“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cqN4NIEtOY -- Democrat Party candidate Barack Hussein Obama, October 30, 2008.
President Obama and the majority Democrats in the US Senate and Congress, are destroying our free economy and it is being taken over by our government; while dreams are being denied from American’ entrepreneurs as free men and women to participate in a free and open economy.
The insurance industry, as a whole, is the backbone of America’s financial community. The insurance industry offers us life insurance, health insurance, homeowners and/or renters insurance, and all coverages’ for many other causality losses, etc. With their premium incomes, the insurance industry invest by provide financing for banks, brokerages, business and individual mortgages, private and government bonds, etc. This circle of financing is imperative to a free revolving economy.
Now, President Obama and the majority Democrats on Capitol Hill are, step-by-step, taking over the financial industry. Once the government takeover of our insurance industry and its financial base is complete, America becomes a “Socialist” nation, economically.
Now, there is HealthCare changes in need, as we currently know it. This current legislation, which is being defined as Healthcare, is a “misnomer”. It could be further defined as a “HealthCare and Economic Killer”. For example, First, this legislation takes a cut into Medicare for the elderly and disabled. Secondly, it pays for abortion, destroying the unborn. Thirdly, we are seeing a cut in allowing women with insurance to begin routine mammograms at age 50, rather than the now recommended age 40 http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/health/a-13-2009-11-18-voa15-70422877.html.
These cuts and changes are all at the added expense of the American taxpayers. Our national debt is growing beyond any possibility of ever being able to repay. Do Americans really understand this as a problem to their own personal wealth and economy, or their debt to China, Saudi Arabia, Japan, and others? Do so many even really care?
The majority Democrats on Capitol Hill will most likely correct this third wrong on Mammograms, in an effort to calm the women of America. We need a HealthCare repair, not a replacement.
This legislation is too expensive in cost for our fragile free economy. This additional HealthCare cost in premiums, taxes, and/or penalties to our products and services force Americans to become less competitive with other contenders around the world; bringing more hardship on large and small businesses, entrepreneurs, and individuals searching for employment. This legislation is an “jobs” killer.
Can Obama and the majority Democrats on Capitol Hill be stopped? There are others options to recover our economy, and take some corrective actions to improve our current HealthCare system. Will President Obama and the majority Democrats allow changes to save our US economy and our HealthCare system? If this legislation is a great plan, why does President Obama and the Capitol Hill Democrats exempt themselves? Is this the “Change” you voted for?
Monday, November 23, 2009
ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20091123
Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
"Daily Motivations"
The components of happiness are quite simple. Happiness is gentleness, peace, concentration, simplicity, forgiveness, humor, fearlessness, trust, and now. In its true form each quality includes all the rest, for happiness is whole, and one feels whole when genuinely happy. -- Hugh Prather
"How soon 'not now' becomes 'never'." -- Martin Luther
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
Look beneath the surface so you can judge correctly. (John 7:24)
You have probably noticed that, even in a society dominated by lawyers, injustice often prevails. As a matter of fact, it may be more prevalent than ever. Have you ever found yourself angry and frustrated by wrongdoing that goes unpunished?
Justice Horace Gray served on the United States Supreme Court during the late 1800s. Not only was he respected as a fair and objective arbiter of justice, but he was admired as a generous philanthropist in the City of Boston.
During his stint as judge on a lower court, a man stood before him after successfully escaping conviction on a legal technicality. Everyone knew he had committed the crime, but no one could do anything about it. Judge Gray addressed the man before the court: "I know that you are guilty and you know it, and I wish you to remember that one day you will stand before a better and wiser Judge, and that there you will be dealt with according to Justice and not according to law."
Nobody likes injustice. God wants us to do all that we can to see fairness prevail. But He also wants us to remember that He will have the final say concerning every human life. Life may not be fair---for now, but the time will come when all accounts will be settled.
Your View of God Really Matters …
When you see injustice, does it cause you to wonder if God is truly just? Or does it cause you to wince for the people who will someday be called to account by God? Pray for those people today, that they will repent while there is still time.
"The Patriot Post"
"They are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare.... [G]iving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as they sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please." -- Thomas Jefferson
Liberty
"Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi's constitutional contempt, perhaps ignorance, is representative of the majority of members of both the House and the Senate. Their comfort in that ignorance and constitutional contempt, and how readily they articulate it, should be worrisome for every single American. It's not a matter of whether you are for or against Congress' health care proposals. It's not a matter of whether you're liberal or conservative, black or white, male or female, Democrat or Republican or member of any other group. It's a matter of whether we are going to remain a relatively free people or permit the insidious encroachment on our liberties to continue. ..... In each new session of Congress since 1995, John Shadegg, R-Ariz.,) has introduced the Enumerated Powers Act, a measure 'To require Congress to specify the source of authority under the United States Constitution for the enactment of laws, and for other purposes.' The highest number of co-sponsors it has ever had in the House of Representatives is 54 and it has never had co-sponsors in the Senate until this year, when 22 senators signed up. The fact that less than 15 percent of the Congress supports such a measure demonstrates the kind of contempt our elected representatives have for the rules of the game -- our Constitution. If you asked the questions: Which way is our nation heading, tiny steps at a time? Are we headed toward more liberty, or are we headed toward greater government control over our lives? I think the answer is unambiguously the latter -- more government control over our lives." -- economist Walter E. Williams
The Gipper
"The difference between the path toward greater freedom or bigger government is the difference between success and failure; between opportunity and coercion; between faith in a glorious future and fear of mediocrity and despair; between respecting people as adults, each with a spark of greatness, and treating them as helpless children to be forever dependent; between a drab, materialistic world where Big Brother rules by promises to special interest groups, and a world of adventure where everyday people set their sights on impossible dreams, distant stars, and the Kingdom of God. We have the true message of hope for America." -- Ronald Reagan
Government
"As an American, I am embarrassed that the U.S. House of Representatives has 220 members who actually believe the government can successfully centrally plan the medical and insurance industries. I'm embarrassed that my representatives think that government can subsidize the consumption of medical care without increasing the budget deficit or interfering with free choice. It's a triumph of mindless wishful thinking over logic and experience. The 1,990-page bill is breathtaking in its bone-headed audacity. The notion that a small group of politicians can know enough to design something so complex and so personal is astounding. That they were advised by 'experts' means nothing since no one is expert enough to do that. There are too many tradeoffs faced by unique individuals with infinitely varying needs. Government cannot do simple things efficiently. The bureaucrats struggle to count votes correctly. They give subsidized loans to 'homeowners' who turn out to be 4-year-olds. Yet congressmen want government to manage our medicine and insurance." -- columnist John Stossel
Opinion in Brief
"One word aptly describes Ft. Hood mass murderer Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan: traitor. Traitor is a tough word. It doesn't smudge and squish. 'Traitor' draws a hard line, one that sharply divides essential life-determining values and marks a defining personal choice between the profound and the profane. There is no question that the accusation of treason, like accusations involving its kin terms sedition and betrayal, has been grossly abused. Self-styled mainstream journalists with no regard for the awful moral weight and terrible consequences of the actual act of sedition heedlessly employ the accusation as a word weapon to thwart discomfiting political criticism. ... With Hasan, however, we move well beyond accusation. Hasan committed an act of treason. Count the bodies, dead and wounded, for they are harsh facts, and they are the consequences. ... Since Hasan survived, we may hear from him about his journey from medical officer to jihadi. His own explanations -- whether glandular, psychological, theological or political theatrical -- will intrigue many, particularly in the chitchat media already fretting over his identity crisis, but they will not raise the dead, comfort the grieving or satisfy fellow soldiers he betrayed." -- columnist Austin Bay
Culture
"Nidal Malik Hasan, was unimpressed by our diversity. In fact, it may have been diversity that set him off. Hasan and other Muslim extremists don't practice diversity. They mostly practice Sharia law, which backlashes against anyone who won't submit to their fundamentalist view of the world. ... Why do so many American leaders seem ashamed and apologetic about America? Holding to the view that America is unexceptional and that no idea, policy, belief, or practice is to be preferred over any other is not diversity. Rather, it is thin gruel; unappealing and unappetizing, and it robs us of our strength. Did diversity build and sustain America through world wars and economic challenges? No, it was a firm set of principles held by patriots of many races who were willing to pay the price in money and blood. These days, we seem to be increasingly confronted with people who are the political equivalent of shoplifters: they want the benefits without paying the price. ... I grow weary of having to tolerate everything when none of those making such demands seem willing to tolerate much of what I believe. Shouldn't diversity be a two-way street instead of a roadblock?" -- columnist Cal Thomas
Reader Comments
"It is not Islamaphobia if they really are trying to kill you." --Brian
The Last Word
"The American people are hearing a call to arms -- not literal arms, for our system can self correct. But we have to out-organize and out-pressure the Left. They have called us 'the enemy' ever since Alinsky's little book radicalized the revolutionaries of the Boomer Left after the violent revolutionary groups were readily suppressed. When somebody really considers you their enemy you have no choice. Either you return the compliment, or you get overwhelmed by the new Chicago Mob in D.C. The Left has shown how to fight from a position of the minority and win. American conservatives by a recent poll have a two-to-one majority. They are constantly undermined by the political Left: Ridiculed in the media, demeaned in the schools and universities, out-maneuvered in politics at the state and national level by Leftists who are far nastier and far more ruthless than ordinary, decent Americans. This is a struggle for the country. We need to toughen up." -- columnist James Lewis
"The Web"
Six of Six Pollsters Say Americans Are Against the Health Care Bill
Category: health care
11/21/09, by Proloy Bhatta
Do you favor/oppose the current health care bill?
Pollster Date Favor Oppose
AVERAGE 40% 48%
Fox News 11/17-18/09 35 51
CBS 11/13-16/09 40 45
CNN 11/13-15/09 46 49
AP GFK Poll 11/5-9/09 39 45
Gallup Poll 11/5-8/09 43 48
Pew Research Poll 10/28-11/8/09 38 47
'Tricks' and 'gimmicks' in Senate healthcare bill
Jim Brown and Chad Groening - OneNewsNow
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=776792
A healthcare policy expert says there are details in the Senate healthcare bill that will frighten everyone.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) has unveiled his more than 2,000-page healthcare bill with an estimated price tag of $849 billion. However, as Grace Marie Turner of the Galen Institute points out, one of the reasons the bill was scored under President Obama's $900 billion cost goal is because no one gets any benefit from the program until 2014.
"So they start collecting taxes and fees now, and...the first ten years of full implementation of this bill is $2.5 trillion, and that's only the beginning," Turner explains. "So this does not in any way...meet President Obama's budget specification. And there are all sorts of tricks that they have pulled in this bill to try to pretend that it's deficit-neutral."
