How else can one describe laws passed recently by congress except as "tyrannical"? From petty laws dictating what kind of light bulbs we may use to essentially banning popular automobiles to raising taxes as our economy appears to be stumbling, very bad left-wing ideas control legislation now as they have sometimes in the past. (Who can forget the 55-MPH speed limit?)
The tragedy is that angry Democrats are voting in record numbers; far outpacing Republicans at the polls this primary season. Democrat fundraising soars well above amounts raised by Republicans; and this has ominous implications. In both Iowa and North Carolina, and all other state voting primaries, Republican turnout was way down.
But the real problem in November, 2008, in addition to loss of the white house, is the potential acquisition of a Democrat veto-proof majority in the senate. Almost half of the Republican Party's 49 senate seats are up for reelection in 2008, as compared to only 12 seats Democrats have to defend. At least 11 of the Democrat seats are considered by "experts" as safe and in seven of 11 seats the incumbents are unlikely to lose because they have been in the senate four or more terms.
A Democrat gain of three to six seats is more than possible and a turnover of nine Republican seats gives Democrats a filibuster-proof majority. In the event of a close case scenario, Republicans would have to rely on RINOs like Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins to sustain a filibuster. Couple this with the likelihood Nancy Pelosi will lead a House with an even bigger Democrat majority, and a Democrat president, and we have an unavoidable disaster for our country ahead.
A Washington Times analysis January 21 gave a realistic appraisal of Democrat prospects in the house:
"While it is surely far too early to make definitive judgments about the vote itself, a rash of Republican retirements in competitive districts has left the party standing on defensive terrain."
With the real possibility of the Democrat left-wing taking over government, here are some of the entirely likely legislative results we will see:
- a "sun-setting" of the Bush tax cuts (favorable rates on capital gains and dividends will expire in 2010) and increased taxes for tax payers, (all of whom Democrats regard as "the wealthy among us" or "rich")
- a mandatory universal healthcare program (the differences between Obama and Clinton proposals are slight) with coverage for illegal immigrants
- bailout of imprudent home loan borrowers, punishing the responsible home buyers and rewarding the irresponsible
- possible Puerto Rican statehood to add two Democrat senators and six to eight Democrats in the House
- a "comprehensive" illegal immigration law granting citizenship to illegal aliens while leaving our borders wide open
- global warming initiatives that will further diminish our freedom and lifestyle
- a turn over of some inherent national rights and prerogatives to the United Nations or some other international authority ("light bulbs and cars came first, what's next, gun rights?)
- increasing and expanded entitlement programs paid for by tax payers as gifts to those not paying taxes
Democrat plans for socialized medicine under the rubric "universal healthcare" alone will cost trillions of dollars and would likely bankrupt the country. Clinton herself estimates the cost at $1 trillion but remember when Medicare was created in the 1960s proponents said the program would cost $9 billion by 1990; in fact it cost $66 billion by 1990. Applying this 700% unanticipated increase to Clinton's plan suggests a more reliable $7 trillion cost for her mandatory health coverage program. Obama's healthcare scheme costs about the same; so if either becomes president and they successfully work with a Democrat congress to produce socialized medicine, our present flirtation with a recession will seem like an economic boom in comparison.