Senators Lee, Cruz and Rubio have gotten a lot of attention recently with their assertion that this is the last chance to rid the world of Obamacare. In the upcoming debt negotiations, they are offering a strategy to refuse to fund Obamacare, even if that means shutting down the government.  Now, no one wants the government to shut down, but this may come down to who blinks first.  Already pundits and some Republicans are saying that this is a bad strategy claiming that Obama will win eventually and Republicans will have another public defeat that will be difficult to recover from.  In the end, some say, the GOP loses.

I say nonsense. Here are 6 reasons why this is a good strategy and we should stand behind it:

1) This really is the last chance to substantially weaken the law.  Democrats knew all those years ago that they needed to build in a phased approach to the law.  Let’s face it, if Obamacare’s implementation had gone any more quickly, we may have still had the backbone needed to do something about it.  But, as it stands, years have gone by and sleepy-eyed members of Congress are tired of fighting Obama, tired of losing.  However, since the law has not been implemented yet fully (though the federal worker bees have been busy prepping to take over the free market ever since the bill was signed into law), the GOP does have a card to play here.  We would be dumb to not use it to its full advantage.

2)  We already lost the Presidential election. There seems to be perpetual hand-wringing  and whining in the Republican Party.  It goes something like this, “if the GOP stands up against Obama, Obama will win and it will make us look bad and lose the next election.  We can’t let that happen, so we need to look like we are working with him.”  This is the most asinine logic I’ve ever heard.  First of all, it doesn’t work.  We already lost!  There is nothing we can do to go back and win.  And, giving in to Obama has gotten us nothing.  In 5 years, I challenge anyone to think of what the GOP has gained strategically by compromising to Obama.  I can’t think of anything.

 3) The law is so bad that it is worth any political risk.  I’m not going to go back and conjure up all of the reports that show how bad this law is.  You can go Google or Bing that yourself.  However, at this point it is well-known that this law will have a substantial negative impact on our economy, on jobs and businesses, and on the healthcare industry as a whole.  Is anyone confused about that?

4291562_eagle_and_american_flag) Obamacare contracts our freedom.  Make no mistake, this is the definition of socialism.  The Executive Branch should not have the power to mandate whatever rules it wants to the healthcare industry.  Going forward, the government gets to design coverage for all Americans the way that it wants. The free market is no longer at play here and people are forced to pay for whatever the government deems to be “basic mandatory coverage.”  I’m not confused about how bad the health care industry was before Obamacare was passed.  But, let’s face it, this takes an existing problem, multiplies it by infinity, and then perpetuates it into eternity.

Obamacare is also a threat to religious liberty.  This is no surprise.  Anytime the government expands its reach, religious liberty is at risk.  The contraceptive mandate is only the beginning.  What other religiously controversial mandates will come out of the Obama (or any future liberal) administration that offend people of faith?

 5) If the GOP loses short-term, we win long-term.  The fact is that this may not work.  However, does the GOP become a strong party again by doing whatever Democrats want?  This battle gives us an opportunity to stand together and fight for something.  It shows voters that this Party is not in retreat.  It provides us with fuel for next year’s elections.  Doing nothing will only hurt us next year.  I’m sad about last November just like everyone else, but the reports of the GOP’s long and slow death are only going to end up being accurate if we let them.

 obama6) Sometimes you just have to do what is right.  If we don’t fight for this, then MSNBC has won, Obama and his Chicago thuggery have won, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and their dishonest cram-down-our-throats tactics have won, and who we are as a party (or as a nation) may never be the same.  There is a time for compromise, and that time has passed.  The President didn’t compromise when he forced his will on the American people with this bloated takeover of the health care industry.  We cannot compromise as we fight back.

Republicans, this is about doing what is right and doing it now.  Visit the site dontfundobamacare.com and see where your Senator stands.

Lisa @ AmericaisConservative.org (This post is a reprint of the original from AmericaisConservative.org.)

Last week’s DaTechGuy on DaRadio with John LaRosa and a special appearance by Robert Stacy McCain is now available here.

My latest for the Examiner is now up too covering Tom Weaver’s appearance at the Twin city Tea Party here:

“You can get 20 people in an apartment with running water, flushing toilets, screens on the doors , air conditioning, a refrigerator, this and that they are living better than any of the people I visited in Pueblo Mexico.”

