A Blog from Yahoo! News:
California on the brink
Armageddon. Apocalypse. Disaster: These are the words being used to describe California's staggering $24 billion budget deficit. With a midnight deadline to balance the budget, state lawmakers are facing a daunting task: Find a way to bridge the gap or start issuing $3 billion in IOUs this week to cover the bills. [How do IOUs cover bills? Why not start selling off the state to cover?]
Almost every state is suffering from the effects of the recession, but not every state accounts for 12 percent of the national gross domestic product. According to AP, if California goes down, so goes the nation: [Wait a minute. Are we talking about the economy or the state budget here?] California's annual $1.7 trillion economy is the world's eighth-largest economy and provides a significant chunk of tax revenue for the government; California alone funds many social programs for the entire nation. [Let's look at the logic. State budget is short money. The US can't let California state government "fail" because the economy will fail and bring the other states down? Maybe the state should spend less. If the state is not bailed out maybe it will stop...that might not be a bad thing.]
Like the Big Three automakers, California may be "too big to fail." If the state implodes, the ripple effect could slow the entire nation's recovery from the recession. Burt P. Flickinger, a retail consultant, tells AP:
"California is the key catalyst for U.S. retail sales, and if California falls further you will see the U.S. economy suffer significantly." [Again, are we talking the state budget failing or the entire economy of California?]
How did California dig itself such a huge hole? The recession certainly didn't help, but Time's Kevin O'Leary writes that California's financial troubles can be traced back to the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978. [So homeowners in California would have given the state even more of their money which means less money circulating in the real-world.] An antitax measure, Prop 13 makes it extremely difficult to raise taxes or pass a budget unless a 2/3 majority in both state houses agree — a virtually impossible task. California Rep. Zoe Lofgren tells Politico:
"If we [in Congress] had to do what the California legislature does, we would never send a bill to the president of the United States,” she said. [Again, this is a bad thing?]
If the political wrangling over the budget isn't resolved by midnight tonight, Californians will be feeling the pain on every level, big and small. Just a few of the proposed spending cuts:
— State employees will be forced to take another day of unpaid leave a month, in addition to the two days leave they were forced to take starting in December. (NYT)
— Funding for the Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement will be slashed by $20 million. The "little-known unit" has played a key role in several of the state's high-profile cases: The bureau's agents helped arrest Scott Petersen for the murder of his wife and unborn child, and their investigation led to charges in Anna Nicole Smith's overdose death. (AP)
— 80 percent of state parks would be closed, 25 in the Bay Area alone, including several beaches along the peninsula. Park visitors spend an estimated $2.6 billion a year in and near state parks, but closing the parks would save only .26 percent of the $24 billion deficit. (SF Chronicle) [So if it doesn't save THAT much why do it?]
— Education funding would be reduced by $5.3 billion. School districts have already laid off 30,000 employees. Class sizes are expected to surge from 20 to 30 students and many after school programs, arts and music classes will be cut. A national education survey conducted this year ranked California 47th in per-student spending. (AP) [I can't believe that. I would believe that California's education quality is 47th.]
— Gov. Schwarzenegger is proposing to eliminate the state's $1.3 billion welfare program. Frank Mecca, the head of the County Welfare Directors Association of California, tells Time, "California could become the only state in the First World without subsistence benefits for poor children." ["It's for the children." Please, welfare (the way it's set up) is one of the first to get cut. What about entitlements? What about the millions of outlaw immigrants running from the law yet taking from our taxes?]
So far, the government is using a "wait and see" approach to California, or as a recent Politico headline stated more bluntly — "Washington to California: Drop dead." Earlier this month, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that the administration would "monitor" the situation, but that California's "budgetary problem unfortunately is one that they're going to have to solve." [If the federal government ever bails out the State of California...tea parties will sprout throughout this country and I will be at one. NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION! I refuse to pay into the budget of a state other than Colorado!]
- Lili Ladaga
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
American Crown again
Senators want hearing on Obama's firing of IG
(AP)WASHINGTON – Two Republican senators asked Monday for a congressional hearing to look at whether President Barack Obama acted appropriately when he fired the national service agency's inspector general earlier this month.
Sens. Mike Enzi of Wyoming and Orrin Hatch of Utah said they were concerned about "significant questions raised regarding the propriety of the decision to remove the IG."
Obama fired Gerald Walpin, the inspector general who investigates AmeriCorps and other programs that are part of the Corporation for National Community Service, saying he had lost confidence in him. The firing followed an investigation by Walpin finding misuse of federal grants by a nonprofit education group led by Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who is an Obama supporter and former professional basketball star.
Johnson and a nonprofit education academy he founded ultimately agreed to repay half of $847,000 in grants it had received from AmeriCorps. Walpin was criticized by the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento for the way he handled the investigation of Johnson and St. HOPE Academy.
Walpin has told The Associated Press that he reported facts and conclusions "in an honest and full way" while serving as IG.
Enzi and Hatch asked Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee, to hold a hearing.
"We have asked for information from the White House counsel and CNCS, but they have not been forthcoming to date nor willing to commit to a timeframe," the senators said in a letter to Kennedy.
A Kennedy spokeswoman, Melissa Wagoner, said the senator's office was reviewing the request.
KJ say it aint so. Say it aint so. (Sorry I'm a Phoenix Suns fan)
What happened to transparency? The whole point to an inspector general is to make sure people within the government are doing their jobs and not cheating the system. Then you have the President and his community organization. We have an inspector general doing his job by investigating into Americorp and its partner community organizations; finding something wrong; the community organization ultimately pays back some funds it shouldn't have gotten. I'd say the guy made his money, did his job.
So why does President Obama fire him? Let me venture to say the inspector general was probably dangerous enough to nail bigger corrupt community organizations...such as ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) who helped Obama get elected. Obama's links to ACORN are extensive and Obama didn't like the inspector general getting too close to their ties to illegal activities.
This sounds more like Cuba or any other dictatorship. The dictator doesn't like the public to find the truth about their squandering of national resources to personal use...so they fire (or hang or stone) the whistleblower.
No doubt Obama will be appointing a community organizer to be the new inspector general.
Then we hear about this:
ABCNews
Vice President Biden announced today that Lynn Rosenthal will be the White House adviser on Violence Against Women, a new position created to work with the president and vice president on domestic violence and sexual assault issues...Rosenthal most recently served as the executive director of the New Mexico Coalition Against Domestic Violence and has focused on domestic violence issues like housing, state and local coordinated community response, federal policy, and survivor-centered advocacy.
Another new position...I mean czar! Does the President really need someone to overlook violence against women? Do we really need someone to establish that violence against women is wrong? Will Rosenthal establish which violence is wrong? This is ridiculous and just another example of the American Crown appointing their princesses/czars. Hey, it's Biden so it might be a joke.
(AP)WASHINGTON – Two Republican senators asked Monday for a congressional hearing to look at whether President Barack Obama acted appropriately when he fired the national service agency's inspector general earlier this month.
Sens. Mike Enzi of Wyoming and Orrin Hatch of Utah said they were concerned about "significant questions raised regarding the propriety of the decision to remove the IG."
Obama fired Gerald Walpin, the inspector general who investigates AmeriCorps and other programs that are part of the Corporation for National Community Service, saying he had lost confidence in him. The firing followed an investigation by Walpin finding misuse of federal grants by a nonprofit education group led by Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who is an Obama supporter and former professional basketball star.
Johnson and a nonprofit education academy he founded ultimately agreed to repay half of $847,000 in grants it had received from AmeriCorps. Walpin was criticized by the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento for the way he handled the investigation of Johnson and St. HOPE Academy.
Walpin has told The Associated Press that he reported facts and conclusions "in an honest and full way" while serving as IG.
Enzi and Hatch asked Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee, to hold a hearing.
"We have asked for information from the White House counsel and CNCS, but they have not been forthcoming to date nor willing to commit to a timeframe," the senators said in a letter to Kennedy.
A Kennedy spokeswoman, Melissa Wagoner, said the senator's office was reviewing the request.
KJ say it aint so. Say it aint so. (Sorry I'm a Phoenix Suns fan)
What happened to transparency? The whole point to an inspector general is to make sure people within the government are doing their jobs and not cheating the system. Then you have the President and his community organization. We have an inspector general doing his job by investigating into Americorp and its partner community organizations; finding something wrong; the community organization ultimately pays back some funds it shouldn't have gotten. I'd say the guy made his money, did his job.
So why does President Obama fire him? Let me venture to say the inspector general was probably dangerous enough to nail bigger corrupt community organizations...such as ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) who helped Obama get elected. Obama's links to ACORN are extensive and Obama didn't like the inspector general getting too close to their ties to illegal activities.
This sounds more like Cuba or any other dictatorship. The dictator doesn't like the public to find the truth about their squandering of national resources to personal use...so they fire (or hang or stone) the whistleblower.
No doubt Obama will be appointing a community organizer to be the new inspector general.
Then we hear about this:
ABCNews
Vice President Biden announced today that Lynn Rosenthal will be the White House adviser on Violence Against Women, a new position created to work with the president and vice president on domestic violence and sexual assault issues...Rosenthal most recently served as the executive director of the New Mexico Coalition Against Domestic Violence and has focused on domestic violence issues like housing, state and local coordinated community response, federal policy, and survivor-centered advocacy.
Another new position...I mean czar! Does the President really need someone to overlook violence against women? Do we really need someone to establish that violence against women is wrong? Will Rosenthal establish which violence is wrong? This is ridiculous and just another example of the American Crown appointing their princesses/czars. Hey, it's Biden so it might be a joke.
Monday, June 29, 2009
tidbit-Why does he even go?
Evergreen Chapel: Obama Chooses Church At Camp David, Same As Bush
For the past five months, White House aides and friends of the Obamas have been quietly visiting local churches and vetting the sermons of prospective first ministers in a search for a new and uncontroversial church home. Obama has even sampled a few himself, attending services at 19th Street Baptist on the weekend before his inauguration and celebrating Easter at St. John's Episcopal Church.
Now, in an unexpected move, Obama has told White House aides that instead of joining a congregation in Washington, D.C., he will follow in George W. Bush's footsteps and make his primary place of worship Evergreen Chapel, the nondenominational church at Camp David.
Let me get this straight: Bush = right-wing/religious right whack job who wears his beliefs on his shoulder.
So Obama is going to a church that he had other people pick for himself. A church that is considered uncontroversial (that's right for 20 years he went to a church headed by Rev. Wright and never knew he was racist.)
So if the preacher at this church helped Bush in his life who's to say Obama won't be influenced the same? This might not be too good for the President. He might become some religious right nut job. Where's the change? :)
But the biggest point this illustrates is this: It seems he hasn't gone to church since he was inaugurated...5 months...I guess he's been too busy..
For the past five months, White House aides and friends of the Obamas have been quietly visiting local churches and vetting the sermons of prospective first ministers in a search for a new and uncontroversial church home. Obama has even sampled a few himself, attending services at 19th Street Baptist on the weekend before his inauguration and celebrating Easter at St. John's Episcopal Church.
Now, in an unexpected move, Obama has told White House aides that instead of joining a congregation in Washington, D.C., he will follow in George W. Bush's footsteps and make his primary place of worship Evergreen Chapel, the nondenominational church at Camp David.
Let me get this straight: Bush = right-wing/religious right whack job who wears his beliefs on his shoulder.
So Obama is going to a church that he had other people pick for himself. A church that is considered uncontroversial (that's right for 20 years he went to a church headed by Rev. Wright and never knew he was racist.)
So if the preacher at this church helped Bush in his life who's to say Obama won't be influenced the same? This might not be too good for the President. He might become some religious right nut job. Where's the change? :)
But the biggest point this illustrates is this: It seems he hasn't gone to church since he was inaugurated...5 months...I guess he's been too busy..
Foreign Policy Obamination
Iran's president lashes out at Obama
The Associated Press
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vowed Saturday to make the U.S. regret its criticism of Iran's post-election crackdown and said the "mask has been removed" from the Obama administration's efforts to improve relations.
Obama officials: talks with Iran still possible
By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – Despite questions about the legitimacy of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's re-election and his belligerent anti-American rhetoric, the White House remains open to discussions with Iran over its nuclear ambitions.
Obama: 'Better Judgment' on Foreign Policy
ABCNews
By JAKE TAPPER
July 25, 2007
...
"One thing I'm very confident about is my judgment in foreign policy is, I believe, better than any other candidate in this race, Republican or Democrat," Obama said.
Others in the race have spent decades in the foreign policy world, including Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who visited 82 countries as first lady, Vietnam veteran Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., and former Vietnam prisoner of war Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
But Obama said, "The notion that somehow from Washington you get this vast foreign policy experience is illusory."
The Clinton campaign begged off commenting, but campaigning in New Hampshire and told of Obama's remark, Sen. McCain, R-Ariz., offered a sarcastic reply.
"Well, I also think I'm the most qualified to run the decathlon because I watch sports on television all the time," McCain said, according to the Associated Press.
President Obama must be out of breath right now. I love that quote from McCain.
Ah yes, the Progressive Pundits said if he was elected President the world would love us again; he's a citizen of the world; correcting the "bad feelings" Bush had created in the Muslim world. Were they serious?
President Obama thought with his immaculate inauguration into office that through his "messiah" power issues around the world would right themselves. He is failing.
