From Gateway Pundit a scary headline, but a little overblown as there seems to have been nothing personal involved.
OBAMA SECRET SERVICE Pulls Guns On Conservative Tea Party Protesters In Bristol
The article tells the whole story, click to read it
Friday, July 31, 2009
A Statement from Henry Louis Gates, Jr.
With all the bad publicity the man has had I believe we should all check out his statement which seems to be very well reasoned and a type of apology without actually being one. One of his key points:
The national conversation over the past week about my arrest has been rowdy, not to say tumultuous and unruly. But we’ve learned that we can have our differences without demonizing one another. There’s reason to hope that many people have emerged with greater sympathy for the daily perils of policing, on the one hand, and for the genuine fears about racial profiling, on the other hand.
National Review Online
You might have noticed I link to many articles from National Review Online.
This one by Mona Charen is well worth reading. It is a book review of George Gilder's The Israel Test.
This one by Mona Charen is well worth reading. It is a book review of George Gilder's The Israel Test.
The thesis of George Gilder’s The Israel Test is this: Today’s hatred of Israel is feeding off the same poison that has nourished anti-Semitism troughout history. Go give it a read.
While you are there have a look at The God Who Bleeds by Jonah Goldberg. Who writes:
In one of my favorite episodes of Star Trek, Captain Kirk is mistaken for a god by inhabitants of a planet of Native Americans (it’s a long story). The illusion works for Kirk until a jealous shaman cuts Kirk’s hand, revealing that the divine being is just a man after all. “Behold! A god who bleeds!” the shaman mocks, exposing Kirk as a fraud to the rest of the tribe.
It may sound like a stretch — and, let’s be fair, it is — but I keep thinking of that episode when I look Barack Obama’s poll numbers these days.
This is good to Hear! Now, Let's Get Busy
Town halls gone wild by Alex Isenstadt in Politico
Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress.
Well, maybe we don't want to get that wild but we do want to get their attention. It's a good idea to read everything at Politico
Skeptical Scientists
Via the Watts up with That? blog more on the skepticism of some scientists who are actively opposing their "betters", (read editors) of the American Chemical Society journal.
An outpouring of skeptical scientists who are members of the American Chemical Society (ACS) are revolting against the group’s editor-in-chief — with some demanding he be removed — after an editorial appeared claiming “the science of anthropogenic climate change is becoming increasingly well established.”
The editorial claimed the “consensus” view was growing “increasingly difficult to challenge, despite the efforts of diehard climate-change deniers.” The editor now admits he is “startled” by the negative reaction from the group’s scientific members. The American Chemical Society bills itself as the “world’s largest scientific society.”
The June 22, 2009 editorial in Chemical and Engineering News by editor in chief Rudy Baum, is facing widespread blowback and condemnation from American Chemical Society member scientists. Baum concluded his editorial by stating that “deniers” are attempting to “derail meaningful efforts to respond to global climate change.”
Dozens of letters from ACS members were published on July 27, 2009 castigating Baum, with some scientists calling for his replacement as editor-in-chief.
The editorial was met with a swift, passionate and scientific rebuke from Baum’s colleagues. Virtually all of the letters published on July 27 in castigated Baum’s climate science views. Scientists rebuked Baum’s use of the word “deniers” because of the terms “association with Holocaust deniers.” In addition, the scientists called Baum’s editorial: “disgusting”; “a disgrace”; “filled with misinformation”; “unworthy of a scientific periodical” and “pap.”
One outraged ACS member wrote to Baum: “When all is said and done, and you and your kind are proven wrong (again), you will have moved on to be an unthinking urn for another rat pleading catastrophe. You will be removed. I promise.”
Baum ’startled’ by scientists reaction.
Baum wrote on July 27, that he was “startled” and “surprised” by the “contempt” and “vehemence” of the ACS scientists to his view of the global warming “consensus.”
“Some of the letters I received are not fit to print. Many of the letters we have printed are, I think it is fair to say, outraged by my position on global warming,” Baum wrote.There are excerpts from the letters opposing his opinions, so go read the whole article.
Blue Dog Democrats
"The question for two weeks has been, Will the Blue Dogs bite? Or will they just piddle on the floor? " a line from the following article in The Hill. go read it.
Dogs of war (or not)
By Cheri Jacobus
Posted: 07/30/09 05:11 PM [ET]
Woof.The Blue Dogs speak. It’s debatable whether their bark matched their bite. Will they ultimately follow the orders of their masters, roll over and help ram socialized medicine through Congress?
The Birth Debate- a good definition
American Thinker has a thoughtful post by James Lewis on the "birther" controversy. In it he opines on how the fact of his birth is not what matters. What matters is the way he is out of sync with many, many Americans. He has not shared our experiences of growing up in America. He was raised and mentored by people who seem alien to our beliefs. They were communists, in many cases radicals and do not share the love of country that most of us have.
An excerpt:
An excerpt:
This is what I suspect the birther movement is about. Yes, the legalities are suspect. No, it will never make any practical difference. But most important, the birthers are aware of a deep intuition about Barry Soetoro Barack Hussein Obama: That he is profoundly out of tune with the meaning of America since the Founding. He is out of harmony with this country and this culture, like the dissonant scream of a power-saw biting into steel or concrete. He just grates on the American sensibility.
Obama is a Ruling Class Aristocrat -- by intuition, beliefs, and personal egomania. He was born to rule. It's partly that he has always gone to all the elite schools, from Hawaii to Harvard, just like Michelle. But he was put into those schools by the efforts of the left, which is a Socialist Ruling Class movement. The left in its own vision is always Ruling Class To Be that is being kept unjustly from taking over the world. That's why they hate real democracy, why they sneer at Coke and fries, and why capitalism is so bad: Because it constant(ly) caters to "vulgar" tastes.
Go read this, it is the best your will read on this subject.
Obama Czar-zarama
Wikipedia has done a nice job of listing all the czars -- and even made note of Glenn Beck's criticism of so many powerful positions with little to no accountability to congress (or we the people) amounting to a "shadow government".
The fact that many of the positions exist is troubling. A "border czar"; why would we possibly need one? What does Napolitano do? A border is a line you draw around your property. It needs to be protected for many reasons, the most important of which is because it is the fundamental definition of your country -- a physical chunk of property with longitudes and lattitudes. If you (the owners) disregard the defnition (borders) so will everyone else. It's as true of a vacant lot as it is a nation. And guess what happens. I'm sure you'll never hear that sort of logic from an Obama border czar.
Climate Czar, Compensation Czar, Car Czar, Energy Czar, Green Jobs Czar, Cyber Czar... the list goes on and on -- and pries more deeply into our personal freedoms than ever. If we have an energy czar -- what does the Secretary of Energy do? Is this person a figure-head with the energy czar having all the real power? I don't know. But I find it all troubling for the potential to be a great increase in government power with a great decrease in government accountability.
And how much does the Compensation Czar make? I'm sure it's too much.
The bias of the people in the positions is troubling as well.
Click the link to see the page on wiki. Editorial Alert: anyone can edit Wikipedia.
The fact that many of the positions exist is troubling. A "border czar"; why would we possibly need one? What does Napolitano do? A border is a line you draw around your property. It needs to be protected for many reasons, the most important of which is because it is the fundamental definition of your country -- a physical chunk of property with longitudes and lattitudes. If you (the owners) disregard the defnition (borders) so will everyone else. It's as true of a vacant lot as it is a nation. And guess what happens. I'm sure you'll never hear that sort of logic from an Obama border czar.
Climate Czar, Compensation Czar, Car Czar, Energy Czar, Green Jobs Czar, Cyber Czar... the list goes on and on -- and pries more deeply into our personal freedoms than ever. If we have an energy czar -- what does the Secretary of Energy do? Is this person a figure-head with the energy czar having all the real power? I don't know. But I find it all troubling for the potential to be a great increase in government power with a great decrease in government accountability.
And how much does the Compensation Czar make? I'm sure it's too much.
The bias of the people in the positions is troubling as well.
Click the link to see the page on wiki. Editorial Alert: anyone can edit Wikipedia.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Lamar Alexander to vote for Sotomayor
According to the blog Right Truth. Click the link to read it.
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml click this to contact him.
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml click this to contact him.
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE?
There has been a lot of interest in the new science advisor, John Holdren, for remarks made in the book, Ecoscience, population, resources, environment (1977). He was the junior author of the third edition of the original by Paul and Anne Ehrlich, Population, resources, environment: issues in human ecology. This was among the first of many “Environmental Science” texts that followed Silent Spring, from the earlier decade. Some years later I started and taught a course in Environmental Science and Management mostly to wildlife and fisheries science students, and I received a number of these books for adoption in the course. Although they were full of good information, well done, and for the most part factually accurate, they were clearly political statements. I recall telling one bookseller this and she seemed to have already heard the criticism.
I saved two-- Chiras, Environmental Science, a framework for decision making and Miller, Living in the environment, principles, connections and solutions, which I judged to be the worst, having errors in the fields I knew something about. Ironically, it probably had the best coverage of environmental problems. The two books I did use the most, both published about 1977, were never reprinted or reissued and are now classics that have been difficult to find since the 1980's.
Much of what these books said were factually true, as stated, because the period during and after WWII paid nearly no attention to pollution. However, even in the 1950's it was realized that things needed changing and some were begun. These “Environmental Science” books were popular and the course that replaced mine, named Conservation of Natural Resources, used the fifth edition of Miller.
In my rejection I was making no political or religious statement, as I simply wanted my students to adhere to good science, not the political value judgments of these books. As examples:
From Miller (Eighth edition, 1994)
Page 696
In a box labeled Earth Strategy is the following quote copied from Robert Fulghum
“I do not want to talk about what you understand about the world. I want to know what you will do about it. I do not want to know what you hope. I want to know what you will work for. I do not want your sympathy for the needs of humanity. I want your muscle. As the wagon driver said when they came to a long, hard hill ’Them that’s going on with us, get out and push. Them that ain’t get out of the way.’” On the opposite page is another box labeled “Major components of an Earth Coalition.”
Page 688 has “The Earth’s Ten Commandments..” Number 3 is “Thy shalt not hold thyself above other living things, nor drive them to extinction.”
Page 696 “...there is no single correct or best culture, worldview, or type of society.”
From Chiras (1985)
Page 550, Fig. 23.2. “Roots of Environmental Damage Caused by Humans.” It shows BIOLOGICAL IMPERIALISM joining JUDEO-CHRISTIAN TEACHINGS leading to ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE. Other more psychological points are shown as contributing.
Page 589 begins the last chapter, “Politics, Government and Environment: toward a sustainable society.” After a reasonable discussion about how the government works and fails, it then discusses "Education and Future Planning, A New Economic Order," where the statement is made that “Another major task is converting the current economic system of unlimited growth to one a of a steady-economics (Chapter 24).” Sounds familiar. Then there are sections on “New Leaders and Longer Terms,” and others up to “Value free decisions and Science Courts.” I doubt if the author realized that a value free decision is a value judgment.
In 1994 I received a request from the Education Testing Service at Princeton “...to help set standards for a new undergraduate examination entitled “Environment and Humanity: The Race to save the planet.” Again these types of Environmental Science books were given as references. There were three multiple choice sample questions. The first two were standard from ecology, but the last was telling.
“Which of the following statements is true about the near future of the biosphere.
(A) Human population will remain stable, (B) Coal will be the primary energy source, (C) The amount of food per person will remain stable, (D) Increased industrialization will not increase pollution.” Perhaps you know the answer, as we are now in the near future.
