Posts Tagged ‘Mitch McConnell’

After Mocking And Slandering John Boehner Over His Failed House Vote, Senate Democrats’ Pathetic Debacle Takes America To Brink Of Fiscal Cliff

December 31, 2012

It couldn’t have happened to a more demon-possessed guy.

Remember just a few days ago, how gleeful Democrats were over John Boehner – who was it should be pointed out merely trying to get something the hell PASSED in the midst of the mean ugly drunk mother of all bureaucrtic debacles in all of history – was unable to get a majority vote on his “plan B” proposal?  With Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid leading the jeering section:

Let me remind you:

“John Boehner seems to care more about keeping his speakership than about keeping the nation on firm financial footing,” Reid said during a fiery address from the Senate floor. “It’s obvious, Mr. President, what’s going on around here. He’s waiting until Jan. 3 to get re-elected as speaker before he gets serious with negotiations because he has so many people over there that won’t follow what he wants. That’s obvious from the debacle that took place last week. And it was a debacle.”

Reid was referring to Boehner’s decision last week to call off a vote on his so-called “Plan B” in what was an embarrassing admission by the House Speaker that his proposal lacked sufficient support.

That actually happened AFTER Reid slanderously demonized Boehner by calling his House Speakership “a dictatorship.”

“The American people I don’t think understand the House of Representatives is  operating without the House of Representatives,” Reid said.

“It’s being operated by a dictatorship of the Speaker of the House, not  allowing the vast majority of the House of Representatives to get what they  want.”

You need to understand something: Reid is demandinging that the House hold a vote on what he wants them to vote on and the way he wants them to like the GOP is being unfair not to do that. Do you have any idea how many voted-on and passed House bills are sitting in Harry Reid’s Senate without Reid offering them an up or down vote???

Okay, so the man who has utterly failed to so much as even be able to produce a damn BUDGET in going on four freaking years is slandering his ideological enemy.  Classy.

How’s it going over there in the Senate that you Democrats (that’s short for “Demonic Bureaucrats”) own?

Not so good:

Congress Done for the Day, No Deal on ‘Fiscal Cliff’ Yet
Washington, DC
Sunday, December 30, 2012

No deal on the so-called “fiscal cliff” is expected in the Senate tonight. The Senate will be back in session tomorrow morning at 11am ET. The House comes back at 9am ET.

Earlier in the day, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) announced on the Senate floor that he was waiting for a response from Democrats to a GOP proposal made yesterday. He said he called Vice President Joe Biden to “jump start” the negotiations. “I’m willing to get this done. I need a dance partner.”

In reply, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) acknowledged Sen. McConnell’s “good faith” effort, but said “I don’t have a counter-offer to make.” Leader Reid said that he was working with the president and that a counter-proposal might be available later in the day. Shortly after words, Sen. Reid indicated that one of the issues holding back a Democratic counter-offer were proposed cuts to social security.

I’m sorry.  I’m not sure I heard that right, Harry Reid, you slandering lying hypocrite.  Tell us one more time how well you – the mocking a-hole who demagogued John Boehner for at least having the balls to call for a damn vote – have done on your side of the aisle:

I have had a number of conversations with the president, and at this stage we’re not able to make a counteroffer. The Republican leader has told me that — and he’s just said here — that he’s working with the vice president, and he and the vice president, I wish them well.

In the meantime, I will continue to try to come up with something. But at this stage, I don’t have a counteroffer to make. Perhaps as the day wears on, I will be able to. I will say this, I think that the Republican leader has shown absolutely good faith. It’s just that we are apart on some pretty big issues.

But Democrats were far too hopelessly fractured to come together to so much as make a counter-offer to the Republicans.  And that refusal to respond to the Republicans attempt to save America from ruin acknowledged after Reid got off the phone with his personal lord and savior Barack Hussein.  Obama doesn’t want a deal: he wants to raise taxes like crazy and actually blame the Republicans for the end to the Bush tax cuts while he’s doing it.  Harry Reid then actually left the Capitol Building for the night – leaving Senate Minority Leader McConnell burning the midnight oil desperately working all by himself to try to come up with something that will save the nation.

