Please excuse our pre-Halloween playfulness here. Its just that when something as particularly dreadful as H.R.3962 gets sprung on Congress at the last bitter moment, we can’t help but giggle nervously, look around, and wonder if this is all part of some mischief night prank. After all, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was seen hovering around it like some sort of medium at a seance.

H.R.3962 is another one of Rep. John Dingell’s environmentally-friendly recycled lobbyist hashes. So far its just titled “To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes.”

We’re waiting on our tip-toes for the next great Democrat acronym, but since all the good ones have already been taken (AHCA, AAHCA, AHFA, AHAA, AAAA, AAA, etc.) we’ll jump the gun and call it “Dingell’s Universal Medical Bill” or DUMB.

Now, we won’t bother ranting and raving about DUMB’s jaw-dropping page count. Been there, done that with Dingell’s pre-DUMB offering, H.R. 3200. Hate to credit the creepy likes of Alan Combs for anything, but he pointed out that nobody questioned the page count of the Patriot Act when it was rammed through Congress. So who should raise a ruckus over the leaning tower of DUMB that was threatening to topple onto Rep. John Boehner the other day? Certainly not us!

Nor shall we raise the issue of “shall” appearing more times throughout the text of DUMB than Sen. Chuck Schumer before a press conference podium in any given week. “Shall” is one of those antagonistic words best left in the earlier works of Shakespeare. Nobody in their 260s and younger actually uses that word in normal conversation. “Thou, thee, thy, shall.” Most bills drooling out of the Congressional offices sound like the King James version of the Bible, only without divine inspiration.

Nor must (aha! “must” not “shall!”) we take on the fact that nobody’s still finished reading Dingell’s other “Nightmare on C Street Southeast,” alternatively titled AHFA. Or AHCA. Or one of those handy acronyms.

Republicans keep demanding 72 hours for the public to glance at a bill before its ram-rodded through Congress like ball-shot in a Parrot gun, but hey! We don’t know anyone who got through Dan Brown’s novels in less than 72 hours. And his stuff’s one-quarter the length and occasionally entertaining.

Let’s face it. We’re slow readers. We like to absorb the nitty-gritty details. Look, we’re still stuck on page 994 of AHFA (or is it AHCA?), where “Ye Lords & Ladies of the manor shall forfeit a goodly portion of crops & fruits of thy forest & heath, lest toiling peasants of thine fields succumb to privation & black death…”

No wait. Wrong bill. That was Title XI Sec. 23 Subsec. 12(A)(1)(a)(iii) of Pelosi’s Medicare overhaul from that other fright-fest, the 110th Congress.

We won’t even bore the kids with pointing out how utterly two-faced it is for Dingell to put “reduce the growth in health care spending” in the title of this crushing behemoth. Great. It’ll reduce health care spending. But where? At the drug store? Will bandages for mummy-wrapping be cheaper after DUMB is signed into law?

Call us crazy, but adding “only” $90,000,000,000 a year to the budget (plus another $90,000,000,000 to cover the lies being told on Capitol Hill) isn’t saving anything. Running a deficit like we are now has never happened in history for a very good reason: It can’t be done. Oh, the Byzantines tried it a couple of centuries ago (when “shall” was the hot word among the nobles and clergy) and we know how THAT ONE turned out: The Fall of Constantinople makes “Saw VI” look like a haunted hay ride!

The biggest problem with DUMB (Oh, how to pick just one! It’s like rummaging for the last Twix in a big crystal bowl of Milky Ways and Snickers while trick-or-treating, isn’t it?) is its bare-faced, pig-headed stubborn blatantness. Hate to get personal here, but come on! A goodly portion of America is deeply offended by the blanket-law bill-dumping practices of the veteran incumbent Democrat leadership.

There ought to be a law against littering Capitol Hill like this. But we figure THAT law won’t be enacted until after Pelosi and the other ghosts of the 111th Congress are exorcised in the 2010 elections.

All right! Forget about these real-life nightmares! Let’s get down to some pumpkin carving, skeleton-hanging, and don’t forget to drop a few lumps of dry ice in a tub of water for good effect.

Halloween is a time for plain fun. Who wants the ghouls of the DNC scaring us out of our wits with their wicked games, anyway?

Ever since the new administration was inaugurated, a tidal wave of legislation has surged forward from the Democrat leadership. Nearly all of this work is old. That is, most of the bills were killed in previous sessions of Congress, or were written by lobbyists and special interests waiting sometimes years for a moment such as this.

And, during the last nine months, the incumbent Democrats have accused the Republicans of being “the Party of No” because GOP leaders repeatedly urged their colleagues to slow down, if only long enough for legislators to obey the Constitution and actually read what they’re voting on. Furthermore, one after another, the Republicans offered bipartisan alternatives, only to be shut down and shut out.

