End Of Day Report

Thursday, February 28, 2013

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

White House vs. Woodward

As we predicted, the Obama White House was quick to retaliate against veteran journalist Bob Woodward. Yesterday evening, Woodward told CNN that a “very senior person” in the White House warned that he would “regret doing this.” We now know that the person who relayed that threat was Gene Sperling, the director of the White House Economic Council.

Woodward added, “It makes me very uncomfortable to have the White House telling reporters, ‘You’re going to regret doing something that you believe in.'” It should make all of us very uncomfortable, because this isn’t the first time the Obama White House has threatened the media.

Obama’s loathing of Fox News has been well documented. Top White House officials have repeatedly tried to delegitimize Fox. But they have turned on liberals too.

The Woodward flap has given Lanny Davis, a former top lawyer for Bill Clinton, the courage to come forward and tell his story about the Obama White House’s vindictiveness. This morning, Davis told a leading Washington, D.C., talk radio show that the Obama White House tried to shut down a column Davis was writing for the Washington Times because, even though he supported Obama, he was occasionally critical of some of his policies.

According to Davis, someone at the White House called his editor at the Times and threatened to revoke the press credentials for its reporters if Davis’ column was not cancelled!

Referring to the White House’s attack on Bob Woodward, Davis added, “You don’t threaten Bob Woodward. He’s one of the best reporters ever.  He’s factual.  …  Don’t mess with him about his facts. You can mess with him about the interpretation of his facts, but this is not a reporter you tangle with.”

Our Founding Fathers knew how vital a free press was to the preservation of freedom. That’s why they insisted on the First Amendment guaranteeing the freedom of speech. Bob Woodward is living proof of the power of truth and a free press to check a rogue government.

But members of the media increasingly see themselves as partisan players rather than independent reporters. How else can you explain Dan Rather shamefully falling for fake documents in his overzealous quest to defeat George W. Bush? How else can you explain Big Media’s attempt to ignore Jeremiah Wright or Chris Matthew’s remark that it was his job to make sure Obama succeeded?

Conservatives have warned that this Chicago gang plays hardball. Now even members of the liberal media are on the receiving end of it.

Fact Checking Sequester Hysteria

For weeks now, President Obama has been barnstorming the country, holding campaign rallies trying to convince us that the sequester cuts will result in the end of civilization as we know it. The Wall Street Journal published an editorial explaining just how much authority Obama has to minimize the “doom” he has been predicting, if he chooses to do so.

The Journal editors added some perspective too, noting, “The truth is that the sequester already gives the White House the legal flexibility to avoid doom, if a 5% cut to programs that have increased more than 17% on average over the Obama Presidency counts as doom.”

Sunday, on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Secretary of Education Arne Duncan did his best to scare the American people when he said, “There are literally teachers now who are getting pink slips, who are getting notices that they can’t come back this fall.”

The news was so sensational that the Washington Post decided to check it out. But when Duncan was challenged to back up his claims of “pink slips,” he could point to only one county in West Virginia. According to county officials, however, the notices involved transfers, not layoffs, and were unrelated to the sequester.

Politico also questioned Obama’s veracity with a column headlined, “Is President Obama telling the truth about sequestration?” In that column it was noted that education programs are forward funded, meaning that cuts to education programs would take effect next year, not this year, giving administrators that much more time to plan and mitigate their impact.

Illegal Immigrants Released

Now here is something that will make your blood pressure rise. Tuesday federal officials decided to begin releasing illegal immigrants from detention centers in eight states citing sequestration cuts as the reason. But the cuts have not yet gone into effect! Moreover, as I just noted, the administration has some authority to decide how to implement the cuts. Yet already the detention doors are swinging open.

The White House claimed it had no knowledge of this decision, but that seems highly unlikely. Administration officials tried to reassure us that the individuals released were “noncriminals and other low-risk offenders who do not have serious criminal histories.” Really?