Turner says although the bill is a "carefully crafted" document designed to garner as close to 60 votes as Senator Reid can, it contains lots of new taxes and $500 billion in cuts to Medicare.
"They're assuming that Congress is going to have the will to make those cuts, which they have no track record in doing -- which means they're going to have to come back to taxpayers for more and more taxes to pay for these alleged promises of accessible healthcare for more Americans," Turner suggests.
She further says that many promises President Obama made to the American people are broken in the Senate healthcare bill, including the notion that "if you like your current health insurance you'll be able to keep it." The Congressional Budget Office predicts that under the Senate's proposal, millions of Americans will lose the employer-based coverage they currently have.
Healthcare dubbed too pricy
A Mississippi senator says with a $12 trillion debt and record job-loss rate, the U.S. cannot afford the Democrats' healthcare plan.
At a Capitol Hill rally, Senate Majority Leader Reid claimed Thursday that the $849-billion, 10-year bill he unveiled hours earlier will save lives, save money, and save Medicare. The Nevada Democrat claims the bill is not just a milestone in a journey of a few months or a few years, but rather, it culminates an effort that began over a half century ago.
But Senator Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi) does not agree with Reid's assessment.
"It's a terribly expensive bill," states Wicker. "I don't know how they can tout it as something that actually saves money; except that they're using a few accounting gimmicks to maybe make it look better at first. It raises taxes to a tune of half-a-trillion dollars." (Listen to audio report)
The GOP lawmaker says there is another huge problem with the Senate bill as "it eliminates the so-called 'Stupak language' which was negotiated in the House and was designed to ensure that no taxpayer dollars go to fund abortion through these insurance plans." The Mississippi senator points out that "that language is taken out."
Wicker is hopeful he can find at least one principled pro-life Democrat who will help Republicans prevent the bill from going forward in its present form. That one vote would be enough in the Democrat-led Senate.
Former CBO official: Senate healthcare bill could cost $1.6 trillion
By Tony Romm
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/68877-former-cbo-official-senate-healthcare-bill-could-cost-16-trillion
Senate Democrats' newly unveiled healthcare bill could cost as much as $1.6 trillion over the next decade, nearly double the amount the Congressional Budget Office first predicted, a former CBO official said Friday.
In an estimate released this afternoon by the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute (AEI), departed CBO analyst Joseph Antos stressed his former employer's prediction that the bill would cost $848 billion actually depends on future Medicare cuts and reforms Congress is unlikely to authorize or enforce.
Foremost among those assumptions, Antos said, is the so-called "doc fix" that lawmakers have debated vigorously this fall. The CBO expects changes to Medicare reimbursements payments to hospitals and physicians to save the federal government $245 billion over 10 years, but Antos contends Congress will never pass those rules -- and thus, will end up losing money over the long term.
Antos' AEI report also anticipates Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's bill would increase the deficit by about $270 billion over the next 10 years. While the official CBO score hints the opposite is true, Antos suggests lost or increased payments to Medicare recipients will ultimately shift the healthcare bill's overall cost curve in the wrong direction.
However, it should be noted that the CBO admitted these limitations in its analysis of Reid's proposal, released earlier this week.
"These longer-term calculations assume that the provisions are enacted and remain unchanged throughout the next two decades, which is often not the case for major legislation," explained CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf, specifically noting the same concerns about lawmakers' ability to pass and enforce both the "doc fix" and other Medicare payment provisions.
"The projected longer-term savings for the legislation also assume that the Independent Medicare Advisory Board that would be established by the bill is fairly effective in reducing costs—beyond the reductions that would be achieved by other aspects of the bill—to meet the targets specified in the legislation," Elmendorf added.
BREAKING: Full List of Tax Hikes In Senate Democrat Health Bill
From Ryan Ellis on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 9:46 PM
http://www.atr.org/breaking-full-list-tax-hikesbr-senate-a4227
Read the full bill - http://www.atr.org/userfiles/ReidHealthBill.pdf
Read the tax revenue score from the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) - Not available
Read the budget and tax score from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) - http://www.atr.org/userfiles/CBOSenHealthScore.pdf
PDF of this Document
Individual Mandate Tax (Page 324/Sec. 1501/$8 bil): Starting in 2014, anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance must pay an income surtax according to the following schedule (capped at 8 percent of income):
Single Single +1 Single +2
2014 $95 $190 $285
2015 $350 $700 $1050
2016, etc. $750 $1500 $2250
Exemptions for religious objectors, undocumented immigrants, prisoners, those earning less than the poverty line, members of Indian tribes, and hardship cases (determined by HHS).
Employer Mandate Tax (Page 348/Sec. 1513/$28 bil): If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $750 for all full-time employees. Applies to all employers with 50 or more employees.
If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer).
Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans (Page 1979/Sec. 9001/$149.1 bil):
Starting in 2013, new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($8500 single/$23,000 family). Higher threshold ($9850 single/$26,000 family) for early retirees and high-risk professions. CPI +1 percentage point indexed.
From 2013-2015, the 17 highest-cost states are 120% of this level.
Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 (Page 1996/Sec. 9002/Min$): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns.
Medicine Cabinet Tax (Page 1997/Sec. 9003/$5 bil): No longer allowable to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin)
HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike (Page 1998/Sec. 9004/$1.3 bil): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.
FSA Cap (Page 1999/Sec. 9005/$14.6 bil): Imposes cap on FSAs of $2500 (now unlimited).
Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting (Page 1999/Sec. 9006/$17.1 bil): Requires businesses to send 1099-MISC information tax forms to corporations (currently limited to individuals), a huge compliance burden for small employers
Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals (page 2001/Sec. 9007/Min$): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new "community health assessment needs," "financial assistance," and "billing and collection" rules set by HHS.
Tax on Innovator Drug Companies (Page 2010/Sec. 9008/ $22.2 bil): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year.
Tax of Medical Device Manufacturers (Page 2020/Sec. 9009/$19.3 bil): $2 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to shares of sales made that year. Exempts items retailing for <$100.
Tax on Health Insurers (Page 2026/Sec. 9010/$60.4 bil): $6.7 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year.
Eliminate tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D (Page 2034/Sec. 9012/$5.4 bil)
Raise "Haircut" for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI (Page 2034/Sec. 9013/$15.2 bil) : Waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only
$500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives (Page 2035/Sec. 9014/$0.6 bil)
Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax (Page 2040/Sec. 9015/$53.8 bil): Current law and changes:
Wages (Employer/Employee) Self-Employment Net Income
Current Law and New Rate on First $200,000 ($250,000 MFJ) 1.45%/1.45% 2.9%
New Rate on Amount Which Exceeds $200,000 ($250,000 MFJ) 1.45%/1.95% 3.4%
The 0.5% new rate addition is not deductible for the self-employment tax adjustment.
Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike (Page 2044/Sec. 9016/$0.4 bil): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services
Tax on Cosmetic Medical Procedures (Page 2045/Sec. 9017/$5.8 bil): New 5% excise tax on elective cosmetic surgery to be paid by the surgery patient.
The Republican Alternative
By Peter Ferrara
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/11/18/the-republican-alternative
Democrats have been telling us all year that the Republicans have no health reform alternative. They are just the party of no! So we must have all been hallucinating when, lo and behold, just before the recent House vote on the Pelosi/Obama government health care takeover bill, there was a vote on…the Republican alternative.
Exactly the opposite of the House Democrat health plan, the Republican alternative would actually reduce the cost of health insurance and care. It would also expand coverage and provide a safety net ensuring that no one would be excluded from essential health coverage or care. It would also expand consumer choice and control over health care.
At the same time, the Republican plan involves no tax increases, no Medicare cuts, no rationing, and no increased deficits now or in the future. Exactly how all this is accomplished is fully explained below.
Lower Costs
The Republican plan allows insurers to sell health insurance across state lines. This would greatly expand competition, enabling the more than 1,000 private insurance companies to each compete nationally. That vastly increased competition would reduce health insurance premiums and costs. It would also greatly expand consumer freedom of choice.
We hear liberal complaints about areas within some states that only have a couple of insurance companies competing. That is entirely due to government regulation. We see ads for car insurance, and every other type of insurance, competing nationally all the time. There is no reason why we can't enjoy the same for health insurance.
The Republican plan, of course, includes medical liability tort reform modeled after successful reforms in California and Texas. This would sharply reduce costly junk lawsuits and the resulting costly defensive medicine pursued just to protect against frivolous claims. Democrats crassly oppose this because of the enormous contributions they receive from Plaintiffs' attorneys, which has been openly admitted.
The Republican plan would further reduce costs by enhancing Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), which are themselves a Republican reform fundamentally changing health care by introducing market incentives to reduce costs. Individuals with HSAs keep most of their money for health care in a savings account, earning tax-free interest, with the rest going to purchase a high-deductible, catastrophic insurance policy. The premium cost for such catastrophic coverage, with deductibles generally ranging from $2,000 to $6,000 a year, is much lower than for standard, low-deductible health insurance, allowing the savings in the account to grow quickly to cover the entire deductible. Patients with HSAs are free to use the money in their accounts for any health care, including preventive care, check-ups, prescriptions, dental care, eye care, and the full range of alternative medicine. Nothing could do more to increase consumer freedom of choice and to put patients in control of their own health care.
Money kept in HSAs can be used for health care in later years, or for anything in retirement. So patients are effectively using their own money for non-catastrophic care. That provides powerful incentives to avoid overly costly or unnecessary care and to look for doctors and hospitals that can provide quality care at lower cost, creating real market competition to reduce costs.
The Republican House alternative would allow consumers to use funds saved in HSAs to pay for the catastrophic insurance covering costs above the deductible. Broadly expanding HSAs across the entire health system, including Medicare and Medicaid, would essentially solve the health cost problem.
CBO confirms that this Republican alternative plan would reduce health insurance costs, exactly the opposite of the Pelosi/Obama plan that CBO confirms would increase health insurance costs. The CBO analysis shows that for millions of families health insurance premiums would be almost $5,000 per year less under this GOP plan than the cheapest health insurance under the Pelosi bill.
Expanded Coverage and a Safety Net
The GOP alternative also includes several provisions to expand health insurance coverage. Most important are the Universal Access Programs that would expand uninsurable risk pools to ensure that all Americans would be able to obtain coverage for any pre-existing condition. The uninsured who become too sick to buy private health insurance covering their condition can turn to their state's risk pool for coverage. They are charged premiums for such coverage based on their ability to pay. Each state then subsidizes its uninsurable risk pool to ensure that it could cover all costs.
