Rep. Paul Ryan: Romneycare Carried ‘Seeds’ of Obamacare

(CNSNews.com) – House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said on Tuesday that the health-care reform plan that Gov. Mitt Romney signed in Massachusetts carried “seeds” of the national heatlh-care reform plan later signed by President Barack Obama.

“Were there seeds for these policy ideas in Massachusetts? Sure I think there were,” Ryan told CNSNews.com Tuesday, during a conference call to preview a major address he will give later this week to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington

But Ryan said that presidential hopeful Mitt Romney “has done a pretty good job of suggesting” that he would not impose on the national level any individual mandate requiring people to purchase health insurance.

Moreover, regardless of whomever becomes the GOP nominee, Ryan said, “We’re not going there” — meaning that Republicans would not support imposing an individual mandate

CNSNews.com had asked Ryan:

“Congressman, a lot of people, including President Obama, have said that Romneycare, which mandates people buy health insurance and provides subsidies for up to 300 percent of poverty level, was the model for Obamacare. Do you agree?”

Read More at cnsnews.com By Pete Winn, cnsnews.com

GOP lawmakers protest removal of ‘God’ from Air Force unit’s patch

A group of Republican lawmakers is protesting the removal a reference to God in the patch logo for the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO).

The 35 lawmakers, led by Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.), wrote a letter to Air Force Secretary Michael Donley and Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz urging them to restore the logo with a reference to God.

Forbes warned that the action taken by the RCO could set a “dangerous precedent” when it comes to religion and the military.

“The action taken by the RCO suggests that all references to God, regardless of their context, must be removed from the military,” Forbes wrote. “As we are confident that your legal advisors would not suggest that censorship is required for compliance with the First Amendment, we ask that you reverse this perplexing decision.”

The patch logo was changed after a military atheist group, the Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers, protested the reference to God on the patch. The patch has a saying on it in Latin, which is common for military patches, that tranlates to: “Doing God’s Work with Other People’s Money.”

Read More at The Hill By Jeremy Herb and Daniel Strauss, The Hill

Sowell: A defining moment for Romney

Mitt Romney’s statement about not worrying about the poor has been treated as a gaffe in much of the media, and those in the Republican establishment who have been rushing toward endorsing his coronation as the GOP’s nominee for president — with 90 percent of the delegates still not yet chosen — have been trying to sweep his statement under the rug.

But Romney’s statement about not worrying about the poor — because they “have a very ample safety net” — was followed by a statement that was not just a slip of the tongue, and should be a defining moment in telling us about this man’s qualifications as a conservative and, more important, as a potential President of the United States.

Mitt Romney has come out in support of indexing the minimum wage law, to have it rise automatically to keep pace with inflation. To many people, that would seem like a small thing that can be left for economists or statisticians to deal with.

But to people who call themselves conservatives, and aspire to public office, there is no excuse for not being aware of what a major social disaster the minimum wage law has been for the young, the poor and especially for young and poor blacks.

It is not written in the stars that young black males must have astronomical rates of unemployment. It is written implicitly in the minimum wage laws.

Read More at dnj.com By Thomas Sowell, dnj.com

Romney on Guns: In His Own Words

Truth, lies and Afghanistan

I spent last year in Afghanistan, visiting and talking with U.S. troops and their Afghan partners. My duties with the Army’s Rapid Equipping Force took me into every significant area where our soldiers engage the enemy. Over the course of 12 months, I covered more than 9,000 miles and talked, traveled and patrolled with troops in Kandahar, Kunar, Ghazni, Khost, Paktika, Kunduz, Balkh, Nangarhar and other provinces.

What I saw bore no resemblance to rosy official statements by U.S. military leaders about conditions on the ground.

Entering this deployment, I was sincerely hoping to learn that the claims were true: that conditions in Afghanistan were improving, that the local government and military were progressing toward self-sufficiency. I did not need to witness dramatic improvements to be reassured, but merely hoped to see evidence of positive trends, to see companies or battalions produce even minimal but sustainable progress.