The New York Times tracked down one of the released illegal immigrants to learn his story. It turns out that he was detained after he had “violated probation for a conviction in 2005” for assault, battery and child abuse. Is that the definition of a “noncriminal” or someone with “no serious criminal history”?

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, blasted the administration, saying, “It’s abhorrent that President Obama is releasing criminals into our communities to promote his political agenda on sequestration. By releasing criminal immigrants onto the streets, the administration is needlessly endangering American lives.” Sadly, Rep. Goodlatte is right.


End Of Day Report

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

Woodward Blasts Obama “Madness”

While most media elites are bending over backwards to promote President Obama and his agenda, Bob Woodard, one of the nation’s most respected journalists, is ruffling feathers for daring to speak critically of Obama.

Big Media has loyally parroted the White House’s spin on the sequester, but Woodward has been the lone voice crying out that the sequester was Barack Obama’s idea. This morning on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Woodward ratcheted up his own rhetoric.

Referring to the Obama Administration’s claim that the sequester cuts would prevent it from deploying a second aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf, Woodward said:

“Can you imagine Ronald Reagan sitting there and saying, ‘Oh, by the way, I can’t do this because of some budget document’? … Under the Constitution, the president is commander-in-chief and employs the force. And so we now have the president going out because of this piece of paper and this agreement [saying] ‘I can’t do what I need to do to protect the country.’ That’s a kind of madness that I haven’t seen in a long time.”
Who would have imagined that the media’s hero — the man who brought down Richard Nixon by exposing the Watergate scandal — would be accusing the media’s anointed one of “madness”? White House retaliation will be swift and harsh. But Woodward is no “right winger,” and his honest critique of Obama’s conduct is raising eyebrows all over Washington.

Hagel Confirmed

Sadly, the Senate voted yesterday 58-to-41 to confirm Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense. I say sadly because I never thought I would see the day when a nominee for Secretary of Defense endorsed by Louis Farrakhan would be confirmed! But that day has arrived.

Every Senate Democrat voted for Hagel. They were joined by four Republicans — Thad Cochran (MS), Mike Johanns (NE), Rand Paul (KY) and Richard Shelby (AL). All four votes are depressing, but I want to comment on Senator Paul’s vote.

When Rand Paul ran for the Senate three years ago, there were concerns about his views on Israel and the Middle East. He has tried to dispel the doubts.

In January, Paul traveled to Israel and said, “I came here to show that I am supportive of the relationship between Israel and America.” He later said, “I think we should … announce to the world … that any attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States.” That is why his vote for Hagel yesterday was so disappointing.

And it is disappointing for another reason too. Paul explained his vote for Hagel by saying, “The president gets to choose political appointees.” That’s true to a point, but Paul is under no obligation to vote for them.

Rand Paul’s claim to conservative support is that he is a champion of constitutional government. The Founding Fathers could have easily said that the president gets to appoint his cabinet and left it at that. But after a protracted debate, they decided that the president’s nominees must receive the consent of the Senate.

Paul’s explanation implies he is ignoring the clear words of the Constitution in exchange for a formulation that suggests presidential appointments are essentially guaranteed. That doesn’t pass the straight face test.

I don’t see how anyone who claims to support a strong national defense, who wants to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons and who believes that Israel is our best ally could vote to confirm Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense. If Rand Paul wants to be a serious contender for the Republican nomination in 2016, he has some explaining to do.

Defend Religious Liberty

The sequester may be dominating the headlines, but other important public policy battles are also taking place right now. Recently I signed on to a coalition effort that is fighting to defend conscience protections in the wake of the Obama Administration’s unprecedented assault on religious liberty. More than 50 national, state and local organizations are part of the Call2Conscience coalition.

You will recall that Hobby Lobby and other Christian-owned businesses are still fighting Obamacare’s outrageous mandates. Now we need your help!

The House of Representatives will soon take up legislation to fund the government for the rest of the year. We want to make sure that critical conscience protections are included in this legislation so that businesses are not forced to pay for services and procedures that violate their religious beliefs.

