***SEE THE TABLE OF PHONE NUMBERS OF SWING VOTE CONGRESSMAN BELOW IN CENTER COLUMN. PLEASE CALL THEM TO STOP OBAMACARE!!!***

In the aftermath of his sham health care summit, President Obama has made clear his determination to proceed to try to jam through his radical legislation.

There is no real chance to stop it in the Senate since he will use reconciliation to pass it. But we can beat it in the House! Dozens of Congressmen who voted for the bill last time are re-thinking their support in view of the tidal wave of opposition. And, since the bill passed by only 220-215, there is no Democratic margin for error.

Each of us can act now to protect our healthcare:

1. Go to dickmorris.com and see a list of marginal Democrats who voted for healthcare last time. The list includes their local and Washington office phone numbers. Pick up the phone and call them. Even if you don’t live in the district, call them. If you live in the same state, tell them. If not, call them anyway. Call your friends or family that might live in their states or even their districts (the list on our web site says where their district is located) and ask them to call the Congressmen. Keep those lines busy all weekend!

2. Please give the League of American Voters funds immediately to run ads in each of these districts. They have created a very effective ad for each of these marginal members and will run it in their districts if you give us the funding. They have raised $200,000 in the past three days but need more to blanket these swing districts.

CLICK HERE to donate.

CLICK HERE to see a sample ad.

Even if you have already given the League money, do it again. Your donations have brought us to the edge of victory on health care and if you give again we can put it to a final end.

Remember what is at stake! If Obama loses this fight, his entire momentum will be crippled. But, if he passes his bill it will:

* Cut $500 billion from Medicare

* Force rationing of health care

* Raise income taxes to 43% (from 35%) and capital gains taxes to 22.5% (from 15%)

* Force a $2,000 increase in the average health insurance premium

* Force young people to buy insurance they don’t need or want that would cost over $8500 per person

* Or…pay 2.5% of their income as a fine for not having insurance

* Or…face prison if they don’t do either

* Tax medical devices and many medical procedures

And, in addition to all of the above, it will have an horrific impact on the deficit. Don’t listen to Obama’s claims to deficit neutrality. The bill will cost $1 trillion over six years and will generate revenues of $1 trillion over ten years. But if you run the projections out to fourteen years, the costs exceed the revenues by over $1 trillion.

These projections do not include about $1 trillion in health insurance premiums or fines that the uninsured will have to pay and about $3 trillion in increased health insurance premiums the rest of us will have to pay.

The Cato Institute estimates that the total cost of this bill over a twenty year period will come to $6.5 trillion.

To support the League of American Voters in their efforts to stop Obama — Go Here Now.

So…please make the calls and write your checks. Our health care lies in the balance!

Thank you!!!

PLEASE CALL!	DC OFFICE	LOCAL OFFICE
Harry Mitchell	(202) 225-2190	(480) 946-2411
Gabrielle Giffords	(202) 225-2542	(520) 881-3588
Ann Kirkpatrick	(202) 225-2315	(928) 226-6914
Jerry McNerney	(202) 225-1947	925-833-0643
John Salazar	202-225-4761	970-245-7107
Jim Hines	(202) 225-5541	(866) 453-0028
Alan Grayson	(202) 225-2176	(407) 841-1757
Bill Foster	(202) 225-2976	630-406-1145
Baron Hill	202 225 5315	812 288 3999
Mark Schauer	(202) 225-6276	(517) 780-9075
Gary Peters	(202) 225-5802	(248) 273-4227
Dina Titus	(202) 225-3252	702-256-DINA (3462)
Carol Shea-Porter	(202) 225-5456	(603) 743-4813
Tim Bishop	(202) 225-3826	(631) 696-6500
John Hall	(202) 225-5441	(845) 225-3641 x49371
Bill Owens	(202) 225-4611	(315) 782-3150
Mike Arcuri	(202)225-3665	(315)793-8146
Dan Maffei	(202) 225-3701	(315) 423-5657
Earl Pomneroy	(202) 225-2611	(701) 224-0355
Steven Driehaus	(202) 225-2216	(513) 684-2723
Mary Jo Kilroy	(202) 225-2015	(614) 294-2196
Zach Space	(202) 225-6265	(330) 364-4300
Kathy Dahlkemper	(202) 225-5406	(814) 456-2038
Patrick Murphy	(202) 225-4276	(215) 826-1963
Christopher Carney	(202) 225-3731	(570) 585-9988
Paul Kanjorski	(202) 225-6511	(570) 825-2200
John Spratt	(202) 225-5501	(803)327-1114
Tom Perriello	(202) 225-4711	(276) 656-2291
Alan Mollohan	(202) 225-4172	(304) 623-4422
Nick Rahall	(202) 225-3452	(304) 252-5000
Steve Kagen	(202) 225-5665	(920) 437-1954

Dick Morris

February 24, 2010

SEND GOP DOCS TO SUMMIT

By DICK MORRIS

Published on TheHill.com on February 9, 2010

Printer-Friendly Version

One out of 10 Republican congressmen is a doctor, and two GOP senators — Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and John Barrasso of Wyoming — also practiced medicine before joining Congress. The Republican Party should send its doctors to the White House for the healthcare summit President Barack Obama is staging right before he tries to ram through his ObamaCare legislation.

Polls show that when it comes to healthcare, the public respects doctors far more than it does politicians or health economists. The House and Senate doctors should say to Obama: “You are the president and we respect your status. But, Mr. President, when it comes to healthcare, we are doctors and we know a lot more than you do.”

Then the legislator-doctors should explain to the president — and the viewing public — how the threat of malpractice litigation forces defensive medicine, unnecessary tests and huge extra spending. They should go on to spell out how thinly stretched doctors are these days and implore the president to augment the supply of doctors before he adds extra patients to the system.

Then the doctors could explain how limited reimbursement rates encourage mass-produced medicine and relate stories to the president of medical rationing gone wrong. They could tell him examples from their own practices of Canadians who have sought their care in the U.S. because of shortcomings in the government-run system north of the border. Finally, they could lay out a plan for increasing the tax deduction for health insurance and allowing individuals the same deduction employers now get as a non-bureaucratic way of covering more patients. By taking the high ground as medical professionals, the Republicans will score a coup in their dealings with Obama and dash his hopes that the meeting will serve as a springboard for the relaunch of his healthcare legislation.

The doctor caucus in the House is ably led by Rep. Tim Murphy (R-Pa.) and includes:

Roscoe Bartlett (Md.-6)

John Boozman (Ark.-3)

Charles Boustany Jr. (La.-7)

Paul Broun (Ga.-10)

Michael Burgess (Texas-26)

Bill Cassidy (La.-6)

John Fleming (La.-4)

Phil Gingrey (Ga.-11)

Parker Griffith (Ala.-5)

John Linder (Ga.-7)

Ron Paul (Texas-14)

Tom Price (Ga.-6)

Phil Roe (Tenn.-1)

Mike Simpson (Idaho-2)

When it comes to healthcare legislation, these medical professionals, who have been elected to Congress, are by far the more credible spokesmen than the GOP’s legislative leadership. They should represent the party at the healthcare summit.

Dick Morris,

February 23, 2010

GOVERNING OURSELVES: THE AMERICAN PASSION

A review of In Search of Self Governance by Scott Rasmussen

By DICK MORRIS

Published on DickMorris.com on February 23, 2010

With his up-to-the-second published polls, Scott Rasmussen has revolutionized the way politics is practiced in America. Now, in his new book, In Search of Self-Governance, he bids us all remember that the real political debate is not left vs. right, but rather between being governed by a bureaucracy and self-governance.