He is failing on the Korean issue. He is failing with Iran. It is obvious that Iran's leadership doesn't trust Obama. So why is Obama still harping on meeting with them when he knows they don't trust him? Delusional.
Instead of actively standing strong against the tyranny of Iran, he gives them rhetoric. Iran (and the Muslim world) sees rhetoric as weakness. Why were so many hesitant with Obama's speech in Cairo instead of jubilant. His speech in Cairo outlined how the US wouldn't get involved with "nation building" and internal affairs. His speech should have been at Waterloo. This is going to haunt him.
His speech in Cairo will be his Achilles heel. Everything that happens in Iran or Israel or AfPak will be weighed against his speech. Brilliant foreign policy move! He started with a sprint and now he's getting tired and Iran is running away from him.
We need to support the protestors in Iran. They really need a revolution, but we (individualists) cannot allow Progressivism to prevail. Unfortunately, our President is a Progressive and if he ever does see a toppling of the theocracy of Iran, I can guarantee he will support a progressive regime of secular totalitarianism.
The Associated Press
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vowed Saturday to make the U.S. regret its criticism of Iran's post-election crackdown and said the "mask has been removed" from the Obama administration's efforts to improve relations.
Obama officials: talks with Iran still possible
By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – Despite questions about the legitimacy of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's re-election and his belligerent anti-American rhetoric, the White House remains open to discussions with Iran over its nuclear ambitions.
Obama: 'Better Judgment' on Foreign Policy
ABCNews
By JAKE TAPPER
July 25, 2007
...
"One thing I'm very confident about is my judgment in foreign policy is, I believe, better than any other candidate in this race, Republican or Democrat," Obama said.
Others in the race have spent decades in the foreign policy world, including Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who visited 82 countries as first lady, Vietnam veteran Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., and former Vietnam prisoner of war Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
But Obama said, "The notion that somehow from Washington you get this vast foreign policy experience is illusory."
The Clinton campaign begged off commenting, but campaigning in New Hampshire and told of Obama's remark, Sen. McCain, R-Ariz., offered a sarcastic reply.
"Well, I also think I'm the most qualified to run the decathlon because I watch sports on television all the time," McCain said, according to the Associated Press.
President Obama must be out of breath right now. I love that quote from McCain.
Ah yes, the Progressive Pundits said if he was elected President the world would love us again; he's a citizen of the world; correcting the "bad feelings" Bush had created in the Muslim world. Were they serious?
President Obama thought with his immaculate inauguration into office that through his "messiah" power issues around the world would right themselves. He is failing.
He is failing on the Korean issue. He is failing with Iran. It is obvious that Iran's leadership doesn't trust Obama. So why is Obama still harping on meeting with them when he knows they don't trust him? Delusional.
Instead of actively standing strong against the tyranny of Iran, he gives them rhetoric. Iran (and the Muslim world) sees rhetoric as weakness. Why were so many hesitant with Obama's speech in Cairo instead of jubilant. His speech in Cairo outlined how the US wouldn't get involved with "nation building" and internal affairs. His speech should have been at Waterloo. This is going to haunt him.
His speech in Cairo will be his Achilles heel. Everything that happens in Iran or Israel or AfPak will be weighed against his speech. Brilliant foreign policy move! He started with a sprint and now he's getting tired and Iran is running away from him.
We need to support the protestors in Iran. They really need a revolution, but we (individualists) cannot allow Progressivism to prevail. Unfortunately, our President is a Progressive and if he ever does see a toppling of the theocracy of Iran, I can guarantee he will support a progressive regime of secular totalitarianism.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Crap and Tax Passed-We are in trouble
I've been watching C-SPAN.
Rep. Mark Souder, Indiana, just said that if the House were made up of businessmen, people who make money and create jobs, this bill would not have passed. This Bill passed by a squeaker, 219-212... with 8 Progressive Republicans voting for it.
This will force American companies to do business in China, India, etc. because of the increase in energy costs. This will help gross polluting countries gain American jobs... thanks Obama.
These are the tyrannous members of the American Crown who voted to destroy our economy and individualism in the name of the farce of Climate Change:
Rep. Mark Souder, Indiana, just said that if the House were made up of businessmen, people who make money and create jobs, this bill would not have passed. This Bill passed by a squeaker, 219-212... with 8 Progressive Republicans voting for it.
This will force American companies to do business in China, India, etc. because of the increase in energy costs. This will help gross polluting countries gain American jobs... thanks Obama.
These are the tyrannous members of the American Crown who voted to destroy our economy and individualism in the name of the farce of Climate Change:
| Abercrombie Ackerman Adler (NJ) Andrews Baca Baird Baldwin Bean Becerra Berkley Berman Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Blumenauer Boccieri Bono Mack Boswell Boucher Boyd Brady (PA) Braley (IA) Brown, Corrine Butterfield Capps Capuano Cardoza Carnahan Carson (IN) Castle Castor (FL) Chandler Clarke Clay Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Connolly (VA) Conyers Cooper Courtney Crowley Cuellar Cummings Davis (CA) Davis (IL) DeGette Delahunt DeLauro Dicks Dingell Doggett Doyle Driehaus Edwards (MD) Ellison Engel Eshoo Etheridge Farr Fattah Filner Frank (MA) Fudge Giffords Gonzalez Gordon (TN) Grayson Green, Al Green, Gene Grijalva Gutierrez Hall (NY) Halvorson | Hare Harman Heinrich Higgins Hill Himes Hinchey Hinojosa Hirono Hodes Holt Honda Hoyer Inslee Israel Jackson (IL) Jackson-Lee (TX) Johnson (GA) Johnson, E. B. Kagen Kanjorski Kaptur Kennedy Kildee Kilpatrick (MI) Kilroy Kind Kirk Klein (FL) Kosmas Kratovil Lance Langevin Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Lee (CA) Levin Lewis (GA) Lipinski LoBiondo Loebsack Lofgren, Zoe Lowey Luján Lynch Maffei Maloney Markey (CO) Markey (MA) Matsui McCarthy (NY) McCollum McDermott McGovern McHugh McMahon McNerney Meek (FL) Meeks (NY) Michaud Miller (NC) Miller, George Moore (KS) Moore (WI) Moran (VA) Murphy (CT) Murphy (NY) Murphy, Patrick Murtha Nadler (NY) Napolitano Neal (MA) Oberstar | Obey Olver Pallone Pascrell Pastor (AZ) Payne Pelosi Perlmutter Perriello Peters Peterson Pingree (ME) Polis (CO) Price (NC) Quigley Rangel Reichert Reyes Richardson Rothman (NJ) Roybal-Allard Ruppersberger Rush Ryan (OH) Sánchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sarbanes Schakowsky Schauer Schiff Schrader Schwartz Scott (GA) Scott (VA) Serrano Sestak Shea-Porter Sherman Shuler Sires Skelton Slaughter Smith (NJ) Smith (WA) Snyder Space Speier Spratt Stupak Sutton Tauscher Teague Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Tierney Titus Tonko Towns Tsongas Van Hollen Velázquez Walz Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Watt Waxman Weiner Welch Wexler Woolsey Wu Yarmuth |
Obama Serves Pork
Obama hosts luau for Congress
WASHINGTON, June 26 (UPI) -- President Barack Obama greeted members of the U.S. Congress and their families Thursday with a merry "Aloha" as he hosted a luau at the White House.
"I just want to say to all the members of Congress, you've been working hard," he said. "I wish I could give you all trips to Hawaii, but I figured since -- given our budget crunch we can't do that, that we'd at least bring Hawaii to you."
The president held his daughter Sasha's hand as the family -- all wearing leis -- walked out of the Oval Office to the South Lawn, as did Vice President Joe Biden. Biden introduced Obama by saying he likes the state he represented in the Senate, Illinois, but "loves" Hawaii, the president's native state.
Obama introduced his family, including "the star," Bo the dog.
Some members of Congress honored the occasion with Hawaiian shirts, including Obama's former Senate colleague, Dick Durbin of Illinois, and Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.
The menu, with some items prepared by an Obama friend, Alan Wang, a chef in Hawaii, included Kahlua pig. Drinks were served at a thatched-roof bar and included the Hawaiian beer Longboard Lager.
Hypocrisy and Irony all stringed up on a lei. Let's look at the hypocrisy: Why celebrate? The country is not going down the tubes...it already has. I was hoping for Obama Huts in DC, but not in the White House serving adult beverages. Secondly, hypocrisy in the media. When President Bush had barbeques, went back to his ranch while Iraq was going on...hmmm. Iran is showing its true colors as a theocratic tyranny. Evil Korea is outwardly and specifically threatening nuclear war with the United States. Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan are still going on.
We have the hypocrisy down...and now the Irony: I see how it went down. President Obama gave the menu to the Congressmen (PORK was the main dish). They approved of the PORK and then they ATE IT! The thing many Democrat supporters don't realize is that in the end WE PAY FOR EVERYTHING! We paid for the real PORK and the financial PORK. The American Crown lapping it up in luxury.
By The Way:
The House will be voting on Cap and Trade today. They want to push it through so they can go on vacation...will they actually read it? This Bill will raise everyone's taxes because of the farce of carbon-caused global warming. Call/eMail/FAX your representative to vote NO!
And finally: There's a 50-50 chance that Michael Jackson is finally happy. When someone mangles their body like that, they can't love themselves or be happy.
WASHINGTON, June 26 (UPI) -- President Barack Obama greeted members of the U.S. Congress and their families Thursday with a merry "Aloha" as he hosted a luau at the White House.
"I just want to say to all the members of Congress, you've been working hard," he said. "I wish I could give you all trips to Hawaii, but I figured since -- given our budget crunch we can't do that, that we'd at least bring Hawaii to you."
The president held his daughter Sasha's hand as the family -- all wearing leis -- walked out of the Oval Office to the South Lawn, as did Vice President Joe Biden. Biden introduced Obama by saying he likes the state he represented in the Senate, Illinois, but "loves" Hawaii, the president's native state.
Obama introduced his family, including "the star," Bo the dog.
Some members of Congress honored the occasion with Hawaiian shirts, including Obama's former Senate colleague, Dick Durbin of Illinois, and Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.
The menu, with some items prepared by an Obama friend, Alan Wang, a chef in Hawaii, included Kahlua pig. Drinks were served at a thatched-roof bar and included the Hawaiian beer Longboard Lager.
Hypocrisy and Irony all stringed up on a lei. Let's look at the hypocrisy: Why celebrate? The country is not going down the tubes...it already has. I was hoping for Obama Huts in DC, but not in the White House serving adult beverages. Secondly, hypocrisy in the media. When President Bush had barbeques, went back to his ranch while Iraq was going on...hmmm. Iran is showing its true colors as a theocratic tyranny. Evil Korea is outwardly and specifically threatening nuclear war with the United States. Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan are still going on.
We have the hypocrisy down...and now the Irony: I see how it went down. President Obama gave the menu to the Congressmen (PORK was the main dish). They approved of the PORK and then they ATE IT! The thing many Democrat supporters don't realize is that in the end WE PAY FOR EVERYTHING! We paid for the real PORK and the financial PORK. The American Crown lapping it up in luxury.
By The Way:
The House will be voting on Cap and Trade today. They want to push it through so they can go on vacation...will they actually read it? This Bill will raise everyone's taxes because of the farce of carbon-caused global warming. Call/eMail/FAX your representative to vote NO!
And finally: There's a 50-50 chance that Michael Jackson is finally happy. When someone mangles their body like that, they can't love themselves or be happy.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Killing Health Care
Op-Ed Contributor: Shifting America from sick care to genuine wellness
Yahoo!
By Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa)
Washington, DC — With the Senate health committee convening daily to craft a comprehensive health reform bill, the basic outline of this landmark legislation is now clear.
Yes, it will ensure access to affordable, quality care for every American. [Oh goodie, the government will take care of all of us] But, just as important, it will hold down health care costs by creating a sharp new emphasis on disease prevention and public health. [The only reason it will lower health care costs for Americans is because the government doesn't need to run on a profit, they just print more money.]
As the lead Senator in drafting the Prevention and Public Health section of the bill, I view this legislation as our opportunity to recreate America as a genuine wellness society – a society that is focused on prevention, good nutrition, fitness, and public health. [Whoa! Hold your horses. "Recreate America?" America does not need to be recreated...it needs to be reinvigorated and purged of the Government Plantation. Beware! When they say prevention, etc. they really mean you WILL exercise, get unnecessary tests every month, stop smoking, stop drinking, stop eating sweets, stop eating meat or else you WILL NOT get treatment when something catastrophic happens. Just ask anyone in the UK]
The fact is, we currently do not have a health care system in the United States; we have a sick care system. [So he doesn't want our health taken care of? More re-definition] If you’re sick, you get care, whether through insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, community health centers, emergency rooms, or charity. [Isn't that the whole point of those things?] The problem is that this is all about patching things up after people develop serious illnesses and chronic conditions. [Please, has this guy never heard of George Burns? This is all leading up to dictating what you can eat and your lifestyle. What are the lifestyle activists known as "gay rights" going to do when this junk goes down? I'm sure they'll be hypocritical about the whole thing.]