Click here to learn more about this important effort and to take action in defense of religious liberty!

End Of Day Report

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

Obama’s Sequester Cynicism

In yesterday’s report I warned that in spite of the sequester’s miniscule size compared to the overall federal budget, Barack Obama is determined to make the cuts as painful as possible. But don’t take my word for it. Over the weekend, the Washington Post ran a story headlined, “The Big Sequester Gamble: How Badly Will The Cuts Hurt?”

The article argued that defenders of Big Government need the sequester to be painful in order to convince the American people that the solution is higher taxes, more spending and even bigger government. “The worst-case scenario for us is the sequester hits and nothing bad really happens,” one liberal lobbyist confessed to the Post.

That is why Barack Obama is telling us just how awful these cuts will be. Kids will be kicked out of school. Flights will be delayed. Workers will be furloughed and their paychecks will be cut. Today the president went to Newport News, Virginia, to warn that the Navy might have to cancel repairs to 11 ships and lay off civilian workers.

It doesn’t have to be this way. But that is exactly how Obama wants it to be! The cynicism of this White House and its allies is breathtaking. They are willing to punish hard-working, taxpaying citizens of this country in order to advance their far-left, big government agenda.

Will Obama’s Cynicism Prevail?

This morning I got more real life evidence of why the Obama strategy on sequestration may ultimately work. I begin every morning by trying to personally respond to as many emails as I can from our loyal friends and supporters. I want to share two I received today.

Keep in mind these folks are receiving my daily report. They are most likely pro-life and pro-family, and they probably voted for Mitt Romney. The first one comes from a military family in Europe.

“Mr. Bauer,
I still receive your End of the Day reports… but now, I read them from [Europe].  My husband is a former Marine, Operation Iraqi Freedom Soldier, and now a civilian employee with the [Department of Defense].  …

“This morning, my husband … was informed that should the sequester take place, he will be forced to take one day a week off, and we will live without $400+ a paycheck… Then my daughters came home from the international school they attend, with the news that the teachers will also be furloughed. …

“Can I ask a question?  Are ANY of the entitlement checks, received by millions… being cut a penny or two?  Are any congressmen going to lose even $400 out of THEIR paychecks?  Is the president, or even one member of his cabinet,  going to see a lower amount in THEIR paycheck if this happens?”

Here is the second message:

“As one of the ‘bureaucrats at desk jobs,’ who is facing a 20% cut in my pay, I would hope that you wouldn’t discount the impact that would have on my life.  It won’t just hit me on the odd day I happen to be at the airport.  I  have shown up for thirty years to a job that those in leadership deemed necessary to be done, worked hard all day long every day, producing excellent results, and continually educated myself … so I would be prepared to change with the times and do an ever better job.  I made a deal and kept my end of the bargain. I just wish my employers (Congress, the executive branch and the voters) had kept theirs.”

There is no logical reason why they or anyone else should be suffering cuts in pay or why teachers should be furloughed — EXCEPT for the fact that Obama is doing his best to portray any cut in government spending as draconian. But if I am receiving these kinds of emails from people who are probably loyal conservatives, just imagine what kind of messages Republican congressmen are receiving — and in many cases from voters who supported them.

When the sequester was negotiated, Obama demanded that some areas of the budget — such as major entitlement programs — be off limits. As a result, even though the sequester only amounts to 2.5% of total spending, the parts of the budget that are getting hit are taking a bigger hit proportionally than just 2.5%. Some discretionary programs are taking a 5% cut while some Defense programs are taking a 7% cut.

But rather than cutting salaries, agency executives should be looking for fraud, waste, and other unnecessary spending. Any department head who can’t find five or six percent in waste, fraud, duplication, etc., should be fired!

Last night on the CBS Evening News, the director of the National Institutes of Health told viewers, “Medical research in America will be slowed by [the sequester], advances that could have happened sooner will happen later or perhaps not at all.”