For several reasons I did not respond and do not know what happened, but I am told that this sort of thing is common across schools of education around the country. I have no problems with books like Chiras and Miller being published, but they do not belong in a science curriculum.
I saved two-- Chiras, Environmental Science, a framework for decision making and Miller, Living in the environment, principles, connections and solutions, which I judged to be the worst, having errors in the fields I knew something about. Ironically, it probably had the best coverage of environmental problems. The two books I did use the most, both published about 1977, were never reprinted or reissued and are now classics that have been difficult to find since the 1980's.
Much of what these books said were factually true, as stated, because the period during and after WWII paid nearly no attention to pollution. However, even in the 1950's it was realized that things needed changing and some were begun. These “Environmental Science” books were popular and the course that replaced mine, named Conservation of Natural Resources, used the fifth edition of Miller.
In my rejection I was making no political or religious statement, as I simply wanted my students to adhere to good science, not the political value judgments of these books. As examples:
From Miller (Eighth edition, 1994)
Page 696
In a box labeled Earth Strategy is the following quote copied from Robert Fulghum
“I do not want to talk about what you understand about the world. I want to know what you will do about it. I do not want to know what you hope. I want to know what you will work for. I do not want your sympathy for the needs of humanity. I want your muscle. As the wagon driver said when they came to a long, hard hill ’Them that’s going on with us, get out and push. Them that ain’t get out of the way.’” On the opposite page is another box labeled “Major components of an Earth Coalition.”
Page 688 has “The Earth’s Ten Commandments..” Number 3 is “Thy shalt not hold thyself above other living things, nor drive them to extinction.”
Page 696 “...there is no single correct or best culture, worldview, or type of society.”
From Chiras (1985)
Page 550, Fig. 23.2. “Roots of Environmental Damage Caused by Humans.” It shows BIOLOGICAL IMPERIALISM joining JUDEO-CHRISTIAN TEACHINGS leading to ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE. Other more psychological points are shown as contributing.
Page 589 begins the last chapter, “Politics, Government and Environment: toward a sustainable society.” After a reasonable discussion about how the government works and fails, it then discusses "Education and Future Planning, A New Economic Order," where the statement is made that “Another major task is converting the current economic system of unlimited growth to one a of a steady-economics (Chapter 24).” Sounds familiar. Then there are sections on “New Leaders and Longer Terms,” and others up to “Value free decisions and Science Courts.” I doubt if the author realized that a value free decision is a value judgment.
In 1994 I received a request from the Education Testing Service at Princeton “...to help set standards for a new undergraduate examination entitled “Environment and Humanity: The Race to save the planet.” Again these types of Environmental Science books were given as references. There were three multiple choice sample questions. The first two were standard from ecology, but the last was telling.
“Which of the following statements is true about the near future of the biosphere.
(A) Human population will remain stable, (B) Coal will be the primary energy source, (C) The amount of food per person will remain stable, (D) Increased industrialization will not increase pollution.” Perhaps you know the answer, as we are now in the near future.
For several reasons I did not respond and do not know what happened, but I am told that this sort of thing is common across schools of education around the country. I have no problems with books like Chiras and Miller being published, but they do not belong in a science curriculum.
Why the Justice Dept. Dropped the Voter Intimidation Charges
From Instapundit a link to Jonathan Turley on the dropping of the charges against the New Black Panther Party on voter intimidation.
Don't forget We can Work at the County Level, Too
Pima County, Arizona had a visit from the local Tea Partiers. An article on the website of KOLD Channel 13 has the story. Take a look.
I Missed the Wall Street Journal Online Yesterday
I've had a busy several days lately and my trying to keep up with all the newspapers online and all the blogs has been a little slack. I know, I know, I've sure managed to post a lot of "stuff." But I have missed a lot, too. Today I finally happened on this article from the Wall Street Journal. It needs to be read by everyone.
Revenge of the ‘Shoe Bomber’ by Debra Burlingame
The terrorist sues to resume his jihad from prison. The Obama administration caves in.
Revenge of the ‘Shoe Bomber’ by Debra Burlingame
The terrorist sues to resume his jihad from prison. The Obama administration caves in.
Last May at the National Archives, President Barack Obama warned that “more mistakes would occur” if Congress continued to politicize terrorist detention policy and the closure of Guantanamo Bay. “[I]f we refuse to deal with those issues today,” he predicted, “then I guarantee you, they will be an albatross around our efforts to combat terrorism in the future.”
On June 17, at the Administrative Maximum (ADX) penitentiary in Florence, Colo., one of those albatrosses, inmate number 24079-038, began his day with a whole new range of possibilities. Eight days earlier, the U.S. Attorney’s office in Denver filed notice in federal court that the Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) which applied to that prisoner—Richard C. Reid, a.k.a. the “Shoe Bomber”—were being
allowed to expire. SAMs are security directives, renewable yearly, issued by the attorney general when “there is a substantial risk that a prisoner’s communications, correspondence or contacts with persons could result in death or serious bodily injury” to others.This is just the first two paragraphs, read it all.
Funny but True
I got this in an email from a friend. Probably a lot of you have seen it before, I had not. I don't know where it started or whether it actually happened, but here it is. Enjoy!
RECENT VIRGINIA CHURCH SERVICE SERMON
Gen 47: 13-27Good morning, brothers and sisters; it's always a delight to see the pews crowded on Sunday morning, and so eager to get into God's Word. Turn with me in your Bibles, if you will, to the 47th chapter of Genesis; we'll begin our reading at verse 13, and go through verse 27.
Brother Ray, would you stand and read that great passage for us?...(reading)... Thank you for that fine reading, Brother Ray..
So we see that economic hard times fell upon Egypt , and the people turned to the government of Pharaoh to deal with this for them. And Pharaoh nationalized the grain harvest, and placed the grain in great storehouses that he had built. So the people brought their money to Pharaoh, like a great tax increase, and gave it all to him willingly in return for grain.
And this went on until their money ran out, and they were hungry again. So when they went to Pharaoh after that, they brought their livestock - their cattle, their horses, their sheep, and their donkey - to barter for grain, and verse 17 says that only took them through the end of that year.
But the famine wasn't over, was it? So the next year, the people came before Pharaoh and admitted they had nothing left, except their land and their own lives. "There is nothing left in the sight of my lord but our bodies and our land. Why should we die before your eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for food, and we with our land will be servants to Pharaoh."
So they surrendered their homes, their land, and their real estate to Pharaoh's government, and Then sold themselves into slavery to him, in return for grain.
What can we learn from this, brothers and sisters? That turning to the government instead of to God to be our provider in hard times only leads to slavery? Yes.
That the only reason government wants to be our provider is to also become our master? Yes.
But look how that passage ends, brothers and sisters! Thus Israel settled in the land of Egypt , in the land of Goshen . And they gained possessions in it, and were fruitful and multiplied greatly." God provided for His people, just as He always has! They didn't end up giving all their possessions to the government, no, it says they gained possessions!
But I also tell you a great truth today, and an ominous one. We see the same thing happening today - the government today wants to "share the wealth" once again, to take it from us and redistribute it back to us. It wants to take control of healthcare, just as it has taken control of education, and ration it back to us, and when government rations it, then government decides who gets it, and how much, and what kind. And if we go along with it, and do it willingly, then we will wind up no differently than the people of Egypt did four thousand years ago - as slaves to the government, and as slaves to our leaders.
What Mr. Obama's government is doing now is no different from what Pharaoh's government did then, and it will end the same.. And a lot of people like to call Mr. Obama a "Messiah," don't they? Is he a Messiah? A savior?
Didn't the Egyptians say, after Pharaoh made them his slaves, "You have saved our lives; may it please my lord, we will be servants to Pharaoh"?
Well, I tell you this - I know the Messiah; the Messiah is a friend of mine; and Mr. Obama is no Messiah!
No, brothers and sisters, if Mr. Obama is a character from the Bible, then he is Pharaoh.
Bow with me in prayer, if you will.
Lord, You alone are worthy to be served, and we rely on You, and You alone. We confess that the government is not our deliverer, and never rightly will be. We read in the eighth chapter of 1 Samuel, when Samuel warned the people of what a ruler would do, where it says "And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORD will not answer you in that day." And Lord, we acknowledge that day has come. We cry out to you because of the ruler that we have chosen for ourselves as a nation..Lord, we pray for this nation. We pray for revival, and we pray for deliverance from those who would be our masters. Give us hearts to seek You and hands to serve You, and protect Your people from the atrocities of Pharaoh's government.
RECENT VIRGINIA CHURCH SERVICE SERMON
Gen 47: 13-27
Brother Ray, would you stand and read that great passage for us?...(reading)... Thank you for that fine reading, Brother Ray..
So we see that economic hard times fell upon Egypt , and the people turned to the government of Pharaoh to deal with this for them. And Pharaoh nationalized the grain harvest, and placed the grain in great storehouses that he had built. So the people brought their money to Pharaoh, like a great tax increase, and gave it all to him willingly in return for grain.
And this went on until their money ran out, and they were hungry again. So when they went to Pharaoh after that, they brought their livestock - their cattle, their horses, their sheep, and their donkey - to barter for grain, and verse 17 says that only took them through the end of that year.
But the famine wasn't over, was it? So the next year, the people came before Pharaoh and admitted they had nothing left, except their land and their own lives. "There is nothing left in the sight of my lord but our bodies and our land. Why should we die before your eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for food, and we with our land will be servants to Pharaoh."
So they surrendered their homes, their land, and their real estate to Pharaoh's government, and Then sold themselves into slavery to him, in return for grain.
What can we learn from this, brothers and sisters? That turning to the government instead of to God to be our provider in hard times only leads to slavery? Yes.
That the only reason government wants to be our provider is to also become our master? Yes.
But look how that passage ends, brothers and sisters! Thus Israel settled in the land of Egypt , in the land of Goshen . And they gained possessions in it, and were fruitful and multiplied greatly." God provided for His people, just as He always has! They didn't end up giving all their possessions to the government, no, it says they gained possessions!
But I also tell you a great truth today, and an ominous one. We see the same thing happening today - the government today wants to "share the wealth" once again, to take it from us and redistribute it back to us. It wants to take control of healthcare, just as it has taken control of education, and ration it back to us, and when government rations it, then government decides who gets it, and how much, and what kind. And if we go along with it, and do it willingly, then we will wind up no differently than the people of Egypt did four thousand years ago - as slaves to the government, and as slaves to our leaders.
What Mr. Obama's government is doing now is no different from what Pharaoh's government did then, and it will end the same.. And a lot of people like to call Mr. Obama a "Messiah," don't they? Is he a Messiah? A savior?
Didn't the Egyptians say, after Pharaoh made them his slaves, "You have saved our lives; may it please my lord, we will be servants to Pharaoh"?
Well, I tell you this - I know the Messiah; the Messiah is a friend of mine; and Mr. Obama is no Messiah!
No, brothers and sisters, if Mr. Obama is a character from the Bible, then he is Pharaoh.
Bow with me in prayer, if you will.
Lord, You alone are worthy to be served, and we rely on You, and You alone. We confess that the government is not our deliverer, and never rightly will be. We read in the eighth chapter of 1 Samuel, when Samuel warned the people of what a ruler would do, where it says "And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORD will not answer you in that day." And Lord, we acknowledge that day has come. We cry out to you because of the ruler that we have chosen for ourselves as a nation..Lord, we pray for this nation. We pray for revival, and we pray for deliverance from those who would be our masters. Give us hearts to seek You and hands to serve You, and protect Your people from the atrocities of Pharaoh's government.
