The Republican National Committee raised more than $1 million in new pledges since Sunday's House vote to enact Obamacare. The campaign, which uses the clever tag line of "Fire Pelosi," is designed to raise money to help Republicans capture majority control of the House.

For more information, click here.

(H/T The Heritage Foundation)

Finding an honest Democrat in Congress is proving to be a difficult task.

Less than 24 hours after replacing crooked Democrat Charlie Rangel as chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, crooked Democrat Pete Stark was also forced to resign.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi better get busy draining that swamp she keeps talking about. The place is beginning to smell. Then again, there's only eight months until the November elections. The American public will take care of cleaning out the cesspool that is Congress on Nov. 2.

From POLITICO:

Rep. Sander Levin will take over as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee after Rep. Pete Stark, who held the gavel for a day, stepped aside.

The dominoes fell after Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) resigned the chairmanship of the powerful tax-writing panel Wednesday as Republicans and many Democrats were moving to oust him following an ethics committee ruling that found he violated House gift rules.

Levin, who had been chairman of the trade subcommittee, will helm the panel through the end of this Congress — barring the unlikely return of Rangel.

Officially, Stark stepped aside to keep the gavel of the panel's health subcommittee. But lawmakers and aides said Stark faced a rebellion within the committee and the caucus over his sometimes bizarre behavior and penchant for making offensive comments.

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen told Stark at a Ways and Means Committee meeting Wednesday that his stepping aside would be in the best interests of the party, according to a Democratic aide familiar with the meeting.

Read more at the link below:Pete Stark hands off gavel - Jonathan Allen and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

Has anyone else noticed that Nancy Pelosi's four years as Speaker of the House coincide with the United States' rapid decline as an economic power? Record unemployment, skyrocketing energy prices, record budget deficits, massive corruption. That's Nancy Pelosi's legacy.

Nancy Pelosi's brutal reality check - John Bresnahan and Jonathan Allen - POLITICO.com

A new Rasmussen Reports survey of Americans voters finds that 61% believe Congress is doing a poor job.

In case you get all your information from the Mainstream Media, Congress has been controlled by the Democrats since the 2006 elections.

There is a bright side to the dismal poll numbers. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will be out as leaders of their respective chambers after the November election when Republicans will win majorities in the House and Senate.

From Rasmussen Reports:

The number of voters who give Congress a poor job performance rating is now at its highest level in more than three years. More voters also think most members of Congress are corrupt.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 61% of likely voters say Congress is doing a poor job. Just 12% give Congress good or excellent ratings, marking no change from last month. Positive ratings for Congress have changed little from a year ago, when 14% gave the legislature good or excellent marks.

Since then, of course, Congress has passed a controversial economic stimulus plan and unpopular bailout plans for the financial industry, General Motors and Chrysler. The health care plan now stalled in Congress has long been opposed by most voters. In fact, 61% now want Congress to drop health care and focus on jobs.

Forty-five percent (45%) of voters now view most members of Congress as being corrupt, the highest level found since June 2008. Just 28% disagree and say most members are not corrupt. Another 26% are undecided.

Read more survey results at Rasmussen Reports.

(H/T NewsBusters)

From Investor's Business Daily:

This year's $787 billion "stimulus" is now the costliest fiscal failure in U.S. history. Put bluntly, it didn't work — in fact, it made things worse. So what do you follow it up with? Why, "Stimulus, Part II."

Government is by its very essence wasteful, but it doesn't have to be stupid. Yet, with more than a year's experience under our belt and no real progress seen in ending our jobless recovery, you'd think Congress would be hesitant to pass another big-spending, job-killing failure like the last.

On Thursday, however, the House passed another $175 billion "jobs" bill. Given what we know, this is an act of either total ignorance or breathtaking political opportunism — or a bit of both.

It amounts to a third round of stimulus. In 2008, President George W. Bush tried one, handing out some $152 billion — a bit under 1% of GDP — to Americans and inviting them to spend it to get the economy growing again. Instead, they saved it or paid down credit cards.

This year's mammoth stimulus, we were assured by the Obama White House, would be different. It would cap unemployment at 8% and kick-start the economy. But the unemployment rate soared above 10%, and we've lost 4 million jobs this year alone.