He begins his short, easily readable book by debunking the myth that big business wants a free market without government regulation.  Instead, he points out, they want to use government intervention – through regulations and the tax code – to assure their continued bigness and dominance.  When Philip Morris — or Altria in its new incarnation, supported FDA regulation of tobacco in order to guarantee its current market domination, we all saw an illustration of how right Rasmussen is.

But the new dimension of Scott’s book is that he discusses how thoroughly Americans do, in fact, govern themselves.  Faced with the possible collapse of the Social Security system under the weight of retiring baby boomers, they plan to fund their own retirements.  Facing technological changes and global competition, they go back to school and upgrade their skills.  They do not see the public sector as the place to get relief.  They prefer to work it out on their own. Rasmussen’s treatise raises the question of whether self-reliance is indeed universal.  Are we not becoming more like an Eastern European country where those who are employed by the private sector vote for free markets while a coalition of the unemployed, the retired, students, and government workers sustain liberals in power?   Are we not divided increasingly along the fault lines of tax-payers vs. tax-eaters?  Doesn’t Obama’s class warfare tax policy simply accentuate that trend?

Rasmussen’s book would be worth reading if only for the quote it contains from Democratic stalwart, former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan.  “Never pass major legislation,” he said, “that affects most Americans without real bi-partisan support.  It opens the door to all kinds of political trouble.”  Indeed.  Would that Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Barack Obama felt the same way?

But Rasmussen goes off the track a bit when he belittles the stakes in the current partisan confrontation.  He is certainly correct in recognizing the flaws of both parties and their lack of anything approaching purity or virtue, but when he says “many political activists get so caught up in the competition that they act as if the fate of the world hinges on the results of the next election.”

As it happens, in 2010 it does!

Yet Rasmussen’s book is useful and important in that it casts a light on what is happening in the private side of the public sphere where, outside of politics, real and usually constructive change is taking place.  He broadens our perspective and reminds us that most of the great good in this world was not achieved on the floor of Congress, but in the hearts, minds, and actions of the individuals who make up America.

Click Here To Purchase A Copy Of In Search of Self Governance

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

Dick Morris

February 22, 2010

SWING VOTES ON HEALTH CARE

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on February 22, 2010

THESE ARE THE SWING HEALTH CARE VOTES!

We don’t believe that there is any chance of stopping Obama’s renewed push for his horrible health care changes in the Senate.  Harry Reid is going to use the reconciliation procedure to jam it through with 51 votes — and he will get them.  All the hype about how difficult it will be is to distract us from the real battle which will come in the House.

There, where every member faces re-election, it will be a lot harder for Pelosi to round up the vote she needs.   Last time she passed health care by 220-215.  This time, a lot of the Democrats who voted for health care are going to be so worried about re-election that they might be induced to jump ship.

The League of American voters has produced ads targeting these swing Congressmen and we urge you STRONGLY to CLICK HERE to send them money to help fund these ads. But please do more.  If you live in any of the states from which these swing Congressmen come, please call them.  Let them know your opposition to health care changes.  The phone for Congress is 202-224-3121.  Here’s the list:

Vulnerable Democratic Congressmen Who Voted FOR Obamacare The First Time Around

These are the folks we need to pressure to switch their votes!

Arizona:

Harry Mitchell (Phoenix suburbs)
Gabrielle Giffords (Tucson)
Ann Kirkpatrick (most of rural Arizona, NE part of state)

California:

Jerry McNerney (Stockton and Pleasanton)

Colorado:

John Salazar (Pueblo)

Connecticut:

Jim Hines (Fairfield County)

Florida:

Alan Grayson (Orlando)

Illinois:

Bill Foster (Dixon, Batavia, and Geneseo)

Indiana:

Baron Hill (from Kentucky border up to Bloomington)

Michigan:

Mark Schauer (Branch, Calhoun, Eaton, Hillsdale, Jackson, Lenawee & Washtenaw counties)
Gary Peters (Oakland County)

Nevada:

Dina Titus (Las Vegas)

New Hampshire:

Carol Shea-Porter (Portsmouth, Manchester, Lakes Region)

New York:

Tim Bishop (Suffolk County)
John Hall (Northern Westchester)
Bill Owens (Plattsburgh up along Vermont border to Canada)
Mike Arcuri (Utica and south central NY)
Dan Maffei (Syracuse)

North Dakota:

Earl Pomneroy (at large)

Ohio:

Steven Driehaus (Cincinnati west to Indiana border)
Mary Jo Kilroy (Columbus and west to Indiana border)
Zach Space (Dover, Zanesville, Chillicothe)

Pennsylvania:

Kathy Dahlkemper (Erie)
Patrick Murphy (Bucks County)
Christopher Carney (NE Penn)
Paul Kanjorski (Scranton, Wilkes-Barre)

South Carolina:

John Spratt (rural SC between Columbia and Charlotte)

Virginia:

Tom Perriello (Charlottesville, Bedford, Timberlake, Martinsville & Danville)

West Virginia:

Alan Mollohan (Wheeling, Morgantown)
Nick Rahall (Huntington)

Wisconsin:

Steve Kagen (Green Bay)

Let’s get busy to save health care in America!

Free Report Reveals How You Can Sweep Arteries Clear. Click here: This Free Report Could Save Your Life!

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

Dick Morris

February 19, 2010

FINAL PUSH FOR OBAMACARE IS COMING…

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on February 19, 2010

As the story below indicates, our prediction of a month ago is, unfortunately, coming true: Obama is planning one final push to pass healthcare with no Republican support. Disguising his true intentions behind a health care summit which is designed to fail, he will try to pass the Senate bill in the House and send it to the White House to become law. Then, he will use the reconciliation procedure (which lets him pass budget related bills in the Senate with only 51 votes) to push through additional legislation which modifies the bill to suit House and Senate liberals (probably including a public option).

We need to rally one last time to STOP him!

Obama will probably get the House liberals to go along with passing the Senate bill as long as reconcilation looms in the future. He will also have no trouble getting the 51 votes to pass reconciliation in the Senate.

The only way to stop him is to deny Pelosi the support of conservative Democrats in the House who are scared to death following the Scott Brown victory in Massachusetts. When we first figured out what the White House was up to, we prepared ads to run in each of the districts of the swing conservative Democrats who voted for the original health care bill.

As you may remember, health care passed in the House by only 220-115. Thirty-eight Democrats voted no. But about twenty-three conservative Democrats voted in favor of Obamacare. They are all vulnerable to defeat this year. We need to advertise in their districts to persuade them that voting for Obamacare would mean likely political defeat. We need your funds to make these ads possible. We need $1 million for this final push.

Click here to see the ad we propose to run in one such typical district. We have eleven others which we have already produced and are in the can, waiting to go. We will produce and run in more districts as our funding level increases.

PLEASE HELP US WIN THIS FIGHT! Even if you have given before — even if you have given several times before — please give again. This is the final round. Remember what Obama says: “we are on the five yard line with health care reform.” He is indeed in our red zone with the bill having passed both Houses in different forms already. We need a tough, strong goal line stand to block this disastrous piece of legislation from passing.

Please support the League of American Voters in their efforts to stop Obama — Go Here Now.

Check out the story below about the Dems plan to pass the health care bill or click here to read it.

—————————————————————————————————————————————

Dems Near Plan To Pass Health Care Bill

White House, Congressional Democrats Are Preparing Proposal Which Could Pass Via Reconciliation in the Senate.