In God we Trust
This is interesting-have you followed the birther controversy?
I got an email from a friend with this link. I had never heard of the site TheObamaFile.com, and I guess now I won't be seeing it, either. It is GONE. Not by government action but by the owner of the site.
I haven't paid a lot of attention to this argument, I know his mother was a citizen. I've personally thought that if he had a false birth certificate it would be the one that had the name Barry Sotero on it.
The man who ran the website lamented in the WND article has a whole 'nother point of view. And it looks like a valid one to me. I am not a constitutional scholar so I would like to know if there is more elaboration on this idea somewhere else in it that would negate this mans argument.
Go to World Net Daily and read the article.
Earmarks-Ethics?
As those of you who have read this from the beginning (July 16, 2009) know, I don't get a newspaper at my home, we are in a very remote spot. I get my news online from the Houston Chronicle, Washington Post, many other newspapers online, Luciane.com and the many blogs I read daily. Here is another very good article, this one from Carol D. Leonnig, a Washington Post staff writer.
Earmarks of Committee Members Probing Murtha Questioned
Earmarks of Committee Members Probing Murtha Questioned
As I always say, read the whole thing.Members of the House ethics committee, who are now investigating a pattern of lawmakers steering federal funds to generous defense contractors, are all set to have their pet military projects funded by the same committee whose activities they are probing. (italics by ed.)
The 10 committee members together would get 29 earmarks -- or $59 million in federal funding for projects they requested in their districts or states -- under a proposed House military spending bill up for a vote today or tomorrow.
The details were approved last week by the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee, whose practice of steering earmarks to a well-connected lobby firm close to the chairman, Rep. John P.
Murtha, is the subject of the ethics committee's investigation. Ethics
committee chairwoman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) would receive $9.5 million in three earmarks under Murtha's bill. That includes $4 million to clean up contamination at the former Almaden, Calif., Air Force Station, $2 million for "printed and conformal electronics" research, and $3.5 million to help Stanford University aeronautical
research into the use of parafin-based rocket fuel.
Last month, Lofgren's committee announced it was investigating the ties between members of Congress and PMA Group, a lobby firm run by one of Murtha's close friends. It did not name the members, but Murtha and fellow Defense Appropriation members Reps. Peter
Visclosky (D-Ind.) and Jim Moran (D-Va.) have longtime ties to PMA and have orchestrated hundreds of millions of dollars in earmarks to PMA clients in recent years. The PMA Group closed after being raided by the FBI late last year, and Visclosky's congressional records were subpoenaed in May by a grand jury investigating defense contracts.
Mark Tapscott on Obamacare and the AARP
Mark Tapscott: Obamacare could kill AARP an editorial in the Washington Examiner.
It couldn't happen to a better organization.There are not enough perks to justify supporting such a leftist board. I realize many of the members have no idea, but really....
go read the whole thing not just this excerpt. And then send it to all your friends who still believe in the AARP.
It couldn't happen to a better organization.There are not enough perks to justify supporting such a leftist board. I realize many of the members have no idea, but really....
go read the whole thing not just this excerpt. And then send it to all your friends who still believe in the AARP.
Marketing operations don't get any slicker than the one behind AARP. Their invitation to join arrived in my mail box even before I turned 50. I joined for one year, but never renewed because I knew the truth about this famous group.
That truth is this: Millions join AARP and in return receive a host of useful services and resources. But their money and influence are hijacked to support causes that are absolutely inimical to their best interests.
The hijacking is the work of AARP's Washington staff, which is an integral part of the tireless liberal lobbying machine that runs 24/7 in the nation's capital pushing to protect and expand current government entitlements and to create costly new ones.
via email from Tibby
Apparently that Cash for Clunkers thing isn't working For the Dealers
A previous post by RayH talks about the Cash For Clunkers program. Well, according to an article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune it isn't working for the dealers.
dealers reported problems with the government's online system to get the transactions approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which is running the program.
Scott Lambert, vice president of the Minnesota Auto Dealers Association, said he was "astounded" to learn at a meeting Tuesday representing about 150 Minnesota dealers that not one has had a deal approved.
Go read it all.Via Instapundit
Obama's 32 Czar's
A Washington Post Op-Ed by Eric Cantor hits the president's Czars.
By Eric CantorThursday, July 30, 2009
In spite of this having been done in the past, I do wonder has no one has questioned the constitutionality of it.?
By Eric CantorThursday, July 30, 2009
"The biggest problems that we're facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all. And that's what I intend to reverse when I'm president of the United States." -- Sen. Barack Obama, March 31, 2008
To say President Obama failed to follow through on this promise is an understatement. By appointing a virtual army of "czars" -- each wholly unaccountable to Congress yet tasked with spearheading major policy efforts for the White House -- in his first six months, the president has embarked on an end-run around the legislative branch of historic proportions.
To be sure, the appointment of a few special officers to play a constructive role in a given administration is nothing new. What is new is the elevation of so many czars, with so much authority on endless policy fronts. Vesting such broad authority in the hands of people not subjected to Senate confirmation and congressional oversight poses a grave threat to our system of checks and balances.
At last count, there were at least 32 active czars that we knew of, meaning the current administration has more czars than Imperial Russia. Read it all.
In spite of this having been done in the past, I do wonder has no one has questioned the constitutionality of it.?
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
The Government Pays For Nothing
As I listen to, and read, various news items and commentary (I note them separately -- news and commentary -- but they've pretty much blended into one these days) I hear the phrase "the government pays for..." this and that.
Most recently it is the clunker program. $4500 bucks from the gub’ment for your old gas guzzler, as long as it guzzles 18 mpg or less. My current vehicle -- a 1995 SUV -- might actually qualify. But I love my Trooper and though I feel extreme F150 lust every time I go to lunch in my friend's new 4-door pickup, I cannot bear the thought of a perfectly good vehicle (much less my friend of all these years) being destroyed for no good reason other than the government saw fit to reimburse me $4500 of my own money for the privilege of driving something shinier.
And the new caureaucracy requires all trade-ins to be destroyed, thoroughly. They require the oil to be drained, and replaced with a salt solution, and the engine run until it freezes or stops -- ensuring its demise. Putting your car to sleep forever. Is it just me or does that sound like an anti-internal-combustion-Marxist regime gone wild? Subsidizing car companies and destroying things. But I digress...
There was the TARP of last year. The Bush administration's demonstration that at least one thing Keith Oberman has said in his life may be true. The government paid for AIG and other major campaign contributors to remain solvent.
And then the stimulus bill. Not that anything has been stimulated besides angst and debt. And I'm pretty sure no one in congress has even yet to read the bill. But it's getting San Antonio 50 new police officers for three years. Woo hoo. And the government paid for it.
And now the health care discussion. The Government MUST pay for it.
I hear people call in to talk shows and argue. I read letters to the editor. The government will pay for it.
I hate to sound arrogant, but where the hell do these people think the government gets its money? (Well, yes, it does print it up at its leisure... but that's different...)
The government doesn't pay for a thing. We do. And we pay dearly. Half of everything we make goes to the government in the form of one tax or another. Right out of every pay check. On every gallon of gasoline. Things we buy. Things we own -- like houses and cars. Plane flights and hotel rooms, soda bottles and cigarettes. Tax. Tax. Tax. Tax. Tax. Tax. Living and dying, we are taxed into the ground every year. And the government wastes it at every turn.
I know people "know" this, but since I firmly believe "to know and not do, is to not know" so I very much feel the need to shout it from every mountain top. Or at least out the window as I sit stuck in traffic on the way home listening to idiots argue on the radio about who pays for what.
So I will shout it here.
THE GOVERNMENT PAYS FOR NOTHING!!!!! WE PAY FOR EVERYTHING!!!!
The government has money because we let them take it from us.
You'd think we deserve a little more respect than we're getting from our government. You'd think they'd be a little more careful with it. (Medicare fraud and abuse loses $120 million per day.) You'd think they'd study other countries' systems of healthcare and business before passing any new rules and laws here. You'd think they'd be smart enough to know they can't fix ANYTHING in one fell swoop -- it must be taken piece by piece, slowly and carefully.
You'd think they would want to respect and protect the source of their money -- us and our businesses.
But no. They sprint in the dark, blindly fumbling around with generalizations and broad decrees they believe will save money or assist people of lesser means. (It's all theory, not carefully-researched business plans; they’re experimenting on us at every turn.) And they cram it all into a big document called "Comprehensive Healthcare Reform" so they can pretend they're doing something.
The government pays for nothing. We pay for everything. With both our money and our most precious asset -- our time, which is how we make money. And build lives.
I’ll be damned if I’m going to have them lure me into a new car loan by reimbursing me with my own damn money -- and destroying perfectly roadworthy vehicles in the process.
Think about it. And if you don't get mad, and you think the clunker program is all fine and well…. well, here's a link for you. Cheers.
Most recently it is the clunker program. $4500 bucks from the gub’ment for your old gas guzzler, as long as it guzzles 18 mpg or less. My current vehicle -- a 1995 SUV -- might actually qualify. But I love my Trooper and though I feel extreme F150 lust every time I go to lunch in my friend's new 4-door pickup, I cannot bear the thought of a perfectly good vehicle (much less my friend of all these years) being destroyed for no good reason other than the government saw fit to reimburse me $4500 of my own money for the privilege of driving something shinier.
And the new caureaucracy requires all trade-ins to be destroyed, thoroughly. They require the oil to be drained, and replaced with a salt solution, and the engine run until it freezes or stops -- ensuring its demise. Putting your car to sleep forever. Is it just me or does that sound like an anti-internal-combustion-Marxist regime gone wild? Subsidizing car companies and destroying things. But I digress...
There was the TARP of last year. The Bush administration's demonstration that at least one thing Keith Oberman has said in his life may be true. The government paid for AIG and other major campaign contributors to remain solvent.
And then the stimulus bill. Not that anything has been stimulated besides angst and debt. And I'm pretty sure no one in congress has even yet to read the bill. But it's getting San Antonio 50 new police officers for three years. Woo hoo. And the government paid for it.
And now the health care discussion. The Government MUST pay for it.
I hear people call in to talk shows and argue. I read letters to the editor. The government will pay for it.
I hate to sound arrogant, but where the hell do these people think the government gets its money? (Well, yes, it does print it up at its leisure... but that's different...)
The government doesn't pay for a thing. We do. And we pay dearly. Half of everything we make goes to the government in the form of one tax or another. Right out of every pay check. On every gallon of gasoline. Things we buy. Things we own -- like houses and cars. Plane flights and hotel rooms, soda bottles and cigarettes. Tax. Tax. Tax. Tax. Tax. Tax. Living and dying, we are taxed into the ground every year. And the government wastes it at every turn.
I know people "know" this, but since I firmly believe "to know and not do, is to not know" so I very much feel the need to shout it from every mountain top. Or at least out the window as I sit stuck in traffic on the way home listening to idiots argue on the radio about who pays for what.
So I will shout it here.
THE GOVERNMENT PAYS FOR NOTHING!!!!! WE PAY FOR EVERYTHING!!!!
The government has money because we let them take it from us.
You'd think we deserve a little more respect than we're getting from our government. You'd think they'd be a little more careful with it. (Medicare fraud and abuse loses $120 million per day.) You'd think they'd study other countries' systems of healthcare and business before passing any new rules and laws here. You'd think they'd be smart enough to know they can't fix ANYTHING in one fell swoop -- it must be taken piece by piece, slowly and carefully.
You'd think they would want to respect and protect the source of their money -- us and our businesses.