Few people become truly uninsurable because of their health condition, so the risk pools are a low cost solution. But trying to force these people into the same market risk pools as everyone else through such policies as guaranteed issue (requiring insurers to accept all applicants for coverage regardless of health condition) and community rating (requiring insurers to charge everyone the same regardless of health condition) just ruins health insurance for the general public, making it too expensive and sharply increasing the uninsured as a result. Providing for the uninsurable separately through their own pool is consequently a much better policy.
The GOP plan would also enable small businesses to pool together to offer health insurance at lower prices, like big corporations and labor unions, which would further increase coverage. The proposal would also allow and encourage coverage for young adults on their parents' insurance through age 25. And though this has already been the law for many years, the Republican plan would also expressly prohibit insurers from canceling health insurance policies as long as payments continue, unless the insured commits fraud or conceals a material fact about a health condition.
I HOPE I DO NOT HEAR OF ANYONE BREAKING THIS ONE OR SEE DELETED
http://americanheritagegoju.com/Troops.asp
This is a ribbon for soldiers fighting in Iraq ... Pass it on to everyone and pray.
SLEEP LAST NIGHT?
Bed a little lumpy... Toss and turn any... Wish the heat was higher... maybe the A/C wasn't on... Had to go to the John ... Need a drink of water... ? ?
Yes.. It is like that!
Count your blessings, pray for them,
Talk to your Creator and the next time when...
the other car cuts you off and you must hit the brakes, or you have to park a little further from Walmart than you want to be, or you're served slightly warm food at the restaurant, or you're sitting and cursing the traffic in front of you, or the shower runs out of hot water ,
Think of them... for Protecting your freedom!
Message from Iraq
The proud warriors of Baker Company wanted to do something to pay tribute To our fallen comrades So since we are part of the only Marine Infantry Battalion left in Iraq the one way that we could think of doing that is By taking a picture of Baker Company saying the way we feel. It would be awesome if you could find a way to share this with our fellow countrymen. I
was wondering if there was any way to get this into your papers to let the world know that 'WE HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN' and are proud to serve our country.'
Semper Fi
1st Sgt Dave Jobe
The attached photo was forwarded from one of the last U.S. Marine companies in Iraq < /st1:place> . They would like to have it passed to as many people as possible, to let the folks back home know that they remember why th ey're there and that they remember those who've been lost.
Send this on. Go.
PATRIOT MICRO CHIP
http://seanlinnane.blogspot.com/2009/09/patriot-micro-chip.html
THE PATRIOT MICROCHIP is intended to be implanted in terrorists.
The implant is specifically designed to be installed in the forehead.
When properly installed, it will allow the one implanted, to speak to God.
It comes in various sizes:
The exact size of the implant will be selected by a well-trained and highly-skilled technician.
The implant may or may not be painless. Side effects, like headaches and nausea, are temporary.
Some bleeding or swelling may occur at the injection site.
Please enjoy the security we provide for you.
Best regards,
U.S Military
"The e-mail Bag"
A pastor's wife was expecting a baby, so he stood before the congregation and asked for a raise. After much discussion, they passed a rule that whenever the preacher's family expanded, so would his paycheck.
After 6 children, this started to get expensive and the congregation decided to hold another meeting to discuss the preacher's expanding salary.
A great deal of yelling and inner bickering ensued, as to how much the clergyman's additional children were costing the church, and how much more it could potentially cost.
After listening to them for about an hour, the pastor rose from his chair and spoke, 'Children are a gift from God, and we will take as many gifts as He gives us. Silence fell on the congregation.
In the back pew, a little old lady struggled to stand, and finally said in her frail voice, 'Rain is also a gift from God, but when we get too much of it, we wear rubbers.'
The entire congregation said, 'Amen.'
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
"Daily Motivations"
The components of happiness are quite simple. Happiness is gentleness, peace, concentration, simplicity, forgiveness, humor, fearlessness, trust, and now. In its true form each quality includes all the rest, for happiness is whole, and one feels whole when genuinely happy. -- Hugh Prather
"How soon 'not now' becomes 'never'." -- Martin Luther
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
Look beneath the surface so you can judge correctly. (John 7:24)
You have probably noticed that, even in a society dominated by lawyers, injustice often prevails. As a matter of fact, it may be more prevalent than ever. Have you ever found yourself angry and frustrated by wrongdoing that goes unpunished?
Justice Horace Gray served on the United States Supreme Court during the late 1800s. Not only was he respected as a fair and objective arbiter of justice, but he was admired as a generous philanthropist in the City of Boston.
During his stint as judge on a lower court, a man stood before him after successfully escaping conviction on a legal technicality. Everyone knew he had committed the crime, but no one could do anything about it. Judge Gray addressed the man before the court: "I know that you are guilty and you know it, and I wish you to remember that one day you will stand before a better and wiser Judge, and that there you will be dealt with according to Justice and not according to law."
Nobody likes injustice. God wants us to do all that we can to see fairness prevail. But He also wants us to remember that He will have the final say concerning every human life. Life may not be fair---for now, but the time will come when all accounts will be settled.
Your View of God Really Matters …
When you see injustice, does it cause you to wonder if God is truly just? Or does it cause you to wince for the people who will someday be called to account by God? Pray for those people today, that they will repent while there is still time.
"The Patriot Post"
"They are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare.... [G]iving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as they sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please." -- Thomas Jefferson
Liberty
"Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi's constitutional contempt, perhaps ignorance, is representative of the majority of members of both the House and the Senate. Their comfort in that ignorance and constitutional contempt, and how readily they articulate it, should be worrisome for every single American. It's not a matter of whether you are for or against Congress' health care proposals. It's not a matter of whether you're liberal or conservative, black or white, male or female, Democrat or Republican or member of any other group. It's a matter of whether we are going to remain a relatively free people or permit the insidious encroachment on our liberties to continue. ..... In each new session of Congress since 1995, John Shadegg, R-Ariz.,) has introduced the Enumerated Powers Act, a measure 'To require Congress to specify the source of authority under the United States Constitution for the enactment of laws, and for other purposes.' The highest number of co-sponsors it has ever had in the House of Representatives is 54 and it has never had co-sponsors in the Senate until this year, when 22 senators signed up. The fact that less than 15 percent of the Congress supports such a measure demonstrates the kind of contempt our elected representatives have for the rules of the game -- our Constitution. If you asked the questions: Which way is our nation heading, tiny steps at a time? Are we headed toward more liberty, or are we headed toward greater government control over our lives? I think the answer is unambiguously the latter -- more government control over our lives." -- economist Walter E. Williams
The Gipper
"The difference between the path toward greater freedom or bigger government is the difference between success and failure; between opportunity and coercion; between faith in a glorious future and fear of mediocrity and despair; between respecting people as adults, each with a spark of greatness, and treating them as helpless children to be forever dependent; between a drab, materialistic world where Big Brother rules by promises to special interest groups, and a world of adventure where everyday people set their sights on impossible dreams, distant stars, and the Kingdom of God. We have the true message of hope for America." -- Ronald Reagan
Government
"As an American, I am embarrassed that the U.S. House of Representatives has 220 members who actually believe the government can successfully centrally plan the medical and insurance industries. I'm embarrassed that my representatives think that government can subsidize the consumption of medical care without increasing the budget deficit or interfering with free choice. It's a triumph of mindless wishful thinking over logic and experience. The 1,990-page bill is breathtaking in its bone-headed audacity. The notion that a small group of politicians can know enough to design something so complex and so personal is astounding. That they were advised by 'experts' means nothing since no one is expert enough to do that. There are too many tradeoffs faced by unique individuals with infinitely varying needs. Government cannot do simple things efficiently. The bureaucrats struggle to count votes correctly. They give subsidized loans to 'homeowners' who turn out to be 4-year-olds. Yet congressmen want government to manage our medicine and insurance." -- columnist John Stossel
Opinion in Brief
"One word aptly describes Ft. Hood mass murderer Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan: traitor. Traitor is a tough word. It doesn't smudge and squish. 'Traitor' draws a hard line, one that sharply divides essential life-determining values and marks a defining personal choice between the profound and the profane. There is no question that the accusation of treason, like accusations involving its kin terms sedition and betrayal, has been grossly abused. Self-styled mainstream journalists with no regard for the awful moral weight and terrible consequences of the actual act of sedition heedlessly employ the accusation as a word weapon to thwart discomfiting political criticism. ... With Hasan, however, we move well beyond accusation. Hasan committed an act of treason. Count the bodies, dead and wounded, for they are harsh facts, and they are the consequences. ... Since Hasan survived, we may hear from him about his journey from medical officer to jihadi. His own explanations -- whether glandular, psychological, theological or political theatrical -- will intrigue many, particularly in the chitchat media already fretting over his identity crisis, but they will not raise the dead, comfort the grieving or satisfy fellow soldiers he betrayed." -- columnist Austin Bay
Culture
"Nidal Malik Hasan, was unimpressed by our diversity. In fact, it may have been diversity that set him off. Hasan and other Muslim extremists don't practice diversity. They mostly practice Sharia law, which backlashes against anyone who won't submit to their fundamentalist view of the world. ... Why do so many American leaders seem ashamed and apologetic about America? Holding to the view that America is unexceptional and that no idea, policy, belief, or practice is to be preferred over any other is not diversity. Rather, it is thin gruel; unappealing and unappetizing, and it robs us of our strength. Did diversity build and sustain America through world wars and economic challenges? No, it was a firm set of principles held by patriots of many races who were willing to pay the price in money and blood. These days, we seem to be increasingly confronted with people who are the political equivalent of shoplifters: they want the benefits without paying the price. ... I grow weary of having to tolerate everything when none of those making such demands seem willing to tolerate much of what I believe. Shouldn't diversity be a two-way street instead of a roadblock?" -- columnist Cal Thomas
Reader Comments
"It is not Islamaphobia if they really are trying to kill you." --Brian
The Last Word
"The American people are hearing a call to arms -- not literal arms, for our system can self correct. But we have to out-organize and out-pressure the Left. They have called us 'the enemy' ever since Alinsky's little book radicalized the revolutionaries of the Boomer Left after the violent revolutionary groups were readily suppressed. When somebody really considers you their enemy you have no choice. Either you return the compliment, or you get overwhelmed by the new Chicago Mob in D.C. The Left has shown how to fight from a position of the minority and win. American conservatives by a recent poll have a two-to-one majority. They are constantly undermined by the political Left: Ridiculed in the media, demeaned in the schools and universities, out-maneuvered in politics at the state and national level by Leftists who are far nastier and far more ruthless than ordinary, decent Americans. This is a struggle for the country. We need to toughen up." -- columnist James Lewis
"The Web"
Six of Six Pollsters Say Americans Are Against the Health Care Bill
Category: health care
11/21/09, by Proloy Bhatta
Do you favor/oppose the current health care bill?
