One of them is Reagan. The other one would like to be.

After the “shellacking,” what will President Obama have to say about the State of our Union?  He gives his annual report tonight.

President Reagan made Americans feel proud of our country.  President Obama makes Americans feel obliged to defend our country (from him).  In his inauguration speech, his stated vision was to “remake America.”  Since then, we’ve gotten a glimpse of what he wants to make us into — and Americans rejected his view of America this last election.

While his messaging since then gives the appearance that he gets what Americans want, his policies and agenda have yet to change.  People are more savvy now and won’t be fooled by a cloak of rhetoric that covers the old agenda of big-government-by-regulation, disrespecting American Exceptionalism, promoting sexual identity politics, or empty words about “reducing abortion.”

President Obama will face a new Congress and public, both who are extremely sensitive to Constitutional limits and fearful of government spending.  Americans are unified, and ready for politicians to cut spending, reduce government, and quit vilifying political opponents — three items, by the way, of which the opposite mark President Obama’s career and his last State of the Union, when he pushed ObamaCare and unfairly criticized the Supreme Court justices sitting in front of him.

President Obama has an advantage this year in that it is no secret what Americans want and what the majority in Congress recognize is their mandate.  But like Reagan, his audience will not trust without verifying.

President Obama will have to prove through his actions that he will reduce government spending, promote and defend America to the outside world, stop funding abortion, and respect the Constitution and our religious heritage.

Liberals are the self-proclaimed champions of social justice and redistribution of wealth in the name of fairness and equality.  But is their ideology consistent with their lifestyle?

Last September, Roll Call released a list of the 50 richest members of Congress.  Lo and behold, the top ten members on the list were all liberals!  In fact, Senator John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) tops the list.  How could this be?  The advocates of the working class?  I don’t think so.

Conservatives are lambasted as being the rich and entitled and are guilted into describing themselves as “compassionate” conservatives just to emphasize the fact that they are not out of touch with the middle and lower classes.

There is obviously a mischaracterization of conservatives and what motivates the policies they promote.  For instance, conservatives don’t advocate free health care for all.  However, the reasoning behind that doesn’t come from a desire to withhold care from those who need it, but from a desire to avoid low quality of care and rationing of care for all.  And these things are inevitable with “free” health care — in fact, they’re a couple of the “hidden costs.”  We’ve already seen evidence of this in the health care systems of Canada and Great Britain.

True conservatives also oppose the welfare system, but not out of a lack of compassion for the underprivileged.  Rather, they are driven to compel people to work hard and reap the financial benefits of that work.  This is the philosophy on which our capitalist society was built.  To promote a society that encourages dependence on the government for income undermines capitalism and demeans the individual.

Liberals consistently paint an image of their congressional opponents as elitist, wealthy, upper-class citizens who are unable to relate to the common American.  It’s sadly ironic to find out that the very members who point fingers at the right wing and characterize them as “entitled” and “out of touch with the American people” are actually the wealthiest and most elite legislators in town.  You will not find a true conservative complaining about anyone’s wealth or saying that someone does not deserve to be as wealthy as they are — or that they’ve probably earned enough.  

Seems to me the liberals paint a false image of themselves while promoting a big government agenda under the guise of helping the average American.  But are they really in touch with the American people?  I think it’s entirely unfair that they would lie in order to hijack issues like social justice and health care, because it looks to me as if they have a lot less in common with the average American than they’d like you to think.

In today’s world, many women not only work to balance the family finances but, according to the Small Business Administration, 6.5 million of us also work to keep a business afloat.  The vast majority of these, eighty percent, have receipts of less than $50,000.  So it is fascinating to realize that these same women, many of whom are independents and voted for Obama, have become disenchanted with our winsome president.

Democrats and Republicans are scratching their heads and commissioning focus groups to understand why, but I think it’s clear.  Women are the chief operating officers of the American family and often of a small business as well.  Women understand what it means to live within our means and thus find it outrageous that Congress refuses to live up to the same standards. 

