Mark Kirk is a politician masquerading as a Republican.  He represents the 10th district of Illinois in the House of Representatives. He voted for the Cap and Trade bill last spring.  He should be stripped of his (R).

Anyway, the dude decided to run for the Senate in 2010.  Obama’s old seat.  The one now filled by Roland Burris, who was appointed by Rod Blogojevich.  You know, the governor that was caught selling the senate seat to the highest bidder and was subsequently kicked out of office?  Well, before he left, he appointed Burris.  And Burris is still there.  It’s complete craziness.

But I have to stop talking about Burris and Blogojevich and how ludicrous the whole situation is before my head explodes.

Back to Mark Kirk. Who is running as a Republican against Burris for that much discussed seat.  Since he’s running as a Republican, he’s had to address his “yes” vote on Cap and Trade, as no Republican that actually acted like one would have ever in a million years voted for it.

Here’s what he said:

“It was in the narrow interests of my congressional district…But, as your (senator), representing the entire state of Illinois, I would vote ‘no’ against the bill coming up, and that’s because we are manufacturing, agriculture and coal state.”

It’s ironic that by trying to sound more conservative in order to gain the Republican nomination, he just ended up sounding even more liberal. If he was fine screwing over the other 18 districts in Illinois “in the narrow interests” of his own turf, then I doubt he’d take issue screwing over the other 49 states in Illinios’ narrow interest.

Mr. Kirk, you may call yourself a Republican, but you are certainly not a conservative.

In case you haven’t heard (and you probably haven’t, since even seasoned reporter Charlie Gibson hadn’t heard), the Senate voted yesterday to freeze all tax-payer funds going to ACORN. This comes after the United States Census Bureau told the group to take a hike a few days ago.

What is ACORN anyway?  It is the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now; that little organization of community organizers organizing for an organized life. It’s also where President Obama began his career.  It mainly functions to help people fill out forms (voter registration, welfare applications, housing grants, etc.). Sounds pretty innocuous, doesn’t it?

Except that ACORN seems to be less about organized communities than it is about organized crime.

ACORN is currently being investigated in 17 states for voter registration fraud. That means that people working for ACORN registered fake people to vote. Since you don’t have to show ID to vote, people can vote several times. Vote early and vote often!

Even with the numerous voter fraud allegations, ACORN was still receiving big fat checks from the government, thanks to the up to 4 billion dollars approved by that stimulus bill that was supposed to save the economy (remember the good old days when unemployment was 7%? Thank goodness we’ve been pulled back from the brink).  Not only was ACORN still receiving tax-payer money so they could sign more and more people up for welfare instead of teaching them how to fill out a job application, they were also partnering with the U. S. Census Bureau to produce the 2010 census.

Why is counting people such a big deal?  Isn’t that what the census is?  Counting people?  The census is a big deal because the results are used to allocate Congressional seats, electoral votes, and government program funding.  Since we know that many ACORN workers don’t have issues making up fake people, what would stop them from making up fake people in highly liberal locations, in order to get more representatives in that area and therefore more voting power in Congress?

The U. S. Census Bureau finally woke up and severed its ties with the corrupt organization.  The Senate also woke up and voted to freeze funds to ACORN pending further investigation into it’s criminal activities.

So what was the alarm clock that had people waking up?

ACORN was caught on video helping a young couple fill out an application for a housing grant.  The woman said that she was a prostitute, and the ACORN employee told her that she should put “performing artist” under occupation.  The couple then told the ACORN employee that they would be using the house as a brothel filled with thirteen year old South American girls.  The advice given to the couple?  Don’t claim more than three of them as dependents, and don’t declare any of their income.  Did your stomach just sink to your knees reading that?  Mine did typing it out.

This story is as disgustingly and deliciously evil as they come. Political controversy. Tax evasion. Underage prostitution.  Kidnapping (thirteen year olds don’t volunteer to be prostitutes, I’m pretty sure). It is the epitome of corruption and sleaze. It’s the sort of story that grips you and makes you yell at the TV and makes you ache with the knowledge of so much evil in the world.

Yet the main stream media isn’t covering it.

Why not?

My great-grandmother was not one to mince words.  A dust bowl “Okkie” immigrant to California in the 1930s, she felt that she had survived enough life to tell it like it was.  One of her favorite things to say when someone complimented her on something she didn’t feel worthy of compliment was, “That lie sure does fall sweetly on my ears!”

She is gone now, but her memory was alive and strong last night as I watched President Obama’s speech on health-care.  The speech was wonderful.  President Obama is just trying to help me! He’s trying to protect me from the evil and greedy insurance companies that only care about making a profit!  He loves me and wants to buy me a teddy bear!  Or something like that.