(AP) The White House and congressional leaders are preparing a detailed health care proposal designed to win passage without Republican support if GOP lawmakers fail to embrace bipartisan compromises at President Barack Obama’s summit next week.

A senior White House official said Thursday that Democratic negotiators are resolving final differences in House and Senate health bills that passed last year with virtually no Republican help. The White House plans to post the proposals online by Monday morning, three days ahead of the Feb. 25 summit, which GOP leaders are approaching warily.

The comments signal that Obama and Congress’ Democratic leaders still plan to use assertive and sometimes controversial parliamentary powers to enact a far-reaching health care bill if no GOP lawmakers get on board. Republicans and conservative activists have denounced such a strategy, and it’s unclear whether enough House and Senate Democrats would back it. Both parties have used the strategy, known as reconciliation, in the past.

Obama says he is open to Republican ideas for changing the health care legislation. But many Democrats seriously doubt GOP leaders will support compromises that could draw enough lawmakers from both parties to create a bipartisan majority.

The negotiations, led by Democratic leaders with White House input, are meant to determine what changes must be made to the Senate-passed bill for House Democrats to accept it, the administration official said. The goal is to craft a reconciled measure that Senate Democrats can pass, under rules barring GOP filibusters, unless Republicans offer acceptable changes at next week’s summit.

Democrats lost their ability to block filibusters when Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown won a Senate seat last month.

The White House official spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private negotiations.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Thursday that Obama plans to have a health care proposal that “will take some of the best ideas and put them into a framework” ahead of the Feb. 25 summit.

House Democrats insist on several changes to the bill the Senate passed on Christmas Eve. They include reducing or eliminating a proposed tax on generous employer-provider health plans, and eliminating a Medicaid subsidy aimed only at Nebraska.

Overall, the Democratic plans would provide health insurance to more than 30 million people now uninsured and end the industry practice of denying coverage to those with medical problems. Most Americans would be required to carry health coverage, with new government subsidies available to reduce the cost for many.

The main beneficiaries would be small businesses and people who now buy their own insurance. They now have few choices, and premium prices can spike unpredictably from year to year.

Under the Democrats’ legislation, they would be able to pick a plan in a new insurance marketplace offering a range of choices similar to those available to federal employees.

The cost of the legislation – about $1 trillion over 10 years – would be paid for through Medicare cuts and a series of tax increases. In the short run, the nation would spend more on health care under the Democratic plans, since newly covered people would be able to get care they had previously put off. Over time, however, the rate of increase in medical costs would begin to slow.

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

OBAMA GOES TOO FAR AND FALLS TOO SHORT

By DICK MORRIS

Published on TheHill.com on February 16, 2010

One of my favorite quotes about politics comes from Henry Kissinger in his book Years of Upheaval, his memoir of the Ford Presidency:

“A statesman’s duty is to bridge the gap between his vision and his nation’s experience.   If his vision gets too far out ahead of his nation’s experience, he will lose his mandate.  But if he hues too close to the conventional, he will lose control over events.”

Now, at once, we see both happening to President Obama. His health care proposals obviously ran afoul of the first of Kissinger’s warnings.  By pushing for changes that conflicted with America’s values, common sense, and experience, he lost his mandate.  In that disastrous push for an elusive goal, he ruined his own presidency and his party.  It may take decades for the Democratic Party to recover from his folly.  Indeed, his push for health legislation, in the face of rapidly eroding public support, ranks with the War in Vietnam, Watergate, and, of course, Clinton’s health care initiatives as the most costly to their respective political parties.

But now, as he faces threats from Iran, domestic terrorism, continually high unemployment, and the swollen deficit, he is also violating the second half of the Kissinger warning – his politics are too passive and too conventional and, as a result, losing control over events.

In the phase of presidential dithering in the aftermath of the Brown victory in Massachusetts, there is no clear presidential message, no coherent strategy and, even, no identifiable program.  His budget cuts are far too tepid.  His tax program nothing new.  Obama’s stimulus 2 package seems like the same old, same old.

His short lived bounce from the State of the Union speech is indicative of how limited a vision he has these days.   It lasted a week and was never more than three points at its apogee.

And, as Kissinger would have predicted, he is losing control over events.  Senator Evan Bayh’s retirement, with its implied blast at Obama’s policies, the increasing recklessness of Iran, and the seemingly intractable unemployment all provide evidence that President Obama is no longer dictating the national agenda.

As a result, the negatives he incurred by moving too far out ahead of the nation’s experience are combining with those he is getting for being too conventional.  He is experiencing both ends of the Kissinger prediction.  Republicans and Independents are still in shock from his headlong rush into socialism while Democrats are increasingly restive and disillusioned by his failure to lead.

And…the entire country is worried at his passivity in the face of domestic terror threats and the rapidly growing Iranian momentum toward the acquisition of nuclear weapons.

While his job rating has remained relatively stead in recent months, hovering just below 50% of likely voters, his ratings in specific areas – like holding down spending, cutting the deficit, creating jobs, and managing the economy — are all eroding, presaging further drops in his overall ratings.

Seemingly paralyzed by adversity, President Obama and his advisors are showing a lack of resilience in the face of reversals that is perhaps the inevitable outcome of his smooth rise to the top in 2008.  Never tried by bad outcomes (as Hillary has doubtless been), he and they seem unable to regain momentum and appear to be just flailing without strategic or even tactical direction.

All this might be what happens when you elect a State Senator whose US Senate career was consumed with his presidential campaign as president.

Terror Chatter High, Prepare Now with the Emergency Radio!

Top Docs Share Secrets to Surviving Cancer

Dick Morris & 15,000 “Lucky” Americans Will Dodge Financial Aftershock. Join Them

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

Dick Morris

February 15, 2010

THEY’RE DROPPING LIKE FLIES

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on February 15, 2010

Enter Coats.  Exit Bayh.  Bye, bye, Bayh!

The first time Evan Bayh gets a serious race for re-election, he quits!

The Scott Brown victory is still rippling through the House and the Senate causing retirements among committed, dedicated, long-term liberal Democrats.  Seeing voter anger, they are heading for the hills.

The process seems to work as follows:

a. Public anger manifests itself in the Brown victory

b. The improvement in Republican chances impels top notch, former statewide elected officials to jump into races against Democratic incumbents

c. The Democrat bows out in the face of likely defeat.  Suddenly, he wants to spend more time with his family.

This process has run its course in Indiana and may shortly be manifest in Wisconsin where former Governor Tommy Thompson is considering a run against Senator Russ Feingold.  It may yet play out in Arkansas where Senator Blanche Lincoln now has a top tier opponent in Congressman John Boozman.  And Senator Patty Murray may hear footsteps behind her with the entry into the race of wealthy businessman Paul Akers and the possible entry of former almost-Governor Dino Rossi.  Rossi lost the governorship of Washington State in a Franken-esque theft after initial counts showed him defeating Christine Gregoire by 261 votes.  Now Governor Gregoire won in the recount.

In New York State, billionaire Mort Zuckerman may take on appointed Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and, if he doesn’t, former Governor George Pataki might jump into the race.

When we predicted a Republican win in the Senate in 2010, some laughed.  But nobody’s laughing now.

On a less high profile level, the House is also swinging Republican.  The death of Pennsylvania Congressman John Murtha opens the way for a likely GOP pickup in a special election and the Republicans now stand to pick up ten more seats through Democratic retirements.  One wonders if the likes of Texas Democrat Chip Edwards, South Carolina’s John Spratt, or Arkansas‘ Mike Ross might not be far behind in the race into retirement.

