rob_92183's Blog
Loading...
September 2009
Tuesday September 29, 2009
Senate Finance panel rejects govt insurance option
Posted by: rob_92183 at 2:31PM CST on September 29, 2009

WASHINGTON – Liberal Democrats failed Tuesday to inject a government-run insurance option into sweeping health care legislation taking shape in the Senate Finance Committee, despite widespread accusations that private insurers routinely deny coverage in pursuit of higher profits.

The 15-8 rejection marked a victory for Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the committee chairman, who is hoping to push his middle-of-the-road measure through the panel by week's end. It also kept alive the possibility that at least one Republican may yet swing behind the bill, a key goal of both Baucus and the White House.

"My job is to put together a bill that gets to 60 votes" in the full Senate, the Montana Democrat said shortly before he joined a majority on the committee in opposing the provision. "No one shows me how to get to 60 votes with a public option," the term used to describe a new government role in health care. It takes 60 votes to overcome delaying actions that Republicans may attempt on the Senate floor.

The maneuvering occurred as the committee plunged into a second week of public debate on legislation that generally adheres to conditions that President Barack Obama has called for. The bill includes numerous new consumer protections, including a ban on companies denying insurance on the basis of pre-existing conditions. At the same time it provides government subsidies to help lower-income Americans afford insurance that is currently beyond their means. It also includes steps that supporters say will begin to slow the rate of growth in health care costs nationwide.

After weeks of delay, both the House and Senate appear on track to vote on different versions of health care legislation in October. Passage in both houses would set the stage for a compromise to be passed deeper into the fall.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090929/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_overhaul


Monday September 28, 2009
Support for Health Care Reform Hits New Low/Democrats Trailing in Key Races.
Posted by: rob_92183 at 12:44PM CST on September 28, 2009

Just 41% of voters nationwide now favor the health care reform proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s down two points from a week ago and the lowest level of support yet measured.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% are opposed to the plan.

Senior citizens are less supportive of the plan than younger voters. In the latest survey, just 33% of seniors favor the plan while 59% are opposed. The intensity gap among seniors is significant. Only 16% of the over-65 crowd Strongly Favors the legislation while 46% are Strongly Opposed.

For the first time ever, a slight plurality of voters now express doubt that the legislation will become law this year. Forty-six percent (46%) say passage is likely while 47% say it is not. Those figures include 18% who say passage is Very Likely and 15% who say it is Not at All Likely. Sixty percent (60%) are less certain.

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Democrats say the plan is at least somewhat likely to become law. Sixty-one percent (61%) of Republicans disagree. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 34% say passage is at least somewhat likely while 58% say it is not.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

The overall picture remains one of stability. Today’s record low support for the plan of 41% is just a point lower than the results found twice before. With the exception of a slight bounce earlier this month following the president’s nationally televised speech to Congress to promote the plan, support for it has remained in the low-to-mid 40s since early July. During that same time period, opposition has generally stayed in the low-to-mid 50s.

Intensity has been with the opposition from the beginning of the public debate. Currently, among all voters 23% Strongly Favor the legislative effort and 43% are Strongly Opposed.

Also, from the beginning of the debate, the has been a huge partisan divide. Currently 75% of Democrats favor the plan. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of Republicans are opposed, as are 72% of the unaffiliated.

Rasmussen Reports will continue to track support for the plan on a weekly basis (see day-by-day numbers).

As Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, wrote recently in the Wall Street Journal: “The most important fundamental is that 68% of American voters have health insurance coverage they rate good or excellent … Most of these voters approach the health care reform debate fearing that they have more to lose than to gain.” A Rasmussen video report shows that 53% of those with insurance believe it’s likely they would have to change coverage if the congressional plan becomes law.

Despite strong efforts by the White House to counter that belief, including many comments by the president himself, there has been no change for months in the number who fear they will be forced out of their current coverage.

Polling released last week shows that 58% of uninsured voters favor passage of the health care plan. However, 35% of the uninsured are opposed. The divide fell largely along partisan and ideological grounds.

If the plan passes, 24% of voters say the quality of care will get better, and 55% say it will get worse. In August, the numbers were 23% better and 50% worse.

Fifty-four percent (54%) say passage of the plan will make the cost of health care go up while 23% say it will make costs go down. In August, 52% thought the plan would lead to higher costs, and just 17% thought it would achieve the stated goal of lowering costs.

While many credit or blame the town hall protests for building opposition to the plan, it appears they were simply a reflection of public opinion rather than a creator of it. This sense is confirmed by the fact that Obama’s approval ratings fell more in June and July before stabilizing in August.

One thing that did change during the month of August is that public perception of the protesters improved. Most voters came to believe that the purpose of the town hall meetings was for members of Congress to listen rather than speak. That’s partly because just 22% believe Congress has a good understanding of the legislation.

While some Democrats have charged that opposition to the president’s plan is based upon racism, just 12% of voters agree.

Voters overwhelmingly believe that every American should be able to buy the same health insurance plan that Congress has. Most favor limits on jury awards for medical malpractice claims and think that tort reform will significantly reduce the cost of health care. Forty-eight percent (48%) want a prohibition on abortion in any government subsidized program while 13% want a mandate requiring abortion coverage.

The health care debate has produced a difficult political environment for Democrats. Several incumbent Democratic senators currently are behind in their reelection bids including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in Nevada, Chris Dodd in Connecticut and Michael Bennet in Colorado. Republicans appear to have a better shot than expected at hanging on to the New Hampshire Senate seat, and GOP incumbents lead in both North Carolina and Iowa. The races for soon-to-be-vacant Senate seats in Missouri and Ohio are neck-and-neck, and longtime incumbent Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer polls under 50% against two potential 2010 challengers in California. Appointed Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand holds a very narrow lead over former Governor George Pataki in a hypothetical match-up for New York State’s 2010 Senate race.

Democrats also trail in the 2009 governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia. Incumbent Democratic governors in Iowa and Ohio face tough challenges next year. In New York's gubernatorial race, the fate of the Democrats appears to depend on which of two nominees they choose.

The health care debate has become one focal point for voters frustrated by a string of government actions. Voters overwhelmingly opposed the bailout of the financial industry and the bailout and takeover of General Motors.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform


Saturday September 26, 2009
Penalty for not purchasing health care confirmed.
Posted by: rob_92183 at 12:32PM CST on September 26, 2009
Senator John Ensign received a handwritten note from from Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff Tom Barthold on Thursday (viewable here) that confirms a $1900 fee for not purchasing a plan, a misdemeanor charge with 1 year in jail and a $25,000 fine, and felony tax evasion charges of $100,000 and five years in prison.

Transcripted:
Dear Senator Ensign,
     Sec 7203 of the code provides that if there is a willful failure to file, pay, maintain appropriate records and the like that the taxpayer may be charged with a misdemeanor with a penalty of up to $25,000 and not more than a year in jail.
     Sincerely,
     Thomas A. Barthold

     Felony tax evasion provides for restitution and a fine of up to $100,000 for an individual and up to five years in jail.

Friday September 25, 2009
Economic Woes
Posted by: rob_92183 at 1:03PM CST on September 25, 2009
The last two days have thrown me for a loop.  I have no idea what in the hell is going on with the economy right now.  The dollars has dropped in value, gold has dropped in value, the stock market has dropped.  Logically if the dollar drops, the value of gold is supposed to go up.  China is still buying up massive amounts of gold, which is raising demand.  But yet the value dropped almost $20 an ounce right back under $1,000.

The only solution I can possibly come up with is the Fed claiming that the recession is over, but were that true (or even believable) then why are investors abandoning stocks and the dollar?  This doesn't make any sense.

Going back to the Fed claiming we're out of the recession, look around once and see if you truly believe that.  How many people are still unemployed on top of the number of people losing their jobs weekly?  Jobs and housing are the most important aspect of the recession, and housing only rose .7% mostly because of government initiative in first time home buyer credits.  This isn't much different from cash for clunkers, which has crashed auto sales since it ended.  What's going to happen when the government stops the tax credit?