Let’s take a look at all of that sweet talk and find the truth that is buried beneath it, shall we?

Seductive Lie #1 Obama has saved America! “We have pulled this economy back from the brink.”

The truth- Unemployment continues to rise. If the economy has been pulled back from the brink, why are people still losing their jobs and not finding new ones?

Seductive lie #2- It will be free! “[I] won’t sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits- now, or in the future. period.”

The truth-Someone please show me one time that a government program has not created a deficit.  Just one.  Hmm… never?  I rest my case.

Seductive lie #3- It’s bipartisan! “It’s a plan that incorporates ideas from senators and congressmen; from democrats and republicans.”

The truth- Actually, republicans have been shut out of meetings regarding health care reform for months now.

Seductive lie #4- You can keep your coverage! “First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.”

The truth- There is nothing in the bill that would require you or your employer to change your doctor or coverage.  But the bill will decimate the private health care industry.  Employers will be taxed and audited if they choose a private plan. Many employers and individuals will have to choose between accepting the public “option” or paying crippling taxes and fees.

Seductive lie #5- It will stop unfair practices! “It will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition.”

The truth- Why on Earth would anyone buy health insurance while they were still healthy, if they could get coverage after they became ill?  That’s like saying you only have to buy a lottery ticket if you have the winning numbers.  The money taken in by the healthy people is what pays for the sick people!  Just like the money taken in from the losing lottery tickets is what creates the payout for the winner.  Only in the case of insurance, you’re sort of a winner if you lose (as in, you stay fit and healthy enough to never need a huge payout for medical expenses).

Seductive lie #6- It will save us from potential financial ruin! “In the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick.”

The truth- And everyone should go to an Ivy League school, live in a mansion, work hard at a high-paying and secure job, have an intact family, and adopt a golden retriever puppy that never messes on the carpet.  The fact of life is that sometimes it sucks.  Sometimes it throws you a curve ball.  No one plans to get cancer or hit by a drunk driver.  A better way to prevent people from going broke because they get sick is to allow them to purchase catastrophic health insurance, and pay for routine visits out of pocket.  I even bet there are some super nice doctors out there that would be willing to work with you, so long as the government doesn’t stop them.

Seductive Lie #7- Mandatory routine check ups and tests will save us money! “Insurance companies will be required to cover… routine check ups and preventative care like mammograms and colonoscopies, because there’s no reason we shouldn’t be catching diseases… before they get worse. That makes sense, it saves money, and it saves lives.”

The truth- It doesn’t save money.  It not only doesn’t save money, but it costs more.  Read the Congressional Budget Office report if you don’t believe me.

Seductive Lie #8- It’s all about choice! “If you don’t currently have health insurance… this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices.”

The Truth- Did he say choices?  What choices?  He doesn’t even want to let us decide for ourselves if we even want health insurance!  Here’s the choice- accept government “insurance” or else.

Seductive lie #9- There’s no such thing as death panels. “Some of people’s concerns have grown out of bogus claims…the best example is the claim that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens…it is a lie- plain and simple.”

The truth- No bureaucrat is going to be putting “Death Panel Analyst” on his resume.  However, your application for medical treatment will end up on some bureaucrat’s desk, and they will decide whether to stamp it with “approve” or “deny.”  And you’ll have no way to contest it.  That sounds super scary to me.  And kind of like a death panel.

Seductive lie #10- It would not allow coverage to people that are in this country illegally. “There are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This too, is false!”

The Truth- Identification will not be required for services. So how would anyone know if the person needing/wanting treatment was in fact a citizen? Also, all family members of a citizen would be covered.  Sneak across the border to have your baby in a US hospital (because they’re not checking ID, you know), and bam! Health care for your baby, for you, for the baby’s daddy, and for the baby’s siblings. Don’t speak English? Not a problem, as the bill requires free translation services.

This morning, Representative Joe Wilson called the White House to apologize to the President for loudly yelling, “You lie!” during the speech last night.  Mr. President, I think you’re the one that owes us an apology for your seductive and beautiful lies.

John Boehner says that President Obama has not talked to Republicans about health care in months.

Boehner told reporters that the president has not invited House GOP leaders to the White House for meetings on healthcare reform since the end of April.

Earlier this year, GOP leaders sent a letter to the president in May stating that they would like to work with the administration to find “common ground” on healthcare reform.

But the administration responded with a tersely worded letter indicating that they had healthcare reform under control.

So much for unity and bipartisanship. Sheesh!