Instead, I witnessed the absence of success on virtually every level.

My arrival in country in late 2010 marked the start of my fourth combat deployment, and my second in Afghanistan. A Regular Army officer in the Armor Branch, I served in Operation Desert Storm, in Afghanistan in 2005-06 and in Iraq in 2008-09. In the middle of my career, I spent eight years in the U.S. Army Reserve and held a number of civilian jobs — among them, legislative correspondent for defense and foreign affairs for Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas.

Read More at the Armed Forces Journal By Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis, Armed Forces Journal

The United Nations’ Rogue Agency

We have all heard the jocular remark about the inmates taking over the asylum. But I had never actually witnessed that unnerving event until last October 31, when I spent an afternoon in the press gallery of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization in Paris. The vast conference hall was not quite a madhouse, but it was noisy, agitated, and full of wild surmise. Hundreds of delegates from member states milled about, chattering excitedly as the president of UNESCO’s biennial general conference plaintively called for them to take their seats and get on with the business at hand. To wit, voting on a request by the Palestinian Authority for membership—and with it, the first recognition of its statehood by a United Nations agency.

The stakes were high. In its quest for statehood without making concessions to Israel, the PA had applied for full membership in the UN in September, but it was obvious that the U.S. would veto that ploy in the Security Council. So PA President Mahmoud Abbas was targeting a weak link in the UN system where the veto does not exist. He knew that UNESCO, with its fuzzy cultural mandate, was as open to political manipulation now as it had been when it was an ideological battlefield in the Cold War.

The U.S. had made abundantly clear that, due to laws dating from the 1990s, admitting Palestine to any UN agency would mean an immediate cutoff of American funding. In UNESCO’s case, this amounted to fully 22 percent of its budget. There was no leeway for interpretation, no possibility of waiving the laws’ provisions. Perversely, that seemed only to sharpen the delegates’ appetite for admitting Palestine. As the roll was called, it became obvious that they relished thumbing their collective nose at the U.S. and the handful of member states that held this was the wrong place to decide Palestinian statehood. Cheers greeted votes in favor by delegations from Africa, South America, the Middle East, Russia, China, and, of course, France. Joining the fun was the ambassador from Uzbekistan, the beauteous 32-year-old Lola Karimova-Tillyaeva, socialite daughter of President Islam Karimov, whose use of torture against dissidents, including boiling to death, the UN itself has termed “systematic.”

A sprinkling of moans or boos rippled through the assembly when the U.S., Germany, Holland, and a few others voted against. The president repeatedly called for a bit of decorum. Not a chance: now the grinning, gibbering, gesticulating inmates had indeed taken over. The final vote was 107 in favor to 14 against, with 52 abstentions. For anyone who still believed in UNESCO’s mission, it was an appalling spectacle. With that frivolous, self-defeating act, UNESCO signaled to the world that, once again, it was becoming the UN’s over-politicized rogue agency.

IT WAS A LOSE-LOSE MOVE both for Palestine and UNESCO itself. After the grandstanding, Palestine was no closer to statehood and possibly further away, hardening positions and jeopardizing the peace process. “It was an extremely reckless and callous move by Abbas,” one dismayed Western ambassador to UNESCO told me later. “There are no winners in this. Abbas has alienated some of his most important supporters.” The State Department and both parties in Congress quickly denounced the vote. As Texas Republican Kay Granger, chair of the House State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee, had warned, “I have made it clear to the Palestinian leadership that I would not support sending U.S. taxpayer money to the Palestinians if they sought statehood at the United Nations. There are consequences for short-cutting the process, not only for the Palestinians, but for our longstanding relationship with the United Nations.”

 Read More at The American Spectator By Joseph A. Harris, The American Spectator

Chrysler Is Back? Great. Then Why Hasn’t It Repaid Taxpayers the $1.3 Billion It Still Owes Them?

Amid the controversy over Chrysler’s “It’s Halftime In America” Super Bowl commercial, a glaring question remains: if Chrysler is back on top and so strong, then why hasn’t it repaid taxpayers the $1.3 billion it still owes them?