This recession isn't over, not by a long shot.  And I'm really hoping this downward spiral isn't what I think it is, but if the price of gold suddenly shoots skyward while the dollar stagnates, brace for the worst.

Thursday September 24, 2009
Last Week in Self Defense: Elderly and Armed
Posted by: rob_92183 at 12:44PM CST on September 24, 2009
Concealed carry for the elderly, a naked senior citizen, and a senior citizen with a machete.  I think it's a nice change from the Racine stories where the robbers always win.  Score a few for the seniors out there who can still defend themselves.

From the Dayton Daily News of September 19, 2009
Elderly victim shoots would-be robber, 24, police say

A 24-year-old man who allegedly got out of his car and tried to rob an elderly man at gunpoint was shot by the would-be victim, who was licensed to carry a concealed weapon and fired to defend himself, police said.

The younger man was shot twice on Saturday, Sept. 19, and was taken to Miami Valley Hospital, where he was under guard, Dayton police Sgt. Damon Castor said. The gunshot injuries were not believed to be life-threatening, Castor said.

“Apparently he was trying to rob the older gentleman of something,” Castor said of the younger man. “He picked on the wrong person.”

The would-be victim, in his 70s, was not injured, Castor said. The confrontation took place at West Third Street and Brooklyn Avenue in west Dayton, police said.

It was not clear whether the alleged attacker was trying to steal the older man’s car or money, Castor said.

No charges had been filed Saturday. Police are investigating.

From the CBS 12 of September 17, 2009
Naked 91-year-old holds burglar at gunpoint

This next homeowner is a force to be reckoned with. He's 91, he was buck naked, but he and his dog decided to go after a would be burglar. He held the man at gunpoint until police arrived. Deputies say they found the would be burglar on the back porch by the pool drunk and trembling, probably not how he thought it would all go down. He got more than he bargained for when he decided to mess with this elderly man and his trusty rottweiler mix. 91-year-old Robert Thompson and his 5-year-old dog Rett tag-teamed a thug trying to break into their Lake Worth home Friday night.

Thompson said, "I think the guy was scared to death, he was screaming."

Thompson jumped out of bed, totally naked he went to go check things out with Rett by his side.

He said, "I started to let him out the door and he was so anxious he got caught in the door."

According to the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office 26-year-old Jose Pascual was the man on the porch. Rett pinned Pascual, but this purple heart World War Two Veteran wanted back-up.

Thompson said, "I went in and got my cell phone and dialed 911 and got my gun."

Thompson says Pascual was coming toward him so he fired a shot. Authorities say he held the drunk intruder at gunpoint until deputies arrived, but he's giving his best bud Rett all the credit for the happy ending.

He said, "He's the hero."

Pascual was arrested, Thompson was taken to the hospital. One of the shots he fired ricocheted giving him a minor battle wound. He hopes the bad guys learned a lesson about messing the boys at 504 North C Street.

"If anyone violates my home they better be careful, that's all I got to say," said Thompson.

Thompson tells us that he has been living alone since his wife passed away 10 years ago, and that having Rett around makes life easier. The suspect in this case is facing burglary charges

From the Delaware Online of September 11, 2009
Intruders shot, cut by 74-year-old man, police say

State police say a 74-year-old man shot one intruder and cut another at his home west of Lewes. The intruders fled but were later arrested by police.

The incident happened about 6:20 p.m. Thursday in the 19000 block of Bee Jay Lane, off Beaver Dam Road.

Sgt. Walter Newton said the homeowner arrived back at the house and found an empty SUV in his driveway and a side door that had been locked was open. He then found the front door had been kicked in.

Two men -- later identified by police as Paul L. Spencer, 43, and Gregory B. Stewart, 49, both of Lincoln -- approached the homeowner at the side door and said they were “looking to purchase a dump truck,” Newton said.

The homeowner told them to leave, but they continued toward him. Spencer crossed the threshold and grabbed a landscaping tool and threatened the homeowner, Newton said. The homeowner took a machete from next to the door and swung it at Spencer, striking him several times in his right forearm and hand.

“Both suspects continued toward the homeowner, which caused him to fire two .25 caliber rounds from a handgun. One of the bullets struck Stewart in his abdomen,” Newton said.

Both Lincoln men then fled, but Stewart was arrested at Milford Memorial Hospital, where he was admitted for treatment of a gunshot wound, Newton said.

Police later located Spencer at his home and charged him with burglary, conspiracy, menacing and criminal mischief. He was treated for cuts to his right arm and committed to Sussex Correctional Institution. Bail information was not immediately available.

Warrants were on file charging Stewart with the same offenses, Newton said. He was reported in stable condition at the hospital.

The homeowner was not injured.





Wednesday September 23, 2009
Congressional Budget Office Proves President Wrong Again
Posted by: rob_92183 at 12:11PM CST on September 23, 2009
"Don't pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut. ... That will never happen on my watch. I will protect Medicare."

The President made that claim on Capitol Hill to a rousing standing ovation from the left.  The only problem?  It's not true.

The health care bill being pushed through specifically cuts over $100 billion over ten years from Medicare Advantage plans.  This information comes directly from the Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan organization connected to Washington.

The Finance Committee bill along with other health care legislation in Congress would cut around $500 billion in projected Medicare payments to providers over a decade, including around $125 billion from Medicare Advantage.  Obama has pushed the cuts to providers even while repeatedly insisting they won't reduce seniors' benefits.

We used to have a word for this sort of thing, I think it was called...lying?  But when you stand up and question the president, the White House contacts you directly to stop informing your customers of the truth (if you're an insurance company like Humana who was warned to stop sending mailings out) or they censure you (if you're a politician who dares to stand up to the left).

See the video of the CBO's claims here: http://www.freedomslighthouse.com/2009/07/cbo-director-directly-contradicts-obama.html

Energy Secretary: "Americans are like teenage kids..."
Posted by: rob_92183 at 7:51AM CST on September 23, 2009
“The American public…just like your teenage kids, aren’t acting in a way that they should act,” Dr. Chu said. “The American public has to really understand in their core how important this issue is.”

I think this perfectly defines the attitude of the entire administration towards the American people:  "Teenage children, the whole lot of you!  If we don't legislate your safety, you're too stupid to survive!"

"...there’s very little debate” that a new green energy economy will bring economic prosperity, Mr. Chu told reporters."

Is it sad that this makes me laugh out loud at the absurdity of the statement?  Of COURSE there's no debate, the left won't allow it!  Because they're right and anyone who wants to argue is a teenager who won't listen to his parents who know what's best for him!

And I won't even get into the hypocrisy of a government that is hell-bent on devaluing the dollar trying to act as a parent.  If the United States government was a parent and we were the children, we'd either belong to a Chinese bookie right now or be living in the street bankrupt.  And both could still happen!

UPDATED:
The public relations wheels are already in motion. 

Energy Department spokesman Dan Leistikow added: “Secretary Chu was not comparing the public to teenagers. He was saying that we need to educate teenagers about ways to save energy."

When these people are voted out, they'll always have a career in standup comedy.

Health Care Reform is More Corporate Welfare
Posted by: rob_92183 at 7:50AM CST on September 23, 2009
Last Wednesday the nation was riveted to the President's speech on healthcare reform before Congress. While the President's concern for the uninsured is no doubt sincere, his plan amounts to a magnanimous gift to the health insurance industry, despite any implications to the contrary.

For decades the insurance industry has been lobbying for mandated coverage for everyone. Imagine if the cell phone industry or the cable TV industry received such a gift from government? If government were to fine individuals simply for not buying a corporation's product, it would be an incredible and completely unfair boon to that industry, at the expense of freedom and the free market. Yet this is what the current healthcare reform plans intend to do for the very powerful health insurance industry.

