National Geographic: 'The Final Report: Watergate'

Source:National Geographic- The Watergate Hotel and Office Complex in Washington.

"The Final Report: Watergate (National Geographic)" 

From Michael L. Clark

It's hard to imagine a dumber political scandal in American political history (and that's saying a mountain's worth) than the Watergate break-in by President Richard Nixon's reelection committee in 1972. I mean this was the equivalent of robbing a loaf of bread at a local convenient store and taking nothing else. 

But Richard Nixon was so paranoid and his people were so loyal to him and they believed the more political information that you have on your opponents, the better and they believed that President Nixon would've approved of this operation, that they did it for him. But there's no evidence to suggest that President Nixon either gave the approval of the operation, or knew about it before it happened.

Americans For Tax Reform: Meet The Press- Grover Norquist: 'Schools Liberal Media On Obstructionist Charges'

Source:Americans For Tax Reform- Grover Norquist, on NBC News's Meet The Press.

"ATR President Grover Norquist joins MSNBC's Meet the Press panel and knocks down absurd charges of GOP obstructionism in Congress." 

From Americans For Tax Reform

Grover Norquist is half-right (which is generally more credit than I'm willing to give him) that the Republican House (not Congress, sorry Democrats) have moved their agenda, including a budget and economic agenda. 

Where Grover is wrong is about Republicans in Congress not being obstructionist. Senate Republicans led by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell have blocked (thanks to the cloture rule) everything that President Obama and Senate Democrats led by Majority Leader Harry Reid, everything that Congressional Democrats (House and Senate) and President Obama want to do as far as passing a Federal budget and moving the economy forward again. Including legislation dealing with infrastructure, middle class tax relief, small business, and immigration. 

So I have a proposed compromise for Senate Majority Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell: 

Senate Republicans allow Senate Democrats to bring all of their economic bills or put all of those bills into one package, to the floor for debate and amendments. Senate Republicans bring all of their relevant amendments, including the bills that House Republicans have already passed, if they want too. And the Senate votes on everything. And if neither side in the Senate has 60 votes to pass their economic plan, then Majority Leader Reid and Minority Leader McConnell come together or a handful of other Senate Democrats and Republicans come together to work out an agreement on economic plan that can pass the Senate with at least 60 votes. 

I'm not naive, (despite what other people may say) I know my proposal is not going to happen. You are probably not going to see another major piece of legislation passed out of this Congress the rest of year, other than to keep the government running. Both parties are simply totally focused on the 2012 elections. 

But if common sense ever made an appearance in Washington, especially in Congress (and it also stopped snowing in the North Pole for good) this is what the leaders of both parties would be doing, just because they know neither party has the power to do everything that they want and govern the country by themselves.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor: 'Remarks On The Obamacare Repeal Act'

Source:House Majority Leader Eric Cantor- speaking on the House floor about his bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

"Majority Leader Eric Cantor is a results-oriented leader in Congress who supports innovative solutions for free markets, economic growth, job creation and national security." 

From House Majority Leader Eric Cantor

There's a better term for what the House Republicans (led by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor) are doing here, I just can't think of it right now and haven't found it. But to put it simply: it's commonplace for Congress (House and Senate) to take up partisan, political votes, that they know won't either pass in the other chamber, or will be vetoed by the President, or will get blocked in the Senate, if the Senate Minority Leader has enough votes to block whatever the House majority leadership is trying to pass.  

House Republicans led by Speaker John Boehner (Republican, Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Republican, Virginia) know their ObamaCare (also known as the Affordable Care Act) repeal will die in the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Democrat, Nevada) will simply not take the bill up, or will have it voted down with all the Democrats voting against it and trying to use that vote against vulnerable, Senate Republicans, who are up for reelection. 

House Republicans also know that they don't have a replacement for the Affordable Care Act, a bill that they've been campaigning against at least since 2010. So even if their repeal were to pass and they still didn't have an alternative to it, we would go back to the health care system that we had in 2009 that left 45 million Americans without health insurance, or at least affordable health insurance. Which seems to be what the Republican Party Leadership wants anyway. 

PBS NewsHour: Judy Woodruff- House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer & Senator John Cornyn: ACA Ruling

Source:PBS NewsHour- House Minority Whip (Democrat, Maryland) and Senator John Cornyn (Republican, Texas)

"The Supreme Court upheld the individual insurance requirement at the heart of President Barack Obama's historic health care overhaul Thursday. Marcia Coyle parses the ruling with Jeffrey Brown." 

From the PBS NewsHour

Now that the John Roberts, Republican led Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (also known as ObamaCare) Republicans will now has a choice in how they play this out during the rest of the election season, with both the House and Senate up for reelection and Republicans wanting to retake the The White House.

Looks like House Republicans are going to continue to do what they're been doing for the last three years: run on repealing the ACA and then say they'll work to pass a new health care law, even though there is no Republican Party plan to what they would replace the ACA with. 

Senate Republicans are in a different position. They're still in the minority in the Senate, even with 47 seats and to win back the Senate, they might need a real plan, or at least their incumbents and candidates who are up for reelection. 

Republican Party presidential nominee Mitt Romney is in a different position. He passed in Massachusetts as their Governor the very law that became known as ObamaCare back in 2006 and now he's running against his own health care law. So he could say: "I was for it before I was against it." Let's see how that plays in Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. 

American Enterprise Institute: Dean Clancy: 'Three Steps to Patient-Centered Care'

Source:American Enterprise Institute- Dean Clancy talking about health care reform at AEI.

"Third-party photos, graphics, and video clips in this video may have been cropped or reframed. Music in this video may have been recut from its original arrangement and timing.