But no. They sprint in the dark, blindly fumbling around with generalizations and broad decrees they believe will save money or assist people of lesser means. (It's all theory, not carefully-researched business plans; they’re experimenting on us at every turn.) And they cram it all into a big document called "Comprehensive Healthcare Reform" so they can pretend they're doing something.
The government pays for nothing. We pay for everything. With both our money and our most precious asset -- our time, which is how we make money. And build lives.
I’ll be damned if I’m going to have them lure me into a new car loan by reimbursing me with my own damn money -- and destroying perfectly roadworthy vehicles in the process.
Think about it. And if you don't get mad, and you think the clunker program is all fine and well…. well, here's a link for you. Cheers.
Superstition?
My grandmother, literate in two languages with only a 5th grade education, blamed the moon landing for unusual weather. Recently, I received mail from a marine supply company saying that although they have been mostly focused on their business model, they want people to contact legislators about the impending acidification of the ocean from the demon (my word, not theirs, except by context) carbon dioxide.
These struck me as similar. Assume that nothing was known about ocean chemistry and you heard this. The end of the world from the collapse of ocean ecosystems. It would be the street corner prophet who continually changes the date as each passes. Is it different because it comes from a mathematical model published in a presumably competent scientific journal? Such models require assumptions and if this came from the one I saw, it had an important caveat, but I will have to check.
The problem is that such hypotheticals are hard to disprove (or prove). The ocean carbon dioxide cycle is simple in outline, but has all sorts of complications. However, if we assume the model is correct, what will happen to the critters? I cite conclusions from a recent paper.
“There is also huge uncertainty as to what extent organism adaptation or acclimation will mitigate the long-term effects of ocean acidification.
There are clearly many gaps......” From page 199, volume 366 (2008) of the Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. There are others, but to be fair the believers should be cited. One I have uses the word “hypothesized” prominently in the abstract. My world is not hypothetical as I keep rudely discovering. More later.
It may be that the company is just adjusting to a “Green” business model. Those with business experience may know more about this sort of thing. Decades ago when the recent (this is not a new phenomenon) “Green” revolution really began and the oil industry was moving offshore, they were required to put elaborate septic systems on their platforms. It was a relatively tiny cost, but lost on the regulators were the facts that the amount of effluent became untraceable rapidly and some systems were used so infrequently that they lost the biological bugs that ran the system. This might have made it worse, but again the magnitude of the ocean would have swallowed it.
Most have not heard about the “Precautionary Principle,” which may be the superstition, if it really is that. More on that later, but what it evolved into seems to be a no-risk concept. This would be new to religion, science, law and common sense.
These struck me as similar. Assume that nothing was known about ocean chemistry and you heard this. The end of the world from the collapse of ocean ecosystems. It would be the street corner prophet who continually changes the date as each passes. Is it different because it comes from a mathematical model published in a presumably competent scientific journal? Such models require assumptions and if this came from the one I saw, it had an important caveat, but I will have to check.
The problem is that such hypotheticals are hard to disprove (or prove). The ocean carbon dioxide cycle is simple in outline, but has all sorts of complications. However, if we assume the model is correct, what will happen to the critters? I cite conclusions from a recent paper.
“There is also huge uncertainty as to what extent organism adaptation or acclimation will mitigate the long-term effects of ocean acidification.
There are clearly many gaps......” From page 199, volume 366 (2008) of the Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. There are others, but to be fair the believers should be cited. One I have uses the word “hypothesized” prominently in the abstract. My world is not hypothetical as I keep rudely discovering. More later.
It may be that the company is just adjusting to a “Green” business model. Those with business experience may know more about this sort of thing. Decades ago when the recent (this is not a new phenomenon) “Green” revolution really began and the oil industry was moving offshore, they were required to put elaborate septic systems on their platforms. It was a relatively tiny cost, but lost on the regulators were the facts that the amount of effluent became untraceable rapidly and some systems were used so infrequently that they lost the biological bugs that ran the system. This might have made it worse, but again the magnitude of the ocean would have swallowed it.
Most have not heard about the “Precautionary Principle,” which may be the superstition, if it really is that. More on that later, but what it evolved into seems to be a no-risk concept. This would be new to religion, science, law and common sense.
Obama and the AARP
Bookworm Room is written by an original thinker. She does some linking but she also does a lot of clear-eyed, right thinking. She is a professional and knows how to break things down to get to the reality of the subject. Here she takes on the AARP and Obamacare. I had planned to post this much earlier and then I heard Rush talking about it, and almost decided not to link. But I've gone back and read it again. It is just to0 important not to post about it.
Obama and the AARP — partners in crime
Obama and the AARP — partners in crime
A consensus seems to be growing that the ObamaCare bill does not bode well for seniors. Aside from the mandatory “counseling” for all seniors, counseling that’s only worth doing if it’s meant to steer seniors away from obtaining treatment, simple common sense dictates that the health care cannot work without rationing — and rationing will always affect first those who use the product most. In this case, seniors are not merely the health care system’s biggest users, they’re also the ones the government sees as most expendable. This being the case, why then is the AARP, which ostensibly exists to advance the interests of seniors all over America, enthusiastically supporting ObamaCare? The answer might lie in AARP’s management.
The AARP is an interesting organization, because membership is automatic, provided that you pay your dues. This means that most of its constituents pay no attention to what it’s doing (they just like the benefits). Few of them, I’m sure, realize that AARP’s management is extremely far Left.
How do I know this about the management? Well, aside from the AARP’s bizarrely enthusiastic embrace of a legislative policy that will radically decrease its membership by depriving large segments of decent medical care, one of the AARP’s major players is John Stoltenberg. It is Stoltenberg who manages the magazine that’s sent to every senior in America.As always, read the whole thing.
Colin Powell Republican?
More from the American Thinker Blog
Colin Powell, Republican Strategist?
Henry P. Wickham, Jr
Colin Powell, Republican Strategist?
Henry P. Wickham, Jr
Colin Powell appeared on CNN's Larry King Show on Tuesday evening. In the wake of his endorsement of Barack Obama, some conservatives have suggested that he leave the Republican Party. Powell's response to King was defiant, "I decide what party I am going to be in." He then offered advice to the Republican Party for improving its electoral prospects.There is a lot more of this article. Click on the link you will want to read it all.
When one takes to the national airwaves and asserts his allegiance and offers his wisdom to the Party, this assumes both political and moral standing. There must be a perception in the audience of good faith that has been earned and maintained. Powell is not entitled to this assumption or this perception because of his actions while Secretary of State in the Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame "scandal" that were so damaging to President Bush.
From July of 2003 until September of 2006 the Bush Administration was embroiled in the Wilson/Plame scandal, and Powell contributed to its duration and the severity of its effect. What this media-driven scandal lacked in political hysteria and cheap theatrics, it made up in layers of deceit.
More from the Canadian Free Press
Sent to me in an email from a friend here in town. As I said earlier they seem to be a little more open in what they say about the Obamas.
First Lady requires more than twenty attendants
by Dr. Paul Williams
Read the rest.
First Lady requires more than twenty attendants
by Dr. Paul Williams
“In my own life, in my own small way, I have tried to give back to this country that has given me so much,” she said. “See, that’s why I left a job at a big law firm for a career in public service, “ Michelle ObamaI have to admit this is little more than gossip I find interesting but it tells us that the Obamas seem not to be "walking the walk" of the talk they are talking.
No, Michele Obama does not get paid to serve as the First Lady and she doesn’t perform any official duties. But this hasn’t deterred her from hiring an unprecedented number of staffers to cater to her every whim and to satisfy her every request in the midst of the Great Recession. Just think Mary Lincoln was taken to task for purchasing china for the White House during the Civil War. And Mamie Eisenhower had to shell out the salary for her personal secretary.
Read the rest.
Sarah Palin, Our New Leader?
If I haven't posted something from American Thinker I have not done well by the readers of this blog. Today is an article that has also been going around as an email.
Palin's Commencement Address
by Pamela Geller
Palin's Commencement Address
by Pamela Geller
Sarah Palin's Farewell Address as Governor of Alaska Sunday was no farewell address at all. It was just the beginning; it was a commencement address. "I will fight even harder for you, for what is right and for the truth," she promised. "And I have never felt I needed a title to do that!"
Her speech embodied what a great American sounds like, and what a President ought to sound like. Palin made no apologies. She said nothing like Obama's inane drone of "America's best days are behind us." No tearing down of our nation. Obama ranks on us; Palin raises us up and speaks of national pride.
First and foremost, she thanked our brave men and women defending this great nation and ripped the media, warning:
"You represent what could and should be a respected, honest profession that could and should be a cornerstone of our democracy. Democracy depends on you, and that is why, that's why our troops are willing to die for you. So, how about, in honor of the American soldier, you quit makin' things up?"
She briefly outlined her plans for real energy independence -- American resources for Americans -- speaking of commercializing our clean natural gas (AGEA) as the first private sector energy project in the history of America. Palin believes (and rightly so) that the pressing issue of our time is energy independence. "There is," she said, "an inherent link between energy and prosperity...We will prove you can be pro-development and pro-environment because no one loves their clean air, and their land, and their wildlife more than an Alaskan. We will protect it!"This is just a portion of the address and the article, READ IT ALL.
The CanadiansReally Get it
UPDATE: the links are fixed
Somehow the conservative Canadians seem to feel freer to tell it like it really is. Here is another reason why I say that.
Obama, the remaking of America, the reverie for a police state
By Toby Westerman Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Somehow the conservative Canadians seem to feel freer to tell it like it really is. Here is another reason why I say that.
Obama, the remaking of America, the reverie for a police state
By Toby Westerman Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Nationalized health care is only the latest page in the ongoing saga of
U.S. president Barak Obama’s attempt to remake/reinvent America into a socialist utopia. Without fail, an ever-vigilant, all-powerful central government with police state powers will also arise to assist in tending to the “needs” of the dependent population.
Almost unbelievably, a recent poll taken in Germany confirms that once dependency is bred into a people, the longing for security becomes so strong that a police state is preferred to the uncertainties of a freesociety. This is a stark warning to Americans.
Go read it all. He just cuts to the chase.
Just Not That Into You
That is what Laura Rosen Cohen says about Muslims in Front Page Magazine. Cute title, but a very serious subject. Here's just a portion of her article. Click on the link above to read it all.
“I have the highest respect for the religion of Islam, and recognize the heroic efforts of many religious leaders in contemporary Iran to stand up to the repressions wrought by the ruling system,” says Jewish human rights activist Irwin Cotler.“I refuse to associate these crimes generically with the mullahs of Iran, and I deplore any attempt to do so,” he continued in his July 24th letter to the editor. And thus began yet another misguided chapter of the never-ending Jewish and liberal quest for the Islamic world to “like us”.
Cotler’s bizarre statements have little to do with reality. Iran is where
religious fervour , led by a religious leader-the Ayatollah Khomeni, brought upon the Islamic revolution. It is religious fervour -- inspired by a perverse interpretation of Shiia Islam -- that motivates Iran’s genocidal leader, with the continued blessings of the religious establishment. It has been said that a definition of crazy is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result. Certainly, there can be no better explanation for Jews, and particularly liberal Jews to keep trying new ways of currying favour in the eyes of the Islamic world.
Thomas Sowell is a Man who States the Issues Very Clearly
If you do not read the Townhall articles on a regular basis, now might be the time to start. Here is one by Thomas Sowell titled Disaster in the Making.
After many a disappointment with someone, and especially after a disaster, we may be able to look back at numerous clues that should have warned us that the person we trusted did not deserve our trust.