In reality, the Democrats are the REAL Party of NO, and here are several reasons why:

1. TARP. Even before the election, Democrats accused the Republicans for not supporting the TARP bailout of the biggest, richest banks. For questioning the moral right of the government to pick and choose which bank should be allowed to take taxpayer cash and then use it to become richer and more powerful, the Republicans were already being called the “Party of Doing Nothing.” But the Democrats were the ones who said NO to sensibility and moderation.

2. Stimulus. When the Stimulus came around, the GOP was already stereotyped as “The Party of No” for not supporting a comprehensive recovery plan. But the Republicans denounced the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) (pronounced ERROR) as an inflation of welfare. Republican lawmakers issued dozens of amendments, but they were killed in committee by the Democrats, who said NO to steering tax money toward solid infrastructure projects this year.

Even progressive activists who advocated investment in public works as a good stimulus were unhappy with the expansion of welfare by ARRA. The progressives knew nothing in the stimulus package would actually help the economy or build public infrastructure. And, the Democrats said NO to stimulating the economy through tax breaks and targeted stimulus measures as the Republicans had requested.

3. Budget. The Democrats’ 2010 budget was released with great fanfare, and received by the public with great anxiety. Never before had so much money been committed to so many special interests. In response, the Republicans issued a structural blueprint of how they felt the next budget should progress: their plan called for moderation in the tough economic climate, especially as the IRS released a warning on revenue loss.

The incumbent Democrat leadership responded with ridicule, saying their budget had no numbers, and the media declared the GOP dead in the water. Within a week, the Republican alternative budget was fleshed out with numbers, but it was too late. Speaker Pelosi had the votes to pass her monolithic creation. And the Democrats said NO to compromise and NO to respect for the American taxpayer.

4. Cap-And-Trade. Rep. Henry Waxman’s job-destroying Global Warming bill was rushed through Congress. The quicker, the better. So many special interests stood to benefit from the penalties on American manufacturers, grants for unproven green industries, and carbon trading  in the gambling house called Wall Street. All while doing literally nothing to alleviate climate change.

Immediately, the Republicans submitted their comprehensive “New Manhattan Project” for encouraging the strategic development of alternative energy. Grants for research and development would expand to full federal funding where progress toward sustainable energy solutions were proven. But Rep. Waxman denounced the bill as “a prize-giving competition” compared to his bill. The Democrat Party said NO to rewarding innovation and creative problem-solving.

5. Health Care Reform.Time and time again, Rep. Rosa DeLauro has denounced the Republicans for being a party without ideas, a party of “No.” In her House floor statement of April 29, 2009, Rep. DeLauro said:

If you listen to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, they were missing in action over this last 8 years. It is hard to believe that they were in charge. It is a little bit like “see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil.” They were gone from the playing field over these last 8 years. We will not let a party of “no” stand in the way of a reformed health care system that the majority of Americans so desperately want.

Long before Senator Kennedy’s terrible AHCA and Rep. John Dingell’s even worse AAHCA, there was the Republican’s bipartisan Patient’s Choice Act (PCA). It would enact major reforms to the industry and still keep government from intruding on the all-important doctor-patient relationship. The PCA promises to reward innovation, allow doctors the freedom to practice medicine as they see fit, and broaden the patients’ choices, while streamlining administrative work, reducing liability costs, and cutting down on fraud.

But the PCA is going nowhere. That’s because the Democrat leadership has said NO to giving the American people the right to choose what’s best for themselves and their families.

6. “Bipartisanship”. Like the rest of the veteran incumbent Democrat leadership, “bipartisanship” in the 111th Congress is simple: Vote with us! Or get NOas an alternative. Rep. DeLauro unequivocally stated:

We will work to craft bipartisan legislation, but the American people are not interested in process. They are interested in results.

For 12 years, the Democrat minority thundered about bipartisanship, about being included in the legislative process because they had been voted into office by Democrat constituents. President George W. Bush responded by including Democrat proposals into his agenda. The result was massive deficits. When Rep. DeLauro said,

But let’s be clear. It was under their leadership that a $5.6 trillion surplus turned into the historic budget deficit that President Obama and this Congress inherited a deficit of well over $1 trillion in 2009.

She really meant, “Let’s be clear. It was under Democrat guidance and authorship and pressure that massive entitlements were signed into law.” Only audacious denial of facts allow Democrats to get away with blaming the last Administration for debts and deficits when their administration will be tripling deficits each and every year!

Here is the truth about the last eight years: The problem was bipartisanship, offering the Democrat opposition a voice that did not belong to them. Because of this, an era of prosperity and record tax revenue still kept us trillions in debt.