The stipulation that pre-existing conditions would have to be covered seems a small price to pay for increasing their client pool to 100 of the American people. A big red flag, however, is that they would also have immunity from lawsuits, should they fail to actually cover what they are supposedly required to cover, so these requirements on them are probably meaningless. Mandates on all citizens to be customers of theirs, however, are enforceable with fines and taxes.

Insurance providers seem to have successfully equated health insurance with health care but this is a relatively new concept. There were doctors and medicine long before there was health insurance. Health insurance is not a bad thing, but it is not the only conceivable way to get health care. Instead, we seem to still rely on the creativity and competence of politicians to solve problems, which always somehow seem to be tied in with which lobby is the strongest in Washington.

It is sad to think of the many creative, free market solutions that government prohibits with all its interference. What if instead of joining a health insurance plan, you could buy a membership directly from a hospital or doctor? What if a doctor wanted to have a cash-only practice, or make house calls, or determine his or her own patient load, or otherwise practice medicine outside the constraints of the current bureaucratic system? Alternative healthcare delivery models will be at an even stronger competitive disadvantage if families are forced to buy into the insurance model. And yet, the reforms are sold to us as increasing competition.

What if just once Washington got out of the way and allowed the ingenuity of the American people to come up with a whole spectrum of alternatives to our broken system? Then the free market, not lobbyists and politicians, would decide which models work and which did not.

Unfortunately, the most broken aspect of our system is that Washington sees the need to act on every problem in society, rather than staying out of the way, or getting out of the way. The only tools the government has are force and favors. These are tools that many unscrupulous and lazy corporations would like to wield to their own advantage, rather than simply providing a better product that people will willingly buy. It seems the health insurance industry will get more of those advantages very soon.

By Ron Paul
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=218

Monday September 21, 2009
Optional Adjustable Rates aka why the Housing Market hasn't Bottomed
Posted by: rob_92183 at 9:35AM CST on September 21, 2009
One of the shows I listen to on the radio is Clarke Howard, who usually gives fairly good advice on everything money-saving except when it comes to the economy.  He has a far too positive outlook on everything, in specific when it comes to the real estate market.

Typically the safest investment advice is to buy low and sell high.  I still don't agree with that philosophy in Real Estate as the market stands right now for separate reasons, but for the sake of this article I'll stick to the main point and that is: Optional ARM mortgages are about to explode at the same level that subprime mortgages did, and if you remember that mess then you don't want to be anywhere near owning a home until this all subsides.

The way that optional ARM loans is to allow someone to buy a more expensive house by avoiding full interest payments for the introductory part of the loan.  The introductory period is short though, sometimes less than a year.  After that, interests rates are raised every half year or so, most of the time far past the prime interest rate.  This is problematic because banks figured the ability to afford payments based on the introductory period and NOT on the mortgage reset.

The options left for the homeowner are almost none.  Refinancing requires excellent credit history and proof the homeowner can afford the payments, and that's only if the value of their home hasn't dropped to a point where the amount needed to borrow exceeds the value of the house.

To help sort this out, I've included a handy little chart from over at bp3.blogger.com, which points out exactly where we are in the real estate market and why things won't clear up until at least 2013 (realistically, probably a few years after that).

And this doesn't even begin to cover how many banks this could shut down or the repercussions from that.  Just look at the billions of dollars and you kind of get the picture.



Saturday September 19, 2009
Must See: Celente Predicts Revolution Next for U.S
Posted by: rob_92183 at 12:26PM CST on September 19, 2009


Gerald Celente has earned his reputation as "The most trusted name in trends" by accurately forecasting hundreds of social, business, consumer, environmental, economic, political, entertainment, and technology trends. Celente is publisher of the Trends Journal® and author of Trends 2000 and Trend Tracking

Have We Reached Critical Mass of Debt?
Posted by: rob_92183 at 11:08AM CST on September 19, 2009
I'm going to go on record and make a prediction here.  A few things are going to happen, unfortunately I don't have a specific time frame but I will say that sooner is more likely than later and it will happen within a year.  First, the Federal Reserve is going to raise interest rates.  As a result of that, the stock market will tumble and the value of a dollar will tank.  Secondly, the value of gold is going to skyrocket.  I think $1500 is a great lower point but $2000 is looking more and more likely.

Now, allow me to explain how I've reached these conclusions.  Check out this chart from market-ticker.org:




This very clearly points out how America is standing today.  We've skyrocketed our debt with no regard for GDP and the only reason our entire monetary system hasn't collapsed already is in part because of the government's ability to sell off it's own debt.  I know I've said this before, and I'm going to keep coming back to it, because with every idiotic statement Ben Bernanke and Timothy Geithner make to the public, more people become delusional about the actual standing of America's economy.

On Wednesday, in a press conference from the Treasury department you DIDN'T hear about in the mainstream media, they all but said that foreign demand for US debt has tanked.  In June, private foreign investors bought $77.6 billion dollars worth of debt.  In July, they bought $14.6 billion.  This is at the same time the Treasury is auctioning off record levels of debt.  Any rational person can view this for what it is: a government desperately trying to sell off whatever they can to stay afloat by any means possible.  And it's backfiring now as countries realize the likelihood of the U.S ever paying it back is non-existent.  And on top of this very bad news, you should also know that even with the private foreign investments buying our debt, the Federal Reserve is turning around and buying it right back from them sometimes as short as five to ten days after the Treasury auction.  They're actively monetizing the debt, which is driving down the value of your dollar and artificially creating demand on the Treasury auctions.  Why are they doing this?

As I mentioned in my first point, when they can't hide the fact there is no demand for U.S debt, they will have to raise interest rates to make up for the shortfall of money.  As far as I can tell, they're trying to actively protect the stock market, because if interest rates are raised, then investors are going to run and we're going to see a HUGE tumble in stocks.  But with the present numbers, this is inevitable and you should brace yourself for a minimum 30% unemployment.  If there's a total monetary collapse?  Imagine the government stopping all social programs including Social Security and Medicare and anyone with any debt being completely bankrupt.  As best described, "100 million homeless, penniless Americans wandering the streets for the people who put them in that position."

Now, for the gold aspect.  You can thank China for this one.  Since they've been the largest purchaser of our debt, they've also had a very close eye on our monetary policies to look for warning signs of inflation and ruining of the dollar.  Over the past six months, they've looked to hedge their investments against devaluation of the dollar.  In 2002, ownership of gold in China was a jailable offense while in 2009, the government actively encouraged it's citizens to buy up gold.  You can currently walk into any bank in China and buy four different size gold bars right over the counter.  This doesn't mention China's investment in mining recently, and trying to increase supply from within their own country.  These actions are negative for the dollar, but positive for the price of gold, as they're reducing supply outside of China.

Friday September 18, 2009
Mass. Gov says Obama discussed Kennedy replacement
Posted by: rob_92183 at 2:00PM CST on September 18, 2009

RICHMOND, Mass. – Gov. Deval Patrick said Friday that President Barack Obama had personally talked to him about changing the Senate succession law in Massachusetts, and White House aides were pushing for him to gain the power to temporarily replace the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy amid the administration's health care push.

A month after a White House spokesman labeled the issue a state matter, Patrick said he and Obama spoke about changing the law as they both attended Kennedy's funeral in Boston last month. He also said White House aides have been in contact frequently ever since and pushing for the change so they can regain their filibuster-proof majority in the U.S. Senate.

"He and his whole team have been very clear about that," Patrick told reporters after holding a Cabinet meeting near his Berkshire Mountains vacation home.

"It's out there that the Senate president and the (House) speaker are tyring to figure out whether this can be accomplished, and he fully understands, as do his aides, who I have talked to more about it, the importance of having the support for a change agenda down in Washington," Patrick added.

The governor spoke just moments after Republicans in the Massachusetts Senate temporarily blocked a bill allowing Patrick to name an interim appointment.

