching Glenn Beck, 7 non-union members will watch Glenn Beck, and buy your products, because of his pro-freedom, Common Sense, anti-Progressive message. 

Please keep supporting Glenn Beck and 86% of Americans will support your company."

If handled properly, campaign’s like this one, with the stated intention of shutting down Glenn Beck’s free speech, can have the opposite effect.  Some companies may get SEIU letters and cave to union pressure.  Some may take a fresh look at how unpopular unions are and shift more dollars to popular shows like Glenn Beck because it makes financial sense.  But I hope many CEOs and VPs of Marketing are like many other Americans – they’re patriotic, they value free speech, they resent SEIU’s manipulative tactics and campaigns like this will only strengthen their resolve to support others who value freedom.

Given that background, the world was anxious to see what would happen when the Prime Minister of Israel, one of our strongest allies, visited the White House on Tuesday.  How would Obama react to the visit?  The Times of London, aka TimesOnline, described it this way:

Binyamin Netanyahu humiliated after Barack Obama ‘dumped him for dinner’

The story is another great example of how English news media can often be the best, sometimes only, source of information about what’s happening here, in America.  Despite nothing in the article being about England, it’s listed as the Most Read and Most Commented on article at the Times.  But we digress…onto the shocking substance of the article.

According to the article, Mr. Netanyahu, “received the treatment reserved for the President of Equatorial Guinea”:

“For a head of government to visit the White House and not pose for photographers is rare. For a key ally to be left to his own devices while the President withdraws to have dinner in private was, until this week, unheard of. Yet that is how Binyamin Netanyahu was treated by President Obama on Tuesday night, according to Israeli reports on a trip viewed in Jerusalem as a humiliation.”

Apparently, Obama told the Netanyahu that he was to have dinner with his family and simply walked out of the room:

“Mr Obama then suggested that Mr Netanyahu and his staff stay at the White House to consider his proposals so that if he changed his mind he could inform the President right away. “I’m still around,” the daily newspaper Yediot Aharonot quoted Mr Obama as saying. “Let me know if there is anything new.””

The President had soured relations with the Israeli delegation so much that,

“by the end of the evening, the Israelis decided that they could not trust the telephone line they had been lent for their consultations.  Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, his Defence Minister, went to the Israeli Embassy to ensure that the Americans were not listening in.”

This from a President that is willing to sit down with leaders of Iran, North Korea, Sudan, etc..  anyone really, except our closest allies – for them, he gets up and leaves.  Remember how calm and supportive Obama was when Iran cracked down on freedom fighters?  Contrast that with how angry Obama was at Netanyahu.  In fact, Rush Limbaugh today suggested a way forward for Israel, a way to get respect  and support:  Israel should change name to Iran.

He will bow to Sheiks in Saudi Arabia but he snubs Israel?  Perhaps the bowing and the snubbing are related?  Does Obama want to send a message to Arabs that America will no longer stand by Israel?  Even if unintentional, that is an extremely dangerous message to send when Iran is on the verge of obtaining the nuclear weapons necessary for their oft-stated goal of “wiping Israel off the map”.

So, where does all this leave U.S. supporters of Israel, many of them Jewish Americans, who, statistically, support Democrats at the ballot box.  Shouldn’t this be the last straw?  What’s worse than humiliating the leader of Israel when they’re most vulnerable to a second holocaust?  Surely, many of my Jewish friends who supported Obama, and the Democrats for 30 years, agree that it’s time to rethink support for politicians that snub Israel but bow to her enemies.

The only hope for real change, in US foreign policy, is to replace Obama in 2012 & his Democrat allies in 2010. 

Don’t just hope for change, vote for it.

Ten years before, on May 29, 1765, Jefferson heard Patrick Henry speak out against the Stamp Act.  Jefferson was studying law @ William & Mary and often stopped at the Virginia House of Burgesses to listen to the debate.  Later Jefferson would recall,

“that, as he listened to Henry speak, a flame was kindled in Jefferson’s soul – a flame of liberty and patriotism that would burn brighter and ever brighter until he himself would feel compelled to take up the banner of the great American cause – Jefferson would later refer to this as the most important day of his life.”  from Andrew Allison’s “The Real Thomas Jefferson”

So, Henry may not have gone on to become President but Americans should never forget the man or the speech below.  Although spoken 235 years ago, a quick re-read will remind us these principles are timeless and more relevant than ever.  I included the entire text below, rather than a link, because it’s human nature to assume you know what’s in this speech and move on – don’t!

Stop whatever you were about to do, read it for yourself and tell me you can’t see the parallels between the tyranny of King George then and the tyranny of Progressive Democrats today?

Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death

Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free– if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending–if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained–we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace– but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

As one of the “millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty” otherwise known as the modern tea party movement, I will echo Henry’s call that “we must fight!”  It’s not yet necessary to risk death for liberty, but that day will come if we become disheartened or complacent.

Right off the bat, I knew this call was different when she told Rush, “I’m tired of all these A-holes!”  She was very determined to say what she wanted to say and I didn’t see anyway that Rush could wrap it up – but he did and it was brilliant.  Please read the entire call to see how Rush ended it. 

Here’s the call:

RUSH: Here’s Nancy in Morris Plains, New Jersey. Welcome
to the EIB Network.  Hello.

CALLER:  Hi, Rush.  I’m really spitting nails.  You’ve got an
irate Italian on your hands here.  Every time I hear that Obama is at 46%, I want to know why half of the people in the United States are this stupid.  Of course my husband the engineer keeps telling me that, you know, they pick the intelligence level at 80, so half of the people are below that.

RUSH: (sighs)

CALLER: But I am sick and tired of listening to these actors and actresses and the Main Street (sic), quote, media pushing this garbage agenda, this "progressive" nonsense.  Unless people listen to Fox, or ABC Radio, they’re fed the same crap.  And most of them do not have either the intelligence or the will to listen to the other side.  What. Can. We. Do?  This is so frustrating.  I’m tired of Tom Hanks. I’m tired of all these A-holes! Excuse me. This frustration level just builds and builds.  My husband has worked since he was 15 years old. We’re almost ready to retire. Our money is gone from our 401(k). He went to college 12 years. Now, we grew up in Newark, no one gave us a penny, and I have to listen to this idiot talking about "sharing the wealth"?  I just cannot stand it anymore.  I have had it, and it is so frustrating.  I argue with people in the post office, in the grocery store.  My husband’s afraid he’s going to have to bail me out someday.  What can we do?  We have calls, we have e-mails, we have written letters. They’re not listening to us.  They are trying to ruin this country.  My father came here in Ellis Island and built a business when he couldn’t even talk English.  What can we do besides calling?  They’re ignoring us.  You can hear the frustration in my voice.

RUSH:  I hear it, and it is being echoed from coast to coast.

CALLER:  But they’re not listening!

RUSH: Yeah. Wait, no —

CALLER: They don’t care what we say!

RUSH:  It’s not that they’re ignoring us, Nancy. It’s that they are looking us in the face and saying, "Screw you."

CALLER:  Absolutely.

RUSH:  They’re not ignoring us.  They are insulting us. They are telling us that we don’t count. They are telling us, "Whatever the hell you want doesn’t matter.  They look at us with contempt."  They look at us as an obstacle to overcome.  They are like many totalitarians: The people are the problem.  The people are the obstacle. The Constitution is an obstacle that has to be overcome and they’re using trickery and illegality and lawlessness to get this done if they’re able to Sunday with the Slaughter Solution. You —

CALLER:  But, Rush, 46% of the people in the United States are still approving of the job he’s doing! Where are these idiot 46%?  He should be at 20%.  That’s what they did to Bush —

RUSH:  Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. It took ‘em —

CALLER: — who in my estimation, I wish he was back.

RUSH:  Wait a second, now.  Bush was nowhere near these numbers at this point in his presidency.  He was still in the sixties.  It took —

CALLER:  Oh, I know, but at the end —

RUSH:  Wait a second, now! Wait. It took them five years to get Bush into the thirties.  At this rate we’ll have Obama in the thirties by August.

CALLER:  He should be in the twenties now.  Don’t they see?

RUSH:  Well, "should be" and "will be" are two different things, and you have to understand: It’s still honeymoon time for a lot of people.  He’s the president.  There are some people who are just going to say they like the job he’s doing because they’re afraid to tell a pollster anything other than that because he’s black.  They don’t want a pollster to think they’re racist.  There’s all kinds of stuff that factors into this.  What you have to understand is that you are in the vast majority of people in this country.  You are as frustrated, and you have as many millions and millions of Americans who are as frustrated as you, who are asking: "Who the hell is Tom Hanks and why do we care?" and, "Who the hell is actress A, B, C, and D? Why do we care?" and, "Who is Chris Matthews and why do we care whoever is?"

CALLER: But they have a platform.

RUSH: Why do we care?  

CALLER: They have a platform.

RUSH: Well, we don’t care.  The Cartoon Network has a larger audience than MSNBC and CNN combined!  People aren’t watching them, Nancy.  We are winning this except our obstacle is we have a bunch of statist, tyranny-devoted totalitarians that we’re fighting here, who don’t care about the democratic process or that this is a representative republic.

