Tuesday, November 10, 2015

By Nancy Thorner and Bonnie O’Neil – 


We all should be concerned, actually outraged, about a secret deal reported to have been made between former House Speaker Boehner and President Obama. Recently,an executive with Eagle Forum met with his organization’s state leaders, a dozen members of the House and a Senator. Each Congress member complained about the deal and expressed their outrage.

`Their complaints centered around the procedure and a lack of information, among which were the following complaints:

  • “It (the deal)  just came out and no one really knows what’s in it.”
  • “Republican leadership wants it passed, but how can we vote on this massive deal if we haven’t even read it?”

The manner in which Congress members described the budget bill’s secret deal was not unlike what Nancy Pelosi told Congress March 9, 2010 about Obamacare:  “But you have to pass the Obamacare bill to find out what’s in it . . . .”   That caused many Republicans to be furious, but who ever thought the Republican leadership would allow Obama to persuade them to enact the same type of back room type deal?

It was obvious that John Boehner was asking Republicans to vote for a budget bill they did not yet understand and that would give President Obama unlimited authority to raise the debt. Is it any wonder why congressmen were infuriated?  The U.S. national debt jumped $339 billion on Monday, November 2, 2015, the same day President Obama signed into law the two-year budget legislation suspending the debt ceiling which allows the government to borrow as much as it wants above the $18.1 trillion debt ceiling that had been in place.

Dave Walker, who headed the Government Accountability Office (GAO) under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, said that when you add up all of the nation’s unfunded liabilities, the national debt is more than three times the number generally advertised or about $65 trillion!

After further meetings with officials, it finally occurred to the Eagle Forum president what was about to happen. The House was preparing to execute another deception to the American people:  the old bait-and-switch vote.  Just after 3 p.m. EST Wednesday, Oct. 28, there was a vote on the floor of the House with all but 29 of the Republicans in the House voting to advance the “Rule” for the Boehner-Obama secret budget deal.

By passing this “rule,” Republicans who had not read the bill or even likely understood its details were putting Boehner, Pelosi and Obama in charge of our future.  If the Republicans had voted against this “rule,” there would have been no vote on the budget deal. However, just after 5 p.m. the House voted on the Boehner-Obama secret budget bill BEFORE voting against it. This enabled congressmen to go home and tell their constituents that they voted against a very bad bill.  But in reality they didn’t vote against the Boehner-Obama budget deal until after they voted for it.  This is not what constituents expect from their leaders.

The 1st vote of House members to move the Boehner-Obama Budget Deal was at 3:33 pm, Wed. Oct. 28th. You can learn how your member voted here:  Unfortunately, not one U.S. Illinois congressman voted to stop the bill!

The 2nd vote of the House to move the Boehner-Obama Budget Deal occurred at 5:21 pm, Wed. Oct. 28th.   Now, 167 Republicans voted to stop it, but it was too late!  You can find how your member voted here: 

This is the oldest political game in the book — token voting and token opposition. This is not the first time the Republicans in power used tactics that allowed Democrats to pass controversial bills. There is a growing number of people who now suspect many Republicans who claimed they were against Obamacare actually wanted it, which is why they supported Romney as their choice for the Republican presidential ticket. His health care insurance law known as Romneycare, which passed in MA in 2006, was their primary reason.

It is also suspected that specific Republicans allowed Al Franken to steal the 2008 election from Norm Coleman. Facts indicated fraud, but Republicans did little to demand further scrutiny and/or evidence of the fraud, thus their lack of demands allowed Franken to become the vote needed to get a filibuster proof vote of 60 .

Then Republicans permitted Obamacare to pass on Christmas Eve in 2009 when they could have easily stalled and waited until Scott Brown become the 41st vote to filibuster it.  Ultimately, Republicans, refused to defund Obamacare when a shutdown over Obamacare would have been a political winner.  This is clearly why Republican voters are eyeing non-establishment candidates for 2016; they are weary of their representatives ignoring their requests, using deceptive tactics, and voting with the opposition party on highly controversial legislation.

Other D.C. games that hide the agenda of many Republican leaders

1.  By voting for Paul Ryan to replace House Speaker Boehner, conservatives must now have 218 votes to initiate or object to any bill Ryan does not want.  Since Ryan has advocated open borders, what are the chances of enacting and passing conservative bills with which the speaker disagrees even if a Republican president should be elected?

2. By allowing Democrats to register the bad votes, Republican House moderates are spared the blame when unpopular bills are passed.  There should be a caucus rule that no bill reaches to the floor that doesn’t have majority Republican support. Any such bill, except with a discharge petition, would mean an automatic revote for a new Republican House Speaker by the Republican caucus.

3. By allowing one rule for Democrats but another rule for Republicans, Democrats were allowed to suspend the filibuster under Reid to get Obama’s bad judges through, but the Republicans didn’t turn the tables and end it under their rule this year. Republicans could force Obama to veto a lot of bad bills. In 2001 Bush’s tax cuts got through the Senate on budget reconciliation rules so Democrats couldn’t filibuster them. Are we going to do the same thing for President Cruz’ or President Trump’s tax plans? Maybe. But what about all the other legislation Democrats could filibuster, including judges and other presidential appointments?

Might Republicans suffer from ‘Stockholm Syndrome’?

This accusation from the Eagle Forum president is not lost on many frustrated conservatives:

“It is always a surprise when men and women of good will are dishonest.   We conservatives believe the truth matters and that men and women of good will are abiders of the truth. To be candid, I am not sure whether the lies we are being told are malicious or if the Republicans are in the throes of ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ and believe that what they are doing is somehow justified. But I am not sure it matters: America is on the brink and our congress is lying to us.”

The budget deal hammered out by Boehner with his fellow leaders in Congress and the White House, enraged the very members of his conference who edged Boehner out.  The Obama-Boehner deal would increase the $18.1 trillion debt limit by at least $1.5 trillion and add $80 billion in spending. Although the Boehner deal has been called his “parting gift”, whose gift is it?  While Paul Ryan blasted Boehner over the budget deal, the fact is, Ryan did vote for it.

For many, the 2016 election represents this nation’s last chance to right itself from the path it is has been traveling towards Socialism, a political system that has never succeeded wherever or wherever it has been enacted. This nation desperately needs a president who will wrest control from the establishment of both parties.  We need an entirely new Congress that will work with a conservative president and not use the parliamentary games described above to stop him.