It now looks more likely than ever that Congress will go Republican in the elections of 2010.

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

Obama Lacks Courage to Halt Iran

Friday, 12 Feb 2010 12:46 PM

By: Jim Meyers

The U.S. Navy should interdict gasoline shipments to Iran to pressure the regime to halt its development of nuclear weapons — but President Obama doesn’t have the “courage” to do that, veteran political analyst Dick Morris tells Newsmax.

The best-selling author and regular Newsmax contributor also said the United States is more vulnerable to terrorist attacks because Obama has “terrorized” the anti-terror investigators. He also asserted that the president’s tax credit proposal for job creation should not pass.

To see the video of Dick Morris — Click Here.

Newsmax.TV’s Kathleen Walter noted that Iran declared itself a “nuclear state” on Thursday, and asked Morris whether he believes the Obama administration has allowed this to happen.

“I think we have to apportion blame both to Bush and to Obama,” he responded. “I personally think Bush is more culpable than Obama because he was inactive for a longer period of time.

“The United States has absolutely refused to get tough with Iran, and as a result Iran is going to sooner or later develop nuclear weapons — unless Israel is gutsy enough and willing to accept the losses it would incur in attacking.

“There’s a very simple thing we could do to stymie Iran. Forty percent of its gasoline is imported” because the Iranians don’t have the refineries to convert enough of their oil to gasoline and they must import more, mostly through Dubai.

“The United States could interdict that flow of gasoline,” Morris said.
“It has a navy. We could just stop it, or persuade Dubai not to be complicit in sending it. Obama will not take that step. He talks about all other kinds of sanctions that are not meaningful, and won’t take that key step.

“Because he doesn’t have the courage to do that, or the commitment to do that, Israel may have to take action on their own and attack Iran, with devastating consequences to Iran and to Israel.”

Vice President Joe Biden said in an interview this week that he expects more terrorist attacks in the U.S. similar to the attempted Christmas Day bombing. Walter asked Morris for his response.

“Pessimism is always the bodyguard of liberalism,” he declared.

“When liberals are ineffective at stimulating the economy, they tell us we’re in an era of permanently high unemployment. And when they’re ineffective in defending us against terrorism, they say, oh, we have to expect a lot of different attacks. They try to get people to believe that their own inability is not the cause of the problem, but the overall environment is.

“The fact is that, under George W. Bush, we were safe for seven years. Now under President Obama, we’ve had 13 soldiers killed in an attack on Fort Hood, and a passenger airliner would have been blown up but for the action of a few brave and aggressive passengers. Now the vice president’s warning us to acclimate ourselves to this kind of stuff.

“The reason this is all happening is that Obama has made the anti-terror investigators, not the terrorists, the object of government scrutiny, and he’s terrorized the investigators.

“Therefore they’re very much afraid, when they get data on somebody, to send it on or to put him on a no-fly list or to send it to the military. They’re concerned that they might be racially profiling someone or violating someone’s civil liberties, and the result is it doesn’t get done.

“As a result, these terrorist slip through the cracks. It’s not fate, it’s Obama’s policies that are causing this.”

Continuing his assessment of the Obama administration’s handling of the terrorist threat, Morris said: “I think the thing that is really helping al-Qaida is that we released the details of the interrogation of the Nigerian underwear bomber. We said he’s giving us all kinds of information.

“In releasing those statements they’re telling al-Qaida: Change whatever plans you had. Assume that this guy is singing and he’ll tell the Feds everything, and change your plans.”

As part of a job creation effort, the White House is proposing offering employers a $5,000 tax credit for each new worker they hire. Walter asked: “Do you think he will get the support he needs to get that measure passed?”

“I think probably he will be able to pass that bill and aspects of this job package because I’m not sure Republicans will be unanimous in voting against it,” Morris said.

“They should, though. This is a bill that should not pass.

“We need to understand that you do not create jobs by spending money. You don’t even create jobs by borrowing money and giving it out as a tax credit to businesses.

“The reason businesses are not creating jobs right now is that they have no access to credit. And the reason they have no access to credit is that the government is hogging it all.

“Commercial lending in the United States is down by more than 20 percent over the past year, and government borrowing is up by 41 percent in the same period. So as long as the government hogs the loan window and pushes the private business that’s trying to create jobs aside, no tax credit in the world is going to be particularly effective at creating jobs.”

To see the video of Dick Morris — Click Here.

© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

February 11, 2010

OBAMA’S P.R. HELPS TERRORISTS

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on February 10, 2010

When President Obama’s leading counter-terrorism staff member, John Brennan, says that “politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda,” he has it exactly backwards.

It is the president’s efforts to crow about how effective he is in fighting terrorism that are helping al-Qaeda.  What kind of policy is it to announce to the world that Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab, the Nigerian terrorist who attempted to blow up a plane as it approached Detroit this past Christmas, is talking to investigators and giving them much valuable information?  Obama’s people put the story out to counter accusations that their decision to try Mutallab in a civilian court and to permit him access to an attorney jeopardized efforts to interrogate him.  Stung by the charge that they were blowing a chance to learn about subsequent al-Qaeda plans, they told the media that Mutallab was being very co-operative, especially after a visit from his family.

While releasing this information may help Obama politically and certainly pushes back those of us who criticized him for handling the Mutallab case civilly, it provides al-Qaeda with a timely warning that we are on to their plans and that Mutallab has explained to us what they have up their sleeves.  In counter-terrorism, knowing your enemy’s plans is key to thwarting them.  And, if al-Qaeda knows that we are prepared, they will, obviously, change their plans. Incumbent politicians always have to balance their need to get re-elected against the need to keep many of their intelligence successes private.  The Bush Administration, for example, took great pains not to reveal how it used wiretaps to stop al-Qaeda from blowing up the Brooklyn Bridge because it did not want to make the taps public lest al-Qaeda realize the FBI was listening in.

Winston Churchill made the ultimate sacrifice early in World War II when, alerted to German plans to bomb the city of Coventry, he chose to let the attack proceed without any evacuation of the city lest the Nazis realize that the British had cracked their code.  Thousands were killed and Churchill had to take the lumps for it politically.  He could have grandstanded, like Obama is doing now, and bragged about how effective his counter-intelligence was, but it would have aided Germany in the war.

So, likewise, Obama’s efforts to bolster his own credibility in fighting terror are helping our enemies.

The rest of Brennan’s quote is also interesting.  He said “terrorists are not 100 feet tall.  Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill.”  This line of argument finds its apogee in Michael Moore’s famous quote that the chances of being struck by lightning are better than those of dying in a terrorist attack.

The burden of this view, popular in Europe, is, in effect to tell the American people to get over it.  Sure we lost 3,000 people on 9-11, but Britain lost 50,000 in the blitz and France suffered the death of three million men in World War I.  They ask that we put the attack into perspective.

But we take the loss of those 3,000 people quite seriously and refuse to treat it as a mere crime.  We see it as a declaration of war and are responding accordingly.  That the counter-terrorism point person in the Obama Administration is, in effect, asking us to tone down our fear of terrorism is both disappointing and quite alarming.

Save up to 75% on Term Life Coverage: Call now for a free quote 888-543-3428

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

OUR ECONOMIC FUTURE
By Dick Morris and Eileen McGann

Dear Concerned Citizen,

As economists — and normal people — ponder what is next for the U.S. economy, we have to realize the limitations of the conventional models in predicting what ongoing problems we will face.