I’ve grown up with the law.  Literally.  My parents met in law school, and my mom was pregnant with me when she graduated.  I spent the first 6 months of my life nestled in her arms as she studied for the bar exam (although now that I have my own darling little hooligans, I can barely believe I was that good of a baby.  My mom is just THAT SMART for passing the bar on the first try.).

Many Saturdays and school holidays were spent at my parents’ law office; making forts under my dad’s big walnut desk, coloring pictures with florescent highlighters, and making paperclip chain necklaces.  I didn’t understand what they did, but I saw that they loved it.  I knew they worked passionately and tirelessly.  I knew I wanted to be just like them when I grew up.

In second grade, my teacher asked us students to share what we would like to be when we grew up.  After several ballerinas, teachers, and firemen, it was my turn to answer.  “A United States Supreme Court Justice.  But I’d settle for senator.”  What a mouth I had even at the age of eight!

Needless to say, I’ve always been fascinated with the law.  It’s probably why I’m so passionate about politics.  I want politicians to uphold the Constitution.  You know, that thing upon which our laws are based?  That simple document that built the greatest nation the world has ever seen?  The one signed by George Washington, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and lots of other dudes in funny looking clothes?  Yeah, that’s the one.

So it’s no surprise that sparks of excitement practically shot out my fingers and toes when my mom invited me to attend a lecture by the Honorable Antonin Scalia, of the United States Supreme Court.  Justice Scalia (a Reagan nominee) is an outspoken proponent of Constitutional Orginalism, the idea that the Constitution is not a living, breathing document that is given to morph through the years into something unrecognizable to the founders of our great nation.  A constitutional originalist understands that times and technology may change, but that we must calculate the trajectory of the meaning of the founders in the original document.

I had an invitation to hear the foremost authority in the country talk about an issue that is near and dear to me.  To say that I was thrilled would be an understatement.  I even showed up two hours early to the event.  Well, you never know if you’re going to get a flat tire, or maybe spill your Coke Zero on your blouse and have to make a mad dash to the nearest clothing store to buy a new, unstained shirt.  Thankfully, I made it to the venue in plenty of time, and managed to snag a seat in the third row.

The auditorium filled up behind me while jittery nervousness coursed through my veins.  Justice Scalia is a man that I’ve held in high esteem for years, and everyone knows that pedestals have a tendency to crumble.  The room began to hush as four very scholarly looking professors made their way onto the stage.  Mike Rappaport (the Director for Study of Constitutional Originalism at USD) introduced the man of the hour.

Within the first 27 seconds, I knew that my image of Justice Scalia would not come crumbling to the ground.  He was at ease.  He made jokes with the professors and the audience.  His defense of “the enduring Constitution” was clearly defined and well articulated. He didn’t talk above our heads, but he didn’t dumb it down either.  He was not boring.

And now I have a new favorite buzz term: Constitutional Originalism.  Justice Scalia explained that if judges do not hold to originalism, they will rewrite the Constitution, which would change the very nature of America. (Rewriting the constitution should not be confused with amendments, which have done wonderful things like abolishing slavery and giving equal rights to men and women of all skin colors.)

Here’s what I learned:

It keeps up with the times. A common criticism of originalism is that it’s impractical.  The Constitution was implemented long before vehicles, computers, or indoor plumbing were an everyday part of life.  How is it possible to stay true to such an ancient document in a modern world?  Justice Scalia gave the example of Saia v. New York, a case in which amplified sound was an issue.  Of course there was no electronically amplified sound at the time of the Constitution.  A non-originalist judge might make up any new rule that he felt like on the particular day that the case was handed to him.  An originalist judge would try to figure out how our founders would’ve ruled on such a case given the current technology.  Even though there wasn’t electronically amplified sound 200 years ago, there were certainly public nuisances.  The originalist then could focus on whether the case violated public nuisance laws.

Even liberals can be originalists- In the summer of 2008, the Supreme Court saw a case regarding the right to keep and bear arms. In DC v. Heller, the court held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for private use.  All of the opinions issued, even the two dissents, were originalist opinions.  Although they arrived at different conclusions, the Justices examined what the founders intended in, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

It is ok (and sometimes necessary) to impose limitations on Constitutional rights.  A convicted felon does not have a right as an individual to keep and bear arms. Drunk drivers may be discriminated against by having their licenses revoked.  Screaming, “FIRE!” in a crowded public place as a joke does not fall within the bounds of free speech.

It’s hard to do the right thing. Part of the fun of being a non-originalist is that you can make up whatever you like.  If our courts and legislature do not hold true to the meaning and intent of the Constitution, what do they cling to?  Their own convictions and morality?  It’s much easier to make decisions based on how you feel, or upon popular opinion, than it is to make them based on that mean old rule book.