Pollster Date Favor Oppose
AVERAGE 40% 48%
Fox News 11/17-18/09 35 51
CBS 11/13-16/09 40 45
CNN 11/13-15/09 46 49
AP GFK Poll 11/5-9/09 39 45
Gallup Poll 11/5-8/09 43 48
Pew Research Poll 10/28-11/8/09 38 47
'Tricks' and 'gimmicks' in Senate healthcare bill
Jim Brown and Chad Groening - OneNewsNow
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=776792
A healthcare policy expert says there are details in the Senate healthcare bill that will frighten everyone.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) has unveiled his more than 2,000-page healthcare bill with an estimated price tag of $849 billion. However, as Grace Marie Turner of the Galen Institute points out, one of the reasons the bill was scored under President Obama's $900 billion cost goal is because no one gets any benefit from the program until 2014.
"So they start collecting taxes and fees now, and...the first ten years of full implementation of this bill is $2.5 trillion, and that's only the beginning," Turner explains. "So this does not in any way...meet President Obama's budget specification. And there are all sorts of tricks that they have pulled in this bill to try to pretend that it's deficit-neutral."
Turner says although the bill is a "carefully crafted" document designed to garner as close to 60 votes as Senator Reid can, it contains lots of new taxes and $500 billion in cuts to Medicare.
"They're assuming that Congress is going to have the will to make those cuts, which they have no track record in doing -- which means they're going to have to come back to taxpayers for more and more taxes to pay for these alleged promises of accessible healthcare for more Americans," Turner suggests.
She further says that many promises President Obama made to the American people are broken in the Senate healthcare bill, including the notion that "if you like your current health insurance you'll be able to keep it." The Congressional Budget Office predicts that under the Senate's proposal, millions of Americans will lose the employer-based coverage they currently have.
Healthcare dubbed too pricy
A Mississippi senator says with a $12 trillion debt and record job-loss rate, the U.S. cannot afford the Democrats' healthcare plan.
At a Capitol Hill rally, Senate Majority Leader Reid claimed Thursday that the $849-billion, 10-year bill he unveiled hours earlier will save lives, save money, and save Medicare. The Nevada Democrat claims the bill is not just a milestone in a journey of a few months or a few years, but rather, it culminates an effort that began over a half century ago.
But Senator Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi) does not agree with Reid's assessment.
"It's a terribly expensive bill," states Wicker. "I don't know how they can tout it as something that actually saves money; except that they're using a few accounting gimmicks to maybe make it look better at first. It raises taxes to a tune of half-a-trillion dollars." (Listen to audio report)
The GOP lawmaker says there is another huge problem with the Senate bill as "it eliminates the so-called 'Stupak language' which was negotiated in the House and was designed to ensure that no taxpayer dollars go to fund abortion through these insurance plans." The Mississippi senator points out that "that language is taken out."
Wicker is hopeful he can find at least one principled pro-life Democrat who will help Republicans prevent the bill from going forward in its present form. That one vote would be enough in the Democrat-led Senate.
Former CBO official: Senate healthcare bill could cost $1.6 trillion
By Tony Romm
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/68877-former-cbo-official-senate-healthcare-bill-could-cost-16-trillion
Senate Democrats' newly unveiled healthcare bill could cost as much as $1.6 trillion over the next decade, nearly double the amount the Congressional Budget Office first predicted, a former CBO official said Friday.
In an estimate released this afternoon by the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute (AEI), departed CBO analyst Joseph Antos stressed his former employer's prediction that the bill would cost $848 billion actually depends on future Medicare cuts and reforms Congress is unlikely to authorize or enforce.
Foremost among those assumptions, Antos said, is the so-called "doc fix" that lawmakers have debated vigorously this fall. The CBO expects changes to Medicare reimbursements payments to hospitals and physicians to save the federal government $245 billion over 10 years, but Antos contends Congress will never pass those rules -- and thus, will end up losing money over the long term.
Antos' AEI report also anticipates Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's bill would increase the deficit by about $270 billion over the next 10 years. While the official CBO score hints the opposite is true, Antos suggests lost or increased payments to Medicare recipients will ultimately shift the healthcare bill's overall cost curve in the wrong direction.
However, it should be noted that the CBO admitted these limitations in its analysis of Reid's proposal, released earlier this week.
"These longer-term calculations assume that the provisions are enacted and remain unchanged throughout the next two decades, which is often not the case for major legislation," explained CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf, specifically noting the same concerns about lawmakers' ability to pass and enforce both the "doc fix" and other Medicare payment provisions.
"The projected longer-term savings for the legislation also assume that the Independent Medicare Advisory Board that would be established by the bill is fairly effective in reducing costs—beyond the reductions that would be achieved by other aspects of the bill—to meet the targets specified in the legislation," Elmendorf added.
BREAKING: Full List of Tax Hikes In Senate Democrat Health Bill
From Ryan Ellis on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 9:46 PM
http://www.atr.org/breaking-full-list-tax-hikesbr-senate-a4227
Read the full bill - http://www.atr.org/userfiles/ReidHealthBill.pdf
Read the tax revenue score from the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) - Not available
Read the budget and tax score from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) - http://www.atr.org/userfiles/CBOSenHealthScore.pdf
PDF of this Document
Individual Mandate Tax (Page 324/Sec. 1501/$8 bil): Starting in 2014, anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance must pay an income surtax according to the following schedule (capped at 8 percent of income):
Single Single +1 Single +2
2014 $95 $190 $285
2015 $350 $700 $1050
2016, etc. $750 $1500 $2250
Exemptions for religious objectors, undocumented immigrants, prisoners, those earning less than the poverty line, members of Indian tribes, and hardship cases (determined by HHS).
Employer Mandate Tax (Page 348/Sec. 1513/$28 bil): If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $750 for all full-time employees. Applies to all employers with 50 or more employees.
If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer).
Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans (Page 1979/Sec. 9001/$149.1 bil):
Starting in 2013, new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($8500 single/$23,000 family). Higher threshold ($9850 single/$26,000 family) for early retirees and high-risk professions. CPI +1 percentage point indexed.
From 2013-2015, the 17 highest-cost states are 120% of this level.
Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 (Page 1996/Sec. 9002/Min$): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns.
Medicine Cabinet Tax (Page 1997/Sec. 9003/$5 bil): No longer allowable to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin)
HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike (Page 1998/Sec. 9004/$1.3 bil): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.
FSA Cap (Page 1999/Sec. 9005/$14.6 bil): Imposes cap on FSAs of $2500 (now unlimited).
Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting (Page 1999/Sec. 9006/$17.1 bil): Requires businesses to send 1099-MISC information tax forms to corporations (currently limited to individuals), a huge compliance burden for small employers
Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals (page 2001/Sec. 9007/Min$): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new "community health assessment needs," "financial assistance," and "billing and collection" rules set by HHS.
Tax on Innovator Drug Companies (Page 2010/Sec. 9008/ $22.2 bil): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year.
Tax of Medical Device Manufacturers (Page 2020/Sec. 9009/$19.3 bil): $2 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to shares of sales made that year. Exempts items retailing for <$100.
Tax on Health Insurers (Page 2026/Sec. 9010/$60.4 bil): $6.7 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year.
Eliminate tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D (Page 2034/Sec. 9012/$5.4 bil)
Raise "Haircut" for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI (Page 2034/Sec. 9013/$15.2 bil) : Waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only
$500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives (Page 2035/Sec. 9014/$0.6 bil)
Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax (Page 2040/Sec. 9015/$53.8 bil): Current law and changes:
Wages (Employer/Employee) Self-Employment Net Income
Current Law and New Rate on First $200,000 ($250,000 MFJ) 1.45%/1.45% 2.9%
New Rate on Amount Which Exceeds $200,000 ($250,000 MFJ) 1.45%/1.95% 3.4%
The 0.5% new rate addition is not deductible for the self-employment tax adjustment.
Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike (Page 2044/Sec. 9016/$0.4 bil): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services
Tax on Cosmetic Medical Procedures (Page 2045/Sec. 9017/$5.8 bil): New 5% excise tax on elective cosmetic surgery to be paid by the surgery patient.
The Republican Alternative
By Peter Ferrara
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/11/18/the-republican-alternative
Democrats have been telling us all year that the Republicans have no health reform alternative. They are just the party of no! So we must have all been hallucinating when, lo and behold, just before the recent House vote on the Pelosi/Obama government health care takeover bill, there was a vote on…the Republican alternative.
Exactly the opposite of the House Democrat health plan, the Republican alternative would actually reduce the cost of health insurance and care. It would also expand coverage and provide a safety net ensuring that no one would be excluded from essential health coverage or care. It would also expand consumer choice and control over health care.
At the same time, the Republican plan involves no tax increases, no Medicare cuts, no rationing, and no increased deficits now or in the future. Exactly how all this is accomplished is fully explained below.
Lower Costs
The Republican plan allows insurers to sell health insurance across state lines. This would greatly expand competition, enabling the more than 1,000 private insurance companies to each compete nationally. That vastly increased competition would reduce health insurance premiums and costs. It would also greatly expand consumer freedom of choice.
We hear liberal complaints about areas within some states that only have a couple of insurance companies competing. That is entirely due to government regulation. We see ads for car insurance, and every other type of insurance, competing nationally all the time. There is no reason why we can't enjoy the same for health insurance.
The Republican plan, of course, includes medical liability tort reform modeled after successful reforms in California and Texas. This would sharply reduce costly junk lawsuits and the resulting costly defensive medicine pursued just to protect against frivolous claims. Democrats crassly oppose this because of the enormous contributions they receive from Plaintiffs' attorneys, which has been openly admitted.
The Republican plan would further reduce costs by enhancing Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), which are themselves a Republican reform fundamentally changing health care by introducing market incentives to reduce costs. Individuals with HSAs keep most of their money for health care in a savings account, earning tax-free interest, with the rest going to purchase a high-deductible, catastrophic insurance policy. The premium cost for such catastrophic coverage, with deductibles generally ranging from $2,000 to $6,000 a year, is much lower than for standard, low-deductible health insurance, allowing the savings in the account to grow quickly to cover the entire deductible. Patients with HSAs are free to use the money in their accounts for any health care, including preventive care, check-ups, prescriptions, dental care, eye care, and the full range of alternative medicine. Nothing could do more to increase consumer freedom of choice and to put patients in control of their own health care.
Money kept in HSAs can be used for health care in later years, or for anything in retirement. So patients are effectively using their own money for non-catastrophic care. That provides powerful incentives to avoid overly costly or unnecessary care and to look for doctors and hospitals that can provide quality care at lower cost, creating real market competition to reduce costs.