Conservatives have the tools to fight back!

We applaud Kyle McCarter for taking on a “Republican” congressman (John Shimkus of the 15th Congressional District) who has been cynically playing the Washington game to fool his constituents.  Hopefully there will be others who will step forward to take on the rest of Illinois’ “Republican” delegation.

But even if no one steps forward, there is a good possibility of a third party springing up in the fall to register voter disgust.  Dissatisfied Illinois voters can safely vote third party without being accused of “electing a worse Democrat”, in light of U. S. Illinois congressmen like Peter Roskam (67.22%); Randy Hultgrin (65.6%); John Shimkus (75%); and Adam Kinzinger (70.7%) who won by large margins of voters in 2014.

It’s really not a mystery why this nation is failing and patriots are concerned.  Not only are some Republicans not adhering to their campaign promises, but Conservatives won’t use the tools they have to fight back.  If we don’t start now, it won’t be long before we will all be like Kim David, in jail because of the actions of liberal judges and bureaucrats flush with power and an unprecedented audacity never before seen in America until now.

It is time for all good men to come to the aid of their party.  Those of us who loved the America we once knew must not allow socialism to seep into the fabric that allowed us to become the greatest nation in the World.  Elections have consequences; make your vote an educated one and elect a strong, honest patriot who will not be influenced by anything other than what is best for America.

Saturday, November 29, 2014


By Nancy Thorner – 

On November 20 President Obama acted with unprecedented executive powers to grant legal status and new protections to as many as 5 million illegal immigrants. Obama arrogantly ignored the contents of a letter dated the day before – issued following a Justice Department investigation — that he lacked the authority to act via an executive order regarding illegal immigrants.

Obama sold his executive overreach by claiming that his executive amnesty was not “amnesty” but actually “accountability” for illegal immigrants. Obama’s argument was that because Congress hasn’t passed legislation giving amnesty to illegal immigrants, he has no choice but to ram it through on his own. Granted to at least four million currently illegal immigrants are work permits, Social Security numbers and protection from deportation.

This flouting of the law and of the Constitution, which designates three branches of government to act as checks and balances, will only encourage yet another wave of illegal immigration, worsening rather than doing anything to address the problem. President Obama has procedural discretion, but his expansive action exceeds his authority in ways that none of his predecessors ever envisioned.

Then too, how does Obama explain that twenty two time prior to his executive amnesty he publicly stated that it would be unconstitutionally impossible to do so, for as he said in one instance, “I’m president.  I’m not king.”

It was while speaking in Chicago to promote his executive amnesty that President Obama admitted that the action he took was to change the law.  It was in response to a confrontation with hecklers protesting the deportation of families.

While it might seem the compassionate thing to do to offer legal status in America to millions of illegal immigrants, what about the millions of people already in this nation mired in dire poverty?  According to a Rasmussen poll of Nov. 24, 62% of Americans oppose Obama’s plan to give millions of illegal immigrants a temporary amnesty.

Regarding fairness, what about the millions of people who have immigrated here legally as well as those who have been waiting in the queue for years to be admitted? 1.4 immigrants are admitted legally every year.  Doesn’t fairness demand that amnesty should not be given to those who have jumped illegally ahead of them in line?

Regarding the net cost — which is total benefits minus total benefits paid in – the cost of the Obama’s amnesty recipients is estimated to be around $2 trillion over the course of their lifetime. Three dollars of benefits are received for every dollar they put in. This would not be a problem if we had plenty of money, but with our national debt approaching $18 trillion, paying it back at a rate of $1 billion per day would take nearly 50 years! 

But by far the most important reason to object to Obama’s executive order with its far reaching implications is because Obama’s move has set up a historic shift in power towards the office of the executive. Throughout history unchecked power has led to the rise of tyrants and despots.

Although the House Appropriations Committee said Thursday, Nov. 20, that it would be impossible to defund President Obama’s executive actions on immigration through a government spending bill, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) told Breitbart that a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service contends that Rep. Hal Rogers, Rep. Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, is incorrect in his assumption. The CRS indicated that Congress can deny funds to the immigration enforcement agency despite the fact that it operates primarily on revenues collected through the imposition of fees.

The American people are not stupid.  Speaker John Boehner’s and company must be told in no uncertain terms to use the Constitutional power of the purse granted to the House to stop Obama’s dictatorial amnesty decree when returning to work after their Thanksgiving break.

Minimum Wage Fuels Poverty

February 26, 2014

By:  Nancy Thorner and Bonnie O’Neil

Minimum wage has become a contentious political issue, even though it has little to do with a living wage.  Workers’ salaries are decided by employers whose decisions are based upon the worth that employee and job is to the company.  A business must be run to make a profit, for the sake of every employee and owner whose lives are dependent upon that viability.  An overreaching federal government’s tampering with private enterprise can do more overall harm than good.

Nevertheless, Democrats plan to tap into what they see as one more opportunity to use class warfare as a political tool.  Inserting buzz words such as “inequality” and “social justice” and using minimum wage as a plank in their populist economic platform is one more easy way to gain votes in the November election.

President Obama and Democrat candidates hope their rhetoric will resonate and that the public will not discover a prevailing fact that should make a difference in the minds of the majority. According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (the “government’s own bean counter) Obamacare will result in the loss of two-to two-and-a-half million jobs in the years ahead, and another CBO report notes President Obama’s proposed minimum wage hike would result in another half-million lost jobs.

The Democratic ploy in their election-year playbook, to hold Republicans hostage to raising the minimum wage, can be blamed on President Bush.  He issued an executive order raising the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour for future federal contractors.

Minimum wage continues to be a priority for President Obama. Recently Obama used his weekly address (Saturday, Feb. 22), to cajole Congress into approving a raise in the federal minimum wage that now stands at $7.25 per house, further noting that “while the economy was beginning to recover from the last recession, wages have barely ticked upwards over the past four years.”

According to ObamaRaising Americans’ wages isn’t just a good deed; it’s good business and good for our economy.  It helps reduce turnover, it boosts productivity, and it gives folks some more money to spend at local businesses.