The proper question is not what will happen after the recession is over.

The answer to that is always that there will be recovery. And usually a sharp and smart one at that.

But that’s not the correct question.

The real issue is how we recover from the cures we have taken to end the recession. It is the side effects of that medicine, not the lingering recession, which pose our most serious threats.

Had the Fed not almost tripled the money supply . . .

Had the government not almost doubled the deficit with new spending programs . . .

Had the Treasury not bought more than $1 trillion in questionable mortgage-backed securities . . .

And were the president not committed to major tax increases next year . . .

Then, perhaps, a V-shaped bounce-back would be in the offing.
But we are like the patient who has become addicted to his pain medication and now faces the entirely new task of adjusting to the rigors of cold turkey.

Phrased differently, this is the central theme of an important new book, Aftershock, by David and Robert Wiedemer and Cindy Spitzer.

The Wiedemers and Spitzer characterize these new challenges as a series of “bubbles” that will burst, bringing in their wake new devastation to our economy and our society.

Unfortunately they are right, and they spell out some important strategies for surviving these unfortunate developments.

But whether we are seeing the bursting of new bubbles (their formulation) or the side effects of Obama’s “cures” (mine), the key fact is that we are in for a very rough time.

We cannot solve the budget deficit without major inflation.

We cannot pay our debt service without huge cuts in spending.

We won’t be able to find borrowers for our debt without much higher interest rates, which will badly cripple our economy.

We can’t ratchet back the money supply in time to avoid inflation. And the Obama tax increases will wreak an economic havoc all their own.

Newsmax has asked me to team up with them in a financial webinar to elaborate my views and answer questions concerning the serious issues presented in Aftershock.

To view this important Internet broadcast all you need to do is secure one of the copies of Aftershock that my friend, Christopher Ruddy, the CEO and Editor in Chief of Newsmax, has secured.

He believes this book is so important to your financial well-being that he is giving it away for free. I suggest you claim one of these quickly fleeting copies — you can do so by clicking here.

Aftershock puts these calamities in an understandable context and offers a worldview that is both more accurate and pessimistic than the conventional wisdom suggests. So it’s worth a read.

Just don’t try to go to sleep right after putting the book down.

To claim your free copy of Aftershock simply click here now to read a quick report about this book.

To Your Success,

Dick Morris
Fox News Analyst

GOP’S HEALTHCARE MOMENT

By DICK MORRIS

Published on DickMorris.com on February 9, 2010

President Barack Obama has so lowered expectations for the Republican Party that if they come to the healthcare summit he has called at the White House with concrete and well-articulated proposals, it will blow the country away. Repeatedly, the president has fashioned the GOP as the party of “no,” goading them by saying, “If you have any ideas, bring them on.”

Well, let them do it.

Republicans need to be on their toes and aggressive in the meeting and not let it devolve into a question-and-answer session with the president hogging the mike. He asked for a meeting, not a lecture or a media conference, and Republicans need to demand equal time to present their ideas.

Start with tort reform. The Republicans need to explain how much of the unnecessary medical costs are being driven by useless tort litigation. In Mississippi, where they acted to preclude much of it, malpractice premiums have declined by 50 percent. The GOP needs to explain to the nation that when the president says he is going to cut costs by eliminating tests that aren’t necessary, he is catching doctors in a vise. On the one side, they have the government prohibiting or discouraging them from tests, and on the other, the trial-lawyer bar waiting to pounce on them for failing to administer the proper tests if their care has a bad outcome.

The Republicans need to make the cost-cutting part of the healthcare summit about tort reform, constantly raising the subject as the counter to the president’s proposed $500 billion cut in Medicare.

Then Republicans need to discuss other cost-saving measures such as allowing health insurance to be sold across state lines and other measures to encourage competition.

Republicans should also zero in on the need for more doctors if we are to expand the number of patients covered. They must articulate the conclusion so much of the nation has come to (but official Washington has never embraced): that you cannot have more patients without more doctors unless you want to impose rationing. They should make the case that you need to phase in coverage for those who are not now covered so that you can increase the supply of doctors and nurses at the same time. Supply must keep pace with demand so that artificial scarcity does not leave the nation short of doctors.

The Republicans need to point out that in Massachusetts, where Romney inflicted a version of ObamaCare on the state, the waiting time to see a doctor in Boston is now 63 days. They need to stress that any rationing will be felt primarily by the elderly and will lead to premature deaths.

Finally, Republicans need to explain their own proposals for reforming healthcare — including Medical Savings Accounts and expansions of current tax breaks to encourage people and small businesses to purchase insurance.

Then, Republicans need to keep up a steady drumfire of criticism of the president’s proposals. They need to:

• Attack the proposed cuts in Medicare.

• Criticize the individual mandate as unconstitutional and paint a vivid picture of how much it will cost young families.

• Demand that young people be permitted to purchase catastrophic coverage to satisfy any mandate, rather than full coverage they don’t need.

• Spell out, in detail, how the tax on medical devices will raise the cost of pacemakers, automated wheelchairs, arterial stints, prosthetic limbs and all manner of necessary medical equipment.

• Attack the proposal to make a taxpayer spend 10 percent of his income — as opposed to 7.5 percent at present — on medical expenses in order to deduct them. Expose this tax as a tax on the sick.

• Criticize the idea that people could be imprisoned for failing to have health insurance or paying the fine the legislation imposes. There is a big difference between tax evasion and failing to have health insurance.

With proper preparation, the Republicans can turn this healthcare summit into a nationally televised town meeting such as those that frustrated Democratic congressmen last August.

HOT: Obama Hates Fox News – Get the Inside Scoop

Robbed: Obama’s Trick that Could Wipe Out Your Savings

Doctor Says Chronic Arthritis Can Be Stopped Naturally

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

HOW THE GOP WILL WIN THE SENATE

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on February 8, 2010

If the Republican Party wins every senate seat in which it now holds a lead, according to Rasmussen’s polls, it will capture eight Democratic seats while holding all of its own.  The two remaining pickups, to assure control, could be in Indiana where former Senator Dan Coats may run against Senator Evan Bayh and in California.  Even if Coats does not run, former Congressman John Hostettler is only behind Bayh by 44-41.  And, in California, former Hewlitt Packhard CEO Carly Fiorina is also only three points behind Senator Barbara Boxer.

(This assumes that former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson takes on Senator Russ Feingold). Here’s the data:

In these eight races, the Republican is ahead:

State	Contest	Latest Polling	Date
Delaware	Thompson +3	Jan	Jan
ND	Hoeven v unknown	Hoeven +20 (v Dorgan)	Dec
Ark	Lincoln v 4 opps	Repub (Baker) +19	Feb
Nev	Reid v 3 opps	Repub (Tarkanian) +8	Feb
Colorado	Norton v Bennet	Norton +14	Feb
Penn	Toomey v Specter	Toomey +9	Jan
Illinois	Kirk v Giannoulias	Kirk +6	Feb
Wisconsin	Thompson v Feingold

And, in these two states, the results are close:

State	Contest	Latest Polling	Date
California	Boxer v 3 opps	Boxer (v Fiorina) +3	Jan
Indiana	Bayh v Hostettler	Bayh +3	Jan

If Republicans take all ten seats, they take control in the Senate.

In addition strong challenges may be shaping up in New York against Kirsten Gillibrand and in Washington State against Patty Murray.