Check em both out but remember I get paid by the click at the examiner so if you can talk a few million folks into hitting that link I’ll be good for quite a while

Speaking of Stacy I have to agree Monica is better looker than that leathers girl, but either way both have made bad decisions and while Leathers hasn’t had its full effect yet consider this.

Monica Lewinsky is 40 years old, she is not reported married and I imagine a lot of people still judge her by her irresponsible actions where she was manipulated by Bill Clinton. Any dates may still be very uncomfortable

No husband, no children and alone, and while youth not withstanding she should have known better Bill Clinton certainly should have and realized what it would to this lady’s future.

He didn’t give a damn.

Now perhaps she wasn’t looking for a man or didn’t want children, but if she did Clinton made such a result much harder.

I think she deserved better.

Remember those sweet, warm New England summers? Remember sipping lemonade underneath a shady tree? Remember when you hit that pedestrian with your car at the crosswalk and then just drove away? Pepperidge Farm remembers, but Pepperidge Farm ain’t just gonna keep it to Pepperidge Farm’s self free of charge. Maybe you go out and buy yourself some of these distinctive Milano cookies, maybe this whole thing disappears.

Family Guy Hell Comes to Quahog 2006

Pepperidge farm isn’t the only one who remembers, Byron York does too.

Mrs. Clinton was a key player in her husband’s defense on both occasions, and today she is close with Abedin, her long-time aide. So why shouldn’t Abedin try to emulate her mentor’s success?

Because it won’t work. Abedin can’t follow Volume I of the Clinton playbook because Weiner can’t deny everything, as Clinton did — falsely but successfully — in ’92. And she can’t follow Volume II because Weiner is not president of the United States.

For one thing Clinton had plenty of help

Stephanopoulos was dumbfounded. “[Clinton] lied,” the campaign aide later recounted thinking. “How come he let me hang out there? Never a word … while I swore to reporters her story was false.” But Clinton kept denying everything. And so did the loyal Stephanopoulos, claiming the tape was fake, or doctored or something. A mostly sympathetic press accepted the story, and Clinton survived.

Even if Anthony Weiner could lie as well as Bill Clinton, which he can’t, and even if he had an aide who could lie as well as George Stephanpoulos, which he doesn’t — even if all that were the case, Volume I of the Clinton playbook would still not be an option for Weiner. The proof of his sexting escapades is just too overwhelming.

Byron does forget the “Deny” card was in fact used by Weiner for a full week back in 2011 and many in the media went along with it. I’ll bet Pepperidge Farm would remember “Help us Help you

And that doesn’t even include Media Matters or Morning Joe

Weiner even spent $45k to give that card verisimilitude. but the tech trail was too solid particularly in an age of crowd sourcing.

As for card two, when years later with a new scandal and Ken Starr unwilling to roll over the playbook changed:

There were Republicans and Democrats who, early in the scandal, assumed Clinton would have to resign. But he survived through the sheer power of the presidency. He used (and in some cases invented) White House privileges to thwart Starr. After an initial panic, Democrats on Capitol Hill came to see the scandal as a life-or-death matter and rallied around the president.

For Democrats highly invested in the GOP “war on women” meme there is no gain in Anthony Weiner’s success.

This is why many of those same democrats who stood behind Al Gore as he praised Clinton after impeachment are now going after Weiner.

Of course the Clinton scandals didn’t take place during the age of cell phones, Youtube and Twitter, nor was the idea of being known as the sexting paramour of a pol considered an attractive proposition as it apparently is now. If that was true this might have ended differently.

However Weiner & Huma are following one card of the Clinton Playbook that Byron doesn’t bring up. A Narcissistic concern only for themselves.

Bill Clinton rightly figured there was no percentage in resigning and forever being the first democrat to resign the presidency. He understood what a post resignation presidency would be and it wouldn’t be anything like it is today and that doesn’t even count Hilary. His wife would forever be tagged as not the woman who stood by him but his accomplice in deceiving the public at the start. the first lady who did so and it would have made her own ambitions much harder to achieve.

So they went all in vs Starr and with the media’s help managed to win.

