. . . . .
Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler

Subscribe here – To The Point News

Merry Christmas Eve!  It’s a good time to turn our eyes towards Heaven, for the Congress from Hell has finally ended.

The Enemedia is celebrating the 111th Congress and its Lame Schmuck Session as “the most productive in history,” modern or even ever.  That’s certainly true if you, as does the Enemedia, have a Hate-America agenda.  For anyone Pro-America, the 111th has been the most destructive in US history, modern or even ever.

So – the multi-trillion dollar, fate-of-America question is:  will the 112th ride to America’s rescue and undo the damage?  The scientifically precise answer is… Maybe.

The Zero Presidency and Reid-Pelosi Congress have made many folks aware of this terrifying truth:  that Democrats are more dangerous to America than terrorists.

The damage any conceivable attack on America perpetrated by Moslem crazies is miniscule compared to the damage Democrats have already wrought upon our country in the last two years – and they intend via their Man in the White House to perpetrate vastly more.

This just-ended Lame Schmuck Congress adds an instructive codicil to this:  that RINO Republicans are just as dangerous as America-destroying Democrats.

The one great Dem defeat during the LSC, so great that Zero publicly declared it was “incredibly disappointing,” was their illegal alien amnesty DREAM Act shot down by failing to get 60 Senate votes required for “cloture” (end debate and allow a simple majority vote).  The final vote was 55-41.

It’s cosmically ironic that the bill was defeated by five defecting Dems:  Ben Nelson (NE), Pryor (AR), Tester (MT), Baucus (MT), and Hagan (NC).  A sixth Dem, Manchin of WV skipped the vote.  Note that Nelson and Tester are up for re-election in 2012 in overwhelmingly Pub states.

If just two of them had not done so, it would have passed – for three RINOs voted yes, Lugar (IN), Bennett (UT), and Murkowski (AK).

The two great Dem victories of the LSC, DADT Repeal and the New START Treaty, were made possible by RINO votes.

Cloture on DADT Repeal won by 63-33.  One Dem voted no (Manchin-WV), five RINOs yes: Brown (MA), Kirk (IL), Voinovich (OH) and the two Mainiacs, Snow & Collins.

Treaty ratification requires 67 Senators (2/3 of 100) to vote yes.  Incredibly, thirteen RINOs voted yes on Wednesday (12/22), with New START ratified 71-26.  Here’s the list ( r= retired, will not be in 112th, *= up for re-election in 2012):

Lamar Alexander TN
Dick Lugar IN*
Scott Brown MA*
Bob Corker TN*
Johnny Isakson GA
Lisa Murkowski AK
Thad Cochran MS
Judd Gregg NH (r)
George Voinovich OH (r)
Mike Johanns NE
Bob Bennett UT (r)
Olympia Snowe ME*
Susan Collinss ME

The question arises:  are these people just plain stupid, are they appeasement-addicted useful idiots, are they as outright treasonous as Hate America Democrats, or what?

Some of them could be all three, yet the real answer may be even worse:  that they are motivated by personal revenge.  The RINO votes for DREAM, DADT Repeal, and New START were revenge votes, explosions of resentment for voters forcing them to retire (Murkowski had to get away with massive write-in cheating to avoid this), or electing real Pro-Americans on Nov 2nd.

In deciding to take their resentment out on America’s capacity to defend itself, these RINOs have joined the Hate America clique of the Democrats.

Skye on the Forum explained one reason the treaty is disastrous:

“The New START treaty would cripple our construction, possession, and use of dual platform delivery systems such as the B-1, B-2, B-52, and certain cruise missiles. This would have the perverse effect of making the US more dependent on the use of nuclear weapons by reducing our ability to use precision non-nuclear weapons instead… Not having enough B-52s to carry a lot of precision guided non-nuclear kilotonage is a huge defeat.”

As always, danger provides an opportunity – in this case, a teachable moment during the 2012 campaigns.  Dick Lugar and Bob Corker are particularly vulnerable to successful primary challenges, albeit Snowe and Brown less so.  It is in the presidential campaign, however, that this treasonous vote should be spotlighted.

That’s because of what George Bush did in 2001, his first year in office:  he unilaterally suspended provisions of the ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) Treaty with Russia.  Here is the Bush Justice Department’s Memo explaining the President’s constitutional authority to do so.

Part of a Republican presidential candidate’s platform has to include an iron-clad commitment to suspend those provisions of New Start that defenestrate US defense. “I will abrogate New Start” has to be his – or her – campaign promise.

*  *  *  *  *
Which brings the HFR to the subject of vanilla ice cream.  Jack Kelly made the case (not his personal case, just the case for you to consider) for Plain Vanilla in 2012.  A non-threatening “plain vanilla” conservative like Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty might stand a better chance of defeating Zero, for the key to this goal is to keep the campaign focus on Zero, rather than a demonizable opponent.

