Anyway, enjoy:

Obama: bla bla bla bla bla hey guys bla bla bla the constitution says I gotta bore you to death tonight

Obama: bla bla bla bla I inherited a mess just like the world wars bla bla *Biden head shake* bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla random small town reference bla bla bla wall street hates children bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla this is the hardest presidency EVAH bla bla bla *fox letting teleprompter screens in the frame* bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla bla bla I healed the economy bla bla bla but not really bla bla but I will

Obama: bla bla bla bla taxes are fun and good for the economy bla bla bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla bla taxes arent fun and so I killed them all bla bla bla bla *obvious politician joke* hahahahahahahah bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla *harry reid falls asleep* bla bla bla *Pelosi displays no emotion or appearance of humanity* bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla the stimulus is totally awesome, come on guys, stop laughing bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla ok, so, never mind about the stimulus working bla bla bla bla lets do it again anyway! bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla bla bla *head swivel* bla bla bla bla bla bla *head swivel* bla bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla lets eliminate the capitol gains tax bla bla bla bla lets re-institute the WPA also!

Obama: bla bla I want to give a shout out to *looks at back of guitar* THE HOUSE!!! bla bla and lets not forget *looks again* THE SENATE!

Obama: bla bla bla bla people told me not to do stuff bla bla bla bla but I said hell no man! *slow serious head shake from Biden*

Obama: bla bla bla bla the US sucks at stuff compared to China and Germany bla bla USA USA USA USA!!! bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla solar power *crikets* bla bla bla bla nuclear power *cheering* bla bla bla oil drilling *cheering*

Obama: bla bla bla bla just kidding about oil and coal *puts on gotcha face* bla bla bla cap and trade!

Obama: bla bla bla bla exports will double because I want them to bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla *clapping* bla *clapping* bl*clapping* bla bla *clapping*

Obama: bla bla bla bla government schools suck bla bla bla bla solution? More government! bla bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla bla universal college! bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla universal healthcare! bla bla bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla I suck at politics bla bla bla bla bla insurance companies are evil bla bla bla fat kids

Obama: bla bla bla bla bla *dust off trusty talking points that have worked so well before* bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla seriously, your gonna like my health plan eventually bla bla bla bla seriously

Obama: bla bla dude, Bush made me spend all that money bla bla bla bla just statin’ the facts

Obama: bla bla bla bla *fox cuts to weird overhead view* bla bla bla belt tightening

Obama: bla bla bla bla bipartisanship bla bla *random democrat* bla bla bla *random republican*

Obama: bla bla I never believed all that crap I spewed on the campaign trail bla bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla Democrats have massive majority bla bla Republicans stop blocking everything we do!!! bla

Obama: bla bla bla bla I’m like Kennedy and Reagan combined and will rid the world of nukes bla bla bla bla bla

Obama: bla Iran is gonna get it bla bla bla bla you know, eventually

Obama: bla bla bla America rocks

Obama: bla bla bla bla oh yea, I almost forgot, dont ask dont tell bla bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla dude, dont you guys remember my slogan? bla bla bla bla

Obama: bla bla *random average person quote* bla bla bla bla *random average person quote* bla

Obama: bla bla bla God Da– Bless the United States of America bla bla bla bla *republicans rush out* Thank you *the end*

Now for the McDonnell translation:

McDonnell: bla bla bla Republican bla bla bla jobs bla bla jobs bla jobs

McDonnell: bla bla unemployment is high bla bla bla jobs are the answer bla

McDonnell: bla the stimulus sucks bla bla bla jobs

McDonnell: bla bla bla bla children bla bla grandchildren bla bla bla

McDonnell: bla bla big government is bad bla bla bla bla limited government is good

McDonnell: bla Obamacare sucks bla bla bla bla Obamacare sucks bla bla

McDonnell: bla Virginia’s got lots of oil bla bla bla bla

McDonnell: bla bla bla bla *Asian glasses guy shakes head* bla bla

McDonnell: bla bla bla I and the president agree bla bla bla but not really at all

McDonnell: bla bla bla bla *randomly drop scott brown’s name* bla bla bla bla

McDonnell: bla bla big government is bad bla bla bla limited government is good

McDonnell: bla bla bla bla USA USA USA USA!!! bla bla bla

McDonnell: bla bla bla God Bless America bla bla thank you *the end*

The reason Obama wanted health care finished before the recess can be explained in one quote: “I plan to have a lot of town hall meetings.” This was said by Rep. Allen Boyd Jr. (D-FL), a leader of the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of fiscal conservative Democrats. When Congress hears from members of their respective districts, and their problems and questions about this legislation, Congressional backing for this type of health care change will decrease to match their voters’ support.