A day before this weekend’s address of Friday, Feb. 21, President Obama pitched the same message at a meeting with members of the Democratic Governors Association in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, at which Obama admitted that higher pay is not only “good policy, it also happens to be “good politics.” =

Meanwhile, John Boehner, Republican Speaker of the House, believes it’s a job killer.  Boehner once said that he would rather commit suicide than vote for a “clean” increase.

The President is correct in saying that an overwhelming majority of the American people favors minimum wage hikes.  A Quinnipiac poll (January 8th), indicated voters support raising the minimum wage, but are split on the amount.   Despite this apparent support for an increase, half of the voters believe raising the minimum wage would cause businesses to cut jobs.

One cannot help but wonder what could produce this seemingly mixed resultOne explanation is that the American people tend to be compassionate in nature when suffering is perceived, and believe it is not right for a person to work full time and then have to raise their family in poverty.

At the same time there is a dichotomy over concerns expressed for minimum wage workers and what issues Americans care most about.  In a recent Gallop poll conducted on what Americans rate as this country’s biggest problem, raising the minimum wage didn’t make the Top 10.  Unemployment and jobs was rated #1, while Poverty came in at #10.

This all suggest that the Quinnipiac poll might have produced different results had the questions been asked in a different sequence or if those questioned had been privy to facts which dispute any suggested benefits accrued by increasing the minimum wage for low income workers. Certainly most people would prefer some income rather than none, and how can we justify raising the minimum wage if evidence indicates it would increase the jobless rate in America.

Part 2:  FDR and the Minimum Wage; 27 years ago the New York Times got it right; President Johnson’s War on Income Equality and over-the-board raises; and why Minimum Wage hikes make all we buy more expensive.





It was House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-23 District, CA) who left the “cat out of the bag” as to how the House will deal with immigration reform, when according to an interview McCarthy gave to eyewitness News in Bakersfield, CA on Wednesday, January 22, “Republican leaders are calling for the first time to give legal status to millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United States,” signaling that amnesty will be part of the House Republican “piecemeal” immigration strategy. McCarthy’s district just happens to include a huge Hispanic population. Hispanics now equal the number of whites in California.

A clue to what John Boehner really had in mind was when in December of last year Boehner hired an adviser who had helped Sen. John McCain push comprehensive immigration, Rebecca Tallent, a well-known expert in the field of immigration.

What is the piecemeal deal now being considered by top House Republicans? It is a set of principles and standard by which the GOP can proceed on the path to full-scale reform. At an upcoming House Republican Conference annual retreat beginning on January 29th to discuss their legislative agenda, immigration reform will undoubtedly be front and center in the lead up to the endorsement of piecemeal immigration reform by House Republicans.

The two shiny objects in the Republican piecemeal approach to immigration which seem to glitter with so much promise in the eyes of Republican Party Leadership and many establishment members are twofold, the Dream Act and amnesty for agricultural workers.

1. Dream (or KIDS) Act: The stand-alone House version of this bill has not yet been unveiled, but the Gang of 8’s DREAM plank would legalize between 2-3 million individuals currently in the country illegally. Once legalized, they could then sponsor family member–those abroad and those who are currently in the country illegally–resulting in a “chain migration” that could triple the number of amnesty recipients.

Although this act might initially sound like the compassionate thing as it represents a law for children, but under the Senate bill there is no age requirement in applying for amnesty as long as the child has a high school diploma and was under the age of 16 when they entered unlawfully. Given the president broad use of executive power, he has board discretion to waive various requirements of a bill by giving special exemptions for hardship or public interest.

Consider also that each new citizen would be eligible for a host of mean-tested welfare program as a cost that might well amount to billions each year. The House version might vary, but most likely it will contain the same framework.

2. Agriculture Jobs Amnesty: H.R. 1773 (The “Agricultural Guest Worker Act”) would grant amnesty to all current illegal agricultural workers and welcomes 500,000 new workers each year (permitting the Secretary of Agriculture full discretion to raise the cap to accommodate a number of elusive considerations). Not unlike the DREAM Act, H.R. 1773 creates a new center of gravity from which chain legalization and government subsidies will follow.

Are House establishment Republican about to put hood-winked again by their naivete in believing that any piecemeal approach to immigration would survive once their proposed bills did go to conference with the Senate’s version produced by the Gang of Eight (S. 744).

Remember the recent Ryan/Murray budget proposal and its final conference product.

Consider what Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) had to say on August 7, 2013:

We would prefer a big comprehensive bill but any way the House can get there is okay by us. If they pass individual, smaller bills they will get agglomerated.

Why would President Obama support a piecemeal approach to immigration reform? President Obama. according to The Wall Street Journal, said he would be willing to accept a series of immigration bills instead of a single piece of comprehensive legislation that overhauls immigration policy, so long as the outcome would be the same as the Senate’s Gang of Eight bill.

Statement such as the above should raise the antenna of House Republicans. They have for Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama), who in voting “no” on the Senate bill believes that the Republican-controlled House should be dubious and remain on alert. Sessions’ statement of warning:

It’s not step-by-step if the individual bills are combined into a comprehensive proposal in a backroom negotiation and delivered to the president’s desk.

Instead, the House must insist that enforcement is accomplished before advancing any other immigration bills.

It would be wise for members of Congress when attending their annual retreat on January 29th to vocally oppose any plan to unveil and pass piecemeal immigration bills during this Congress, for in the conformation process such bills could be capitulated and even ignored by President Obama.

Ignoring the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and big Republican donors who are in favor or amnesty and who are pushing the House to rally to their cause is a big order for establishment Republicans to fulfill. Are they really up to the challenge given their propensity to be liked and with policies that are Democrat-lite in nature?

Michell Malkin makes the case why Republican legislators should not be wooed by what is literally a wolf in sheep’s clothing — the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — in her article of January 24, The U.S. Chamber of Commerce vs. America.

When businesses get in the government handout line, it’s not a “public-private partnership.” It’s corporate welfare. Venture socialism. Whatever you call it, it stinks as much under Democrat administrations as it does under Republican ones.

Always beware of Washington business-boosters wearing false free-market facades.

Malkin goes on to explain in her article, among many troubling facts about the U.S. Chamber of Commerce:

1. How the chamber is one of the staunchest promoters of mass illegal immigration, and joined with the AFL-CIO and American Civil Liberties Union to oppose immigration enforcement measures.