We’re 24 hours away from going off the cliff, and the Democrats can’t even get their acts together enough to make a counter offer to keep the talks going.  They want to raise your taxes and gut the military and they’re going to get what they want because this is God damn America and this is what happens in God damn America.  So Harry Reid closes up shop and goes home for the night.  Does the word “debacle” sound about right to describe what just happened in this hypocrites Senate under his dictatorship???

Why couldn’t you make a counter-offer, Harry, you turd?  Was it because you care only about your leadership position, you slandering demagogue hypocrite?  What the hell kind of damned dictatorship are you running in that banana republic of yours, anyway???

It so serves you right, Harry Reid.  And it so serves America right for cursing itself with stinking lumps of fecal matter for leaders such as yourself.  We deserve what is happening.  Our children deserve it.

Unfortunately, Republicans have made concession after concession while the lying Democrat Party has pretty much come up with snake eyes.  Which is fitting, given the fact that without snake eyes Democrats wouldn’t be able to see anything at all.

Meanwhile Obama has provided an example of his “compromise” in the form of the CPI (Chained Consumer Price) index adjustment he claims he’s willing to make.  Here’s the problem: there is absolutely zero way in hell that the Senate Democrats would ever go along with that.  In fact, the negotiations in the Democrat-controlled Senate utterly broke down until the Republicans conceded yet AGAIN by removing their demand for it:

WASHINGTON — Tense “fiscal cliff” negotiations on Capitol Hill Sunday inched forward slightly as Republican senators agreed to take Social Security cuts off their list of immediate demands.

The cut that GOP leaders had proposed — picking up on a now-defunct offer from President Barack Obama — involved basing Social Security cost-of-living adjustments on a chained consumer price index (CPI), which grows more slowly than current measures of inflation and therefore would give seniors less in benefits as time went on.

But Senate Republicans realized in a caucus meeting Sunday afternoon that the idea was a loser for now, even if they might return to it in reaching a larger deal later on.

“CPI has to be off the table because it’s not a winning argument to say benefits for seniors versus tax breaks for rich people,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). “We need to take CPI off the table — that’s not part of the negotiations — because we can’t win an argument that has Social Security for seniors versus taxes for the rich.”

“There’s a realization that in spite of the president’s apparent endorsement of a chained CPI that that proposal deserves more study,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). “My guess, based on what Democrats are saying is that that reform would not happen during this stage of the negotiations.”

A Democratic aide, informed of the reversal from a proposal that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) had offered late Saturday — which included the Social Security cut — took it as a hopeful sign.

“Well, that’s some progress,” said the aide, who was granted anonymity due to the sensitivity of the talks.

Which is another way of saying Obama has offered absolutely no realistic compromise of any kind.  Every single time Obama says that Republicans have to meet him half way, he is an absolute liar without shame, without honor and without decency.  Because this national disgrace-in-chief has offered up absolutely no real compromise that would ever actually see the light of day whatsoever.

Republicans are almost as insane as the Democrats for trying again and again to make concessions hoping to get a deal done with these fascists.

You want the truth?  America is now about $225 trillion in debt.  We are necessarily going to implode.  Children and old people are going to die.  And it is 99.999% the fault of the Democrat Party who cursed America with unsustainable entitlements in the form of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid without ever ONCE in their history being willing to fix the national ruin they guaranteed.

That said, not only do the Democrats demand tax hikes that won’t even pay for nine days of spending at current Obama fiscal insanity; they actually demand MORE spending and MORE debt to hasten our national collapse.  And somehow the Republican Party is immoral for trying to reign in this demonic spending.

This is God damn America under Obama, and God damn America fully deserves to go off the fiscal cliff and any other kind of cliff that we race toward in the determined drive to national suicide that began when Obama was re-elected.

America is now a truly evil nation.  We are an evil people who have wickedly and foolishly chosen evil leaders.  And God has made abundantly clear in His Word that He judges nations for the wickedness of their leaders.