Gillibrand, appointed to fill Hillary’s seat, is very vulnerable, both in a primary against former Tennessee Democratic Congressman Harold Ford and in a general election. If a strong candidate emerges, she and/or Ford could be defeated.

And in Washington State, innovative businessman (and millionaire) Paul Akers is likely to run against Patty Murray. The Washington State senator only won with 55% of the vote last time, a poor performance for a three term incumbent. Akers’ company takes new technologies, buys them, and then uses them to create jobs. He should give Murray a tough race which he could end up winning.

But the message of Massachusetts is that any Republican can beat any Democrat anywhere. So don’t count out former Congressman Rob Simmons’ race against Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal or any possible candidate against Oregon’s Ron Wyden and New York’s Chuck Schumer.

The Republicans will win the Senate (and the House) and might win it with a few seats to spare!

Free Report reveals how to survive the most menacing economic crisis of your lifetime!

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

Like Toyota, Obama’s Accelerator Pedal Is Stuck

by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann

As he professes to want to reduce the dangerous budget deficit, Obama brings to mind the hapless engineers at Toyota who find that their vehicles accelerate whether or not the driver wants them to.

It appears that no matter how hard Obama jams on the brakes with his new-found commitment to deficit reduction — having already almost doubled the deficit in one year — the level of red ink just seems inexorably to rise. Obviously, more fundamental change in the budget’s engineering is needed. But, unfortunately, it is easier to recall a car than a president.

Obama’s announced intention to freeze 13 percent of the budget spending for three years is a relatively minor cut. It will reduce the deficit by only 3 percent over the decade. If Obama really wants to get serious about reducing the deficit, he could do so easily.

All he has to do to bring the deficit under control is to stop the remaining $500 billion of his $800 billion stimulus package from being spent and to refund back to the U.S. Treasury the $500 billion in TARP funds the banks have repaid.

Instead, he is merrily proceeding to build pork barrel projects all over America using stimulus funding despite its demonstrated inability to curb the recession.

Only $300 billion of the stimulus has been spent. He could easily call back the remaining $500 billion before its expenditure creates a deficit so big that America’s economy may not be able to find its way out. But he won’t do so. His commitment to expansion of government spending reminds one of nothing so much as an alcoholic’s desire for a drink right before going on the wagon or a dieter’s attachment to one last banana split before starting a diet.

And, when the money George W. Bush laid out in TARP funding is repaid by the banks that borrowed it, Obama is intent on using these funds to pay for his stimulus 2 package, earmarking $100 billion for state and local aid, $30 billion to small businesses for job creation and $30 billion for consumer credit.

He is, literally, intercepting the money the banks are repaying before it lands in the Treasury and sending it out the door again — this time as spending that will never be recouped instead of the short-term lending for which the money was initially appropriated.

Obama has only to get out of the way and let the banks repay the Treasury to bring the deficit down by a further $500 billion.

When will Obama learn that deficit spending is not the way to stimulate the economy? When will he realize that by adding to the deficit, he is stopping business from borrowing to create jobs and blocking consumers from getting the capital they need to make purchases?

With Treasury debt up 41 percent over the past year and commercial and consumer lending down by more than 20 percent, doesn’t Obama get the point that by hogging the loan window, he is blocking, not catalyzing, job creation.

Yet despite the evidence that stimulus 1 did little to cure the recession, he proceeds with stimulus 2. Like the Medieval doctors who bled a patient to expel the evil spirits that they believed were causing his illness, he drains the economy of the capital it needs to grow. And, when the patient got sicker as the blood flowed out, the doctors decided they had not bled enough and resumed opening his veins. Likewise, Obama has figured that he has not diverted enough capital to the public sector and is about to reopen the spigot.

And, in a novel way to encourage economic growth and new spending, he has announced drastic tax increases on the horizon for next year. What an incentive to potential consumers to know that next year, they will have to pay taxes that are about one-eighth higher than those they pay this year (from 35 percent to 39.6 percent)! And what an inducement to investment to know that when you go to sell your real estate or stocks, you will be socked with a capital gains tax 33 percent higher than at present (15 percent to 20 percent)!

With incentives like these, no wonder the unemployment rate seems stuck at its current high level.

Recall Obama!

THE OBVIOUS DEFICIT-CLOSERS

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published in the New York Post on February 5, 2010

As he tells us he wants to reduce the dangerous budget deficit, President Obama brings to mind the hapless engineers at Toyota who find that their vehicles accelerate whether or not the driver wants them to. It appears that no matter how hard Obama jams on the brakes with his newfound commitment to deficit reduction (after almost doubling the deficit in one year), the level of red ink just seems inexorably to rise. The House voted yesterday to raise the federal debt limit another $1.9 trillion.

Obviously, more fundamental change in the budget’s engineering is needed. But, unfortunately, it is easier to recall a car than a president.

Obama’s announced intention to freeze 13 percent of the budget for three years is a relatively minor cut. It will trim the deficit by only 3 percent over the decade.

But if the president really wanted to get serious about reducing the deficit, he’s got two easy steps to take:

1) Stop the remaining $500 billion of last year’s $800 billion stimulus package.

2) Refund to the Treasury the $500 billion in TARP funds repaid by the banks.

Instead, he’s merrily spending the remaining stimulus cash — even though the first round failed to curb the recession, doing little more than protecting the jobs and pay of state and local government employees. The remaining money would do more of the same — while also funding pork-barrel projects all over America.

But only $300 billion of the stimulus has been spent. Why not call back the remaining $500 billion? Because Obama is still committed to the expansion of government spending. His promise of a (minor) freeze next year brings to mind an overweight friend’s talk of the diet he’ll go on — even as he starts another banana split.

Then there’s the TARP funds. Most of the money laid out under President George W. Bush is being repaid by the banks that borrowed it — but Obama is intent on intercepting the cash before it lands in the Treasury and sending it out the door again.

He wants these funds for his second stimulus, relabeled as a “jobs bill.” Some $30 billion is to go to small businesses for job creation, $30 billion for consumer credit and yet another $100 billion for more state and local aid — that is, more protection for government workers.

And none of that cash will ever come back — even though it’s TARP money that was initially appropriated for short-term lending, spending that the government would quickly recoup.

When will the president learn that deficit spending isn’t the way to stimulate the economy? That by adding to the deficit, he is stopping business from borrowing to create jobs and blocking consumers from getting the capital they need to make purchases?

Treasury debt is up 41 percent over the last year, while commercial and consumer lending is down by more than 20 percent: The government is hogging the loan window. Doesn’t the president realize that this is blocking, not catalyzing, job creation?

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

BEHIND OBAMA’S PHONY DEFICIT NUMBERS

By DICK MORRIS

Published on DickMorris.com on February 1, 2010

President Obama is being disingenuous when he says that the budget deficit he faced “when I walked in the door” of the White House was $1.3 trillion.  He went on to say that he only increased it to $1.4 trillion in 2009 and was raising it to $1.6 trillion in 2010.

Congressman Joe Wilson might have said “you lie,” but we’ll settle for “you distort.”

(As Mark Twain once said, there are three kinds of lies: “lies, damn lies, and statistics.”)

Here are the facts:

In 2008, Bush ran a deficit of $485 billion.  By the time the fiscal year started on October 1, 2008, it had gone up by another $100 billion due to increased recession-related spending and depressed revenues.  So it was about $600 billion at the start of the fiscal crisis.  That was the real Bush deficit. But when the fiscal crisis hit, Bush had to pass TARP in the final months of his presidency which cost $700 billion.  Under the federal budget rules, a loan and a grant are treated the same.  So the $700 billion pushed the deficit — officially — up to $1.3 trillion.  But not really.  The $700 billion was a short term loan.  $500 billion of it has already been repaid.