2. How the chamber opposed E-verify and sued Arizona over its employer sanctions law.

3. How the chamber supported a pro-ObamaCare, pro-TARP, pro-stimulus, pro-amnesty Democrat in Arizona over his free-market GOP challenger.

The two shiny objects are destined to become tarnished objects to sully the Republican Party brand and cause irreparable damage, if the House Republican Party leadership insists on following through – egged on by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and wealthy Republican donors – with its doomed piecemeal approach to illegal immigration.

Get active and call your Illinois U.S. representative. If Republican, there are six Illinois Republican U.S. congressmen. Tell them not to support the piecemeal amnesty strategy that the Republican establishment hopes to have approved at next week’s Republican House annual retreat.

It’s better to do nothing than to go to conference with the Senate and find that the final outcome would be essentially the same as the Senate’s Gang of Eight bill.

Part 1: Republicans pin their hopes on elusive shiny objects http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2014/01/thorner-republicans-pin-their-hopes-on-elusive-shiny-objects.html#more

Sunday, January 26, 2014 at 04:00 PM | Permalink

It was shortly after the reelection of Barack Obama as President that Majority Leader Eric Cantor came across a poll indicating that had Republicans received 5% more of the Hispanic vote, Mitt Romney would have been the victor. To this day, Cantor regards amnesty as the key to a winning Republican strategy.

It took longer for the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, to similarly view amnesty as a God-send for the Republican Party. Boehner did vow in 2013 that he would never enter into House conference negotiations with the Senate in the aftermath of its passage of the “Gang-of-8” amnesty bill (S.744).

Was Boehner sincere when he vowed not to participate in Senate conference negotiations regarding amnesty? Only Boehner can answer that question. It’s highly unlikely that Boehner’s answer would please those of his Republican base for whom any discussion of immigration reform is contingent upon border security being addressed before and above all else.

It is more than likely that Boehner and those in House leadership positions, persuaded by U.S. Chamber of Commerce president Tom Donohue to push for immigration reform with a path to citizenship, sold out to crony capitalism. For as Donohue said in his recent speech on the state of American business, “We’re determined to make 2014 the year that immigration reform is finally enacted.” The Chamber of Commerce lobby will work with churches, community organizations, law enforcement groups and others to make sure the Republican-led House approves immigration reform.

Last year the U.S Chamber of Commerce spent more than $50 million on their lobbying efforts. The Chamber plans to surpass its $52.7 million lobbying efforts of last year as it ramps up its efforts on amnesty, Common Core, and the destruction of the Tea Party. Most of the Chamber’s money was spent on what Donohue calls the “top legislative priority for the business community”– amnesty for illegal immigrants. Tom Donohue even had the audacity to claim that this nation needs more workers!

As Donohue proclaimed:

“We need to provide a path out of the shadows for the 11 million undocumented immigrants who live in the United States today. As we have this debate, let’s not forget who we are, or what this nation was built upon — the dreams and hard work of those who came here seeking a better life.”

Undocumented usually means illegal. This nation was not build on illegal immigrants who were able to sneak across the borders or who overstayed their visas. At least 11 million have broken the law to be here. Do they now deserve to be placed on a fast track above the 4.4 million individuals already waiting in line, some for years, to become United States citizens? It is neither fair, nor can this nation afford to do so, given that the object of the Chamber in representing the business community is to maintain a supply to cheap labor. Furthermore, granting amnesty would set a precedent that would only encourage others to enter or stay in the U.S.illegally in hope of the same reward of citizenship

There has been an increase in border apprehensions by Border Patrol in FY 2012 and 2013, following six years of decline, which indicates a higher number of attempted illegal border crossings. This has been brought about by the relaxing of the of immigration policy by the Obama administration. The promise of amnesty has likewise spurred the flow of illegals especially over the southern border, for once in the United States there is a good chance that amnesty will be theirs (Out of 420,789 border apprehensions in fiscal 2013, 414,397 of them — or 98.48% — happened along the Southwest border.).

What about Unemployment in Illinois? Illinois ranked 48th in monthly state rankings at 8.7% for November 2013 when seasonally adjusted. Unemployment is actually much higher in Illinois when taking into consideration those individuals who have dropped out of the labor force because they can’t find work. These individuals do not factor into the unemployment rates in any state.

According to Pew’s State and Consumer Initiatives, Illinois’ job market will not improve in 2015. Predicted is that Illinois will rank dead last in the nation with an estimated job growth rate of 0.98%, amounting to a paltry 56,996 jobs added

A question that demands serious consideration here in Illinois is whether immigration reform (amnesty) is going to improve the dismal job situation?

Part two will conveys warnings as to what is afoot in the U.S. House under the leadership of John Boehner, why House legislators must be alerted not to vote for what would amount to a piecemeal approach to immigration reform by the House leadership, and the influence of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its push for amnesty as a politically entrenched synod of special interests which represents big business of the Beltway, not the business of mainstream America.

Saturday, January 25, 2014 at 04:07 PM | Permalink

Technorati Tags: Illinois Review

Thursday, January 16, 2014

Erick Erickson of Red State wrote that “Republicans are laying the groundwork to abandon their opposition to Obamacare,” citing the Business Roundtable, which has a great relationship with Republican leaders, as now listing Obamacare as an entitlement worth preserving?

This is extremely serious. Not only are Republicans now agreeable with immigration reform (code word for amnesty), but now they are ready to sanction the continuation of Obamacare thanks to business groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce who are influencing Republicans in leadership positions. What do Republicans stand for anymore; that is, those in power who call the shots and decide what is best for the American people?

I heard a very disturbing account on Mark Levin’s show (WLS-AM 890) last night (1/15) about the Omnibus bill passed by the House yesterday. Levin indicated that he had received the following information from a very reliable source in the House: After after having received immense pressure from President Obama not to mess with 1) the conscience clause in the Omnibus bill and 2) a new law that would greatly hamper action by Tea Party groups, Republicans caved in and passed the Bill because not to do as Obama had demanded would have shut down the government.

Republicans, in essence, allowed Obama to kick them around like the bully he is! House Republicans were also fine with the sequester being eliminated but left in the provision that denies pensions to veterans, which could amount to a reduction of retirement benefits by 20% over the lifetime of veterans.