The Republican House alternative would allow consumers to use funds saved in HSAs to pay for the catastrophic insurance covering costs above the deductible. Broadly expanding HSAs across the entire health system, including Medicare and Medicaid, would essentially solve the health cost problem.
CBO confirms that this Republican alternative plan would reduce health insurance costs, exactly the opposite of the Pelosi/Obama plan that CBO confirms would increase health insurance costs. The CBO analysis shows that for millions of families health insurance premiums would be almost $5,000 per year less under this GOP plan than the cheapest health insurance under the Pelosi bill.
Expanded Coverage and a Safety Net
The GOP alternative also includes several provisions to expand health insurance coverage. Most important are the Universal Access Programs that would expand uninsurable risk pools to ensure that all Americans would be able to obtain coverage for any pre-existing condition. The uninsured who become too sick to buy private health insurance covering their condition can turn to their state's risk pool for coverage. They are charged premiums for such coverage based on their ability to pay. Each state then subsidizes its uninsurable risk pool to ensure that it could cover all costs.
Few people become truly uninsurable because of their health condition, so the risk pools are a low cost solution. But trying to force these people into the same market risk pools as everyone else through such policies as guaranteed issue (requiring insurers to accept all applicants for coverage regardless of health condition) and community rating (requiring insurers to charge everyone the same regardless of health condition) just ruins health insurance for the general public, making it too expensive and sharply increasing the uninsured as a result. Providing for the uninsurable separately through their own pool is consequently a much better policy.
The GOP plan would also enable small businesses to pool together to offer health insurance at lower prices, like big corporations and labor unions, which would further increase coverage. The proposal would also allow and encourage coverage for young adults on their parents' insurance through age 25. And though this has already been the law for many years, the Republican plan would also expressly prohibit insurers from canceling health insurance policies as long as payments continue, unless the insured commits fraud or conceals a material fact about a health condition.
I HOPE I DO NOT HEAR OF ANYONE BREAKING THIS ONE OR SEE DELETED
http://americanheritagegoju.com/Troops.asp
This is a ribbon for soldiers fighting in Iraq ... Pass it on to everyone and pray.
SLEEP LAST NIGHT?
Bed a little lumpy... Toss and turn any... Wish the heat was higher... maybe the A/C wasn't on... Had to go to the John ... Need a drink of water... ? ?
Yes.. It is like that!
Count your blessings, pray for them,
Talk to your Creator and the next time when...
the other car cuts you off and you must hit the brakes, or you have to park a little further from Walmart than you want to be, or you're served slightly warm food at the restaurant, or you're sitting and cursing the traffic in front of you, or the shower runs out of hot water ,
Think of them... for Protecting your freedom!
Message from Iraq
The proud warriors of Baker Company wanted to do something to pay tribute To our fallen comrades So since we are part of the only Marine Infantry Battalion left in Iraq the one way that we could think of doing that is By taking a picture of Baker Company saying the way we feel. It would be awesome if you could find a way to share this with our fellow countrymen. I
was wondering if there was any way to get this into your papers to let the world know that 'WE HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN' and are proud to serve our country.'
Semper Fi
1st Sgt Dave Jobe
The attached photo was forwarded from one of the last U.S. Marine companies in Iraq < /st1:place> . They would like to have it passed to as many people as possible, to let the folks back home know that they remember why th ey're there and that they remember those who've been lost.
Send this on. Go.
PATRIOT MICRO CHIP
http://seanlinnane.blogspot.com/2009/09/patriot-micro-chip.html
THE PATRIOT MICROCHIP is intended to be implanted in terrorists.
The implant is specifically designed to be installed in the forehead.
When properly installed, it will allow the one implanted, to speak to God.
It comes in various sizes:
The exact size of the implant will be selected by a well-trained and highly-skilled technician.
The implant may or may not be painless. Side effects, like headaches and nausea, are temporary.
Some bleeding or swelling may occur at the injection site.
Please enjoy the security we provide for you.
Best regards,
U.S Military
"The e-mail Bag"
A pastor's wife was expecting a baby, so he stood before the congregation and asked for a raise. After much discussion, they passed a rule that whenever the preacher's family expanded, so would his paycheck.
After 6 children, this started to get expensive and the congregation decided to hold another meeting to discuss the preacher's expanding salary.
A great deal of yelling and inner bickering ensued, as to how much the clergyman's additional children were costing the church, and how much more it could potentially cost.
After listening to them for about an hour, the pastor rose from his chair and spoke, 'Children are a gift from God, and we will take as many gifts as He gives us. Silence fell on the congregation.
In the back pew, a little old lady struggled to stand, and finally said in her frail voice, 'Rain is also a gift from God, but when we get too much of it, we wear rubbers.'
The entire congregation said, 'Amen.'
Friday, November 20, 2009
ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20091120
Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
"Daily Motivations"
"Small differences in your performance can lead to large differences in your results." -- Brian Tracy
"Service to others is the rent you pay for your room here on earth." -- Muhammad Ali
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
With the Lord's authority I say this: Live no longer as the Gentiles do, for they are hopelessly confused. (Ephesians 4:17)
Do you have a moral compass? Where does its "true north" point?
At the outset of World War II, a group of young German soldiers had the opportunity to join an Officers' Club that would put them on the fast track to promotion. But it would involve attending weekend dancing, and their churches had taught that dancing led to immorality. They declined.
Later in the war, the same young soldiers served in German death camps. While they did not personally assist with executing Jewish prisoners in the notorious ovens, they stood by without protest. When interviewed years later, these soldiers felt they had made good ethical decisions in all cases. In the first instance; they had rejected social pressure and refused to dance; in the second, they had been obedient to their commanders.
The world is filled with confused and conflicting ideas about what is right. But true righteousness is found only in God. That is why having a proper understanding of who God really is, is so important. Our moral code cannot rise above our view of God. In fact, we can trace all our human problems to a flawed view of God.
Your View of God Really Matters …
Do you believe morality is relative to culture and your personal circumstances, or to God's character? Your answer to that question will determine your moral strength. In fact, your view of God will determine who you become.
"The Patriot Post"
"If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy." -- Thomas Jefferson
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it." -- Thomas Paine
This Week's 'Braying Jenny' Award
PelosiCare includes a possible fine and jail time for those who don't abide by the mandate to buy health insurance. Is it really fair to send people to jail for choosing to pay their own way?
Pelosi thinks so: "I think the legislation is very fair in this respect. It gives people an opportunity to have health care." If by "gives people an opportunity" you mean coerces them to have health insurance...
The BIG Dodge
Where is the constitutional authority for a federal mandate that individuals must buy health insurance?
Sen. Ben Nelson, a Democrat in red-state Nebraska, pleaded the Fifth: "Well, you know, uh, uh, I don't know that I'm a constitutional scholar, so, I, I'm not going to be able to answer that question."
Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI) likewise dodged the question, saying, "I'm not aware of [any constitutional authority], let me put it that way. But what we're trying to do is to provide for people who have needs and that's where the accessibility comes in, and one of the goals that we're trying to present here is to make it accessible." Right. "Provide" for them by mandating they do something under penalty of massive fines and/or imprisonment -- that's leftist "compassion" for you.
Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) answered, "The United States Congress passed laws regarding Medicare and Medicaid that became de facto mandatory programs. States all the time require people to have driver's licenses. I think that this is a bit of a spurious argument that's being made by some folks." Uh, states require licenses only for the privilege of driving.
Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), a member of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee -- one of two committees that wrote and approved health care legislation -- pointed to precedent as justification: "Let me see. I would have to check the specific sections, so I'll have to get back to you on the specific section, but it is not unusual that the Congress has required individuals to do things, like sign up for the draft, uh, uh, and do many other things too, which I don't think are explicitly contained [in the Constitution]. It gives Congress a right to raise an army, but it doesn't say you can take people and draft them, uh, but since that was something necessary for the functioning of the government over the past several years, the practice on the books, it's been recognized, the authority to do that." So because Congress has acted unconstitutionally before, they can do it again now? Our guess is he understands health care about as well as he comprehends the Constitution.
Quote of the Week
"America once made the required nod to the Constitution.. When We the People wanted to make some fundamental change or expand the federal government's reach, we did the right thing and amended the Constitution. ... If we once thought that we had to amend the Constitution to ban 'intoxicating liquors' and later had to again amend the Constitution to re-legalize the stuff, wouldn't we need an amendment to allow the government to intrude even more intimately into our lives? ... If Congress were to do the right thing and initiate an amendment to enshrine the 'individual mandate' in the Constitution ... it would fail miserably. If America is still America, Americans will not tolerate being told they have to buy something, especially if it's for no other reason than that they exist. ... I'm afraid Congress has not only misread the Constitution, but they've also misjudged the American people. Or maybe they just don't know what country they live in." -- Jon N. Hall at American Thinker
You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it
“You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.” -- Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931 – 2005
"The Web"
Democrats push through judge who banned Jesus prayers
Associated Press
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Headlines/Default.aspx?id=773814
WASHINGTON- Democrats have crushed a Senate filibuster against appeals court nominee David Hamilton -- a judge who prohibited prayers that mentioned Jesus Christ, while allowing Muslim prayers to Allah-- before sessions of the Indiana House of Representatives.
Tuesday's 70-29 vote limited debate over Hamilton's qualifications and assured his elevation to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Sixty votes were needed to end the filibuster, but confirmation only requires a simple majority of the 100-member Senate.
Alabama Republican Jeff Sessions noted that while Hamilton prohibited the mention of Jesus in invocations, he allowed a Muslim cleric to pray to Allah.
But several Republicans supported the Democrats, including Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), Susan Collins (Maine), John Cornyn (Texas), Orrin Hatch (Utah) and Richard Lugar (Indiana).
Update: The US Senate approved David Hamilton on a vote of 59 to 39. See article below.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00350
Senate confirms controversial judge
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29732.html
The Senate confirmed Judge David Hamilton to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals 59-39 Thursday after breaking a GOP filibuster Tuesday and a five-and-a-half month delay.
Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), who represents Hamilton's home state of Indiana, cast the lone Republican vote for the judge.
“This is a nomination that should be confirmed and should have been confirmed months ago," said Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) in a statement. "David Hamilton is a fine judge and will make a good addition to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit."
Hamilton, who was President Barack Obama's first judicial nominee, came under Republican fire for several rulings he made in Indiana, from barring certain prayers in the state legislature to a ruling stating that abortion clinics should not be required to provide information on alternatives to abortion.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said Monday he sought to block Hamilton's nomination because he believed the judge was extreme and would add "footnotes to the Constitution."