In the event this video uses Creative Commons assets: If not noted in the description, titles for Creative Commons assets used in this video can be found at the link provided after each asset. 

The use of third-party photos, graphics, video clips, and/or music in this video does not constitute an endorsement from the artists and producers licensing those materials. 

AEI operates independently of any political party and does not take institutional positions on any issues. AEI scholars, fellows, and their guests frequently take positions on policy and other issues. When they do, they speak for themselves and not for AEI or its trustees or other scholars or employees.

More information on AEI research integrity can be found here:American Enterprise Institute." 

From AEI  

Dean Clancy is talking about 3 ways he would reform health care in America, but he didn't really anything on the table. He was really talking about the health care system in America pre-2010 when the Affordable Care Act was passed. 

Mr. Clancy talked about controlling health care costs, without putting anything on the table. 

He talked about expanding individual liberty in the health care market, but without putting anything on the table. 

And then he talked about what he called health care status, which I guess is the right-wing talking point for pre-existing conditions. And said that someone's health status, which could a pre-existing condition that someone was born with, or a woman whose had kids in her life, should be used against them in either denying them health insurance or charging them more for health insurance. 

What Mr. Clancy seems to be talking about but doing it more openly and honestly (unlike the House Republicans and the Tea Party populist wing of the Republican Party) is saying that we should go back to the health care system of 2009 and before that. I would love to see Mitt Romney run for President out in the open on that, as well as House Republicans in swing districts and Senate Republicans in swing states. 

Reagan Foundation: 'Candidacy for Presidency: Ronald Reagans Announcement of Candidacy For President of U.S. 11/13/79'

Source:Reagan Foundation- Governor Ronald W. Reagan (Republican, California) announcing his run for President, in 1979.

"Ronald Reagan's Announcement of Candidacy for President of the United States on 11/13/79.

For more information on the ongoing works of President Reagan's Foundation, visit us at:Reagan Foundation."

Source:Reagan Foundation

You could make a case that when Ronald Reagan announced that he was running for President in November, 1979 that he won the 1980 presidential election and defeated President Jimmy Carter right there. Because of how different the message that he was giving, then what was being delivered from President Carter. 

President Carter constantly told the country how bad the situation was. Reporting on from one disaster from another, especially economically and even telling the country that they were partially at fault for this. Living too well and that was contributing to the economic problems. The country feeling as bad, or if not worse than the President said we were doing. 

To sound really corny: what Ronald Reagan was saying in 1979-80 is that our best days are still ahead of us, if we change course, go in a different direction, get the economy going again. And he had a plan for all of that. We can argue about how successful he was with the all the economic growth and jobs, but in exchange for high deficits, debt, and interest rates. But he was laying his vision for America being the City on a Shining Hill.

The Daily Caller: Nicholas Ballasy- 'Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid- Won't Say if ACA Mandate is a Tax'

Source:The Daily Caller- Nicholas Ballasy is a Washington correspondent for The Daily Caller publication.

"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wouldn’t say if he agrees with the Supreme Court ruling that the individual mandate in the health care law is constitutional as a tax.

“I’m not here to give everyone my limited knowledge of constitutional law. I am here to say that the law has been upheld,” Reid told The Daily Caller Thursday at the Capitol. “It’s good for the country. It’s good for my people in Nevada.”

“It’s something that now we can look at, I don’t have to worry about a child that’s born with a cleft pallet. I don’t have to worry about a child who shortly after birth develops diabetes or as the kids that came to see me today have cystic fibrosis that develops,” he continued. “I don’t have to worry about them anymore and very, very soon all adults, not just those that are under age of 18 will be entitled to insurance even though they have a pre-existing disability.”

In 2009, President Obama told ABC News that the individual mandate requiring all Americans to purchase health insurance is not a tax. House Minority Leader told The Daily Caller earlier Thursday that the question about whether the individual mandate is a tax is “Washington talk” that doesn’t matter to Americans. (RELATED: Obamacare becomes Obamatax)

“The people can stay on their parents insurance policy, 6 or 7 million of them, are benefiting from this law,” Reid said. “The millions and millions of senior citizens who are having the donut hole filled because of what we did in this health care law. Millions of these senior citizens now can get wellness checks that they could never do before so I’m not about here to give you all a dissertation on constitutional law. The law has been withheld [upheld], and I’m very happy it has been.” 

From The Daily Caller

This just in: Washington politicians lie and career politicians lie a lot. That's a big reason for how they become career politicians and are able to hold onto the same political office for 30 years, as if they have tenure at a college or some place. Of course the individual mandate is a tax and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, (Democrat, Nevada) House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, (Democrat, California) President Barack Obama, (Democrat, Illinois) Vice President Joe Biden, (Democrat, Delaware) all know this. 

But similar to admitting that you are a Socialist, is not popular, (even if you are a Socialist) admitting to a tax increase, even if goes to help fund health insurance for people who can't afford it, is also not popular either. Unless you represent some gerrymandered, left-wing district in the House, or in Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders (Democratic Socialist, Socialist Republic of Vermont) represents Vermont.  

I think the real question here is how much do Republicans, especially hyper-partisan Republicans want to play this. Do they really want to run on ObamaCare repeal by saying that it should be repealed simply because taxes were raised to fund it. Do they think Independent voters, especially if they're currently benefitting from the Affordable Care Act, want to see ObamaCare repealed, simply to get the taxes that were raised to pay for the ACA eliminated. Or would they rather keep their ACA benefits as they stand. This is a political question that Republicans are going to have to answer themselves.