Sixty-three percent of such women say that the longer a politician is in Washington, the less he or she listens to voters, and the more they become part of the problem — and the health care bill is a good example of the kind of “problem” women are fed up with.  The same women who voted for Obama are very displeased with the president’s health care overhaul.  Fifty-two percent oppose it, with 42 percent saying it will make things worse in their personal or family situation.

And the fact that our government has chosen to saddle our kids with a $13 trillion debt — $1 trillion of which was run up in the last six months — is unconscionable to American moms.  That’s why CWA has joined SpendingRevolt.com.  Join us on the bus tour when it comes to your area, and let Washington know it needs to stop the spending spree!

Democrats all over Capitol Hill are whining that the American people are mad at them.  They are pointing to some rare and frankly minor examples of that ire going too far.  My question is: What did you expect would happen when you “Stupaked” the American people?   Did you not think they would be a little upset?  There are two major things wrong with this scenario:  (1) you’re blaming the victim, and (2) you’re exaggerating. 

First, polling data for a solid year from every credible source known to man has shown that the American people overwhelmingly did not want the President’s version of health care reform.  However, the Democrats (except for a notable few) think they know what’s best for the rest of us.  Instead of focusing on improving the best health care system in the world, they radically changed it, costing us billions, perhaps trillions of dollars to insure a few more of us.  Yes, we are upset!  We’re just not excited that you’re going to send us to prison if we don’t buy into your health insurance scam and that you’re forcing us to pay for abortions with our taxes.  

No, the real story here is not a few impolite people on the right.  The real story is the restraint Americans are showing.  In most countries there would be rioting in the streets over this kind of raw power grab by government.  No, Concerned Women for America does not support bad behavior or violence.  We will, in our own very ladylike way, NEVER FORGET! 

Secondly, anyone in the public eye has war stories.  I have personally had everything from death threats, Web harassment, and vile epithets left on my voice mail.  Man up guys!  You know this is part of the job, and you get it all the time.  I am sorry that Congressman Perriello’s brother’s gas line to his outdoor grill was mysteriously cut/slipped off.  Gasp!  What are they going to do with the steaks they thawed out already?  Tsk tsk!  Just when the weather got nice.  Now that is a travesty!  

I know someone said something unkind to Bart Stupak on his voice mail, but I’d trade what his guy said with the truly ugly word I got called any day.  I am sorry it hurt his feelings. (For the record: Before Mr. Stupak joined the dark side, CWA asked its members in Michigan to contact him to thank him politely for his then-pro-life stand, as he was taking the heat from the nasty folks on the other side of the abortion issue.  Maybe they weren’t as nasty as he led us to believe.) 

This is bush league.  What’s really going on is that Members of Congress are trying to distract the public from the arrogance of power by creating sympathy.  It’s an old trick and wouldn’t work at all except that the mainstream media is complicit in the charade.  I was at the Capitol on Sunday, and Tea Party folks were yelling at anyone in a suit, including me, but they weren’t yelling vulgarities.  People who say they were are probably lying, but we will never know because the media didn’t bother to ask them to corroborate their stories.  The media would have demanded several witnesses if any conservative had made those claims.  

The same media so excited to rush to protect the “defenseless” Congressmen barely mentioned that someone set Sarah Palin’s church on fire or that private citizens in California were personally harassed and targeted for simply suggesting that there should be a ballot initiative on marriage.  The game being played here would be funny if it weren’t for the fact that these guys thwarted the will of their constituents.  I would, however, suggest that the best way to handle this is to be patient.  After all, isn’t revenge best served up cold?  Isn’t there a Biblical quote about that? 

Update:  I’ve just learned (12:50 p.m., 3/25/2010, Thursday) that someone fired a gun into Republican Congressman Eric Cantor’s (R-Virginia) Richmond office last Monday.  Rep. Cantor didn’t whine, and thus, it’s just now getting reported.  Notice that it’s an attack on a conservative who opposed ObamaCare, but that wasn’t news till now.  I just want to re-emphasize that violence is not the answer.  There are better ways to deal with bullies.