Who will get the blame?  Republicans will.  Not because they deserve it, but because the people who will blame them are a wicked people.

I think back to George W. Bush getting all the blame for the bad economy during a period of time that Nancy Pelosi and Democrats owned the House of Representatives and Harry Reid and the Democrats owned the Senate.  When The Democrats took over in 2006, America was at full employment and America had a deficit of $162 billion.  Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi sure fixed that good.  Yet somehow Bush got all the blame even though Democrats controlled both houses of Congress.  And now that Obama is president and Democrats control the Senate, a stupid and wicked people are going to hypocritically and dishonestly blame Republicans even though they have a fraction of the power and responsibility that Democrats had when America went down in 2008.

I’m just waiting for the Rapture.  I call it the Great Bailout now.  Because Democrats have so completely screwed up America that its collapse is a guaranteed done deal at this point.  And the Antichrist is coming next.

Advertisements

Democrats Treating Obama’s Regurgitated Stimulus ‘Jobs Bill’ Like An Afterthought

September 23, 2011

I pointed this out a coupld of weeks ago: when Obama said, “We’ve got more than a million unemployed construction workers ready to get dirty right now,” how exactly was that not the same damn thing as saying “We’ve got all kinds of shovel-ready projects”???

This is the exact same pork-laden boondoggle that massively failed three years ago.  Obama is even using the exact same arguments to try to sell it.  The only difference is he’s expressing the exact same arguments with different soundbites.

Mitch McConnell recognizes this.  And tears Obama into a bunch of little socialist pieces:

Posted on September 22, 2011
McConnell: Dems Treating Obama’s Jobs Bill “Like An Afterthought”

Washington, D.C.- U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor Thursday regarding the President’s visit to Ohio and the bipartisan opposition to his stimulus and tax hike proposals:
 
“Over the past week, President Obama has been traveling around the country trying to set a record for the number of times he can say the words ‘pass this bill right away’ in a single five-minute speech.
 
“And today, he’ll bring his act to a 50-year-old bridge that connects my own state of Kentucky with Ohio.

“Now, the purpose of this visit is clear: The President’s plan is to go out to this bridge and say that if only lawmakers in Washington would pass his second stimulus bill ‘right away’, then bridges like this one would get fixed — and that the only thing standing in the way of repairing them is people like me.
 
“Well, I would just make a couple of points about all this.
 
“First, I find it hard to take the President’s message all that seriously when his own Communications Director is over at the White House telling people he’s no longer interested in legislative compromise; and when the leaders of the President’s own party in Congress are treating this bill like an afterthought.
 
“We’d be more inclined to look at this so-called jobs bill if the President’s own staff and the members of his own party in Congress started taking it a little more seriously themselves.
 
“Second, I’d remind the President that the people of Kentucky and Ohio have heard this kind of thing before. Don’t forget: the President made the same promises when he was selling his first stimulus. It’s a message he brought to Ohio repeatedly.
 
“Here’s what he said two years ago this week at a stop in Warren, Ohio: ‘All across Ohio and all across the country, rebuilding our roads and our bridges … that’s what the Recovery Act has been all about.’
 
“Yet two and a half years later, what do we have to show for it: politically-connected companies like Solyndra ended up with hundreds of millions in taxpayer-backed money, and bridges like the one the President’s at today still need to be fixed.
 
“It’s worth noting, in fact, that this one company blew through more taxpayer money than the first stimulus allocated for every road and bridge in the entire state of Kentucky — combined.
 
“The President told Ohioans and Kentuckians the first stimulus would keep unemployment below 8% too.
 
“Yet two and a half years later, unemployment in both states is still above 9 percent.
 
“So we’ve heard these promises before, and I don’t think the President should expect anybody to fall for them again.
 
“I mean, how many stimulus bills do we have to pass before these bridges get fixed?
 
“How many Solyndras do we have to finance?
 
“How much money do we have to waste before the President makes good on the promises he’s already made?
 