When that person is the President of the United States, the potential for disaster is virtually unlimited.
Many people are rightly worried about what this administration's
reckless spending will do to the economy in our time and to our children and grandchildren, to whom a staggering national debt will be passed on. But if the worst that Barack Obama does is ruin the economy, I will breathe a sigh of relief.
He is heading this country toward disaster on many fronts, including a
nuclear Iran, which has every prospect of being an irretrievable disaster of almost unimaginable magnitude. We cannot put that genie back in the bottle-- and neither can generations yet unborn. They may yet curse us all for leaving them hostages to nuclear terror. Read the whole article.
Govern't healthcare as unfair as having a ref who plays for one of the teams.
On NPR last night Heritage Foundation Vice President Stuart Butler advocates a restructured system based on consumer choice. Counter point was Pulitzer- and Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman who "argues that free markets alone can't fix the health care system."
Butler, (who is ironcally British and likes the healthcare he gets), really crystalized the most significant argument against having a government healthcare plan: if you're playing a ball game and the referee works for one of the teams -- the game is inherently unfair and will result in that team having major advantages.
Butler, (who is ironcally British and likes the healthcare he gets), really crystalized the most significant argument against having a government healthcare plan: if you're playing a ball game and the referee works for one of the teams -- the game is inherently unfair and will result in that team having major advantages.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Two back-room deals fast-tracking ObamaCare today
This just in from my Louisiana contact. To act on it Use the list I published several days ago if you don't know who to contact. (click on the above link)
From the Desk of:Steve Elliott, President,
Grassfire.org Alliance
Two shadowy back-room deals are being struck right now in Congress as part of the Obama-Reid-Pelosi push to advance socialized healthcare before the August "recess."In the House, Blue Dog Democrats are reviewing a private"compromise" that would advance ObamaCare to the House floor as soon as this Friday. Meanwhile in the Senate, six Senators are working behind closed doors on a bill that would allow the Senate to move ObamaCare through committee in the next few days.
THAT MEANS TWO CLOSED-DOOR, BACK-ROOM DEALS ARE BEING STRUCK RIGHT NOW TO PUSH US TO THE BRINK OF OBAMACARE THIS WEEK!
In both cases, details have not been released. We are simply told to trust members of Congress with the future of our health care and then accept their final vote.If they get ObamaCare passed through the House and through the Senate Finance Committee this week, most of their work will be done. The Democrats will then simply iron out the differences (i.e. revert to the full ObamaCare blueprint).
The next 48 hours are crucial and we must now fight this battle on two fronts -- the House and the Senate.That's why we have just expanded our FaxFire campaign to include the six Senators who are striking the back-room deal. Even if you have done so already, please go here right now to send your faxes opposing socialized health care to key members of this House committee along with the six Senate negotiators, your two Senators and Representative: http://www.grassfire.net/r.asp?U=20543&CID=122&RID=21762224 (As always, if you want to send your own faxes, we have providedthe fax numbers and sample text for you. Just click here to access that information: http://www.grassfire.net/r.asp?U=20544&CID=122&RID=21762224
Action #2 -- Call your Representative and the "Senate Six"! Your Member of Congress will likely cast a vote this week on socialized ObamaCare. Call your representative today and make sure your voice is heard or, call the House Switchboard: 202-224-3121.
Also, call the "Senate Six" and tell them you do NOT want any government mandate program that further burdens our economy, undermines the private sector and creates a federal healthcare mandate on businesses or individuals. The "Senate Six":
Max Baucus: 202-224-2651;
Chuck Grassley: 202-224-3744;
Kent Conrad: 202-224-2043;
Jeff Bingaman: 202-224-5521;
Olympia Snowe: 202-224-5344;
Mike Enzi: 202--224-3424
Talking Points:#1 -- I am outraged that the House and Senate are fast-tracking the President's socialized healthcare plan this week.
#2 -- I do not want the government to have more control and influence over my health care. That is why I reject House health care bill (H.R. 3200) and the soon-to-be-released Senate "compromise" plan that still creates a federal mandate.
#3 -- America cannot afford the $1.5 trillion price tag of socialized health care during these difficult economic times. I flatly reject any health care proposal that increases costs or imposes new taxes on any American.
Again, we are now fighting a two-front battle THIS WEEK that could determine whether socialized ObamaCare becomes a reality this year.Please... schedule your faxes rightnow: http://www.grassfire.net/r.aspU=20545&CID=122&RID=21762224
And please alert your friends. Thanks for taking action.
From the Desk of:Steve Elliott, President,
Grassfire.org Alliance
Two shadowy back-room deals are being struck right now in Congress as part of the Obama-Reid-Pelosi push to advance socialized healthcare before the August "recess."In the House, Blue Dog Democrats are reviewing a private"compromise" that would advance ObamaCare to the House floor as soon as this Friday. Meanwhile in the Senate, six Senators are working behind closed doors on a bill that would allow the Senate to move ObamaCare through committee in the next few days.
THAT MEANS TWO CLOSED-DOOR, BACK-ROOM DEALS ARE BEING STRUCK RIGHT NOW TO PUSH US TO THE BRINK OF OBAMACARE THIS WEEK!
In both cases, details have not been released. We are simply told to trust members of Congress with the future of our health care and then accept their final vote.If they get ObamaCare passed through the House and through the Senate Finance Committee this week, most of their work will be done. The Democrats will then simply iron out the differences (i.e. revert to the full ObamaCare blueprint).
The next 48 hours are crucial and we must now fight this battle on two fronts -- the House and the Senate.That's why we have just expanded our FaxFire campaign to include the six Senators who are striking the back-room deal. Even if you have done so already, please go here right now to send your faxes opposing socialized health care to key members of this House committee along with the six Senate negotiators, your two Senators and Representative: http://www.grassfire.net/r.asp?U=20543&CID=122&RID=21762224 (As always, if you want to send your own faxes, we have providedthe fax numbers and sample text for you. Just click here to access that information: http://www.grassfire.net/r.asp?U=20544&CID=122&RID=21762224
Action #2 -- Call your Representative and the "Senate Six"! Your Member of Congress will likely cast a vote this week on socialized ObamaCare. Call your representative today and make sure your voice is heard or, call the House Switchboard: 202-224-3121.
Also, call the "Senate Six" and tell them you do NOT want any government mandate program that further burdens our economy, undermines the private sector and creates a federal healthcare mandate on businesses or individuals. The "Senate Six":
Max Baucus: 202-224-2651;
Chuck Grassley: 202-224-3744;
Kent Conrad: 202-224-2043;
Jeff Bingaman: 202-224-5521;
Olympia Snowe: 202-224-5344;
Mike Enzi: 202--224-3424
Talking Points:#1 -- I am outraged that the House and Senate are fast-tracking the President's socialized healthcare plan this week.
#2 -- I do not want the government to have more control and influence over my health care. That is why I reject House health care bill (H.R. 3200) and the soon-to-be-released Senate "compromise" plan that still creates a federal mandate.
#3 -- America cannot afford the $1.5 trillion price tag of socialized health care during these difficult economic times. I flatly reject any health care proposal that increases costs or imposes new taxes on any American.
Again, we are now fighting a two-front battle THIS WEEK that could determine whether socialized ObamaCare becomes a reality this year.Please... schedule your faxes rightnow: http://www.grassfire.net/r.aspU=20545&CID=122&RID=21762224
And please alert your friends. Thanks for taking action.
National Right to Work Foundation
A friend in Louisiana send me this email with a petition from the National Right to Work Foundation. Click on the link to view the web site and see the petition.
I owe those unions... When their leaders call, I do my best to call them back right away. I don't mind feeling obligated." - Barack Obama, Audacity of Hope
Dear Friend: Barack Obama may indeed owe the Big Labor Bosses. But his election did not give him a "mandate" to dramatically expand their forced unionism power... and your PETITION below sends that message loud and clear to our new President! As a member of Congress, I can tell you that we now face OVERWHELMING challenges in stopping these forced unionism power grabs. Generating massive grassroots pressure is our only hope. Because it is vital that he understands HE HAS NO MANDATE to give his Big Labor patrons new powers to enslave millions of additional workers in unions and steal their income through confiscatory dues... and your PETITION below will do just that! If the union bosses get their way, you and I will pay the price in higher taxes, bigger government, and more job-killing, freedom-crushing forced unionism. Make no mistake: We fail at our nation's peril! I hope you agree. And that I hear back from you without delay.
Sincerely, Steve King (R-IA) United States Congressman
I owe those unions... When their leaders call, I do my best to call them back right away. I don't mind feeling obligated." - Barack Obama, Audacity of Hope
Dear Friend: Barack Obama may indeed owe the Big Labor Bosses. But his election did not give him a "mandate" to dramatically expand their forced unionism power... and your PETITION below sends that message loud and clear to our new President! As a member of Congress, I can tell you that we now face OVERWHELMING challenges in stopping these forced unionism power grabs. Generating massive grassroots pressure is our only hope. Because it is vital that he understands HE HAS NO MANDATE to give his Big Labor patrons new powers to enslave millions of additional workers in unions and steal their income through confiscatory dues... and your PETITION below will do just that! If the union bosses get their way, you and I will pay the price in higher taxes, bigger government, and more job-killing, freedom-crushing forced unionism. Make no mistake: We fail at our nation's peril! I hope you agree. And that I hear back from you without delay.
Sincerely, Steve King (R-IA) United States Congressman
Green Jobs: hope or hype?
Tank thinker, Samuel Sherraden, lays out a more reasonable estimate on the economic impact of the heavily-subsidized green companies. It is a fact-filled appriasal which contrasts starkly with Obama's rhetoric on how the green initiatives (in the cap and trade bill) will help save the economy. He does not come right out and say that the subsidies are so heavy, these are practically government jobs. And he does not come right out say Obama's lying. But the point is clear; like most politicians these days, if his lips are moving...
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- After the release of a miserable June jobs report, President Obama stood with a group of green company CEOs and told reporters that "men and women like these will help lead us out of this recession and into a better future."
But if the White House puts too many eggs in the green recovery basket, we may all be disappointed. The green sector is simply not large enough or competitive enough to be a major engine of job creation.
The CEOs who stood with Obama lead smart, innovative and, in many cases, rapidly growing firms. But green firms in the United States are small and employ relatively few people.
On a side note, it is a refreshing change to see CNN publishing something other than pro-Obama press releases. Click here to read the entire piece at CNN.com.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- After the release of a miserable June jobs report, President Obama stood with a group of green company CEOs and told reporters that "men and women like these will help lead us out of this recession and into a better future."
But if the White House puts too many eggs in the green recovery basket, we may all be disappointed. The green sector is simply not large enough or competitive enough to be a major engine of job creation.
The CEOs who stood with Obama lead smart, innovative and, in many cases, rapidly growing firms. But green firms in the United States are small and employ relatively few people.
On a side note, it is a refreshing change to see CNN publishing something other than pro-Obama press releases. Click here to read the entire piece at CNN.com.
Doomed Planet?
I know many people who are conservative believe in Global Warming or as they call it now "Climate Change." I believe that if the climate is changing it is just part of the natural pattern that has been happening since time began. CO2 has nothing to do with warming but happens after warming. I know from having lived with a scientist for over 51 years now that it is not true that most scientist believe humans have caused global warming. This is not to say they do not do damage on a local basis. Via Tigerhawk we get this:
Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, explains for a popular audience why climate alarmism is a crock, and the motivations behind those who promote it. Professor Lindzen, I should say, is the rare academic who uses his tenure for its supposed purpose, to take controversial positions that threaten his own specialty's conventional wisdom. Please go read all of Professor Lindzen's article.