That statement is absurd. The federal government is not the only entity doing medical research. Is there really nothing else in the NIH’s budget to cut other than important research projects? Of course there is. But if you are the person getting cut, if you are the family in Europe, it doesn’t sound absurd when your paycheck shows up 20% smaller. That is what Obama is counting on.

And because the left-wing media willingly parrots the administration’s propaganda, many Americans who don’t watch Fox News, listen to Rush Limbaugh or read these daily reports won’t know the cynical game that is being played here.

Do I think Republicans in Congress could be doing a better job? Yes. I pointed out yesterday there should have been more oversight hearings. Perhaps they should be raising money to run ads to explain this.

But there is no way for Republicans to explain it without the cooperation of the media. Speaker Boehner and House leaders held a press conference yesterday and presented a lot of great information. It got about 30 seconds of coverage on the evening news.

This is a very frustrating time in Washington, my friends. But we cannot give up. The skirmish over sequestration is a major battle in the fight over the size and scope of government. If Obama can convince the American people that it is too draconian to cut just 2.5% of the budget, then America is doomed to follow the path of European-style socialism.

End Of Day Report

Monday, February 25, 2013

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

Opposition To Hagel Grows

The Senate is expected to hold another vote on Chuck Hagel’s nomination to be Secretary of Defense this week — perhaps as early as tomorrow. Yet as Democrats prepare to force Hagel’s confirmation, they are doing so as opposition grows from pro-Israel groups.

Friday, B’nai B’rith International issued a statement that was critical of Hagel and urged a thorough review of his record. Here is an excerpt of the B’nai B’rith press release:

“B’nai B’rith International remains concerned with many aspects of former Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel’s responses to questions during his confirmation hearing for the position of secretary of defense. Since then, more questions have been raised about Hagel’s views on a number of important issues. …

“We are concerned that Hagel, unlike the vast majority of his Senate colleagues, underestimates the threat of the Iran-backed terrorist group Hezbollah. …

“We are troubled that Hagel, during his confirmation hearings, undermined the importance of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. He appeared to endorse a policy of containment of a nuclear Iran before being advised that containment was not administration policy.

“In recent days, Hagel has disavowed, or said he didn’t remember, making certain past comments about Israel. At a 2007 speech he is said to have referred to the U.S. State Department as ‘an adjunct of the Israeli foreign minister’s office.’ Our hesitation on his nomination is based on our uneasiness with such updates to his record.”
In addition to B’nai B’rith International, the American Jewish Committee has also called on the Senate to further investigate Hagel’s anti-Israeli comments in speeches that came to light after his confirmation hearings. But getting more information is proving difficult.

The Weekly Standard has attempted to gain access to the former senator’s archives, currently housed at the University of Nebraska-Omaha. But its requests were denied by university officials and by Hagel himself. This is a hypocritical, but not unusual, move for someone seeking to join the “most transparent administration in history.”

Senator Lindsey Graham wrote a letter to Hagel asking him to grant Senate staffers access to his archives as well as transcripts to his speeches arranged by the Washington Speakers Bureau. Given what has been uncovered about Hagel since his confirmation hearing, senators would be more than justified in continuing to filibuster his nomination until they have had time to thoroughly examine his archives and speech transcripts.

TAKE ACTION: Call your senators now at 202-224-3121. Politely, but firmly, urge them to oppose ending debate on Hagel’s confirmation until he grants Senate staffers access to his archives and speech transcripts.

Obama’s Sequester Fearmongering

Last week I quoted Rush Limbaugh and agreed with him about Obama’s hysterical statements when it comes to the potential impact of the sequester cuts. But maybe we are missing the point. I believe this White House intends to make these modest cuts in the worst possible places so that they inflict the greatest amount of pain on average Americans. It is entirely possible that the worst may in fact happen.