“If a bridge needs fixing, by all means, let’s fix it.

“But don’t tell us we need to pass a half a trillion dollar stimulus bill and accept job-killing tax hikes to do it.
 
“Don’t tell the people of Kentucky they need to finance every turtle tunnel and solar panel company on some bureaucrat’s wish list in order to get their bridges fixed.
 
“And don’t patronize us by implying that if we just pass this second stimulus, that bridges will be fixed ‘right away.’
 
“The American people heard the same thing when the administration was selling the first stimulus, only to turn on their television sets two and a half years later to see the President having a big laugh over the fact that all those shovel-ready projects weren’t quite as shovel-ready as he thought they were.
 
“So I would suggest, Mr. President, that you think about ways to actually help the people of Kentucky and Ohio, instead of how you can use their roads and bridges as a backdrop for making a political point.
 
“If you’re truly interested in helping our state — if you really want to help our state — then come back to Washington and work with Republicans on legislation that will actually do something to revive our economy and create jobs. And forget the political theater.”

Amazingly, rather than work with Republicans to come up with a solution that could actually pass, Barack Obama NEVER ONCE picked up a phone and tried to talk to Republicans AT ANY TIME prior to his so-called “Jobs Speech.”  He is a naked demagogue, and it is long-past time the American people realized that he is utterly naked of ideas that will do anything other than seek to get himself re-elected.

ObamaCare Increases Health Cost By $311 Billion While Threatening Access To Care

April 23, 2010

Just in case you didn’t catch it, it’s official: ObamaCare was packaged and sold entirely based on lies.

CMS Study Shows Health Care Law Increases Costs–$311 Billion in 10 Years
By Tom White, on April 23rd, 2010, at 11:43 am

US Senate Morning Briefing

Last night, the chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released his long-awaited report on the Democrats’ health care spending bill. The report states, “[W]e estimate that overall national health expenditures under the health reform act would increase by a total of $311 billion during calendar years 2010-2019. . . .” This was an assessment that was requested by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell prior to the final votes on health care in the House, but CMS told Republicans that they couldn’t complete an analysis in time for the vote. Given the report’s findings, it’s easy to see why Democrats decided to rush ahead with a vote before the report could be completed.Reporting on the CMS analysis last night, the AP wrote, “President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul law will increase the nation’s health care tab instead of bringing costs down, government economic forecasters concluded Thursday in a sobering assessment of the sweeping legislation. A report by economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department said the health care remake will achieve Obama’s aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million Americans to the coverage rolls. But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president’s twin goal of controlling runaway costs. It also warned that Medicare cuts may be unrealistic and unsustainable, driving about 15 percent of hospitals into the red and ‘possibly jeopardizing access’ to care for seniors.”

But in the run-up to the vote, indeed throughout the year-long debate on health care, Democrats and President Obama repeatedly insisted that their unpopular legislation would control costs and save the government money. In December, President Obama announced, “We agree on reforms that will finally reduce the costs of health care. Families will save on their premiums. Businesses that will see their costs rise if we do nothing will save money now and in the future.” Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) insisted at the beginning of debate in the Senate, “The Republican Leader just a few moments ago says that this bill raises costs. With all due respect to my good friend from Kentucky, that statement is false.” And Democrats repeatedly cited a CBO report saying that if all the Medicare cuts are implemented, the bill could save $130 billion over the next decade. This was pointed to by everyone from Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to rank-and-file House Democrats like Ohio Rep. John Boccieri.

But as the AP story explains, “The [CMS] report acknowledged that some of the cost-control measures in the bill — Medicare cuts, a tax on high-cost insurance and a commission to seek ongoing Medicare savings — could help reduce the rate of cost increases beyond 2020. But it held out little hope for progress in the first decade. ‘During 2010-2019, however, these effects would be outweighed by the increased costs associated with the expansions of health insurance coverage,’ wrote Richard S. Foster, Medicare’s chief actuary. ‘Also, the longer-term viability of the Medicare … reductions is doubtful.’”