“I knew at the time that changing my vote at the 11th hour may have been tantamount to political suicide.”

— Former Congresswoman Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky (D-Pennsylvania), on casting the final vote for the 1993 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation.

Note to Members of Congress in moderate districts: 

He can’t save you from us!  Don’t even think it for a moment.  President Obama may promise, cajole, threaten or even beg, but don’t fall for it.  Make no mistake, if moderate Democrats or Republicans vote for anything even remotely resembling the current health care bill on process or otherwise, you will need to dust off your resume. 

This is not a new scenario.  Bill Clinton strong-armed moderate Democrats in 1993, and 34 of them are rumored to be working at 7-11 today.  As the people’s representatives, Members of Congress have one job and that is to represent the interests and views of their constituents consistent with the higher law.  Poll after poll has been taken and it is clear, no matter how well the President explains his plan, the American people have rejected it.  I am sorry.  I know it hurts his feelings, but wake up.  You all work for us, the voters, and we do the hiring and firing.  He can’t save you. 

The arrogance of the Obama Administration and Democrat leaders in Congress is astounding.  Despite several polls, including swing districts, showing that Americans don’t want the health care bill that is currently on the table, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs commented over the weekend “Whoever sits here at this time next week, I think will not be talking about health care as a proposal, but as the law of the land.”

What about the will of the American people?  And what will the Obama Administration and Nancy Pelosi have to do in order to get the votes necessary to pass health care since they don’t have them as of yet?  Welcome back, shady bribes and backroom deals!

I predicted last week in an op-ed on FoxNews.com that health care won’t pass unless government funding of abortion is taken out.  The Democrat leadership in Congress said at the end of last week that talks have been shut down in the area of abortion funding and that the Stupak Amendment, which extends the Hyde Amendment to the health care legislation, won’t be put into the final bill.  That’s a lot of key Democratic votes that Pelosi is risking over an issue that is bi-partisan and clearly unpopular with Americans, the majority of whom do not want to fund abortions with public money.

“Déjà vu all over again” is the funny phrase that comes to mind about a not-at-all-funny issue.  During the Clinton years I stood with other pro-life lobbyists outside the Capitol on behalf of Concerned Women for America (CWA), sometimes until very late at night (in high heels by the way), helping to circulate a letter from pro-life Dems to the President regarding abortion in health care.  This letter was one of the final nails in the coffin to Clinton Care because it was proof that they could not pass the bill if it included funding for abortion.  The Obama administration’s unchecked arrogance on the issue flies in the face of the fact that the public is more — not less — pro-life now than in the Clinton years.  Gallup reports that more Americans, 51 percent of them, consider themselves pro-life now than at any time since Gallup began asking the question in 1995, http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/more-americans-pro-life-than-pro-choice-first-time.aspx.

Nancy Pelosi’s reaction to the push-back from members of her party (64 of whom voted in favor of the pro-life Stupak Amendment) verges on delusional.  I have had calls and emails from CWA members around the country asking “what is she talking about?”  My answer is that she has been doing mental gymnastics that should earn her a gold medal.  Speaker Pelosi knows that the current bill has an abortion “problem” but she chooses tacit denial to the simple fact that if she passes a health care bill without abortion coverage it will alienate her base.  If she doesn’t allow the pro-life Blue Dogs to pass another amendment then she looses their support.     

The Clintons couldn’t pass a bill containing abortion funding and neither can President Obama, no matter how well he explains it.  I shouldn’t be explaining this to Pelosi because the abortion funding is just one bad idea in the very bad bill.  But then again, she’ll just deny it.   

For more on this issue, see my piece today on FoxNews.com, http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/03/08/penny-young-nance-obama-health-care-plan-abortion-democrats/, and CWA President Wendy Wright’s article today at Human Events, http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35936/.