Democrats changed the succession law in 2004 to create a five-month special election campaign and block then-Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican, from naming a temporary replacement if Sen. John Kerry had won his presidential bid.

To change the law now that there is a Democrat in the governor's office smacks of hypocrisy, the GOP says. The special election campaign is underway, with party primaries scheduled for Dec. 8 and the general election set for Jan. 19.

Sen. Bruce E. Tarr, a Gloucester Republican who raised the objection, said he assumes Democratic leaders believe they have the votes to pass the bill, yet he still holds out hope enough Democrats may be swayed to vote against it.

"I think there is some doubt about the ultimate outcome. Clearly the vote in the House was not a completely partisan vote," he said. "I'm not sure that anyone has an accurate count on who is on the yes side and who is on the no side."

Republicans, who hold just five of 40 seats in the state Senate, objected to the bill being taken up without formal notice. Under Senate rules, the objection means the bill can't be debated until the next formal session.

The body will next meet in a formal session on Monday. Senate President Therese Murray, a Democrat, has been tightlipped about the bill's chances.

The delay came a day after the Massachusetts House voted 95-58 in favor of the bill, with 42 House Democrats joining all 16 Republicans in opposition.

Supporters, including House Speaker Robert DeLeo, a Democrat, said the change is needed to ensure Massachusetts continues to be represented by two senators until voters can choose a replacement in the special election.

Kennedy, in a letter sent to lawmakers before his death, urged the change in law in a letters to Patrick and legislative leaders shortly before his death last month of brain cancer.

He said, "It is vital for this Commonwealth to have two voices speaking for the needs of its citizens."

Besides Obama and his team, others in Washington closely watching the debate include Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Massachusetts' all-Democratic delegation to the U.S. House.

Obama presidential counselor David Axelrod has contacted Massachusetts officials and the Massachusetts branch of Obama's political arm, Organizing for America, has sent out e-mails advocating for the change.

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass. said Friday that qualms about whether to allow the interim appointment shouldn't be used to help defeat major policy issues like expanding Americans access to health care.

"Public policy questions important to everyone in America shouldn't be decided by a tragedy of death or some other non-electoral factor," Frank said.

The bill initially would have required the appointee be from the same party as the person who created the vacancy, a Democrat in the case of Kennedy's successor.

That requirement was stripped after critics in the House raised constitutional concerns and noted that more than half of voters in Massachusetts aren't enrolled in any party and would be barred from consideration.

Patrick has said he would extract from the appointee a promise not to be a candidate in the special election.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090918/ap_on_re_us/us_kennedy_successor

How much more evidence do you need that this is a corrupt administration hell-bent on pushing an anti-American agenda by quelling the majority and ignoring the voices of citizens?


Thursday September 17, 2009
Atlas Shrugged: The New Supermajority
Posted by: rob_92183 at 5:09PM CST on September 17, 2009
Yesterday I posted about the new minority in America, the people who live within their means, don't spend money they don't have with endless credit limits, and live their life without relying on the charity of others.

Don't listen to a word of it.  It was stupid advice for the new, liberal America.  Welcome to your wildest dreams.

ACORN was right all along.  People that play by the rules are suckers.  You want to survive as part of the majority in the new Liberal America?  You better learn how to lie, cheat and steal.  And you better learn quick.

Did you notice The National Association or Realtors is pushing to extend the first-time homebuyers credit?  The first time around it was an $8,000 credit completely furnished by your neighbors.  They're paying for your house!  You'd be a sucker not to buy!  That cost $15 billion dollars to this country, twice as much as expected, and you didn't have to contribute a dime!  You feeling good about suckering people out of money yet?  It gets better!  The NAR not only wants to extend the tax credit, they want to DOUBLE it!  $15,000 and make ALL homeowners eligible!

(By the way, if you already bought a house and received your $8,000 I'm going to call you a sucker for buying too soon when you knew the government was going to throw more money at you.  Always hold out for more money in the new Liberal America.  After all, it's not YOUR money.)

My advice is to buy the biggest house you can't possibly afford.  Of course you're going to lose it eventually, but you're getting fifteen grand for free out of it, and if you're really lucky, the bank will walk away from the foreclosure auction!  That's right, in the new Liberal America, it costs banks too much to auction some of these homes off compared to their value, so they have been canceling the auctions and leaving the deed in the homeowners name.  You no longer have to pay for it and you can keep your house!  Hah!  Only suckers pay for things with their own money in the new Liberal America!

While you're at it, you should have bought a new car you couldn't possibly afford.  Put it in your new garage, because the repossession agency can't legally enter your property to reclaim it.  You can be irresponsible twice here, first using your neighbors money to own a car, and then hiding it when those repossession men come!  Only suckers allow their property to be repossessed in the new Liberal America!

While you're at it, you're going to need new appliances for your home.  Since the government is extending cash for clunkers to appliances, you can completely restock your home!  $200 for old appliances!  Then invite your neighbors over to check out your new digs, after all, they're paying for it!  Only suckers pay full price for new appliances in the new Liberal America!

But you're going to need food to use that new stove, right?  Well, you already own your house free of charge, you have no intention of paying for your appliances and your vehicle, why not quit your job?  You can cash in on unemployment and when that's out, apply for foodstamps!  After all, why shouldn't your neighbors feed you?  It's not fair that they should do things like work to pay their bills and eat without even thinking of your needs or wants.  You know what that is?  That's selfishness from the high and mighty upper-class in America.  Let them pay your way, they're the ones working after all.  Only suckers work for supplies essential to life in new Liberal America.

And when it's all said and done and you've got the nice mansion and newest appliances, lean back and crack a Miller High Life.  You're living the high life and you didn't have to contribute a dime to it.  And if your liver gets shot, who cares?  You'll get a transplant completely for free under universal health care!  You're living the high life now, only suckers use one set of organs when you can get new ones completely free.

Welcome to the new Liberal America.


Wednesday September 16, 2009
The New Racism: America's Minority
Posted by: rob_92183 at 12:34PM CST on September 16, 2009
The left has brought the fight for health care reform to a new low this week, suggesting that the only reason people could possibly oppose this idea is because they're nothing but a bunch of aging old white men scared of a African American man in power.  But I'm here to argue today that it's no longer the African American who is the minority in America today.  That's an age-old tactic from a party who has nothing better to argue to advance their agenda than the color of one's skin, and that in itself IS actually racism.

The fight today isn't between skin color or gender, the fight today is between people who want to work, earn money, and be productive citizens and people who want everything handed to them.  That's why I say the minority in America is no longer the African American, the minority in America is the person who works hard and saves responsibly and lives without debt.  The minority in America is the citizen who has always produced for his country without demanding anything in return.  The minority in America is the responsible American, who, through no fault of his own, is now taking up the slack for the irresponsible who want and demand handouts from their politicians.

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But under the name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without knowing how it happened.”
-Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Candidate 1940,44,48

This is the fight for liberty itself that we're facing today.  I don't know about anyone else out there, but when I hear my grandparents argue this issue, it isn't from desperation or fear of death or uninformed senility like the media would have you believe, but from the understanding of the American Dream from a generation of Americans who lived through the toughest years and prospered without anything being given to them.  They didn't expect the government to provide, because the America that they knew, the freedom that they knew, required them to be responsible for their own efforts.  They took pride in their success and owned up to their failures.

You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot help small men by tearing down big men. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot lift the wage-earner by pulling down the wage-payer. You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot establish security on borrowed money. You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.
-William Boetcker

I've said it before and I'll say it again, you cannot have liberty and equality.  While every man should be born free with the same rights afforded under the constitution, this should only guarantee a fair pursuit in life amongst man and not a fair outcome.  Someone who puts their time into education and work should not be forced into the same outcome as someone who puts their time into drugs and homelessness.  The majority of American citizens today realize this, they know their rights are on the line.  They know they're under attack and they're already being punished for the debt of the irresponsible.  This is what liberals cannot and will never understand.