As Sen. McConnell said when President Obama signed the health care bill, “Most Americans out there aren’t celebrating today. . . . People oppose this bill not because they don’t know what’s in it, but because they know exactly what’s in it. . . . They know you don’t have to slash Medicare by half a trillion dollars to get lower premiums. . . . People know you won’t save money on health care by spending another $2.6 trillion on health care. . . . They know you don’t reduce the deficit by creating a massive new government program that even Democrats have described as a Ponzi scheme. They know you can go a long ways towards doing all these things without creating a brand new entitlement at a time when we can’t even cover the cost of the entitlements we have.”

Once again, studies by neutral observers have shown that Democrats’ claims about their health care bill just do not match reality. This was a flawed bill rushed through because Democrats wanted to “make history.” But Americans know better. At a time of record deficits and debt, this irresponsible health spending bill should be repealed and replaced with legislation that actually addresses health care costs.

All one has to do is look at Obama’s plunging polls in the aftermath of the passage of ObamaCare to verify that the American people did not want and do not want this “boondogglization” of the American health care system.  Polls across the board show Obama’s approval plunging dramatically since health care “reform” was shoved down the nation’s throat: Quinnipiac has Obama’s approval at a lowest-ever-measured 44% – with a majority disapproving of him; top-pollster Rasmussen has Obama at only 47% – with a whopping 52% disapproving of him; and the RCP average has Obama WELL below a 50% approval.  Barack Obama is no longer in any way speaking for or representing the American people.

It turns out this is the same guy who is on tape at least eight times saying all the health care negotiations would all be on C-SPAN – and then he went to closed-door meeting after closed door meeting that resulted in a health care bill that NOBODY knows anything about.  It turns out that this is the same guy who promised he would unite the country in a bipartisan manner – and instead broke that promise and became the most polarizing and divisive president in history.   This is the same guy who said he would NEVER allow health care to pass by the awful partisan reconciliation tactic – and then he did exactly what he promised he wouldn’t do.  This is the guy who repeatedly promised that he wouldn’t tax anyone making less than $250,000 a year – and now everyone knows he’ll break that central, fundamental promise.  This is the same guy who demonized Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell for doing what his own chief of staff had just done only the day before.

I can go on.  For example, I can talk about how his administration promised up and down that the $787 billion (subsequently massively upwardly revised to $862 billion) stimulus – which will actually cost $3.27 TRILLION – would keep unemployment under 8%.  Obama sold a massive lie to sell a massive porkulus.  And now we’re paying for a fat pile of lies.

Now we find out that this fundamental liar told yet another massive, fundamental lie.

Now we find out that Barack Obama personally and repeatedly lied to the American people about the cost of his precious boondoggle ObamaCare:

“I pledged that I will not sign health insurance reform — as badly as I think it’s necessary, I won’t sign it if that reform adds even one dime to our deficit over the next decade — and I mean what I say.”

You loathsome, vile LIAR.

You said whatever you thought you needed to say to get the American people to jump into bed with you.  Then you raped them.  And then moved on to the next lie and rape.  And the next lie and rape after that.

Now, you think this is terrible news about the terrible ObamaCare power-grab?  You aint seen NOTHING yet.  Have a gander at this:

Not one of its major programs has gotten started, and already the wheels are starting to come off of Obamacare. The administration’s own actuary reported on Thursday that millions of people could lose their health insurance, that health-care costs will rise faster than they would have if the law hadn’t passed, and that the overhaul will mean that people will have a harder and harder time finding physicians to see them.

The White House is trying to spin the new report from Medicare’s chief actuary Richard Foster as only half bad because it concludes that, while costs will increase, only 23 million people will remain uninsured (instead of 24 million previously estimated).

But looking at the details of Foster’s report shows the many, many danger signs for Obamacare and how many of its promises will be broken:

1. People losing coverage: About 14 million people will lose their employer coverage by 2019, as smaller employers terminate their plans and workers who currently have employer coverage enroll in Medicaid. Half of all seniors on Medicare Advantage could lose their coverage and the extra benefits the plans offer.