So what was the real deficit Obama inherited?  The $600 billion deficit Bush was running plus the $200 billion of TARP money that probably won’t be repaid (mainly AIG and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac).  That totals $800 billion.  That was the real deficit Obama inherited.

Then…he added $300 billion in his stimulus package, bringing the deficit to $1.1 trillion.  This $300 billion was, of course, totally qualitatively different from the TARP money in that it was spending not lending.   It would never be paid back.  Once it was out the door, it was gone.  Other spending and falling revenues due to the recession pushed the final numbers for Obama’s 2009 deficit up to $1.4 trillion.

So, effectively, Obama came close to doubling the deficit.

Obama seems not to understand that the deficit is the jobs problem. To add to the deficit in the hope of creating more jobs is an oxymoron.  Additional deficit spending just crowds out small businesses trying to borrow money to create jobs and consumers seeking credit to buy cars and homes.

Soon, when the Fed stops printing money and we have to borrow real funds from real lenders, the high deficit will send interest rates soaring, further retarding growth and creating a cost-push inflation.

The interest rate we are now paying for the debt — about 3.5% — is totally artificial and based on the massive injection of money supply created by the purchase of mortgage backed securities by an obliging Federal Reserve.  Once these injections of currency/heroin stop, the rate will more than double, sending our debt service spending into the stratosphere.  Once we had to choose between guns and butter.  Now we will have to choose between guns and butter on the one hand and paying our debt service on the other.

Obama’s program of fiscal austerity in this new budget is a joke.  He freezes very selected budget items while he shovels out new spending in his stimulus packages.  If he wanted to lower the deficit, here’s what he could do:

1. Cancel the remaining $500 billion of stimulus spending and

2. Cancel the $300 billion of spending in stimulus II.

Those are the real numbers.  Or, as Al Gore would have it, “the inconvenient truth.”

Terror Chatter High, Prepare Now with the Emergency Radio!

Latest: Warren Buffett Prepares for Financial Storm, Read More Here

Doctor: This Everyday Food Additive is Poisoning Your Body. Find Out How Now!

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

OBAMA AND TRIANGULATION

By DICK MORRIS

Published on TheHill.com on January 26, 2010

Q: How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?

A: None, if it really wants to change.

Any president, at any time, can choose to embody the consensus his nation has reached after it has engaged in a period of extended debate. That process, called triangulation, involves the embrace of the elements advanced by the right and by the left that Americans have found valid, and the rejection of those from which they have turned away.

When our nation encounters a new problem, we welcome vigorous debate and encourage each side to articulate its views and elaborate its solutions. But, after a time, we have heard enough and want resolution, consensus and implementation. If Obama heeds that call, he can, indeed, turn his presidency around. But if he continues to pursue his leftist, socialist agenda and uses a feigned moderation as a guise for his radicalism, we will not be fooled again. We have been down that road with him before.

In healthcare, for example, the debate has left most of us in agreement that insurance companies need to be reined in. They should not be allowed to reject those with pre-existing conditions or to raise rates when their clients become sick. We mostly agree that lifetime caps on benefits are unfair. Since each of us could become sick and run afoul of those rules, we oppose them and ask for their reform. On the other hand, we reject the total revamping of the healthcare industry, the reduction of doctor pay, the cuts in Medicare and the mandatory insurance embedded in the ObamaCare legislation. Were Obama to embrace these solutions, he would be able to pass his bill quickly and would be hailed for it.

But will Obama do it? Will he emulate Clinton and save his presidency by moving to the center? Certainly not before he has lost his control over Congress. It was not the defeat of healthcare that impelled Clinton’s change of course, but his defeat in the elections of 1994. Even then, it took six months to turn the battleship around.

And after he loses Congress? Probably not even then. Clinton was a lifelong moderate who moved to the left when expediency dictated. Obama is a lifelong liberal who pretends to move to the center when he has to.

A committed socialist, one doubts that Obama would sacrifice his cherished transformative goals for incremental policies.

But even if Obama did, it might not save him. There is a basic difference between the circumstances that surround the Obama and Clinton administrations. Clinton faced relatively minor problems while Obama is neck deep in recession, deficit and stagnation. Clinton could reshape his presidency by positioning, posturing and passing moderate legislation. But Obama can only succeed by altering outcomes. Americans want jobs, lower unemployment, economic growth, a reduced deficit and an end to the recession. They will not be assuaged or appeased by programs or proposals. They demand results.

The skills of the spin doctor are wasted on his administration. All the photo-ops in the world and all the populist-sounding rhetoric will not do the job.

They may provide a short-term bounce — as will probably follow the State of the Union speech — but they will become undone with the next week’s jobless numbers.

Just as George W. Bush could not recapture his popularity with new programs for Iraq — voters demanded a reduction in casualties and then withdrawal — Obama cannot save his by announcing new ideas. He has to produce.

All the spin in the world will not save Obama.

BREAKING NEWS: The REAL State of the Union

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!
PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND TELL THEM THEY CAN GET THESE COLUMNS E-MAILED TO THEM FOR FREE BY SUBSCRIBING ATWWW.DICKMORRIS.COM!

THANK YOU!

***COPYRIGHT EILEEN MCGANN AND DICK MORRIS 2010.  REPRINTS WITH PERMISSION ONLY***

THE STATE OF THE UNION: A HOLLOW SPEECH

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published in the New York Post on January 28, 2010

When President Bill Clinton faced Congress in 1995, after first losing any hope of health-care reform and then control of Congress, he used his State of the Union speech to declare, “The era of big government is over.” President Obama’s State of the Union speech last night only served to remind us that the era of big speeches is over.

As America struggles with a 10 percent unemployment rate, stubbornly refusing to go down even as other economic numbers seem to rise, the public will no longer believe in speeches — only in results. As Cuba Gooding Jr. says to Tom Cruise in “Jerry Maguire,” Americans are saying, “show me the money.”

In this sense, the Obama administration is remarkably similar to that of George W. Bush: There’s no hope of overcoming the president’s political problems by speeches, spin or posturing. It’ll take results. As long as the body count rose in Iraq, nothing Bush said mattered much. And as long as the “body count” of un- and under-employed workers remains hovering over 20 percent, the American people won’t be moved by presidential speeches or even actions. Only results will matter.

Obama’s proposals to address the deficit, which is what is prolonging the recession, were ludicrous. None take effect until next year. And, even when they do, they will only trim the deficit by 3 percent.

The very notion of a “jobs package” that underpins Obama’s newly announced program is oxymoronic. The president still seems not to have grasped the essential point that borrowing money to spend it to create jobs in fact costs jobs. Or that increasing the deficit de creases the opportunities for businesses and consumers to borrow and cuts the number of jobs.

Ultimately, the fate of the Obama presidency depends on whether he is right or his conservative critics are. If he’s correct, more spending will bring down unemployment and put people to work. If he’s wrong, the deficit that results from his spending will keep joblessness high.

A lot of last night’s speech was, in effect, an apology for his own policies. His lamentation of partisanship and division; his appeals for unity — it all seemed almost to disregard his own record of polarization.

His allusion to the deficit “in which we find ourselves” was disingenuousness — at best. He has to hope that nobody was reading the newspaper as he proposed a stimulus package costing nearly $800 billion.

