Yesterday, I proposed some planning changes for the next caucus whenever that occurs.  The St. Charles caucus was reported in just about every news outlet in the state. Here is a recap of that meeting by an attendee.  I urge you to follow the link and read the entire article.

I was at the St. Charles County caucus held in St. Peters, MO, on Saturday, March 17, 2012, which I now affectionately refer to as “The Raucous Caucus”. I’m not really interested in putting a particular political spin on what occurred. Rather, I’d like to state what occurred as just matters of fact and go over the major points of contention that led to it being brought to a close with no delegates and alternates being designated. So, as much as is possible, I have left out the names of the camps of supporters involved in the events of the Raucous Caucus. Source material and links provided are a different matter: they can and do name names and I didn’t take it upon myself to edit them. Where I do interject my perspective while delineating the points of contention, it’s for the purpose of logically connecting the sequence of events, to provide an explanation for why there appeared to be a conflict on a particular matter or specific event, or to provide a reasonable range of possible objectives or motivations.  –– The Blog Czar, March 20, 2012. 

The article documents the source of some of the confusion and presents more lessons learned to make future caucus planning and operation move more smoothly.

Obamacare goes before the US Supreme Court next week.  Oral arguments will be heard, briefs submitted, if they haven’t been already, and in a few weeks, or months, a decision will be rendered.

From some reports, it’s beginning to appear that Obama and his liberal cronies are preparing for a loss.

By Amie Parnes – 03/21/12 05:00 AM ET 

In the mean time, HHS Secretary Sibellius is pushing full steam to implement the worst elements of the bill—violating the 1st Amendment on religion for one.  It makes one speculate whether the Obama left hand is fully communicating with the Obama right hand.

Oh!  Silly me. There are no Right hands in the Obama administration.

***

Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI) presented a proposed federal budget and the screams of Washington liberals were heard clear to the left coast. The democrats have refused to submit or pass a budget since Obama took office. They prefer stealth spending that keeps their attempts to transform our country into a “dictatorship of the proletariat” as secret as possible. 

Paul Ryan submitted a budget last year what was blocked by democrats. Once again he is proposing a budget that cuts trillions from the budget over the coming years and impacts heavily welfare spending.

Ryan, Obama budgets offer radically opposed visions of America

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin did something Tuesday that President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and other Democratic congressional leaders refuse to do — propose a 2013 federal budget that makes the hard choices needed if America is to regain its economic vitality and avoid becoming Greece. At least Obama did propose a 2013 budget earlier this year; Reid and his Democratic colleagues in Congress haven’t done that in three years. Unfortunately, the president’s approach makes all the wrong choices, opting to increase spending, taxes and debt without regard to the consequences. Worse still is the fact that the Obama budget, if adopted, would add immensely to the difficulties facing his successors in the Oval Office, to say nothing of the children and grandchildren of today’s taxpayers.

On spending, for example, the Obama budget increases federal spending every year, for a total of $1.5 trillion over the next decade. Ryan’s “Path to Prosperity” decreases federal spending by $3.5 trillion. On the federal deficit, not only does Obama propose the fourth-straight year with a federal deficit of at least $1 trillion, his budget projects oceans of red ink as far as an accountant’s eye can see. The Ryan budget goes in the opposite direction by progressively reducing the deficit by $3 trillion over a decade, compared with the Obama proposal, and puts the government’s ledger on the way to being balanced thereafter. (Go here for the full article.)