Lugar, however, refuted GOP sentiment in a floor statement Monday on Hamilton's behalf, saying that the judge appreciated "the vital, and yet vitally limited, role of the federal judiciary faithfully to interpret and apply our laws, rather than seeking to impose their own policy views."
What the Pelosi Health-Care Bill Really Says
Here are some important passages in the 2,000 page legislation.
By BETSY MCCAUGHEY
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704795604574519671055918380.html
The health bill that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is bringing to a vote (H.R. 3962) is 1,990 pages. Here are some of the details you need to know.
What the government will require you to do:
• Sec. 202 (p. 91-92) of the bill requires you to enroll in a "qualified plan." If you get your insurance at work, your employer will have a "grace period" to switch you to a "qualified plan," meaning a plan designed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. If you buy your own insurance, there's no grace period. You'll have to enroll in a qualified plan as soon as any term in your contract changes, such as the co-pay, deductible or benefit.
• Sec. 224 (p. 118) provides that 18 months after the bill becomes law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will decide what a "qualified plan" covers and how much you'll be legally required to pay for it. That's like a banker telling you to sign the loan agreement now, then filling in the interest rate and repayment terms 18 months later.
Associated Press
Protestors wave signs in front of the Capitol on Thursday.
On Nov. 2, the Congressional Budget Office estimated what the plans will likely cost. An individual earning $44,000 before taxes who purchases his own insurance will have to pay a $5,300 premium and an estimated $2,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, for a total of $7,300 a year, which is 17% of his pre-tax income. A family earning $102,100 a year before taxes will have to pay a $15,000 premium plus an estimated $5,300 out-of-pocket, for a $20,300 total, or 20% of its pre-tax income. Individuals and families earning less than these amounts will be eligible for subsidies paid directly to their insurer.
• Sec. 303 (pp. 167-168) makes it clear that, although the "qualified plan" is not yet designed, it will be of the "one size fits all" variety. The bill claims to offer choice—basic, enhanced and premium levels—but the benefits are the same. Only the co-pays and deductibles differ. You will have to enroll in the same plan, whether the government is paying for it or you and your employer are footing the bill.
• Sec. 59b (pp. 297-299) says that when you file your taxes, you must include proof that you are in a qualified plan. If not, you will be fined thousands of dollars. Illegal immigrants are exempt from this requirement.
• Sec. 412 (p. 272) says that employers must provide a "qualified plan" for their employees and pay 72.5% of the cost, and a smaller share of family coverage, or incur an 8% payroll tax. Small businesses, with payrolls from $500,000 to $750,000, are fined less.
Eviscerating Medicare:
In addition to reducing future Medicare funding by an estimated $500 billion, the bill fundamentally changes how Medicare pays doctors and hospitals, permitting the government to dictate treatment decisions.
• Sec. 1302 (pp. 672-692) moves Medicare from a fee-for-service payment system, in which patients choose which doctors to see and doctors are paid for each service they provide, toward what's called a "medical home."
The medical home is this decade's version of HMO-restrictions on care. A primary-care provider manages access to costly specialists and diagnostic tests for a flat monthly fee. The bill specifies that patients may have to settle for a nurse practitioner rather than a physician as the primary-care provider. Medical homes begin with demonstration projects, but the HHS secretary is authorized to "disseminate this approach rapidly on a national basis."
A December 2008 Congressional Budget Office report noted that "medical homes" were likely to resemble the unpopular gatekeepers of 20 years ago if cost control was a priority.
• Sec. 1114 (pp. 391-393) replaces physicians with physician assistants in overseeing care for hospice patients.
• Secs. 1158-1160 (pp. 499-520) initiates programs to reduce payments for patient care to what it costs in the lowest cost regions of the country. This will reduce payments for care (and by implication the standard of care) for hospital patients in higher cost areas such as New York and Florida.
• Sec. 1161 (pp. 520-545) cuts payments to Medicare Advantage plans (used by 20% of seniors). Advantage plans have warned this will result in reductions in optional benefits such as vision and dental care.
• Sec. 1402 (p. 756) says that the results of comparative effectiveness research conducted by the government will be delivered to doctors electronically to guide their use of "medical items and services."
Questionable Priorities:
While the bill will slash Medicare funding, it will also direct billions of dollars to numerous inner-city social work and diversity programs with vague standards of accountability.
• Sec. 399V (p. 1422) provides for grants to community "entities" with no required qualifications except having "documented community activity and experience with community healthcare workers" to "educate, guide, and provide experiential learning opportunities" aimed at drug abuse, poor nutrition, smoking and obesity. "Each community health worker program receiving funds under the grant will provide services in the cultural context most appropriate for the individual served by the program."
These programs will "enhance the capacity of individuals to utilize health services and health related social services under Federal, State and local programs by assisting individuals in establishing eligibility . . .. and in receiving services and other benefits" including transportation and translation services.
• Sec. 222 (p. 617) provides reimbursement for culturally and linguistically appropriate services. This program will train health-care workers to inform Medicare beneficiaries of their "right" to have an interpreter at all times and with no co-pays for language services.
• Secs. 2521 and 2533 (pp. 1379 and 1437) establishes racial and ethnic preferences in awarding grants for training nurses and creating secondary-school health science programs. For example, grants for nursing schools should "give preference to programs that provide for improving the diversity of new nurse graduates to reflect changes in the demographics of the patient population." And secondary-school grants should go to schools "graduating students from disadvantaged backgrounds including racial and ethnic minorities."
• Sec. 305 (p. 189) Provides for automatic Medicaid enrollment of newborns who do not otherwise have insurance.
For the text of the bill with page numbers, see www.defendyourhealthcare.us.
Ms. McCaughey is chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former Lt. Governor of New York state.
Exclusive: Palin Slams Obama for Bowing, Breaking Promises
By: David A. Patten
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/palin_obama_bow_book/2009/11/17/287559.html?s=al&promo_code=9161-1
In an exclusive Newsmax interview, former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin on Tuesday sharply criticized President Obama's deep bow to the emperor of Japan, and charged Democrats "purposefully" are holding back details on their healthcare reform proposals from the American people to avoid an open debate.
On tour promoting her best-selling book, “Going Rogue: An American Life,” the former Alaska governor also told Newsmax she was so embarrassed by a Newsweek magazine cover depicting her in running shorts that she sent an e-mail to her family saying "I almost feel like I have to apologize."
Palin cited the contrast between Obama's comportment in bowing to Japanese royalty and the leadership style of former President Ronald Reagan.
"There is where his steel spine strengthened our entire nation," she said of the Republican icon. "The leadership he provided, where he allowed us to believe in ourselves as a superpower — not in an abusive way as a superpower, but as a power and a light and a hope for the rest of the world.
“That allowed us to be a healthier, safer, and more generous nation to help other nations. So those things that Ronald Reagan did . . . he said on national security issues, he said you know: 'We win. They lose.' Leadership like that we need today. [It] allows a very clear path in front of us we'd be foolish not to follow."
In criticizing the bow, Palin underscored the distinction between Reagan's view of American exceptionalism and President Obama's efforts to cast America as but one member of the community of nations.
"That [bow] made me and many of us uncomfortable, and I don't think it was just an accidental breach of protocol, because we've seen it before with one of the Saudi leaders, too," Palin told Newsmax. "I think it goes along with that same mode of operation that was apologizing for who America is. In order to build relationships with other countries and strengthen our allies and allow more alliances across the globe, we don't need to apologize for who we are. In fact, I think we would be respected to an even greater degree if we exerted more of the diplomatic power that, again, Ronald Reagan did."
Palin, who was a lightning rod for criticism during the presidential campaign, warned that America is in "a dangerous place economically" because Congress is debating healthcare reforms that would affect up to one-sixth of the U.S. economy, without keeping the public informed about exactly what provisions are being proposed. And she doesn't think that void of information is accidental, either.
"There are so many questions right now that I'm like every other American," Palin told Newsmax, "just kind of scratching my head saying, 'When are we going to get the answers so that we can debate this very responsibly and very intelligently?'
"I think it's purposeful that some in Washington, D.C., don't want us to have all of the answers, so that the debate is more nebulous and puts more of the generalities out there. Even knowing what we do know about it though, I think it is a very dangerous place for Americans to be, to be told that the only solutions to the healthcare challenges in our country . . . is that government has to take it over."
Palin, whose book was a runaway best-seller before it was even released, charged that Obama has broken his promise to take a transparent, bipartisan approach to governance.
She noted the efforts of GOP Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner and Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., and others in Congress: "They're saying, 'Hey, we've got some common-sense conservative solutions that we've put forth and were shut out of the discussions.
"That's a broken promise of Obama's and others in Congress, who promised an open, transparent, bipartisan approach to finding these solutions, and that's unfortunate. But these common-sense conservatives have put forth solutions suggesting the intra- and interstate competition amongst healthcare providers, and the tort reform, and the waste and fraud measures that can help address the rising cost problems right now.
"Those things aren't even being considered in the bills pending before Congress. Very frustrating for a lot of us as Americans, saying wait a minute, this isn't what we've bargained for."
Palin also gave Newsmax a behind-the-scenes account of her candid reaction after she saw the controversial, critical Newsweek cover story, which she has criticized as "out of context" and "sexist." The magazine took an image of Palin posing in short running shorts, which she did for Runners World magazine to promote the benefits of exercise, and splashed it on its recent cover.
Palin told Newsmax she was mortified.
"I fired off an e-mail to my daughters, to my sisters and my mom, and I said you know I almost feel like I have to apologize for some of these surprises that happen in our lives here," she told Newsmax. "I don't know why I felt like I had to apologize because I didn't do anything wrong with it, but I didn't like it. But it was a bit of a shot there by Newsweek that I thought was unnecessary and I didn't like it."
Asked why some journalists in the mainstream media have attacked her, she responded: "Maybe some people are really threatened by just a normal everyday average American who is very blessed to have a megaphone right now, and doesn't want to squander or blow this opportunity to get a common-sense conservative message out there heard across the nation. I'm very blessed to have the opportunities that I have in speaking up for normal Americans."
Palin predicted that, in the 2010 mid-term elections, Americans will look back at what Reagan did for the country and vote against big-spending incumbents.
Hoyer Says Conservatives Agree With Him and Holder That Terrorists Should Be Tried in Civilian Courts
By Matt Cover, Staff Writer
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=57299
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., at an Oct. 29, 2009 news conference on Capitol. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
(CNSNews.com) – House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said at a press briefing on Tuesday that there was “bipartisan support” for Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to prosecute four prominent terrorists, including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in civilian court in New York City.