Is it any wonder why I am ashamed of Mitch McConnell, Lamar Alexander, Eric Cantor, John Boehner and others in the leadership of the Republican Party? We conservatives are being literally screwed by the Republican leadership who are listening to voices other than the grassroots to decide policy and who are in the process of targeting conservative candidates who dare to challenge them in primary elections.

As crazy as this might sound, it might be time for a third party to rescue this nation from both the Democrat and the Republican parties. Both parties like big government and massive spending which is leading this nation down the path to financial ruin.

Thursday, January 16, 2014 at 10:15 AM | Permalink

Friday, December 27, 2013

Conservatives Fight For Choice, Not An Echo

ThornerBy Nancy Thorner –

Conservative Republicans are often looked upon as irresponsible and right wing nuts until election time rolls around. We are then courted for our votes. In the aftermath we are expected to remain quite and obedient in the background, even though the principles we espouse and hold sacred within us (smaller government, less spending, adherence to social and moral values, liberty, and freedom of choice) are being disregarded and dismantled as our Constitution is likewise being torn and tattered.

Recently Republican House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio brought home how he views conservatives and conservative groups. Boehner roundly conservative criticized groups who had mobilized in opposition to the emerging bipartisan budget bill once news reports surfaced that it would undo sequestration spending levels in the near term. It was Boehner, however, who had broken his pledge made in 2010 by rushing the bill to the floor instead of making a bill available online 72 hours before a vote is held.

Groups roundly criticized by Speaker Boehner for mobilizing against the bi-partisan bill were Heritage Action and Americans for Prosperity. He went on to call these groups “ridiculous.” Both organizations should be heralded rather than vilified for their action.

The groundwork for Heritage Action was laid by Edwin J Feulner, president of the conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation, for 35 years until former senator Jim DeMint was named successor in late 2012, taking over as president on April 3, 2013.  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Feulner

As the sister organization to The Heritage Foundation, Heritage Action’s troops (http://heritageaction.com) engage in politics in the narrow sense by holding legislators accountable for their  votes, while the Heritage Foundation remains dedicated to politics in the larger sense, laying out the big idea and broad themes that must underlie our nation’s policies.

For too long, Washington has advanced a liberal agenda and served the needs of special interests. The nation desperately needs conservative voices, but in Washington even many self-described conservatives advance the ideas of the left.  A new conservative direction is needed. Heritage Action is working toward that goal.

What Boehner finds objectionable about the work of Heritage Action, as do many establishment Republicans in both the U.S. House and Senate, which extends also to their fellow conservative Republican House and Senate members, relates not only to the experienced Heritage Action legislative team that works the halls of Capitol Hill to tell lawmakers and their staffs how to vote to promote conservative principles, but also the activist army of grassroots organizers — now more than 300,000 strong — who get the conservative message to their local representatives and then hold them accountable for how they vote.  There is even a Conservative Scorecard that rates each lawmaker.

Heritage Action’s grassroots army is open to all who wish to join in the fight to take back this nation from those who advocate and are continuing to advance a Socialist agenda.  The task at hand involves engaging legislators in the politics issues of the day, but also trying to convince legislators that there are more compassionate ways of helping the poor; more enlightened ways of protecting the environment; more effective ways of educating our children; healing our sick; and tending to our elderly than to rely on the invisible foot of a distant bureaucracy.  Thorner has been a member of the Heritage Action grassroots army for two years.

Chip Borman is the Upper Midwest Regional Coordinator of Heritage Action which includes the state of Illinois.  If interested in becoming a member of Heritage Action’s grassroots army, contact Mr. Borman at Chip.Borman@heritageaction.com.

Worthy of sharing is the following essay by Chip Borman published on December 19:  Activist Versus Establishment:  Constant Accountability. It explains in no uncertain terms the real “inside/outside” fight that is now underway as conservatives fight those on the “inside.”   http://heritageaction.com/2013/12/activist-versus-establishment-constant-accountability/

This is a fight for the heart and soul of the “right”.  We saw something like this in the 1960’s with the Rockefeller vs Goldwater wings that broke down by Liberal Republican versus Conservative Republican.   Pro-Choice, Anti-war, High Taxes, Big Government.  This is why Reagan said that we needed a “Choice, not an Echo.”

This fight is somewhat different…. I believe that this split in the “movement” is not totally left versus right. This is also between “Inside” and “outside”.   Those Republicans on the “inside” want to get re-elected at all costs and don’t mind spending China’s borrowed money, raising taxes and increasing government’s reach to do it.  The worst part is them telling activists to get out of the way until we are needed at the next election time.   Insiders want to be held accountable only at elections, when the choice is an either/or choice of Republican or Worse.  Inside Republicans know that they will win that choice.  Outside conservatives want to have a voice in their government – and not just at election time.

While the Constitution gives us (at several places) the right to vote, the First Amendment re-affirms our God-given right to “petition for redress of grievances”.  This doesn’t merely mean that we can circulate a petition; it means that we have an innate right to speak our opinions and directly tell our Representatives what we believe.  The right to Express an Opinion.  I can recall a time after the Tea Party victories in 2010 and the mood seemed to darken for the newly minted GOP leadership in the House.  Boehner’s people asked the Tea Party why they had “turned” on them.   The Tea Party response was “What, you thought we’d just go away after November?”

What we see here is Inside Republicans frustrated with the success of those that are demanding a smaller, limited government.  The success of the grass roots in stopping the Farm (food stamp) Bill and our success in bringing the truth of ObamaCare to light has made the insiders nervous.   I believe that if we didn’t express our opinions about the unfair, unworkable and un-American Health Insurance Scheme, most inside Republicans would have been happy to foist that on the American People so long as it didn’t interfere with their next election.   At election time, they counted on an easy re-election because they had taken 39 meaningless votes against an unpopular policy while the Democrat was 100% for it.  No matter the actual damage of the policy – they wanted the political win.

The accuse us of helping the Democrats, as if that’s our only choice: take what they give us or throw them out.  We can speak up, we can score the conservative position, we can tell them (politely) that this is not leading down a path of limited government, we can publish our opinions for all to see, we can be angry, we can be supportive, we can organize and we can write.  In short we can hold them accountable, and not just at election time.  Insiders hate that.   Sure, we always have the choice at election time to vote Dem or to stay home, but this means that they are essentially taking two rights away – the right to speak up and be heard; and the right to vote for a clear choice, not an echo.