Barack Obama is president and head of the executive branch of government. His administration controls how the cuts will be enforced. Rather than furloughing bureaucrats at desk jobs, they could decide to cut TSA agents at the nation’s busiest airports in order to make delays as horrific as possible. Under those circumstances congressional Republicans might panic after hearing from an outraged American public.

The sequester was signed into law in 2011. The White House knew this was coming. House Republicans have twice passed legislation to mitigate the sequester’s impact with more targeted cuts. But the Senate refused to vote on it and Obama threatened to veto it. So make no mistake, my friends. Whatever happens and however it happens — Obama owns the sequester.

But I believe House leaders have missed an opportunity in not using the past year to call more attention to this fact. They could have called department heads to Capitol Hill for oversight hearings on the sequester. The first question asked could have been, “When did the White House send you a memo asking to identify the waste, fat, duplicative programs, etc., that could be cut to minimize the impact of sequestration?”

Members of Congress should be demanding to know what the administration has been doing for the past year to avoid any “catastrophic” effects. This could have been going on for the last several months in order to build a case that Obama is not interested in cutting waste and that he is trying to make the sequester as painful and disruptive for the American people as possible.

By the way, even with the sequester’s “draconian cuts,” the government will still spend $15 billion more in 2013 than it did in 2012. And here’s one more thing to consider: The Congressional Research Service reported last month that in fiscal year 2011, the Obama Administration made more than $115 billion in improper government payments, i.e., “payments made in an incorrect amount, payments that should not have been made at all, or payments made to an ineligible recipient or for an ineligible purpose.” That $115 billion came out of your pocket! So don’t fall for Obama’s rhetoric about the sequester.

The Intolerant Left-Wing Media

Conservatives have railed against left-wing media bias for years. It’s one thing for someone like Rush Limbaugh to criticize Big Media as biased. But it is far more damning when another liberal blasts the left-wing media for being intolerant. So consider this recent comment by liberal columnist and commentator Juan Williams, who was fired by National Public Radio in 2010:

“I always thought it was the Archie Bunkers of the world, the right-wingers of world, who were more resistant and more closed-minded about hearing the other side. In fact, what I have learned is, in a very painful way — and I can open this shirt and show you the scars and the knife wounds — is that it is big media institutions who are identifiably more liberal to left-leaning who will shut you down, stab you and kill you, fire you, if they perceive that you are not telling the story in the way that they want it told.”
Here’s another example of media bias. MSNBC has hired Obama apologists David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs to be regular analysts. (One of them wasn’t enough?) This led one media columnist to say that NBC News is now all but a “bona fide organ of state propaganda.” He’s right. If you want the latest talking points from the Obama White House, just tune in to “MSDNC.

End Of Day Report

riday, February 22, 2013

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

Sequester Armageddon?

To hear the breathless media reports you would think that we are on the verge of an economic collapse, not because of our runaway debt but because of spending cuts ranging from $22 to $85 billion (the sequester) scheduled to be implemented on March 1st. The budget this year is $3.7 trillion, which is the same as $3,700 billion, and we are being told that not spending 1/43 (on the high end) of that $3,700 billion will destroy us!

Rush Limbaugh was right yesterday when he said this about the crisis:

“What’s happening here, folks, is we are being played for fools and being suckered — suckered into supporting the never-ending expansion of government, the wholesale destruction of the private economy. Everybody who joins in this debate under the premise that Obama puts forth, as well as debating the politics of this nonsense, is just being used to cover up what’s actually going on. Now, what’s going on is no great conspiracy. It’s no mystery. We’re spending much more money than we have.

“The government is getting inexorably larger.

“It’s less and less efficient at accomplishing anything. We’re creating more and more dependents. We’re robbing people of their dignity and humanity and of their opportunity to realize their dreams as they turn their lives over to the government. It’s like a never-ending cycle. The government makes the private sector smaller. There are fewer job opportunities. There’s less money in the private sector, less opportunity to accrue wealth. Income taxes and others threaten to go higher; they do go higher.