Weiner & Huma are using the same calculus.

Weiner and Huma are staying in the race because they understand there is no advantage to leaving. If he pulls out he is the guy whose comeback failed and is done and Huma’s future is compromised by her defense of him. If he stays there is a chance, a tiny one, but a chance that he makes the cut to the next round.

If he does he can credit Huma’s public defense of him and if he fails it can be dismissed as just not enough to save the day. As for the critiques of her while right now women are hitting Huma for backing him some were hitting Hillary too. That will pass but Huma’s connections and the funding they can provide will not.

That’s why although many in the media world are hitting her, nobody in the political world is.

Bottom line while Weiner can’t play Clinton’s hand his best card is to stay put because it plays to the same motivation that Bill Clinton did.

Narcissism.

Update: Nolte

Monday, a local political reporter admitted that everyone in San Diego knew what Democrat Mayor Bob Filner had been up to, but that they didn’t bother to do anything about it.

And now, after dozens of reporters from major news outlets swarmed Weiner for weeks, not a single outlet — not Politico, not BuzzFeed, not the New York Times — has audio or even a quote they can shove in Anthony Weiner’s face of him responding to a question about when the sexting stopped.

Because. No. One. Bothered. To. Ask.

Update 2: Talk about the tweet heard round the world:

Penny Carter: Is anyone gonna tell me what’s going on?

10th Doctor: What, you’re a journalist?

Penny Carter: Yes.

10th Doctor: Well, make it up!

Doctor Who Partners in Crime 2008

There seems to be a lot of people very worried about the media jumping all over the Pope’s statement as reported   with weeping and Gnashing of teeth. Here is the ABC report in full:

Pope Francis is reaching out to gays, saying he won’t judge priests for their sexual orientation, in a remarkably open and wide-ranging news conference as he returns from his first foreign trip.

Francis says: “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”

His predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, authored a document that said men with deep-rooted homosexual tendencies should not be priests. Francis is being much more conciliatory, saying gay clergymen should be forgiven and their sins forgotten.

His remarks came Monday during a plane journey back to the Vatican from his first foreign trip in Brazil.

Before we even bother to touch this in context, lets look at it as ABC presents it.

“A person searching for the Lord and has good will” a person searching for the Lord is implicitly looking for truth, and person of good will, when finding truth will accept it. It might be hard, it might take time but a person searching the Lord will eventually find him waiting with arms open.

In other words, he is saying the Doctrine of the church as it has been, the problem being the MSM has always painted the church as something it is not.

This of course is not the message the media is transmitting or even wanting to transmit. The left is looking to spin this as: The Pope says Gay sex is OK and the low information voter might fall for it.

Catholics should not.

Now let’s look at it all in context. There are several issues, lets take them one by one:

Pope Francis told reporters, “I did what canon law said must be done, I ordered an ‘investigation brevia,’ and this investigation found nothing.”

The pope continued by talking about how “many times in the church, outside this case, but also in this one, we go searching for the sins — of one’s youth, for example — for publicity. I’m not talking about crimes here — the abuse of a minor is a crime — but of sins.”

There is a difference between sin and crime. You won’t always find crime when you look at a person but you’ll always be able to find sin because that is the nature of humanity:

“But if a person, whether a layperson, priest or sister, goes to confession and converts, the Lord forgives. And when the Lord forgives, he forgets. This is important,” he said, because those who want the Lord to forget their sins should forget those of others.

That is the whole point of confession, to have our sins forgiven. Even if we haven’t conquered them, even if we are still struggling with sin and wrestling with it as Jacob did with the angel.

“St. Peter committed one of the biggest sins ever — he denied Christ — and he made him pope,” Pope Francis said.

That’s some serious perspective. Now comes the quote the media is going nuts over.

“A gay person who is seeking God, who is of good will — well, who am I to judge him?” the pope said.

I’ve already gone over this but with the context above the message is even clearer.  Stripped of all context it’s easier to spin, in context it’s a lot harder.

“The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains this very well. It says one must not marginalize these persons, they must be integrated into society.

Again this is clearly stated by anyone who has read it.

The problem isn’t this (homosexual) orientation — we must be like brothers and sisters.

We are all sinners and falling short of the glory of God, otherwise Christ’s sacrifice would not have been needed.

