Unite on 'Common Ground'

USA Today’s online editorial this morning is titled “Unite on ‘Common Ground.’ It is written by, of all people, California ultra-liberal Nancy Pelosi. Well isn’t that special, coming from someone who could be defined by Webster’s as “an expert in partisan divisiveness.” I’m sure she can teach us a great deal—NOT!

After Republicans and conservatives have had a chance to politely celebrate our recent victories in the election for the office of the President, the House, the Senate, and various local and regional races, we will innately turn to the task of healing wounds and attempting to bring a coalition of Americans from both sides together to go about the business of running our country. And we will do this as a matter of instinct and human nature, not at the request of the venomous Ms. Pelosi and newspapers like USA Today that have covered the election in a shamefully partisan manner.

I find it curious that Nancy and the USA Today editors waste no time offering an olive branch of peace to the 2004 Republican politicians and their supporters when they in reality should be waving a white flag of surrender. They want to shake hands, get a big ‘ole hug, maybe a sloppy kiss on the mouth, and let bygones be bygones. I have a little problem being so friendly so soon after declaring the “end of major military operations.”

In a country other the USA, like Iran or Korea, the whole liberal crowd and their media co-conspirators could be facing a firing squad as a result of their actions. And the sad thing is that I am afraid, while the liberals seem to be calling for a good working relationship—“a climate of give and take”—that in reality it will be business as usual with conservatives doing all of the giving and the liberals doing all of the taking. “We gotta do this” and “we gotta do that.” That’s liberal speak for “you have to give me this concession” and “you must give me that concession,” lest I hold my breath or lie down in the floor and have a screaming kicking fit.

To quote Ms. Pelosi:

“The new administration should also address, at once, our domestic priorities: creating good jobs, better access to health care and the best possible education for our children. Even on these complicated issues, there is broad bipartisan consensus on certain concrete steps we could take immediately.

To create jobs, we can begin by passing a robust transportation bill that will create 1.7 million new jobs nationwide, while modernizing our infrastructure.”

OK Nancy, show me in the Constitution where it says that it is the government’s responsibility to create jobs? Show me where the Federal Government should be involved in Education (you can thank Jimmy Carter for the Department of Education and the current debacle.)

“We must also reform the tax code to end incentives for outsourcing. As a matter of basic fairness, no taxpayer should have to subsidize the outsourcing of his or her own job.”

Outsourcing of jobs? Where I come from its is called subcontracting, and it is very effective. If it is my company, they are MY jobs, not the employees’ jobs, and I’ll by God hire whoever I want to, where ever I want to--male, female, purple skin, or green.

It’s my company and the bottom line costs are my responsibility. I am a business working to make me and the other owners of the company a profit. We are not a job creating charity, and further, if the government isn't in the business of creating jobs or subsidizing jobs, the taxpayer won't have "to subsidize the outsourcing of his or her own job.

“To expand access to quality, affordable health care, Congress should take up legislation on the first day of the new session to provide health insurance to every child. We must also revisit the widely unpopular prescription drug bill to lower the cost of prescription drugs by allowing the safe reimportation of drugs from Canada and elsewhere. And we must unlock the miraculous promise of stem cell research.”

Health insurance for every child? Health care for children is already available virtually across the board. The crack head parents just need to take the child to the free clinic.

And another thing. The Prescription Drug Bill was a perfect example of the Republicans trying to work with the Democrats in a bi-partisan effort. You are right that in it’s current form it is bad, but it’s the concept in general, not the implementation that is the problem. More government involvement in our national healthcare system will only serve to cause more waste and further increase costs. The FDA regulation of the hated “big pharmaceutical companies” is the cause of high drug costs, not the solution. Canada’s drugs cost less because their bureaucrats have less hurdles for the drug makers to jump through to get medicine on the shelves for consumers. And we don’t have enough flue shots this year as a direct result of lawyers like John Edwards and government's vaccine purchasing programs.

Get this through your expensively coiffed head: there is no government ban on stem cell research. There is a ban on funding new lines of embryonic stems cells, but all the existing lines are not being used currently. There is increased government funding on adult stem cell work. The only existing therapies using stem cells involve the use of adult stem cells. There are no existing treatment’s that have developed using embryonic stem cells. Further, private businesses are free to spend their entire piggy bank on existing embryonic stem cell lines and all the adult stem cell lines they can finance. The election is over, stop lying about “bans on stem cell research.”

“To improve education, we must keep the promise of No Child Left Behind, which passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. And we must make college education more affordable, so that every student who has the motivation will also have the means.”

No Child Left Behind is an under funded Federal government mandate on the states that is doomed to failure as long as students and parents don’t make an equal commitment to academic success. College education is a function of supply and demand, not government regulation. Student motivation will produce the means, massive government funding of unqualified students will simply lower educational quality. Look at Georgia’s Hope Scholarship Program if you want a perfect example of the outcome

Finally, Ms Pelosi ends her piece with this gem:

“As the rhetoric of the campaign recedes, the business of governing—and leading—begins anew. As elected officials, our commitment must be to build a future worthy of the vision of our Founding Fathers, worthy of the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform and worthy of the aspirations of our children.”

I trust that Nancy Pelosi will take a large, double dose of her own advice. And in the words of Forrest Gump…”and that’s all I have to say about that…”

UPDATE: November 4, 2004

I just knew that Nancy didn't sound in the USA Today OpEd piece like the old Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader that we love to hate. On the same day her flowery text was published, her mouth was busy telling us what she really thought and felt in response to House Speaker Dennis Hastert's offer "to work with those Democrats who want to work with me to get good things done for the American people..."

Miss Pelosi says "(t)he Republicans did not have an election about jobs, health care, education, environment, national security. They had an election about wedge issues in our country, and you know what they are," she said.

"They exploited the loveliness of the American people, the devoutness of people of faith for a political end."

So which is it Nancy?

Are you, or aren't you going to listen to your own words and 'unite on common ground'?