During the campaign and throughout the ongoing health care “reform” debate, President Obama has made a promise to the American people – one that he repeated in a speech to a convention of the American Medical Association last week: “No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people. If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”
Now that the Democrats’ health care plan has been brought into greater focus, that promise doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. A Lewin Group study confirms that under a new government-run health plan more than 100 million Americans may lose their current health care coverage and be forced onto government rolls. Last week, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported that 23 million Americans would lose their current plans if a Senate Democratic health care “reform” bill was enacted. As a result, the White House began to walk back from its promise, with the Associated Press reporting, “White House officials suggest the president’s rhetoric shouldn’t be taken literally.” At his news conference yesterday, the President continued the reversal, answering a question about the promise with some rather tortured language:
JAKE TAPPER, ABC NEWS: “I’m sorry, but what about keeping your promise to the American people that they won’t have to change plans even if employers –“
THE PRESIDENT: “Well, no, no, I mean – when I say if you have your plan and you like it and your doctor has a plan, or you have a doctor and you like your doctor that you don’t have to change plans, what I’m saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform.”
In an interview today on Good Morning America, the backtracking continued, with the President telling ABC’s Diane Sawyer, “I can’t pass a law that says, ‘I’m sorry, employers, you can never make changes to the health care plans that you provide your employees.’” In other words, the Administration has gone from “If you like your plan, you get to keep it” to “Well, we really can’t promise much of anything.” That’s “change” alright – but not exactly the type of change Americans were hoping for during this new era in Washington.
The reason this broken promise is especially painful for the Administration is because it underscores just the real fear Americans have about a government takeover of health care. Today’s Washington Post reports:
“Part of the reason so many are nervous about future changes is a fear they may lose what they currently have. More than eight in 10 said they are satisfied with the quality of care they now receive and relatively content with their own current expenses, and worry about future rising costs cuts across party lines and is amplified in the weak economy.”
No wonder Washington Democrats are doing anything and everything they can to NOT answer questions about how and why tens of millions of Americans will lose their current plan under Democratic versions of health care “reform.”
Then call your representatives and congress and tell them to STOP THE SPENDING and do a real insurance and pharm reform.
NEW YORK TIMES & WASHINGTON POST COLUMNISTS PREDICT THAT THE DEMOCRATS’ TRILLION-DOLLAR HEALTH CARE PLAN WILL PILE MORE DEBT ON FUTURE GENERATIONS
Despite the Administration’s pledge that its government takeover of health care will be “deficit neutral” – meaning Democrats will either raise taxes or cut benefits by at least a trillion dollars – columns in both the New York Times and Washington Post today raised the possibility that the massive government takeover will add even more red ink to the already-staggering federal debt. That means that after the trillion-dollar “stimulus” bill that still isn’t creating jobs, the half-trillion omnibus with nearly 9,000 earmarks, and a budget that already includes trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, Democrats intend to borrow even more money from China and the Middle East and pass the bill to our kids and grandkids.
In an op-ed entitled, “Prognosis: Debt” Washington Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt writes:
“If you listened to President Obama addressing the American Medical Association last week, you might think that the primary purpose of health-care reform is, as he said, ‘to control the spiraling cost of health care in America…’”
“Yet extending coverage is overwhelmingly the focus of congressional attention so far, and it is quite likely that any legislation that emerges will create a hugely expensive health-care entitlement with no guarantee of the upward cost spiral being slowed.”
In a New York Times op-ed, “Tossing and Turning Over the Federal Deficit,” John Harwood raised similar concerns:
“Mr. Obama insists he will act to narrow the long-term deficit once the economy recovers. But neither the president nor his budget director can be sure that their principal strategies, which involve curbing rising health care costs, will work.”
On Friday, House Democratic Leaders introduced a “health care plan” without even an estimate of how much it will cost, let alone how they will pay for it, leaving the American people to wonder how serious Congressional Democrats are about keeping the President’s pledge. The American people don’t want a government takeover of health care that will raise taxes, ration care, and swell our already-staggering debt. Both parties need to work together to craft a plan that will control costs and fix what’s broken in American health care. House Republicans stand ready to do just that and have offered a better health care reform solution that will:
Make quality health care coverage affordable and accessible for every American, regardless of pre-existing health conditions. Protect Americans from being forced into a new government-run health care plan that would eliminate the health care coverage that more than 100 million Americans currently receive through their job. Let Americans who like their health care coverage keep it, and give all Americans the freedom to choose the health plan that best meets their needs. Ensure that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not government bureaucrats. Improve Americans’ lives through effective prevention, wellness, and disease management programs, while developing new treatments and cures for life-threatening diseases. Let’s be clear: America can’t afford the Democrats’ government takeover of health care. Under the Democratic plan, millions of Americans will lose their health coverage, their doctors, and their jobs. Americans deserve better, and Republicans are offering a better plan to reduce costs, expand access, and improve the quality of care. Will Democrats continue their go-it-alone approach and pass their costly government takeover of health care? Or will they finally work with Republicans on a bipartisan plan to make health care more affordable and accessible without burying future generations under mountains of debt we know they cannot afford?
I don't believe mine is Kenyon. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2009/06/21/sfchron-slobbers-obama-father-our-country-has-super-dad-status
from newsbuster.org-- BMI’s Julia Seymour Exposes the Media’s Lies to Fox Business By Catherine Maggio (Bio | Archive) June 19, 2009 - 14:59 ET
How many uninsured Americans are there really? It’s a number that the mainstream media have repeatedly misrepresented to make the health care “crisis” seem worse than it is.
Business & Media Institute’s Julia A. Seymour hammered this point in an apprearance on Fox Business. Seymour exposed the common error by breaking down the actual number to more than 30 million less than the media claim it is.
Journalists have used the statistic of 46 million-47 million uninsured Americans, but as Seymour told Fox Business, this number was wildy inflated. “The Census Bureau comes up with this number and they said that the number of uninsured is really 45.6 million people. But that's total people, and that includes almost 10 million who are non-citizens,” Seymour clarified.
That meant the label “Americans” after “uninsured” was totally inaccurate. But that wasn’t the only ambiguous part of this overused statistic. Seymour also broke the statistic further down, explaining that almost 9 million were young people who didn’t need of health insurance, and 9 million were those who make more than $75,000 and chose not to buy insurance.
Seymour spelled out to host Stuart Varney that contrary to what the media have told their viewers, the number of “chronically uninsured,” according to the liberal Kaiser Family Foundation, was only somewhere between 8 million and 13 million people.
But even these people were not lacking in health care. “We all have healthcare, but the media say healthcare because they use that term to promote universal coverage. What they really should be saying is that there are a number of people without health insurance…” Seymour explained, “So the crisis is actually much smaller than the news media make it out to be.”
Ma'am], we live in a world that has walls and those walls need to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? You? You, [Senator Waxman]? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for [Guantanomo detainees] and curse the [Bush administration]; you have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that [the detention of detainees], while [inconvenient], probably saved lives and that my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at [California and DC] parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use then as the backbone of a life trying to defend something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said “thank you,” and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest that you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.
This bill is BS what about thier cival rights? those Gdarn republicans are at it again . Darn BBuuuuuuuuuuush .they lost .Get over it The proposal, offered as a motion to recommit by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), would prohibit any funds under the act being used to provide the rights Americans enjoy under Miranda v. Arizona by the Department of Justice, to terrorist detainees in the custody of U.S. Armed Forces in Afghanistan:
“Terrorists who want to kill Americans and destroy our way of life should not be granted the same rights as American citizens. I am pleased House Democrats joined Republicans to send a clear message to the Obama Administration that terrorists should not be given Miranda rights and an opportunity to take advantage of the U.S. legal system. As this legislation is finalized, House Democrats who supported this proposal must ensure it remains a part of the bill ultimately sent to the President’s desk. Let’s be clear: terrorism is not a law enforcement issue. That is a pre-9/11 mentality that helped pave the way for deadliest terrorist strike in American history, and granting terrorists Miranda rights would be a significant blow to our efforts to defeat the terrorist threat.”
NOTE: News reports recently noted that the Federal Bureau of Investigation agents have read terrorist suspects their Miranda rights overseas, at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan and other places
Or are they just worried about ratings? How can THE ONE socialize/ahh I mean/destroy/I mean,, fix yea that's it ,fix the health care industry with this kind of descent? Don't they know we need to spend more money (that we don't have)on poor illiterate hardworking migrant Americans and get rid of those evil private insurance companies? Don't they know the consequences or are thier ratings more important? http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2009/06/16/cbs-airs-reality-check-obamas-false-claim-health-plan-deficit-neutral
Shutting down investigations into ACORN .Shutting down investigations into Corruption. Shuttting OUT bipartisan formulation of bills.Denies an investigation into Nancy to call the CIA liers without backing it up.Raise the tax on 95% of the country.These people are furked up.2010 can't get here soon enough.
I don't judge him by the color of his skin,but by the content of his character. I'll have to agree with the orange guy.
AS DEMS' COSTLY PLAN IS EXPOSED, HOUSE REPUBLICANS PREPARE BETTER SOLUTIONS TO INCREASE AMERICANS' ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE
June 16, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Yesterday’s Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on a Democratic health care “reform” bill has sent shockwaves through Washington – and middle-class families, small businesses, and all taxpayers are right to take notice. Here’s what CBO has uncovered:
The Democratic plan will cost taxpayers at least $1 trillion; The legislation will leave at least 36 million Americans uninsured; and The proposal will force at least 23 million Americans to give up the health coverage they currently enjoy. This is reform?
House Republicans are working on a better solution to ensure that every American has access to affordable health care. To that end, tomorrow, the House GOP’s Health Care Reform Solutions Group will outline a common-sense plan to reduce costs, expand access, and increase the quality of care in a way that Americans can afford. The GOP plan will:
Expand access to affordable, quality care regardless of pre-existing conditions; Protect Americans from being forced into a government-run plan, making certain that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not Washington bureaucrats; and Let Americans who like their health coverage keep it, while giving Americans the freedom to choose the plan that best meets their needs. With the Democratic and GOP plans now coming into clearer focus, middle-class families and small businesses across the country are beginning to ask: is a $1 trillion government takeover of health care really worth it if it leaves at least 36 million Americans uninsured and forces at least 23 million Americans off their current plans? Or, is the better solution a proposal that will expand access to affordable care while protecting Americans’ relationships with their doctors? That choice will become increasingly evident in the weeks to come, as Democrats in charge of Washington continue pushing their costly plan onto Americans who just don’t support it.
Earlier Today, House Appropriators Rejected E-Verify Amendments; Reps. Price, Obey, and Wasserman-Schultz Spoke Against These Provisions
Earlier this morning, the House Appropriations Committee met to write the annual Homeland Security spending bill and the annual bill that funds Congress for the coming year. At the "mark-up," the Committee rejected two E-Verify related amendments to the Homeland Security bill and another related to the Legislative Branch spending bill. E-Verify is an electronically operated system that ensures American jobs go to American workers by allowing employers to quickly check the work authorization status of their new hires.
Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA) -- a true immigration reformer -- offered an amendment to the Homeland Security bill to extend E-Verify. While that bill already contains a short, two-year reauthorization of E-Verify, Congressman Calvert knows the true value of the program and sought a longer extension of E-Verify. After Calvert spoke in support of his amendment, Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee Chairman, Rep. David Price (D-NC), spoke against the amendment. Rep. Price urged the entire Committee to vote against the amendment. Then, the Committee Chairman, Rep. David Obey (D-WI), spoke against the amendment, as well. Obey argued that the Homeland Security spending bill shouldn't contain an E-Verify authorization at all!
Immediately following the rejection of the Calvert Amendment, another true immigration reformer -- Representative Jack Kingston (R-GA) -- offered an amendment to the Homeland Security bill to require companies who contract with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to use E-Verify. This common sense amendment would have ensured that contractors who do business with DHS -- the same agency tasked with enforcing our immigration laws -- do not hire illegal aliens. Congressman Price AGAIN spoke in opposition to the Kingston amendment, erroneously claiming that E-Verify is inaccurate and that the program would be unable to handle the expansion to DHS contractors. Even though Congressman Kingston pointed out that DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano stated last month that the program could indeed handle a large-scale expansion, and that the program has an incredible accuracy rate of 99.6%, the House Appropriations Committee still rejected the amendment!
Later in the morning, Congressman Kingston attempted to attach a similar E-Verify amendment to the Legislative Branch spending bill. This provision would have required contractors who do business with the U.S. Congress to use E-Verify. This time, Appropriations Legislative Branch Subcommittee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL) urged the Committee to reject the Kingston Amendment.
In speaking out against these amendments, Reps. Price, Obey, and Wasserman-Schultz effectively urged their colleagues to not only put the E-Verify program in jeopardy, but also ensure that illegal aliens can continue to work on federal contracts with DHS and the U.S. Congress!
Liberty Counsel's sources are reporting that the anti-faith Hate Crimes bill will skip normal procedures and be put on the fast-track to passage.
According to reports, the Senate leadership will attach the bill as an amendment to another bill because it is the "most efficient" way to get it passed -- bypassing the traditionally longer process of committee deliberations and markup.
Essentially, Harry Reid and others are going to hide the bill as an attachment on another bill to expedite passage... and short-circuit efforts to expose and defeat this anti-faith measure.
+ + I'm telling Mr. Reid: "I Object!"
Contact Reid and other key Senators now
I'm asking you to support this with a flood of contact that will literally overwhelm Sen. Reid's office as well as the offices of other key leaders in the Senate -- along with your own two Senators.
1. I am very disappointed that the Senate is considering fast-tracking the "Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act" (S. 909) by attaching it as an amendment to another bill.
2. This bill deserves its own consideration as a stand-alone bill, not being rushed forward as an amendment.
3. I oppose the Hate Crimes Prevention Act and urge you to oppose it as well. It is an attack on faith and family while granting special rights based on "sexual orientation" and "gender identity," terms which are not even clearly defined in the bill.
+ + This is a crucial battle
Very simply, this bill is the start of putting faith and family values on the wrong side of the law -- and elevating deviant behavior to protected status.
I will not allow Senate leaders to fast-track this bill and rush it through without a real debate.
souds like bussness as usual. President Barack Obama plans to fire the inspector general who investigates AmeriCorps and other national service programs amid a controversy between the IG and Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who is an Obama supporter and former NBA basketball star. The IG, Gerald Walpin, was criticized by the U.S. attorney in Sacramento for the way he handled an investigation of Johnson and his nonprofit group, St. HOPE Academy, which received hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal grants from the Corporation for National Community Service. The corporation runs the AmeriCorps program. On Thursday, Obama said in a letter to Congress that he had lost confidence in Walpin. Neither the president nor deputy White House press secretary Josh Earnest would give details. The president must give Congress 30 days’ notice before removing Walpin, who is being suspended with pay for the 30 days. Earnest said, “The president will appoint a replacement in whom he has full confidence as the corporation carries out its important mission.” Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, in a letter to Obama, pointed to a law requiring that Congress be given the reasons an IG is fired. He cited a Senate report saying the requirement is designed to ensure that inspectors general are not removed for political reasons. Grassley said Walpin had identified millions of dollars in AmeriCorps funds that were wasted or misspent and “it appears he has been doing a good job.” Michelle Malkin . com has more and a very interesting take.Backed with referances.
I don't think so but apparently Obama wants to employ them before he grants amnista and healthcare.Millions of AMERICANS unemployed.A scam for a stimulas.
One of the few things the Bush administration did right on immigration enforcement was to strengthen and expand the E-Verify citizenship verification system for employers.
The Obama White House is preparing to gut the program.
Team Obama will repeal some of the Executive Orders from the Bush Administration dealing with E-verify and so-called “No Match” Social Security number notices.
1. In the case of companies that have federal contracts, the employer will not have to use E-verify to check the employment eligibility of his current employees, only new hires as a result of the federal contract.
a. So for example, X sweatshop could have 15 illegal’s working for them right now who are illegal. If X sweatshop gets a federal contract they will not have to verify the employment eligibility of those 15 illegal’s. So they will receive a federal contract and our tax payer dollars will go to paying the salary of illegal workers.
2. E-verify requirements will stay in place for new hires.
a. So if X sweatshop has to hire 4 more people as part of their federal contract they will be required to verify those workers.
3. DHS could also announce that it will rescind the No Match rule, which provides a safe harbor process for employers who receive a No Match letter from SSA, can follow in order to terminate the employee without repercussion. SSA “no-match” letters alert employers to the fact that they have submitted Social Security tax withholdings based on Social Security account numbers that do not match SSA records as to issued numbers and corresponding names.
The rule, which will be rescinded – proposed as a “safe harbor” for employers – steps to be taken when they receive a No Match letter from SSA. If the steps are taken for the employees who submitted suspect Social Security numbers and if the employer is later audited/investigated by DHS for hiring illegal immigrants, the employer can use the fact that he took the steps laid out in the rule as a defense to a charge of illegally employing those illegal immigrants for which the No Match letter was issued.
Businesses requested that such a process be laid out so that they were no longer subject to lawsuits.
Make sure your congressional reps have this on their radar screens: 202-224-3121
Democrats’ attempts to pass a national energy tax through Congress haven’t gone quite as smoothly as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and other Democratic leaders had hoped. Meanwhile, House Republicans are uniting behind the American Energy Act, legislation that represents the fastest route to a cleaner environment, lower energy costs, and more American jobs. In an op-ed in this morning’s Wall Street Journal, House GOP Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-IN), Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL), and Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) highlighted the Republican plan – and contrasted it with the Democrats’ “Waxman-Markey” national energy tax that would increase energy costs and send American jobs overseas: “Independent analyses by Charles River Associates Inc. and the National Association of Manufacturers predict the Waxman-Markey bill will cost millions of domestic jobs as manufacturers relocate plants to countries with less draconian environmental regulations. Meanwhile, the electricity rates under a cap-and-trade system would, as President Barack Obama said in January 2008 ‘necessarily skyrocket,’ by some estimates up to $4,300 each year.” “This is not the way to go. Instead, House Republicans this week unveiled legislation that will lead to lower prices, more jobs, a cleaner environment, and greater energy independence. The centerpiece of our American Energy Act is a commitment to increase the production of our abundant domestic natural resources, and not to punish traditional energy producers and consumers…” “In the midst of a deep recession, Democratic leaders want to impose higher fuel bills on all of us and relocate American jobs overseas in pursuit of an unproven environmental agenda. Instead, the American Energy Act will produce more energy, lower fuel bills, create more jobs, yield a cleaner environment, and lead to a more secure nation. Can there be any doubt what path is best for the country?”