We spend a staggering $2.3 trillion annually on health care – 16.5 percent of our GDP and far more than any other country spends on health care – yet the World Health Organization ranks U.S. health care only 37th among nations, on par with Serbia. [Oh, by the way, they fail to mention that of that $2.3 trillion, $547 billion is paid by Medicare and Medicaid (CBO January 2007) or 24% is already paid out by the government. This genius says that we spend more than any other country but then forgets we have the third largest population in the world. The US has a population of about two-thirds of the entire European Union. Only China and India have more people and we know that they are at the same level of health care as us. As for the WHO ranking, let's look at the results:
Death Rate: US 8/1000 people; UK 10/1000 people; Serbia 14/1000 people
Life Expectancy: US 78 years; UK 79 years; Serbia 74 years
(CIA Factbook)
(WOW what a difference in the results...we are so much worse off than the UK and so much similar to Serbia, puh-leez)
We spend twice as much per capita on health care as European countries, but we are twice as sick with chronic disease. [Ya, and they also have people waiting on long lists for life-saving surgeries and they also block access to health care for those who need it but don't live the life the government approves]
How can this be so? The problem is that we have systematically neglected wellness and disease prevention. Currently in the United States, 95 percent of every health care dollar is spent on treating illnesses and conditions after they occur. But we spend peanuts on prevention. [Our word of the day: Prevention. The original point to insurance (this is waht everyone means when speakiing of "health care") was for catastrophes.]
The good news in these dismal statistics is that, by reforming our system and focusing on fighting and preventing chronic disease, we have a huge opportunity. We can not only save hundreds of billions of dollars; we can also dramatically improve the health of the American people. [Since when is it the responsibility of the Government to improve the health of the American people. Where is it in the constitution? In the Declaration of Independence? We need to leave it up to the American people to decide what they do to their health.]
Consider this: Right now, some 75 percent of health care costs are accounted for by heart disease, diabetes, prostate cancer, breast cancer, and obesity. What these five diseases and conditions have in common is that they are largely preventable and even reversible by changes in nutrition, physical activity, and lifestyle. [Two points on this one. 80% of health care costs occur for those of the senior persuasion (it's a fact of life) many of the problems he lists happen more commonly in the senior age. Secondly, considering this article is about what the government wants to do to American health care...I don't think the "changes in lifestyle" will be a suggestion, more likely a government mandate.]
Listen to what Dr. Dean Ornish told our Senate health committee: “Studies have shown that changing lifestyle could prevent at least 90 percent of all heart disease. Thus, the disease that accounts for more premature deaths and costs Americans more than any other illness is almost completely preventable, and even reversible, simply by changing lifestyle.” [Of course, Dr Ornish would be doing the preventing...and charging for it. Does prevention really save that much money? I think that is still up in the air. Again...the "change in lifestyle" will not be optional when the government flips the bill.]
It’s not enough to talk about how to extend insurance coverage and how to pay for health care – as important as those things are. It makes no sense just to figure out a better way to pay the bills for a system that is dysfunctional, ineffective, and broken. We also have to change the health care system itself, beginning with a sharp new emphasis on prevention and public health. [So he admits it...cost means nothing. Just print more money.]
We also have to realize that wellness and prevention must be truly comprehensive. It is not only about what goes on in a doctor’s office. It encompasses workplace wellness programs, community-wide wellness programs, building bike paths and walking trails, getting junk food out of our schools, making school breakfasts and lunches more nutritious, increasing the amount of physical activity our children get, and so much more. [If you haven't watched the movie "Demolition Man" with Sly Stallone, watch it because it really sounds like this paragraph. "Be well fellow citizen."]
I am heartened by the fact that the major players in this endeavor – Democrats and Republicans alike – all “get it” when it comes to prevention and public health. We all agree that it must be at the heart of reform legislation. [It's bi-partisan so it's cool, okay.]
As President Obama said in his speech to Congress earlier this year: “[It is time] to make the largest investment ever in preventive care, because that's one of the best ways to keep our people healthy and our costs under control.” [Since when has President Obama been worried about how much something costs? $787 billion there, $1 trillion here.]
No question, comprehensive health reform is an extraordinarily ambitious undertaking. But what makes me optimistic is that all the major groups are playing a constructive role, including those that opposed the 1993-94 health reform effort. Everyone agrees that the current system is broken. [It could be said that the health reform effort of the 1930s is partially at fault here.]
Winston Churchill famously said that “Americans always do the right thing – after they’ve tried everything else.” Well, we’ve tried everything else, and it has led us to bad health and the brink of bankruptcy. [Winston Churchill also said "However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results." I wonder what Churchill would have said when the UK health care system denies him treatment for stroke (he died of stroke) because of his ever-present cigar smoking?]
Comprehensive health reform legislation is our opportunity to change the paradigm. We are going to extend health insurance to every American. And we are going to give our citizens access to a 21st century health care system – one that is focused on helping us to live healthy, active, happy lives. [Living a healthy, active and happy life is up to us. It is up to the individual. Will the government "change" my mind if I'm not happy? Watch "Brazil" or read 1984. Aren't these works supposed to be fiction and not how things should be?]
President Obama claims that universal health care, or the "public option", will reduce costs. Creating a health care insurance branch to the government will kill the private health care insurance industry and boost prices sky-high. Creating a system that does not require a profit (it has an Obamabudget with no bottom just print more money) will charge its customers nothing while paying to health care providers a lot of money. The private companies out there cannot compete against this because they need to run a profit to stay in business. You cannot stay in business if your competitor gives away their product for free. President Obama will then appoint a health care board to run this system. He will appoint doctors and businessmen who believe and follow his steps. (Another Churchill quote: "Never hold discussions with the monkey when the organ grinder is in the room.") If this Czarist Board decides that the elderly are burdening the system they will restrict access. Nothing will stop them. Former Democrat/Progressive Governor of Colorado, Roy Romer has been quoted to say "The elderly have a duty to die." This is how most progressives think. It has its roots in eugenics (no, not the study of Eugenes) and progressivism. Do you remember the stupid classroom activity 6 people in a 5-person boat...who do we throw overboard. This is progressive thought. I reject the premise. Just build a bigger boat. Capitalism and the economy are not zero-sum games...they can grow...OK, I'm getting into another posting another day.
President Obama is trying to kill the private health care system. He will try to do it by injecting gobs of the virus of socialism into our health care system. A health care system already infected by what I will call socialitis progressus, a virus of our civilization, that has been slowly poisoning our country. Socialitis progressus has slowly cost us our individualism. Fortunately, we have the antidote, together we can redress our representatives, educate others and VOTE.
Yahoo!
By Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa)
Washington, DC — With the Senate health committee convening daily to craft a comprehensive health reform bill, the basic outline of this landmark legislation is now clear.
Yes, it will ensure access to affordable, quality care for every American. [Oh goodie, the government will take care of all of us] But, just as important, it will hold down health care costs by creating a sharp new emphasis on disease prevention and public health. [The only reason it will lower health care costs for Americans is because the government doesn't need to run on a profit, they just print more money.]
As the lead Senator in drafting the Prevention and Public Health section of the bill, I view this legislation as our opportunity to recreate America as a genuine wellness society – a society that is focused on prevention, good nutrition, fitness, and public health. [Whoa! Hold your horses. "Recreate America?" America does not need to be recreated...it needs to be reinvigorated and purged of the Government Plantation. Beware! When they say prevention, etc. they really mean you WILL exercise, get unnecessary tests every month, stop smoking, stop drinking, stop eating sweets, stop eating meat or else you WILL NOT get treatment when something catastrophic happens. Just ask anyone in the UK]
The fact is, we currently do not have a health care system in the United States; we have a sick care system. [So he doesn't want our health taken care of? More re-definition] If you’re sick, you get care, whether through insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, community health centers, emergency rooms, or charity. [Isn't that the whole point of those things?] The problem is that this is all about patching things up after people develop serious illnesses and chronic conditions. [Please, has this guy never heard of George Burns? This is all leading up to dictating what you can eat and your lifestyle. What are the lifestyle activists known as "gay rights" going to do when this junk goes down? I'm sure they'll be hypocritical about the whole thing.]
We spend a staggering $2.3 trillion annually on health care – 16.5 percent of our GDP and far more than any other country spends on health care – yet the World Health Organization ranks U.S. health care only 37th among nations, on par with Serbia. [Oh, by the way, they fail to mention that of that $2.3 trillion, $547 billion is paid by Medicare and Medicaid (CBO January 2007) or 24% is already paid out by the government. This genius says that we spend more than any other country but then forgets we have the third largest population in the world. The US has a population of about two-thirds of the entire European Union. Only China and India have more people and we know that they are at the same level of health care as us. As for the WHO ranking, let's look at the results:
Death Rate: US 8/1000 people; UK 10/1000 people; Serbia 14/1000 people
Life Expectancy: US 78 years; UK 79 years; Serbia 74 years
(CIA Factbook)
(WOW what a difference in the results...we are so much worse off than the UK and so much similar to Serbia, puh-leez)
We spend twice as much per capita on health care as European countries, but we are twice as sick with chronic disease. [Ya, and they also have people waiting on long lists for life-saving surgeries and they also block access to health care for those who need it but don't live the life the government approves]
How can this be so? The problem is that we have systematically neglected wellness and disease prevention. Currently in the United States, 95 percent of every health care dollar is spent on treating illnesses and conditions after they occur. But we spend peanuts on prevention. [Our word of the day: Prevention. The original point to insurance (this is waht everyone means when speakiing of "health care") was for catastrophes.]
The good news in these dismal statistics is that, by reforming our system and focusing on fighting and preventing chronic disease, we have a huge opportunity. We can not only save hundreds of billions of dollars; we can also dramatically improve the health of the American people. [Since when is it the responsibility of the Government to improve the health of the American people. Where is it in the constitution? In the Declaration of Independence? We need to leave it up to the American people to decide what they do to their health.]
Consider this: Right now, some 75 percent of health care costs are accounted for by heart disease, diabetes, prostate cancer, breast cancer, and obesity. What these five diseases and conditions have in common is that they are largely preventable and even reversible by changes in nutrition, physical activity, and lifestyle. [Two points on this one. 80% of health care costs occur for those of the senior persuasion (it's a fact of life) many of the problems he lists happen more commonly in the senior age. Secondly, considering this article is about what the government wants to do to American health care...I don't think the "changes in lifestyle" will be a suggestion, more likely a government mandate.]
Listen to what Dr. Dean Ornish told our Senate health committee: “Studies have shown that changing lifestyle could prevent at least 90 percent of all heart disease. Thus, the disease that accounts for more premature deaths and costs Americans more than any other illness is almost completely preventable, and even reversible, simply by changing lifestyle.” [Of course, Dr Ornish would be doing the preventing...and charging for it. Does prevention really save that much money? I think that is still up in the air. Again...the "change in lifestyle" will not be optional when the government flips the bill.]
It’s not enough to talk about how to extend insurance coverage and how to pay for health care – as important as those things are. It makes no sense just to figure out a better way to pay the bills for a system that is dysfunctional, ineffective, and broken. We also have to change the health care system itself, beginning with a sharp new emphasis on prevention and public health. [So he admits it...cost means nothing. Just print more money.]
We also have to realize that wellness and prevention must be truly comprehensive. It is not only about what goes on in a doctor’s office. It encompasses workplace wellness programs, community-wide wellness programs, building bike paths and walking trails, getting junk food out of our schools, making school breakfasts and lunches more nutritious, increasing the amount of physical activity our children get, and so much more. [If you haven't watched the movie "Demolition Man" with Sly Stallone, watch it because it really sounds like this paragraph. "Be well fellow citizen."]
I am heartened by the fact that the major players in this endeavor – Democrats and Republicans alike – all “get it” when it comes to prevention and public health. We all agree that it must be at the heart of reform legislation. [It's bi-partisan so it's cool, okay.]
As President Obama said in his speech to Congress earlier this year: “[It is time] to make the largest investment ever in preventive care, because that's one of the best ways to keep our people healthy and our costs under control.” [Since when has President Obama been worried about how much something costs? $787 billion there, $1 trillion here.]
No question, comprehensive health reform is an extraordinarily ambitious undertaking. But what makes me optimistic is that all the major groups are playing a constructive role, including those that opposed the 1993-94 health reform effort. Everyone agrees that the current system is broken. [It could be said that the health reform effort of the 1930s is partially at fault here.]
Winston Churchill famously said that “Americans always do the right thing – after they’ve tried everything else.” Well, we’ve tried everything else, and it has led us to bad health and the brink of bankruptcy. [Winston Churchill also said "However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results." I wonder what Churchill would have said when the UK health care system denies him treatment for stroke (he died of stroke) because of his ever-present cigar smoking?]
Comprehensive health reform legislation is our opportunity to change the paradigm. We are going to extend health insurance to every American. And we are going to give our citizens access to a 21st century health care system – one that is focused on helping us to live healthy, active, happy lives. [Living a healthy, active and happy life is up to us. It is up to the individual. Will the government "change" my mind if I'm not happy? Watch "Brazil" or read 1984. Aren't these works supposed to be fiction and not how things should be?]