Because what they want is all the success of the wealthy for people who've never earned it with no regard for the path it took to get there.  They want the American Dream without working to attain it.  And they absolutely hate people who have successfully achieved it over a lifetime of hard work.

If you believe in laboring for what you want instead of handouts, or if you're a successful, hard working American, welcome to the new minority.


Tuesday September 15, 2009
Obama: "Do As I Say and Not As I Do"
Posted by: rob_92183 at 10:49AM CST on September 15, 2009
I briefly considered calling this post, "The pot calling the kettle black", but I can only imagine the frothing outrage from the left wanting to throw out the race card like they're doubling down on 11 on a blackjack table in Vegas.  You don't question whether you do it, you just do it.

 So Obama was on Wall Street yesterday, touting government takeover of the financial regulatory industry.  Ironically, he pitched his plan in the exact same spot where the founding fathers argued over how much control over the economy the government should have.  Clearly, not being satisfied just being ironic, president Obama went for hypocrisy when he said, "We will not go back to the days of reckless behavior and unchecked excess that was at the heart of this crisis. ... Those on Wall Street cannot resume taking risks without regard for consequences."

This is the exact same day that a report came out citing the Federal Budget Deficit at $1.38 trillion with one month left in the fiscal year.  Reckless behavior and unchecked excess?  Only the left thinks it can harm America when it's not them spending the money.  I personally would appreciate it if President Obama stopped lecturing others about risks and consequences and started heeding his own advice.


Obama calls Kanye 'jackass'
Posted by: rob_92183 at 12:43AM CST on September 15, 2009

Because I'm almost positive you won't hear this story in the mainstream media.

ABC's Terry Moran set the Twitter-sphere all aflutter when he wrote:

We've reached out to Moran and will update this post when we learn more. 

Now, an ABC spokesperson explains to POLITICO what happened:

"In the process of reporting on remarks by President Obama that were made during a CNBC interview, ABC News employees prematurely tweeted a portion of those remarks that turned out to be from an off-the-record portion of the interview. This was done before our editorial process had been completed. That was wrong. We apologize to the White House and CNBC and are taking steps to ensure that it will not happen again."

The White House had no immediate comment.

http://www.politico.com/click/stories/0909/did_obama_call_kanye_a_jackass.html

http://search.twitter.com/search?q=&ands=obama&phrase=&ors=&nots=&tag=&lang=all&from=terrymoran&to=&ref=&near=&within=15&units=mi&since=&until=&rpp=15


Monday September 14, 2009
A Complete Ignorance of Reality
Posted by: rob_92183 at 10:05AM CST on September 14, 2009
"I don't think it's indicative of the nation's mood," White House senior adviser David Axelrod said on CBS' "Face the Nation." "You know, I don't think we ought to be distracted by that. My message to them is, they're wrong."

"They" are the crowds who gathered at the White House over the weekend to protest the proposed health care program, government spending, excessive bailouts, and the all-out power grab coming from Washington.

Mimicking the disconnect from reality of the White House, the liberal media follows by severely under-reporting the amount of people at the rallies.  MSNBC reported, "tens of thousands" of people and accompanied it with this picture.

Image: Taxpayer rally

CNN didn't even bother giving an estimate of how many people showed up, but they did include a much better picture of the crowd.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/POLITICS/09/12/tea.party.rally/art.capitol.march.cnn.jpg

So how many people really were there?  Up to two million people showed up for the rally.  Far more than "tens of thousands".  My message to David Axelrod, who apparently lives in a world of his own, is that when a large number of people voice their concern with your actions, and they're essentially the people hiring you to do a job, you should at the very least listen to what they're saying.  Otherwise the next time you see this many people together, it's going to be at the ballot box while they vote you out of power.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/09/12/article-1213056-0666DB48000005DC-801_634x330.jpg

Friday September 11, 2009
Last Week in Self Defense: Be Glad You're Not British
Posted by: rob_92183 at 12:02PM CST on September 11, 2009

A millionaire businessman is facing jail for attacking a career criminal who had held his family hostage at knifepoint.

Munir Hussain, 52, was told he would be killed when three raiders invaded his home.

He and his wife, their teenage daughter and two sons were ordered to lie on the floor of the living room with their hands behind their backs. 


Thursday September 10, 2009
Obama Won’t Give Federal Insurance Benefits to Illegal Aliens, He’ll Make Them Legal First
Posted by: rob_92183 at 2:32PM CST on September 10, 2009
(CNSNews.com) - In his speech to a joint session of Congress last night, President Obama said that his health care reform plan will not insure “illegal immigrants.” The statement instantly became a matter of controversy when Rep. Joe Wilson (R.-S.C.) yelled out in the House chamber, “You lie.”
 
Wilson has since apologized for his outburst.

But President Obama’s statement about illegal aliens and health care reform deserves further scrutiny.
 
“There are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants,” said Obama. “This, too, is false.  The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.”
 
It is true that both the House and Senate health care bills as they are now drafted would make illegal aliens ineligible for federally funded health care. But President Obama has stated as recently as last month at a press conference in Mexico that he will seek “comprehensive immigration reform” legislation that will put illegal aliens on a “pathway to citizenship.”

Viewed in combination, the president’s health care and immigration reform plans would in fact let people who are illegal immigrants in the United States today receive federally funded health care benefits when the plan comes on line. In his speech last night, the president said that the health insurance exchanges where people would buy federally subsidized insurance would not begin operating until four years from now. If Obama follows through on his agenda as planned, immigration reform will be enacted in the intervening time.
 
Section 246 of the health care reform bill that has been approved by three House committees is titled, “No Federal Payment for Undocumented Aliens.”  It says, “Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.”
 
The bill passed by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, defines an “eligible individual” under the bill as “a citizen or national of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence or an alien lawfully present in the United States.”

At an August 10 press conference in Guadalajara, Mexico, President Obama was asked this question: “I wonder if you can tell us what you think the prospects are for immigration reform, for comprehensive immigration reform, which you've said is your goal; and whether you think that the blows you're taking now on health care and that the Democrats are likely to take around the midterm elections will make it hard, if not impossible, to achieve comprehensive immigration reform in this term.”
 
Obama responded that he was “confident” he would get immigration reform that created a “pathway to citizenship” for illegal aliens.
 
“Now, am I going to be able to snap my fingers and get this done? No,” said Obama. “This is going to be difficult; it's going to require bipartisan cooperation. There are going to be demagogues out there who try to suggest that any form of pathway for legalization for those who are already in the United States is unacceptable. And those are fights that I'd have to have if my poll numbers are at 70 or if my poll numbers are at 40. That's just the nature of the U.S. immigration debate.
 
“But ultimately, I think the American people want fairness,” Obama continued. “And we can create a system in which you have strong border security, we have an orderly process for people to come in, but we're also giving an opportunity for those who are already in the United States to be able to achieve a pathway to citizenship so that they don't have to live in the shadows, and their children and their grandchildren can have a full participation in the United States. So I'm confident we can get it done.”
 
So, the bottom line is this: Obama intends to enact health-care reform legislation that expressly prohibits giving federal health insurance benefits to illegal aliens. He then intends to enact “comprehensive immigration reform” that will make illegal aliens into legal residents of the United States thus making them eligible for the new federal health insurance benefits created by his health-care reform bill.
 
Illegal immigrants won’t get federal health insurance benefits under Obama’s plan because they won’t be illegal immigrants anymore, they will be legal immigrants.



Wednesday September 9, 2009
Loony Liberals and the Offshore Oil Hypocrisy
Posted by: rob_92183 at 4:31PM CST on September 9, 2009
How do you waste $10 billion dollars while doing nothing for job creation?  This is a solution only the tolerant and compassionate left can provide.