As Republicans rally around their “all of the above” strategy for lower energy costs, cleaner water and air, and more jobs, Democratic leaders are having trouble convincing their own Members – particularly those representing rural districts – to support a national energy tax. Those concerns of rural Democratic Members may come to a head during a House Agriculture Committee hearing today. Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN) warns in a story in The Hill titled “Dem Mutiny on Climate Bill Grows, Says Peterson” that Democrats are “stuck” amidst plenty of infighting. The Chairman’s concerns are echoed by rural electrical cooperatives across the nation, which are sounding the alarm on behalf of rural Americans who will be forced to pay much higher electricity rates under Speaker Pelosi’s national energy tax. The Hill reports: “Rural electric cooperatives, vestiges of a New Deal-era campaign to provide power to rural America, have started to lobby against the House climate change bill by stressing that it would raise electricity costs in certain states more than in others.” “The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association opposes the bill because it doesn’t provide enough free emissions allowances to regions of the country that are more reliant on coal to produce to electricity. Consumers in these regions could end up seeing their energy costs rise at a faster clip than areas that use more climate-friendly sources of power. Rural co-ops tend to rely more on coal for electric generation than other fuels and could be more affected by a carbon cap than utilities with more diverse energy portfolios.”
As Washington Democrats insist on barreling ahead with a national energy tax in the midst of a recession – one that will costs middle-class families dearly and cost American workers their jobs – House Republicans are looking toward a cleaner, more reliable energy future for all Americans, including those in rural communities. With a better solution now on the table to clean up our environment, lower energy costs, and create more jobs, will Democrats drop their ill-advised plans for a national energy tax? Or will they stubbornly insist on saddling the middle class, rural Americans, and small businesses with higher energy prices when they can afford it least?
Can you imagine the reaction if a Republican had tried this?
Top aides to Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) called a last-minute, pre-emptive strike on Wednesday with a group of prominent Democratic lobbyists, warning them to advise their clients not to attend a meeting with Senate Republicans set for Thursday.
Russell Sullivan, the top staffer on Finance, and Jon Selib, Baucus’ chief of staff, met with a bloc of more than 20 contract lobbyists, including several former Baucus aides.
“They said, ‘Republicans are having this meeting and you need to let all of your clients know if they have someone there, that will be viewed as a hostile act,’” said a Democratic lobbyist who attended the meeting.
“Going to the Republican meeting will say, ‘I’m interested in working with Republicans to stop health care reform,’” the lobbyist added…
Senate Republicans are opposed to plans by President Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats to implement a government-run, public plan option as a part of health care reform. They also are concerned with how Democrats plan to pay for reform.
Recognizing they don’t have the votes to stop legislation on their own, Republicans are pushing their natural allies in the business community to help bring public pressure to bear as another way to influence the outcome.
Obama has set Oct. 15 as the deadline for approval of health care reform, and Democratic leaders in Congress are rushing to clear bills from their respective chambers by the end of July.
“Our effort has been to get these folks to speak their mind,” one senior Senate Republican aide said…
But with Baucus’ office still warning dissenters that anyone who makes their opposition public could be permanently excluded from future negotiations, the groups representing businesses, health care providers, hospitals and similar stakeholders are still wavering on whether to voice their concerns publicly.
The lineup of lobbyists who attended the Wednesday session included a cast of Democratic insiders similar to that at previous meetings convened by Baucus’ staff. The participants included: Jeff Forbes, a former Baucus chief of staff who lobbies at Cauthen Forbes & Williams; Jonathon Jones, a partner with Peck, Madigan, Jones & Stewart; Tarplin Strategies’ Rich Tarplin, an assistant secretary at Health and Human Services in the Clinton administration; another former Baucus top aide, David Castagnetti, of Mehlman Vogel Castagnetti and OB-C Group founder Larry O’Brien.
The lobbyists represented at this meeting undoubtedly represent all sorts of health care stakeholders: hospitals, doctors, nurses, insurance companies, etc. The unmistakable message from Baucus is that those who don’t roll over and make a deal will wind up getting raked over the coals. Democrats railed for years about the purported heavy hand of hardball politicians like Tom DeLay, but they never resorted to blackmail.
I'm sure I'Ie missed a few.It's getting more difficult by the day to keep track of which Democrats are involved with exactly what corrupt and/or ethically challenged activities. Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) and her husband own as much as $500,000 in stock of the troubled OneUnited Bank. In a direct conflict-of-interest, she intervened with regulators on behalf of the bank. Ed Morrissey asks the rhetorical question: "Did Americans go deep into debt to send bailout money to politically-connected banks and to prop up the investment portfolios of elected officials? Apparently, yes we did."
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) engaged in a relationship with a Fannie Mae executive while supposedly overseeing the GSE. Fannie's meltdown -- amid repeated financial scandals and Frank's fierce fight to shield them from regulators -- played a critical role in the financial crisis.
Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT), the powerful Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, threatened filibuster after filibuster over additional regulation of the mortgage market while accepting funds and sweetheart mortgages from the very organizations he was supposed to be regulating. In fact, Dodd has yet to disclose the nature of his personal loan deals, despite having promised to do so months ago.
Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, appears to be the subject of 32 simultaneous ethics issues or investigations including 28 mysterious asset transfers (prohibited by House rules); undisclosed income from his Costa Rican rental property; multiple violations of New York City rent control statutes; killing a tax increase that would have hurt a contributor; and more.
Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-WV), dubbed "the overnight millionaire," is in the news again. He received his nickname because in 2000 Mollohan had no portfolio to speak of while making less than $80K a year. By 2004, he reported having at least $6.3 million in assets that generated income of somewhere around $700K annually. Earlier this week, it was reported that a non-profit funded by Mollohan (with the taxpayers' money, of course) had provided his family with $75,000 in free rent and services.
Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), an unindicted co-conspirator from the Abscam days, has had several ethical clouds hanging over his head for decades. The latest theft of taxpayer money is especially disturbing: Over the course of the past decade, Rep. John P. Murtha has earmarked millions of dollars for the Electro-Optics Center at Penn State University — money that has, in turn, gone to clients of the PMA Group, the Murtha-linked lobbying shop that was raided in November as part of a federal criminal probe..
Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, helped award $3.7 billion to companies controlled by her hsuband. Despite an obvious conflict of interest, Feinstein voted for appropriations "worth billions to her husband's firms."
Sen. Harry "Land Deal" Reid (D-NV), the Senate Majority Leader, collected a $1.1 million windfall profit on a Las Vegas land sale even though he hadn't owned the property for at least three years. Reid also did not disclose to Congress an earlier sale in which he transferred his land to a company created by a friend and took a financial stake in that company. The AP learned of the land deal from a former Reid aide who was concerned that the deal had been "hidden from Congress."
Just remember, peons: these jamokes are all still serving in Congress -- without a care in the world -- because they are above the law. They are royalty, not rabble (like you and I). Sure, if any one of us normal folks had pulled this type of chicanery, we'd be serving ten years in the big house.
Oh come now Nancy ,, Does this mean your not going to drain the swamp,release the memo or end the culture of corruption? Boy am I disappointed.Just protecting the privalaged class of the politician as usual.I'm sure this will help all your problems with accountability and transparency go away .Those dam people who whatch FOX or read on the internet will just stop looking at your record of criminality now.Good for you girl.I just know that after you've pissed away the democratic control in the congress by 2010 the dirty repub's will not go back to the past (like you) and prosecute yours and your parties malfeasence.Bon Chance Madamme Speaker.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is working to buffer lawmakers from federal investigators. This is a bad idea. Special legal protections for politicians encourage unethical conduct.
Irvin B. Nathan, general counsel of the House of Representatives, sent a letter to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. about establishing a protocol on how to handle "hopefully rare searches and electronic surveillance involving members of Congress." Mr. Nathan previously failed to negotiate such an agreement with the George W. Bush administration when Republicans controlled the House. His return to this effort isn't surprising given the number of congressional Democrats facing accusations of ethical misconduct.
Democrats facing scrutiny include the chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania, for his close ties to the defense lobby firm PMA Group, which is under federal investigation; House Ways and Means Chairman Charles B. Rangel of New York about a number of tax issues; Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. of Illinois over his reported effort to persuade ousted Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich to appoint him to fill President Obama's former Senate seat; and Rep. Jane Harman of California, who reportedly was taped in 2005 by the National Security Agency purportedly agreeing to help seek leniency for two accused Israeli spies in exchange for help in lobbying her appointment to chair the House Intelligence Committee.
Mrs. Pelosi, California Democrat, invoked the separation of powers as justification for the move. Mrs. Pelosi, who has acknowledged being aware previously of Mrs. Harman's controversial dialogue, claims the stance is a matter of principle. "Whether it's invading an office or wiretapping a conversation, it's important for us to have the separation of powers and the respect for individual liberties, again, while not harboring information that would be useful under the speech [or] debate clause," she said
House Democrats have begun rolling out their long-awaited health care “reform” legislation, and it turns out there’s not much “reform” to it after all. Instead, it would increase taxes, raise health care costs, ration care, and leave key medical decisions to government bureaucrats, rather than patients and their doctors – a proposal that House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) warned in an op-ed published on Townhall.com could cause more than 100 million Americans to “be forced out of their current health care plan and onto the government rolls.” With a debate on health care reform slated to begin in Congress, here are the top 10 facts about the House Democrats’ health care proposal:
1. A Government Takeover of Health Care. The House Democrats’ plan will create a new government-run program, will make health care more expensive, limit treatments and ration care, and put bureaucrats in charge of medical decisions rather than patients and doctors. Translation: higher costs, lower quality, and fewer choices for patients.
2. Forcing More than 100 Million Out of their Health Care. The House Democrats’ plan will force more than 100 million Americans out of their current health care plan and onto the government rolls. A Lewin Group study confirms that under a new government-run health plan millions will lose their current health care coverage.
3. Rationing Health Care Treatments. The House Democrats’ plan establishes an “advisory committee” that will put bureaucrats and politicians in charge of deciding patient treatments and cures. Translation: The government will make health care treatment decisions rather than doctors and patients.
4. A New Mandate on Individuals. The House Democrats’ plan mandates that every American buy health insurance or pay a hefty tax to Washington. This would force more Americans into government-run system that will make health care more expensive, ration care, and put bureaucrats in charge of medical decisions.
5. A New Mandate on Employers. The House Democrats’ plan would impose employer mandates and cost jobs by requiring some employers – especially small businesses – to pay a new tax to Washington. The plan would also slap employers that are unable to offer coverage the government deems adequate with another new tax to Washington. These two new taxes will make it more difficult than ever for small business owners to reinvest in their businesses and create and retain good paying jobs.
6. Harming Small Businesses. The House Democrats’ plan doesn’t yet define “small businesses,” which is troubling news for millions of Americans who depend on these engines of economic growth. One Democratic draft plan revealed to date only provides assistance to ease employer mandates for small businesses with an average of 27 or fewer employees. This leaves a huge number of small businesses to deal with the onerous and expensive mandates of the Democrats’ government defined health benefit plan (“small businesses” are traditionally defined as employing less than 500 people).
7. Expanding Entitlements. The House Democrats’ plan expands the Medicare and Medicaid programs without reform, ignoring the pending insolvency of programs that millions of seniors and families rely upon. These policies will result in benefit cuts and premium increases for many Americans who depend on these programs.
8. Unfunded Mandates on States. The House Democrats’ plan creates new unfunded mandates for already cash-strapped states by expanding Medicaid, forcing both the federal government and states to pay more to finance this entitlement expansion. This will leave states no choice but to raise taxes or reduce services for citizens of those states.
9. How Many Taxes Will Democrats Raise? The House Democrats’ plan expands benefits and includes massive new subsidies and government-dictated benefits, but it doesn’t identify any significant savings to help pay for the new scheme, nor does it acknowledge the massive new costs it will impose on individuals, employers, and states. In the past, Democrats promised a series of new tax hikes to pay for their plan. How many will there be? When do Democrats plan to reveal them?
10. Shifts Massive New Costs onto Taxpayers. The House Democrats’ plan represents a bait-and-switch that will make health care more expensive and hit the middle class particularly hard with higher taxes, rationed care, and new health costs. As millions of middle-class families are struggling to make ends meet while making responsible choices, this plan forces those that make responsible decisions to foot the bill for those who don’t.
House Republicans believe there is a better way, and led by Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO) and his Health Care Reform Solutions Group, they are crafting better solutions to expand access to affordable, quality care regardless of pre-existing conditions; protect Americans from being forced into a government-run plan, making certain that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not Washington bureaucrats; and let Americans who like their health care coverage keep it, while giving all Americans the freedom to choose the plan that best meets their needs. Will Democrats finally agree to work with Republicans on a plan to expand access to high-quality, affordable health care without raising taxes and rationing care? Or will they barrel ahead with their government-run plan? Middle-class families and small businesses are awaiting the answer
FACT CHECK: Obama disowns deficit he helped shape By CALVIN WOODWARD Associated Press Writer That wasn't me,President Barack Obama said on his 100th day in office, disclaiming responsibility for the huge budget deficit waiting for him on Day One. It actually was him and the other Democrats controlling Congress the previous two years who shaped a budget so out of balance. And as a presidential candidate and president-elect, he backed the twilight Bush-era stimulus plan that made the deficit deeper, all before he took over and promoted spending plans that have made it much deeper still. Obama met citizens at an Arnold, Mo., high school last month in advance of his prime-time news conference. Both forums were a platform to review his progress at the 100-day mark and look ahead. At various times, he brought an air of certainty to ambitions that are far from cast in stone. His assertion that his proposed budget will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term is an eyeball-roller among many economists, given the uncharted terrain of trillion-dollar deficits and economic calamity that the government is negotiating. He promised vast savings from increased spending on preventive health care in the face of doubts that such an effort, however laudable it might be for public welfare, can pay for itself, let alone yield huge savings. A look at some of his claims from that Wednesday: OBAMA:Number one, we inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit.... That wasn't me. Number two, there is almost uniform consensus among economists that in the middle of the biggest crisis, financial crisis, since the Great Depression, we had to take extraordinary steps. So you've got a lot of Republican economists who agree that we had to do a stimulus package and we had to do something about the banks. Those are one-time charges, and they're big, and they'll make our deficits go up over the next two years. THE FACTS: Congress controls the purse strings, not the president, and it was under Democratic control for Obama's last two years as Illinois senator. Obama supported the emergency bailout package in President George W. Bush's final months a package Democratic leaders wanted to make bigger. To be sure, Obama opposed the Iraq war, a drain on federal coffers for six years before he became president. But with one major exception, he voted in support of Iraq war spending. The economy has worsened under Obama, though from forces surely in play before he became president, and he can credibly claim to have inherited a grim situation. Still, his response to the crisis goes well beyond one-time charges. He's persuaded Congress to expand children's health insurance, education spending, health information technology and more. He's moving ahead on a variety of big-ticket items on health care, the environment, energy and transportation that, if achieved, will be more enduring than bank bailouts and aid for homeowners. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated his policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years, even accounting for his spending reduction goals. Now, the deficit is nearly quadrupling to $1.75 trillion. OBAMA: I think one basic principle that we know is that the more we do on the (disease) prevention side, the more we can obtain serious savings down the road. ... If we're making those investments, we will save huge amounts of money in the long term. THE FACTS: It sounds believable that preventing illness should be cheaper than treating it, and indeed that's the case with steps like preventing smoking and improving diets and exercise. But during the 2008 campaign, when Obama and other presidential candidates were touting a focus on preventive care, the New England Journal of Medicine cautioned that sweeping statements about the cost-saving potential of prevention, however, are overreaching. It said that although some preventive measures do save money, the vast majority reviewed in the health economics literature do not. And a study released in December by the Congressional Budget Office found that increasing preventive care could improve people's health but would probably generate either modest reductions in the overall costs of health care or increases in such spending within a 10-year budgetary time frame. OBAMA: You could cut (Social Security) benefits. You could raise the tax on everybody so everybody's payroll tax goes up a little bit. Or you can do what I think is probably the best solution, which is you can raise the cap on the payroll tax. THE FACTS: Obama's proposal would reduce the Social Security trust fund's deficit by less than half, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. That means he would still have to cut benefits, raise the payroll tax rate, raise the retirement age or some combination to deal with the program's long-term imbalance. Workers currently pay 6.2 percent and their employers pay an equal rate for a total of 12.4 percent on annual wages of up to $106,800, after which no more payroll tax is collected. Obama wants workers making more than $250,000 to pay payroll tax on their income over that amount. That would still protect workers making under $250,000 from an additional burden. But it would raise much less money than removing the cap completely. Even though extensions had been granted to an initial round of requests to delay the proceedings, the government now says it needs even more time to prepare a response to a question that could be answered with a five-minute telephone call from the president to Hawaiian officials asking that his birth documentation be made public. Instead, a request submitted by Ralph Marra Jr., the acting U.S. attorney, and Elizabeth Pascal, the assistant U.S. attorney in New Jersey, explains that the Department of Justice, operating under Obama appointee Attorney General Eric Holder, still is working on a decision on representation for the defendants
FACT CHECK: Obama disowns deficit he helped shape By CALVIN WOODWARD Associated Press Writer That wasn't me,President Barack Obama said on his 100th day in office, disclaiming responsibility for the huge budget deficit waiting for him on Day One. It actually was him and the other Democrats controlling Congress the previous two years who shaped a budget so out of balance. And as a presidential candidate and president-elect, he backed the twilight Bush-era stimulus plan that made the deficit deeper, all before he took over and promoted spending plans that have made it much deeper still. Obama met citizens at an Arnold, Mo., high school last month in advance of his prime-time news conference. Both forums were a platform to review his progress at the 100-day mark and look ahead. At various times, he brought an air of certainty to ambitions that are far from cast in stone. His assertion that his proposed budget will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term is an eyeball-roller among many economists, given the uncharted terrain of trillion-dollar deficits and economic calamity that the government is negotiating. He promised vast savings from increased spending on preventive health care in the face of doubts that such an effort, however laudable it might be for public welfare, can pay for itself, let alone yield huge savings. A look at some of his claims from that Wednesday: OBAMA:Number one, we inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit.... That wasn't me. Number two, there is almost uniform consensus among economists that in the middle of the biggest crisis, financial crisis, since the Great Depression, we had to take extraordinary steps. So you've got a lot of Republican economists who agree that we had to do a stimulus package and we had to do something about the banks. Those are one-time charges, and they're big, and they'll make our deficits go up over the next two years. THE FACTS: Congress controls the purse strings, not the president, and it was under Democratic control for Obama's last two years as Illinois senator. Obama supported the emergency bailout package in President George W. Bush's final months a package Democratic leaders wanted to make bigger. To be sure, Obama opposed the Iraq war, a drain on federal coffers for six years before he became president. But with one major exception, he voted in support of Iraq war spending. The economy has worsened under Obama, though from forces surely in play before he became president, and he can credibly claim to have inherited a grim situation. Still, his response to the crisis goes well beyond one-time charges. He's persuaded Congress to expand children's health insurance, education spending, health information technology and more. He's moving ahead on a variety of big-ticket items on health care, the environment, energy and transportation that, if achieved, will be more enduring than bank bailouts and aid for homeowners. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated his policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years, even accounting for his spending reduction goals. Now, the deficit is nearly quadrupling to $1.75 trillion. OBAMA: I think one basic principle that we know is that the more we do on the (disease) prevention side, the more we can obtain serious savings down the road. ... If we're making those investments, we will save huge amounts of money in the long term. THE FACTS: It sounds believable that preventing illness should be cheaper than treating it, and indeed that's the case with steps like preventing smoking and improving diets and exercise. But during the 2008 campaign, when Obama and other presidential candidates were touting a focus on preventive care, the New England Journal of Medicine cautioned that sweeping statements about the cost-saving potential of prevention, however, are overreaching. It said that although some preventive measures do save money, the vast majority reviewed in the health economics literature do not. And a study released in December by the Congressional Budget Office found that increasing preventive care could improve people's health but would probably generate either modest reductions in the overall costs of health care or increases in such spending within a 10-year budgetary time frame. OBAMA: You could cut (Social Security) benefits. You could raise the tax on everybody so everybody's payroll tax goes up a little bit. Or you can do what I think is probably the best solution, which is you can raise the cap on the payroll tax. THE FACTS: Obama's proposal would reduce the Social Security trust fund's deficit by less than half, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. That means he would still have to cut benefits, raise the payroll tax rate, raise the retirement age or some combination to deal with the program's long-term imbalance. Workers currently pay 6.2 percent and their employers pay an equal rate for a total of 12.4 percent on annual wages of up to $106,800, after which no more payroll tax is collected. Obama wants workers making more than $250,000 to pay payroll tax on their income over that amount. That would still protect workers making under $250,000 from an additional burden. But it would raise much less money than removing the cap completely. Even though extensions had been granted to an initial round of requests to delay the proceedings, the government now says it needs even more time to prepare a response to a question that could be answered with a five-minute telephone call from the president to Hawaiian officials asking that his birth documentation be made public. Instead, a request submitted by Ralph Marra Jr., the acting U.S. attorney, and Elizabeth Pascal, the assistant U.S. attorney in New Jersey, explains that the Department of Justice, operating under Obama appointee Attorney General Eric Holder, still is working on a decision on representation for the defendants.