President Obama claims that universal health care, or the "public option", will reduce costs. Creating a health care insurance branch to the government will kill the private health care insurance industry and boost prices sky-high. Creating a system that does not require a profit (it has an Obamabudget with no bottom just print more money) will charge its customers nothing while paying to health care providers a lot of money. The private companies out there cannot compete against this because they need to run a profit to stay in business. You cannot stay in business if your competitor gives away their product for free. President Obama will then appoint a health care board to run this system. He will appoint doctors and businessmen who believe and follow his steps. (Another Churchill quote: "Never hold discussions with the monkey when the organ grinder is in the room.") If this Czarist Board decides that the elderly are burdening the system they will restrict access. Nothing will stop them. Former Democrat/Progressive Governor of Colorado, Roy Romer has been quoted to say "The elderly have a duty to die." This is how most progressives think. It has its roots in eugenics (no, not the study of Eugenes) and progressivism. Do you remember the stupid classroom activity 6 people in a 5-person boat...who do we throw overboard. This is progressive thought. I reject the premise. Just build a bigger boat. Capitalism and the economy are not zero-sum games...they can grow...OK, I'm getting into another posting another day.
President Obama is trying to kill the private health care system. He will try to do it by injecting gobs of the virus of socialism into our health care system. A health care system already infected by what I will call socialitis progressus, a virus of our civilization, that has been slowly poisoning our country. Socialitis progressus has slowly cost us our individualism. Fortunately, we have the antidote, together we can redress our representatives, educate others and VOTE.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
NYC wasting money? No
700 NYC teachers are paid to do nothing
By KAREN MATTHEWS, Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK – Hundreds of New York City public school teachers accused of offenses ranging from insubordination to sexual misconduct are being paid their full salaries to sit around all day playing Scrabble, surfing the Internet or just staring at the wall, if that's what they want to do.
Because their union contract makes it extremely difficult to fire them, the teachers have been banished by the school system to its "rubber rooms" — off-campus office space where they wait months, even years, for their disciplinary hearings.
According to salary.com, the average teacher's salary in New York City (Brooklyn) is $60,173. Multiply that by 700 teachers, that's $42 million of waste (thanks to the teachers' union).
Harsh lesson: New York City Education Department announces $405 million in school budget cuts
BY Meredith Kolodner
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Schools will lose hundreds of millions of dollars due to budget cuts next year - meaning kids will have fewer after-school programs, tutoring services and arts classes.
The Education Department announced a $405 million cut Tuesday, an average of 4.9% per school.
If the City was able to fire these dead-beat teachers, that would knock the average cut per school to 4.4%... and that doesn't include the amount it costs for their full benefits.
GM probably figured since their union was bankrupting them and public teachers' unions would have bankrupted the government...oh wait, the government is never bankrupt. Just print more money. Why doesn't NYC schools ask for a bailout?
Where's the outrage over this by ACORN and other "community organizations"? They ragged on AIG bonuses...this is a joke.
By KAREN MATTHEWS, Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK – Hundreds of New York City public school teachers accused of offenses ranging from insubordination to sexual misconduct are being paid their full salaries to sit around all day playing Scrabble, surfing the Internet or just staring at the wall, if that's what they want to do.
Because their union contract makes it extremely difficult to fire them, the teachers have been banished by the school system to its "rubber rooms" — off-campus office space where they wait months, even years, for their disciplinary hearings.
According to salary.com, the average teacher's salary in New York City (Brooklyn) is $60,173. Multiply that by 700 teachers, that's $42 million of waste (thanks to the teachers' union).
Harsh lesson: New York City Education Department announces $405 million in school budget cuts
BY Meredith Kolodner
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Schools will lose hundreds of millions of dollars due to budget cuts next year - meaning kids will have fewer after-school programs, tutoring services and arts classes.
The Education Department announced a $405 million cut Tuesday, an average of 4.9% per school.
If the City was able to fire these dead-beat teachers, that would knock the average cut per school to 4.4%... and that doesn't include the amount it costs for their full benefits.
GM probably figured since their union was bankrupting them and public teachers' unions would have bankrupted the government...oh wait, the government is never bankrupt. Just print more money. Why doesn't NYC schools ask for a bailout?
Where's the outrage over this by ACORN and other "community organizations"? They ragged on AIG bonuses...this is a joke.
Monday, June 22, 2009
tidbit-Obama is Enough
Obama announces agreement with drug companies
Washington (AP)
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Monday welcomed the pharmaceutical industry's agreement to help close a gap in Medicare's drug coverage, calling the pact a step forward in the push for overhaul of the health care system.
Obama said that drug companies have pledged to spend $80 billion over the next decade to help reduce the cost of drugs for seniors and pay for a portion of Obama's health care legislation. The agreement with the pharmaceutical industry would help close a gap in prescription drug coverage under Medicare.
"This is a significant breakthrough on the road to health care reform, one that will make a difference in the lives of many older Americans," Obama said in the White House's Diplomatic Room.
Obama said the move will help correct an anomaly in the program that provides a prescription drug benefit through Medicare. Under the deal, drug companies will pay part of the cost of brand name drugs for lower and middle-income older people in the so-called "doughnut hole." That term refers to a feature of the current drug program that requires beneficiaries to pay the entire cost of prescriptions after initial coverage is exhausted but before catastrophic coverage begins.
"It's a reform that will make prescription drugs more affordable for millions of seniors and restore a measure of fairness," Obama said.
Obama said some Medicare beneficiaries will find at least a 50 percent discount on prescription drugs. Obama says drug companies stand to benefit when more Americans can afford prescription drugs.
The drug companies' investment would reduce the cost of drugs for seniors and pay for a portion of Obama's proposed revamping of health care. The deal was struck with Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, as well as the White House.
The president was joined Monday in announcing the deal by Barry Rand, head of the senior citizens' advocacy group AARP, as well as Baucus and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.
"This is an early win for reform," Rand said.
Where's the journalism here? If the pharmaceutical companies are really on board and gung-ho, why aren't they represented in this article? All I read is Obama said this, AARP says that. Why wasn't the "other side" contacted? Or does His Presidency need no follow up. I'm sure if this is entirely true, the companies freely agreed to this pact. Or was it political muscling and Obama's "charisma" that coherced them. I'm sure it's the charisma and messiah complex. He miraculously changes the hearts and minds of companies so there's no need to get anybody else's info about it...Obama is enough.
Washington (AP)
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Monday welcomed the pharmaceutical industry's agreement to help close a gap in Medicare's drug coverage, calling the pact a step forward in the push for overhaul of the health care system.
Obama said that drug companies have pledged to spend $80 billion over the next decade to help reduce the cost of drugs for seniors and pay for a portion of Obama's health care legislation. The agreement with the pharmaceutical industry would help close a gap in prescription drug coverage under Medicare.
"This is a significant breakthrough on the road to health care reform, one that will make a difference in the lives of many older Americans," Obama said in the White House's Diplomatic Room.
Obama said the move will help correct an anomaly in the program that provides a prescription drug benefit through Medicare. Under the deal, drug companies will pay part of the cost of brand name drugs for lower and middle-income older people in the so-called "doughnut hole." That term refers to a feature of the current drug program that requires beneficiaries to pay the entire cost of prescriptions after initial coverage is exhausted but before catastrophic coverage begins.
"It's a reform that will make prescription drugs more affordable for millions of seniors and restore a measure of fairness," Obama said.
Obama said some Medicare beneficiaries will find at least a 50 percent discount on prescription drugs. Obama says drug companies stand to benefit when more Americans can afford prescription drugs.
The drug companies' investment would reduce the cost of drugs for seniors and pay for a portion of Obama's proposed revamping of health care. The deal was struck with Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, as well as the White House.
The president was joined Monday in announcing the deal by Barry Rand, head of the senior citizens' advocacy group AARP, as well as Baucus and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.
"This is an early win for reform," Rand said.
Where's the journalism here? If the pharmaceutical companies are really on board and gung-ho, why aren't they represented in this article? All I read is Obama said this, AARP says that. Why wasn't the "other side" contacted? Or does His Presidency need no follow up. I'm sure if this is entirely true, the companies freely agreed to this pact. Or was it political muscling and Obama's "charisma" that coherced them. I'm sure it's the charisma and messiah complex. He miraculously changes the hearts and minds of companies so there's no need to get anybody else's info about it...Obama is enough.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
"Sacrifice" This!
Democrats may be posturing on proposed tax increases
By Steven Harmon
MercuryNews.com
In a letter, Democratic state Party Chairman John Burton thanked Senate Leader Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, and Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, D-Los Angeles, for "pushing back against the governor's plans to eviscerate state programs that protect the poor, the elderly, people with disabilities and students," and he applauded their efforts to "share the sacrifice" with taxes.
Hillary Backs Rangel Tax, Calls For Sacrifice
From the transcript of last night’s Democrat debate (October 30), via MSNBC:
From Sweetness & Light
Russert: You went to Harlem with your husband, with Charlie Rangel. And the former president said, quote, “Charlie Rangel wants me to pay more taxes so you can pay less and I think that’s a good idea.”
Clinton: You know, we’ve not been asked to sacrifice anything. You know, young men and women wearing the uniform of our country are dying and being maimed. We have the average American family losing a thousand dollars in income, and George Bush and his cronies can’t figure out how they can give even more tax cuts to the wealthiest of Americans.
You know I can't stand Progressive's changing our vocabulary. (One would say calling socialists something like Progressive is changing it, but I believe that a Progressive is a precise way of saying someone who would progressively lead our country (bit by bit) into socialism). Many Progressives love to say that Americans need to sacrifice more in the way of taxes. People like Cindy Sheehan would say that Bush sacrificed her son for an immoral war. I think we need to clarify the difference between sacrifice and service.
Sacrifice can be most easily described and exhibited by Jesus Christ. He was the ultimate sacrifice. He loves everyone and was willing to die to make men free. Not only die in the face of adversity, but die willingly. He could have spoken against His accusers, He could have gotten a pardon from Pontius Pilate.
When someone ENLISTS in the Armed Forces, they do so willingly. We do not have a draft. Our forces are voluntary. And they SERVE our country honorably. I found something interesting (yet it does come from Wikipedia so it should be true) about Cindy Sheehan's son, Casey:
"Near the end of his active service, the U.S. invasion of Iraq began. Sheehan re-enlisted, knowing that his unit would be sent there.[4] Sheehan's division, the First Cavalry Division, was sent to Iraq. On March 19, 2004, Sheehan's Battery C, 1st Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery Regiment, arrived at FOB War Eagle in Sadr City. On April 4, 2004, Sheehan was killed in action after volunteering to be part of a Quick Reaction Force to rescue American troops."
I would venture to say that nobody sacrifices their life for the President or the country or the military. A sacrifice means you are willing die for your country even if you can get out of dying. The military doesn't work if its soldiers die. The ultimate goal of the military is to accomplish the mission and keep everyone alive. Cindy Sheehan is wrong. Her son did not sacrifice his life because of Bush. He sacrificed his life for his brothers. He re-enlisted, and volunteered to save his brothers; he died so his brothers could live. Cindy Sheehan does not get it. Her son didn't have to do what he did; but he did it anyway.
My favorite movie is Glory. I admit it, I get teary-eyed when I watch it. Captain Shaw didn't have to lead his regiment on a frontal assault of Fort Wagner, in fact he was told that his men were tired and shouldn't do it...his men were behind him all the way.
It is the sacrifice of one's life for his brother/friend that we honor.
So when Progressives call for us to "sacrifice" by paying more taxes I laugh. Because maybe they are truly talking about real sacrifice. If paying more taxes to give to the government plantation is me giving something up with control.... nope, taxes are not sacrifice. If they were we would have the option of paying them or not. Just like Jesus had the option of dying or not, like Casey Sheehan had the option of re-enlisting or not.
So...are paying taxes a sacrifice if it's forced? NO! Paying or donating time to a charity out of the kindness of our hearts IS. We need more of that and less government in our lives.
Socialism will come with a happy face :)
By Steven Harmon
MercuryNews.com
In a letter, Democratic state Party Chairman John Burton thanked Senate Leader Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, and Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, D-Los Angeles, for "pushing back against the governor's plans to eviscerate state programs that protect the poor, the elderly, people with disabilities and students," and he applauded their efforts to "share the sacrifice" with taxes.
Hillary Backs Rangel Tax, Calls For Sacrifice
From the transcript of last night’s Democrat debate (October 30), via MSNBC:
From Sweetness & Light
Russert: You went to Harlem with your husband, with Charlie Rangel. And the former president said, quote, “Charlie Rangel wants me to pay more taxes so you can pay less and I think that’s a good idea.”
Clinton: You know, we’ve not been asked to sacrifice anything. You know, young men and women wearing the uniform of our country are dying and being maimed. We have the average American family losing a thousand dollars in income, and George Bush and his cronies can’t figure out how they can give even more tax cuts to the wealthiest of Americans.
You know I can't stand Progressive's changing our vocabulary. (One would say calling socialists something like Progressive is changing it, but I believe that a Progressive is a precise way of saying someone who would progressively lead our country (bit by bit) into socialism). Many Progressives love to say that Americans need to sacrifice more in the way of taxes. People like Cindy Sheehan would say that Bush sacrificed her son for an immoral war. I think we need to clarify the difference between sacrifice and service.
Sacrifice can be most easily described and exhibited by Jesus Christ. He was the ultimate sacrifice. He loves everyone and was willing to die to make men free. Not only die in the face of adversity, but die willingly. He could have spoken against His accusers, He could have gotten a pardon from Pontius Pilate.