“It all adds up to the government growing, the private sector shrinking, freedom being lost ever so slowly, and nobody ever talks about stopping this.”
Well said, Rush.

NBC Mocks Christ

If you haven’t already heard, the NBC comedy show “Saturday Night Live” ran a disgusting segment last week mocking Jesus Christ. Intended as a parody of the movie “Django Unchained,” the skit was entitled “Djesus Uncrossed.” If you are even remotely familiar with movie director Quentin Tarantino’s work, you can only imagine what happened next — “DJesus” goes on a bloody rampage seeking revenge against those who crucified him.

“Saturday Night Live” chose to run this skit just as the Lenten season was beginning — a time of reflection when Christians consider the incredible sacrifice of the Cross, culminating in the celebration of the resurrection. While it would be far more historically accurate, there is no way NBC would tolerate a similar skit about Muhammad. But our liberal media elites don’t think twice about mocking Christians.

NBC is feeling the heat. Our friends at the American Family Association report that Sears is pulling its ads from “Saturday Night Live.” Good for them. If you would like to share your feelings with NBC, click here. Be certain to select “Saturday Night Live” in the Select Show pull down menu.

Sending Your Tax Dollars To China

One of the great outrages about Obama’s failed stimulus bill is that some of your hard-earned tax dollars were wasted creating jobs in China when the whole point was to create jobs in America. To add insult to injury, the redistribution of wealth is still going on.

In December, the battery maker A123 was sold to a Chinese company for $257 million. A123 was the recipient of $249 million of stimulus money — your tax dollars — as part of Obama’s green energy push to make batteries for electric cars. Now the Chinese own it.

And speaking of electric cars, do you remember Fisker? In 2009, Fisker Automotive received a $529 million loan from the federal government in exchange for the promise of creating so-called “green jobs” by producing electric cars at a shuttered GM plant in Delaware. In 2011, Fisker announced plans to open a plant in Finland.

But like so many of Obama’s failed green “investments,” Fisker too has gone under. It seems there just wasn’t much of a market for $103,000 electric cars. Now a Chinese company, Dongfeng Motor Corporation, is bidding to buy Fisker for $350 million. Fisker reportedly still owes $200 million to the American taxpayers.

Thankfully, Senators Charles Grassley (R-IA) and John Thune (R-SD) are speaking up and objecting to the sale. Senator Grassley told Bloomberg News, “Technology developed with American taxpayer subsidies should not be sold off to China.” Senator Thune said, “Obama’s green energy investments appear to be nothing more than venture capital for eventual Chinese acquisitions.”

Defending Religious Freedom

Kudos to Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ). Rep. Franks is the Co-Chairman of the International Religious Freedom Caucus. He recently authored a letter signed by more than 80 members of Congress calling on Secretary of State John Kerry to “exhaust every possible option to secure U.S. citizen Saeed Abedini’s release from Iran.”

Saeed Abedini is a convert from Islam. Now a Christian pastor, Abedini has made several trips to Iran in recent years. But the Islamic Republic has repeatedly harassed him. Now Abedini is sitting in one of Iran’s most notorious jails after a mock trial in a kangaroo court. Rep. Franks and other members of Congress are demanding the Obama Administration find its voice when it comes to defending Pastor Abedini’s religious freedom. I applaud their efforts, but I won’t hold my breath waiting for Obama or Kerry to speak up.

End Of Day Report

Thursday, February 21, 2013

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

So Much For “Universal” Coverage

Socialized medicine, with the promise of universal healthcare coverage, is the crown jewel of the left’s big government agenda. In 2007, as he was preparing his campaign for the presidency, Barack Obama told a union convention, “We can have universal health care by … by the end of my first term.” Obamacare did not achieve universal coverage by 2012. In fact, it is costing more and more people the coverage they currently have.

Tuesday we told you that the CEO of Kroger grocery stores acknowledged that his company was contemplating dropping its health insurance because of Obamacare. This week it was reported that Universal Studios in Orlando, Florida, will no longer be offering health insurance to its part-time employees as of December 31st of this year.