Obamacare Risks
Byron York has an opinion piece in the Washington Examiner this morning called GOP's Teachable Moment on the Risks of Obamacare. It seems the Republicans have finally learned a lesson to help combat the Democrat's full court press to pass huge spending bills that send us further and further along the road to socialism. I recognize the Republicans did a little of that to themselves in the past eight years, too.
Here's a portion of his article, follow this link to read it all.
Here's a portion of his article, follow this link to read it all.
Pick your average member of the House of Representatives, one who has a lot of work to do but hasn't been deeply involved in crafting the massive health care makeover bill. Who knows more about what's in that bill -- Mr. Average Democrat, or Mr. Average Republican?
Bet on the Republican. For weeks now, GOP lawmakers have been studying the Democratic health care bill, and for months before that, they studied preliminary Democratic plans. Many rank-and-file
Democrats, on the other hand, have been so ill-informed about what their leadership has been doing that it was only last week, when the party offered a five-hour class on the bill's contents, that some members began to grasp the details.
Monday, July 27, 2009
The Pledge
This is so important it is completely copied from Power Line including the title.
Reprinted below is a pledge pertaining to health care reform that the two Senators from Virginia have been asked to sign. There's not much chance that either of these Democrats -- Senator Webb or Senator Warner -- will actually take the pledge. However, if they refuse to do so, it will help sharpen the debate.
Readers may wish to present this pledge to their Senators and Representatives.My Pledge to My Constituents on National Health Insurance
1. I will not vote to expand the bankrupt Medicare program unless and until it is first placed on a sound actuarial basis.
2. I will not vote for any national health insurance legislation that includes a public plan unless I am prepared to enroll myself and my family in the public plan. If a national health insurance bill with a public plan passes the Senate with my vote in support, then I pledge to enroll myself and my family in that public plan.
Mandatory Evacuation
I have been thinking about the relation of science and law, both understood by our framers to be important, sharing similar rules, the facts and their reasonable interpretation. The language is a little different, but both are a common sense approach to the truth.
It was brought home to me listening to WWL radio in New Orleans, which comes in good here, where the SPUD show was devoted entirely to the Texas Mandatory Evacuation Law. Now here are recent survivors of Katrina wondering how Texans are such wimps (my word, not theirs) about their rights. Discussion ranged from constitutional right to practical considerations, and of the half of the program I heard, no one thought the law proper. The Corpus Christ Caller-Times said that while no one was going to get arrested, it gave local mayors and judges that right. Sorry, but I do not have the confidence in government to know better than I do about evacuation. It is not an easy decision, but in my experience, and borne out in Katrina, both government and non-government individuals and groups act both competently and incompetenly near the time of a storm. Adrenalin flows, and we all know how that goes.
Furthermore, a presumably scientifically designed map of surge zones, puts the area where I live in zone A1, the most dangerous, a zone shared with San Jose Island and other slender pieces elsewhere. We live ten miles from the Gulf of Mexico in Lamar in a location and house designed to be as hurricane proof as we could afford. We experienced Claudette when local government and others encouraged evacuation, some going to Beevillle and Victoria where the hurricane did more damage than in Aransas County, after strengthening while hitting the coast at Matagorda Bay.
The decision to evacuate is difficult, some areas obvious, many more debatable. There is considerable risk in evacuation, both economically and otherwise. Claudette was interesting because I thought the safest place to avoid inshore hurricane damage would be to go to west Texas. Guess which way Claudette went. Katrina survivors repeatedly brought up the problem of access if you evacuate. Some storm damage could be prevented with rapid action.
Our local officials have not had the experience of a severe storm, Claudette a category 1, maybe turning a low 2. Celia, a narrow severe storm in 1970, nicked the county to the south. Many say, and I agree, when you go through a serious storm you say, never again, I will evacuate. But that may be more an emotional than rational decision. I am thinking of going to Michigan.
If we do the science wrong, the law will follow, if both lack common sense.
It was brought home to me listening to WWL radio in New Orleans, which comes in good here, where the SPUD show was devoted entirely to the Texas Mandatory Evacuation Law. Now here are recent survivors of Katrina wondering how Texans are such wimps (my word, not theirs) about their rights. Discussion ranged from constitutional right to practical considerations, and of the half of the program I heard, no one thought the law proper. The Corpus Christ Caller-Times said that while no one was going to get arrested, it gave local mayors and judges that right. Sorry, but I do not have the confidence in government to know better than I do about evacuation. It is not an easy decision, but in my experience, and borne out in Katrina, both government and non-government individuals and groups act both competently and incompetenly near the time of a storm. Adrenalin flows, and we all know how that goes.
Furthermore, a presumably scientifically designed map of surge zones, puts the area where I live in zone A1, the most dangerous, a zone shared with San Jose Island and other slender pieces elsewhere. We live ten miles from the Gulf of Mexico in Lamar in a location and house designed to be as hurricane proof as we could afford. We experienced Claudette when local government and others encouraged evacuation, some going to Beevillle and Victoria where the hurricane did more damage than in Aransas County, after strengthening while hitting the coast at Matagorda Bay.
The decision to evacuate is difficult, some areas obvious, many more debatable. There is considerable risk in evacuation, both economically and otherwise. Claudette was interesting because I thought the safest place to avoid inshore hurricane damage would be to go to west Texas. Guess which way Claudette went. Katrina survivors repeatedly brought up the problem of access if you evacuate. Some storm damage could be prevented with rapid action.
Our local officials have not had the experience of a severe storm, Claudette a category 1, maybe turning a low 2. Celia, a narrow severe storm in 1970, nicked the county to the south. Many say, and I agree, when you go through a serious storm you say, never again, I will evacuate. But that may be more an emotional than rational decision. I am thinking of going to Michigan.
If we do the science wrong, the law will follow, if both lack common sense.
Apparently England is planning to ration health care
Via Bookworm Room blog I found this article on what plans Great Britain has in case of a swine flu epidemic.
Thousands of patients could be denied NHS treatment and left to die under ‘worst-case’ emergency plans for a swine-flu epidemic. The blueprint would force doctors to 'play God' and prioritise intensive-care treatment for those most likely to benefit - ruling out patients with problems such as advanced cancer. The 'scoring' system would be introduced if half the population became infected with flu.I understand these type scenarios must be planned for, and that triage will have to be done. They are being honest, I wonder what is planned for us in America.
How Smart is Obama?
The question is asked at American Thinker by Clarice Feldman. The whole thing made me chuckle. I have some close family that thinks he is a genius. I think he is a people pleaser who wants to be thought of as a genius. Feldman looks at the evidence.
Obama's books:
Jack Cashill has expended a great deal of effort at
American Thinker to blast holes in the "foundational
myth" that President Obama is a "literary genius"...
Obama Geography:
"I've now been in 57 states -- I think one left to go."
"Eau Claire [Wisconsin] is a big important state."....
Obama History
"On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes -- and I see many of them in the audience here today -- our sense of patriotism is particularly strong. " (He sees dead people?)...Obviously I haven't copied the whole article, but you need to read it all, it just goes on and on.
Check out the Brutally Honest Blog
Alan Grayson is suggesting that the constitution is being usurped by the federal reserve
My husband and I have just almost given up exclaiming over every new example of the government (read President Obama there) ignoring the constitution. TARP was bad. The so called stimulus bill was bad , but when the government started giving portions of GM to the highest bidder, (read donations here) we just really started shaking our heads. When the bankruptcy judge went along with it we really started shaking in our boots. Where is our constituion, why isn't more of congress objecting? I know we are in the minority but where are the patriots? The Alan Grayson link leads to a 5 minute video so if you have a fast internet connection you will want to see it.
My husband and I have just almost given up exclaiming over every new example of the government (read President Obama there) ignoring the constitution. TARP was bad. The so called stimulus bill was bad , but when the government started giving portions of GM to the highest bidder, (read donations here) we just really started shaking our heads. When the bankruptcy judge went along with it we really started shaking in our boots. Where is our constituion, why isn't more of congress objecting? I know we are in the minority but where are the patriots? The Alan Grayson link leads to a 5 minute video so if you have a fast internet connection you will want to see it.
The National Debt Road Trip
That was the name of an email I got last week. It had a wonderful, funny movie title on debt as a road trip. I told my friend if I knew how to do it I would love to have it for this blog. Well, I still don't know how, but others do.
I always check the Anchoress and she has it. Go see it now!
I always check the Anchoress and she has it. Go see it now!
Monday Morning Links
Stumbling governors spell trouble for Dems according to Michael Barone at Townhall.com
With polls showing a drop in Barack Obama's job rating and sinking support for the Democrats' health care plans, there is evidence of collateral damage where you might not expect to find it: in the standing of Democratic governors. Pennsylvania's Ed Rendell suddenly is getting negative job ratings in both the Quinnipiac University and the Franklin & Marshall College polls -- his lowest marks in seven years as governor. Ohio's Ted Strickland, who has spent most of his first term working amicably with Republican legislators, scores less than 50 percent in the latest Quinnipiac poll and has only tenuous leads over two Republicans, John Kasich and Mike DeWine, who may run against him next year.An interesting read on the coming elections.
Congressional Health Care Not Free- from Cleveland Plain Dealer
Reuben Grossberg of Pepper Pike, a structural engineer and former project manager for an architectural firm, certainly thought it was true, arguably with good reason, because Congress has done almost nothing to knock it down.
"I want the same quality of health care as the politicians get, and I don't want to have to pay any more for it," Grossberg, 63, said in an interview last week when President Barack Obama was flying to Cleveland and Congress struggled to craft a trillion-dollar health reform package.
Problem is, the belief that Congress gets cheap-but-Cadillac-quality health benefits is a myth. Some members of Congress, in fact, pay higher premiums for their health plans than they would if privately employed. Read it all to get the whole story, they do pay premiums, sometimes very high premiums.
"I want the same quality of health care as the politicians get, and I don't want to have to pay any more for it," Grossberg, 63, said in an interview last week when President Barack Obama was flying to Cleveland and Congress struggled to craft a trillion-dollar health reform package.
Problem is, the belief that Congress gets cheap-but-Cadillac-quality health benefits is a myth. Some members of Congress, in fact, pay higher premiums for their health plans than they would if privately employed. Read it all to get the whole story, they do pay premiums, sometimes very high premiums.
The Abortion Debate - Slate has an article I'm not sure how to take.
I notice they quote themselves quite often and that is okay.... but it is also opinion. Read it and see what you think. It is titled Culture of Death - the rightwing assault on abortion reduction. I have a nephew who is adopting a yet to be born baby, just so you know where I come down on a lot of this.
A new fault line has opened in the abortion debate. The fight is no longer between pro-lifers and pro-choicers. It's between militants and pragmatists.While some extremists have been raising hell and shooting doctors, pragmatists have been hashing out common-ground legislation. Their latest bill, introduced Thursday, is the Preventing Unintended Pregnancies, Reducing the Need for Abortion, and Supporting Parents Act. If that sounds like a jumble of ideas from both sides, it's because lots of bargaining went into it. Among other things, pro-choicers got money for contraception and sex education. Pro-lifers got abstinence-friendly curriculum, a bigger adoption tax credit, and financial support for women who continue their pregnancies.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Richard Fernandez who blogs at Pajamas Media has a long article from
Bala Ambati, who is an MD, takes a sober and well reasoned look at the healthcare debate on his site, Daylight’s Mark. He breaks out who has health care coverage; why or why not; where the potential cost savings are; where the ripoffs may be located and finally lists out the measures which, in his opinion, can really make health care system better.It is a fairly long but I think it is well worth the time to go there and read it. Dr. Ambati has carefully thought out how he would go about changing and improving our nation's health care systems. He has seen it inside and out, go read it all.