When it comes to the last eight years, the blame game is rightly bipartisan. Both parties frittered away a great opportunity to use record revenues to balance the budget and reduce the debt while protecting manufacturing jobs.

What has happened since January 2009, however, sits squarely in the lap of the real Party of NO: The Democrats.

Without a doubt, the “Picture of the Week” has got to be Connecticut lawmakers engaged in rousing games of solitaire and other computer distractions during the legislative session. It has been said that a picture is worth a thousand words, but this one’s been generating millions of words, and more than a few four-letter adjectives. This picture is poignant simply because it quickly defines precisely what everyone has long suspected about our legislators:

The debate is useless. Boring. They already made up their minds about an issue long ago. Or someone made it for them. Therefore, its time to take a nap or play a game. Even when the state is wracked by a budget crisis unlike any other in recent history.

Hopefully, this photograph will still be in circulation come election day.

As every Congressman, Senator, and White House Aide has a very public conniption over AIG and its bailout bonus giveaway, its important to ask how all of this happened. Who gave AIG billions in bailout money? Whose money did it become the moment AIG received it? Was it a shipload of cash with “taxpayer dollars, do not spend” stamped across each note? Did the people in charge of this bailout give specific instructions as to how AIG should spend this money? Did they say if it should ever be paid back? The Politico throws some fuel on the AIG fire:

Billions of American taxpayer dollars used to bailout insurance giant AIG are flowing to some of the largest foreign banks in the world. The revelation seemed sure to cause political complications for President Obama and his economic team, already on the defensive Sunday over why they couldn’t stop AIG from doling out $165 million in bonuses to some of its top corporate officials.

AIG disclosed payments of $105.3 billion between Sept. and Dec. 2008. And some of the biggest recipients were European banks. Societe Generale, based in France, was the top foreign recipient at $11.9 billion, Deutsche Bank of Germany got $11.8 billion and Barclays, based in England, was paid $8.5 billion.

Ask again: Who gave AIG these billions and billions of dollars to hand over to its foreign creditors?

Political pressure is also building on AIG, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday called on AIG executives to “renounce” their bonuses and refuse retention pay, and said that House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank would “examine options that are legally available to recover taxpayer funds of companies that abuse the privilege of taxpayer assistance.”

Ask again: Never mind where the money went, never mind how it was spent; who gave AIG untold billions to spend however they see fit without condition or oversight?

Democrat Congressional leaders told AIG to clean up their financial mess. Democrat leaders pushed for the TARP bailout and Treasury’s plan to give AIG $180 billion to pay off its debts. And AIG decided its most pressing debts were to foreign banks and unpaid executives.

Last night, Senator Chris Dodd swore he would tax AIG just to recover the $165 million in bonuses and, as he claimed, “give it back to the American people.” But Senator Dodd is the one who added an executive-compensation amendment which provided an exception for bonuses agreed to before February 11th. (This is the same Dodd who received $103,000 in political contributions from AIG in 2008.)

Senator Dodd personally exempted AIG’s bonuses for $103,000. Now he claims to be America’s Robin Hood for free publicity. Bottom line: Don’t blame AIG for using the “Get Out of Jail Free” Card they were given. Blame the Democrats for giving it to them, along with $180 billion!

HR 1105, the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, is the proverbial “Cherry on Top” of the wasteful Stimulus Package. For the hard-working, tax-paying American, it is madness that within days of the passage of the largest spending bill in history, there is another colossal spending bill ready for passage! But that is the sort of Orwellian dream in which our Representatives in Congress seem to live. If an extra large spending bill is enough to make the American people simmer, imagine how they would feel if they knew that HR 1105 provides for a 7.5% increase in funding across the board? And at a time when nearly all Americans are cutting back to save themselves from ruin? The U.S. House of Representatives Republican Committee on Appropriations launched a scathing criticism of the House Democrats’ inability to grasp reality:

One of the basic duties of Congress is to pass annual spending bills to fund the federal government. As part of this process, Congress is responsible for making tough budget decisions and providing critical oversight of government spending, while representing the interests of the taxpayers who foot the bill. The FY 2009 Omnibus is the essence of the Democrat Majority’s failure to fulfill these basic responsibilities.

To make matters worse, this massive spending bill was created undercover and out of view of the American public. Only three of the bills contained in the Omnibus were cleared by the full House Appropriations Committee in a public mark-up, and none were considered on the House floor. The rest have been crafted and negotiated by staff under the direction of the Democrat leadership without the involvement of the vast majority of Members of Congress or the public.

This back-door dealing has resulted in an Omnibus package that represents the interests of a handful of Democrat leaders and staff. Everyone else – including Democrat and Republican Members of Congress and American taxpayers – has been left out.