CALLER:  They have a soapbox, and so does… You know (TV channels) two, four, five, seven, they got him elected. They are the ones. Those idiots on Saturday Night Live that made fun of Sarah Palin. Every time somebody says to me, "Sarah Palin is an airhead. She’s stupid," I say, "Tell me one stupid thing she said."

RUSH: (groans).

CALLER: They can’t say anything. They watched Saturday Night Live and Tina Fey. They listened to Tina Fey and equated that with Sarah Palin.  Nobody can tell me one stupid thing she said, and I say to them, "You’re telling me she can’t do a better job than Obama is doing?" I mean, I look at people and say, "Tell me what stupid thing she said."  On the economy, why aren’t we drilling for oil?  Do you know how much money we could save if we drilled for oil in Alaska?  All that money we wouldn’t have to pay Saudi Arabia

RUSH:  All right.  All right, all right.  Why don’t you try to answer just one of these questions for me? Why —

CALLER:  I know why.  It’s all political.  Why did he send $2.2 billion to Brazil and let them drill to oil?  It’s because George Soros gave money to his campaign and he owes money.

RUSH: All right.

CALLER:  Oh, I know what’s going on but you can’t talk people into it.  I’m arguing in the post office and some idiot kid says to me "Halliburton." I said, "If I hear that name one more time…"  I’m just I have almost gone to jail. I tell my nephew, who’s a police officer, "Tom, get ready to bail me out," because I’m standing in the post office, and I said something, and then some idiot turns around and says, "Oh, Halliburton."  I said, "Oh, PUH-leez with the Halliburton! Let it go."  I said, "Do you know that Obama’s sent $2.2 billion to Brazil to drill for oil off the coast of Brazil because his friend George Soros owns a company?"

RUSH:  Yeah, but why?

CALLER:  Most people don’t know that.  They have buzzwords.

RUSH:  Why?  I want you to dig deep.

CALLER: Because the media isn’t reporting it.

RUSH: No, no, no, no, no.  

CALLER: None of the stations is honest.

RUSH: Why? No, no, no, no.  No, no.  Why is Obama doing all these destructive things?  Why?

CALLER:  Because he wants to ruin the country.

RUSH:  Okay!

CALLER:  He wants to bring us down. He wants a world economy because he’s a communist. I’m sorry, but he’s a communist.

RUSH: What’s your favorite pasta dish?

CALLER:  Umm, I guess I like manicotti best.  Any time you’re in New Jersey, give me a call. I’ll make you a nice Italian dinner.

RUSH:  Thank you, Nancy. I appreciate your call.

CALLER:  I make it homemade!

RUSH: (laughs) I can’t wait.  I’d love that.  Thanks so much.

Amazing.  How on earth did Rush come up with that question in the middle of the caller’s rant?  In written form, instead of the audio, it may be hard to sense her anger, or the pace of the call, but Nancy was on a roll when Rush asked her that question and, without skipping a beat, Nancy answered the question and graciously invited Rush to dinner.

After the Massachusetts miracle election of Scott Brown, Democrats could have scrapped the bill and started over with something bi-partisan or focused on jobs.  Instead, recognizing their chance to force U.S. to take a giant step left would be gone by November anyway, they doubled-down on healthcare by attempting unconstitutional procedures like “deem and pass”. 

So, this week, and this weekend, in particular, would be critical in stopping this madness and preserving not just the best health care system in the world, but our liberty itself.  If Democrats won the healthcare vote, using corrupt tactics for a corrupt bill, what’s to stop them from doing that for other progressive priorities that country rejects like amnesty for illegals, cap and tx based on junk science, etc….  This had to be stopped and today was the day.

Fox News says “Democrats have the votes” (DHTV)

I first heard this yesterday when Neil Cavuto was covering the capital on a Saturday.  He must have said it three or four times in one way or another.  I was stunned.  I had been watching the whip count carefully and, as of 11:54, the Hill reported that 215 were likely against – just one short of 216 needed to stop the bill – and 24 Democrats were undecided.  Likewise, NRCC Code Red reported 209 NO votes – just 7 short of the 216 needed to stop, with 14 undecided Dems.  So where was Fox getting it’s information.  If anyone knew the hill, it was the Hill.

