Last week I suggested that upcoming healthcare summit at the White House was just for show – a play fake to give Obama the appearance of bi-partisanship, but was really intended to set the stage for congressional liberals to “go nuclear” and ram ObamaCare through Congress using budget reconciliation rules. We got some unfortunate evidence validating my concerns yesterday.

More than a dozen Senate Democrats and 119 House Democrats are asking the president not only to use reconciliation, but also to include the most radical ideas, such as the so-called “public option.” Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), the third highest ranking House Democrat, said yesterday, “If you’re not going to do a 60-vote strategy, but instead a 50-plus-one strategy [reconciliation], the public option could very well be part of this package.”

This is a very disturbing development. Here’s why: The public option is a gigantic leap toward socialism and Big Government control over your life. The public option is the vehicle liberals will use to achieve single-payer socialized medicine in America. Barney Frank admits it. The radical Left knows it. And Barack Obama wants it.

Why It Matters

Earlier this week, the Obama Administration announced that it would unilaterally regulate carbon emissions unless Congress adopted a cap and trade scheme. I’ve devoted a lot of space in this report to explaining the tremendous implications of cap and trade, but you could summarize it this way: a cap on our prosperity that trades our liberty for a radical ideology. Tuesday, the White House made clear what that ideology is – Soviet-style socialism.

Responding to the EPA’s announcement that it would begin regulating carbon, a top White House official issued a blunt threat to our elected representatives: “If you [Congress] don’t pass this legislation [cap and trade], then … the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area. And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it’s going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty.”

That statement is a declaration of war against working families and America’s free-market economy. The White House is telling Congress to pick its poison – cap and trade or command-and-control. That’s extortion, but that’s the “Chicago way,” isn’t it? And when did White House officials start using phrases like “command-and-control”? I thought command-and-control economies died with the Soviet Union.

This threat gives you some idea of just how devastating cap and trade is for the economy. The White House is unintentionally admitting, “We know cap and trade is bad. But the EPA regulations would be really, really bad.” The administration is playing a game of chicken with the economy in the middle of a severe recession.

There is a way out of this – rein in the bureaucracy and reduce the size and scope of government. Congress can amend the Clean Air Act to strip the EPA of authority over carbon emissions. That would be the most logical thing to do. Sadly, many liberal politicians are ideologically biased against common sense and fundamental economics. (If you needed any more evidence of the radical ideology behind climate change, a leader of the Chinese delegation in Copenhagen just announced that population control “fits right into the picture.”)

So, what’s the alternative? Clint Eastwood’s famous line comes to mind: “Go ahead, make my day.” Pollster Scott Rasmussen found that just 24% of American adults felt the EPA should act unilaterally to regulate carbon emissions. Conservatives ought to call Obama’s bluff: They should fight cap and trade tooth and nail, and dare Obama to destroy the economy with his command-and-control ideology. Ulysses S. Grant said, “I know no method to secure the repeal of bad or obnoxious laws so effective as their stringent execution.” Perhaps it’s time to test that method.

Liberals just can’t contain themselves. When they start losing a debate, they resort to epithets. Yesterday, Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid went to the Senate floor and denounced opponents of socialized medicine by comparing them to defenders of slavery and opponents of civil rights. Reid said:

“Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all the Republicans can come up with is, ‘slow down, stop everything, let’s start over.’ If you think you’ve heard these same excuses before, you’re right. When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said ‘slow down, it’s too early, things aren’t bad enough.’ …When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today.”

[For those who don't understand why Reid is way off on his statement: Republicans today aren't saying "slow down, it's too early, things aren't bad enough." They're saying "start over"!  There's a BIG difference.  Republicans want change in health care too (and they've made propositions for the past X years including this year), but not the change that Liberals are forcing down our throats.]

Media reaction so far has been subdued, and that’s not surprising – there’s a different standard for liberal politicians. You’ll no doubt recall that leftwing pundits lectured the town hall protestors this summer for their incivility for daring to question the wisdom of government-run healthcare. Yet they are silent when liberal leaders display their own incivility and contempt for the American people. Sadly, this is nothing new for Harry Reid. This summer he called the town hall protesters “evil mongers.”

Our liberal elites just can’t imagine why anyone would oppose socialism. What’s not to love about government bureaucrats denying needed surgeries, arthritis medication and cancer treatments?