It’s an interesting argument made by serious people.  Evidence for it is, e.g., hated-by-voters Harry Reid was able to win only because he was able to focus voter attention away from him on his opponent, Sharron Angle.

So, the argument continues, Zero wouldn’t be able to do this with Pawlenty, but sure could with Sarah Palin, whose candidacy “would be like sticking a red hot branding iron in the face of the Washington establishment… Palin v. Obama would be like WWIII.”

Folks, it is the absolute, stone-cold opinion of the HFR that such a WWIII branding iron is exactly what America needs in 2012.  It is one – one – main reason why the HFR is all up/all in for Palin 2012.

America must, if it is to survive in any recognizable form, be given a clear explicit choice in 2012:  between the producers and the moochers, the wealth-makers and the wealth-takers.

“Mr. Obama is, by his own admission and his actions in office, a wealth-taker.  He has no  concept of how wealth and prosperity is created, how it comes into existence.  He thinks it is made by some kind of mysterious, and basically malevolent, magic.  His only concern is how to take­ – which means steal with government guns – the wealth of those who have earned it, and ‘redistribute’ it to those who have not.

“Is it any wonder that his presidency has been such a total abject failure at creating jobs?

“Mr. Obama calls Democrat wealth-taking ‘social justice.’  My definition of social justice is the same as that of the great economist Walter Williams, who defines real social justice to mean:  ‘I get to keep what I make, you get to keep what you make.’

“The key word is make – honestly earn, not steal or mooch or get a government subsidy for.  Should I be elected your President, I vow to get the federal government out of the way of wealth creation – to remove all the barriers, rules, regulations, and taxes that inhibit or prevent entrepreneurs from starting or expanding their businesses and creating real jobs thereby.

“And I vow, as your president, to end any and all government subsidies of corporations and industries hooked on the drug of corporate welfare or protected from competition by their buddies in the federal bureaucracy or Congress.

“Mr. Obama will spin this as a terrible threat – that if I am elected President, you will be ‘on your own’ with the government not there to subsidize and take care of you.  He’s right.  When I’m your President, you’re darn right you’ll be on your own, as Americans were meant to be – responsible for their own lives and free to succeed or fail.

“I want to state this very clearly:  if you are a moocher, if you are a wealth-taker, I don’t want your vote.  Vote for Mr. Obama.  If, on the other hand, you are a producer, a wealth-maker – or just as important, if you aspire to be, if that’s what you want for your life – then I sure do want your vote.  For I promise you, as your President, I will do everything it is possible for a President of the United States to constitutionally do to make that aspiration come true.  For that is the real American Dream.  It always has been, and as your President, I swear on my oath of office that it will continue to be.”

Folks – can you imagine any legitimate Republican presidential candidate saying these words in a presidential debate other than Sarah Palin?  Neither can I.

*  *  *  *  *
That’s for 2012.  What about now, the next few months of the incoming 112th?

FCC Fascism is providing it with marvelous defunding opportunities. Sen. Jim DeMint calls the agency the “Fabricating a Crisis Commission,” and will be introducing a bill to repeal the agency’s “net neutrality” rules.

Far better, though, are now serious calls for the House not just defund some of the FCC’s activities, but to eliminate the entire agency.  In so doing, Republicans would become heroes to virtually the entire Internet world.

(Note:  how the Marxist goal of net neutrality was pulled off is explained well by John Fund in the WSJ.)

And how about this for a great Defunding headline: Republicans Plot Death of EPA Climate Rules.  It’s a start.  After eliminating the FCC, zeroing-out any and all funding for it altogether, the EPA should be next.

Meantime, here’s how American ingenuity is thwarting the EPA with a fracking technology trifecta:  making money, frustrating eco-luddites, and securing US energy independence.

*  *  *  *  *
Out of all of this, the best news of the week occurred on Wednesday (12/22).  Hours before funding for all federal government activities expired at midnight, both the House and Senate passed and Zero signed a Continuing Resolution to pay for the government – all the way to March 4.  Not a single earmark – thousands were stripped out.

This means the 112th starts with a clean plate.  Nothing is funded now after March 4.  The defunding possibilities are endless.  Skye has a suggestion for one:  no funding for dismantling any B-52s as required by New START.

Again, laws are simply authorizations to implement.  But if the House subsequently refuses to allow any money to be spent on implementation, then the law to be implemented is defunct.

The goal then should be for 2011 to be a Goldwater Year.  Back in 1964 he said the purpose of a Conservative Congress should be to repeal laws, not to pass them.  That should be the purpose of the 112th.  And it will be, if the RINOs can be pushed out of the way.

For the next two years, the purpose of the 112th must be the repair the horrific damage of the 111th.  Then a Palin-Bolton Administration can repair the damage of its predecessor – and make the American Dream become a reality once again.

Merry Christmas to you all!!!

. . . . .