When someone ENLISTS in the Armed Forces, they do so willingly. We do not have a draft. Our forces are voluntary. And they SERVE our country honorably. I found something interesting (yet it does come from Wikipedia so it should be true) about Cindy Sheehan's son, Casey:
"Near the end of his active service, the U.S. invasion of Iraq began. Sheehan re-enlisted, knowing that his unit would be sent there.[4] Sheehan's division, the First Cavalry Division, was sent to Iraq. On March 19, 2004, Sheehan's Battery C, 1st Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery Regiment, arrived at FOB War Eagle in Sadr City. On April 4, 2004, Sheehan was killed in action after volunteering to be part of a Quick Reaction Force to rescue American troops."
I would venture to say that nobody sacrifices their life for the President or the country or the military. A sacrifice means you are willing die for your country even if you can get out of dying. The military doesn't work if its soldiers die. The ultimate goal of the military is to accomplish the mission and keep everyone alive. Cindy Sheehan is wrong. Her son did not sacrifice his life because of Bush. He sacrificed his life for his brothers. He re-enlisted, and volunteered to save his brothers; he died so his brothers could live. Cindy Sheehan does not get it. Her son didn't have to do what he did; but he did it anyway.
My favorite movie is Glory. I admit it, I get teary-eyed when I watch it. Captain Shaw didn't have to lead his regiment on a frontal assault of Fort Wagner, in fact he was told that his men were tired and shouldn't do it...his men were behind him all the way.
It is the sacrifice of one's life for his brother/friend that we honor.
So when Progressives call for us to "sacrifice" by paying more taxes I laugh. Because maybe they are truly talking about real sacrifice. If paying more taxes to give to the government plantation is me giving something up with control.... nope, taxes are not sacrifice. If they were we would have the option of paying them or not. Just like Jesus had the option of dying or not, like Casey Sheehan had the option of re-enlisting or not.
So...are paying taxes a sacrifice if it's forced? NO! Paying or donating time to a charity out of the kindness of our hearts IS. We need more of that and less government in our lives.
Socialism will come with a happy face :)
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Keep us "Dar al-Harb"
Mich. judges get discretion after Muslim veil flap
By DAVID EGGERT, Associated Press Writer
LANSING, Mich. – The Michigan Supreme Court on Wednesday voted to give judges authority over how witnesses dress in court after a Muslim woman refused to remove her veil while testifying in a small claims case.
A statewide court rule letting judges regulate the appearance of witnesses — such as asking them to remove face coverings — was approved by a 5-2 vote. The dissenters said there should be an exception for people whose clothing is dictated by their religion.
Justices heard last month from a Muslim woman who sued because her small claims case was dismissed when she refused to remove her veil.
Hamtramck District Judge Paul Paruk told Ginnnah Muhammad he needed to see her face to judge her truthfulness. The 45-year-old from Detroit kept her niqab on during the 2006 hearing.
Some Muslim leaders interpret the Quran to require that women wear a headscarf, veil or burqa in the presence of a man who is not their husband or close relative.
...
Muhammad originally went to court to contest a $3,000 charge from a rental-car company to repair a vehicle that she said thieves had broken into. The ACLU said Muhammad did not want to speak with the media Wednesday.
Here, here for the Michigan Supreme Court. This is along the same line as states not allowing head coverings on IDs (please what would be the point?), or the secretary that was wrongly fired because she ate a BLT.
The judge in this case needed to observe the plaintiff while she was on the stand in order to make a judgment about her truthfulness. We are not in Iran, we are not under the oppresive Sharia Law.
Under Christianity there may be fringe groups that still disrespect women by not allowing them freedom, but that's why they're fringe. Unfortunately, many mohammedans still "kill women with kindness". Think Taming of the Shrew, coddling women so much that their will is broken and their freedom stomped. Where are the bra burning feminist activists?
Islam has many different interpretations. I won't venture to guess what percentage are peaceful and freedom-loving.
Here's the problem with Islam in a free society:
It is not only a religion, it's a political, economic and religious system. As in Christianity, the main tenets govern a believer's relationship with his Creator and his fellow man - The Golden Rule and Ten Commandments. In Islam, apart from the religious aspect and relationships is Sharia Law which includes politics, economics, contracts, family issues, sexuality, hygiene and many social issues (including wearing burqas).
Mohammedans' belief system may hinder their ability to be free in our society and rubs against the freedoms of individuals. Do we allow polygamy as well? Disallowing polygamy is a prohibition of Islamic belief.
We as a nation, in order to secure a free and individualist society, must resist the creeping in of Sharia Law under the guise of "religious freedom". While one can argue that forcing a woman to take a burqa off is "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion, I put forth this: When a religion greatly abridges the freedoms of women in the name of "decency", then it fails to be a religion. But it becomes a system of law that spits upon the Declaration of Independence and the whole point of our founding, and works to subvert.
It is up to the freedom-loving mohammedans in this country to combat viral Islam that segregates itself from American society.
Look up "Dar al-Harb"
PS. Watching the Rockies game and Helton hitting a walk-off homerun in the bottom of the ninth...15 wins out of 16 games, woo hoo!!
By DAVID EGGERT, Associated Press Writer
LANSING, Mich. – The Michigan Supreme Court on Wednesday voted to give judges authority over how witnesses dress in court after a Muslim woman refused to remove her veil while testifying in a small claims case.
A statewide court rule letting judges regulate the appearance of witnesses — such as asking them to remove face coverings — was approved by a 5-2 vote. The dissenters said there should be an exception for people whose clothing is dictated by their religion.
Justices heard last month from a Muslim woman who sued because her small claims case was dismissed when she refused to remove her veil.
Hamtramck District Judge Paul Paruk told Ginnnah Muhammad he needed to see her face to judge her truthfulness. The 45-year-old from Detroit kept her niqab on during the 2006 hearing.
Some Muslim leaders interpret the Quran to require that women wear a headscarf, veil or burqa in the presence of a man who is not their husband or close relative.
...
Muhammad originally went to court to contest a $3,000 charge from a rental-car company to repair a vehicle that she said thieves had broken into. The ACLU said Muhammad did not want to speak with the media Wednesday.
Here, here for the Michigan Supreme Court. This is along the same line as states not allowing head coverings on IDs (please what would be the point?), or the secretary that was wrongly fired because she ate a BLT.
The judge in this case needed to observe the plaintiff while she was on the stand in order to make a judgment about her truthfulness. We are not in Iran, we are not under the oppresive Sharia Law.
Under Christianity there may be fringe groups that still disrespect women by not allowing them freedom, but that's why they're fringe. Unfortunately, many mohammedans still "kill women with kindness". Think Taming of the Shrew, coddling women so much that their will is broken and their freedom stomped. Where are the bra burning feminist activists?
Islam has many different interpretations. I won't venture to guess what percentage are peaceful and freedom-loving.
Here's the problem with Islam in a free society:
It is not only a religion, it's a political, economic and religious system. As in Christianity, the main tenets govern a believer's relationship with his Creator and his fellow man - The Golden Rule and Ten Commandments. In Islam, apart from the religious aspect and relationships is Sharia Law which includes politics, economics, contracts, family issues, sexuality, hygiene and many social issues (including wearing burqas).
Mohammedans' belief system may hinder their ability to be free in our society and rubs against the freedoms of individuals. Do we allow polygamy as well? Disallowing polygamy is a prohibition of Islamic belief.
We as a nation, in order to secure a free and individualist society, must resist the creeping in of Sharia Law under the guise of "religious freedom". While one can argue that forcing a woman to take a burqa off is "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion, I put forth this: When a religion greatly abridges the freedoms of women in the name of "decency", then it fails to be a religion. But it becomes a system of law that spits upon the Declaration of Independence and the whole point of our founding, and works to subvert.
It is up to the freedom-loving mohammedans in this country to combat viral Islam that segregates itself from American society.
Look up "Dar al-Harb"
PS. Watching the Rockies game and Helton hitting a walk-off homerun in the bottom of the ninth...15 wins out of 16 games, woo hoo!!
Friday, June 19, 2009
tidbit-"Don't call me Ma'am" Boxer
Don't Call Me Ma'am: Senator Boxer California law maker bristles at general's greeting
nbcsandiego.com
Brigadier General Michael Walsh, a top-ranking officer in the Army Corps of Engineers, is a veteran of the Iraq war. But he's never been fired on like this.
Don't call me ma'am, Senator Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.) barked at him as he started to explain delays in repairs to New Orleans's levee system.
"Do me a favor," she continued. "Could you call me 'Senator' instead of 'ma'am'? It's just a thing. I worked so hard to get that title, so I'd appreciate it, yes, thank you."
The Hot Air blog points out that Walsh had addressed Senator David Vitter as "sir," not "Senator," in the same hearing.
Click here for the YouTube
Another example of the American Crown. Boxer deems it wrong for a military man to call her ma'am because of her own ultra-feminist notion of "genderism". It is proper for someone in the military to address someone who is at a higher rank (ie Senator) a "sir" or "ma'am". Boxer ordered him to oblige and go against military protocol.
nbcsandiego.com
Brigadier General Michael Walsh, a top-ranking officer in the Army Corps of Engineers, is a veteran of the Iraq war. But he's never been fired on like this.
Don't call me ma'am, Senator Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.) barked at him as he started to explain delays in repairs to New Orleans's levee system.
"Do me a favor," she continued. "Could you call me 'Senator' instead of 'ma'am'? It's just a thing. I worked so hard to get that title, so I'd appreciate it, yes, thank you."
The Hot Air blog points out that Walsh had addressed Senator David Vitter as "sir," not "Senator," in the same hearing.
Click here for the YouTube
Another example of the American Crown. Boxer deems it wrong for a military man to call her ma'am because of her own ultra-feminist notion of "genderism". It is proper for someone in the military to address someone who is at a higher rank (ie Senator) a "sir" or "ma'am". Boxer ordered him to oblige and go against military protocol.
He Didn't Start the Fire: Ayatollah in Iran
Iran's top leader warns of protest crackdown
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI and NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writers
TEHRAN, Iran – Iran's supreme leader sternly warned of a crackdown if protesters continue days of massive street rallies, escalating the government's showdown with demonstrators demanding a new presidential election.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in his first response to the protests that the country's disputed presidential vote had not been rigged, siding with hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and offering no concessions to the opposition. He effectively ruled out any chance for a new vote, lauding the June 12 election as an expression of the people's will.
"Some of our enemies in different parts of the world intended to depict this absolute victory, this definitive victory, as a doubtful victory," Khamenei said at Friday prayers at Tehran University. "It is your victory. They cannot manipulate it."
...
He said Tuesday that opposition to Ahmadinejad represented "a questioning of the kinds of antagonistic postures towards the international community that have taken place in the past, and that there are people who want to see greater openness and greater debate and want to see greater democracy."
Khamenei reacted strongly, saying Obama's statements contradicted the president's stated goal of opening dialogue with Iran and the conciliatory tone of other recent American messages.
"The U.S. president said 'We were waiting for a day like this to see people on the street,'" Khamenei said. "They write to us and say they respect the Islamic Republic and then they make comments like this ... which one should we believe?
Payvand Iran News
President Obama: Unite Free World behind a Re-Vote Monitored by International Observers
By Reza Ladjevardian, Houston, Texas
Sadly, the Obama administration's Iran policies in so many ways resemble the bipolar policies of the Bush administration – only more exaggerated. Carrot and stick policy didn't work then and offering more carrots and threatening more sticks won't work now.
32% See Better U.S. Relationship With Muslim World
rasmussenreports.com
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, taken just before the election protests broke out in Iran this week, finds that 32% of voters now think that relationship will get better in the next year, although 28% say things will get worse in that time period.
At the beginning of the month just before the president's speech in Cairo, 28% of voters said the U.S. relationship with the Muslim world would be better a year from now, while 21% expected it to worsen.
The biggest change is in the number who expect the relationship to remain about the same. Thirty-five percent (35%) feel that way now, down from 45% two weeks ago.
Let's see... the Supreme Leader (Ayatollah) of Iran says the people have spoken. OK, the fact that they have a Supreme Leader running things behind the figure-head of a "President" is a joke to a democratic republic. He accuses the Obama Administration of hypocrisy or at least what the Bush Administration was accused of (bipolar and contradictory policies).
Obama has no clue what he's doing? I guess Hope goes just so far. At least the Bush Administration didn't make speeches and promises they couldn't back up. This President makes a grand gesture (quite a Change in foreign policy) but in the end it is all lip service like his campaign was. When the leaders of the muslim world realize that Obama is a typical American politician and not someone who has the will to back up his words (right or wrong) they will walk all over him while smiling at his face. It is quite honorable to lie with a straight and happy face to an infidel especially knowing he won't do anything.
The headline from Rasmussen is all wrong for the data. The real news is not how many see a better relationship with the muslim world, it is this:
2 weeks ago: 28% better, 21% worse, 45% same (6% don't know?)
Now: 32% better, 28% worse, 35% same (5% don't know?)
Looking at the changes in perception 4% more people think things are getting better, while 7% more people think things will get worse.
These are not good trends for Obama, I thought he would improve our image around the world by just being President.
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI and NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writers
TEHRAN, Iran – Iran's supreme leader sternly warned of a crackdown if protesters continue days of massive street rallies, escalating the government's showdown with demonstrators demanding a new presidential election.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in his first response to the protests that the country's disputed presidential vote had not been rigged, siding with hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and offering no concessions to the opposition. He effectively ruled out any chance for a new vote, lauding the June 12 election as an expression of the people's will.