2. Huge fines for companies: Businesses will pay $87 billion in penalties in the first five years after the fines trigger in 2014, partly because they can’t afford to offer expensive, government-mandated coverage and partly because some of their employees will apply for taxpayer-subsidized insurance.

3. Higher costs for consumers: Tens of billions of dollars in new fees and excise taxes will be “passed through to health consumers in the form of higher drug and devices prices and higher premiums,” according to Foster. A separate report shows small businesses will be hit hardest.

4. A program created to fail: The new “CLASS Act” long-term-care insurance program will face “a significant risk of failure,” according to Foster. Indeed, he finds, “there is a very serious risk that the problem of adverse selection will make the CLASS program unsustainable.”

5. Spending increases: Under the new law, national health spending will increase by $311 billion over the coming decade. And instead of bending the federal spending curve down, it will move it upward “by a net total of $251 billion” over the next decade.

6. “Free-riders”: An estimated 23 million people will remain uninsured in 2019, roughly 5 million of whom would be undocumented aliens; the remainder would be the 18 million who decline to get coverage and who will pay the penalty.

7. Spending reductions are fiction
: Estimated reductions in the growth rate of health spending “may not be fully achievable” because “Medicare productivity adjustments could become unsustainable even within the next ten years, and over time the reductions in the scope of employer-sponsored health insurance could also become an issue.”

8. You can’t keep your doctor
: Fifteen percent of all hospitals, nursing homes, and other providers treating Medicare patients could be operating at a loss by 2019, which will “possibly jeopardize access to care for beneficiaries.” Doctors are threatening to drop out of Medicare because cuts in Medicare reimbursement rates mean they can’t even cover their costs.

9. Coverage but no care: A significant portion of those newly eligible for Medicaid will have trouble finding physicians who will see them, and the increased demand for Medicaid services could be difficult to meet.

This is an objective report by administration actuaries that shows this sweeping legislation has serious, serious problems.

And there’s more: Joint Economic Committee Republicans explain in a new report the impact of a rarely mentioned $14.3 billion per year tax on health insurance, effective in 2014. They find this tax will be mostly passed through to consumers in the form of higher premiums for private coverage. It will cost the typical family of four with job-based coverage an additional $1,000 a year in higher premiums and will fall largely, and inequitably, on small businesses and their employees.

States are fighting back. The Florida legislature voted Thursday to place a state constitutional amendment on the ballot that would ban any laws that compel someone to “participate in any health care system.” It requires a 60 percent vote to succeed. The legislation is modeled after the American Legislative Exchange Council’s Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act, which has been introduced or announced in 42 states.

It just makes you want to cry.  Fifteen percent of hospitals are going to close, tens of thousands of doctors will leave medicine, and yet millions of people are going to start swamping the healthcare rolls.  If I wanted to destroy our healthcare system, that’s how I’d do it.

On top of that – something that will crash the system even sooner – is the fact that more and more healthier people will increasingly pay the fines and opt out of ObamaCare, will more and more sick people enter the system.  The result will be a social catastrophe.  Our very worst enemy couldn’t have engineered our downfall better.

Business after business have been and will continue to be writing down billions and billions of dollars in profits to cover the huge costs of ObamaCare.  These are businesses that would have hired workers, only now the skyrocketing costs of paying for ObamaCare for their employees will keep that hiring to an absolute minimum.

Barack Obama proudly and arrogantly said, “You Can Measure America’s Bottom Line By Looking At Caterpillar’s’” – and then he torpedoed Caterpillar’s bottom line.

Unemployment is going to be soaringly high for years – as even the Obama White House acknowledges.  Now you know why.

What’s the result of the Democrats’ idiotic policies?  Ask Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who just told us that sky-high “unemployment is likely to remain unacceptably high for a long time.”

The unemployment rate “is still terribly high and is going to stay unacceptably high for a very long time,” Geithner said.

Of course, if unemployment is going to stay “unacceptably high” for “a very long time,” you’re pretty much accepting it, aren’t you?