In researching this further, I came across an at RedState called, “Fox News and their “vote count”.    In that article, Dan Perrin wrote that the Washington Post was reporting that Dems were “feverishly” rounding up votes.  Why, if, as Fox News reported, that DHTV.  Mr. Perrin also pointed out that firedoglake also reported the Dems were short.  No one was willing to say on the record what Fox News had been asserting – that the Dems were one or two votes away and then, on Saturday that DHTV.  It seemed suspiciously like what the Obama White House would want Fox News to say.

Was Fox News being used by the WH to create false momentum on the nation’s most-watched cable news station?

The next morning, on Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace contradicted Cavuto, “After a year of debate, the outcome is still not certain”.   A few moments later, FNC’s White House correspondent Major Garrett said, “As Carl Cameron said (he didn’t) DHTV!

What???  So one part of Fox News (Wallace) says it up in the air and another (Cavuto and Cameron) says DHTV.  These are two completely opposite facts.  One says we don’t know, the other is we do know and DHTV.  Why the discrepancy??

Surely Fox News understood the importance of the whip count for one of the most important votes in 50 years?? 

Surely, they understood that they needed to be careful not to simply regurgitate the White House line that DHTV – would make FNC a party to creating false momentum to pass the worst pieces of legislation in our lifetime? So, either Fox is a lot more incompetent than we thought or…there are Obama-Progressive supporters at Fox that seemed to be in charge last weekend.

Later in the show, Wallace spoke with Rep Wasserman-Schulz (D-FL) and Paul Ryan (R-WI):

Rep Schultz, the Democratic Whip, was asked if Democrats had the votes and she said, “Yes, I think we will.  Between the members who’ve already committed and the ones we’ve talked to, we will have 216.”  Aha!  So, even the Democrats own whip acknowledges she doesn’t have 216 at the time.  So, how could Fox report they had the votes yesterday?  They can’t, not unless they’re being misled or they’re misleading people.

But it gets better.  Wallace reminded Schultz that, prior to airtime, she had told Wallace the whip count was “in flux”.

“Whip counts are always in flux.  We don’t have a hard 216 right now…I don’t know which 216 will vote for the bill”  Rep Paul Ryan had a big smile on his face.

WHAT!  Why has the President, Pelosi, Hoyer, Cavuto & Carl Cameron been saying “Democrats have the votes” when their own whip says it’s not a “hard 216” and she doesn’t know “which 216 will vote for the bill”?  Tip for Carl Cameron – if a whip doesn’t know which lawmakers are voting for a bill, they don’t know if it will pass. So, clearly Democrats did not have the votes.

[Note:  Later, the bill would pass with just 3 votes despite Stupak group signing on after Schultz’s appearance on FNS.  That means, as of airtime for FNS, the Dems were far short of the 216 needed in direct contradiction to what Cavuto and Cameron were saying]

Then Wallace turns to Rep Ryan and asks him, “Do Democrats have the votes and if so, what would Republicans do today”.

Rep Ryan answers, as usual for him, directly and honestly, “She’s right that it’s in flux and they’ve been saying  they’ve had the votes all week when we knew they haven’t had the votes…what we Republicans do is move on from there and fix the damage that we believe will be done to the health care system.”

Later,  around 11AM EST, Carl Cameron was asked by a Fox News host if DHTV?.  Cameron indicated that it appears the “GOP thinks so” because “earlier on Fox News, Paul Ryan tells us their looking beyond the vote” and then they played a clip of the above interview but edited very carefully to exclude the part where Wallace asks Ryan to presume (Wallace’s presumption not Ryan’s) that “If Dems pass the bill", what would the GOP do”.  They also edited out the part where Ryan says they absolutely don’t have the votes.

So for Carl Cameron to leave you with an impression that a) Dems have the votes and b) the GOP thinks so too, was AN OUTRIGHT LIE.  To also edit the a raw clip of the above FNS interview so that it fits Carl’s narrative is JOURNALISTIC FRAUD!

This isn’t the first time Carl Cameron and his producer have tried stunts like this.

After the McCain loss to Obama, Carl & his Fox News producer filed a report with Shep Smith smearing Sarah Palin.  I wrote a blog at the time called, “Little Man Smears Palin.  Afterword, we didn’t see much of Carl – I think Fox News heard millions of Palin fans, like myself, who thought that was incredibly bad taste and poor journalism.

Worse yet, during the 2007 Florida GOP primary, Fox News helped McCain sucker-punched Mitt Romney when McCain alleged Romney supported timetables to withdraw from Iraq, like the Democrats.  To  Florida’s retired military voters, that was a serious charge.  To make that claim just 3 days before the polls closed made it impossible for Romney to refute the claims quickly enough, especially when Fox News, the network most Florida conservatives watch, assisted McCain by skillfully editing Romney’s comments on the subject to fit a narrative – sound familiar?  Again, at the time, I wrote a blog on the subject entitled “Fox News Enabled McCain’s Political Hit Job”, posted just after the primary in January 2008.