Why not? According to the Orlando Sentinel, the policy Universal offered its part-time employees “will no longer be permitted under the federal Affordable Care Act.”

Let me repeat that so no one is confused or tempted to blame “corporate greed” for hurting the “little guy.” According to the Orlando Sentinel, the policy Universal offered its part-time employees “will no longer be permitted under the federal Affordable Care Act.”

As many as 500 Universal employees stand to lose their current health insurance because of Obamacare. The Sentinel also reports that Walt Disney World is currently evaluating the impact on its 1,400 part-time employees who currently have health insurance policies that will be banned by Obamacare.

This is happening all over the country, and, again, it’s not because of “evil” Big Business. Small businesses and the self-employed are getting slammed too. This week I received the following email from a supporter:

“Dear Mr. Bauer,

I just wanted to let you know that my husband and I have recently received a termination letter from our insurance company. We are self-employed and are covered by private insurance… The letter stated they will no longer be offering our plan in California and suggested we sign up in October with a state exchange. Nice, huh? What happened to “If you like your health plan you can keep it”?
As time goes on and the onerous burdens of Obamacare increase, remind your friends and family members that it was Obama and his party that created this mess. Remember that when it comes time to go to the polls in 2014.

Obamacare’s “Death Spiral”

Many conservatives warned that Obamacare would not work. Even liberals complained it did not go far enough. Some have speculated that it may have been designed to fail, setting up the left to push for its real goal — a single-payer, socialized system — when it finally collapses.

In that same 2007 speech, Barack Obama also said, “I don’t think we’re going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There’s going to be potentially some transition process.” Obamacare is that “transition process.”

A column this week in Investor’s Business Daily explains why. Obamacare is actually making private health insurance more expensive, dramatically so for younger workers, and creating a “death spiral” for the private insurance industry. Consider these excerpts:

“But as ObamaCare’s official launch date approaches, even its backers are beginning to admit that the law could actually create powerful incentives for millions of people and thousands of businesses to drop their coverage, despite the mandate. There is growing concern, for example, that the law’s market reforms will cause a huge ‘rate shock,’ particularly for those young and healthy.
“A February survey of major health insurance companies in five cities across the country found that they expect premiums for this group to climb an average 169%. Aetna CEO Mark Bertolini said late last year that he expects premiums to double for some small businesses and some individuals as a result of the law. …

“The problem is that if the young and healthy drop coverage, the result would be what the industry calls a ‘death spiral.’ Premiums will climb as the pool of insured gets sicker, causing still more to cancel their policies.”

As insurance costs skyrocket and more and more Americans remain uninsured, Democrats will never admit they were wrong about Obamacare. The left will simply contend that it wasn’t allowed to go far enough, and the push for a full-fledged socialized healthcare system as the only alternative will begin in earnest.

Cornyn To Obama: Withdraw Hagel

Kudos to Senator John Cornyn (R-TX). Senator Cornyn sent a letter to President Obama today urging him to withdraw the nomination of Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense. Contrasting the Senate’s unanimous support for current Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, Senator Cornyn noted that it would be “unprecedented for a Secretary of Defense to take office without the broad base of bipartisan support.”

Cornyn also slammed Hagel’s performance at his confirmation hearing as “deeply concerning, leading to serious doubts about his basic competence.” You can read the letter here.

Senator Cornyn’s letter was signed by fourteen of his GOP colleagues: Marco Rubio (R-FL), Jim Risch (R-ID), Dan Coats (R-IN), David Vitter (R-LA), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Pat Toomey (R-PA), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Tim Scott (R-SC), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Mike Lee (R-UT), Ron Johnson (R-WI) and John Barrasso (R-WY).

End Of Day Report

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

To: Friends & Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer

Obama’s Foreign Policy Fiasco

The damage that Barack Obama is doing to America economically and culturally is obvious to most of you, and we are doing all that we can to fight back. But the damage to our foreign policy is not so obvious, and the mess Obama is making will be very hard for the next president to clean up.