Boehner Statement on White House “Stimulus” Announcement WASHINGTON, DC – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today issued the following statement on President Obama and Vice President Biden’s announcement on increased government “stimulus” spending:
“Today’s announcement is an acknowledgement that the Democrats’ trillion-dollar stimulus is not working, and the American people know it. When they passed this spending plan, Democrats said it would immediately create jobs, yet nearly four months later unemployment has continued to climb and none of their rosy predictions have come true. These policies are harming middle-class families when they can least afford it, and adding to the massive debt we’re passing on to future generations.
“The American people know that we can’t borrow and spend our way back to prosperity, and that’s why House Republicans offered a better solution. Our plan to let the American people keep more of what they earn would have created twice the jobs at half the cost of the Democrats’ bloated government spending scheme. But instead of shifting course, Democrats are doubling down on their plan to spend taxpayer dollars as fast as possible, even as their own Vice President admits that the American people are being scammed. Wasting more money that the government doesn’t have – money that is borrowed from China and the Middle East, and will have to be paid back by our kids and grandkids – is the wrong choice. I believe our economy will improve, and Republicans support policies to make that happen faster. But it will not recover because of more wasteful government spending.”
by Rod Blum How would you evaluate President Obama's performance thus far? Obama administration ushering in socialism In nearly every policy area, he wants to tax, spend and control. Citizens need to act before we lose our freedoms to big government.
In 1927, Norman Thomas, a six-time candidate for president on the American Socialist Party ticket, said, "The American people will never vote for socialism. But under the name of liberalism, the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program."
The threat of socialism has always been with us, but at this moment -- under unchecked Democrat rule -- the threat is real. Russia's newspaper, the Pravda, recently featured a column that said, "Like the breaking of a great dam, the American descent into Marxism is happening with breathtaking speed, against the backdrop of a passive, hapless people." Even Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has warned Barack Obama against adopting further socialism, saying Russian history clearly proves it is a recipe for failure. "Any fourth-grade student knows socialism has failed in every country, at every time in history," said Putin.
Last November, millions of Americans voted for a first-term senator about whom they knew little. His voting record was the most liberal in the Senate but his rhetoric was moderate, so many voters took a chance. After Obama's first four months in office, voters' doubts have been answered: Obama is a European-style socialist. Simply put, he wants to tax, spend and control. In everything from his economic policy to his energy policy, Obama is moving the country from a traditional American model of entrepreneurship and private initiative to a European model of regulation and government control. I don't think the American people knowingly voted for this type of power grab.
Obama came into office highly critical of the previous administration's spending and deficits. Well! His proposed deficit over the next two years is an astonishing $3 trillion, or $27,000 of debt per U.S. household. George Bush might have spent like a drunken sailor, but Obama's spending orgy makes Bush look like a teetotaler. Government spending soars by 30 percent to $3.9 trillion in the Democrat's 2009 budget. Furthermore, Obama projects $500 billion deficits as far as the eye can see despite saying, "We are out of money now" in a recent CSPAN interview. During the debates he vowed to carefully scrub the budget line by line for programs that did not work. Toward that end he recently asked his Cabinet to cut costs in their departments by $100 million -- a minuscule .0027 percent of the budget! That's the equivalent of a family of four cutting $1 from its annual budget.
We are also now witnessing the most radical meddling of the government in private industry ever as we've quickly become "bailout nation." Taxpayers will spend at least $10 billion on Chrysler, $50 billion on GM, $170 billion on AIG, $700 billion for the TARP bank fund, $400 billion to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, $29 billion to Bear Stearns and the list goes on. Up next -- the health care and energy industries. When does this insanity stop?
From his pro-abortion stance to his "blame America first" mindset, this president does not share the values of most voters. We did not elect a leader who punishes the job creators in America while warmly embracing two-bit dictators whose goal is the destruction of America. He is a leader who closes the highly successful school voucher program for needy children in Washington while bailing out fiscally irresponsible states. What can we do? Well, you and I can do a great deal. Contact your elected officials. Participate in Tea Party protests. But please DO SOMETHING before we lose our individual liberties and freedoms to big government.
Sobbi,,"that the US is foolish for not exploiting poor immigrants to the degree that is easily done elsewhere?" I 'm believing they'd make 'em legal first.Withn Amnisty,
Asalam Alakum to you Barack. I am not alone and cannot wait until reality definitively slaps you upside the head…. And thank you for opening the eyes of millions of Ameicans to the insanity that is the progressive movement. Your bullsh1t is awakening many political fencesitters and will galvanize the rational thinking people to keep the democratic party out of office for many , many years to come.This is the good you've brought to America.
Yea john where is the Birth certificate? Shine on blackie defend your hero on the only issue you think you know. 'DUh I'm an insider and you'll see when the truth comes out I was right all along,Duhh My name is blackmanlikker and I own a mansion and a yaght Duh ..You'll see".Arsehole troll
From HOTAIR.COM.... Neil Barofsky is “SIGTARP,” the special investigator general whose job is to keep an eye on disbursement from the Troubled Assets Relief Program, the $3 trillion financial bailout that was rushed through Congress in October. Last week, Grassley sent a stern letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, asking about “a dispute over certain Treasury documents that were being withheld from SIGTARP auditors on a specious claim of attorney-client privilege.” At stake in the TARP case — as in the cases of the IGs at Amtrak, AmeriCorps and the ITC — is whether the inspectors generals will remain vigilant watchdogs on behalf of taxpayers or become compliant lapdogs, allowing Obama’s political appointees to do as they wish without fear of independent scrutiny. Given the controversial nature of the TARP — including the public outcry over bonuses paid to top employees of insurance giant AIG, a bailout beneficiary — Grassley is by no means the only member of Congress interested in preserving Barofsky’s independence. In April, Geithner was grilled by Texas Republican Rep. Jeb Hensarling and other members of Congress at a hearing after Barofsky reported a “staggering” amount of fraud in the bailout program. Hensarling is one of the staunchest critics of TARP and, as ABC News reported last week, the Texan sent a letter to Elizabeth Warren, chairwoman of the congressional panel charged with overseeing the bailout, warning that Treasury’s actions were a “threat to [Barofksy's] independence.” . . .
Not So Much ,, During the campaign and throughout the ongoing health care “reform” debate, President Obama has made a promise to the American people – one that he repeated in a speech to a convention of the American Medical Association last week: “No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people. If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”
Now that the Democrats’ health care plan has been brought into greater focus, that promise doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. A Lewin Group study confirms that under a new government-run health plan more than 100 million Americans may lose their current health care coverage and be forced onto government rolls. Last week, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported that 23 million Americans would lose their current plans if a Senate Democratic health care “reform” bill was enacted. As a result, the White House began to walk back from its promise, with the Associated Press reporting, “White House officials suggest the president’s rhetoric shouldn’t be taken literally.” At his news conference yesterday, the President continued the reversal, answering a question about the promise with some rather tortured language:
JAKE TAPPER, ABC NEWS: “I’m sorry, but what about keeping your promise to the American people that they won’t have to change plans even if employers –“
THE PRESIDENT: “Well, no, no, I mean – when I say if you have your plan and you like it and your doctor has a plan, or you have a doctor and you like your doctor that you don’t have to change plans, what I’m saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform.”
In an interview today on Good Morning America, the backtracking continued, with the President telling ABC’s Diane Sawyer, “I can’t pass a law that says, ‘I’m sorry, employers, you can never make changes to the health care plans that you provide your employees.’” In other words, the Administration has gone from “If you like your plan, you get to keep it” to “Well, we really can’t promise much of anything.” That’s “change” alright – but not exactly the type of change Americans were hoping for during this new era in Washington.
The reason this broken promise is especially painful for the Administration is because it underscores just the real fear Americans have about a government takeover of health care. Today’s Washington Post reports:
“Part of the reason so many are nervous about future changes is a fear they may lose what they currently have. More than eight in 10 said they are satisfied with the quality of care they now receive and relatively content with their own current expenses, and worry about future rising costs cuts across party lines and is amplified in the weak economy.”
No wonder Washington Democrats are doing anything and everything they can to NOT answer questions about how and why tens of millions of Americans will lose their current plan under Democratic versions of health care “reform.”
Let's start with these thieving teacher unions from yahoo news,, 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.
The 700 or so teachers can practice yoga, work on their novels, paint portraits of their colleagues _ pretty much anything but school work. They have summer vacation just like their classroom colleagues and enjoy weekends and holidays through the school year.
give your teenager a gun to take to middle school so he can show-and-tell with his friends and let me know how it goes.
What stupid way to think and to say.There are more kids ,who are not on crack that know gun safety. refuse to accept the flawed reasoning which suggests that the only way to "feel" safe from becoming murdered is by murdering the other person first.
So you ARE against self defence?..
And I already won this debate...In your mind
Military men and women are trained to follow orders not emotions. If they are told you are the a domestic terrorist and label you with treason you are toast.
Only if I work in a baby factory cause you know they only kill the innocent terrorist
Your a single issue troll go bback to fields of love canal.Or step up and defend the first porch monk on any one of the things I posted .Even your white master at ACORN would let you do that.Oh waitr that's right they'd tell you to change your name and try again. Sing me song while you shine
Yea Squeek Carter was ahero , ifyoulike gas line ups/rationing and hyper inflation . We'll be there soon dooooooon't chew worry.Reagan had balls.Kinda like the ones blackie licks.
Suck It TrollMore for the hardcore lefties to deny,ignore and blame somebody else.
Here is a few things Democrats are working on too.Gotta love them Haitians,Mexicans and Gut E-Verify,then it would be easier to get a drivers license
Why the hell WQOULD a guy from Hawaii care about secure borders.He lives on a crowded island , inside a special interest groups pocket,,
Senators introduce Legislation to Weaken Secure Driver's License Standards
Last week, Senator Daniel Akaka introduced legislation entitled PASS ID (S. 1261), a bill that would gut the REAL ID Act. Congress passed the REAL ID Act in the wake of the September 11th Terrorist Attacks in order to improve the security of U.S. issued driver's licenses. (Bill Text). Read the full article
Wow creep squiker your as bad as that dick head blackman likker.Your site referanced a fuccin story from October .Was probbably the first one dismissed . Why would I STFU nikker Your starting to implode.I want to help you grt there faster.HE HE HE stings a bit don't it .DICCHEAD
Pending Moderator Approval since Tuesday abou 4:15 PM Then call your representatives and congress and tell them to STOP THE SPENDING and do a real insurance and pharm reform.
NEW YORK TIMES & WASHINGTON POST COLUMNISTS PREDICT THAT THE DEMOCRATS’ TRILLION-DOLLAR HEALTH CARE PLAN WILL PILE MORE DEBT ON FUTURE GENERATIONS
Despite the Administration’s pledge that its government takeover of health care will be “deficit neutral” – meaning Democrats will either raise taxes or cut benefits by at least a trillion dollars – columns in both the New York Times and Washington Post today raised the possibility that the massive government takeover will add even more red ink to the already-staggering federal debt. That means that after the trillion-dollar “stimulus” bill that still isn’t creating jobs, the half-trillion omnibus with nearly 9,000 earmarks, and a budget that already includes trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, Democrats intend to borrow even more money from China and the Middle East and pass the bill to our kids and grandkids.
In an op-ed entitled, “Prognosis: Debt” Washington Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt writes:
“If you listened to President Obama addressing the American Medical Association last week, you might think that the primary purpose of health-care reform is, as he said, ‘to control the spiraling cost of health care in America…’”
“Yet extending coverage is overwhelmingly the focus of congressional attention so far, and it is quite likely that any legislation that emerges will create a hugely expensive health-care entitlement with no guarantee of the upward cost spiral being slowed.”
In a New York Times op-ed, “Tossing and Turning Over the Federal Deficit,” John Harwood raised similar concerns:
“Mr. Obama insists he will act to narrow the long-term deficit once the economy recovers. But neither the president nor his budget director can be sure that their principal strategies, which involve curbing rising health care costs, will work.”
On Friday, House Democratic Leaders introduced a “health care plan” without even an estimate of how much it will cost, let alone how they will pay for it, leaving the American people to wonder how serious Congressional Democrats are about keeping the President’s pledge. The American people don’t want a government takeover of health care that will raise taxes, ration care, and swell our already-staggering debt. Both parties need to work together to craft a plan that will control costs and fix what’s broken in American health care. House Republicans stand ready to do just that and have offered a better health care reform solution that will:
Make quality health care coverage affordable and accessible for every American, regardless of pre-existing health conditions. Protect Americans from being forced into a new government-run health care plan that would eliminate the health care coverage that more than 100 million Americans currently receive through their job. Let Americans who like their health care coverage keep it, and give all Americans the freedom to choose the health plan that best meets their needs. Ensure that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not government bureaucrats. Improve Americans’ lives through effective prevention, wellness, and disease management programs, while developing new treatments and cures for life-threatening diseases. Let’s be clear: America can’t afford the Democrats’ government takeover of health care. Under the Democratic plan, millions of Americans will lose their health coverage, their doctors, and their jobs. Americans deserve better, and Republicans are offering a better plan to reduce costs, expand access, and improve the quality of care. Will Democrats continue their go-it-alone approach and pass their costly government takeover of health care? Or will they finally work with Republicans on a bipartisan plan to make health care more affordable and accessible without burying future generations under mountains of debt we know they cannot afford?
Your just admitting the truth hurts bblackmanlikker.Your queen Wookie is as dirty as sh1t just like THE ONE.Birds of a feather are sh1t together. "Why would I consider giving her lies any credence over typical birfer lies?" She backs all her columns up with actual facts from actual sources and that bothers you to no end .Go find a rope.
Again,,Troll,, I mean blackmanlikker,, Why don't you focus your attention on a real scandel?,,,,like this one,, http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/20/americrooks-watch-meddling-michelle-obama-to-keynote-volunteerism-conference/
Instead of wasting your time stirring your own sh1tpot try defending this..
Blackmanlikker said - "I think". Good One.What ethics law was she found giulty of? Concerned about something? How about your beloved ACORN fraud staying hidden.You have no comment on the first Wookie's involvement? Oh wait there's more.TROLL.
Troll,, I mean blackmanlikker,, Why don't you focus your attention on a real scandel?,,,,like this one,, http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/20/americrooks-watch-meddling-michelle-obama-to-keynote-volunteerism-conference/
Instead of wasting your time stirring your own sh1tpot try defending this..
More from newsbusrers, NYT/CBS Stock Pro-Obamacare Poll With Obama Voters By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive) June 21, 2009 - 13:22 ET
Realizing that Barack Obama's healthcare initiative has hit some roadblocks in Congress, the good folks at CBS News and the New York Times figured they'd help it along by creating a new poll on the subject that WAY oversampled people who voted for Obama.
Although the then junior senator from Illinois received 53 percent of the votes last November, NYT/CBS surveyed almost twice as many Obama voters as McCain voters.
Before we get to the hilarious inner-workings of this truly disgraceful deception, here's how the Times reported its rigged findings Saturday (h/t Gateway Pundit via NBer slickwillie2001):
Story Continues Below Ad ↓
Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
The poll found that most Americans would be willing to pay higher taxes so everyone could have health insurance and that they said the government could do a better job of holding down health-care costs than the private sector.
Actually, as Bruce Kesler cleverly discovered, what the poll really found was that most Obama voters support substantial changes to healthcare and are willing to pay higher taxes for a government run system:
[A]ccording to the actual poll data, of the 73% of respondents who said they voted in 2008 only 34% voted for McCain and 66% for Obama.