If you listen to Congressional Democrats and President Obama, you would think our health care system is broken and ineffective. However, groups around the world think differently. Recently, the World Health Organization, an agency of the United Nations, ranked our health care system number 1 out of 191 counties for being responsive to patients’ needs. Also, in an ABC News poll, 89% of Americans are happy with their health care coverage.

In President Obama’s vision, he would have the government insure the uninsured, control costs, allow those who have health care to stay in the coverage, and improve the quality of the health care system. Oh, and add in doing all of that without increasing the already record high budget deficit. Do you buy that? No? Don’t worry about it. Neither does he.

The Congressional Budget Office has come out, stating that the Senate bill would not reduce costs, as President Obama has stated as one of his goals. In fact, this legislation would increase health care costs for Americans.

Another big piece of selling this plan to America comes when Obama says if you like your plan you can keep your plan. However, this is not entirely true. The government will move in and look into all the health care plans Americans have. If they deem the plan is unacceptable, you will be forced into a government-approved plan. Also, if anything in your current plan changes, such as a deductible, again, you will be forced into a government-approved option. The Lewin Group has made estimates, and concludes that 118 million people will lose their private insurance.

While President Obama says he will improve the health care system with a government takeover, evidence from other government-run health care systems show otherwise. Politicians who support a universal health care system point to Europe and Canada, where government run systems are the norm. However, in those places, health care is rationed to the population.

For instance, a person might wait to receive open heart surgery in one of those counties while the same person would be treated immediately. Or, if a person wants a hip replacement, the government can refuse to do that, based on the person’s age. Also, there is a reason why that cancer survival rates in Europe lag behind the United States’. In fact, Great Britain, know for its government-run, universal health care system, has even worse survival rates than the European averages. On the other hand, the United States, with faster diagnosis and easier access to treatments, sets the standard for cancer treatment.

President Obama refutes these claims by saying we wouldn’t have a European system. We would create an American system for American needs. Well, fine. If you want American evidence that government-run health care doesn’t work, look no further than Medicaid and Medicare, the health care program for the poor and elderly, respectively. Both are over budget and are draining the federal budget.

However, there currently is a health care bill that could pass the House after narrowly getting approval from the House Energy and Commerce Committee, with 5 Democrats joining 23 Republicans in opposition. The full House is expected to vote on this next month after their break.

This bill comes with about a $1 trillion price tag, with some estimates even higher. This piece of legislation will consume 1/6 of our federal budget. Another plan in the Senate has a price tag of $1.5 trillion, according to the CBO. To pay for this, Democrats propose an $800 billion tax increase during a recession, and mandates for employers that will discourage job growth.

None of this is to say some tweaking couldn’t hurt. But let’s remember, no one in this country can be denied care based on money. Our government already pays hospitals each year to care for the uninsured. However, there is room for improvement. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has experience in health care reform. His plan has some points that could benefit the rest of the country.

First, like car insurance, make it mandatory to have health insurance. Currently, there are people who can afford health insurance who decide not to get it. So let’s not pay for those who can buy insurance. For those who actually cannot afford to buy insurance, let’s use the money we spend on free hospital care to help pay for private insurance for these people.

In Massachusetts, a health insurance marketplace was created to help the uninsured to buy private health coverage. Mitt Romney also put in tax penalties to those who do not buy coverage, and to businesses with 11 or more workers that did not buy their employees coverage.

Maybe these ideas will work to improve our health care system. On the other hand, maybe it won’t. However, we owe it to each American to evaluate the system, its strengths and its weaknesses, figure out ways to make our current system better without harming future generations, and to take our time on it. For something that even President Obama says is one of the most important parts of our economy, we cannot afford to move this quickly on health care.