"Some of our enemies in different parts of the world intended to depict this absolute victory, this definitive victory, as a doubtful victory," Khamenei said at Friday prayers at Tehran University. "It is your victory. They cannot manipulate it."
...
He said Tuesday that opposition to Ahmadinejad represented "a questioning of the kinds of antagonistic postures towards the international community that have taken place in the past, and that there are people who want to see greater openness and greater debate and want to see greater democracy."
Khamenei reacted strongly, saying Obama's statements contradicted the president's stated goal of opening dialogue with Iran and the conciliatory tone of other recent American messages.
"The U.S. president said 'We were waiting for a day like this to see people on the street,'" Khamenei said. "They write to us and say they respect the Islamic Republic and then they make comments like this ... which one should we believe?
Payvand Iran News
President Obama: Unite Free World behind a Re-Vote Monitored by International Observers
By Reza Ladjevardian, Houston, Texas
Sadly, the Obama administration's Iran policies in so many ways resemble the bipolar policies of the Bush administration – only more exaggerated. Carrot and stick policy didn't work then and offering more carrots and threatening more sticks won't work now.
32% See Better U.S. Relationship With Muslim World
rasmussenreports.com
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, taken just before the election protests broke out in Iran this week, finds that 32% of voters now think that relationship will get better in the next year, although 28% say things will get worse in that time period.
At the beginning of the month just before the president's speech in Cairo, 28% of voters said the U.S. relationship with the Muslim world would be better a year from now, while 21% expected it to worsen.
The biggest change is in the number who expect the relationship to remain about the same. Thirty-five percent (35%) feel that way now, down from 45% two weeks ago.
Let's see... the Supreme Leader (Ayatollah) of Iran says the people have spoken. OK, the fact that they have a Supreme Leader running things behind the figure-head of a "President" is a joke to a democratic republic. He accuses the Obama Administration of hypocrisy or at least what the Bush Administration was accused of (bipolar and contradictory policies).
Obama has no clue what he's doing? I guess Hope goes just so far. At least the Bush Administration didn't make speeches and promises they couldn't back up. This President makes a grand gesture (quite a Change in foreign policy) but in the end it is all lip service like his campaign was. When the leaders of the muslim world realize that Obama is a typical American politician and not someone who has the will to back up his words (right or wrong) they will walk all over him while smiling at his face. It is quite honorable to lie with a straight and happy face to an infidel especially knowing he won't do anything.
The headline from Rasmussen is all wrong for the data. The real news is not how many see a better relationship with the muslim world, it is this:
2 weeks ago: 28% better, 21% worse, 45% same (6% don't know?)
Now: 32% better, 28% worse, 35% same (5% don't know?)
Looking at the changes in perception 4% more people think things are getting better, while 7% more people think things will get worse.
These are not good trends for Obama, I thought he would improve our image around the world by just being President.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Pretty Fly for a DC Guy
OBAMA: HUMAN FLY-SWATTER
AP
The president, irritated by an omnipresent fly during a TV interview at the Executive Mansion Tuesday, took matters into his own hands.
Said Obama to the persistent fly: "Get out of here."
But it didn't.
So Obama waited for the fly to settle, put his hand up and then smacked the fly dead in one try.
Without missing a beat, the president said to CNBC correspondent John Harwood: "Now, where were we?"
Well, maybe one more second to gloat.
Said Obama: "That was pretty impressive, wasn't it? I got the sucker."
Does anyone think this is disgusting? He didn't wash his hands or use something other than his hands? He thought it was impressive to kill a fly. I know this might sound petty; it is. This reminds me of the scene in Indiana Jones: Raiders of the Lost Ark; where Belloq eats a fly as Indiana threatens to blow up the Ark. He ate a fly and kept on acting and they used it. Now that's impressive.
I killed a fly with my hands a couple days ago...I washed them immediately.
One thing Obama has learned from the incident: The fly didn't respond to talk "Get out of here"; Obama had to resort to force and kill the fly. He should have asked his interviewer to help in talking the fly into leaving instead of using force.
AP
The president, irritated by an omnipresent fly during a TV interview at the Executive Mansion Tuesday, took matters into his own hands.
Said Obama to the persistent fly: "Get out of here."
But it didn't.
So Obama waited for the fly to settle, put his hand up and then smacked the fly dead in one try.
Without missing a beat, the president said to CNBC correspondent John Harwood: "Now, where were we?"
Well, maybe one more second to gloat.
Said Obama: "That was pretty impressive, wasn't it? I got the sucker."
Does anyone think this is disgusting? He didn't wash his hands or use something other than his hands? He thought it was impressive to kill a fly. I know this might sound petty; it is. This reminds me of the scene in Indiana Jones: Raiders of the Lost Ark; where Belloq eats a fly as Indiana threatens to blow up the Ark. He ate a fly and kept on acting and they used it. Now that's impressive.
I killed a fly with my hands a couple days ago...I washed them immediately.
One thing Obama has learned from the incident: The fly didn't respond to talk "Get out of here"; Obama had to resort to force and kill the fly. He should have asked his interviewer to help in talking the fly into leaving instead of using force.
We need to Bed the Fed.
Obama cites decades of mistakes behind recession
By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is offering a broad-scale overhaul of the financial system, saying hard times struck largely because a post-Depression era business regulatory scheme couldn't keep up with an increasingly global economy.
In remarks readied for the unveiling of new rules to govern business, Obama attributed much of the country's current problem to "a cascade of mistakes and missed opportunities" which happened over several decades.
His plan would bestow vast new powers on the Federal Reserve, authorizing it to oversee the entire financial system. It also would create a new consumer protection agency to guard against the types of abuses that played a big role in the current crisis.
The president said in his prepared remarks that "a culture of irresponsibility took root from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street."
After reading all this, Why did Washington pass TARP (bank bailout)? The bailout was supposed to fix everything. Bush pushed it. Obama was for it. McCain was for it.
Credit is still frozen. Sure, the banks are trying to pay it back (so Washington won't have any more control over them), but has anything changed? No.
The economy is doing horribly. Unemployment is the worst since over 20 years. The only thing saving Americans is the lower cost of living due to low gas prices...except that gas prices have gone up almost 100% since Obama's been President.
Obama was wrong with bailing out the banks, he is wrong in spending trillions of dollars we don't have on temporary fixes, and he's wrong with taking more power from private businesses to make decisions bad or good. We need to let companies fail. We spent billions on GM and it still failed. This is irresponsible.
We need to vote these bums out. Obama can't do all this without the Democrats/Progressives in Congress cowtowing to his whim. The only chance we have is to stop the hemmorhaging through Congress in 2010 and then vote the "Little Dictator" and his czars out in 2012.
By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is offering a broad-scale overhaul of the financial system, saying hard times struck largely because a post-Depression era business regulatory scheme couldn't keep up with an increasingly global economy.
In remarks readied for the unveiling of new rules to govern business, Obama attributed much of the country's current problem to "a cascade of mistakes and missed opportunities" which happened over several decades.
His plan would bestow vast new powers on the Federal Reserve, authorizing it to oversee the entire financial system. It also would create a new consumer protection agency to guard against the types of abuses that played a big role in the current crisis.
The president said in his prepared remarks that "a culture of irresponsibility took root from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street."
After reading all this, Why did Washington pass TARP (bank bailout)? The bailout was supposed to fix everything. Bush pushed it. Obama was for it. McCain was for it.
Credit is still frozen. Sure, the banks are trying to pay it back (so Washington won't have any more control over them), but has anything changed? No.
The economy is doing horribly. Unemployment is the worst since over 20 years. The only thing saving Americans is the lower cost of living due to low gas prices...except that gas prices have gone up almost 100% since Obama's been President.
Obama was wrong with bailing out the banks, he is wrong in spending trillions of dollars we don't have on temporary fixes, and he's wrong with taking more power from private businesses to make decisions bad or good. We need to let companies fail. We spent billions on GM and it still failed. This is irresponsible.
We need to vote these bums out. Obama can't do all this without the Democrats/Progressives in Congress cowtowing to his whim. The only chance we have is to stop the hemmorhaging through Congress in 2010 and then vote the "Little Dictator" and his czars out in 2012.
Monday, June 15, 2009
"Snake Oil" Obama - Health Care
House Health-Care Proposal Adds $600 Billion in Taxes
Laura Litvan – Fri Jun 12
June 12 (Bloomberg) -- Health-care overhaul legislation being drafted by House Democrats will include $600 billion in tax increases and $400 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel said.
Obama: We can afford health care reform
President proposed $313 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid to help pay for $1 trillion health care reforms.
June 13, 2009
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President Barack Obama Saturday proposed an additional $313 billion in cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and other programs to pay for health care reforms expected to cost about $1 trillion over the next decade.
"I know some question whether we can afford to act this year. But the unmistakable truth is that it would be irresponsible to not act," Obama said in an advance text of his weekly radio address.
Wow! They are very bold to suggest cutting Medicare and Medicaid to help pay for universal health care; let alone increasing taxes $600 billion. Rangel suggests $400 billion and Obama adds an addition $313 billion, that would be over $700 billion in cuts to elderly care. Then they get you with this additional $600 billion in tax increases.
According to Forbes, the top 400 richest Americans are worth $1,250 billion, so if you were to not only tax to 400 richest Americans but take all their wealth it would pay for Obama's health care system for ten years...but then how would you pay for the Recovery Act, the budget, the bank bailouts...
Those of you who depend upon Medicare and Medicaid...watch your services drop and your income drop.
To find out who pays for Medicare and Medicaid and most of government check this site out...hint it's not the bottom 50% of income earners.
http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/js1287.htm
Laura Litvan – Fri Jun 12
June 12 (Bloomberg) -- Health-care overhaul legislation being drafted by House Democrats will include $600 billion in tax increases and $400 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel said.
Obama: We can afford health care reform
President proposed $313 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid to help pay for $1 trillion health care reforms.
June 13, 2009
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President Barack Obama Saturday proposed an additional $313 billion in cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and other programs to pay for health care reforms expected to cost about $1 trillion over the next decade.
"I know some question whether we can afford to act this year. But the unmistakable truth is that it would be irresponsible to not act," Obama said in an advance text of his weekly radio address.
Wow! They are very bold to suggest cutting Medicare and Medicaid to help pay for universal health care; let alone increasing taxes $600 billion. Rangel suggests $400 billion and Obama adds an addition $313 billion, that would be over $700 billion in cuts to elderly care. Then they get you with this additional $600 billion in tax increases.
According to Forbes, the top 400 richest Americans are worth $1,250 billion, so if you were to not only tax to 400 richest Americans but take all their wealth it would pay for Obama's health care system for ten years...but then how would you pay for the Recovery Act, the budget, the bank bailouts...
Those of you who depend upon Medicare and Medicaid...watch your services drop and your income drop.
To find out who pays for Medicare and Medicaid and most of government check this site out...hint it's not the bottom 50% of income earners.
http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/js1287.htm
Sunday, June 14, 2009
UPDATE! A Nightmare in the Museum
You won't find this heralded on the major news wires.
The so-called "right-wing" extremist shooter at the Holocaust Museum; a man who has been deemed a 9/11 Truther (believes 9/11 was an inside job by the Bush Administration) is also a registered Democrat. Is there no political spectrum? Maybe a political circle... when you're called a right-wing extremist maybe you're close to being a left-wing extremist...who cares. I thought that it is inconceivable that a Democrat be a racist or a white-supremacist? He is a democrat so didn't he vote for Obama?
The so-called "right-wing" extremist shooter at the Holocaust Museum; a man who has been deemed a 9/11 Truther (believes 9/11 was an inside job by the Bush Administration) is also a registered Democrat. Is there no political spectrum? Maybe a political circle... when you're called a right-wing extremist maybe you're close to being a left-wing extremist...who cares. I thought that it is inconceivable that a Democrat be a racist or a white-supremacist? He is a democrat so didn't he vote for Obama?
Mullah Bully
3 Articles in chronological order (older to newer)
Obama "excited" by Iran's robust election debate
Reuters: David Alexander
"We are excited to see what appears to be a robust debate taking place in Iran," Obama told reporters when asked about the Iranian election during an event at the White House.
...
The United States has had no ties with Iran since shortly after the 1979 Islamic revolution, but Obama has expressed an interest in a dialogue if Tehran "unclenches its fist."
Obama said he had tried to send a clear message during a speech to the Islamic world last week in Cairo that his administration sees a possibility for a change in relations.
He said while "ultimately the election is for the Iranians to decide," voters in the Middle East had shown they were looking at the possibility of a change.
Ahmadinejad defends vote as 'real and free'
TEHRAN, Iran – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Sunday his re-election was "real and free" and cannot be questioned — despite accusations of mass voter fraud.
Ahmadinejad: Clashes over election 'not important'
By ANNA JOHNSON and NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writers Anna Johnson And Nasser Karimi, Associated Press Writers
TEHRAN, Iran – Protesters set fires and smashed store windows Sunday in a second day of violence as groups challenging President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's re-election tried to keep pressure on authorities. Anti-riot police lashed back and the regime blocked Internet sites used to rally the pro-reform campaign.
His Presidency believed his speech to the Muslims around the world would inspire them with hope. The "messiah" would miraculously stop fighting and instill freedom and democracy. He calls it robust debate. In the end, it doesn't matter who runs for President because ultimately it's the Mullahs that run Iran (Iran is really a theocracy).