Hoyer pointed to "three very conservative observers"--former Libertarian Party presidential candidate and U.S. Rep. Bob Barr (R.-Ga.), American Conservative Union Chairman David Keene and Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist--who he said agreed with Holder's decision.
Hoyer also said that while he thought Abd al-Nashiri--who allegedly orchestrated the terrorist bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in 2000 that killed 17 U.S. sailors--would get a fair trial at a military tribunal, Kalid Sheikh Mohammed would also get a fair trial in a civilian court instead of a military tribunal for his role in 9/11.
Hoyer cited a letter signed by Barr, Keene and Norquist that said civilian courts were the “proper forum” for terrorism trials.
The letter was issued by the anti-Guantanamo Bay Constitution Project. Hoyer read portions of the letter at his weekly press briefing on Tuesday and referred to the letter again when answering a question from CNSNews.com during the event.
The portion that Hoyer cited reads: “Civilian federal courts are the proper forum for terrorism cases. Civilian prisons are the safe, cost-effective and appropriate venue to hold persons convicted in federal courts. Over the last two decades, federal courts constituted under Article III of the U.S. Constitution have proven capable of trying a wide array of terrorism cases, without sacrificing either national security or fair trial standards.”
“Likewise, the federal prison system has proven itself fully capable of safely holding literally hundreds of convicted terrorists with no threat or danger to the surrounding community,” Hoyer read from the letter.
These arguments led Hoyer to conclude that there is now “bipartisan support” for the Obama administration’s decision to try top terrorists in federal court in New York City.
“So, obviously there is, I would say, bipartisan support for the actions that the attorney general has determined are in the best interest of bringing these--what I think all of us would agree are heinous criminals who created heinous acts--to justice and that Keene and Norquist and Barr all agree with the attorney general and the president that this can be done consistent with the safety and security of the United States,” said Hoyer.
However, not all of the al Qaeda terrorists currently being held at Guantanamo Bay are being tried in civilian courts. Five other detainees will be tried by military tribunals, including Abd al-Nashiri, the mastermind of the October 2000 attack on the U.S.S. Cole, which killed 17 American sailors.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed Sept. 11 mastermind, shown shortly after his capture in Pakistan in this March 1, 2003 photo. He and four other Guantanamo Bay detainees will be sent to New York to face trial in a civilian federal court. (AP File Photo)
Despite his support for trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in civilian court, Hoyer did say that the military was perfectly capable of giving terrorists like al-Nashiri a fair and constitutionally acceptable trial.
When CNSNews.com asked, “Do you think that al-Nashiri can get a constitutionally legitimate and fair trial in a military tribunal?” Hoyer said, “Yes.”
Hoyer was then asked why, if the military can give al Qaeda terrorists a fair and constitutionally acceptable trial, it should not try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who planned the attack on the Pentagon, where military personnel were also killed.
Hoyer said he did not disagree with Holder’s decision to try some terrorists in military tribunals, but added that he thought, like the three conservatives he had cited, that civilian courts were better for prosecuting terrorists than military courts.
CNSNews.com asked: “If we can give a fair trial in a military tribunal to the alleged mastermind of the U.S.S. Cole [bombing] then why not try the mastermind of the attack on the Pentagon, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in a military tribunal as well?”
Hoyer said: “I think that probably would be possible. Again, let me reference--with which I happen to agree--Barr, Norquist, and Keene, very conservative observers who believe in this case, Holder has made the right decision.”
“I don’t disagree with his [Holder] decision in the other case,” said Hoyer. “I think the military commission, particularly as it has been changed and revised by the Obama administration, can in fact in that [al-Nashiri] case act appropriately.”
The other Al Qaeda terrorists who will be tried by military tribunals include the following:
-- Omar Ahmed Khadr, charged with war crimes for the murder of Army Sergeant First Class Christopher Speer, and conspiracy, material support for terrorism, and spying. Khadr, a Canadian citizen, spent his formative years traveling with his family in Afghanistan, often spending the Muslim holiday of Eid with Osama bin Laden.
-- Ibrahim al Qosi, a former bin Laden bodyguard captured fighting U.S. troops at Tora Bora in Afghanistan.
-- Mohammed Kamin, an al Qaeda terrorist and weapons supplier captured in Afghanistan in 2003 after launching missiles at U.S. troops.
-- Noor Uthman Muhammed, the director of an al Qaeda terrorist training camp who personally trained al Qaeda recruits in small arms and missile training until his capture in Pakistan in 2002.
The United States has always prosecuted war criminals and others accused of unlawful combat in war tribunals, most notably in the case of eight Nazi saboteurs captured in the United States during World War II.
All were tried by military tribunal on the order of then-President Franklin D. Roosevelt and six were put to death. The two who were not put to death had their sentences commuted by Roosevelt because they had turned themselves in to the FBI and had aided in the capture of their co-conspirators.
The case was eventually appealed to the Supreme Court, where the court unanimously upheld that military tribunals were the proper place to try unlawful combatants.That case is known as Ex Parte Quirin.
Keene, Norquist and Barr did not respond to requests for comment on this story
DON'T KEEP CUT ONIONS!
Written by Zola Gorgon - author of several cookbooks.
http://www.cafemom.com/journals/read/1454634/DON_T_KEEP_CUT_ONIONS
Watch out for those spoiled onions...
I had the wonderful privilege of touring Mullins Food Products, makers of mayonnaise. Mullins is huge, owned by brothers and sisters in the Mullins family. My friend, Jeanne, is the CEO.
Questions about food poisoning came up, and I wanted to share what I learned from a chemist.
The man who gave us our tour is named Ed. He's one of the brothers. Ed is a chemistry expert involved in developing most of the sauce formula..(He's even developed sauce formula for McDonald's.)
Keep in mind that Ed is a food chemistry whiz. During the tour, someone asked if we really needed to worry about mayonnaise. People are always worried that mayonnaise will spoil. Ed's answer will surprise you.
He said that all commercially-made Mayo is completely safe.
"It doesn't even have to be refrigerated. No harm in refrigerating it, but it's not really necessary." He explained that the pH in mayonnaise is set at a point that bacteria could not survive in that environment. He then talked about the quintessential picnic with the bowl of potato salad sitting on the table and how everyone blames the mayonnaise in it when someone gets sick.
Ed says that when food poisoning is reported, the first thing the officials look for is when the victim last ate ONIONS and where those onions came from (in the potato salad?). He says it's not the mayonnaise (as long as it's not homemade Mayo) that spoils in the outdoors. It's probably the onions, and if not the onions, it's the POTATOES. He explained that onions are a huge magnet for bacteria, especially uncooked onions.
You should never plan to keep a portion of a sliced onion. He says it's not even safe if you put it in a zip-lock bag and put it in your refrigerator. It's already contaminated enough just by being cut open and out for a bit that it can be a danger to you. (And doubly watch out for those onions you put on your hotdogs at the baseball park!)
Ed says if you take the leftover onion and cook it like crazy,you'll probably be okay, but if you slice that leftover onion and put it in your sandwich, you're asking for trouble. Both the onions and the moist potato in a potato salad will attract and grow bacteria faster than any commercial mayonnaise will even begin to break down.
So, how's that for news? Take it for what you will. I (the author) am going to be very careful about onions from now on. I see a lot of credibility in this info, coming from a chemist and a company that produces millions of pounds of mayonnaise every year.
(Dogs should never eat onions.. Their stomachs cannot metabolize them.)
UPDATE:
http://www.snopes.com/food/tainted/cutonions.asp - Says Undetermined
Check out what "Ed" says in regards to this. I think it is worth taking note of... I am sticking to what I said before... I will not eat or use onions that have been cut up and sat out, even after they have been refrigerated.
"The e-mail Bag"
MELANIE (age 5) asked her Granny how old she was. Granny replied she was so old she didn't remember any more. Melanie said, 'If you don't remember you must look in the back of your panties. Mine say five to six.'
STEVEN (age 3) hugged and kissed his Mom good night. 'I love you so much that when you die I'm going to bury you outside my bedroom window.'
BRITTANY (age 4) had an ear ache and wanted a pain killer. She tried in vain to take the lid off the bottle. Seeing her frustration, her Mom explained it was a child-proof cap and she'd have to open it for her. Eyes wide with wonder, the little girl asked: 'How does it know it's me?'
SUSAN (age 4) was drinking juice when she got the hiccups. 'Please don't give me this juice again,' she said, 'It makes my teeth cough.'
DJ (age 4) stepped onto the bathroom scale and asked: 'How much do I cost?'
CLINTON (age 5) was in his bedroom looking worried when his Mom asked what was troubling him, he replied, 'I don't know what'll happen with this bed when I get married. How will my wife fit in it?'
MARC (age 4) was engrossed in a young couple that were hugging and kissing in a restaurant. Without taking his eyes off them, he asked his dad: 'Why is he whispering in her mouth?'
TAMMY (age 4) was with her mother when they met an elderly, rather wrinkled woman her Mom knew. Tammy looked at her for a while and then asked, 'Why doesn't your skin fit your face?'
JAMES (age 4) was listening to a Bible story. His dad read: 'The man named Lot was warned to take his wife and flee out of the city but his wife looked back and was turned to salt.' Concerned, James asked: 'What happened to the flea?'
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
"Daily Motivations"
"Small differences in your performance can lead to large differences in your results." -- Brian Tracy
"Service to others is the rent you pay for your room here on earth." -- Muhammad Ali
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
With the Lord's authority I say this: Live no longer as the Gentiles do, for they are hopelessly confused. (Ephesians 4:17)
Do you have a moral compass? Where does its "true north" point?
At the outset of World War II, a group of young German soldiers had the opportunity to join an Officers' Club that would put them on the fast track to promotion. But it would involve attending weekend dancing, and their churches had taught that dancing led to immorality. They declined.
Later in the war, the same young soldiers served in German death camps. While they did not personally assist with executing Jewish prisoners in the notorious ovens, they stood by without protest. When interviewed years later, these soldiers felt they had made good ethical decisions in all cases. In the first instance; they had rejected social pressure and refused to dance; in the second, they had been obedient to their commanders.
The world is filled with confused and conflicting ideas about what is right. But true righteousness is found only in God. That is why having a proper understanding of who God really is, is so important. Our moral code cannot rise above our view of God. In fact, we can trace all our human problems to a flawed view of God.
Your View of God Really Matters …
Do you believe morality is relative to culture and your personal circumstances, or to God's character? Your answer to that question will determine your moral strength. In fact, your view of God will determine who you become.
"The Patriot Post"
"If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy." -- Thomas Jefferson
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it." -- Thomas Paine
This Week's 'Braying Jenny' Award
PelosiCare includes a possible fine and jail time for those who don't abide by the mandate to buy health insurance. Is it really fair to send people to jail for choosing to pay their own way?