In what comes as a surprising twist the New Hampshire house has rejected a new bill which would have legalized gay marriage. Its particularly surprising not just because its well… New Hampshire but also because the house had already approved a previous bill legalizing gay marriage which was ultimately vetoed by the governor. Not to mention the fact that the New Hampshire senate had passed the new bill. Here’s how the AP described it:

A divided New Hampshire House has refused to go along with changes the governor demanded to make his state the sixth to allow gay marriage. Instead, it voted to further negotiate with the Senate.

But let’s not get our hopes up about this one. It seems they aren’t necessarily being held up by wether or not gay marriage should be legal but instead are arguing about protections for churches who refuse to perform marriage ceremonies for gay couples.

The AP story is extremely light on details but the vote totals show how divided even the New Hampshire house is over gay marriage so take a gander…

I’ll try to update when more info comes out about the exact reasons why the New Hampshire house didn’t pass this bill.

Yea. Not gonna happen:

President Obama, after meeting Thursday with Mexico’s president, signaled he is backing away from his pledge to renew the U.S. ban on assault weapons but still wishes to stop the cross-border flow of guns that wind up in the arsenals of drug cartels.

[...]

Obama said Thursday he preferred to focus on enforcing existing laws to keep assault weapons out of Mexico, rather than trying to renew the U.S. ban on the weapons.

“We are absolutely committed to working in partnership with Mexico to make sure we are dealing with this scourge on both sides of the border,” Obama said at a news conference with Calderon outlining their strategy.

Probably a smart move. I mean even Mexico’s President realizes that Americans don’t like when politicians try to screw with their God given rights:

“We know that it is a politically delicate topic because Americans truly cherish their constitutional rights,” Calderon said.

Regardless of the realities though, I highly doubt this signals an Obama administration shift into the pro second amendment camp. I think it’s obvious that this is merely an abandonment of an enviable policy point in favor of pursuing less controversial but perhaps equally gun grabbing initiatives.

This is certainly a victory for bitter clingers everywhere but it is by no means a signal to relax in the fight to preserve what is rightfully ours.

In a move that vindicates my view that when it comes to policy positions Sarah Palin is substantively little more than a McCain clone she declared today that we need to reduce green house gases. Sure her attitude and focus are certainly different but when you boil it down they have always been twins on policy… well at least since the election started.

You see back before she was picked to be McCain’s running mate Palin was wishy washy on the global warming hysteria at one point she fought against the Bush administration’s idiotic plan to put polar bears on the endangered species list, despite the fact that the polar bear population is way up over the past several decades, yet still forming a “sub-cabinet” position on global warming. But, once she was picked she went completely soft. She started saying that, while global warming may not be man made, it was a problem that needed government intervention to solve.

Apparently and unfortunately she still thinks that’s true:

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin acknowledged Tuesday that global warming was harming her state, but said stepped-up natural-gas production could mitigate its effects.

Speaking at a hearing before Interior Secretary Ken Salazar — the third of several he is holding across the country to consider renewed oil and gas leasing on the outer continental shelf — Palin said that relatively clean-burning natural gas could supplant dirtier fuels and slow the discharge of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

“We Alaskans are living with the changes that you are observing in Washington,” she said. “The dramatic decreases in the extent of summer sea ice, increased coastal erosion, melting of permafrost, decrease in alpine glaciers and overall ecosystem changes are very real to us.”

Yup. She’s buying into the so called science behind the alarmism (at least publicly). Yes, I know, to her pseudo-credit she doesn’t buy into the nut job economy wrecking policies that the alarmists push:

Palin acknowledged that “many believe” a global effort to reduce greenhouse gases is needed.

“Simply waiting for low-carbon-emitting renewable capacity to be large enough will mean that it will be too late to meet the mitigation goals for reducing [carbon dioxide] that will be required under most credible climate-change models,” she warned.

“Meeting these goals will require a dramatic increase . . . to preferred available fuels, including natural gas, that have a very low carbon footprint . . .,” she said. “These available fuels are required to supply the nation’s energy needs during the transition to green energy alternatives.”