In yet another story that went completely past every single mainstream media network, the US Government has pledged up to $10 billion dollars worth of loans to Petrobras, a Brazilian oil company, to finance the development of massive hydrocarbon reserves off the coast of Brazil.  Supposedly there are up to 80 BILLION barrels of high quality crude. 

The surprise (and, the hypocrisy) is that this comes just days after President Obama reversed course and stated he could accept an expansion of offshore drilling.  Current estimates for the Gulf Of Mexico suggest that there are 3 billion barrels of oil and somewhere around 11 trillion cubic feet of natural gas just 45 minutes off the coast of Florida.  As of right now, all of those natural resources lie right where American companies aren't allowed to drill.  So, while Brazil, China, India, Norway, Spain and Russia have all signed deals with Cuba and the Bahamas to initiate exploration for the best drill sights, President Obama and the Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar have dragged their feet through the approval process that would allow Americans the same chance to drill.

But, why would this administration approve $10 billion to another country while not allowing US Citizens to drill off the coast of their own country?  Especially when the drilling would create $1.3 trillion in new government revenue and 160,000 high-paying jobs over the next two decades.

It's going to be the continued pattern of empty rhetoric of job creation and hypocrisy that loses Democratic seats in midterm elections and, with any luck, the White House.


Tuesday September 8, 2009
Debt, Gold and Endless Greenbacks
Posted by: rob_92183 at 7:24PM CST on September 8, 2009
“Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren.  America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.”

-Senator Obama in 2006, just before voting against the Senate raising the debt limit.

Three years later, Senator Obama is now President Obama and openly asking the Senate to raise the debt limit.  Of course, now that a Democrat is president this is a necessary measure to save the country, as opposed to an evil Republican only doing it to make a profit for himself.  Failure to do so, suggests the president's right hand man Timothy Geithner, would lead the nation to default in mid-October when American debt is expected to exceed it's limit.  I would suggest that $12 trillion dollars worth of debt is a fairly good starting point to limit government spending, but what do I know?  I suppose I would be more enlightened if I was a Democrat that had a printing press which could be run every time my checkbook went into the red.  But alas, I'm just a lowly fiscal conservative (soon to be renamed financial terrorist), and probably a racist for criticizing government spending.

But I refuse to apologize for the belief that maybe, just maybe, my government should show a little restraint in spending their constituent's money.  I understand the left is dumb enough to put their politicians in one of those carnival tubes with the air compressor and paper bills floating around just waiting to be taken. But for the rational American, I think most of us can see a disaster eight or ten years in the making.  "But Obama has only had less than a year!"  Yeah, well can you tell me how he has differed from George Bush on ANYTHING?

So $13 trillion dollars isn't enough of a debt cap for the one, and any temporary raise won't be enough of a debt cap for the forseeable future as we're on pace for $3 trillion more dollars of debt in the rest of this year and next year combined.

Oh, I almost forgot.  Roger Wiegand of Trader Tracks Newsletter reports that one out of four auto buyers who used Cash For Clunkers is now having buyers remorse as they signed up for so many new payments they can't afford.  HAH.  I guess they didn't realize $4,000 wasn't much of a relief on a brand new car, not to mention the full insurance payments needed because of the loan.  Clearly everyone against this program was a rightwing fearmongerer though, they couldn't possibly be telling the truth that this kind of debt spending is the cause of the problem and can't possibly be the solution.  Personally, I'm waiting for the bailout of the Cash for Clunkers loans.

While we're on the topic of worthless dollars, Gold skyrocketed past $1,000 dollars per ounce today.  Why is this?  Three reasons, the first was listed already in Obama asking to raise the debt limit.  The second is because the United Nations is now actively looking to replace the dollar as the world's backup currency with a plethora of different currencies from countries around the world that might be able to balance each other out rather than have one country dominate.  And the third is a story that even the Chinese can understand while Americans seem oblivious (maybe it's their much higher ranking in basic Mathematics?).  Simply put, the Federal Reserve is printing money to buy bonds, which is going to lead to inflation and crash the value of the dollar.  The Chinese are now actively working to get rid of foreign reserves in US bonds while diversifying into the Euro and the Yen.

Could it be too late already?  Possibly, if you believe the Forbes article that openly claims the crash of the dollar is happening RIGHT NOW.  Clearly this is right-wing paranoia fear mongering though.  Excessive spending and debt could never lead to currency collapse, not with a Democrat in office.

There's an old saying, "Trust in God.  All other's pay cash."  I move to amend the second half of that to, "All others pay gold or silver."  Because that's going to be the only thing worth value.

Monday September 7, 2009
"I am Tired" by Robert A. Hall
Posted by: rob_92183 at 9:45PM CST on September 7, 2009
Robert Hall is a Marine Vietnam veteran who served five terms in the
Massachusetts State Senate.

"I'm Tired" by Robert A. Hall

I'll be 63 soon. Except for one semester in college when jobs were scarce, and a six-month period when I was between jobs, but job-hunting every day, I've worked hard since I was 18.  Despite some health challenges, I still put in 50-hour weeks, and haven't called in sick in seven or eight years. I make a good salary, but I didn't inherit my job or my income, and I worked to get where I am. Given the economy, there's no retirement in sight, and I'm tired. Very tired.

I'm tired of being told that I have to "spread the wealth around" to people who don't have my work ethic. I'm tired of being told the government will take the money I earned, by force if necessary, and give it to people too lazy or stupid to earn it. I'm tired of being told that I have to pay more taxes to "keep people in their homes." Sure, if they lost their jobs or got sick, I'm willing to help.  But if they bought Mansions at three times the price of our paid-off, $250,000 condo, on one-third of my salary, then let the left-wing Congress-critters who passed Fannie and Freddie and the Community Reinvestment Act that created the bubble help them with their own money.

I'm tired of being told how bad America is by left-wing millionaires like Michael Moore, George Soros, and Hollywood entertainers who live in luxury because of the opportunities America offers. In thirty years, if they get their way, the United States will have the economy of Zimbabwe, the freedom of the press of China, the crime and violence of Mexico, the tolerance for Christian people of Iran, and the freedom of speech of Venezuela. Won't multiculturalism be beautiful?

I'm tired of being told that Islam is a "Religion of Peace," when every day I can read dozens of stories of Muslim men killing their sisters, wives and daughters for their family "honor"; of Muslims rioting over some slight offense; of Muslims murdering Christian and Jews because they aren't "believers" ; of Muslims burning schools for girls; of Muslims stoning teenage rape victims to death for "adultery"; of Muslims mutilating the genitals of little girls; all in the name of Allah, because the Qur'an and Shari'a law tells them to. I believe "a man should be judged by the content of his character, not by the color of his skin."

I'm tired of being told that "race doesn't matter" in the post-racial world of Obama, when it's all that matters in affirmative action jobs, lower college admission and graduation standards for minorities (harming them the most), government contract set-asides, tolerance for the ghetto culture of violence and fatherless children that hurts minorities more than anyone, and in the appointment of US Senators from Illinois.

I think it's very cool that we have a black president and that a black child is doing her homework at the desk where Lincoln wrote the emancipation proclamation.. I just wish the black president was Condi Rice, or someone who believes more in freedom and the individual and less arrogantly of an all-knowing government.
I'm tired of a news media that thinks Bush's fundraising and inaugural expenses were obscene, but that think Obama's, at triple the cost, were wonderful. That thinks Bush exercising daily was a waste of presidential time, but Obama exercising is a great example for the public to control weight and stress, that picked over every line of Bush's military records, but never demanded that Kerry release his, that slammed Palin, with two years as governor, for being too inexperienced for VP, but touted Obama with three years as senator as potentially the best president ever.

I Wonder why people are dropping their subscriptions or switching to Fox News ? Get a clue.

I'm tired of being told that out of "tolerance for other cultures" we must let Saudi Arabia use our oil money to fund mosques and madrassa Islamic schools to preach hate in America, while no American group is allowed to fund a church, synagogue, or religious school in Saudi Arabia to teach love and tolerance.