As can be plainly seen on page 7 of the poll's data, only 73 percent of respondents divulged who they voted for last November. 48 percent said Obama, 25 percent McCain.
What this means is this poll surveyed 66 percent Obama supporters versus 34 percent McCain.
As the final tally last year was 53 percent to 46 percent, this poll WAY oversampled Obama voters.
And you wonder why the survey found so much support for Obamacare?
Honestly, stuff like this should be illegal and any news organization found doing it should be significantly fined.
In any industry you could name, such deception of the public would meet with very serious consequences.
Why are so-called news outlets allowed to get away with such obvious deceit with total impunity?
JUAN--"Make gun owner ship almost illegal and watch how crime rates, murders and domestic terrorist cases shrink".
Do you think most of this is done by licsenced gun owners?
JUAN-"America has the highest homicide rate of any first world country in the world. We also have the most lax gun laws of any first world country in the world".
Do you think if we enforced the laws we allready have ,It would be better? Kinda like immagration laws. Your libtards friends try to make it sound as if we are a lawless frontier when it comes to this.
Sarah Palin is a genuine ethics reformer, so they are trying to destroy her with frivolous ethics complaints. April 29, 2009 · 2 Comments Sarah is like Reagan, whose son described him as a guy “who always thinks the best of people” and can’t imagine that they would stab him in the back. Neither can Sarah Palin. She has spent less in personal expenses than her predecessors. She has managed the state budget more responsibly. She put an end to backroom deal-making with oil producers and initiated an open and transparent process for negotiating a fair return on Alaska’s resources and developing a natural gas pipeline that is not beholden to any monopoly interest. She wanted them to hold her accountable because she knew that she could meet any fair final accounting.
But she didn’t anticipate the base motives of vindictive evil people. Yes, it is evil to try to bankrupt a family, to smear their names, to chase an honest reformer out of office. Read More
Latest Complaint Deemed Outrageous
The Office of the Governor today expressed outrage that yet another baseless ethics complaint has been filed as part of an alarming new development in Alaska politics.
“These allegations are categorically false and ridiculous, and are an abuse of the Executive Ethics Act,” Nizich said.
“We are blessed to live in a democracy in which everyone has the right to free speech, to petition their lawmakers, to vote, to run for office and, yes, to allege misconduct by public officials,” said Bill McAllister, the governor’s communications director. “But obviously the purpose of this complaint and the previous ones is to distract the administration and the public, and to paralyze the Department of Law and the executive branch.
“There’s a core hypocrisy in nearly all of the ethics complaints brought against the governor, including this one. The ethics act clearly states that complaints, when filed, are to be confidential. Ms. Tompkins publicized her filing on several blogs, breaking the letter and the spirit of the law. While there are no penalties in the statute for this illegal behavior, Alaskans of all political persuasions should be appalled that the people who are alleging unethical behavior by the governor are repeatedly doing so unethically.”
The relevant section of the ethics act follows:
“Sec. 39.52.340. Confidentiality. (a) Except as provided in AS 39.52.335, before the initiation of formal proceedings under AS 39.52.350, the complaint and all other documents and information regarding an investigation conducted under this chapter or obtained by the attorney general during the investigation are confidential and not subject to inspection by the public. In the case of a complaint concerning the governor, lieutenant governor, or attorney general, all meetings of the personnel board concerning the complaint and investigation before the determination of probable cause are closed to the public. … The attorney general and all persons contacted during the course of an investigation shall maintain confidentiality regarding the existence of the investigation.” Keep reading
The liberals have more ethics problems than Sarah Palin ever has! We could name a list of ethic corrupt democrats but then it would be to long a list to post here!
The Democrats can not get over the fact that Sarah Palin really was more experience than Barack when it comes to being President! Barack has now shown in his first 100 days just how inexperience he is!
Palin cleared in ethics probe "The Alaska Personnel Board report, issued on the eve of the U.S. presidential election, ran contrary to findings from a legislative inquiry that concluded in October that Palin had abused the power of her office by pressuring subordinates to fire a state trooper involved in a feud with her family."
Keep trolling sh1t disturber,She's been cleared of ALL BS charges brought up by democratic nitwits .YOU Fear her and it shows.She is all democrats wish they had.
May as well add AMTRAC to the list.Was to be a temporary takeover then go private.Was'nt that about 35 years ago or so?.Good luck with the car companies being temporary.
Al Gore caught lying to Congress posted at 8:40 am on June 6, 2009 by Keemo [ Enviro-nitwits ] Send to a Friend | printer-friendly Al Gore’s venture capital firm has invested $6 million in a software company that stands to make billions of dollars from cap-and-trade regulation — further fueling controversy that Gore lied about his profiteering from cap-and-trade to Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee during testimony in April. Hara Software sells software to help track greenhouse gas emissions. The market for such software is now about $2.5 billion dollars in size, and is expected to grow by a factor of ten to $25 billion if cap-and-trade legislation is enacted, according to Hara CEO Amit Chatterjee. Kleiner Perkins, a venture capital firm in which Al Gore is a partner, invested in Hara just last year. Chatterjee told Reuters that, “This company would not have existed if Al Gore had not bought off on the idea.” Gore is also under fire for lying to Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) at the same congressional hearing about his relationship with Goldman Sachs. Operating as a stealth tax, cap-and-trade will make the vast majority of Americans poorer and less free — but Al Gore, Kleiner Perkins, Amit Chatterjee and Hara will be laughing all the way to the bank.
JUAN I live in western NY and know a good # of Canadians thruogh marriage and can tell you that many of them come here instead of wait for weeks to months for MRI's and simple surgeries.Those commercials you ignore on TV are very accurate.The link posted above is the real reason demtards are pushing so hard. You should search this site for my post Help a Liberal .
Realizing that Barack Obama's healthcare initiative has hit some roadblocks in Congress, the good folks at CBS News and the New York Times figured they'd help it along by creating a new poll on the subject that WAY oversampled people who voted for Obama.
Although the then junior senator from Illinois received 53 percent of the votes last November, NYT/CBS surveyed almost twice as many Obama voters as McCain voters.
Before we get to the hilarious inner-workings of this truly disgraceful deception, here's how the Times reported its rigged findings Saturday (h/t Gateway Pundit via NBer slickwillie2001):
Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
The poll found that most Americans would be willing to pay higher taxes so everyone could have health insurance and that they said the government could do a better job of holding down health-care costs than the private sector.
Actually, as Bruce Kezler cleverly discovered, what the poll really found was that most Obama voters support substantial changes to healthcare and are willing to pay higher taxes for a government run system:
[A]ccording to the actual poll data, of the 73% of respondents who said they voted in 2008 only 34% voted for McCain and 66% for Obama.
As can be plainly seen on page 7 of the poll's data, only 73 percent of respondents divulged who they voted for last November. 48 percent said Obama, 25 percent McCain.
What this means is this poll surveyed 66 percent Obama supporters versus 34 percent McCain.
As the final tally last year was 53 percent to 46 percent, this poll WAY oversampled Obama voters.
And you wonder why the survey found so much support for Obamacare?
Honestly, stuff like this should be illegal and any news organization found doing it should be significantly fined.
In any industry you could name, such deception of the public would meet with very serious consequences.
Why are so-called news outlets allowed to get away with such obvious deceit with total impunity?
TSIYA,,I'm sure you'll see this in the media.AL GORE IS WRONG,,Oh I mean nothin' to see here move along,, Detriment removed,,from yahoo news..
One contributor to global warming _ bigger than coal mines, landfills and sewage treatment plants _ is being left out of efforts by the Obama administration and House Democrats to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
Cow burps.
Belching from the nation's 170 million cattle, sheep and pigs produces about one-quarter of the methane released in the U.S. each year, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. That makes the hoofed critters the largest source of the heat-trapping gas.
In part because of an adept farm lobby campaign that equates government regulation with a cow tax, the gas that farm animals pass is exempt from legislation being considered by Congress to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
The EPA under President Barack Obama has said it has no plans to regulate the gas, even though the agency recently included methane among six greenhouse gases it believes are endangering human health and welfare.
We allready have immagration rules in the books.Used by millions ,for years to come here legally.Why not just enforce the laws we have,instead of changing them to accomodate millions who have allready broke them.I believe the dems are banking on these new voters to keep them in office.That's why dems harpooned the latino's that were appointed to the supreme court and to the AG by Bush,But now that THE ONE is proposing latina to the SCOTUS he is some kind of transformational wunderkind .Hypocrocy at its finest.
There are many problems with health insurance, but that doesn’t mean we should put the government in control. If it’s decided that health care should be paid for with tax dollars, then it’s up to the government to decide how that money should be spent. There’s only so much money to go around, so the inevitable result is rationing.
It’s just the law of supply and demand. Lowering prices increases demand. Lowering the price to nothing pushes demand through the roof. Author P.J. O’Rourke said it best: “If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it’s free.”
When health care is free, governments deal with all that increased demand by limiting what’s available.
The reality of “free” health care is that people wait. In the United Kingdom, one in eight patients waits more than a year for hospital treatment and the British government recently set its goal to keep wait times to less than 18 weeks that’s more than four months! In Canada, almost a million citizens are waiting for necessary surgery and more than a million Canadians can’t find a regular doctor. In the small town of Norwood, Ontario, a weekly drawing is held in which a townsperson wins the right to access the town’s one family doctor.
Governments ratchet down health-care costs in different ways. Doctors went on strike last year in Germany because their government’s system pays them less than they thought they deserved and forces them to work thousands of hours of unpaid overtime. In the United Kingdom, one hospital was inspired to save money money by not changing sheets daily. British papers report that instead of washing the linens, nurses were told to just turn the bedsheets over.
Government is less the answer to our health-care crisis than the problem. It was our government that helped to create the absurd system in which two out of three Americans get health insurance through their employer. In a country where four in 10 Americans change their job every year, this system makes little sense; it leaves people like Readling without coverage when they need it most.
The government also makes insurance expensive by mandating the medical services that policies must cover. Required services vary state by state and include massage therapy, pastoral counseling, acupuncture, hair prosthesis and dentures. Such mandates are a reason why an individual policy in New Jersey costs around $4,000 a year while a policy in Iowa costs only a third of that. Yet insurance regulations make it illegal for someone in New Jersey to buy a policy from out of state…
…The more people control the money they spend on their own health care, the more people shop around and the more providers compete to attract patients by lowering prices while improving quality. It’s putting individuals in control that could turn our health-care sector into the vibrant, competitive marketplace that we see in nearly every other area of our economy.
After all, it’s our body and our health. Shouldn’t we be in control of how our health-care dollars are spent?
Harvard’s Herzlinger said, “Who should decide whether you live or die? Do you want the government to decide? Do you want a health insurer to decide? Who’s gonna make that decision? Is it gonna be a government? Is it gonna be an insurer? Or is it gonna be you and me?”
Putting individuals in control of our health rather than our employers or the government is a better way to cure what ails America’s health system.
Europe has health care for all yet aren't bankrupted by it. Why? ---Maybe ,,rationing benefits like Canada.
Too many doctors give patients drugs which are bad for them and don't follow up on warnings, etc. There are drug deaths and seniors are losing their homes---Doctors prescribing drugs provided by pharm. companies that engage in kickbacks,gifts and other perks.
You could've warned me about the picture containing a Wookie. This must be a spoofer piece. I thought THE ONE was the best , brightest , most loyal , honest , most transformational , intelligent , hippist and omnicient god to grace the iniverse with his presence.
These are the five simple words that every AMERICAN and officeholder should be repeating often and loudly.
It’s about the fraud. It’s about the coordinated corruption. It’s about the effect on housing, the economy, and the entire electoral landscape.
Does the GOP get it yet? At least one Republican candidate does.
Kris Kobach, the former Bush administration national security/immigration enforcement official and constitutional lawyer, announced that he will run for Kansas Secretary of State last week. His prime motivation: stopping the ACORN racket:
Kris Kobach’s desire to be Kansas Secretary of State can be summed up in one word:
“ACORN,” he told a modest audience that gathered Thursday for lunch at Salina’s Western Sizzlin restaurant.
Salina is one of eight cities Kobach, who until recently was chairman of the Kansas Republican Party, is visiting to announce his desire to be secretary of state.
ACORN — the Association of Corrupt Organizations for Retarded Nucklrheads — is an aggressive get-out-the-vote for only democrats that represents low- and moderate-income people nationally. “Since 1970, ACORN has been building community organizations that are committed to social and economic justice,” its Web site says.
Kobach describes it differently.
“ACORN is a criminal enterprise,” he said Thursday.
He said 12 ACORN workers in Missouri were convicted of violating voter laws in connection with 2006 elections.
Voter fraud was the central theme of Kobach’s campaign stop. He warned of the “rise of ACORN” and said it was only after the November election that he learned ACORN has three offices in Kansas.
“We didn’t find out until after the election how busy they have been in Kansas,” he said.
ACORN’s Web site lists offices in Kansas City, Topeka and Wichita. None of the telephone numbers listed works, nor do the e-mail addresses.How odd?
Kobach said he plans to push for a photo identification law, which would require voters to present an approved photo ID before they vote. He also wants to require that people prove they are citizens before they are allowed to register to vote. We need a Kris Kobach in every state in the country.
So socialization of the massaes is the answer? Rationing ? Why do canadiens come here for treatment ?Why do Brits wait in long lines at the emergency room?Homeless addicted people need a hand up ,not a hand out.
I don't know research her record of activity and like I said ,She seemed like a rational thinker.I'm going back to Molsons and whatch the race. HAPPY FATHERS DAY !!
"I believe the government needs to start having income and stepping into big business." I think Obama likes this part of the plan.As for the rest of us,,,,Not so much.
One contributor to global warming _ bigger than coal mines, landfills and sewage treatment plants _ is being left out of efforts by the Obama administration and House Democrats to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
Cow burps.
Belching from the nation's 170 million cattle, sheep and pigs produces about one-quarter of the methane released in the U.S. each year, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. That makes the hoofed critters the largest source of the heat-trapping gas.
In part because of an adept farm lobby campaign that equates government regulation with a cow tax, the gas that farm animals pass is exempt from legislation being considered by Congress to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
The EPA under President Barack Obama has said it has no plans to regulate the gas, even though the agency recently included methane among six greenhouse gases it believes are endangering human health and welfare.
Yes and we could build great big super green stables in every state in every state to hold all the unicorns.Do they produce methane that could be a detriment.
Don't we do that now? Like after the tsunami in Asia .I remember locals rushing to get boxxes of food off our helicopters wearing Osama Bin Lanid T-shirts.You really think that helped us look better to islamoradicals? I don't.Keep em here and help our own,Katrina ,Earthquakes,No.Dakota flood.OH YEA they could wear gilley suits and whatch our border thruogh the cross hairs on thier scopes.
Awesome! The best thing about it is that lefties will actually think it’s a fitting, truthful tribute to Ogabehttp: //hotair.com/archives/2009/06/20/new-jibjab-barack-obama-superhero/
We were warned about the tax and spend democrats before the election.I know not the republicans are not all about cutting taxxes either ,but they sure as hell are lot more conservative when it comes to spending other peoples money..Five times the amount ALL 43 previous administrations COMBINED .That is a pretty good platform for 2010 .Unfortunatley they're not done yet.
Gotta love michellemalkin.com from todays post,check it out ,Americore to Waulpin firing,
Well, well, well.
Michelle, Michelle, Michelle.
Guess where the First Lady will be on Monday?
Why, she’ll be delivering the keynote address at the 2009 National Conference on Volunteering and Service in San Francisco.
And who is co-sponsoring the conference?
Why, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS)!
Yes, that’s the same CNCS that is the parent organization of AmeriCorps.
It’s the same CNCS that last year suspended Sacramento mayor/Obama crony Kevin Johnson from receiving federal funds after then-inspector general Gerald Walpin blew the whistle on massive fraud and abuse of AmeriCorps dollars for personal and political gain.
It’s the same CNCS that then sat by and meekly watched Team Obama and the U.S. Attorney in Sacramento railroad Walpin after the November 2008 election for doing his damned job.
And now, there is no honest, independent watchdog to raise questions on behalf of taxpayers as the Obama political machine takes over the national service juggernaut. How…convenient.
By the way: The First Lady’s former chief of staff, Jackie Norris, starts her new job as “senior adviser” (translation: Michelle O’s mole) at CNCS on Monday. And from the AmeriCorps press release published yesterday:
“The First Lady has made service and volunteering a life calling, and her leadership is helping to inspire a whole new generation of Americans who are making service a part of their daily lives,” said Nicola Goren, Acting CEO of the Corporation for National and Community Service. “Her participation demonstrates the high priority the White House has placed on service as a way to help in our nation’s recovery.”
“First Lady Michelle Obama knows first-hand the power of service to transform lives and communities,” said Michelle Nunn, CEO of the Points of Light Institute and co-founder of HandsOn Network. “We are thrilled that she chose our national conference as the platform to launch United We Serve. She has made service a centerpiece of her agenda, and her appearance will add a burst of excitement and a new significance to this gathering of service leaders as well as our larger efforts to usher in a new era of service.”
I first raised questions about the First Lady’s meddling into the AmeriCrooks mess on June 12 after following up on little-noticed reports in the niche publication Youth Today detailing Mrs. Obama’s active role and interest in staffing the top management at CNCS. As I noted last week:
Mrs. Obama’s interest is more than passing. She ran the AmeriCorps-funded non-profit Public Allies in Chicago from 1993-1996 and served on its national board until 2001. Like so many of the AmeriCorps recipients investigated by the inspector general’s office over the years, Public Allies was found to have violated basic eligibility and compliance rules. A January 2007 audit reported that the group lacked internal controls verifying that recipients who received education grants and living allowances were legal citizens or permanent residents as required by law. Michelle Obama’s installation as the face and voice of the government volunteerism boondoggle only deepens suspicions about the role she and her staff may have played in Walpin’s sacking. So does her past exploitation of the “community service” mantle to reward Chicago politicos (see “The Obama horror story you won’t hear”).
***
You know who else was supposed to speak at the CNCS conference next week?
The supposedly dazed and confused Gerald Walpin.
Via WashTimes (hat tip - Quin Hilyer):
On Tuesday June 9, just one day before the White House first asked him to step down, the agency asked him to make a speech on June 23 in San Francisco to a conference of some 2,000 staff members and grantees. The invitation, he said, was delivered by Gretchen Van De Veer, director of the Office of Leadership Development and Training at the Corporation for National and Community Service.