The problem is something else, the problem is lobbying either for this orientation or a political lobby or a Masonic lobby.”

BINGO! Once we define ourselves, are lives and our actions based on sin, or based on our desire for sin everything changes. Instead of being the woman caught in sin accepting the forgiveness Christ offers her:

Neither do I condemn you. Go, (and) from now on do not sin any more.”

we instead answer back:

But Jesus, I like this sin, I enjoy this sin and who are you to really say this is sin? Maybe you should reconsider.

The media is setting two traps with the same bait. The media want both the uninformed about the faith and the faithful to think the Pope is saying something he is not and on the later Satan is helping out using the most effective temptation of all, the sin of pride.

Let’s not fall for either. I’ll give the last word to the Anchoress:

To proclaim a Gospel of Mercy and then only permit a man or woman who has converted their lives in Christ to assume lesser or menial positions is to say we do not trust our own teaching — Christ’s own teaching — about mercy. The pope is correct; by that way of thinking, Peter would never have been given the keys to the kingdom. We are the church of Saint Mary Magdalene and Saint Paul; sinners who were first forgiven and then trusted with prominence.


Update:
KJ Lopez at National Review:

It’s important to bear in mind that the pope today seemed (we’ve been reading partial transcripts in news stories) to be talking about men who are priests, not seminary candidates. Fundamentally, he was talking about mercy. It wasn’t a break with Benedict or a policy change but an elucidation of Church teaching (which popes don’t make up on airplane rides).

The media has not mentioned that there has been a real change in the seminaries over the last 10 years and those changes haven’t changed.

Update 2:
Lisa Graas makes a great point

Sandro Magister offers a concise explanation, in the context of the Msgr. Ricca story/scandal, of the difference in requirements re: same-sex attraction among priests, bishops and cardinals as opposed to consecrated persons. I knew this, but it leaped out at me as I read it as a point I have overlooked. A light bulb went off in my head.

Against homosexuals who live in chastity, including priests, bishops, cardinals, there is no preconceived hostility whatsoever in the Church, so much so that, in tranquility, a number of them have occupied and still occupy important positions.

What the Church does not accept is that consecrated persons, who have made a public commitment of celibacy and chastity “for the Kingdom of Heaven,” should betray their promise.

Aha. Like I said, I knew that…but it’s been going way over my head. If you want people to become saints, if you want people to know Jesus as St. Gemma did, you’re “hostile” to “gays.”

BTW that is a betrayal no matter who that vow is broken with is it’s own sin. If you have a second sin along with it that’s another story.

Update 3: Cardinal Dolan on CBS This Morning

What surprises me is that anyone is surprised

He is on the Today’s show and they are trying to pound him and he’s just letting it slide off his back.

Update 4: The Anchoress gets it so well we’ll quote her follow up post as well:

I am not sure many people fully realize what Francis did on that plane, so let me tell you: he neutralized the power of the media narrative; he exposed the truth that in Christ there is mercy and forgiveness, and that the church exists to offer this in his name; he set whatever “gay lobby” exists in the church on notice that while he has no intention of acting as gay-priest-witch-hunter, he won’t tolerate a bloc acting against the interests of the church.

in fact we’ll quote two of them:

As Mollie Hemingway pointed out at Get Religion, any pope discussing gay anything will make headlines. In this case, nothing Francis actually said about homosexuality was new. In fact, in these two quotes Francis is doing nothing more than pronouncing long-standing Catholic teaching on homosexuality, sin, and the mercy of God.

Let that sink in for a moment: A pope is teaching the Christian faith, and the press is accurately quoting him, in blazing headlines that everyone will read.

The Press doesn’t know what he is doing but the Holy Spirit does.

Update 5: Fr Longenecker

So if you think the mainstream media are pleased about Pope Francis the rock star pope. Think again. They’re hopping mad….

…but they’re not going to show it.

***********************************
Olimometer 2.52

I’m pretty close to my best month ever (very odd for a July) both in terms of DatipJar and in terms of page views, but the quest for the weekly paycheck continues unabated.

$253 more dollars Basically 13 Tip jar hitters of $20 this week will get me there, If you would care to be one of them hit datipJar below

.