I'm tired of being told I must lower my living standard to fight global warming, which no one is allowed to debate. My wife and I live in a two-bedroom apartment and carpool together five miles to our jobs. We also own a three -bedroom condo where our daughter and granddaughter live. Our carbon footprint is about 5% of Al Gore's, and if you're greener than Gore, you're green enough for me.

I'm tired of being told that drug addicts have a disease, and I must help support and treat them, and pay for the damage they do. Did a giant germ rush out of a dark alley, grab them, and stuff white powder up their noses while they tried to fight it off? I don't think Gay people choose to be Gay, but I damn sure think druggies chose to take drugs. And I'm tired of harassment from cool people treating me like a freak when I tell them I never tried marijuana.

I'm tired of illegal aliens being called "undocumented workers," especially the ones who aren't working, but are living on welfare or crime. What's next? Calling drug dealers, "Undocumented Pharmacists"? And, no, I'm not against Hispanics. Most of them are Catholic, and it's been a few hundred years since Catholics wanted to kill me for my religion. I'm willing to fast track for citizenship any Hispanic person, who can speak English, doesn't have a criminal record and who is self-supporting without family on welfare, or who serves honorably for three years in our military... Those are the citizens we need.

I'm tired of latte liberals and journalists, who would never wear the uniform of the Republic themselves, or let their entitlement-handicapped kids near a recruiting station, trashing our military. They and their kids can sit at home, never having to make split-second decisions under life and death circumstances, and bad mouth better people than themselves. Do bad things happen in war? You bet. Do our troops sometimes misbehave? Sure. Does this compare with the atrocities that were the policy of our enemies for the last fifty years-and still are? Not even close.  So here's the deal. I'll let myself be subjected to all the humiliation and abuse that was heaped on terrorists at Abu Ghraib or Gitmo, and the critics can let themselves be subject to captivity by the Muslims who tortured and beheaded Daniel Pearl in Pakistan, or the Muslims who tortured and murdered Marine Lt. Col. William Higgins in Lebanon, or the Muslims who
ran the blood-spattered Al Qaeda torture rooms our troops found in Iraq, or the Muslims who cut off the heads of schoolgirls in Indonesia, because the girls were Christian. Then we'll compare notes. British and American soldiers are the only troops in history that civilians came to for help and handouts, instead of hiding from in fear.

I'm tired of people telling me that their party has a corner on virtue and the other party has a corner on corruption. Read the papers-bums are bipartisan. And I'm tired of people telling me we need bipartisanship. I live in Illinois, where the "Illinois Combine" of Democrats has worked to loot the public for years. Not to mention the tax cheats in Obama's cabinet as well.

I'm tired of hearing wealthy athletes, entertainers, and politicians of both parties talking about innocent mistakes, stupid mistakes or youthful mistakes, when we all know they think their only mistake was getting caught..

I'm tired of people with a sense of entitlement, rich or poor. Speaking of poor, I' m tired of hearing people with air-conditioned homes, color TVs and two cars called poor. The majority of Americans didn't have that in 1970, but we didn't know we were "poor." The poverty pimps have to keep changing the definition of poor to keep the dollars flowing I'm real tired of people who don't take responsibility for their lives and actions. I'm tired of hearing them blame the government, or discrimination, or big-whatever for their problems.

Yes, I'm damn tired. But I'm also glad to be 63. Because, mostly, I'm not going to have to see the world these people are making. I'm just sorry for my grandchildren.

http://tartanmarine.blogspot.com/2009/02/robert.html

Wednesday September 2, 2009
Sentenced to death on the NHS
Posted by: rob_92183 at 5:25PM CST on September 2, 2009

Patients with terminal illnesses are being made to die prematurely under an NHS scheme to help end their lives, leading doctors warn today.

By Kate Devlin, Medical Correspondent
Published: 10:00PM BSR 02 Sep 2009

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.

Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.

But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.

As a result the scheme is causing a “national crisis” in patient care, the letter states. It has been signed palliative care experts including Professor Peter Millard, Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics, University of London, Dr Peter Hargreaves, a consultant in Palliative Medicine at St Luke’s cancer centre in Guildford, and four others.

“Forecasting death is an inexact science,”they say. Patients are being diagnosed as being close to death “without regard to the fact that the diagnosis could be wrong.

“As a result a national wave of discontent is building up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food to patients."

The warning comes just a week after a report by the Patients Association estimated that up to one million patients had received poor or cruel care on the NHS.

The scheme, called the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP), was designed to reduce patient suffering in their final hours.

Developed by Marie Curie, the cancer charity, in a Liverpool hospice it was initially developed for cancer patients but now includes other life threatening conditions.

It was recommended as a model by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice), the Government’s health scrutiny body, in 2004.

It has been gradually adopted nationwide and more than 300 hospitals, 130 hospices and 560 care homes in England currently use the system.

Under the guidelines the decision to diagnose that a patient is close to death is made by the entire medical team treating them, including a senior doctor.

They look for signs that a patient is approaching their final hours, which can include if patients have lost consciousness or whether they are having difficulty swallowing medication.

However, doctors warn that these signs can point to other medical problems.

Patients can become semi-conscious and confused as a side effect of pain-killing drugs such as morphine if they are also dehydrated, for instance.

When a decision has been made to place a patient on the pathway doctors are then recommended to consider removing medication or invasive procedures, such as intravenous drips, which are no longer of benefit.

If a patient is judged to still be able to eat or drink food and water will still be offered to them, as this is considered nursing care rather than medical intervention.

Dr Hargreaves said that this depended, however, on constant assessment of a patient’s condition.

He added that some patients were being “wrongly” put on the pathway, which created a “self-fulfilling prophecy” that they would die.

He said: “I have been practising palliative medicine for more than 20 years and I am getting more concerned about this “death pathway” that is coming in.

“It is supposed to let people die with dignity but it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

“Patients who are allowed to become dehydrated and then become confused can be wrongly put on this pathway.”

He added: “What they are trying to do is stop people being overtreated as they are dying.

“It is a very laudable idea. But the concern is that it is tick box medicine that stops people thinking.”

He said that he had personally taken patients off the pathway who went on to live for “significant” amounts of time and warned that many doctors were not checking the progress of patients enough to notice improvement in their condition.

Prof Millard said that it was “worrying” that patients were being “terminally” sedated, using syringe drivers, which continually empty their contents into a patient over the course of 24 hours.

In 2007-08 16.5 per cent of deaths in Britain came about after continuous deep sedation, according to researchers at the Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, twice as many as in Belgium and the Netherlands.

“If they are sedated it is much harder to see that a patient is getting better,” Prof Millard said.

Katherine Murphy, director of the Patients Association, said: “Even the tiniest things that happen towards the end of a patient’s life can have a huge and lasting affect on patients and their families feelings about their care.

“Guidelines like the LCP can be very helpful but healthcare professionals always need to keep in mind the individual needs of patients.

“There is no one size fits all approach.”

A spokesman for Marie Curie said: “The letter highlights some complex issues related to care of the dying.

“The Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient was developed in response to a societal need to transfer best practice of care of the dying from the hospice to other care settings.

“The LCP is not the answer to all the complex elements of this area of health care but we believe it is a step in the right direction.”

The pathway also includes advice on the spiritual care of the patient and their family both before and after the death.

It has also been used in 800 instances outside care homes, hospices and hospitals, including for people who have died in their own homes.

The letter has also been signed by Dr Anthony Cole, the chairman of the Medical Ethics Alliance, Dr David Hill, an anaesthetist, Dowager Lady Salisbury, chairman of the Choose Life campaign and Dr Elizabeth Negus a lecturer in English at Barking University.

A spokesman for the Department of Health said: “People coming to the end of their lives should have a right to high quality, compassionate and dignified care.