So it's no longer debatable: Based on what was promised, the stimulus has failed. Even so, we now may get another one (called a "jobs bill" this time), which no doubt will be just as wasteful.

Read the full editorial, "More Jobs Jive," at the newspaper's Web site.

Americans for Tax Reform has released its 2009 Naughty and Nice List featuring a lot of well-known Democrats, including Vice President Joe Biden and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

In case you haven't figured it out, Biden and Pelosi are on the "Naughty" list, which also includes former Gov. Jon Corzine, Rep. Charlie Rangel, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Sen. Chris Dodd, Rep. Barney Frank and Rahm Emanuel.

Why it's a virtual who's who of everybody running Washington ... and running this country into the ground.

The "Nice" list is overwhelmingly Republican: House Republican Leader John Boehner, Sen. Mike Johanns, Rep. Michelle Bachmann, Rep. Darrell Issa, Sen. Jim DeMint and Rep. Tom Price.

For the complete list, visit the ATR Web site.

Be sure to thank a Democrat for keeping a watchful eye on your tax dollars.

From POLITICO:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) spent $2,993 in taxpayer money on flowers between June and October. House Majority Whip James Clyburn has a thing for Chantilly Donuts, spending about $265 at the Virginia shop in the past quarter. And Rep. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), a fiscal conservative, decided to give about $2,000 in unused office funds back to the government to help reduce the deficit.

Nancy Pelosi spends $2,993 on flowers - Jake Sherman and Meredith Shiner - POLITICO.com

Attention Democrats who supported the Pelosi Health Care Bill that guts Medicare to pay for expanded coverage to younger people: Seniors have long memories and they tend to vote in every election.

The 60 Plus Association is targeting 15 Democrats, including two from Pennsylvania.

New $1.5 Million Campaign Targeting 15 'YES' Votes on House Health Care Reform

Remember all the grief former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin received from the liberal media when she pointed out that the health care reform bills pushed by Democrats included provisions for the so-called "death panels" to advise elderly Americans on alternatives to medical treatment after they reach a certain age?

Guess what? Sarah Palin was right. The House bill touted by Nancy Pelosi includes end-of-life counseling by government-sponsored "death panels."

From The Associated Press:

It's alive! End-of-life counseling in health bill

WASHINGTON (AP) — It's alive.

The Medicare end-of-life planning provision that 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin said was tantamount to "death panels" for seniors is staying in the latest Democratic health care bill unveiled Thursday.

The provision allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling to help beneficiaries deal with the complex and painful decisions families face when a loved one is approaching death.

For years, federal laws and policies have encouraged Americans to think ahead about end-of-life decisions, and make their wishes known in advance through living wills and similar legal documents. But when House Democrats proposed this summer to pay doctors for end-of-life counseling, it touched off a wave of suspicion and anger.

Prominent Republicans singled it out as a glaring example of government overreach.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, at the time a lead negotiator on health care legislation, told constituents at a town hall meeting they had good reason to question the proposal.

"I don't have any problem with things like living wills, but they ought to be done within the family," he said. "We should not have a government program that determines you're going to pull the plug on grandma."

Job approval numbers for members of Congress have plummeted since the Democrats took control after the 2006 election. Now a majority of Americans say we should flush all of Congress away and start over.

From Rasmussen Reports:

If they could vote to keep or replace the entire Congress, just 25% of voters nationwide would keep the current batch of legislators.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% would vote to replace the entire Congress and start all over again. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure how they would vote.

Overall, these numbers are little changed since last October. When Congress was passing the unpopular $700-billion bailout plan in the heat of a presidential campaign and a seeming financial industry meltdown, 59% wanted to throw them all out. At that time, just 17% wanted to keep them.

There has been a bit of a partisan shift since last fall. With Democrats controlling both chambers of Congress, it's not surprising to find that the number of Democrats who would vote to keep the entire Congress has grown from 25% last fall to 43% today. In fact, a modest plurality of Democrats would now vote to keep the legislators. Last fall, a plurality of Democrats were ready to throw them all out.

Read more poll results at Rasmussen Reports

Six months of failure under the Democratic leadership of Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid has convinced 7 in 10 Americans that big government liberalism is not the way to go, according to a new poll.