One thing is absolutely certain: the conniving lobbyists and special interests will have a front row seat in Speaker Pelosi’s office while this assault on America’s future is being drafted. Numerous House members had complained how lobbying firms received drafts of the Stimulus Package before they did; in some cases, lobbyist handwriting was scribbled into the margins, directing their lawmakers exactly where to put taxpayer money. And this time is no different.

Worst of all: This massive spending bill comes hard on the heels of President Obama’s Fiscal Responsibility conference, as well as repeated promises to end earmarks. As Yahoo Finance reports:

The measure includes thousands of earmarks, the pet projects favored by lawmakers but often criticized by the public in opinion polls. There was no official total of the bill’s earmarks, which accounted for at least $3.8 billion. The legislation, which includes an increase of roughly 8 percent over spending in the last fiscal year, is expected to clear the House later in the week.

No doubt, Rep. Rosa DeLauro will cast a YES vote for HR 1105 and another colossal financial assault on every single one of her struggling, worried constituents. And, her YES vote will be a grave insult to President Obama’s pledge to end earmarks and promote fiscal responsibility.

Only in Washington can congressional Democrats increase government spending and congratulate themselves for “cutting” the size of a bill. While the bill is reported to cost $789.5 billion, Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid have removed what little amount of tax relief for working families and small businesses was contained in the bill in order to pay for more big government spending. All of this was done behind closed doors and out the sight of the American people. In fact, congressional Democrats have yet to share the text of the conference report with Republicans. Apparently congressional Democrats don’t want the American people to know what’s in this massive bill before it becomes law.

Democrats Made Tax Relief Smaller…
• Cut car credit (potentially from $11.5 billion to $1.6 billion)
• Cut “Make Work Pay” credit from $500/individual to $400/individual, and from $1,000/couple to $800/couple (approximately $28 billion less in tax relief)
• Cut home buyer credit from $35 billion to $6.6 billion (limited to first-time home-buyers and limited to $8,000)
• Cut Net Operating Loss significantly to as little as $947million (makes it only applicable to employers with $15 million or less in revenue—but only for the year 2008, in other words it provide no help for losses in 2009)

…To Add More Government Spending Back In
• $9 billion for school construction was added back in (originally cut by Nelson-Collins)
• $5 billion increase for state fiscal stabilization fund (originally cut by Nelson-Collins), making it a grand total of $53.6 b
• $2 billion for neighborhood stabilization program, money for groups like ACORN
• $1 billion added back for Prevention & Wellness Programs, including STD education
• Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research was added back in, leading Americans down the path towards healthcare rationing (63 patient advocacy groups signed a letter voicing their concerns with this provision)
• $8 billion for Harry Reid’s high speed rail ($6 billion over the Senate and $8 billion over the House). The spending will go to at least two rail projects–LA to Las Vegas and one in the mid-west including Wisconsin and Illinois.
• $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts (the Senate struck this $)
• $300 million for golf carts STILL included
• $100 million for “small shipyards” (this money did not exist in the House-passed bill)
• $650 million for DTV conversion STILL included
• $20 million “for the removal of small-to-medium-sized fish passage barriers”
• $25 million “for recreation maintenance, especially for rehabilitation of off-road vehicle routes”
• $43 million for other park and fish and wildlife trails
• $150 million for the Economic Development Administration (EDA), some of which can go to the “mob” museum
But, Not for Infrastructure: Money for highways and bridges was cut by $1 billion from the House-passed level

Key Points:
• Tax relief to help middle class families and small businesses was sharply pared back in order to increase government spending. (Americans overwhelming believe tax cuts, and not government spending, are a better way to stimulate the economy)
• Approximately $75 billion in true tax relief was CUT from the Nelson-Collins package. So, while the overall size of the package may have gotten slightly smaller, the spending actually increased.

Total Tax Numbers:
• Total Conference Report Tax Title = $326 Billion (41% of the bill)
• However, $111.9 billion is actually spending through the tax code, and not new tax relief (subtract this out and Democrats’ tax relief falls to 27%)
• Finally, Democrats include a 1-year patch for the AMT, which while necessary by the end of the year because it prevents a tax increase, does not add new tax relief to help stimulate the economy (subtract this $70 billion out and Democrats’ tax relief falls to 18%
• Total Conference Report Tax Relief = $144 Billion (only 18% of the bill)

Instead, Mr. Obama chose to let House Democrats write the bill, and they did what comes naturally: They cleaned out their intellectual cupboards and wrote a bill that is 90% social policy, and 10% economic policy. (See here for a case study.) It is designed to support incomes with transfer payments, rather than grow incomes through job creation.