What to ask your Congressman
From Townhall blogs, a 31 second video you must see. I haven't learned to embed videos yet but all you have to do is click the link below.
Did you Read It?
Did you Read It?
Fred Barnes wonders if our president is an economic illiterate
In the latest issue of The Weekly Standard he asks the question. Then goes on to answer it.
Is President Obama an economic illiterate? Harsh as that sounds, there's growing evidence he understands little about economics and even less about economic growth or job creation. Yet, as we saw at last week's presidential press conference, he's undeterred from holding forth, with seeming confidence, on economic issues.
Obama professes to believe in free market economics. But no one expects his policies to reflect the unfettered capitalism of a Milton Friedman. That's too much to ask. Demonstrating a passing acquaintance with free market ideas and how they might be used to fight the recession--that's not too much to ask. But the president talks as if free market solutions are nonexistent, and in his mind they may be. Three weeks after taking office, he said only government "has the
resources to jolt our economy back into life." He hasn't retreated, in words or policies, from that view. Read the whole thing.
Rasmussen Poll Results
Presidential Tracking Poll
40% Say Obama Has Too Many Press Conferences, 47% Say Number Is Right
2012 Match-ups: Obama, Romney Tied at 45%; Obama 48%, Palin 42%
52% of Twitter Users Concerned about Safety of Personal Information
72% Don’t Want Feds Changing Their Light Bulbs
64% of California Voters Say Illegal Immigrants Are Major Strain on State Budget
55% of California Voters Oppose State Budget Deal
Just 20% Say Health Care Is Obama’s Top Priority
53% Now Oppose Congressional Health Care Reform
BY THE NUMBERS
40% Say Obama Has Too Many Press Conferences, 47% Say Number Is Right
2012 Match-ups: Obama, Romney Tied at 45%; Obama 48%, Palin 42%
52% of Twitter Users Concerned about Safety of Personal Information
72% Don’t Want Feds Changing Their Light Bulbs
64% of California Voters Say Illegal Immigrants Are Major Strain on State Budget
55% of California Voters Oppose State Budget Deal
Just 20% Say Health Care Is Obama’s Top Priority
53% Now Oppose Congressional Health Care Reform
BY THE NUMBERS
Tennessee Tried a type of Obama Healthcare
Real Clear Politics has an article showing a Tennessee attempt at health care that was very much like the Democrats would like us to have. Via the Strata-Sphere blog:
Go read what the Strata-sphere has to say and the whole story at Real Clear Politics
The genesis of TennCare has many parallels to the situation in which we find ourselves today. It was a public option plan designed to save money and expand coverage. In the early 1990s, Tennessee was facing rising costs in its Medicaid program. TennCare was designed to replace Medicaid with managed care and use the promised savings to expand coverage. By 1998, TennCare swelled to cover 1.2 million people. Private business dropped coverage for employees and forced them onto state rolls. By 2002 enrollment had swelled to 1.4 million people and forced Tennessee’s Governor to raise taxes and ultimately propose an entirely new state income tax to cover the unforeseen costs. Governor Bredesen was ultimately forced to dramatically restructure a program he has since called “a disaster”. By 2006 Bredesen had disenrolled nearly 200,000 people and slashed benefits.
Go read what the Strata-sphere has to say and the whole story at Real Clear Politics
Chicago Politics in Washington? Yes.
I've always thought we should be afraid of a Chicago politician, ed.
Lynn Sweet, a Chicago Sun Times columnist says "THE 51ST WARD D.C. gathering could as easily have been in Daley's City Hall." She then proceeds to lay it all out.
Lynn Sweet, a Chicago Sun Times columnist says "THE 51ST WARD D.C. gathering could as easily have been in Daley's City Hall." She then proceeds to lay it all out.
WASHINGTON -- It's a Tuesday in June, and I am in one of the high-ceiling big rooms of the old office building next to the White House.
As I look around the room at the players assembled here -- including this scribe -- I'm thinking that with a few twists of fate, this all-Chicago gang could be huddling in Mayor Daley's City Hall. With so many prominent Chicagoans playing key roles in the Obama administration, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has become the 51st ward. In front of me is Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to President Obama who today is chairing a roundtable marking the 37th anniversary of Title IX, the sports equity law. Across the room is Arne Duncan, the education secretary. Seated in the first row is Tina Tchen, director of
the White House public engagement office. Leaning against a wall is Susan Sher, chief of staff for Michelle Obama. In back of me in the vestibule is Daniel Hornung, a graduate of the University of Chicago Lab School who is working this summer for Jarrett. He is a friend of the daughter of Desiree Rogers, the White House social secretary. Marilyn Katz, a public affairs consultant visiting from Chicago, is also at the Title IX event.
Jarrett, Sher, Duncan and Tchen were all Daley appointees on boards or in top posts at City Hall, as was Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel. David Axelrod was Daley's political adviser. First lady Michelle Obama worked a stint at City Hall.
The Chicagoans have replaced the Texans in the White House.
Are we "Reapeating the Mistakes of Japan's Lost Decade?"
An editorial in the Washington Examiner says we are.
Here's something that ought to scare the daylights out of everybody: After Japan's stock and real estate markets collapsed in 1991, government officials made a series of disastrous policy decisions that prevented the world's second largest economy from recovering for more than a decade. Starting with the closing months of the Bush administration and continuing now with President Obama, America is making the exact same mistakes today.
Read it all, it looks as though we are making the same serious mistakes.
Articles from Politico
CBO Deals New Blow to Health Plan
For the second time this month, congressional budget analysts have dealt a blow to the Democrat's health reform efforts, this time by saying a plan touted by the White House as crucial to paying for the bill would actually save almost no money over 10 years.
A key House chairman and moderate House Democrats on Tuesday agreed to a White House-backed proposal that would give an outside panel the power to make cuts to government-financed health care programs. White House budget director Peter Orszag declared the plan "probably the most important piece that can be added" to the House's health care reform legislation.
But on Saturday, the Congressional Budget Office said the proposal to give an independent panel the power to keep Medicare spending in check would only save about $2 billion over 10 years- a drop in the bucket compared to the bill's $1 trillion price tag. Read more.
Another headline I saw used this as good news, saving big bucks!
Pelosi-Hoyer Tension on Health Care Vote Update:
The health care debate has sprouted an oldie-but-goodie storyline -- rising tensions between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her No. 2, Steny Hoyer over legislative tactics.
[UPDATE: Hoyer says there's "no tension" between himself and the Speaker, just that leadership is groping towards a good solution.
"There's been no tension of any kind," he told me a short time ago in the Capitol. "With all due respect, we say things a little different sometimes -- maybe one says things more carefully that the other... The Speaker and I both have reasonably strong personalities... But you'll see the Speaker and I invariably come to the same place and agree and move forward as a team… I think the speaker is one of the most prioncipled and pragmatic people I know -- she's what I like to call 'operational' -- she knows how to get things done."]Hoyer raised eyebrows earlier this week by saying punting the vote through the August recess wouldn't be the worst thing. Pelosi responded by saying she hoped to hold the vote before next week's recess -- and predicted she would have the votes.
The speaker's statements apparently haven't weakened Hoyer's resolve to delay the vote. Read More
For the second time this month, congressional budget analysts have dealt a blow to the Democrat's health reform efforts, this time by saying a plan touted by the White House as crucial to paying for the bill would actually save almost no money over 10 years.
A key House chairman and moderate House Democrats on Tuesday agreed to a White House-backed proposal that would give an outside panel the power to make cuts to government-financed health care programs. White House budget director Peter Orszag declared the plan "probably the most important piece that can be added" to the House's health care reform legislation.
But on Saturday, the Congressional Budget Office said the proposal to give an independent panel the power to keep Medicare spending in check would only save about $2 billion over 10 years- a drop in the bucket compared to the bill's $1 trillion price tag. Read more.
Another headline I saw used this as good news, saving big bucks!
Pelosi-Hoyer Tension on Health Care Vote Update:
The health care debate has sprouted an oldie-but-goodie storyline -- rising tensions between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her No. 2, Steny Hoyer over legislative tactics.
[UPDATE: Hoyer says there's "no tension" between himself and the Speaker, just that leadership is groping towards a good solution.
"There's been no tension of any kind," he told me a short time ago in the Capitol. "With all due respect, we say things a little different sometimes -- maybe one says things more carefully that the other... The Speaker and I both have reasonably strong personalities... But you'll see the Speaker and I invariably come to the same place and agree and move forward as a team… I think the speaker is one of the most prioncipled and pragmatic people I know -- she's what I like to call 'operational' -- she knows how to get things done."]Hoyer raised eyebrows earlier this week by saying punting the vote through the August recess wouldn't be the worst thing. Pelosi responded by saying she hoped to hold the vote before next week's recess -- and predicted she would have the votes.
The speaker's statements apparently haven't weakened Hoyer's resolve to delay the vote. Read More
Saturday, July 25, 2009
A Grass Roots Petition
From the same friend
Update: I've fixed the link, sorry about that.
I have just signed a national grassroots-led petition opposing Obama's socialist health care plan. If allowed to go unchecked and unchallenged, Obama will steal away your right to choose your health care options! Don't give the Government control over our private and personal health care decisions. Take a moment to join with me by adding your name to Grassfire's national petition opposing Obama'ssocialist plan. Click here to add your name: http://www.grassfire.org/122/petition.asp?PID=21513444&NID=1
Update: I've fixed the link, sorry about that.
I have just signed a national grassroots-led petition opposing Obama's socialist health care plan. If allowed to go unchecked and unchallenged, Obama will steal away your right to choose your health care options! Don't give the Government control over our private and personal health care decisions. Take a moment to join with me by adding your name to Grassfire's national petition opposing Obama'ssocialist plan. Click here to add your name: http://www.grassfire.org/122/petition.asp?PID=21513444&NID=1
What they are doing to Defeat Obamacare in Lafayette, LA
Is anything like this happening in Texas?
I got this in an email from a friend and former neighbor.
Do you know how your senators are going to vote on your health care?
The proposals on the table in Washington include all sorts of new mandates, taxes, and overall more government control of our health care. Instead of giving us more options, the Democrats’ plans so far would severely restrict our options and would cost us taxpayers trillions of dollars in new debt. (Examine the bill for yourself online!) We all agree we need health care reform. But a government takeover is not the solution. Do you want bureaucrats and politicians making your health care decisions? Sign the petition here to tell your senators and representative to take their hands off our health care!
A government takeover will allow Washington bureaucrats to take away your right to choose your doctors and hospitals and delay – or even deny – your access to the care you need. No one should come between your family and your doctor. When it comes to health care reform, patients must come first.
Bring your family and friends out on TUESDAY, JULY 28, 2009 to the Patients First tour!
Make sure your voice is heard against a Washington takeover of your family’s health care,and support real health care choices for every American. Click here to
We’ll have free food for the family, top-notch speakers, fantastic t-shirts and tons of information from organizations in the community.
What: Patients First Tour - LAFAYETTE
Where: Hilton at the Lafayette Airport, 1521 West Pinhook, Lafayette.
When: TUESDAY, JULY 28, 2009
For many in D.C., cutting costs means cutting care – your care. Join Patients First and let Washington know that a one-size-fits-all government plan doesn’t fit all because patients have different needs. Please forward this e-mail and encourage friends, family and co-workers to come out to this free event.Hope you can make it!