When he seemed at a loss, he lapsed into easy, populist applause lines — almost a parody of partisanship. His campaign speech, dressed up as a State of the Union, seemed irrelevant to the economic experience of our past year.

Even his forays into patriotism (“I do not accept second place for the United States of America”) sounded like a return to his rhetoric of the campaign — irrelevant to our current situation.

His threat to “send back” to Congress any regulatory reform which does not meet his specifications was reminiscent of Clinton’s threat — as he brandished a pen — to veto any health-care reform that didn’t seem sufficient. The fact is that Congress isn’t about to vote to give him the power to seize any corporation that he deems is “too big to fail” and “potentially insolvent.” His threat to veto is irrelevant.

The most attractive of his proposals — and the one with the greatest potential political payoff — was his proposal to offer a $10,000-a-year tax credit for college tuition. His accompanying suggestion that student-loan payments be capped at 10 percent of a graduate’s income and that the debt be extinguished after 20 years (10 if he or she works in public service) also does him proud.

But even as Obama stumbled in embracing spending as the cure for joblessness, he failed even more in his comments about the War on Terror. Accumulating evidence is leading independents to demand that terror trials be handled by the military, not the civilian, justice system — and without Miranda warnings.

Getting intelligence about the next attack has a priority over criminal prosecution in the minds of all Americans . . . except perhaps those of the attorney general and the president.

Free Report Reveals How You Can Sweep Arteries Clear!  Click Here: This Free Report could save your life!

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

THE FINAL HEALTH CARE BATTLE

: NOW IS THE TIMEBy DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on January 26, 2010

The long battle over health care changes is finally entering its final moments. The result could go either way. It hinges on 23 moderate House Democrats, vulnerable in the 2010 election, terrified by the Brown victory in Massachusetts, barely held in line by Pelosi and up for grabs in this new health care vote.

We need to run television ads in their districts to encourage them to put the final nail in the health care bill. Here’s the text of the ad we propose to run:

We have targeted twelve of the twenty-three Democrats for the initial flight of advertising. We will start on Thursday. We will advertise in these districts:

Christopher Carney = Pa 10 (Scranton)

Kathy Dahlkemper = Pa 3 (Erie)

Baron Hill = Indiana 9 (southern Indiana)

Steve Kagen = Wisc (Green Bay)

Paul Kanjorsky = Pa 11 (Scranton-Wilkes Barre)

Allan Mollohan = W Va (Wheeling)

Tom Perriello = Va 5 (Roanoke)

Nick Rahall = W Va (Charleston)

Mark Schauer = Mich 7 (Lansing)

Dan Maffei = (Syrqacuse)

Zack Space = Ohio 18 (Columbus)

If you have helped us before in our efforts to defeat Obamacare or if you haven’t yet donated, now is the time to step up! It costs us between $30,000 and $50,000 for each district in which we advertise to achieve the proper levels. We want to spend about $400,000 on these twelve Congressmen and then move on to the other eleven.

Please donate now! Please give as much as you possibly can! Now is the time.

CLICK HERE TO DONATE!

Thank you and with your help, we can save health care in America.

Warren Buffett Reveals His Luckiest Day

Prevent Alzheimer’s Before It’s Too Late

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns!

The legislation he seeks to pilot through the Senate (it already passed the House) literally gives the Secretary of the Treasury the power to seize any company in any sector which, in his judgment, is in danger of insolvency and whose failure would cause systemic damage to the national economy (aka – too big to fail).

Beyond a pleasing sight for the heart, what would Ted Kennedy’s seat going Republican really mean?But in the Senate itself, it would really signal the end of Obama’s legislative dominance.  He’ll probably be able to pass health care either by Democratic dithering in certifying Brown’s election or by ramming through the bill while he’s en route to Washington

But, beyond that, the prospects of getting 60 votes on the remaining items in Obama’s legislative agenda:  cap and trade, union card check, and immigration reform would slip away with the Massachusetts

He cannot govern through reconciliation (passing bills with 51 votes by pretending they are just budget bills).  If it were that easy, why would Harry Reid have worked so hard – and so successfully – to bribe Senators Landrieu (D-La), Lincoln (D-Ark) and Nelson (D-Neb)?  Why would he have caved in to the demands of Connecticut

A victory for Scott Brown would represent the Gettysburg

But even more corrosive for Obama and the Democrats is the knowledge that nobody is safe from Republican assault.  If the GOP can win a Senate seat in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts

Democrats will try to spin their defeat by blaming their candidate, Martha Coakley, for not campaigning hard enough.  They will say that they lost because their base did not turn out and that the solution is to pass ever more radical legislation in the hopes of rekindling their fervor.  But losing Massachusetts, on top of Virginia and New Jersey

For all of these reasons, please make an effort today to telephone or e-mail any friends, family or colleagues you know in Massachusetts

Below is a letter from HonorandRemember.org, a group dedicated to honoring American war dead.  This email is not a paid sponsorship and I am sending it to you because I thought you might want to participate.

Dick Morris

Dear Readers,

On December 29, 2005, just six weeks after being deployed to Fallujah, Iraq, Corporal Tony Lutz was killed by a sniper’s bullet while on patrol. His family and friends were devastated by the emotional agony and crushing loss that followed the terrible news. Eventually, the shock of Tony’s death gave way to profound grief, then dazed numbness and finally melancholy acceptance. Fond memories of Tony’s life are all that remain for his family and friends.

This scenario has played out thousands of times among American families ever since the first war casualty of the American Revolution. Our war memorials pay tribute to the price that has been paid over a period of more than two centuries during military conflicts in which the blood of our warriors has purchased the freedoms we cherish as a nation. As moving and meaningful as these memorials are, they are tributes to groups of individuals. The only individual symbol of honor given to the families of the fallen is the folded American flag they receive at the military funeral service for their loved one. This flag is meant to remain folded and kept in its wood and glass case.

As George Lutz, Tony’s father, began to think about the symbols Americans use to recognize the ultimate sacrifice made in service to America, he realized that there was no tangible emblem that could be displayed publicly that called specific attention to honoring and remembering the men and women whose lives were lost. And so, the Honor and Remember Flag was born.

The Honor and Remember Flag is intended to serve as a reminder wherever it is flown that the rights and freedoms we cherish as Americans must be constantly defended, often in remote corners of the world. People who value that sacrifice can display the flag as a visible sign of support for our military and gratitude to the families that have given so much for that cause.

IMPORTANT NOTE: A primary goal of the Honor and Remember organization (a 501(c)(3) non-profit entity) is to present families of a fallen military service member (Gold Star family) with a personalized version of the flag, which contains the hero’s name, date of death and place of death. The more than 200 families that have already received personalized flags have expressed heartfelt appreciation for the recognition the flag gives for their sacrifice. Furthermore, there is a bill before the U.S. House of Representatives (HR 1034) to make the Honor and Remember Flag a nationally recognized symbol of our fallen military men and women.

I ask that you consider visiting the Honor and Remember web site to sign an online petition in support of the Honor and Remember Flag. This support is important to the ongoing effort to have the flag officially recognized at city, state and federal levels. Already many cities and states have endorsed or have proposed legislation to recognized the flag. Likewise, many national veteran’s organizations have added their endorsement.

I also ask that you consider making a financial contribution to support the mission to have the Honor and Remember flag established as a national symbol; to present families with personalized versions of the flag; to educate the general public as to the importance, purpose and symbolism of the flag and encourage Americans to individually fly the Honor and Remember Flag.

Here is the link to the web site where you can get more information, sign the petition, purchase a flag and/or make a contribution of any size.