“They begged me to come,” he said. “Why would they do that if they thought I am incapacitated?” Michelle? Anyone?
***
Will the liberal media lapdogs in San Francisco ask tough questions — or will they genuflect a la the Washington Post’s Robin Givan, who gushed last week that “so many eye her with awe and disbelief.”
Will anyone press the First Lady on the financial scandal — or will we get more drool-covered coverage of her bare arms?
Well, here’s the San Francisco Chronicle’s Carla Marinucci previewing the “frenzy” over Michelle Obama’s upcoming visit:
First Lady Michelle Obama is kicking off a White House push to underscore the importance of volunteerism in San Francisco on Monday — a move that will have political figures here elbowing each other to get in the frame with her.
But step aside, folks, it’s California First Lady Maria Shriver who snags that honor before all. Volunteerism has long been her leading issue, and she’s going to be alongside First Lady Michelle for the day in the starring role.
…”During this summer, the president is renewing his call to all Americans to identify needs in their communities, engage in meaningful service to create change — and stay engaged with these projects long after September,” says the Obama Administration press release, which urges Americans to hit the website of the Corporation for National and Community Service for ideas on where to volunteer.
But having Michelle Obama on board in San Francisco to make the case is a coup, bigtime, for Shriver and California; it not only ensures that armies of TV cameras will be focusing on state and local efforts, but brings out an adoring public — and that horde of local elected officials to lend support (and get in the picture). Despite the MSM protectionism, this scandal is not going away.
I have a terrific volunteerism project: Volunteer to do the job the obsequious professional journalists won’t do. There will be national service events involving Team Obama members on Monday all over the country. Volunteer to serve your country by showing up and asking why Dear Leader undermined the IG protection law he helped co-sponsor in cutting Walpin loose.
It could happen,,,right? TEHRAN, Iran or Washington DC – Police beat protesters and fired tear gas and water cannons at thousands who rallied Saturday in open defiance of Iran's clerical/Obama socialist government, sharply escalating the most serious internal conflict since the 1979 Islamic Revolution/American Revolution.
Witnesses described fierce clashes after some 3,000/3000,000 protesters, many wearing black, chanted "Death to the dictator!" and "Death to dictatorship!" near Revolution Square/Washington Monument in downtown Tehran/Washington. Police/ACORN fired tear gas, water cannons and guns but it was not clear if they were firing live ammunition.
Some protesters/American Freedom Fighters appeared to be fighting back, setting fire to militia members' motorcycles, witnesses said. There were no immediate confirmed reports of fatalities and the head of Iran's/Obama's police said his men had been ordered to act with restraint.
"We acted with leniency but I think from today on, we should resume my/law and confront more seriously," General Esmaeil Ahmadi Moghadam/Brian Williams said on state television. "The events have become exhausting, bothersome and intolerable. I want them to take the police/ACORN cautions seriously because we will definitely show a serious confrontation against those who violate rules."
Police and ACORN militia were blocking protesters from gathering on the main thoroughfare running east from Revolution Square/White House to Freedom Square/Washington Monument, the witnesses said.
A massive rally in Freedom Square/Washington Monument Monday set off three consecutive days of protests demanding the government cancel and rerun June 12 elections that ended with a declaration of overwhelming victory for hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad/Barrack Hussien Obama. Reformist presidential candidate (anybody other then THE ONE) says he/she won and Ahmadinejad/Obama stole the election through widespread fraud.
The lieral progressive mindset is pervasive evercresingly in small cities too.I live on the outskirts,not far enough away from the soon to be bankrupt city of Buffalo.All black democratic and going down the tubes fast.Thier philosophy of handouts is how they keep getting elected.We've got our first republican county executive in years making decisions and pushing for a bussinesslike approach to spending and he recieves NOTHING but resistance.
Hey Sandra ,,send a note to thelafluer@yahoo.com That is my fantasy sports address easily dropped if it gets loade with junk.I'd like to stay connected with like minded people after this site closes.
This topic was picked because it's old and has no replies.So the junk should bbe minimal.
"For a long time now, there's been too much secrecy in this city... That era is now over. Starting today, every agency and department should know that this administration stands on the side not of those who seek to withhold information but those who seek to make it known." - Barack Obama, Jan 21, 2009
Regardless of whom they target with their massive powers, they are bound by the constitution.
It is the only inhibition upon them. Never unleash a monster the size of our government to act outside the constraints in the constitution.
Bound by the constitution,against foriegn enemies who don't give a rats ass about it?
Act against the constraints? I thought the constitution was meant to constrain the government against it's people.The American peolple.On American soil. Go back to Holders office.
ARROGANCE.That's why she did it.You'd think she'd know that she serves at the descretion of the people and Brigadier Generals serve at the descretion of the prez.Even this one.For another 3 1/2 years.
You can still get your words out by posting them in a comment section .or,,,Click on the small writing uder the SUBSCRIBE button on the left of the page and see if your post is being held up till moderated.
Hey man send a note to thelafluer@yahoo.com It's my fantasy hockey address and I can delete if I need too.I send it on this thread cause I see there's no traffic here.
Creepsneaker You’re still a lying fool as pointed out previously by Big Rooster I try to not respond to stupid people when I drink,,Molson Export ,better then the good stuff. No dodging “evolving world view”-Socialism has never worked.There is no nuance here ,either you are free to fail or you work in collective . “The person who cannot admit he's wrong learns nothing, and remains ignorant for his whole life” Good observation .see above “To overcome ignorance we must be open minded and share ideas with those who are different from us. Sharing requires equality” This sounds like From each according to their ablilty ,to each according to their need Commie. “So I think you should have included listening and keeping an open mind among the tactics you've suggested for changing liberal minds”. Good advice,use it I've noticed that delusions of superiority and inflexible minds go together. The delusion of superiority is what the inflexible person really wants, not a discussion or a chance to learn and share. If the delusional finds he is incorrect, he'll lose his delusion of superiority. He can't afford to do that-Once again good advice ,use it. But I disagree about unemployment. I don't see how I can be wrong on this one.May as well go way back and use unenjoyment rates from FDR and his push towards socialism in the great depression .Forced unionism is not good and stifles ability to create wealth fotr the common folk. Over the years I've become convinced that right wing conservatives can't accept facts that conflict with their ideology- You should try getting off the campus for a while and work in the real world where people gain real world experience.
creeksneakers2 7 minutes ago Your fears are not well founded. Relax. Listen to the other side of things--And I'll be right behind you the whole time with my hands on your hips forkin you hard,American.
Check out numbersusa and follow the congress link and see who is up for re-election. I would also like to apologize to the slave owners who were dead before my family came to America,for the grave injustices imparted on them by thier ancesters.
What journalist' ? this is Amewrica,do you think the media is in the bag with THE ONE and the democrats?Nope nothin to see here.Move Along.Just like the papers who left out the quotre from THEONE about countries that are happy with nationalized healthcare.That's right they skipped that part of his speech to the AMA.Then when the propoganda minister was asked,,,he got all tongue tied.
Outgunned? As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama deliberately and repeatedly LIED to America's 90 million gun owners across the country, when he insisted that he would NOT try to take away anyone's firearms.
Image Blocked Now, Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder is saying that the president will seek to reinstate the ban on semi-automatic firearms -- which means he KNEW he was lying to the nation, because his own website touted his plan to revive the gun ban and make it permanent!
We warned America that Obama's "support" for the Second Amendment was empty rhetoric -- and now Holder's disclosure has confirmed it. Obama was lying, and now gun rights may be dying.
Several times on the campaign trail, Obama told voters, "I'm not going to take your guns away." He said it at rallies in Duryea, Pennsylvania, and in Boise, Idaho. He also told a news conference that "Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear... I think people can take me at my word."
One thing is now obvious: We shouldn't take Obama's word, even if he says it rains a lot in Seattle. Apparently, law-abiding gun owners have nothing to fear... UNLESS they own sport-utility rifles, semiautomatic shotguns, handguns and any other firearm that Obama and his anti-gun Attorney General don't like.
Thanks to Eric Holder -- who has been far more honest than his boss about his anti-gun philosophy -- it is now clear that the new president doesn't support the Second Amendment at all. American gun owners should remind Democrats in Congress that the Second Amendment means what it says, especially when the president doesn't.
TELL CONGRESS TO REJECT ALL BANS ON GUNS AND GUN SHOWS: SEND YOUR FAXES NOW!
It doesn't stop there! Senators Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Jack Reed (D-RI) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) have joined Paul Helmke, President of the "Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence," along with victims and family members of the Virginia Tech tragedy, to introduce legislation to ELIMINATE the private transfers of firearms and close the nation's "gun show loophole."
You read that right. Did you know that YOU are considered "irrational" if you support private gun sales? Sen. Lautenberg says so! "There is no rational reason to oppose closing the loophole. The reason it's still not closed is simple: the continuing power of the special interest gun lobby in Washington." BUT, not only are YOU irrational for supporting private gun sales -- they also must think you're an IDIOT because, with NO supporting evidence, Lautenberg fell back to the disproven old "90% Obama Mexican Gun" Lie: "Thirty percent of the guns that go to Mexico are bought at gun shows. We don't know whether they're bought from unlicensed dealers, but logic would say let's have some idea who it is that bought those guns and what their intentions might be." Independence Institute researcher David Kopel has written about the so-called "gun show loophole," concluding that it is a myth: "Despite what some media commentators have claimed, if a dealer sells a gun from a storefront, from a room in his home or from a table at a gun show, the rules are exactly the same: he can get authorization from the FBI for the sale only after the FBI runs its 'instant' background check." Image Blocked Even the Bureau of Justice Statistics report entitled "Firearms Use by Offenders" found that less than one percent -- 0.7%, to be exact -- of guns used in crimes originated at gun shows.
None of this matters to the Gun Grabbers -- New York's Democrat Senators Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand have now proposed that computerized background checks be retained, creating a de facto gun registration system; and Lautenberg's bill proposes private transactions be added to this registration system!
This is an OUTRAGEOUS violation of the Second Amendment!
TELL CONGRESS TO REJECT ALL BANS ON GUNS AND GUN SHOWS: SEND YOUR FAXES NOW!
Why are Obama, Lautenberg, and other liberals in Congress doing this?
Motives for eliminating gun shows are twofold:
First, gun shows are a powerful tool in defeating gun control legislation. Grassroots activism burns like a brushfire when Second Amendment supporters gather in one place!
Second, If you can eradicate the gun show, you are a HUGE step closer to eradicating the pro-gun culture altogether.
Lautenberg and the Gun Grabbers in the Senate are also lying about the Virginia Tech gunman who had a background check at a legal gun store, just so they can try to justify themselves. There were abundant warning signs that he posed a serious threat to the campus. Yet he was running loose because the gun check system failed.
It's obvious that the Anti-Gun Coalitions are trying to use tragic events to destroy gun shows and the right of all Americans to keep and bear arms to protect themselves under the law. They are attacking and hiding behind an "Anti-Terrorist" Agenda while getting political and financial support from: George Soros, a Hungarian-born billionaire who is bank rolling efforts with his checkbook and spending more that $100 million to destroy the Constitution.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (CA), who admitted that "guns would be banned and confiscated" if she could have her way.
The United Nations, which actively pushes globalism seeking to disarm all Americans. We must Stop the Anti-Gun Coalition and get ready for the biggest gun control fight of the year from coast to coast. We can not do that without your support.
TELL CONGRESS TO REJECT ALL BANS ON GUNS AND GUN SHOWS: SEND YOUR FAXES NOW!
All that seems to be on the minds of the Anti-Gun Senators and at the offices of gun control extremists is figuring out how to exploit tragedy to erode and eventually destroy the right, and the means, of self-defense.
Like all other threats against our freedoms, we must rise and defeat these attempts by Obama and his followers -- we must slap these bills down hard.
Image Blocked Sens. Dick Durbin (D-IL), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Charles Schumer (D-NY), John Kerry (D-MA), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Carl Levin (D-MI), Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) cosponsor the current Senate legislation. And Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is working to make sure that all of the anti-gun legislation passes over on the House of Representatives side.
In order to stop Schumer, Kerry and Kennedy and their fellow gun-grabbers, we need to let Congress know with tens of thousands of faxes telling them to leave guns alone.
We need Americans like YOU who understand what our Founding Fathers envisioned for our nation... and who are willing to fight to defend our Constitution and for what it stands.
So please, help the Citizens Committee defeat those who wish to gut and trash the United States Constitution.
Help us flood the U.S. Congress with a sea of FAXES big enough to drown each and every Congressman willing to vote away the Second Amendment. Please, SELECT HERE NOW to send Blast Faxes to EVERY SINGLE MEMBER OF CONGRESS, telling them to REJECT all bans on guns and gun shows TODAY!
Sincerely, Image Blocked Alan Gottlieb, Chairman Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
P.S. Keep calling your Senators today, toll free numbers include 1-877-851-6437 and 1-866-220-0044, or call the regular number at 1-202-225-3121 AND REGISTER YOUR OUTRAGE at ongoing efforts to take guns away!
CALL President Obama, 1-202-456-1111 and 1-202-456-1414, expressing your disdain and ABSOLUTE REJECTION of all GUN BANS.
DO NOT BE SILENCED - MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD!
NOTE: We need TENS OF THOUSANDS of faxes and PHONE CALLS and EMAILS delivered to ALL Senators right away!
For our projects to be successful, we also must count on the voluntary financial support from individuals like you who care.
Your contribution of $20 or $25 is urgently needed today.
Your donation for just $10 will help so much. If you can afford to send $50 or $100 or more it would truly be a godsend.
Remember, protecting our freedom is not inexpensive.
But then again, it's impossible to put a price tag on freedom.
PLEASE MAKE YOUR BEST CONTRIBUTION NOW: DONATE ONLINE!
Together, we can preserve the Constitutional rights our Founding Fathers intended our people to have forever.
If you prefer to donate by check, please mail to: The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms 12500 NE Tenth Place Dept Code 2585 Bellevue, Washington 98004
Help us flood the U.S. Congress with a sea of FAXES big enough to drown each and every Congressman willing to vote away the Second Amendment. Please send YOUR Blast Faxes to EVERY SINGLE MEMBER OF CONGRESS, telling them to REJECT all bans on guns and gun shows TODAY!
TELL CONGRESS TO REJECT ALL BANS ON GUNS AND GUN SHOWS: SEND YOUR FAXES NOW!
With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation's premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States. The Citizens Committee can be reached by phone at (425) 454-4911, on the Internet at www.ccrkba.org or by email to InformationRequest@ccrkba.org
Sally ,,you're not going to convince a troll .Creep sqeaker has been shown to be a hardcore leftist.I HOWEVER am in total agreement with you,as are a growing number of your fellow Americans.THat national912coalition is getting to be more and more valuable. Go there and keep strong. these idiots need us.
I think a way to keep them off my porch would be Fly the flag.They're afraid of that .check out this...no porn ,sorry.WASHINGTON, D.C. – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) today released a new web video questioning whether the Obama Administration is keeping the President’s promise not to afford terrorists the same rights as Americans under Miranda v. Arizona. The video highlights President Obama’s recent statement that terrorists should not be given Miranda rights or “be treated like the shoplifter down the block.” Since that statement, however, media reports indicate that the Obama Justice Department has begun reading terrorists Miranda rights as part of its “Global Justice Initiative.” Rogers states flatly in the video: “As a former FBI agent I want to tell you that this is crazy.”
Boehner released the following statement:
“Terrorists who want to kill Americans and destroy our way of life should not be granted the same rights as American citizens. Mike Rogers deserves great credit for his leadership on this issue and his steadfast support our troops and intelligence professionals who dedicate their lives to keeping America safe.”
Full video and script follow:
WASHINGTON, D.C. – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) today released a new web video questioning whether the Obama Administration is keeping the President’s promise not to afford terrorists the same rights as Americans under Miranda v. Arizona. The video highlights President Obama’s recent statement that terrorists should not be given Miranda rights or “be treated like the shoplifter down the block.” Since that statement, however, media reports indicate that the Obama Justice Department has begun reading terrorists Miranda rights as part of its “Global Justice Initiative.” Rogers states flatly in the video: “As a former FBI agent I want to tell you that this is crazy.”
Boehner released the following statement:
“Terrorists who want to kill Americans and destroy our way of life should not be granted the same rights as American citizens. Mike Rogers deserves great credit for his leadership on this issue and his steadfast support our troops and intelligence professionals who dedicate their lives to keeping America safe.”
When they removed language to defund the ACORN scam ,some members showed up in the middle of the night to vote on it.If that is not BS I don't know what is.That kind of nonrepresentation is what's got to stop. A sham like speedreading bills into the congressional record is anothter example of the games Democreeps play.Elections have consequences and they know that 2010 will put an end to they're majority so they'll need to ram as much of thier progressive agenda through now.HOPEFULLY it can be reversed or at LEAST muted after they're out.
Another good wesite with OUR dissedant viewsa .Oblabla needs these voters to continue his repromming.They'll be sneaking this sh1t in ,in the middle of the night just like thier approving more funding for ACORN.Inthe middle of the night with some of your representatives showing up tp vote in shorts and baseball caps.IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT.
Nope ,we sure won't hear about this on the state media.That's why they'll be going aftyer internet contaent soon in the form of regulation"for the children"
I voted this down.I prefer to go to the polling place and pull the lever myself in person.There are too many instances of hackers accessing so called sensitive info on the net. Somebody here posted a recommendation to go back (nationaly) to the paper ballot that I would prefer.Stay on campus Doctor and keep doing governmentaly funded research.
See the white house may be coming around. WHITE HOUSE ADMITS AMERICANS WILL BE FORCED OUT OF THEIR CURRENT HEALTH CARE PLANS
ASSOCIATED PRESS: “WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS SUGGEST THE PRESIDENT’S RHETORIC SHOULDN’T BE TAKEN LITERALLY”
June 19, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has already made clear that millions of Americans would be forced to give up the health coverage they currently have under the Democrats’ plan. Today, the White House CONFIRMED this is true.