But that’s not much of a positive to me. I mean if you really buy into the argument that CO2 is causing the earth to warm, despite the fact that actual science based on observations and not crack pot theory says other wise, then you really ought to be calling for the complete shut down everything that produces CO2 and pray real real hard that your theories are as hair brained as sane people think they are. Because if they aren’t, if global warming is what the alarmists say it is, then we are all screwed and a couple of solar panels and wind turbines won’t do a thing to save us.

Luckily though, the alarmists are nothing more than just that… alarmists. Using the politics of fear, if I may borrow a phrase from the lefties, to achieve both riches and power. Sadly, as much as I might like Palin’s unique attitude and focus I mentioned earlier, I feel she is yet another politician using global warming to push her agenda. In this case it’s something I agree with, more drilling for our national resources, but I still find the strategy reprehensible.

Or in other words, my opinion of this can be summed up in one word: vomit

I wouldn’t be half surprised if she turns out the be dressed as a hooker. The sexualization of youth knows no boundaries…

Ok, well, not exactly. He actually took back his recent comments that Mormons in California were Un-American because they supported proposition 8 which banned gay marriage. But it had about as much meaning as it would have if he’d just said nothing at all.

I mean the apology simply reaks of a forced hand. I bet he didn’t even bother to write it himself. And I think its darn clear that he didn’t mean it. Sure, its a well crafted statement but it only concedes one point. The point that people who supported prop 8 aren’t un-American but really it seems he believes that’s only true because nobody should be labeled un-American not because he feels differently about them.

Also the complete 180 from calling their actions and beliefs “Un-American” to calling them the “most American” shows the disingenuous nature of his “how do I get away from this backlash” apology. I mean who is gonna go from hating someones ideas and actions to absolutely loving or respecting them in the span of a couple of days?

Give us a break Tom Hanks. Nobody believes you’re sorry.

UPDATE: Hot Air gives a possible reason for the remorse

The article will be about how “positive rights” and entitlement has handicapped my generation and how a proper view of the world can restore us. I’ll give you a little taste here:

Positive rights are the greatest fallacy affecting this country today and for well into the future. Their entrenchment in my generation’s culture have handicapped us more than any recession or ever could. The idea of positive rights effectively turns selfish envy for the possessions of others into mere desire for your rights to be upheld. But, on more practical terms, it the programs they directly lead to that are perhaps the clearest example of the dangers of this attitude. The Heritage Foundation has estimated that medicare and social security alone will cost us $42.9 Trillion more than we have budgeted for them over the next 75 years. And that’s just the unfunded commitments of two programs which have developed directly out of a “positive rights” mentality. There are dozens, if not hundreds, more programs and trillions upon trillions of dollars tied up in them.

So, now you see the problems with “positive rights” but what exactly are they anyway? Well, when I say “positive rights” I mean the idea that I have an undeniable right to take from you that which I have not earned. It is the idea that I, just by virtue of being born, am entitled to something that you have rightfully earned. I don’t need to work for these things. I don’t need to rely on your compassion or sympathy for these thing. I simply deserve them because it is my right.

I’m here to say what is rarely said. Neither you or I have an undeniable or unalienable right to take something from somebody else. We have no right to take what is not ours. This principle extends to all things even water and food. We are born with no inherent right to someone else’s water or food no matter how little we have or how much they have.

I understand that seems like an extreme or even radical thing to say but once we examine the issue closer it will become obvious that common sense and even social attitudes dictate this conclusion. Take for example one of our most revered practices, charity.

Charity is taking from what you have rightfully earned and giving it to those in need. It is considered to be a noble or self-less act done out of concern for others. An act of charity is worthy of commendation. However, in a “positive rights” framework there is no such thing as charity.

If a person has an irrefutable right to something from you then it is by no means a noble act to give it to them. Think of it this way, are we grateful when our right to free speech is not violated? Do we thank the government when they don’t impose restrictions on our right to freely exercise our chosen faiths? Do we pat others on the back for not murdering us?

Of course not. We fully, and rightfully, expect these things to be done because they are appropriate. In fact the violation of these rights is just cause for anger, protest, and in extreme cases revolution. For this reason it is simply absurd to extend right-hood to “positive rights”.

STAY TUNED: I know there are several questions unanswered thus far but those will be answered in the full article which I hope to submit today.