Meanwhile, there will be trillions of dollars in additional spending that Obama and the Democrats refused to allow the CBO to count: such as the SIX TRILLION DOLLARS it will cost Americans to buy ObamaCare policies or face fines.

The Titanic wasn’t as big of a disaster as ObamaCare.  If we can’t repeal and replace it, it will bankrupt the country.

Hypocrite Obama At It Again: Attacks GOP Leader For Wall St. Meetings Even As His Chief Of Staff Does Same Thing

April 21, 2010

Let’s see, the definition of “hypocrite“: a person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives.

Yep.  That’s pretty much Barry Hussein – our hypocrite in chief – in a nutshell.

Obama Calls Wall Street Meetings ‘Shocking’ as Rahm Emanuel Meets with Wall Street Investors
by  Connie Hair
04/20/2010

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel met with Wall Street investors Sunday, the night before his boss, President Obama, criticized such meetings with Wall Street investors.

In Los Angeles trying to help Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) boost her sagging senatorial campaign that is in serious trouble, Obama Monday called such Wall Street meetings “shocking.”

“The Senate Republican leader, he paid a visit to Wall Street a week or two ago,” Obama said.  “He took along the chairman of their campaign committee. He met with some of the movers and shakers up there. I don’t know exactly what was discussed. All I can tell you is when he came back, he promptly announced he would oppose the financial regulatory reform.  He would oppose it.  Shocking.”

Just one day before, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was meeting with Wall Street “movers and shakers” working out the finer details of the Democrats’ Wall Street reform that sets up a permanent taxpayer-funded bailout structure for “too big to fail” companies.

How is that NOT hypocrisy?  “How DARE you do the same thing my guy just did!  How DARE YOU!!!”

So what is really “shocking” is just what a loathsome, lying, hypocrite demagogue our president is.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell had absolutely every right and reason to meet with the Wall Street figures, given the fact that he had been blasting the $50 billion in “too big to fail” bailout money that the Democrat legislation had stuffed in it.  That was so heinous that even Obama was trying to strip out the uber-obvious unpopular bailout cash for Wall Street big boys.  Obama said he would onlyonly sign a bill if it passed the test of putting an end to bailouts; this bill contains a gigantic bailout slush fund – and promises many more bailouts to come.  And there is other bad news in that power-grab Obama calls a bill.

Hey, Barry Hussein, how about if we ask one of your Democrats how he feels about that fifty billion bucks that McConnell had been outraged about.  Ask your fellow Democrat how HE feels about your turd of a bill:

(As Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), a Democrat member of the House Financial Services Committee, told the Politico yesterday that even if the $50 billion bailout slush fund currently in the bill were stripped out, “The Dodd bill has unlimited executive bailout authority. … The bill contains permanent, unlimited bailout authority.”)

The Washington Post reports:

“As President Obama prepares to deliver a speech in New York later this week that will attempt to align his administration squarely on the side of American taxpayers furious with Wall Street, his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, met privately on Sunday night with some of the city’s top investors,” The Washington Post’s Jason Horowitz and Michael Shear report. “At a private cocktail reception at the Park Avenue home of investors Jane Hartley and Ralph Schlosstein, Emanuel joked about how each of the 60 guests should take a work of art home before speaking seriously about the administration’s commitment to regulation reform.”

Perhaps Obama didn’t get the Rahmbo memo?

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) blasted Democrats for their support of the $50 billion Wall Street bailout fund from the Senate floor today:

“It is important for the country and taxpayer that we get this right, that we put them before politics.  That’s why I was disappointed to read that Senate Democrats are refusing to drop the $50 billion bailout fund — a fund that the Treasury Secretary himself opposes — unless Republicans pay a price for taking it out. This is exactly what Americans don’t like about Washington: when one side tries to ‘get’ something for doing what they should have done in the first place.  If everyone agrees it should be dropped, then it should be dropped.  And if Senate Democrats think it should stay, then they should explain why they think the Treasury Secretary was wrong when he said that this bailout fund ‘would create expectations that the government would step in to protect shareholders and creditors from losses.’