President Obama and congressional Democrats have made repeated promises that the American people “can keep their current health care coverage if they like it.” But an Associated Press story this morning reports that White House officials admitted that isn’t true:
“White House officials suggest the president’s rhetoric shouldn’t be taken literally …”
Dallas Salisbury, head of the Employee Benefit Research Institute, called Obama's promise “an aspirational statement” in the same story. Middle-class families have every right to be concerned about losing their health care, and the facts show that the Democrats’ government takeover of health care will force millions out of their current health plan. House Republicans have a better solution, and our plan ensures that all Americans who like their health care coverage can actually keep it. The plan outlined by the House GOP Health Care Reform Solutions Group, led by Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO), is designed to:
Make quality health care coverage affordable and accessible for every American, regardless of pre-existing health conditions. Protect Americans from being forced into a new government-run health care plan that would eliminate the health care coverage that more than 100 million Americans currently receive through their job. Let Americans who like their health care coverage keep it, and give all Americans the freedom to choose the health plan that best meets their needs. Ensure that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not government bureaucrats. Improve Americans’ lives through effective prevention, wellness, and disease management programs, while developing new treatments and cures for life-threatening diseases. For information on the House GOP health care reform proposal, visit the House GOP Health Care Solutions Group website HERE. For more information on the Democrats’ government takeover of health care, visit http://healthcare.gopleader.gov.
Moderator and to some degree Blackmanlikker need to have this read to them.
The following steps are to be enacted by the recovering Obama supporter with the assistance of a compassionate conservative: 1. Establish honesty in admitting failure – this is very difficult thing for a liberal. Ones that invested so much time, effort and money in the Obama campaign will find it difficult to admit that their dedication was misguided. Conservatives must allow the recovering Obamaniac to vent about why they felt their original love for Him didn’t turn out to be the flowering garden of love and fairness they envisioned. Like all jilted former admirers, recovering supporters will feel foolish, so it is important to not bring further embarrassment upon them. Just admitting the failure is progress enough for step one. 2. Show faith in a higher power – Recovering Obama supporters have an aversion to discussing faith issues, so this is another difficult step. Avoid telling the former Obama worshiper the importance of believing in God, but focus instead on the fact that Obama turned out not to be God. Recovering from liberalism frequently requires admission that there might actually be a kind and loving God and this by itself is a huge leap. Once again “baby steps” are the objective. Just getting the recovering Obama supporter to admit that Obama is not God might be all the progress one can make.
3. Assist in surrender of control – Obama supporters at one time believed that government control of industry and finance would create a more fair and just society. Instead, it created unemployment and soon-to-come inflation. Still, a recovering Obamniac does not at his core, believe in freedom. Freedom of action, speech and especially of others to own firearms is terrifying to a liberal. Take the recovering Obama supporter to coffee and explain that freedom is the right to choose between a non-fat vanilla latte and a mocha cappuccino. The choice is not threatening. It also isn’t threatening that the guy in front of you ordered a drink he despises. The assisting conservative can then carry the conversation on to the issue of free markets. Without surrendering to a free market, there can be no prosperity – or at least the ability to choose what one orders at Starbucks. 4. Help in taking a personal moral inventory – Liberals absolutely hate this. They would much rather take someone else’s moral inventory and point out the errors of someone else’s ways. Pointing out others’ faults is a trait Democrats cultivate in their followers. Looking for failures within themselves is foreign and threatening. The conservative must be patient and stick to the evidence in discussing topics. A good start is to initiate a conversation regarding why the inevitable inflation next year will be Obama’s cruel tax on the middle class. Obama supporters will connect with the word ‘cruel’ as they are concerned about the future of America’s middle class. When evidence mounts that the conservative position has proven correct, the Obama-type may become frustrated and emotional. Conservatives must continue to bring up factual evidence. Unless the Obamican is brain-dead, this tactic will eventually pay off.
5. Encourage admission that the previously held belief was incorrect – Recovering Obama supporters wrestle mightily with this step. Admission that any previously held belief was incorrect is taken in most liberal minds as a personal defeat. Politics with Democrats is personal. Admission of poor judgment is not something they would choose to make public. Completion of this step might involve admitting to the conservative that he/she ‘may’ have been wrong. A liberal using the word ‘may’ in this context must be read as a definite admission of the wrong. Democrats never admit an error. 6. Help recovering Obama supporter accept defects in judgment – This is where it really gets difficult. Admitting a single error is difficult enough. Admission to a defective judgmental process is entirely different. Field evidence must be used as it was in Step 3, only this time; it is a much more lengthy discussion. A recommended scheme is to discuss the Carter years and why they led to double digit unemployment, interest rates and inflation. Follow this with a discussion on how Reagan was the President to defeat LBJ’s inflationary cycle and restore economic growth, as well as laying the groundwork for defeating the Soviet Union. This is a detailed discussion, so it will be difficult to hold the liberal’s attention for that long. 7. Help restore humility – During the campaign, Obama supporters were anything but humble in their wild support for a community organizer. Looking back, they completely embarrassed themselves. The assisting conservative should point out that it was easy to follow along with such a dynamic speaker and campaigner, but the real measure of maturity is to learn from the experience. Liberals refer to every mistake as a ‘learning experience.’ 8. Establish a willingness to make amends – Gaining an Obama supporter’s willingness to vote for someone other than a Democrat is challenging. Simply point out that since Obama is in office damaging the country for perhaps an entire generation, swift and significant counteraction will be necessary to prevent prolonged economic disaster. After all, a liberal doesn’t want to be blamed for anything, especially while waiting to cash the unemployment check.
9. Assist the Obamican in giving and finding forgiveness – Liberals actually like forgiving others. They aren’t quite so fond of asking forgiveness for themselves. Conservatives must coax this out into the open by making the sting of Obamanomics personal. If the Obama supporter is currently unemployed, this should be easy. 10. Help recovering supporter maintain his progress – Recovering Obama supporters will burn up an incredible amount of personal energy trying to understand why His policies failed. Usually, Democrats fall back on the tried and true method of blaming others. However, with no Republican presence in Congress, Democrats have full responsibility for the condition of the country and won’t be able to logically blame someone else. Encouraging the former Obama worshiper to continue exploring free markets and conservative thought is a continuous effort. 11. Help develop an action plan – Democrats love action plans. They love to make them and assign the difficult actions (like paying taxes) to others. That way they can blame others when the effort produces unintended consequences. Conservatives can get past this by involving the former Obamaniac in regular discussions of inflation, money supply theory and other detailed conservative principles. Recovering Obama supporters will need this level of detail to defend themselves when they go to their weekly book club meeting. 12. Encourage recovering lefty to follow through on action plan – The Obama supporter that realizes he has been hoodwinked into voting for a snake oil salesman will still have to confront those that still consume the Obama Kool-Aid. Making her/his newfound understanding of conservative principles public will be terrifying at first. Conservatives can help by asking probing questions in public. Questions such as: ‘why will there be rapid inflation in 2010?’ will allow the recovering Obamniac to look knowledgeable among his peers. It may also generate an entirely new crop of liberals who wish to throw off the bounds of Obama worship. The conservative assistant may quickly find many in need of his services
That's true he once said that enemy combatants are not ,,constricted,, by OUR constitution. ANYBODY else would see the constitution as restricting government and ensuring freedom for WE THE PEOPLE.
Early in his presidency, Barack Obama had a grace period when the public saw the nation's problems as ones he inherited, but two new polls -- by New York Times/CBS News and Wall Street Journal/NBC News - make clear that there are rising concerns about his policies
The biggest public concern is over the size of the deficit being run up by Obama's economic recovery proposals and how much more it will rise if his plan to overhaul health care and increase coverage for uninsured Americans is enacted. But there is also discomfort about his intervention in the auto industry and taking a big government stake in ownership of General Motors. And voters also disagree with Obama on closing Guantánamo.
On these issues, the new polls track with surveys done by Gallup. Gallup found strong job approval ratings for Obama in a late May poll but disapproval of his handling of the federal deficit and controlling federal spending. A Gallup poll conducted June 9-10 found a majority disapproving of the government's investing in GM. Gallup said that voters opposed closing Guantánamo by more than a 2-to-1 margin. To me, this is reminiscent of some relationships I've seen come and go. It starts with a whirlwind romance. The couple can't get enough of each other. His friends point out some of her rather obvious glaring flaws, but she's fresh, she's new, she's great in bed -- and in his eyes, she can do no wrong. (Stage 1)
After a surprisingly short period of time, he proposes. His friends are dismayed, but they can't really talk to him about it. If they suggest that perhaps they should slow things down and get to know each other a little better, he says he sees no need to wait. If they try to point out her flaws, he gets mad. There's really nothing they can say that will change his mind. Soon, they're married. (Stage 2)
After the marriage, they move in together and even though things still seem pretty good, he can finally see some of the flaws his friends pointed out. She gets in foul moods. She nags. She gets into fights with his parents. She seems flighty. She's not very supportive. She's a drama queen. Wow, how did he miss all these things? (Stage 3)
A few months in, he realizes these are not one time things, they're patterns of behavior and he starts to have doubts, although he really can't bear to talk about them. If you ask him basic questions like -- "Do you enjoy spending time around her? Do you think your wife respects you? Is your wife your best friend? Are you ready to have children? Are you having as much fun as you were six months ago?" -- the answer to every question is, "no." But, if you were to ask him -- "Do you still love your wife? Would you do it all over again? Are you happy to be married?" -- he'd say "yes" to every question.
Why?
Because he's hoping things will change. Because he can't bear to admit his friends were right. Because it would make him feel petty to say, just a few months into his marriage, that he made a bad choice. Because he just can't admit that he blew one of the biggest decisions of his life. (Stage 4)
Fast forward to 12-24 months after the couple is married and things are very different. They yell at each other all the time. He's constantly upset. He's asking his friends privately if they think he should get divorced. He's utterly miserable. (Stage 5)
Then eventually, they get divorced, and it's, "I don't know what I saw in her. I don't know what I was thinking. That was the biggest mistake of my life." (Stage 6)
Today, most of the American people outside of Obama's hard core supporters, who will stick with him no matter what, are either at stage 3 or stage 4. The more of them that move on to stage 4, the harder it's going to be for him to get legislation passed. If the majority of people reach stage 4 and 5 before the 2010 election, and I believe they will, the Democrats will take a tremendous beating. Let's hope this marriage continues to sour because the best thing that could ever happen to this country would be for it to get a divorce from Barack Obama.
Yes there is something wrong with this and a couple senators are looking for anawers to it . I for one hope this is another sign of THE ONE falling from his perch and be exposed as the poser he is.Just like moderator and creepsqueeker.
Who's wielding an amazing amount of power here ? Why is this shiite on my governments website? Oh must be a democratic liberal in the whitehouse.nevermind.Blame Bush.
I'd go with the 1 up.I guess. Boy that moderator has ///No wait .That boy moderator has some serious issues. Go to GlennBeck.com and scroll down to THE LETTER ,read it and sign that petition.I could have wrote most of that ,except for the grandma part and the lifelong democreep part.
Creepsneak Yea might as well allow them to adopt children too,because as you know it's not a chosen lifestyle you're born that way.Or you're not.No problem .Two Gay parents will just as likely raise a straight kid. Right?
Blackmanlikker If you watched the debbates ,then you saw McCain propose taxxing currently held insurance plans then you saw Oblahblah castigate that as a stupid plan with no futre ,Now you see him proposing the exact same fuorkin thing without the $5,000 rebate.JOKERS. All of you
What Govt can do is to only write a code of conduct for a healthy life style and have Insurance co. do their business as they have been doing except that they must take any individual without their past history in their subscription. All the members of any group must be insured. Their should be a basic rate to insure a family who is a standard for a healty life style, and follows the code of conduct 100%. Any one who deviates towards less should pay more and who ever moves towards better than the code, pays less.
What government can do is get the hell out of my kitchen and get the hell out of my wallet .This is more social engineering BS. Go to hell .Apologist move to to VeNezuela
Yep,, But as this site is supposed tp close ,I believe on the 18th what the hell.It's been a pleasure,I guess,whatching the Liberal apologist' declare thier insanity.Stop Obama is where I'll redaing.It's not as interesting as this real time debate thuogh.GO BILLS!! 30 seconds? you'll be gone? that don't get much better.
Moderater said--As much as I would love to give him the boot, I can't flex the massive power I wield just to satisfy the curiosity of random conspiracy theorists.
You want proof, Rooster? Go ahead and call my "bluff". Post some porn and see if I don't give you the boot within 30 seconds. Sounds like a poser to me.Massive Power WOW that's rich lol
They come to kill the Rooster Man I loved that song when it first came out. Stop Barrck Obama facebook , Hey look is that a grenade? I,ll got it here. http://www.newsfilter.org/
Moderator 1 hour ago Report Abuse The argument from silence occurs when you draw a positive conclusion (that you believe I am not a moderator) from the lack of contrary evidence,, Yea kick him out ,
Ahhhh,the sounds of walls crumbling. Won't be the last one either.
Crook Tom Daschle, the man originally tapped to lead President Obama's health care push, is now urging him to drop the idea of offering a government-run plan.
According to ABC, the former Democratic Senate Majority leader had this to say:
"While I feel very strongly that consumers should have the choice of a national, Medicare-like plan, my colleagues do not. . . But we were concerned that the ongoing health reform debate is beginning to show signs of fracture on the public plan issue, so in order to advance the process of developing bipartisan legislation and to move it forward, it's time to find consensus here," Daschle said.
"We've come too far and gained too much momentum for our efforts to fail over disagreements on one single issue," he said.
This is significant news not merely as a result of his relationship to Obama, but because Daschle is somebody who is recognized for his network on Capitol Hill, his ability to shepard legislation through Congress and strike compromises. If he is coming out and saying this publicly, it's a pretty good indication that Democrats simply do not have the votes to pass legislation that would include a government plan.
While this is a positive devolopment for those of us who oppose government health care, I should emphasize that this doesn't mean that we're in the clear. One of the things that supporters of free market health care have feared all along was that Democrats were merely using the government plan as a bargaining tool, so that when they drop it, they can say, "Ok, we gave up something we really wanted, now let's strike a deal." They will use this to label anybody who doesn't go along as an obstructionist. But a "compromise" that still provides subsidies for individuals to purchase government-designed health care plans on a government-run exchange, imposes mandates on individuals and businesses, and steps up regulation, is not much of a compromise. It's a major victory for the left.
That's why this language by Bob Dole is troubling:
"I had a lot of trouble with [individual] mandates just as Tom had trouble with the public plan. ... But if we can't compromise, how do we expect anyone else, how are we going to get a bill passed," Dole said. "We weren't going let two or three issues derail our total effort."
Fortunately, Dole isn't in office anymore. If Obama follows Daschle's advice and drops the government plan, Republicans shouldn't simply roll over. That provision would have made it easier for government to takeover the health care system, but it is far from the only way.
Must be good sale going.Got to help Mexican drug cartels arm up.I just got my Ruger for ,,you know ,target shooting and recreational uses/self protection.
There are many problems with health insurance, but that doesn’t mean we should put the government in control. If it’s decided that health care should be paid for with tax dollars, then it’s up to the government to decide how that money should be spent. There’s only so much money to go around, so the inevitable result is rationing.
It’s just the law of supply and demand. Lowering prices increases demand. Lowering the price to nothing pushes demand through the roof. Author P.J. O’Rourke said it best: “If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it’s free.”
When health care is free, governments deal with all that increased demand by limiting what’s available.
The reality of “free” health care is that people wait. In the United Kingdom, one in eight patients waits more than a year for hospital treatment and the British government recently set its goal to keep wait times to less than 18 weeks that’s more than four months! In Canada, almost a million citizens are waiting for necessary surgery and more than a million Canadians can’t find a regular doctor. In the small town of Norwood, Ontario, a weekly drawing is held in which a townsperson wins the right to access the town’s one family doctor.
Governments ratchet down health-care costs in different ways. Doctors went on strike last year in Germany because their government’s system pays them less than they thought they deserved and forces them to work thousands of hours of unpaid overtime. In the United Kingdom, one hospital was inspired to save money money by not changing sheets daily. British papers report that instead of washing the linens, nurses were told to just turn the bedsheets over.
Government is less the answer to our health-care crisis than the problem. It was our government that helped to create the absurd system in which two out of three Americans get health insurance through their employer. In a country where four in 10 Americans change their job every year, this system makes little sense; it leaves people like Readling without coverage when they need it most.
The government also makes insurance expensive by mandating the medical services that policies must cover. Required services vary state by state and include massage therapy, pastoral counseling, acupuncture, hair prosthesis and dentures. Such mandates are a reason why an individual policy in New Jersey costs around $4,000 a year while a policy in Iowa costs only a third of that. Yet insurance regulations make it illegal for someone in New Jersey to buy a policy from out of state…
…The more people control the money they spend on their own health care, the more people shop around and the more providers compete to attract patients by lowering prices while improving quality. It’s putting individuals in control that could turn our health-care sector into the vibrant, competitive marketplace that we see in nearly every other area of our economy.
After all, it’s our body and our health. Shouldn’t we be in control of how our health-care dollars are spent?
Harvard’s Herzlinger said, “Who should decide whether you live or die? Do you want the government to decide? Do you want a health insurer to decide? Who’s gonna make that decision? Is it gonna be a government? Is it gonna be an insurer? Or is it gonna be you and me?”
Putting individuals in control of our health rather than our employers or the government is a better way to cure what ails America’s health system.
Like this? As early as next week, Democrats are poised to move forward with Speaker Pelosi’s national energy tax that will only serve to drive prices up further and drive more American jobs overseas to countries like China and India. Across the nation, Americans are expressing increased outrage at the plan, with West Virginia Chamber of Commerce President Steve Roberts perhaps putting it best, telling the Charleston (WV) Daily Mail, “We can't let a bunch of California politicians ruin it for us.” In other words, Democratic politicians on either coast are fully prepared to make rural America and the rest of the nation suffer with higher prices and fewer jobs to advance their irresponsible, politically-motivated agenda.
All of this comes at the worst possible time for families and small businesses. That’s because, in the throes of an economic recession and rising unemployment, gas prices have risen for the 50th consecutive day. CNN has the details:
“Gas prices have risen for 50 days in a row and the pain at the pump is taking a toll on household budgets across the nation…”
“The runup in gas prices comes at a time when drivers are already struggling with record high unemployment and an abysmal housing market.”