So Obama can talk about how he has miraculously given the Islamic world peace and happiness and dialogue, but in the end he has a lot of hope that what he does actually produces what he says. The robust dialogue that His Presidency says he helped to foster as turned into violence. He has the Midas touch.
Obama "excited" by Iran's robust election debate
Reuters: David Alexander
"We are excited to see what appears to be a robust debate taking place in Iran," Obama told reporters when asked about the Iranian election during an event at the White House.
...
The United States has had no ties with Iran since shortly after the 1979 Islamic revolution, but Obama has expressed an interest in a dialogue if Tehran "unclenches its fist."
Obama said he had tried to send a clear message during a speech to the Islamic world last week in Cairo that his administration sees a possibility for a change in relations.
He said while "ultimately the election is for the Iranians to decide," voters in the Middle East had shown they were looking at the possibility of a change.
Ahmadinejad defends vote as 'real and free'
TEHRAN, Iran – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Sunday his re-election was "real and free" and cannot be questioned — despite accusations of mass voter fraud.
Ahmadinejad: Clashes over election 'not important'
By ANNA JOHNSON and NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writers Anna Johnson And Nasser Karimi, Associated Press Writers
TEHRAN, Iran – Protesters set fires and smashed store windows Sunday in a second day of violence as groups challenging President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's re-election tried to keep pressure on authorities. Anti-riot police lashed back and the regime blocked Internet sites used to rally the pro-reform campaign.
His Presidency believed his speech to the Muslims around the world would inspire them with hope. The "messiah" would miraculously stop fighting and instill freedom and democracy. He calls it robust debate. In the end, it doesn't matter who runs for President because ultimately it's the Mullahs that run Iran (Iran is really a theocracy).
So Obama can talk about how he has miraculously given the Islamic world peace and happiness and dialogue, but in the end he has a lot of hope that what he does actually produces what he says. The robust dialogue that His Presidency says he helped to foster as turned into violence. He has the Midas touch.
Friday, June 12, 2009
History Repeating
Russia urges U.S. to drop missile shield to help ties
Reuters
...
"Only a rejection by the United States of plans to create a ... missile defense system in Europe could lay the groundwork for our fully fledged dialogue on questions of cooperation in reacting to potential missile risks," Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko told reporters.
U.S. kills Northrop Grumman missile-defense program
Reuters By Jim Wolf June 11, 2009
...
Northrop was notified on Wednesday of the termination, which was "for the convenience of the government," not because of any company performance shortfall, according to a copy of the notice obtained by Reuters.
U.S. missile-defense salvage operations under way
Reuters By Jim Wolf June 9, 2009
U.S. missile-defense contractors and their allies are pushing to salvage what they can of prized, multibillion-dollar programs that Defense Secretary Robert Gates is seeking to scrap or cut back.
...
The Pentagon also has announced plans to kill Lockheed Martin Corp's (LMT.N) Multiple Kill Vehicle, or MKV, which was intended to destroy not only an enemy warhead but any decoys or other countermeasures deployed to spoof U.S. defenses.
Young lashes out at Congress over missile defense
KTUU News by Jason Lamb
ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- Rep. Don Young took his colleagues to task Tuesday for proposed cuts to the Missile Defense Agency at the same time North Korea appears to be preparing to test launch a long-range missile that could strike Alaska.
First thing, His Presidency's job is to protect and defend US soil and not develop ties with Russia.
Well, this is becoming the "generated crisis" that Biden had talked about "testing the mettle" of Obama. Why is Obama trying to cut, scrap and otherwise roll back our missile defense. Especially when very soon Evil Korea will have the ability to send a nuke to California or Alaska or Hawai'i?
This whole thing stinks of FDR. President Roosevelt had an economic crisis on his hands and nothing on the horizon (no hope I guess) of it ending. He puts radar in Hawai'i, but nobody trusts it and he puts the majority of the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor, the Japanese did not pass up the opportunity.
Obama thinks he needs a real crisis so that he can get America out of its funk. Will he implement a full Missile Defense System? Will Evil Korea pass up an opportunity to send a nuke to US soil knowing the President would probably not retaliate? Perhaps Pearl Harbor II? Perhaps Obama is like FDR and "hopes" for things to pick up or an opportunity to build his legacy...at the expense of American lives. Obama may have learned from history and thinks that a national tragedy and serious war will get him off the hook for the economy.
Check "33 minutes out, click here
Reuters
...
"Only a rejection by the United States of plans to create a ... missile defense system in Europe could lay the groundwork for our fully fledged dialogue on questions of cooperation in reacting to potential missile risks," Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko told reporters.
U.S. kills Northrop Grumman missile-defense program
Reuters By Jim Wolf June 11, 2009
...
Northrop was notified on Wednesday of the termination, which was "for the convenience of the government," not because of any company performance shortfall, according to a copy of the notice obtained by Reuters.
U.S. missile-defense salvage operations under way
Reuters By Jim Wolf June 9, 2009
U.S. missile-defense contractors and their allies are pushing to salvage what they can of prized, multibillion-dollar programs that Defense Secretary Robert Gates is seeking to scrap or cut back.
...
The Pentagon also has announced plans to kill Lockheed Martin Corp's (LMT.N) Multiple Kill Vehicle, or MKV, which was intended to destroy not only an enemy warhead but any decoys or other countermeasures deployed to spoof U.S. defenses.
Young lashes out at Congress over missile defense
KTUU News by Jason Lamb
ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- Rep. Don Young took his colleagues to task Tuesday for proposed cuts to the Missile Defense Agency at the same time North Korea appears to be preparing to test launch a long-range missile that could strike Alaska.
First thing, His Presidency's job is to protect and defend US soil and not develop ties with Russia.
Well, this is becoming the "generated crisis" that Biden had talked about "testing the mettle" of Obama. Why is Obama trying to cut, scrap and otherwise roll back our missile defense. Especially when very soon Evil Korea will have the ability to send a nuke to California or Alaska or Hawai'i?
This whole thing stinks of FDR. President Roosevelt had an economic crisis on his hands and nothing on the horizon (no hope I guess) of it ending. He puts radar in Hawai'i, but nobody trusts it and he puts the majority of the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor, the Japanese did not pass up the opportunity.
Obama thinks he needs a real crisis so that he can get America out of its funk. Will he implement a full Missile Defense System? Will Evil Korea pass up an opportunity to send a nuke to US soil knowing the President would probably not retaliate? Perhaps Pearl Harbor II? Perhaps Obama is like FDR and "hopes" for things to pick up or an opportunity to build his legacy...at the expense of American lives. Obama may have learned from history and thinks that a national tragedy and serious war will get him off the hook for the economy.
Check "33 minutes out, click here
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Obama vs AMA
Obama declares time to fix health care is now
By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer
"I know there are some who believe that reform is too expensive, but I can assure you that doing nothing will cost us far more in the coming years," Obama said at a town-hall style meeting at a high school here. "Our deficits will be higher. Our premiums will go up. Our wages will be lower, our jobs will be fewer, and our businesses will suffer."
Since when did Obama care about the cost of anything? He has agreed with TARP ($700 billion), signed the Recovery Act ($787 billion) and a federal budget deficit of $992 billion (a total of $2.5 trillion)
AMA wary of Obama call for public health insurance
CHICAGO – The nation's largest doctors group isn't sold on President Barack Obama's call for a public health plan and could be a hurdle to his reform efforts.
Dr. Nancy Nielsen says the American Medical Association has "major concerns about government control over health care decisions." Nielsen is president of the AMA, which Obama will address on Monday.
The AMA will be Obama and his Cheerleaders' next target.
Do you want to know what will happen with Obamacare? Read this:
Austin ER's got 2,678 visits from 9 people over 6 years
By Mary Ann Roser
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
In the past six years, eight people from Austin and one from Luling racked up 2,678 emergency room visits in Central Texas, costing hospitals, taxpayers and others $3 million, according to a report from a nonprofit made up of hospitals and other providers that care for the uninsured and low-income Central Texans.
The report that mentioned the nine high-frequency patients didn't include reasons for all of those ER visits and didn't identify the patients because of privacy laws. But Kitchen, a former state legislator from Austin, gave a sketch: All nine speak English; three are homeless; five are women whose average age is 40, and four are men whose average age is 50. Seven have a mental health diagnosis and eight have a drug abuse diagnosis. Kitchen said she did not know their citizenship status.
People will abuse the new system, then the federal government will (through need for cost-cutting) dictate you're lifestyle. Think 1984.
By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer
"I know there are some who believe that reform is too expensive, but I can assure you that doing nothing will cost us far more in the coming years," Obama said at a town-hall style meeting at a high school here. "Our deficits will be higher. Our premiums will go up. Our wages will be lower, our jobs will be fewer, and our businesses will suffer."
Since when did Obama care about the cost of anything? He has agreed with TARP ($700 billion), signed the Recovery Act ($787 billion) and a federal budget deficit of $992 billion (a total of $2.5 trillion)
AMA wary of Obama call for public health insurance
CHICAGO – The nation's largest doctors group isn't sold on President Barack Obama's call for a public health plan and could be a hurdle to his reform efforts.
Dr. Nancy Nielsen says the American Medical Association has "major concerns about government control over health care decisions." Nielsen is president of the AMA, which Obama will address on Monday.
The AMA will be Obama and his Cheerleaders' next target.
Do you want to know what will happen with Obamacare? Read this:
Austin ER's got 2,678 visits from 9 people over 6 years
By Mary Ann Roser
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
In the past six years, eight people from Austin and one from Luling racked up 2,678 emergency room visits in Central Texas, costing hospitals, taxpayers and others $3 million, according to a report from a nonprofit made up of hospitals and other providers that care for the uninsured and low-income Central Texans.
The report that mentioned the nine high-frequency patients didn't include reasons for all of those ER visits and didn't identify the patients because of privacy laws. But Kitchen, a former state legislator from Austin, gave a sketch: All nine speak English; three are homeless; five are women whose average age is 40, and four are men whose average age is 50. Seven have a mental health diagnosis and eight have a drug abuse diagnosis. Kitchen said she did not know their citizenship status.
People will abuse the new system, then the federal government will (through need for cost-cutting) dictate you're lifestyle. Think 1984.
A Nightmare in the Museum
Alleged gunman charged in museum shooting
By BRETT ZONGKER and CALVIN WOODWARD, Associated Press Writers
...
Security Guard Stephen T. Johns was shot to death Wednesday by Holocaust denier James von Brunn, who had left his car in a lane of traffic outside an entrance to the museum before walking in with a concealed rifle, District Police Chief Cathy Lanier said at a news conference.
...
In his car, officers found a notebook with a handwritten note saying, "You want my weapons — this is how you'll get them. The Holocaust is a lie. Obama was created by Jews," according to a court affidavit.
Right-wing extremists face extra scrutiny
The Washington Times
Holocaust Museum Shooting Threatens to Undermine Right's Pro-Religion Image
US News & World Report
Right-wing backlash against Obama?
BBC
[Right-wing] Extremist Nation
NBC Philadelphia
So when did anti-semitism and white supremacy become "right-wing" ideas? The Nazi party took control of every aspect of Germany. They blamed their problems on Jews. Fascists want to control everyone's lives. These are not conservative or individualist ideas. Unfortunately, when a perceived "right-winger" pulls the trigger it is as if all real "right-wingers" did it; with their rhetoric. But when it's someone else (ie the Recruiter Murderer), it's a loner not attached to any ideology. This is at least according to the Progressive Cheerleaders...CNN, NY Times. Why aren't the Cheerleaders talking a lot about extreme Islam? Or Obama's pastor.
Wright: 'Them Jews' Won't Let Me Talk To Obama
NEW YORK (CBS) ―
In an interview with The Daily Press of Virginia, Reverend Jeremiah Wright said that "Jews" are keeping him from talking to President Obama, a former member of the pastor's church.
Mr. Obama severed his relationship with Wright during his presidential campaign, after he came under fire for Wright's controversial and racially charged comments, including "G-d America."
A man that Obama called his spiritual adviser and pastor for decades is anti-semitic and resents the fact that "Jews" are corrupting Obama. Why was Obama's relationship with this bigot brushed off as insignificant?
Race should be a non-issue. A true Individualist doesn't see what people are born of. It is Progressive thought that tells the individual that they have been wronged by others and are victims. Victimization does not empower people, it instills hatred and envy. Progressivism tells the individual that he cannot achieve the "American Dream" by himself.
Individualism tells the the individual that it is up to him and his self-interest to get himself off the floor and a productive member of America. Individualism tells the individual not to be a victim and not to hate those who have more than them. Let the individual blossom and grow.
By BRETT ZONGKER and CALVIN WOODWARD, Associated Press Writers
...
Security Guard Stephen T. Johns was shot to death Wednesday by Holocaust denier James von Brunn, who had left his car in a lane of traffic outside an entrance to the museum before walking in with a concealed rifle, District Police Chief Cathy Lanier said at a news conference.
...
In his car, officers found a notebook with a handwritten note saying, "You want my weapons — this is how you'll get them. The Holocaust is a lie. Obama was created by Jews," according to a court affidavit.
Right-wing extremists face extra scrutiny
The Washington Times
Holocaust Museum Shooting Threatens to Undermine Right's Pro-Religion Image
US News & World Report
Right-wing backlash against Obama?