"The Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) is an established and recommended tool that provides clinicians with an evidence-based framework to help delivery of high quality care for people at the end of their lives.

"Many people receive excellent care at the end of their lives. We are investing £286 million over the two years to 2011 to support implementation of the End of Life Care Strategy to help improve end of life care for all adults, regardless of where they live."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6127514/Sentenced-to-death-on-the-NHS.html

But, but,

It Can't Happen Here, right? Right? RIGHT?!

Sorry for the triple post today, plenty of interesting stories out there and I'm going to be gone from tomorrow until Tuesday with plenty more stories to tell.

Throw the bums out!
Posted by: rob_92183 at 4:00PM CST on September 2, 2009

If they could vote to keep or replace the entire Congress, just 25% of voters nationwide would keep the current batch of legislators.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% would vote to replace the entire Congress and start all over again. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure how they would vote.

Overall, these numbers are little changed since last October. When Congress was passing the unpopular $700-billion bailout plan in the heat of a presidential campaign and a seeming financial industry meltdown, 59% wanted to throw them all out. At that time, just 17% wanted to keep them.

There has been a bit of a partisan shift since last fall. With Democrats controlling both chambers of Congress, it's not surprising to find that the number of Democrats who would vote to keep the entire Congress has grown from 25% last fall to 43% today. In fact, a modest plurality of Democrats would now vote to keep the legislators. Last fall, a plurality of Democrats were ready to throw them all out.

While Democrats have become more supportive of the legislators, voters not affiliated with either major party have moved in the opposite direction. Today, 70% of those not affiliated with either major party would vote to replace all of the elected politicians in the House and Senate. That’s up from 62% last year.

Republicans, not surprisingly, overwhelmingly support replacing everyone in the Congress. Their views have not changed. But Republican voters are disenchanted with their team as much as the Congress itself: 69% of GOP Voters say Republicans in Congress are out of touch with the party base.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) now believe that members of Congress are overpaid. That’s up 10 percentage points from last October. Just five percent (5%) think their Congress member is paid too little. Thirty percent (30%) think the pay is about right.

One reason for this attitude may be that most voters say they understand the health care legislation better than Congress. Just 22% think the legislature has a good understanding of the issue. Three-out-of-four (74%) trust their own economic judgment more than Congress’.

Just 14% give Congress good or excellent review for their overall performance, while only 16% believe it’s Very Likely that Congress will address the most important problems facing our nation. Seventy-five percent (75%) say members of Congress are more interested in their own careers than they are in helping people. On the brighter side, just 37% say most in Congress have extramarital affairs.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans believe that when members of Congress meet with regulators and other government officials, they do so to help their friends and hurt their political opponents. Most believe that’s why politicians are able to solicit contributions from business leaders. Most, however, say it’s generally a good investment because political donors get more than their money’s worth. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of American adults say political donors get more than their money back in terms of favors from members of Congress.

Despite these reviews, more than 90% of Congress routinely gets reelected every two years. It’s a shock when any incumbent loses. One explanation for this phenomenon frequently heard in Washington, D.C. is that “people hate Congress but love their own congressman.”

Voters have a different perspective, and 50% say 'rigged' election rules explain high reelection rate for Congress.

When the Constitution was written, the nation’s founders expected that there would be a 50% turnover in the House of Representatives every election cycle. That was the experience they witnessed in state legislatures at the time (and most of the state legislatures offered just one-year terms). For well over 100 years after the Constitution was adopted, the turnover averaged in the 50% range as expected.

In the 20th century, turnover began to decline. As power and prestige flowed to Washington during the New Deal era, fewer and fewer members of Congress wanted to leave. In 1968, congressional turnover fell to single digits for the first time ever, and it has remained very low ever since.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2009/57_would_like_to_replace_entire_congress


Tuesday September 1, 2009
Massachusetts: The Model for Health Care
Posted by: rob_92183 at 6:27PM CST on September 1, 2009
  Well, here is your plan in action.  You have a state where everyone is forced to buy into coverage or be fined for withholding whether they can afford it or not ($912 per year, added to their taxes).  The reasoning?  People without insurance used an emergency as their primary care which put a strain on the overworked shortage of physicians working in those environments.

How did this work in action?

In 2006, the number of uninsured dropped.  The safety funding the government budgeted for uninsured hospital patients spent roughly 38% less.  Two years later, one hundred thousand more than expected joined for a cost nearly double what the government estimated.  Hospitals in urban centers faced budget shortfalls and without a guarantee for a billion dollars from the federal government, would have collapsed.  But the original problem of overcrowded waiting rooms and overworked primary care workers has exploded.  Since more people are covered, more people are using the emergency rooms as their primary care..."And for more than 80,000 people during one year, their visit took upward of eight hours"

http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/other/articles/2007/03/25/at_the_er_the_stay_can_reach_8_hours/

Before the next lefty starts crying, I will point out that eight hours refers to the entire trip.  Although waiting times in the ER are beyond national averages and I can find examples of people waiting both seven and eight hours in the waiting room before they even see an ER doctor.  Want to see a primary care doctor in Massachusetts?  Hope you have 100 days to wait.  That is, if you can even find a doctor accepting new patients.  (Why are ER visits going up?  Maybe because they're stressing primary care doctors and people can't afford to wait.) 

http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2008/09/22/across_mass_wait_to_see_doctors_grows/

But, then you dig a little deeper and what do you see?  The state is no longer covering LEGAL immigrants for dental, hospice, or skilled nursing care.  Remember the claim of killing grandma?  Well, the state will throw her in a hospital first.  Since they cut off hospice and nursing, she really has no choice now, does she?  But why would they do this to immigrants who bothered to come here legally?  Because the governor couldn't find a solution that allowed the state to preserve their health care reform after cutting money because of a budget deficit.

A bankrupt state has to cut services in a government healthcare system like the right has been claiming all along?  Shocking, I know.  So the plan was to pass new legislation that covered the immigrants for less cost to the state (I can only imagine it's nothing near the previous coverage) and also required them to pay more and find new primary care physicians (remember that bit about waiting 100 days if you can even find a new doctor?)

What's going to happen with the next budget shortfall?  Who's getting cut out of the plan then?  And what's the left's argument?  Still, "If it's free, it's for me!"?

China's national flag to go up in White House on Sept 20
Posted by: rob_92183 at 12:57PM CST on September 1, 2009
The national flag of the People's Republic of China (PRC) will be hoisted at the South Lawn of the White House in Washington on September 20, media reported Sunday.

Chinese associations in the United States had applied to hold a ceremony in front of the US President’s residence to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the founding of PRC.  Chen Ronghua, chairman of Fujian Association of the United States, told reporters that their application was approved not only because of the sound Sino-US relations but also because China is a responsible country.

"Many Americans admire China due to the success of last year’s Beijing Olympics," said Chen.

More than 1,000 people will attend the ceremony and the performances held after it, according to Zhao Luqun, who will direct the performances.

Zhao said the performances will demonstrate the friendship, magnanimous spirit and kindness of modern Chinese people.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2009-07/13/content_8422505.htm

Meanwhile, in related news...

Federal Government Will Borrow 40 Percent of the Money It Spends Next Year, Says White House Report

The report, “Mid-Session Review, Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Year 2010,” shows that 39.9 percent of all federal income will be borrowed, making borrowing the single largest share of revenue in 2010. The next largest component of federal revenue is the personal income tax, which accounts for only 27.3 percent of federal funds.
(cont'd)
Debt as a share of the budget reached 15 percent during the 1987 recession. Borrowing was generally high during much of the early Reagan administration, reaching a peak of 25 percent in 1983.  However, Obama’s borrowing is 10 times greater than Reagan’s, which was fueled largely by defense spending as America battled the Soviet Union for dominance in the Cold War.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/53246
About This Blog
1 rating(s)

Older Posts
Current Entries
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009

Latest Entries
Loading...
Links
Loading...
Report Photos