So, let’s review:  Obama learned from Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals that if you don’t have the numbers, make it look like you do, so you create false momentum.  On healthcare, with the public against the bill 49% to 40% in favor, and not nearly enough votes to pass the Senate Bill in the House, Obama and Pelosi push ahead anyway, even willing to violate their oath to defend the Constitution – anything to get the bill passed (By the way, another Alinsky axiom is the ethics of something is directly related to it’s effectiveness so, violating an oath, violating the Constitution, not a problem if it’s allows you to be effective getting what you want.).

So, Obama and Pelosi need to create a false momentum – to make it appear they have the numbers so wimpy wavering Democratic members might commit to supporting the bill, if it seems like it can’t be stopped anyway.  It’s one thing to stop a bill to save your hide in November.  It’s entirely different to vote no only to have the bill go through anyway – then you’re all alone.  The voters are angry it passed and Obama & Pelosi are made at you for voting no.

So, what better way to create false momentum than  to get the “most trusted network” to start repeating the mantra that “Democrats have the votes” (DHTV) – it’s perfect.  No one would pay much attention to MSNBC talking heads claiming DHTV – they lie all the time to cover Dem backsides.  But to get Neil Cavuto to claim DHTV just before the tea party rally – what a great way to discourage the GOP and convince potential Dem NO votes, nervously watching the tea party rallies on TV, that it’s all been decided.

Even better to get Chris Wallace to feature reports from Carl Cameron – who is supposed to balance Major Garret (in the pocket for Obama White House) – that, say it with me Democrats have the votes.  Later, Carl repeats the claim and adds the extra kicker that the GOP thinks so to and is already looking beyond Obamacare’s passage.

The sad fact is Democrats did not have the votes and all the false momentum created by Cavuto & Cameron and others, may have swayed a few Congressmen to commit to Queen Pelosi.  As many as 30 Democrats were undecided as of Saturday morning and 15 undecided on Sunday.  If the the false momentum created by some at Fox News swayed more than 3 members of Congressman – Fox News has blood on it’s hands.

In any event, principled conservatives can’t trust Fox News.  Not until they get rid of a chain of progressives working there that push their agenda through their reporting.   I’m not saying boycott Fox News – they get a lot of things right.  I’m saying they can’t be trusted, so, on the big things, we must confirm their reporting with other credible sources.

Then Paul Ryan (R-WI-1st District) spoke: 
 

Wow!  This guy totally gets it.  Some GOP try to appeal to tea party folk by saying the words they think we want to hear.  However, this speech was obviously from the heart. 

Sarah Palin, one of a handful of principled conservative leaders, once said she was going to use 2010 to help elect other principled conservatives who “get it”.  Paul Ryan is one of those guys!  The whole speech was fantastic, but here’s some quotes that stood out for me:

“America is an idea…it is the most pro-human idea ever designed by mankind"

“Our founders got it right, when they wrote in the Declaration of Independence, that our rights come from nature and nature’s God – not from government!”

“Do we believe that the goal of government is to provide equal opportunity to make the most of their lives – or do we now believe government’s role is to equalize the results of people’s lives?”

“We are fast approaching a tipping point where more Americans depend upon the federal government than upon themselves for their livelihood.”

“This is not who we are, it is not who we should become”

"The quest to reclaim the American idea is not over. The fight to re-apply our founding principles is not finished"

Here, here!

Please get to know this patriot!  Like many of us, I’m just starting to learn more about Paul Ryan.  Despite his prominent role in the GOP congressional leadership, his facebook page only has 17,338 fans, as of 11:10 EST on 3/22.  

Please join me by becoming a fan @http://www.facebook.com/reppaulryan.

In addition, you can also learn about, interact with and support Paul Ryan @ these sites:

• Twitter @ http://twitter.com/reppaulryan.
• US House @ http://www.house.gov/ryan/
• YouTube @ http://www.youtube.com/user/RepPaulRyan
• Wikipedia @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Ryan_(politician)

Although he is a great leader, he cannot save this great nation.  Only “We The People” can save this great nation, but in the fight to “re-apply our founding principles” it helps to be inspired by statesmen like Paul Ryan.

I’m going to try to take all that outrage I felt last night, put it away somewhere and bring it out whenever I start to feel complacent between now and November 2, 2010.  If remembering the outrage doesn’t work, listening to one of Paul Ryan’s speeches should do the trick.

As always, please let me know your thoughts, on my thoughts…