Friday, December 27, 2013 at 11:28 AM | Permalink

Technorati Tags: ,

Monday, October 14, 2013

ThornerBy Nancy Thorner –

In his weekly Saturday radio address, President Obama told the American people that the government shutdown needed to end so Congress could work on passing comprehensive immigration reform.

Not knowing any better, I might believe that Obama was only kidding! In tandem Obamacare and comprehensive immigration reform, if passed, would represent financial boondoggles with ramifications and consequences for future generations of Americans that are impossible to fully comprehend, but destructive they will be in so many ways.

But how is the House’s immigration bill stacking up in this political contentious month of October which is fast slipping away?  After more than four years of secretive talks, the bipartisan House committee, although set to release its proposal a few months ago, remains somewhat hesitant that it will be swatted down by House conservatives who want an opportunity to first vote on measures to strengthen border security.  Republican establishment House members have every right to be concerned if conservatives House member are pushed aside and told to back off.

As it now stands the bipartisan House bill is reported to include a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, but one taking at least two years longer and more arduous than the one in the Senate-passed plan. It is quite telling that the bipartisan House proposal has won the praise of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

Might there be good reason why Nancy Pelosi is so enamored with the bipartisan proposal plan?  House Members of the bi-partisan House group on immigration reform include:  Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.); Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL); Rep. Zoe Logren (D-Calif.); John Yamuth (D-Kentucky); and lone Republican, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida.  Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) dropped out in June over a health care dispute, and Texas Republicans Reps. John Carte and Sam Johnson said that they had “reached a tipping point” in the talks and could no longer continue working on a “broad approach to a rewrite of the nation’s immigration laws.

What might we anticipate from Republican House Speaker John Boehner in how he might deal with House establishment members on immigration reform, especially if Boehner is pressured to deal with reform before the end of this month or at least before the year’s end? Will Boehner remain firm on the need for border security before all else, or will he  be influenced by Paul Ryan in the House and Mitch McConnell and others in the Senate who are pushing for what could only be a disaster in the making — comprehensive immigration reform.

During a news conference back in April Speaker Boehner indicated that he would not allow a floor vote on any immigration bill that didn’t have the support of a majority of his Republican majority.  This seemed to rule out the Senate bill.  Also related by Boehner was that the House bill would be “grounded” in a guarantee of increased border security.

Troubling is a recent report revealing that House Chairman Bob Goodlatte, Chairman Paul Ryan, Congressman Luis Gutierrez, and Majority Leader Eric Cantor are working to advance proposals to open citizenship benefits to the majority of those here illegally, in combination with proposals to expand visa programs.

Representatives Goodlatte, Ryan and Cantor aren’t the only Republicans pushing amnesty in the House.  Rep. Steve Southerland of Florida said this about immigration: “We have to address it  It’s a moral issue” while House GOP conference chairwoman, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodger of Washington state thinks immigration should be a top priority for House Republicans this year and that a window exists between now and the end of the year to accomplish it.

USCIS (U.S. Immigration Citizenship and Immigration Services) president, Kenneth Palinkas, ripped the House leaders noted above on Thursday, October 10, for following the same pathway in pushing amnesty that the Senate “Gang of Eight” members did with proposals to legalize the status of America’s at least 22 million illegal immigrants.   Furthermore. Palinkas related how the Obama administration had placed obstacles and roadblocks in front of adjudication officers who were only attempting to protect this nation’s security and the American taxpayer.  Mr. Palinkas, in attempted to document these abuses on more than one occasion with the authors of the Schumer-Rubio-Corker-Hoeven (S.744), was summarily ignored.

In no uncertain terms  Kenneth Palinkas expressed these concerns to Republican House leaders Goodlatte, Ryan, and Cantor:

Why are plans being pursued prior to first reforming the USCIS where wide spread abuse exists, before the USCS is given the responsibility of reviewing the tens of millions of green cards, temporary visas and citizenship applications?

  • Concerning Eric Cantor’s GOP DREAM Act, tentatively called the KIDS act, it could lead to a slippery slope if successfully argued in the future to include extending birthright citizenship to foreign citizens of other countries
  • Most importantly, why were USCIS agents excluded from all discussions about immigration reform with House leaders, as they were from Senate conversations?
  • Words of caution are in order for how the House might be dealing in October with its immigration reform plan.  Concern exists that any proposed groupings of “step-by-step” House immigration proposals may be used as a tool by House establishment leaders to get to a conference committee.  At this point the House measures would be combined with the Senate bill, sent to the president for his signature, leading to the start of illegal immigrants getting amnesty in its aftermath.

Phyllis Schlafly explains these concern in the following way in her August 2013, The Phyllis Schlafly Report, Vol. 74, No. 1:

The Gang of Eight pro-amnesty Senators are trying to con the House of Representatives into passing parts of an anti-American amnesty bill so they can get a Chuck Schumer-dominated conference committee and bamboozle Representatives into going along with their sellout plans.  The few pro-amnesty Republican Senators had Marco Rubio as the salesman for the unpopular amnesty bill, and the few pro-amnesty Republicans in the House have Paul Ryan to play the same un-Republican role. 

In the same report Schlafly enumerates these dangerous and costly provisions in the Senate’s Gang of Eight bill that are impossible to itemize, but they do speak of foolishness if not challenged by Republicans:

1. Rules are loosened for asylum seekers by reducing the application to be an asylum seeker from the current one-year deadline to as many years as the immigrant wants.  It also allows the U.S. Attorney General to pay the asylum seekers’ legal fees. Have we so soon forgotten how those welcomed as asylum seekers turned out to be terrorists?

2. To help the immigrants transition to American life and apply for government benefits, duties are outsourced to community organizers and activists paid by taxpayers.  This will ensure the loading of new entrants permanently into the Democratic Party.

3. The amnesty bill even assigns some of these so-called non-profit left wing community groups the task of rewriting provisions for U.S. citizenship.

This question needs to be asked and answered honestly.  Why are companies laying off thousands then demanding immigration reform, when at the same time corporate officers are seeking higher numbers of immigrants, both low-skill and high-skill?  An  article written by Byron York and published in the Washington Examiner on September 11, is worth reading.

Before anything else is going to work, people must have confidence that the border is secure to prevent another wave of illegal immigrants who believe that they too will be granted the same “courtesy” of amnesty in the future.