“Both sides have expressed a willingness to make the changes needed to ensure without any doubt that this bill won’t put taxpayers on the hook for future bailouts of Wall Street banks. Let’s just do that.”

Apparently Mitch McConnell is suffering from something slightly worse than Stockholm Syndrome, given the fact that he seems to think the depraved demagogues across the aisle actually have a “willingness” to make “changes needed.”  That just isn’t the way Democrats roll, Mitch: rather, they try to shove through one hard-core partisan bill after another, and then demonize and demagogue anybody who points out what’s wrong with the crap they’re pushing.

You should really KNOW that, Mitch.  After all, Barry Hussein just literally got through doing that very thing to you.

The often-way-too-infuriatingly moderate Susan Collins explained what was wrong with the Democrats’ thrust-into-our-face financial overhaul bill this way:

SEN. SUSAN COLLINS, R-ME.: I don’t think you do it by creating a moral hazard, by putting a big fat fund out there in the first place that tells financial institutions don’t worry, you can engage in risky practices, high-risk products, there is going to be a fund, there it is, $50 billion all ready to bail you out.

But Democrats LOVE moral hazard.  They LOVE rewarding the people who created the mess we’re in to begin with.  And those morally hazardous special interests KNOW it: that’s why Goldman Sachs was the SECOND BIGGEST FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTOR TO OBAMA DURING THE CAMPAIGN.  It’s also why John Paulson, the slimeball investor who made billions screwing America by getting investors to buy investments he was betting would fail, was a major Democrat donor and major supporter of Democrat Chuck Schumer.

Charles Krauthammer points out the fundamental power-grab that this bill truly is:

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: I think what is so interesting about the bill that is now proposed is that it is Congress once again voluntarily emasculating itself.

The bailout as proposed in the bill would allow the executive branch on its own, without appropriation from Congress, any approval from Congress, to seize, essentially seize a firm it designates again unilaterally as systematically risky, take it over, have the treasury back all of the bad loans, and then have the Fed print the money to pay them off.

Now, when we did the Chrysler bailout, or the bailout of TARP, which we had in 2008, we had to get the Congress along. This is an interesting and I think a disturbing trend where so much arbitrary power is not only in Washington, but not only in the executive, there is no checks, no balance.

That means you get a few powerful people in Washington, secretary of the treasury, head of the FDIC. You walk into a large institution and say we might designate you systematically risky. We want you to do “x,” “y” and “z.” I can assure you they will do “x,” “y” and “z.”

And that’s what happens in Putin’s Russia when he takes over oil. That’s not the way it should be. Congress ought to stay engaged, and that it’s willingly giving up its prerogative is remarkable.

As usual, Democrats are counting upon outright lies and demagoguery to sell a truly terrible bill.  They present the facade that they are against Wall Street – even though Wall Street has been lining Democrats’ pockets with millions and millions in contributions, and even though Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel came out of Goldman Sachs – and that Republicans are somehow opposing everything that is good and right by standing against Obama’s next Washington power-grab.

The fact of the matter is that the biggest and most scandal-ridden Wall Street firms such as Goldman Sachs would BENEFIT from Obama’s “regulatory reform.” That’s because the president would have so much power to dole out bailouts and benefits to the most politically-connected Wall Street power-players.  Big Wall Street firms would be able to benefit from low interest government loans and undercut smaller and less politically-connected firms.

To quote the president of Americans for Tax Reform:

The new bank bill would institutionalize more bailouts. No longer would congressmen vote on bailouts, they would be run by bureaucrats and flow automatically from the pockets of taxpayers to the pockets of banks that contribute enough to the Chicago political machine to make the list.

Do you actually want that?  You are literally enabling Obama and Democrats to receive millions and millions of dollars in campaign contributions to help them win reelection even as they give huge Wall Street firms billions and billions in future rewards courtesy of taxpayers.

Please don’t believe the constant stream of lies that spew out of the mouth of your hypocrite-in-chief.