"The proposed Senate omnibus bill makes for truly amazing reading. It’s like the Democrats have decided to wear proudly the mantle forced on them by Republicans in the last election — the mantle of pork, waste, and Obamacare... 

"This 2,000 page monstrosity stuffed down the country’s throat in the last moment of the 111th Congress would be the epitome of everything the voters rejected. Is this the first major piece of legislation President Obama wants to sign after the election? Is this how the Senate Democrats who are up in 2012 want to start their reelection cycles? Republicans must staunchly oppose it, and if it still passes they need to make it very clear to those Senate Democrats that this vote will not be forgotten: It will serve as a symbol of the old way, and together with the 2009 stimulus bill and the health-care bill will hang around the neck of every member of Congress who supports it."

"Only a few months ago, the White House and its allies on the legal left dismissed the constitutional challenges to ObamaCare as frivolous, futile and politically motived. So much for that. Yesterday, a federal district court judge in Virginia ruled that the health law breaches the Constitution's limits on government power. 

"In a careful 42-page ruling, Judge Henry Hudson declared that ObamaCare's core enforcement mechanism known as the individual mandate -- the regulation that requires everyone to purchase health insurance or else pay a penalty -- exceeds Congress's authority to regulate the lives of Americans... 

"As the Virginia case shows, ObamaCare really does stretch the Commerce Clause to the breaking point. The core issue is whether the federal government can order individuals to do anything the political class decides it wants them to do. The stakes couldn't be higher for our constitutional order."

"In 2008, candidate Obama told Joe the Plumber that he wanted high taxes on high earners in order 'to spread the wealth around.' He told ABC's Charlie Gibson that he wanted higher capital gains taxes even if they produced less revenue in the interest of 'fairness.' 

"Now after his party's 2010 shellacking, incumbent Obama seems to have discovered the virtues of a 'growing economy.' The New York Times reports that he has asked his administration to develop proposals to eliminate tax preferences and lower tax rates, as the 1986 bipartisan tax reform did. 

"Perhaps the president is learning that you can't plunder the private sector endlessly, Chicago-style, without ill effects."

"Barack Obama won the great tax-cut showdown of 2010 — and House Democrats don’t have a clue that he did.  In the deal struck this week, the president negotiated the biggest stimulus in American history, larger than his $814 billion 2009 stimulus package.  It will pump a trillion borrowed Chinese dollars into the U.S. economy over the next two years — which just happen to be the two years of the run-up to the next presidential election.  This is a defeat?"

"The tax deal is certainly better for the economy than political gridlock over extending the tax cuts. How much better is uncertain. 

"But the Democratic base seems more interested in expanding government than in stimulating the economy. They are bellowing with rage not so much at Obama but at the reality that he is grudgingly acknowledging. They had their time, and now it's gone."

"In accepting the deal to cut payroll and business taxes and extend all of the Bush-era tax rates through 2012, Mr. Obama has implicitly admitted that his economic strategy has flopped. He is acknowledging that tax rates matter to growth, that treating business like robber barons has hurt investment and hiring, and that tax cuts are superior to spending as stimulus. It took 9.8% unemployment and a loss of 63 House seats for this education to sink in, but the country will benefit."

"[On] December 7, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy -- the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan…  No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory."

"... It is not WikiLeaks that ultimately imperils our national security, but the failing Obama administration, which ignores the nature and extent of threats we face, and which is too often unwilling to act to thwart them. While our economic difficulties have dominated the national debate for two years, national security will inevitably again come to the fore, as Americans see the full extent of the devastation left by Obama's policies. That shift cannot come too soon."

"At a Monday news conference, Attorney General Eric Holder assured the nation that his people are diligently looking into possible legal action against WikiLeaks. Where has Holder been? The WikiLeaks exposure of Afghan war documents occurred five months ago. Holder is looking now at possible indictments? This is a country where a good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich. Months after the first leak, Justice's thousands of lawyers have yet to prepare charges against Julian Assange and his confederates?  

"Throw the Espionage Act of 1917 at them. And if that is not adequate, if that law has been too constrained and watered down by subsequent Supreme Court rulings, then why hasn't the administration prepared new legislation adapted to these kinds of Internet-age violations of U.S. security? It's not as if we didn't know more leaks were coming. And that more leaks are coming still... 

"Want to prevent this from happening again? Let the world see a man who can't sleep in the same bed on consecutive nights, who fears the long arm of American justice. I'm not advocating that we bring out of retirement the KGB proxy who, on a London street, killed a Bulgarian dissident with a poisoned umbrella tip. But it would be nice if people like Assange were made to worry every time they go out in the rain."

"If we had a president in the White House who understood that we are at war with a crazed faction of Islam, and was willing to act on that belief, there would be no question about how we should deal with people who give aid and comfort to the enemy -- they’d be tried for treason and when found guilty stood up before a firing squad. 

"Julian Assange and his fellow conspirator Pvt. Bradley Manning allegedly betrayed the United States, gave aid and comfort to the terrorists who seek to destroy the United States, and if found guilty they deserve nothing less than death sentences for their unspeakable crimes."