From the latest Rasmussen Reports:

Seventy percent (70%) of likely voters now favor a government that offers fewer services and imposes lower taxes over one that provides more services with higher taxes, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

That’s up five points over the past month and is the highest level measured in nearly three years.

Just 19% would prefer a government that provides more services in exchange for higher taxes, down five points from July and the lowest level in over two years. This marks the first time the percentage of voters who prefer this type of government has fallen below 20%.

Most Republicans (88%) and voters not affiliated with either major party (78%) like a government with lower taxes and fewer services, and 48% of Democrats agree. However, one-in-three Democrats (34%) prefer more government services and higher taxes.

Read more at Rasmussen Reports

From a recent editorial in Investor's Business Daily:

At this point in a normal downturn lasting 11 months, the economy should be booming — with big jumps in GDP and 300,000 new jobs each month coming mostly from the private sector.

But 18 months into this downturn, we're still losing jobs — with 2.7 million gone in the private sector just since January, when the Democrats took full control of the government.

Shrinking GDP has crushed investment. First quarter gross private domestic investment — a proxy for business investment — plunged 20%, or nearly $450 billion, annually. The outlook is grim.

Worse, the June jobs data mark a milestone of sorts: Our unemployment rate equals that of the no-growth Eurozone nations.

Why is this job decline happening? The private sector — the real engine of economic and job growth — won't hire because it's scared of what it sees coming out of Washington.

On the horizon, as far as the eye can see, are higher taxes, uncontrolled spending and layers upon layers of new regulations.

Who would hire new workers faced with that?

Read the full editorial at the newspaper's Web site.

U.S. Senate candidate Pat Toomey is reaching across the aisle to extend a pat on the back to four Democratic members of the Pennsylvania Congressional delegation for their recent vote against the cap and trade bill.

The climate change tax bill passed the House by a 219-212 margin, with 44 Democrats voting against it.

Toomey commended Democratic Reps. Jason Altmire (PA-04); Chris Carney (PA-10); Tim Holden (PA-17); and Kathy Dahlkemper (PA-03) for "joining the bipartisan opposition to the cap-and-trade bill that promises to raise taxes and destroy American jobs."

More from a Toomey press release:

"Along with 40 other Democrats, these Pennsylvania Democrats had the courage to stand up to one-party rule in Washington," Toomey said. "They understand that protecting the environment is an important goal, but they are not willing to sacrifice American prosperity and hardworking taxpayers in the process. It is a shame Rep. Joe Sestak (PA-07) couldn't muster up the same courage. Instead, he voted to support Nancy Pelosi's extreme agenda. The question is, will Senator Specter choose the same path?"

"Only a couple of weeks ago, Senator Specter argued in support of maintaining balance in Washington in order to protect the country from extremism," said Toomey Communications Director Nachama Soloveichik. "He told The Hill newspaper that 'The United States desperately needs a two-party system.' But now that he has joined the Democratic Party, he seems intent on marching in lockstep with his new party in order to avoid a Democratic primary, even if it means throwing hardworking Americans under the bus. Senator Specter has the chance to prove he is serious about bringing balance to Washington — will he have the courage to do it?"

For more on Toomey's bid for a U.S. Senate seat from Pennsylvania, visit his campaign Web site, www.toomeyforsenate.com

America's third largest political party is warning that Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats are rushing toward a massive new energy tax on American families known as "cap and trade," or the Waxman-Markey bill.

"With unemployment rising above and beyond what President Obama said it would be with the multi-hundred billion dollar stimulus bill, now is not the time to dismantle our economy with a multi-hundred billion dollar energy tax hike," said William Redpath of the Libertarian Party.

"Libertarians urge House members to defeat this job-killing tax hike on Americans," said Redpath. "Libertarian candidates are out there every day proposing proven solutions to create the jobs we need and restore our prosperity. This $1.9 trillion tax hike would destroy millions of jobs and impose dramatically higher prices for everything."