For example, while Obama is trying to prevent law-abiding American citizens from owning certain firearms, he is sending tanks and jets to the radical Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt — weapons that could well be used against our ally Israel. While reducing America’s dependence on oil from hostile regimes has been a key priority for years, Obama has so far refused to embrace the Keystone pipeline from our ally Canada.

Now there are reports that Obama sent secret missions to North Korea. For years the Left railed against George W. Bush’s “cowboy” policies. “If only we would talk to our enemies,” they said, as if our disagreements were just simple misunderstandings.

So what did Obama do? He reached out to North Korea, and it got us nothing but another nuclear test. The latest North Korean propaganda film says the nuclear test was prompted by our “hostility” and shows Obama and U.S. soldiers engulfed in flames. By the way, North Korea is working hand-in-hand with Iran too.

But the really breathtaking part is that we conducted these missions without letting Japan, a key ally, know. Not only did we not tell Japan, but when Japanese officials discovered evidence of our secret flights to North Korea and approached us, the Obama Administration’s response was dismissive and arrogant, even threatening. According to the report, “The U.S. State Department even warned the [Japanese] Foreign Ministry against making further inquiries, saying they would harm bilateral relations.”

I understand that the U.S. can’t conduct every foreign policy mission in broad daylight. But to the Japanese, this must surely seem very unusual. Japan is facing an increasingly aggressive China, and it is well within range of North Korean missiles. Why wouldn’t we want Japan to know unless we were getting ready to make concessions they would object to?

Obama’s approach to the world can be summed up as a unique foreign policy that reaches out to our enemies while insulting our friends. That is not a recipe for success.

More Questions About Hagel

In recent days new information about controversial speeches by former Senator Chuck Hagel has come to light. Yesterday the Washington Free Beacon reported that during a 2010 appearance at Rutgers University, Hagel allegedly accused Israel of routinely violating U.N. resolutions, called for negotiations with Hamas, labeled Benjamin Netanyahu a “radical” and suggested that Israel was becoming an “apartheid state.”

This new revelation comes on the heels of a report last week about another Rutgers speech Hagel gave in 2007. During those remarks, Hagel said, “The State Department has become adjunct to the Israeli Foreign Minister’s office.” Monday the Daily Caller reported that Hagel’s 2007 speech was organized by a foundation directly controlled by the Iranian regime. In fact, Hooshang Amirahmadi, who ran the foundation at the time of Hagel’s speech, is a candidate for the Iranian presidency this year.

In recent days, I have received a number of emails expressing frustration that some Republican senators appear willing to end the filibuster of Hagel’s nomination. These senators fundamentally believe that the president should get his choices.

As frustrating as that is (and we think Hagel could still be beaten), the really depressing thing is that the overwhelming majority of Senate Democrats campaigned as friends of Israel. Yet not one of them has been willing to stand up to Obama and oppose Chuck Hagel.

Criminalizing Judeo-Christian Values

For those of you who appreciate biblical references, we’ve been telling you that the handwriting is on the wall when it comes to the radical agenda of the militant homosexual rights movement. It is trying to criminalize the teaching of the Bible and punish those who dare defend God’s ordained institution of marriage. Well, here we go.

Last month a homosexual rights group dragged Pastor Scott Lively into a Massachusetts federal court and essentially charged him with “crimes against humanity.” The suit alleges that Lively’s preaching and support for legislation in Uganda criminalizing homosexual behavior directly contributed to violence against homosexuals in the country.

And who is behind the lawsuit? Obama’s good friend George Soros. The plaintiffs in the case are being represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights, which is funded by Soros.

Fortunately the judge seemed highly critical of the Center’s claim that Lively could be held responsible. But this lawsuit is a dangerous precedent that exposes the Left’s intolerance for our First Amendment rights of free speech and religious liberty.