BBC
[Right-wing] Extremist Nation
NBC Philadelphia
So when did anti-semitism and white supremacy become "right-wing" ideas? The Nazi party took control of every aspect of Germany. They blamed their problems on Jews. Fascists want to control everyone's lives. These are not conservative or individualist ideas. Unfortunately, when a perceived "right-winger" pulls the trigger it is as if all real "right-wingers" did it; with their rhetoric. But when it's someone else (ie the Recruiter Murderer), it's a loner not attached to any ideology. This is at least according to the Progressive Cheerleaders...CNN, NY Times. Why aren't the Cheerleaders talking a lot about extreme Islam? Or Obama's pastor.
Wright: 'Them Jews' Won't Let Me Talk To Obama
NEW YORK (CBS) ―
In an interview with The Daily Press of Virginia, Reverend Jeremiah Wright said that "Jews" are keeping him from talking to President Obama, a former member of the pastor's church.
Mr. Obama severed his relationship with Wright during his presidential campaign, after he came under fire for Wright's controversial and racially charged comments, including "G-d America."
A man that Obama called his spiritual adviser and pastor for decades is anti-semitic and resents the fact that "Jews" are corrupting Obama. Why was Obama's relationship with this bigot brushed off as insignificant?
Race should be a non-issue. A true Individualist doesn't see what people are born of. It is Progressive thought that tells the individual that they have been wronged by others and are victims. Victimization does not empower people, it instills hatred and envy. Progressivism tells the individual that he cannot achieve the "American Dream" by himself.
Individualism tells the the individual that it is up to him and his self-interest to get himself off the floor and a productive member of America. Individualism tells the individual not to be a victim and not to hate those who have more than them. Let the individual blossom and grow.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
UPDATE!
Administration seeks ways to tame corporate pay
By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer
Talking tough but stepping gently, the Obama administration rejected direct intervention in corporate pay decisions Wednesday even as officials argued that excessive compensation in the private sector contributed to the nation's financial crisis.
....
The administration has named Kenneth Feinberg, a lawyer who oversaw payments to families of victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, as a "special master" with power to reject pay plans he deems excessive at companies with the biggest injections of public money. Feinberg also would have authority to review compensation for the top 100 salaried employees at those firms.
So another czar, a Compensation Czar, czar #19. But notice the article refers to him as a "special master". What??!! Are we going Southern Plantation now?
President Barack Obama is appointing a special master to oversee his corporate slaves on his government plantation.
By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer
Talking tough but stepping gently, the Obama administration rejected direct intervention in corporate pay decisions Wednesday even as officials argued that excessive compensation in the private sector contributed to the nation's financial crisis.
....
The administration has named Kenneth Feinberg, a lawyer who oversaw payments to families of victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, as a "special master" with power to reject pay plans he deems excessive at companies with the biggest injections of public money. Feinberg also would have authority to review compensation for the top 100 salaried employees at those firms.
So another czar, a Compensation Czar, czar #19. But notice the article refers to him as a "special master". What??!! Are we going Southern Plantation now?
President Barack Obama is appointing a special master to oversee his corporate slaves on his government plantation.
tidbit-Discrimination and Guns
Senate Bill 96: Sponsor Senator David Vitter (LA)
Amends the Public Health Service Act to include a health care entity's refusal to provide coverage of, or pay for, induced abortions among the bases for which the federal government or any state or local government that receives federal financial assistance may not discriminate against such an entity. Expands the definition of "health care entity" to include a hospital, a provider sponsored organization, a health maintenance organization, a health insurance plan, and any other kind of health care facility, organization, or plan.
We need to support this. It may be the only way Christian doctors and hospitals in business if the Freedom of Choice Act is ever enacted.
H.R. 45: Sponsor Rep. Bobby Rush (IL)
Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 - Amends the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to prohibit a person from possessing a firearm unless that person has been issued a firearm license under this Act or a state system certified under this Act and such license has not been invalidated or revoked. Prescribes license application, issuance, and renewal requirements.
Prohibits transferring or receiving a qualifying firearm unless the recipient presents a valid firearms license, the license is verified, and the dealer records a tracking authorization number. Prescribes firearms transfer reporting and record keeping requirements. Directs the Attorney General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system.
We need to fight this one and keep a close eye on it. It seems like it invalidates every gun permit in America and force gun owners to reapply under this law's stricter rules. But the scariest part is the "federal record of sale system". Where is the ACLU? Where are all the people who complained about the Patriot Act being intrusive? What happened to the progressive ideal of a right to privacy?
Amends the Public Health Service Act to include a health care entity's refusal to provide coverage of, or pay for, induced abortions among the bases for which the federal government or any state or local government that receives federal financial assistance may not discriminate against such an entity. Expands the definition of "health care entity" to include a hospital, a provider sponsored organization, a health maintenance organization, a health insurance plan, and any other kind of health care facility, organization, or plan.
We need to support this. It may be the only way Christian doctors and hospitals in business if the Freedom of Choice Act is ever enacted.
H.R. 45: Sponsor Rep. Bobby Rush (IL)
Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 - Amends the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to prohibit a person from possessing a firearm unless that person has been issued a firearm license under this Act or a state system certified under this Act and such license has not been invalidated or revoked. Prescribes license application, issuance, and renewal requirements.
Prohibits transferring or receiving a qualifying firearm unless the recipient presents a valid firearms license, the license is verified, and the dealer records a tracking authorization number. Prescribes firearms transfer reporting and record keeping requirements. Directs the Attorney General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system.
We need to fight this one and keep a close eye on it. It seems like it invalidates every gun permit in America and force gun owners to reapply under this law's stricter rules. But the scariest part is the "federal record of sale system". Where is the ACLU? Where are all the people who complained about the Patriot Act being intrusive? What happened to the progressive ideal of a right to privacy?
Going to His Headlines
Taxpayers Gamble on General Motors
By Amanda Ruggeri-U.S. News & World Report
I don't even need to read this article to understand its meaning. Taxpayers did not gamble on GM, His Administration is. In fact, His Administration is gambling on GM with our money, the money of our children and our grandchildren. Now, one could say that the taxpayers who voted for Obama are gambling. They apparently made a bad bet with Obama and now we are all in trouble.
Administration to issue new Wall Street pay curbs
By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – An up and coming Wall Street executive might want to hold off on buying that condo in Aspen. The Obama administration is ready to issue broad new guidelines that would rein in pay at financial institutions.
Eager to remove incentives that they say contributed to last year's financial crisis, President Barack Obama's economic team plans to unfurl broad executive pay principles, possibly as early as Wednesday, that put a premium on long-term performance over short-term gain.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke want to give the Fed, which regulates banks, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, which oversees the financial markets, greater powers to guide compensation practices on Wall Street and beyond.
Have you ever heard of the executive branch of our government essentially usurping the power of the legislature by putting caps on bonuses. If a company inappropriately offers a bonus and it doesn't work for them...they deserve to fail. Our government should not make this decision. We can all ooh and aah at how much these guys make and think it's horrible. But it plays into class warfare and envy. If you think that a person getting a massive bonus-by contract (it seems regardless of whether they do good or not) is wrong that is Envy. Besides, a couple hundred million dollars in bonuses is nothing compared to how much these companies (billions and billions) are getting from the government. The government is an enabler.
Another Way To Describe the Newspaper Crisis: The Craigslist Boom
Peter Kafka
More fuel for the “Google (GOOG) didn’t kill newspapers, Craigslist did” meme: A report that says the listings service has seen revenue jump 23% this year and will end up booking $100 million — even as the newspaper classifieds business falls off a cliff.
Oh no. Unconstitutionality Warning! Don't tell His Presidency about the newspaper crisis. He'll appoint a Newspaper Czar. Then he'll start bailing out the newspapers and telling them what they can print (why not he tells GM they have to make tin can cars and can't make SUVs). Oh, wait. He can't do that...First Amendment freedom of the press. Why not Obama, you've usurped "checks and balances" and the legislature why not step all over the First Amendment. A state-run media, one more step toward fascism and Hugo Chavez (see previous posting). But of course, it won't matter to the New York Times, LA Times... and the like, because they are already run by Obamanuts...oh and Newsweek.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Hail Obama!
Many may think that the reference to President Obama as a "messiah" or "king" is just crazy talk trying to mock him. Read this next article.
From Real Clear Politics:
Newsweek editor Evan Thomas said President Obama is "sort of God" in a way that's "standing above the country." Transcript below.
CHRIS MATTHEWS (HOST):Evan Thomas is editor at large for Newsweek magazine. Evan, you remember 1984. It wasn't 100 years ago. Reagan and World War II and the sense of us as the good guys in the world, how are we doing?
EVAN THOMAS: Well, we were the good guys in 1984, it felt that way. It hasn't felt that way in recent years. So Obama's had, really, a different task We're seen too often as the bad guys. And he, he has a very different job from ... Reagan was all about America, and you talked about it. Obama is - we are above that now. We're not just parochial, we're not just chauvinistic, we're not just provincial. We stand for something, I mean in a way Obama's standing above the country, above above the world, he's sort of God.
The editor at large of Newsweek has elevated President Obama to God-status. This mean Obama cannot be questioned and needs no explanation. No transparency. Unfortunately, too many in the media believe this too considering he almost never gets bad press.
He probably thinks himself as a dictator. His charisma, his attitude toward corporations and nationalization, he's going to save us all, smells of fascism. Not fascism with stormtroopers. This is fascism with a smile on their faces and a flower in their hands.
That's where His Presidency's czars come in. Here's the list of czars:
1- Bank Bailout
2- Energy and Environment
3- Drug
4- U.S. Border
5- Urban Affairs
6- Regulatory
7- Stimulus Accountability
8- Iran
9- Middle East
10- Afghanistan
11- Pakistan
12- Technology
13- Car
14- Climate/Global Warming
15- Economy
16- Cyber
17- Health
18- Government Performance
This is a compiled list of what I could find in a matter of minutes from Reuters and other news organizations. This is way more than any other President.
Czars have no accountability, no oversight, no confirmation and no requirement of transparency. Just ask Neil Cavuto, he's been asking to talk to the car czar since his appointment, with no response, nobody knows where he is. Transparency?
Just as any two-bit dictator, His Presidency has appointed mini dictators, over parts of our economy and way of life, who don't need to be confirmed by the legislature and don't have to report to them either.
This is exactly what the Founding Fathers did not want to happen and that's why they developed the three branches of government. We have three separate branches with equal footing and "checks and balances" to assure that not one person or group of people could amass the entire power of the government. This is Civics 101. But when czars are appointed it subverts the checks and balances and equality of our three branch system. It allows the President himself to rule without restraint.
Essentially, Obama is trying to run the entire government with his buddies and ideological colleagues. In the process, by-passing the will of the people through their elected representative.
From Real Clear Politics:
Newsweek editor Evan Thomas said President Obama is "sort of God" in a way that's "standing above the country." Transcript below.
CHRIS MATTHEWS (HOST):Evan Thomas is editor at large for Newsweek magazine. Evan, you remember 1984. It wasn't 100 years ago. Reagan and World War II and the sense of us as the good guys in the world, how are we doing?
EVAN THOMAS: Well, we were the good guys in 1984, it felt that way. It hasn't felt that way in recent years. So Obama's had, really, a different task We're seen too often as the bad guys. And he, he has a very different job from ... Reagan was all about America, and you talked about it. Obama is - we are above that now. We're not just parochial, we're not just chauvinistic, we're not just provincial. We stand for something, I mean in a way Obama's standing above the country, above above the world, he's sort of God.
The editor at large of Newsweek has elevated President Obama to God-status. This mean Obama cannot be questioned and needs no explanation. No transparency. Unfortunately, too many in the media believe this too considering he almost never gets bad press.
He probably thinks himself as a dictator. His charisma, his attitude toward corporations and nationalization, he's going to save us all, smells of fascism. Not fascism with stormtroopers. This is fascism with a smile on their faces and a flower in their hands.
That's where His Presidency's czars come in. Here's the list of czars:
1- Bank Bailout
2- Energy and Environment
3- Drug
4- U.S. Border
5- Urban Affairs
6- Regulatory
7- Stimulus Accountability
8- Iran
9- Middle East
10- Afghanistan
11- Pakistan
12- Technology
13- Car
14- Climate/Global Warming
15- Economy
16- Cyber
17- Health
18- Government Performance
This is a compiled list of what I could find in a matter of minutes from Reuters and other news organizations. This is way more than any other President.
Czars have no accountability, no oversight, no confirmation and no requirement of transparency. Just ask Neil Cavuto, he's been asking to talk to the car czar since his appointment, with no response, nobody knows where he is. Transparency?
Just as any two-bit dictator, His Presidency has appointed mini dictators, over parts of our economy and way of life, who don't need to be confirmed by the legislature and don't have to report to them either.
This is exactly what the Founding Fathers did not want to happen and that's why they developed the three branches of government. We have three separate branches with equal footing and "checks and balances" to assure that not one person or group of people could amass the entire power of the government. This is Civics 101. But when czars are appointed it subverts the checks and balances and equality of our three branch system. It allows the President himself to rule without restraint.
Essentially, Obama is trying to run the entire government with his buddies and ideological colleagues. In the process, by-passing the will of the people through their elected representative.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)