Immigration reform, as proposed by the Senate Gang of Eight and now being pushed by some in the House, threatens this nation’s economy, job markets and national security.

Can we afford to allow Congress to pass what is “pretend” immigration reform?   The push for immigration reform must be stopped from happening in the House of Representatives.  According to Article 1, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution, the House is given the sole power to originate all bills for raising revenue under what is know as the Origination CauseThe Gang’s amnesty bill oversteps and includes a provision to raise some revenue, making it possible for the House to reject the Senate bill in what is called a “blue slip” procedure.

You owe it to your family and to your fellow countrymen to contact your own representative and House leaders Speaker John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Bob Goodlatte, and Paul Ryan, insisting that in light of the direction immigration reform seems to be taking in the House with its close proximity to the Senate’s Gang of Eight proposal, immigration reform must die in the House.  The immigration reform legislation as being formulated is a destructive piece of legislation that will destroy this nation.

Isn’t it time that we put the American people and jobs first?  We need to help Americans find jobs, not replace them under the guise of immigration reform.


Part 1:  http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2013/10/thorner-immigration-reform-with-amnesty-is-still-very-much-alive.html#more

Monday, October 14, 2013 at 01:45 PM | Permalink

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Friday, October 11, 2013

CapitolBy Nancy Thorner – 

Listening to the news reports yesterday afternoon, October 10th, of negotiations between Republicans and President Obama was enough to make my head spin, as reports started to surface every 15 minutes or so about the outcome of the meeting.  Finally reported in the early evening was how both sides of the aisle would continue negotiations during the night to see if a compromise could be reached. The only entityfeeling upbeat was the stock market, and this was over the prospect of a deal.

It was was reported as a sign of hope yesterday morning just the fact that President Obama and congressional Republicans had finally decided it was time to talk.  As it was, eighteen House Republicans met at the White House yesterday afternoon in an effort to end the government shutdown and raise the debt ceiling by Oct. 17.  Among the participants were the House GOP’s budget chief, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, who had tried to sell conservatives his two-step plan on Wednesday, October 9, to hike the debt limit short term and reopen the government long enough for Congress to pass entitlement reforms, an idea Ryan expanded on Oct. 9th in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.

Erick Erickson of Redstate reported before the afternoon talks that he had been told by several sources that Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor were plotting to give up trying to either defund or delay Obamacare by working up a deal that would include a debt ceiling increase “with a few sops to the GOP as cover.”  The one change they were considering was the repeal of the medical devise tax.  If such action occurred, wouldn’t it ensure that ObamaCare would be fully funded and the American people, unlike businesses, would have no delay?

Speculation is fine, but what really ensued between House Republicans and President  Obama?  Boehner presented a plan to raise the debt limit for 6 weeks as a good faith effort on the part of Republicans to move halfway to what Obama was demanded in order to begin talks toward meaningful negotiations.  Boehner’s proposal would suspend the debt limit until Nov 22, the Friday before Thanksgiving.

Obama’s initial position, enumerated a number of times by President Obama and other Democratic legislators, was that a clean bill must be proposed with no partisan strings attached to end the government shutdown before Republican issues could be addressed.  Obama additionally preferred a much longer extension of the debt limit than the six weeks offered by Republicans.  By the close of yesterday’s meeting, however, there was a report of a slight hint that Obama just might agree to one of the Republicans demands without the other —  the length of the debt limit extension.  To Republicans, just because Obama didn’t say “no” gave them a slight glimmer of hope.  Republican and Democrats aids agreed to continue talks overnight.

What possibly brought both sides together to talk and attempt to negotiate? Might the effort to negotiate a deal, especially among establishment House Republican leaders, have been tied to a Gallup survey released on Wednesday, Oct. 9th, citing that the favorably rating of the Republican Part had sunk to 28 percent?

But what about the overall poll numbers of an AP-Gfk Poll conducted Oct. 3 – 7 which asked who was to blame for the government shutdown, which in reality is only a partial shutdown?

The AP-GfK poll was a mixed bag of where blame had been placed by the American people, many of whom hear reports coming only from the mainstream media which favor Obama.  Admittedly, Republicans did receive more blame than  Democrats, but Democrats didn’t emerge from the poll smelling like roses!

Regarding President Obama, the “blame shutdown game” ties right in with an AP report of how Barack Obama’s approval level has cratered during the shutdown phase to 37%.  Obama must be worried, as this threatens his grandiose dream to capture the House in 2014 to put in place his progressive socialism without hindrance from an obnoxious House that is holding him hostage!  On the other hand Obama might be in a state of disbelief.

In Obama’s thinking he is invisible, pulling the strings from just out of sight, never realizing that he has overplayed his hand in his attempt to inflict pain due to budget issues.  How could Obama refuse to pay death benefits for soldiers killed in action, even though a law authorizing payment was passed by both houses of Congress on October 1 and signed by Obama?

And just why should Republicans be criticizing the health care enrollment process over a few “glitches” in the software?  Obama can’t explain the doubling of premium costs and carve-outs to big business, members of Congress and big labor as just mere “glitches,” yet when listening to press secretary Jay Carny and President Obama they never happened.  Nothing happened at all!

Providentially not all Americans yet believe that Obama is just an innocent bystander with no culpability for whatever happens.  As incredulous as it might seem to some, G. W. Bush is still being blamed for Obama’s misgivings by his most ardent supporters.

Are members of the Republican leadership either not grounded in reality or does naivety keep them from understanding the ways President Obama formulates policy?  Although Republicans have been burned time and again when caving in to demands of “it’s either my way or no way,” are Republican establishment members so gullible to believe that things will be any different this time around?  A word to the wise, especially to Republican Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell. Hope doesn’t always run eternal.  False promises of hope acted upon will only cause more problems in the long run.

Any deal Boehner reaches with Obama would have to be passed by the House, where, depending on the negotiations made with the President, the terms might not set well with all House members.  House member worried about increasing the debt level without spending cuts to offset the spending are sure to debate the following questions: 1) why we need to raise the debt ceiling when this nation already has a massive $17 trillion and an incomprehensible $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and  2) why default would be inevitable without it as there is enough revenue coming in to pay the interest on our debt?