Driving up gas prices even further isn’t the only consequence of Speaker Pelosi’s national energy tax. Take a look at some of the other ways the tax could make matters even worse for middle-class families and small businesses:
Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Cost Millions of American Jobs. The National Black Chamber of Commerce estimates that even with any new “green jobs,” net job losses will total about 2.5 million jobs. And according to the Environmental Protection Agency’s own analysis, U.S. manufacturing output will steadily decline as American manufacturing jobs move to foreign countries. Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Cause Electricity Rates to “Skyrocket.” President Obama even admitted that a national energy tax would cause electricity rates to “necessarily skyrocket.” And Duke Energy, a major utility company that would receive free allowances under the Democrats’ plan, has already requested a rate hike of 13.5 percent in anticipation of the energy tax. Giving Away Emissions “Allowances” to Utility Companies Won’t Protect American Families from Increased Costs Under Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax. According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, giving allowances for free to utility companies “would offset half or less of the added costs that households would face under an emissions cap, because the majority of the added costs come in areas other than home utility bills.” CBPP goes on to note that “relying on utilities to deliver consumer relief would leave many low- and moderate-income consumers with an uncompensated hole in their budgets.” Moreover, because millions of American families and farmers buy their electricity from rural electric co-ops. Because co-ops receive no free allowances their customers receive no relief at all. Last week, House Republicans unveiled the American Energy Act to clean up the environment, reduce energy costs, and create more American jobs. And as energy costs rise and Americans struggle to keep their jobs, Republicans want to work in a bipartisan way to increase environmentally-safe energy production to reduce prices and create jobs; promote the use of alternative fuels that will reduce carbon emissions; and encourage increased efficiencies and cutting edge technologies to maximize America’s energy potential. Unfortunately, Democratic leaders have chosen a far different, far more costly approach that will hurt our economy and cost American jobs.
As our nation struggles to get the economy moving again and put Americans back to work, shouldn’t Washington Democrats join Republicans to lower prices, create jobs, and clean up our air and water?
And the numbers used to calculate who had insuerance were gathered in 1997 and included people who chose not to get insurance and people who qualified for public insurance but for some reason did not sign up for it.
No one gets left out.Even if they're herer illegally?Who will be able to afford it when a good numbber of insurance companies go out of bidness because they can't compete with the gobmint.Last time I checked there was not people dying in the streets because they did'nt have access to help.
Also Sandra,,did you go to numbers usa and click on the congress banner and follow it to electable candidates.It shows all upcoming elections throughout the country.
The following op-ed was published in the Austin American-Statesman, which can be accessed here. Health care reform is on the fast track in Washington. The elites have promised to pass a bill quickly, even though their specific proposals and how to pay for them have been very slow in coming. So legislation is speeding down the track without all the cars attached and without any idea how much fuel is needed to make it to the station. We don't know yet whether this train will deliver its passengers safely – or if we're headed for a train wreck.
I believe our top priority should be to lower the cost of health care, without reducing quality or access to care. Rising health care costs make it hard to make ends meet, whether you're putting together a family budget or a business plan. Health care costs have risen far faster than inflation in both good economic times and bad. Costs have forced many self-employed workers into the ranks of the uninsured. The American health care system now costs twice as much per capita as those in most of the developed world.
I believe we can lower the cost of health care without giving Washington more control over the decisions of doctors and patients. Yet more control in Washington is the vision behind the government plan proposed by Senator Edward Kennedy. To his credit, Senator Kennedy is the only Democrat on either end of Pennsylvania Avenue who has provided legislative detail on his specific health care reform proposals this year. But the more we learn about these proposals, the more concerned Americans should be that Washington elites will not fix the problems in our health care system, but only make them worse.
First, Senator Kennedy's bill will cost at least $1 trillion over the next ten years – and that's just the beginning. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that this huge price tag will reduce the net uninsured population by less than 30 percent. The taxpayers' $1 trillion does not include the cost of increasing eligibility for Medicaid for people up to 50 percent above the poverty line.
Second, Senator Kennedy's bill includes a government-run health care plan that will force at least 15 million people to lose their current private health insurance. The Congressional Budget Office recognizes that no current provider can long compete against a government that calls the balls and strikes even as it takes the field. According to the independent Lewin Group, a government plan could eventually take away current health benefits from 119 million Americans, and force 130 million Americans into a Washington-run health care plan.
Third, a new Washington-run plan will increase the cost of private insurance. "Cost-shifting" occurs when a health care provider accepts low government reimbursement rates, but only if it can charge extra to those with private insurance. This cost-shifting acts like a hidden tax on millions of American families and small businesses. One respected actuary estimates that cost-shifting increases the average American family's health care premium by more than 10 percent, or more than $1,500. Adding another new government health care plan on top of Medicare and Medicaid will only increase this cost.
Fourth, a new Washington-run plan would lead to government rationing of health care. Just look at the results in Canada. Thousands of our friends to the north come to the United States every year for life-saving surgeries, after their government has told them they'll just have to wait. Various studies suggest that Canadians, especially the poor, are less healthy under socialized medicine than those in our own country. More and more Canadians want to reduce the role of government and expand private options for health care, even as elites in Washington want to move America in the opposite direction.
Fifth, a new government plan would replicate the model of Medicare and Medicaid, which illustrate everything that can go wrong with Washington-run health care. Costs for both plans have exploded. Low reimbursement rates force many providers out of the system, and many patients to long waiting lines. Taxpayers pay up to $90 billion a year in fraudulent and wasteful medical bills, about two-thirds of that in the Medicare program alone.
The Kennedy Bill has other provisions that would increase Washington's control of our health care system – including new punitive tax increases. If a family doesn't have a Washington-regulated health care plan, they would pay a new tax. If a small business owner doesn't offer a Washington-regulated plan for every employee, then she would pay a new tax. These tax increases are designed not to raise revenue to pay for health care, but to punish families and businesses that step out of line.
There are alternatives to a Washington takeover of the health care system, and the best of them will give patients more control over their care. Innovators in both government and the private sector have learned that empowering patients as consumers can lower costs. They've learned that the right incentives can encourage patients to make healthier choices, and providers to compete for their business. These are the ideas that can drive successful reform of our health care system.
Health care reform can be successful if we take the time to get it right. If our experience with the Stimulus Bill tells us anything, it's that when Congress acts too quickly, it often delivers bad policy. I will insist that the Administration and Congressional leaders give the American people plenty of time to understand their proposals, and decide what they mean for themselves and their families. Washington elites want to dictate to the American people the future of health care, but I believe the best solutions will come when Washington begins to listen.
The Oblabla apologizers believe the constitution is a living document subject to change as they see fit to accommodate thier needs.They will create these needs by all means available.2010 cannot get here soon enough.
Azalea-- Ask the Socialists if they think Obama is a socialist and they'll tell you he's not. And if you believe only in capitalist programs and no social programs you believe in a corporate republic where only the ceo's of successful corporation have the vote.
What about Putin saying the speed which we're moving towards Marxism is astouding. Or Chavas quoted as saying,watch out Fidel if we're not careful we'll be to the right of Obama
YOU ARE NOT ALONE Polls: Americans starting to hold Obama responsible for economy NYT/CBS News poll finds that
fewer than half of Americans saying they approve of how he has handled health care and the effort to save General Motors and Chrysler. A majority of people said his policies have had either no effect yet on improving the economy or had made it worse, underscoring how his political strength still rests on faith in his leadership rather than concrete results. WSJ/NBC News poll finds:
Nearly seven in 10 survey respondents said they had concerns about federal interventions into the economy, including Mr. Obama's decision to take an ownership stake in General Motors Corp., limits on executive compensation and the prospect of more government involvement in health care. The negative feeling toward the GM rescue was reflected elsewhere in the survey as well.
A solid majority -- 58% -- said that the president and Congress should focus on keeping the budget deficit down, even if takes longer for the economy to recover. [emphasis added]
Those numbers are pretty impressive.
Laura Zamora, 40, of Orange, Calif., voted for Mr. Obama but says she is frustrated by the economy and finds her support for the president waning. She says she's facing a possible layoff as a local government worker in California.
"He's bailing out the private sector. He's putting all kinds of money into the private sector," says Mrs. Zamora. "The money should be going to social programs, not to bailing out banks and GM. It should go to people who are unemployed."
That's interesting. Yesterday a Rush Limbaugh caller who voted for Obama said something very similar: And to me he's done nothing. Nothing but help the higher-up people in the country [by corporate bailouts]. You know, what about the little people? Rush almost choked on that and tried to educate Jeremy on how Obama was destroying rather than helping businesses. But the point is that people are feeling the pain of the worsening economy and holding Obama's policies responsible. They may not understand his antagonistic relationship with business or his destruction of the private sector but they know whether or not their own situation is improving or deteriorating. Perhaps some reality-mugging is taking place.
From the WSJ poll, people aren't buying Obama's "health care must be fixed to boost the economy" meme: When asked what the most important economic issue facing the country is, 24% cited the deficit, vs. just 11% who named health care.
There was also support for the Democratic push to let people sign up for a public health-care plan that would compete with private companies, one of the toughest issues in the health-care debate. Three in four people said a public plan is extremely or quite important. But when told the arguments for and against the plan, a smaller portion, 47%, agreed with arguments in support of the plan, with 42% agreeing with the arguments against it.
At the same time, nearly half the participants said it was very or somewhat likely that their employer would drop private coverage if a public plan were available.
As for how to pay for the package, estimated at more than $1 trillion over 10 years, the public favors proposals to require all Americans to get insurance, to raise taxes on the rich and, to a lesser extent, to require all but the smallest businesses to offer insurance or pay into a fund.
Gak. From the NYT:
“My feeling is that Obama is just throwing money at things, but I don’t see anything being specifically targeted,” Lynn Adams, 62, a Republican from Troy, Mich., said in a follow-up interview. “But I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt because he hasn’t been in office long enough.” That might be a reasonable approach if he weren't moving so %$@&# fast.
Love this:
As Mr. Obama finishes his fifth month in office and assumes greater ownership of the problems he inherited, Americans are alarmed by the hundreds of billions of dollars that have been doled out to boost the economy. A majority said the government should instead focus on reducing the federal deficit. They make him sound downright magnanimous, don't they? He sure isn't assuming responsibility voluntarily; has he ever missed a chance to blame Bush?
Wow blackmanlikker you must be omniscient to know about my luck my work ethic amnd my friends .You're still trolling for kicks.Go back to the ACORN office and do some preying.
Her's another good article on how to be transparent and drain the swamp http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2009/06/17/house-democrats-trying-to-cover-up-for-dodd-and-conrad/
Shortly after, the White House announced that it had “lost confidence” in Walpin. With Walpin’s removal, the top management positions at AmeriCorps’ parent organization are now all open. The decks are clear to install lackeys who will protect the government volunteerism industry and its Democrat cronies. And a chilling effect has undoubtedly taken hold in every other inspector general’s office in Washington.
GOP Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa is pressing Obama for more details. Tough questions need to be asked of First Lady Michelle Obama, who has “taken the lead” in selecting AmeriCorps’ managers, according to Youth Today. Her former chief of staff, Jackie Norris, will serve as a “senior adviser” to CNCS beginning next week. What role did they play in Walpin’s sacking? And why?
Mrs. Obama’s interest is more than passing. She ran the AmeriCorps-funded non-profit Public Allies in Chicago from 1993-1996 and served on its national board until 2001. Like so many of the AmeriCorps recipients investigated by the inspector general’s office over the years, Public Allies was found to have violated basic eligibility and compliance rules. A January 2007 audit reported that the group lacked internal controls verifying that recipients who received education grants and living allowances were legal citizens or permanent residents as required by law.
Transparency. Accountability. Fiscal responsibility. In Obama World, these are proving to be nothing more than words. Just words.
try here. or the national 912 coalition .This government does not really want to here your ideas if they have'nt convinced you to swallow the kool-aid and spew thier ideas of choke and pain.
Oh look here ,,I don't see any of the usual Obama apologist comments yet.Got to wait and see how THE ONE spins it first,Oh yea he's senile.But in May he was fine and scheduled to be the mainspeaker at a high profile function representing the administration but now he's just an old fool., I'd suggest it will go like this ,with compliments to a clear thinking American..
Stage 1 will be: Lets not rush to judgement. The Administration may have a good reason. Lets wait for their explanation. Lets ignore what we know right now, I'm sure that there is a good reason.
Stage 2 will be: This man was a closet right-wing nut job. After all, he was on board during the Bush administration, so it must be so. He may have even been a veteran. And look, the Republicans are defending him. They are being so divisive and mean-spirited in accusing the President of something he would never do; demonstrate prejudice. These haters will do anything to hurt America and our President.
Stage 3 will be: Why should we waste broadcast time or print space on such old news? This thing happened months ago. These haters will hold on to their hatred, which can only be because our President is black.
For this to result in any consequences to Obama's reputation, there would have to be an actual media that would ask actual questions and seek actual evidence. There isn't, so we will attempt to point it out for a while, then it will be forgotten
I,ve been to Bermuda for the honeymoon and is a really really beautiful island.I would love to go back on the taxpayers dime but I was not trained at an Al-Qaida survivalist school so thier is noway I qualify for the life of an islander drinking rum swizzles with my friends from school,forevah.
That is the best idea since we've made the worst selection. Go to numbersusa.com and click the banner on top,congress.There you will follow the page to electable candidates in the next election.Even if you don't agree with the position of the wabsite (bbut I think you will)you can clearly see who's running.
It WAS a good idea.It's supposed to be closing down on the 19th ,I think.Now there are a lot of Obama apologizers and hardcore Americans of both parties.Seems like Obamacrats allways want to duke it out,and lose.
GLENN: I got a letter from a woman in Arizona. She writes an open letter to our nation's leadership: I'm a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you're willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now. You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would horribly feel so disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut job am I? Will you please tell me?
Well, these are briefly my views and issues for which I seek representation:
One, illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders. Close the underground tunnels. Stop the violence and the trafficking in drugs and people. No amnesty, not again. Been there, done that, no resolution. P.S., I'm not a racist. This isn't to be confused with legal immigration.
Glenn Beck's Common Sense Now available in book stores nationwide...
Two, the TARP bill, I want it repealed and I want no further funding supplied to it. We told you no, but you did it anyway. I want the remaining unfunded 95% repealed. Freeze, repeal.
Three: Czars, I want the circumvention of our checks and balances stopped immediately. Fire the czars. No more czars. Government officials answer to the process, not to the president. Stop trampling on our Constitution and honor it.
Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over. There is more to say.
Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive decision. Don't you dare try to pass this in the middle of the night and then go on break. Slow down!
Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully restored. I want less government in my life, not more. Shrink it down. Mind your own business. You have enough to take care of with your real obligations. Why don't you start there.
Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010 census. I want them investigated. I also do not want mandatory escrow fees contributed to them every time on every real estate deal that closes. Stop the funding to ACORN and its affiliates pending impartial audits and investigations. I do not trust them with taking the census over with our taxpayer money. I don't trust them with our taxpayer money. Face up to the allegations against them and get it resolved before taxpayers get any more involved with them. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, hello. Stop protecting your political buddies. You work for us, the people. Investigate.
Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no. I work for my money. It is mine. I have always worked for people with more money than I have because they gave me jobs. That is the only redistribution of wealth that I will support. I never got a job from a poor person. Why do you want me to hate my employers? Why ‑‑ what do you have against shareholders making a profit?
Nine, charitable contributions. Although I never got a job from a poor person, I have helped many in need. Charity belongs in our local communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and our local resources. Butt out, please. We want to do it ourselves.
Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Sink or swim like the rest of us. If there are hard times ahead, we'll be better off just getting into it and letting the strong survive. Quick and painful. Have you ever ripped off a Band‑Aid? We will pull together. Great things happen in America under great hardship. Give us the chance to innovate. We cannot disappoint you more than you have disappointed us.
Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about it? Let's have it. Let's say we give the buzzwords a rest and have some straight honest talk. Please try ‑‑ please stop manipulating and trying to appease me with clever wording. I am not the idiot you obviously take me for. Stop sneaking around and meeting in back rooms making deals with your friends. It will only be a prelude to your criminal investigation. Stop hiding things from me.
Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.
Take a breath. Listen to the people. Let's just slow down and get some input from some nonpoliticians on the subject. Stop making everything an emergency. Stop speed reading our bills into law. I am not an activist. I am not a community organizer. Nor am I a terrorist, a militant or a violent person. I am a parent and a grandparent. I work. I'm busy. I'm busy. I am busy, and I am tired. I thought we elected competent people to take care of the business of government so that we could work, raise our families, pay our bills, have a little recreation, complain about taxes, endure our hardships, pursue our personal goals, cut our lawn, wash our cars on the weekends and be responsible contributing members of society and teach our children to be the same all while living in the home of the free and land of the brave.
I entrusted you with upholding the Constitution. I believed in the checks and balances to keep from getting far off course. What happened? You are very far off course. Do you really think I find humor in the hiring of a speed reader to unintelligently ramble all through a bill that you signed into law without knowing what it contained? I do not. It is a mockery of the responsibility I have entrusted to you. It is a slap in the face. I am not laughing at your arrogance. Why is it that I feel as if you would not trust me to make a single decision about my own life and how I would live it but you should expect that I should trust you with the debt that you have laid on all of us and our children. We did not want the TARP bill. We said no. We would repeal it if we could. I am sure that we still cannot. There is such urgency and recklessness in all of the recent spending.
From my perspective, it seems that all of you have gone insane. I also know that I am far from alone in these feelings. Do you honestly feel that your current pursuits have merit to patriotic Americans? We want it to stop. We want to put the brakes on everything that is being rushed by us and forced upon us. We want our voice back. You have forced us to put our lives on hold to straighten out the mess that you are making. We will have to give up our vacations, our time spent with our children, any relaxation time we may have had and money we cannot afford to spend on you to bring our concerns to Washington. Our president often knows all the right buzzword is unsustainable. Well, no kidding. How many tens of thousands of dollars did the focus group cost to come up with that word? We don't want your overpriced words. Stop treating us like we're morons.
We want all of you to stop focusing on your reelection and do the job we want done, not the job you want done or the job your party wants done. You work for us and at this rate I guarantee you not for long because we are coming. We will be heard and we will be represented. You think we're so busy with our lives that we will never come for you? We are the formerly silent majority, all of us who quietly work , pay taxes, obey the law, vote, save money, keep our noses to the grindstone and we are now looking up at you. You have awakened us, the patriotic spirit so strong and so powerful that it had been sleeping too long. You have pushed us too far. Our numbers are great. They may surprise you. For every one of us who will be there, there will be hundreds more that could not come. Unlike you, we have their trust. We will represent them honestly, rest assured. They will be at the polls on voting day to usher you out of office. We have cancelled vacations. We will use our last few dollars saved. We will find the representation among us and a grassroots campaign will flourish. We didn't ask for this fight. But the gloves are coming off. We do not come in violence, but we are angry. You will represent us or you will be replaced with someone who will. There are candidates among us when hewill rise like a Phoenix from the ashes that you have made of our constitution.