I got this in an email from a friend and former neighbor.
Do you know how your senators are going to vote on your health care?
The proposals on the table in Washington include all sorts of new mandates, taxes, and overall more government control of our health care. Instead of giving us more options, the Democrats’ plans so far would severely restrict our options and would cost us taxpayers trillions of dollars in new debt. (Examine the bill for yourself online!) We all agree we need health care reform. But a government takeover is not the solution. Do you want bureaucrats and politicians making your health care decisions? Sign the petition here to tell your senators and representative to take their hands off our health care!
A government takeover will allow Washington bureaucrats to take away your right to choose your doctors and hospitals and delay – or even deny – your access to the care you need. No one should come between your family and your doctor. When it comes to health care reform, patients must come first.
Bring your family and friends out on TUESDAY, JULY 28, 2009 to the Patients First tour!
Make sure your voice is heard against a Washington takeover of your family’s health care,and support real health care choices for every American. Click here to
We’ll have free food for the family, top-notch speakers, fantastic t-shirts and tons of information from organizations in the community.
What: Patients First Tour - LAFAYETTE
Where: Hilton at the Lafayette Airport, 1521 West Pinhook, Lafayette.
When: TUESDAY, JULY 28, 2009
For many in D.C., cutting costs means cutting care – your care. Join Patients First and let Washington know that a one-size-fits-all government plan doesn’t fit all because patients have different needs. Please forward this e-mail and encourage friends, family and co-workers to come out to this free event.Hope you can make it!
From the other McCain- Practical Advice for Killing Obamacare
From the middle of his article:
Ordinary Americans need to realize how much power they really have, if only they'll use it. Last week, I was in a senator's office on Capitol Hill, waiting in the lobby to meet somebody, and the phones were ringing off the hook with callers demanding that the senator vote against Judge Sotomayor.How the senator will vote, I'm not sure, but when the calls are running 3-to-1 on a certain issue, that makes a difference. When the calls are running 5-to-1, it makes an even bigger difference. And when John Cornyn gets booed in Texas . . . well, betcha that got his attention, huh?
People this is advice WE need to follow. Go to the link and READ FROM TOP TO BOTTOM. This is important advice for us. We must follow through.After I posted this I saw that Dolley Doright had posted a link to the same article, I am leaving them both up because IT IS SO IMPORTANT! RC
I Just Want to Be Mundane.
Antonia Senior in the Telegraph on the dangers the idealistic.
Ideologies often credit man with either more nobility or more venality than he deserves. In reality he is a mundane creature. He wants a home for himself and those he loves, stocked with food. And he wants to have the right to control his own destiny, own his own stuff, and to acquire more if he can without interference or fear of imminent death. Such low-level acquisitive desires support high concepts: property rights and the rule of law, without which there would be no foundation for democracy.
My desire to live a free, mundane life is a fundamental cog in our messy, glorious, capitalist democracy. It is built on millions of such small entrenched postitions. Red-filtered, my desires are despicable and bourgeois and must be beaten out of me with indoctrination or force. Green-filtered, my small desires are despicable acts of ecological vandalism. My house is a carbon factory. My desire to travel, to own stuff, to eat meat, to procreate, to heat my house, to shower for a really, really long time; all are evil.
I agree with this article, it simply reinforces my understanding of the nature of humanity. Most of us are mundane. We wish for peace and quite to go about our simple daily routines, which are mostly meaningless to everyone but those closest to us. We just want to get by....and in the United States, we just want to get by happily.
But there are those who believe they are born for great things. They are born to change the world. This can be good; slavery was ended in the western world. I've always supposed that those good and impassioned people that lead the way on slavery turned next to achohol and the temperance movement which in turn lead to prohibition which of course gave us the Kennedys. Now how sad is that.
Via Instapundit.
Hutchinson VS Perry
The Dallas News has this headline, Hutchinson Slams Perrry on Stimulus Decision. This is the gist of it:
The article went on to give a statement from Perry's spokesman:
"Kay Bailey Hutchison slammed Rick Perry's decision four months ago to reject $555 million in economic stimulus money to help the unemployed, saying Friday that it was "reckless" and showed a lack of both leadership and judgment..."
The article went on to give a statement from Perry's spokesman:
Perry spokesman Mark Miner said the senator has not been clear on where sheYou will have to read the whole thing and then make up your mind where you stand on this.
stands.
"She's playing a game of Washington politics, and that's not going to
play here in Texas. She's taken several positions on the same issue," Miner said.
Columnist asks, "Who's the Narcissist?"
Jack Kelly in the Toledo Blade asked this question and then answered it for us.
I'm not going to lift the whole article but you must read it.
IN HIS hit piece on Sarah Palin for Vanity Fair, Todd Purdum wrote: "More than once in my travels in Alaska, people brought up, without prompting, the question of Palin's extravagant self regard. Several told me, independently of one another, that they had consulted the definition of 'narcissistic personality disorder' in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - 'a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration and lack of empathy' - and thought it fit her perfectly."He then responds to Todd Purdum and paints Obama as the narcissist.
I'm not going to lift the whole article but you must read it.
A Message from Newt Gringrich
Emailed to Don Durand.
A recent report by the Federal Reserve predicts that we will reach 10% unemployment by the end of the year, and that it will likely take five years before we're creating net new jobs. And yet the President and leaders in Congress are trying to hold a vote before the August recess on a $1 trillion health care bill that will dramatically increase costs for small business and kill jobs. And this follows the House vote last month for a $1 trillion, job-killing National Energy Tax.America needs more jobs, not higher taxes.America cannot work if Americans are not working. So, we're launching a nationwide "Jobs Here, Jobs Now, Jobs First" campaign to convince Congress that its number one priority is to create jobs and to oppose job-killing taxes. To fight for new jobs and stop higher taxes, we created this TV ad, and we need your help to get it on the air. Click here to watch the ad and then share it with your friends.
A recent report by the Federal Reserve predicts that we will reach 10% unemployment by the end of the year, and that it will likely take five years before we're creating net new jobs. And yet the President and leaders in Congress are trying to hold a vote before the August recess on a $1 trillion health care bill that will dramatically increase costs for small business and kill jobs. And this follows the House vote last month for a $1 trillion, job-killing National Energy Tax.America needs more jobs, not higher taxes.America cannot work if Americans are not working. So, we're launching a nationwide "Jobs Here, Jobs Now, Jobs First" campaign to convince Congress that its number one priority is to create jobs and to oppose job-killing taxes. To fight for new jobs and stop higher taxes, we created this TV ad, and we need your help to get it on the air. Click here to watch the ad and then share it with your friends.
"Obama's Dream turning into a Nightmare?"
That question is asked by Nile Gardiner a Washington-based foreign affairs analyst and political commentator. He appears frequently on American and British television and radio, including Fox News Channel, CNN, BBC, Sky News, and NPR. He blogged this at the Telegraph.
.
Today’s Rasmussen Presidential Tracking survey will have hit the poll-obsessed Obama White House like a bullet train at full speed. For the first time, Barack Obama’s approval rating has fallen below 50 per cent among likely voters. 51 per cent of Americans now disapprove of the president, with 38 per cent strongly disapproving. The poll also reveals that 53 per cent oppose the president’s hugely controversial congressional health care reform package, and a mere 31 per cent believe America as a country is heading in the right direction under Obama’s leadership.Go read the whole thing and be sure to read the comments.
.
Nothing on the "Gates Gate" Here
It is almost as constant on TV as the death of Micheal Jackson so I won't be linking or commenting any more than this about the big flap of stupidity over it. It was not even worth mentioning at a presidential news conference, I think it was a setup question that turned into something way beyond what President Obama expected. As we would expect of him he has walked it back and is probably really kicking himself for all the bad publicity. All the political talk and television shows have kicked it around endlessly and I, who am but a lowly housewife, find it above my pay grade and frankly a really tasteless piece of news.
So this is it for what I will say or link to about it.
So this is it for what I will say or link to about it.
Truth Will Out
David Brooks is not known for being the strongest conservative in the world but he is still touted as one by the MSM. Newsbusters has a link to a Wall Street Journal article called The Conversation where he and liberal columnist Gail Collins have a public "conversation." In it he admits
"At the moment, I feel politically closer to Barack Obama than to House Minority Leader John Boehner (and that’s even while being greatly exercised about the current health care bills). "Very interesting - follow the link to read the whole thing at Newsbusters. David Brooks hasn't shown any conservative attributes for a long, long time.
Friday, July 24, 2009
Emails forwarded from Don Durand on Health Care
Dear Donald,
President Obama and the Democratic leadership have ignored the moral, ethical, and financial threats of a government takeover of health care. Just this week, President Obama told CBS News he didn't want to "wade into" the debate over whether taxpayers should be forced to pay for abortions within his health care takeover.
The President has already "waded in" - in fact, he's up to his neck in a plan that would compel Americans to pay for abortion-on-demand. Opposition is building in Congress and across the country against the Obama proposal, which would flood the coffers of the abortion industry.
To learn the story the networks won't tell you, to get the depth of perspective the networks can't give you, and to point the way forward on such a critical issue as health care, join me, along with FRCAction's respected experts as we are joined by key Congressional leaders for an exclusive Webcast beginning at 8:30 pm. EDT on Tuesday, July 28.
During the Webcast, we will give you a behind-the-scenes look at the fight to:
stop taxpayer funding of abortion,
protect the conscience rights of health care workers, and
prevent a government takeover that will impose a massive tax and debt burden on you and your family.
Please join us, and forward this on to your friends and family as we seek to bring together millions of concerned Americans to take united action against this government takeover plan.
Tune-In Tuesday at 8:30 pm ET for this Special FRC Action Webcast on the Moral, Ethical and Financial Dangers of the President's Health Care Reform Plan
Standing (Ephesians 6:13),Tony PerkinsPresident
P.S. Please forward this message to family and friends so they can include FRCAction among their vital sources during this critical debate. Thank you and God bless you.
Don received this from another friend:
President Obama and the Democratic leadership have ignored the moral, ethical, and financial threats of a government takeover of health care. Just this week, President Obama told CBS News he didn't want to "wade into" the debate over whether taxpayers should be forced to pay for abortions within his health care takeover.
The President has already "waded in" - in fact, he's up to his neck in a plan that would compel Americans to pay for abortion-on-demand. Opposition is building in Congress and across the country against the Obama proposal, which would flood the coffers of the abortion industry.
To learn the story the networks won't tell you, to get the depth of perspective the networks can't give you, and to point the way forward on such a critical issue as health care, join me, along with FRCAction's respected experts as we are joined by key Congressional leaders for an exclusive Webcast beginning at 8:30 pm. EDT on Tuesday, July 28.
During the Webcast, we will give you a behind-the-scenes look at the fight to:
stop taxpayer funding of abortion,
protect the conscience rights of health care workers, and
prevent a government takeover that will impose a massive tax and debt burden on you and your family.
Please join us, and forward this on to your friends and family as we seek to bring together millions of concerned Americans to take united action against this government takeover plan.
Tune-In Tuesday at 8:30 pm ET for this Special FRC Action Webcast on the Moral, Ethical and Financial Dangers of the President's Health Care Reform Plan
Standing (Ephesians 6:13),Tony PerkinsPresident
P.S. Please forward this message to family and friends so they can include FRCAction among their vital sources during this critical debate. Thank you and God bless you.
Don received this from another friend:
Let's see how many you can get to sign this petition. We're desperate
here.
Please take a minute to sign this petition keeping Government control OUT
of healthcare.http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