“I was, frankly, offended by it,” said Republican strategist Karl Rove. “I’m a huge fan of Clint Eastwood, I thought it was an extremely well-done ad, but it is a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics, and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising.”

Already, Democrats have begun co-opting the “It’s Halftime In America” meme, and President Barack Obama’s campaign team has already signaled that “saving” Detroit and the American auto industry will be a central campaign theme in Mr. Obama’s 2012 reelection bid. Indeed, in June 2011, Mr. Obama proudly declared:
Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency–and it repaid that money six years ahead of schedule. And this week, we reached a deal to sell our remaining stake. That means Chrysler will be 100 percent in private hands.

We take no view on whether the administration’s efforts on behalf of the automobile industry were a good or bad thing; that’s a matter for the editorial pages and eventually the historians. But we are interested in the facts the president cited to make his case.

What we found is one of the most misleading collections of assertions we have seen in a short presidential speech. Virtually every claim by the president regarding the auto industry needs an asterisk, just like the fine print in that too-good-to-be-true car loan.

Read More at Big Government By Wynton Hall, Big Government

McConnell: Keystone pipeline unlikely to pass until Obama is voted out

Despite ambitious attempts by Republicans to resuscitate the Keystone XL pipeline blocked by Barack Obama, the project isn’t likely to get approved until the president is voted out of office, said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

“We’re going to keep coming back at it with different (bills), but I think probably the only way we’re going to get the Keystone pipeline started is to defeat Barack Obama,” McConnell told HUMAN EVENTS.

TransCanada has waited for three years and undergone numerous environmental studies to get the approval from the White House to build the pipeline from Alberta, Canada to the Gulf Coast and transport 830,000 barrels of oil a day to U.S. refineries.

After numerous delays by the Obama administration, Congress forced Obama through legislation to deliver a verdict, but he killed the project last month.

“It is astonishing, I mean truly astonishing,” McConnell said of Obama’s decision.

Read More at Human Events By Audrey Hudson and Jason Mattera, Human Events

Obama Launches Crusade Against Catholic Institutions

If there were any doubt as to whether this administration is waging a war on religion, it should have disappeared by now.

The administration has ordered — without congressional input — that most health insurance plans cover preventive services for women, including recommended contraceptive services without charging a co-pay, co-insurance, or a deductible. That would include sterilization and emergency contraception, colloquially known as the morning after pill.

The federal government — actually just one branch of the federal government — ordering private companies to offer services at a certain price goes beyond the pale of decency in a free society. By itself, such an order would merit strong backlash from the people.

But it gets worse.

The order forces religious entities, ones that might have a moral aversion to birth control, to provide (i.e. pay for) this insurance for their employees.

Read More at Western Journalism By Thomas Lucenter, Western Journalism

Romney is GOP Holdout on Personhood Pledge

A leader in the pro-life community says he doubts former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s pro-life credentials, because the candidate for the GOP nomination for president never has stopped flip-flopping on the issue.

While campaigning for governor in 2002, Romney said he would “preserve and protect” a woman’s right to choose.

He later said his views had changed, and Rev. Rob Schenck, president of the National Clergy Council, a nationwide network of conservative pastors from all Christian traditions, endorsed him, saying, “When I asked Gov. Romney pointedly about his personal view on abortion, he told me he believes every intentional abortion is an immoral end to a human life. He is clearly pro-life.”

Columnist Ann Coulter has vigorously defended Romney’s pro-life conversion. In a recent column, Coulter said, “Romney changed his mind on abortion – not when it was politically advantageous, but when it mattered. As governor of liberal, pro-choice Massachusetts, he vetoed an embryonic stem cell bill and ‘worked closely’ with Massachusetts Citizens for Life.”

But despite these assurances, Keith Mason, president of Personhood USA, has said he believes Romney wants to have the best of both worlds in order to win the moderate vote.

Read  More at WND By Jack Minor, WorldNetDaily