More from a Libertarian Party release:

At nearly 1,000 pages, H.R. 2454, sponsored by Democrat Reps. Henry Waxman and Edward Markey, imposes new taxes on any economic activity that produces carbon dioxide. Pelosi hopes to rush the bill to a vote, despite no net temperature increase globally over the last decade, significant research showing man-made carbon dioxide isn't changing the climate and opposition from thousands of scientists.

The economic impact would be harsh. According to research from the independent, non-partisan Heritage Foundation, the bill would have devastating impacts on the average American family.

The research found that by 2035, gasoline prices would increase 58 percent, natural gas prices would increase 55 percent, prices for home heating oil would increase 56 percent, and worst of all, electricity prices would jump 90 percent.

While the average American would pay the tax once in the form of higher energy prices, they also pay it again in higher costs for goods that must be manufactured and services that must be provided using energy.

The average family of four could see $2,979 in higher prices per year, paying $4,609 more in 2035 alone. The total costs to the average family in higher prices, from 2012 to 2035, reach $71,493.

The bill would also destroy millions of jobs, even taking into account Obama administration promises of new “green” jobs. The research finds an average annual job loss of 1,145,000 jobs per year because of Waxman-Markey. In the worst years, 2,479,000 Americans will lose their jobs annually under Waxman-Markey.

Rep. Joe Pitts, a Republican who represents Pennsylvania's 16th Congressional District, is a straight shooter, especially when it comes to looking out for the taxpayer.

Pitts is warning that Nancy Pelosi and Democrats are rushing the Waxman-Markey energy tax bill through the House before taxpayers can figure out how much it's going to cost them.

From a statement issued by Pitts:

"Every American should be gravely concerned about this legislation. Protecting the environment is extremely important, but we should do so wisely and carefully. This is reckless and extreme legislation that will hurt people who are already suffering and do significant damage to the American economy. It will drive manufacturing jobs out of the country to places like China. It will hurt American competitiveness in the world economy. Pennsylvania will be among the hardest hit states.

"The economics of this are simple: affordable energy is critical to prosperity. This legislation will make energy much more expensive. That translates to a less prosperous America with higher poverty rates, higher taxes, and a much bigger national debt. The right way to protect the environment is to make clean energy cheaper by encouraging proven sources of clean energy like wind, solar, and nuclear along with the development of cutting-edge technologies like plug-in hybrid cars and hydrogen fuel cells.

"I will be offering amendments to this bill in an attempt to limit its damage to the economy. However, I expect Democratic leaders to block votes on those amendments."

Pitts is a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has primary jurisdiction over the legislation. He is also a member of the committee's Energy and Environment Subcommittee.

The U.S. House of Representatives voted 252-172 Thursday to reject a measure pushed by Republicans to investigate House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's assertion that the CIA misled her on the use of torture.

Odd that Democrats don't want to know the truth, isn't it?

The evidence is overwhelming that Pelosi knew about the "enhanced interrogation" techniques and signed off on them, but Democrats don't want to dig too deep for fear of exposing their leader as a habitual liar.

Here's a roll call of Pennsylvania House members, with a "yes" vote signifying they don't want to investigate Pelosi. Hint: Every Democrat voted to cover up Pelosi's lying.

Democrats — Altmire, Y; Brady, Y; Carney, Y; Dahlkemper, Y; Doyle, Y; Fattah, Y; Holden, Y; Kanjorski, Y; Murphy, Patrick, Y; Murtha, Y; Schwartz, Y; Sestak, Y.

Republicans — Dent, N; Gerlach, N; Pitts, N; Platts, N; Shuster, N; Thompson, N.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney, speaking today at the American Enterprise Institute, confirmed that Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi lied when she claimed the CIA misled her about the use of "enhanced interrogation" techniques against terrorist leaders.

From The Associated Press:

The former vice president bristled over the complaints about interrogation from lawmakers, pointing out that leading members of Congress, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., were briefed on the programs and methods.

"Yet for all these exacting efforts to do a hard and necessary job and to do it right, we hear from some quarters nothing but feigned outrage based on a false narrative," Cheney said. "In my long experience in Washington, few matters have inspired so much contrived indignation and phony moralizing as the interrogation methods applied to a few captured terrorists."

Pelosi has said the CIA misled her in 2002 about whether waterboarding, which simulates drowning, had been used.