Democrat, Republican, independent, libertarian. Understand this. We don't care. Political parties are meaningless to us. Patriotic Americans are willing to do right by us and our Constitution and that is all that matters to us now. We are going to fire all of you who abuse power and seek more. It is not your power. It is ours and we want it back. We entrusted you with it and you abused it. You are dishonorable. You are dishonest. As Americans we are ashamed of you. You have brought shame to us. If you are not representing the wants and needs of your constituency loudly and consistently, in spite of the objections of your party, you will be fired. Did you hear? We no longer care about your political parties. You need to be loyal to us, not to them. Because we will get you fired and they will not save you. If you do or can represent me, my issues, my views, please stand up. Make your identity known. You need to make some noise about it. Speak up. I need to know who you are. If you do not speak up, you will be herded out with the rest of the sheep and we will replace the whole damn congress if need be one by one. We are coming. Are we coming for you? Who do you represent? What do you represent? Listen. Because we are coming. We the people are coming.
WTF are you talking about ? they've got a great big ACORN circle jerk going on tonight in DC .They pull it out and spank it in public,oh no wait ,,they won't allow media in to see Schumer get due recognition for swallowing surplus loads.Elections have consequences .Remember ?They one by a whopping majority too. A clear mandate for socialism.I see NOBODY call for expanding the FED on this site , or anywhere for that matter.So what does THE ONE announce today? EXPANDING THE FED.Like they're the answer.Go To Glenn Beck .com and read the letter from a piszed off grandma and sign the petion./Another useless proposition.
They have to fast track as much as they can cause they won't have the votes for this sh1t for the next 30 yrs. after 2010.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has promised quick action to pass Hate Crimes legislation as early as today! Sources indicate the Senate leadership may append the controversial Hate Crimes law to an innocuous bill like the Travel Promotion Act.
This is outrageous! We've been calling for a full and fair stand-alone hearing for the Hate Crimes bill, but Senate leaders hope they can sneak it through before the end of the week.
++ Urgent Action Needed Now!
Thanks in large part to Liberty Counsel team members, opposition and outrage to the "smuggling" of Hate Crimes legislation through the Senate is building.
In the past few days alone, you have flooded the Senate with tens of thousands of petitions, faxes and phone calls. But now we must keep the pressure on and DEMAND that Harry Reid back away from this plan to fast-track the anti-faith hate crimes bill.
+ + Action #1 -- Fax Reid and other key Senators NOW
Please help overwhelm Senate Majority Leader Reid's office -- as well as the offices of other key leaders in the Senate -- along with your two Senators.
WE MUST DEMAND THAT REID AND OTHERS STOP THE FAST-TRACKING OF THE DANGEROUS HATE CRIMES LAW BY HIDING IT IN A TOTALLY UNRELATED BILL!
1. I am very disappointed that the Senate plans to fast-track the "Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act" (S. 909) by attaching it as an amendment to another bill, quite possibly the Travel Promotion Act (S. 1023).
2. This bill deserves its own consideration as a stand-alone bill, not to be rushed through as an amendment.
3. I oppose the Hate Crimes Prevention Act and urge you to oppose it as well. It is an attack on faith and family while granting special rights based on "sexual orientation" and "gender identity," terms which are not even clearly defined in the bill.
+ + Let's expose the deceitful plan to sneak this bill through
I am thankful that news has leaked about the Senate leadership's attempts to sneak this anti-faith bill through to President Obama's desk. This gives us a small window of opportunity to fight back.
Let's expose this scheme and stop the Hate Crimes law! Thank you in advance for taking a stand with me.
Passed by GWB? or the democrat congress that never put it out till THE ONE was in office,so don't read the bill a couple members constructed got to pass it now,don't read it. So Nan can go to Italy by the weeks end . So THE ONE can let it sit for four days.-FAIL No longer have paychecks? like the 105 and rising on unemployment now?-FAIL Avoiding bloviators on the right.(Implying your opinions only come from the left)the left that controlled both houses -FAIL Lidicrously incorrect? -FAIL wrecklessly invade ?with DEMOCRATIC support-FAIL Allowing 911 after 8 months in office? -FAIL TRY AGAIN after work McDonalds closes at 11
Is this what the country needs.WOW time to research any other options in a bipartisan way? NAAAWWW, don't be silly.This will give dems more time to hide the actual cost is my bet.
The Senate Finance Committee is delaying its first public drafting session on major health care legislation until after the July Fourth recess, a lengthy setback but one that even Democrats say is critically needed to let them work on reducing the costs of the bill.
The Finance Committee’s bill is believed to have the best chance of bipartisan support. The drafting session had been scheduled for Tuesday. But new cost estimates by the Congressional Budget Office on health care proposals came in much more expensive than expected, emboldening critics and alarming Democrats.
A spokesman for the Finance Committee chairman, Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, said the goal was to get the best bill.
“Senator Baucus wants to ensure the committee gets the mark right and will take the time to do exactly that,” the spokesman, Scott Mulhauser, said. “While it’s simply too early to say when the mark-up process will begin, the committee will continue to work hard over the next week and a half to produce a bill that is fully paid for and can pass the Senate. Senator Baucus will continue to work with members on both sides of the aisle and remains confident we’ll have a budget-neutral bill that can pass the Senate.”
The Senate health committee pressed ahead with its drafting session today despite the high cost projections, prompting harsh criticism from Republicans.
I love dogs and I love America.But I don't like that America is going to the dogs.
Right now I am worried for the America I know and love. I suspect most of us are, too.
President Obama’s understanding of economics is based on ideas that are usually, at best questionable, and in no case worthy of indenturing us all under a mountain of debt.Did you see him kill a fly?Miyagi did it with chopsticks.
And unfortunately we have a mainstream press that is googoo-eyed over the president, ever afraid of offending the Spender-in-Chief and asking the tough questions that need to be asked.
It’s a disservice to the profession of journalism. It’s a disservice to America.
The spending spree Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have set into motion is no joke. It is threatening to bury America under a mountain of crushing debt – debt that will impact your life and the lives of your loved ones.
I must say I’m pretty scared about President Obama’s handling of the economy. I can hardly tell you.
The other week he admonished members of Congress to impose “pay-as-you-go” budgeting rules. He says fiscal discipline is suddenly important.
This is from a man who forced through $787 billion in pork-loaded “emergency” stimulus spending in his first weeks of office. It was such an emergency that less than a quarter of this money will be spent in 2009.
This is from a man who signed off on $200 billion dollars to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and hundreds of billions of dollars more for reckless Wall Street firms that deserved to fail.
This is from a man who is now the Chief Executive Officer of Government Motors, Inc, putting you, me, and every other taxpayer on the hook for $50 billion as part of a sweetheart deal benefiting the United Auto Workers.
And while the president preaches fiscal responsibility he wants to spend another $1 trillion ore more on a new health care benefit America can ill afford.
Needless to say, I wish Mr. Obama well in all of his hard work to get the economy restarted. He might start by ending his and his staff's endless telling of how bad things are but the truth hurts. So, yes, I’m scared for America. Yet, there is hope – REAL HOPE.2010.
I believe there is a law that he needs to get 30 days notice and congress gets a written explaination as to why the removal is needed.NOT 'I don't have confidance in him" that's not a reason .TROLL
Pennsylvania law forbids those behind voter-registration efforts to establish quotas. The quite sound rationale is that quotas foster fraud. Those seeking to meet a quota to be paid care more about being paid than the sanctity of the voter-registration process.
Use of quotas is central to the case filed against seven people with ties to ACORN by Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. Officials of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now deny that quotas are employed.
But while their mouths might be saying "no," their how-to manual once said "yes."
As the Trib reported Sunday, a 2004 manual of ACORN affiliate Project Vote clearly documented the quota system: "Anyone who performs at less than three voter registrations per hour SHOULD NOT BE ON THE STAFF," it directs.
A Project Vote spokesman says that management directive no longer is in effect. But Michael McDunnah then made the mess a little deeper. Canvassers now are expected to produce 20 voter registrations daily.
Mr. McDunnah calls it a "performance standard." Let's call it what it is -- a quota system.
ACORN's troubles aren't limited to Pennsylvania; nearly a dozen other states also are on its trail, as is the FBI. Lots of questions remain about an internal embezzlement scandal. And a full airing of ACORN's involvement in the subprime mortgage mess has yet to be made.
Here's to cracking ACORN remaining a top law-enforcement objective.
Like Blackies kids after this goes through....Just Foul. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has promised quick action to pass Hate Crimes legislation as early as today! Sources indicate the Senate leadership may append the controversial Hate Crimes law to an innocuous bill like the Travel Promotion Act.
This is outrageous! We've been calling for a full and fair stand-alone hearing for the Hate Crimes bill, but Senate leaders hope they can sneak it through before the end of the week.
++ Urgent Action Needed Now!
Thanks in large part to Liberty Counsel team members, opposition and outrage to the "smuggling" of Hate Crimes legislation through the Senate is building.
In the past few days alone, you have flooded the Senate with tens of thousands of petitions, faxes and phone calls. But now we must keep the pressure on and DEMAND that Harry Reid back away from this plan to fast-track the anti-faith hate crimes bill.
+ + Action #1 -- Fax Reid and other key Senators NOW
Please help overwhelm Senate Majority Leader Reid's office -- as well as the offices of other key leaders in the Senate -- along with your two Senators.
WE MUST DEMAND THAT REID AND OTHERS STOP THE FAST-TRACKING OF THE DANGEROUS HATE CRIMES LAW BY HIDING IT IN A TOTALLY UNRELATED BILL!
1. I am very disappointed that the Senate plans to fast-track the "Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act" (S. 909) by attaching it as an amendment to another bill, quite possibly the Travel Promotion Act (S. 1023).
2. This bill deserves its own consideration as a stand-alone bill, not to be rushed through as an amendment.
3. I oppose the Hate Crimes Prevention Act and urge you to oppose it as well. It is an attack on faith and family while granting special rights based on "sexual orientation" and "gender identity," terms which are not even clearly defined in the bill.
+ + Let's expose the deceitful plan to sneak this bill through
I am thankful that news has leaked about the Senate leadership's attempts to sneak this anti-faith bill through to President Obama's desk. This gives us a small window of opportunity to fight back.
Let's expose this scheme and stop the Hate Crimes law! Thank you in advance for taking a stand with me.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has promised quick action to pass Hate Crimes legislation as early as today! Sources indicate the Senate leadership may append the controversial Hate Crimes law to an innocuous bill like the Travel Promotion Act.
This is outrageous! We've been calling for a full and fair stand-alone hearing for the Hate Crimes bill, but Senate leaders hope they can sneak it through before the end of the week.
++ Urgent Action Needed Now!
Thanks in large part to Liberty Counsel team members, opposition and outrage to the "smuggling" of Hate Crimes legislation through the Senate is building.
In the past few days alone, you have flooded the Senate with tens of thousands of petitions, faxes and phone calls. But now we must keep the pressure on and DEMAND that Harry Reid back away from this plan to fast-track the anti-faith hate crimes bill.
+ + Action #1 -- Fax Reid and other key Senators NOW
Please help overwhelm Senate Majority Leader Reid's office -- as well as the offices of other key leaders in the Senate -- along with your two Senators.
WE MUST DEMAND THAT REID AND OTHERS STOP THE FAST-TRACKING OF THE DANGEROUS HATE CRIMES LAW BY HIDING IT IN A TOTALLY UNRELATED BILL!
1. I am very disappointed that the Senate plans to fast-track the "Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act" (S. 909) by attaching it as an amendment to another bill, quite possibly the Travel Promotion Act (S. 1023).
2. This bill deserves its own consideration as a stand-alone bill, not to be rushed through as an amendment.
3. I oppose the Hate Crimes Prevention Act and urge you to oppose it as well. It is an attack on faith and family while granting special rights based on "sexual orientation" and "gender identity," terms which are not even clearly defined in the bill.
+ + Let's expose the deceitful plan to sneak this bill through
I am thankful that news has leaked about the Senate leadership's attempts to sneak this anti-faith bill through to President Obama's desk. This gives us a small window of opportunity to fight back.
Let's expose this scheme and stop the Hate Crimes law! Thank you in advance for taking a stand with me.
I think Blackmanlikker is finally losing his mind,a not so terrible thing to waste IMHO,That's why his signature stays the same. With 2 k's Troll ,grow a set .
Yes Blackmanlikker,You are sorry.As well as pathetic.As well as a troll . Aswell as a liar.Aswell as a mindless Mangod syncophant.Just look at your profile and see you are never getting positive votes for your lame apologizing.Troll Boy ,Go Long!!
Blackmanlikker,,It would 'nt matter where it came from .You will just deny it's validity with your usual mindless zeal to protect your MANGOD.heheheheheh stings a bit don't it./TROLL
ACORN is celebrating its birthday and as a gift from its friends in the House leadership an amendment that Congressman Steve King (R-IA) and I offered to keep ACORN from getting federal funds through the Census and other federal programs has been denied debate.
They won't even let it come to the House floor for discussion. They don't want to have to go on the record in support of this corrupt organization.
No wonder: The American people have said loud and clear that they don't want Congress funneling their hard-earned tax dollars to ACORN.
In less than 2 weeks, nearly 32,000 Americans signed my petition to stop Congress from spending millions on ACORN's voter registration fraud.
If you haven't signed yet: SIGN NOW!
CLICK HERE TO SIGN MY PETITION!
Please forward this to all your friends and your family and your co-workers.
Congress has absolutely no intention to stop funding ACORN. And, if they can't say no to ACORN -- an organization investigated and indicted for voter registration fraud in more than a dozen states -- where will they draw the line?!
This is your money. You have the right to say that you've had enough.
Despite what the homepage says about deleting duplicate or irrelevant postings ,it is heavily censored.Some one had posted a ,,,I think it was a facebook group page,,wher like minded Americans can gather.But I did not copy it.That foxnation is OK but I did'nt see any discussion,just one line rants.If anybody does know it,please post it.
Hey BIGROOSTER,, Do you know where us like minded Americans can continue this line of dialog without sh1t disturbing MANGOD syncophants contributing BS?.
Hey photosrme,,Do you know what the facebook link was to talk about the destruction of our country was?It was posted in a comment section a couple days ago but I did not save it.Yours and BigRooster and a few other guys are the most intune with my ideas and I would like tyo keep it in contact.
This is a long , appears the moderaters have trouble with my post' So heres Three..
AS GAS PRICES CLIMB FOR SEVENTH WEEK, SPEAKER PELOSI’S NATIONAL ENERGY TAX POISED TO DRIVE COSTS EVEN HIGHER
TRUCKERS WARN OF "DRAMATIC AND SUDDEN FUEL SPIKES" TO MAKE GASOLINE, FOOD, & OTHER PRODUCTS MORE COSTLY FOR FAMILIES, SMALL BUSINESSES June 16, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | According to AAA, gasoline prices climbed again today, making it seven full weeks that prices have spiked for families and small businesses. Seems to be a bad time to bring to the House floor legislation to drive energy costs even higher, doesn’t it? Apparently not, because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has made this Friday her deadline for having national energy tax legislation ready for consideration in the full House. That troubles the national organization representing America’s truck drivers, who are responsible for transporting food and other products on behalf of families and small businesses across the country. Here’s what Tommy Hodges, First Vice Chairman of the American Trucking Association, said recently about the impact of Speaker Pelosi’s national energy tax on America’s truck drivers: “‘Fleets are extremely sensitive to rapidly shifting operating costs given thin operating margins,’ said Hodges. ‘These margins continue to be chipped away, given the numerous and unprecedented costs being imposed upon the industry to reduce emissions from trucks.’” “Hodges explained that provisions in H.R. 2454’s cap-and-trade program grant oil refiners 2 percent of the carbon allowances between 2014 and 2016 to help mitigate refinery Greenhouse Gas emissions.” “‘This amount is inadequate and will result in significant price increases for refined products,’ said Hodges. ‘The 2 percent allotment to refineries over a 2-year period covers the refineries’ facility emissions, but totally ignores carbon emissions from the combustion of petroleum products, leaving downstream users, such as trucking companies, exposed to dramatic and sudden fuel price spikes.’”
Leaving truck drivers “exposed to dramatic and sudden fuel price spikes,” as Mr. Hodges asserted, would not only mean higher costs for the trucking industry, of course. It would mean higher prices for fuel, food, and other products Americans depend upon each and every day. At a time when costs of living are soaring and middle-class families and small businesses are struggling to make ends meet, is this really the kind of policy Americans are expecting from their leaders in Washington? Of course not, and that’s why House Republicans have proposed the American Energy Act, legislation that represents the fastest route to a cleaner environment, lower energy costs, and more American jobs. The legislation would: • Increase environmentally-safe energy production on remote lands and far off our shores; • Promote the use of alternative fuels that will reduce carbon emissions, such as nuclear, clean-coal, and renewable energy technologies; and • Encourage increased efficiencies and cutting edge technologies to maximize America’s energy potential. As Americans pay more and more at the pump every day, isn’t it time for Democrats to end their ill-advised plans for a national energy tax that will make everything from gasoline to electricity to food much more costly? Isn’t it time for bipartisan cooperation on the American Energy Act to clean up the environment, lower energy costs, and create more jobs here at home? Boehner: Democrats Continue to Stonewall Bipartisan Investigation of Speaker’s Accusations Against our Nation’s Intelligence Professionals WASHINGTON, DC – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today issued the following statement on Democrats’ rejection of a resolution offered by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT) to establish a bipartisan Select Intelligence Subcommittee to investigate the allegation that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) professionals repeatedly lied to the Speaker of the House and Members of Congress: “It has been a month since Speaker Pelosi made serious allegations against our nation’s intelligence professionals. Since then, the Democratic leadership has stonewalled a bipartisan investigation into the matter, while the Speaker has declined to provide evidence to back up her allegations. Our nation’s intelligence professionals, the troops they help protect, and all Americans deserve answers from the Speaker and her colleagues in the Democratic leadership. I am disappointed that, once again, rank-and-file Democrats have refused to join Republicans in establishing a bipartisan investigation into these serious allegations. Until the Speaker finally agrees to provide them, Republicans will continue to insist on answers on behalf of our intelligence professionals and the American people.” CBO: DEMS’ HEALTH CARE PL
Looks Promising!
I'm Not So Sure...
Closed
Report Abuse