It is not really a conservative position to allow an increase in the debt limit without asking for a decrease in spending.  This would be like asking for a credit card limit increase without lowering the monthly expenses.  The debt would only continue to pile up to the detriment of this nation’s financial solvency

To those House members who want only to open government as quickly as possible and are willing to give all that Obama wants with no string attached, they are courting a recipe for disaster. Such action would hopelessly split the Republican Party and would dash all hopes of Republicans of taking control of the Senate and keeping control of the House in the elections of 2014 and recapturing the White House in 2016.

As the debt ceiling can’t be responsibly raised without corresponding cuts, it would be wise to follow the lead of those House Republican members who favor a piecemeal approach to ending the shutdown.  By opening up National Parks and having soldiers and their widows get paid, Obama will have lost his leverage and Republicans can then move onto other agencies until all of government is open except for the HHS and the IRS.  Then Democrats will have to make a call whether to push Obamacare off until October, 2014, with the election only a few weeks away.

Would Democrats even dare to fully enact Obamacare as a set policy not negotiable in any way if the polls are correctly showing Democrat Senate losses in Alaska, Louisiana, Missouri and North Carolina.  With Max Baucus from Montana retiring, his seat should be a pickup for Republicans.  That’s the 51st Senate seat, allowing Republicans to delay the full enforcement of Obamacare.

What happens in the next day or so is of great importance.  How Republicans react could determine the future direction of this nation.  Will this nation go the way of Socialism as government becomes more aggressive and power hungry?  This government already has too much authority with its power to inflict pain.  If Republicans give in to Obama’s demand that only after a clean resolution is passed will he address their other problem, trusting Obama will keep his word, the blood will be on Republican hands for not doing everything possible to halt Obama’s grab for power.  The control of health care is considered an important ingredient in the move toward Socialism.

Sometimes forgotten is that the House holds the purse strings.  Furthermore, that House members were elected to Congess in 2012 to get rid of Obamacare.

Republicans must hold their ground lest future generation look back to this era and question why Republicans allowed Democrats — believing as they do that the Constitution prevents them from doing what they wish to to — to circumvent our Constitution, thereby imposing their will upon the American people and taking with it our God-granted rights of freedom and liberty, only to be replaced by an oppressive government that cares not about the average citizen, but only about doing what is necessary to retain control and power. 

The rallying cry must be for conservatives and like-minded Republicans to hold the line in both the House and the Senate.

You hold the future of America in your hands!

Friday, October 11, 2013 at 02:30 PM | Permalink


ObamacareBy Nancy Thorner – 

 ObamaCare has been described as a “Train Wreck” of which ObamaCare architect Max Backus (D-Montana) warned back on April 17 of this year.

Twenty-somethings who backed Obama’s health care overhaul could well be the slowest to comply with its provisions. As they rarely use medical care, it may prove cheaper to take the penalty rather than get health insurance for the first year or two when the tax is 1% of  their salaries. Penalties, however, do increase to 2.5% by 2016.

Ready or not, the state exchanges mandated under ObamaCare will open for business on October 1st unless funding is delayed for a year through the Graves proposal in the House. Recent reports have cited incomplete exchange websites, less an adequate security, and bugs in the system.

Dr. Benjamin Caron, a retired pediatric neurosurgeon at John Hopkins Children’s Center, has worked in health care long enough to know whether Obamacare is right for this country.  Recently his quote on Facebook hitting ObamaCare became the most popular graphic ever:

We keep delaying things.  Why don’t we just delay the whole bill permanently and come up with a real solution that really is affordable and that really will take care of everybody.

With already 10,500  pages of regulations comprising ObamaCare in the Federal Register, this is only the beginning. The implementation of the law will call for who knows how many more thousands of pages of regulations?  Already the regulations add up to eight times as many pages as there are in the Gutenberg Bible. With these thousands of pages of regulations there won’t be a single area of our life that is not regulated.

Wasn’t it Harry Reid who said in August that ObamaCare is just a step toward an eventual single-payer system, and that this country has to “work our way past” insurance-based heath care? Reid further said of ObamaCare:

What we’ve done with ObamaCare is have a step in the right direction, but we’re far from having something that’s going to work forever.

The final kicker:  ObamaCare is all about government control.  It’s also a slush fund to pay off Obama’s political activists to carry out a massive invasion of privacy that dwarfs the NSA’s collection of personal data on American citizens.

Don’t delay in making calls to our six Illinois Republican congressmen insisting that they 1) Pass a defund bill (Graves Bill) that says the U.S. Government will spend no funds (mandatory, start-up-salary, IRS expansion, discretionary or imaginary) on ObamaCare and then 2) attach (via the Meadows Letter) a rider to the must past continuing resolution bill to fund government, thereby preventing the Democrat-controlled Senate from having the option of discarding the defund ObamaCare option as would occur with the Cantor proposal.

Just because Speaker John Boehner is now open to defunding ObamaCare, be wary and don’t allow him to maneuver a deal if the going gets tough.  Republicans are know to recapitulate at an sign of opposition by Democrats.  We must be the watch dogs to keep those on board who might begin to waver or get cold feet

Local and Washington, D.C. contact numbers for our six Illinois Republican congressmen:
Rodney Davis – 217-403-4690    –  202-225-2371
Randy Hultgren – 630-232-7104  – 202-225-2976
Adam Kinzinger – 815-431-9271  – 202-225-3635
Peter Roskam – 847-656-6354   – 202-225-4561
Adam Schock – 217-670-1653    –  202-225-6201

John Shimkus – 217-446-0664    – 202-225-3635

Leaders of the Republican House, Washington, D.C.: 
Speaker John Boehner   202-225-6205
Majority Leader Eric Cantor  202-225-2815
Majority Whip  202-225-2915
U. S. Republican Senate leadership, Washington, D.C.:
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell  202-224-2541
Minority Whip John Cornyn   202-224-2934
Senator Mark Kirk – 202-224-2854

If you feel ObamaCare is bad for this nation and for the American people, you have an obligation to act.  Once the exchanges begin their operations on October 1 and other aspects of ObamaCare kick in, it is unrealistic to believe that ObamaCare can be tinkered with except by President Obama who has already done so in an unconstitutional way.  Entitlement programs have a way of sticking around once enacted and firmly in place.

Time is of essence. Don’t delay. Make your calls today.

Thursday, September 19, 2013 at 04:58 PM | Permalink