Pelosi thinks so: "I think the legislation is very fair in this respect. It gives people an opportunity to have health care." If by "gives people an opportunity" you mean coerces them to have health insurance...
The BIG Dodge
Where is the constitutional authority for a federal mandate that individuals must buy health insurance?
Sen. Ben Nelson, a Democrat in red-state Nebraska, pleaded the Fifth: "Well, you know, uh, uh, I don't know that I'm a constitutional scholar, so, I, I'm not going to be able to answer that question."
Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI) likewise dodged the question, saying, "I'm not aware of [any constitutional authority], let me put it that way. But what we're trying to do is to provide for people who have needs and that's where the accessibility comes in, and one of the goals that we're trying to present here is to make it accessible." Right. "Provide" for them by mandating they do something under penalty of massive fines and/or imprisonment -- that's leftist "compassion" for you.
Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) answered, "The United States Congress passed laws regarding Medicare and Medicaid that became de facto mandatory programs. States all the time require people to have driver's licenses. I think that this is a bit of a spurious argument that's being made by some folks." Uh, states require licenses only for the privilege of driving.
Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), a member of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee -- one of two committees that wrote and approved health care legislation -- pointed to precedent as justification: "Let me see. I would have to check the specific sections, so I'll have to get back to you on the specific section, but it is not unusual that the Congress has required individuals to do things, like sign up for the draft, uh, uh, and do many other things too, which I don't think are explicitly contained [in the Constitution]. It gives Congress a right to raise an army, but it doesn't say you can take people and draft them, uh, but since that was something necessary for the functioning of the government over the past several years, the practice on the books, it's been recognized, the authority to do that." So because Congress has acted unconstitutionally before, they can do it again now? Our guess is he understands health care about as well as he comprehends the Constitution.
Quote of the Week
"America once made the required nod to the Constitution.. When We the People wanted to make some fundamental change or expand the federal government's reach, we did the right thing and amended the Constitution. ... If we once thought that we had to amend the Constitution to ban 'intoxicating liquors' and later had to again amend the Constitution to re-legalize the stuff, wouldn't we need an amendment to allow the government to intrude even more intimately into our lives? ... If Congress were to do the right thing and initiate an amendment to enshrine the 'individual mandate' in the Constitution ... it would fail miserably. If America is still America, Americans will not tolerate being told they have to buy something, especially if it's for no other reason than that they exist. ... I'm afraid Congress has not only misread the Constitution, but they've also misjudged the American people. Or maybe they just don't know what country they live in." -- Jon N. Hall at American Thinker
You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it
“You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.” -- Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931 – 2005
"The Web"
Democrats push through judge who banned Jesus prayers
Associated Press
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Headlines/Default.aspx?id=773814
WASHINGTON- Democrats have crushed a Senate filibuster against appeals court nominee David Hamilton -- a judge who prohibited prayers that mentioned Jesus Christ, while allowing Muslim prayers to Allah-- before sessions of the Indiana House of Representatives.
Tuesday's 70-29 vote limited debate over Hamilton's qualifications and assured his elevation to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Sixty votes were needed to end the filibuster, but confirmation only requires a simple majority of the 100-member Senate.
Alabama Republican Jeff Sessions noted that while Hamilton prohibited the mention of Jesus in invocations, he allowed a Muslim cleric to pray to Allah.
But several Republicans supported the Democrats, including Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), Susan Collins (Maine), John Cornyn (Texas), Orrin Hatch (Utah) and Richard Lugar (Indiana).
Update: The US Senate approved David Hamilton on a vote of 59 to 39. See article below.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00350
Senate confirms controversial judge
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29732.html
The Senate confirmed Judge David Hamilton to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals 59-39 Thursday after breaking a GOP filibuster Tuesday and a five-and-a-half month delay.
Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), who represents Hamilton's home state of Indiana, cast the lone Republican vote for the judge.
“This is a nomination that should be confirmed and should have been confirmed months ago," said Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) in a statement. "David Hamilton is a fine judge and will make a good addition to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit."
Hamilton, who was President Barack Obama's first judicial nominee, came under Republican fire for several rulings he made in Indiana, from barring certain prayers in the state legislature to a ruling stating that abortion clinics should not be required to provide information on alternatives to abortion.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said Monday he sought to block Hamilton's nomination because he believed the judge was extreme and would add "footnotes to the Constitution."
Lugar, however, refuted GOP sentiment in a floor statement Monday on Hamilton's behalf, saying that the judge appreciated "the vital, and yet vitally limited, role of the federal judiciary faithfully to interpret and apply our laws, rather than seeking to impose their own policy views."
What the Pelosi Health-Care Bill Really Says
Here are some important passages in the 2,000 page legislation.
By BETSY MCCAUGHEY
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704795604574519671055918380.html
The health bill that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is bringing to a vote (H.R. 3962) is 1,990 pages. Here are some of the details you need to know.
What the government will require you to do:
• Sec. 202 (p. 91-92) of the bill requires you to enroll in a "qualified plan." If you get your insurance at work, your employer will have a "grace period" to switch you to a "qualified plan," meaning a plan designed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. If you buy your own insurance, there's no grace period. You'll have to enroll in a qualified plan as soon as any term in your contract changes, such as the co-pay, deductible or benefit.
• Sec. 224 (p. 118) provides that 18 months after the bill becomes law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will decide what a "qualified plan" covers and how much you'll be legally required to pay for it. That's like a banker telling you to sign the loan agreement now, then filling in the interest rate and repayment terms 18 months later.
Associated Press
Protestors wave signs in front of the Capitol on Thursday.
On Nov. 2, the Congressional Budget Office estimated what the plans will likely cost. An individual earning $44,000 before taxes who purchases his own insurance will have to pay a $5,300 premium and an estimated $2,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, for a total of $7,300 a year, which is 17% of his pre-tax income. A family earning $102,100 a year before taxes will have to pay a $15,000 premium plus an estimated $5,300 out-of-pocket, for a $20,300 total, or 20% of its pre-tax income. Individuals and families earning less than these amounts will be eligible for subsidies paid directly to their insurer.
• Sec. 303 (pp. 167-168) makes it clear that, although the "qualified plan" is not yet designed, it will be of the "one size fits all" variety. The bill claims to offer choice—basic, enhanced and premium levels—but the benefits are the same. Only the co-pays and deductibles differ. You will have to enroll in the same plan, whether the government is paying for it or you and your employer are footing the bill.
• Sec. 59b (pp. 297-299) says that when you file your taxes, you must include proof that you are in a qualified plan. If not, you will be fined thousands of dollars. Illegal immigrants are exempt from this requirement.
• Sec. 412 (p. 272) says that employers must provide a "qualified plan" for their employees and pay 72.5% of the cost, and a smaller share of family coverage, or incur an 8% payroll tax. Small businesses, with payrolls from $500,000 to $750,000, are fined less.
Eviscerating Medicare:
In addition to reducing future Medicare funding by an estimated $500 billion, the bill fundamentally changes how Medicare pays doctors and hospitals, permitting the government to dictate treatment decisions.
• Sec. 1302 (pp. 672-692) moves Medicare from a fee-for-service payment system, in which patients choose which doctors to see and doctors are paid for each service they provide, toward what's called a "medical home."
The medical home is this decade's version of HMO-restrictions on care. A primary-care provider manages access to costly specialists and diagnostic tests for a flat monthly fee. The bill specifies that patients may have to settle for a nurse practitioner rather than a physician as the primary-care provider. Medical homes begin with demonstration projects, but the HHS secretary is authorized to "disseminate this approach rapidly on a national basis."
A December 2008 Congressional Budget Office report noted that "medical homes" were likely to resemble the unpopular gatekeepers of 20 years ago if cost control was a priority.
• Sec. 1114 (pp. 391-393) replaces physicians with physician assistants in overseeing care for hospice patients.
• Secs. 1158-1160 (pp. 499-520) initiates programs to reduce payments for patient care to what it costs in the lowest cost regions of the country. This will reduce payments for care (and by implication the standard of care) for hospital patients in higher cost areas such as New York and Florida.
• Sec. 1161 (pp. 520-545) cuts payments to Medicare Advantage plans (used by 20% of seniors). Advantage plans have warned this will result in reductions in optional benefits such as vision and dental care.
• Sec. 1402 (p. 756) says that the results of comparative effectiveness research conducted by the government will be delivered to doctors electronically to guide their use of "medical items and services."
Questionable Priorities:
While the bill will slash Medicare funding, it will also direct billions of dollars to numerous inner-city social work and diversity programs with vague standards of accountability.
• Sec. 399V (p. 1422) provides for grants to community "entities" with no required qualifications except having "documented community activity and experience with community healthcare workers" to "educate, guide, and provide experiential learning opportunities" aimed at drug abuse, poor nutrition, smoking and obesity. "Each community health worker program receiving funds under the grant will provide services in the cultural context most appropriate for the individual served by the program."
These programs will "enhance the capacity of individuals to utilize health services and health related social services under Federal, State and local programs by assisting individuals in establishing eligibility . . .. and in receiving services and other benefits" including transportation and translation services.
• Sec. 222 (p. 617) provides reimbursement for culturally and linguistically appropriate services. This program will train health-care workers to inform Medicare beneficiaries of their "right" to have an interpreter at all times and with no co-pays for language services.
• Secs. 2521 and 2533 (pp. 1379 and 1437) establishes racial and ethnic preferences in awarding grants for training nurses and creating secondary-school health science programs. For example, grants for nursing schools should "give preference to programs that provide for improving the diversity of new nurse graduates to reflect changes in the demographics of the patient population." And secondary-school grants should go to schools "graduating students from disadvantaged backgrounds including racial and ethnic minorities."
• Sec. 305 (p. 189) Provides for automatic Medicaid enrollment of newborns who do not otherwise have insurance.
For the text of the bill with page numbers, see www.defendyourhealthcare.us.
Ms. McCaughey is chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former Lt. Governor of New York state.
Exclusive: Palin Slams Obama for Bowing, Breaking Promises
By: David A. Patten
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/palin_obama_bow_book/2009/11/17/287559.html?s=al&promo_code=9161-1
In an exclusive Newsmax interview, former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin on Tuesday sharply criticized President Obama's deep bow to the emperor of Japan, and charged Democrats "purposefully" are holding back details on their healthcare reform proposals from the American people to avoid an open debate.
On tour promoting her best-selling book, “Going Rogue: An American Life,” the former Alaska governor also told Newsmax she was so embarrassed by a Newsweek magazine cover depicting her in running shorts that she sent an e-mail to her family saying "I almost feel like I have to apologize."
Palin cited the contrast between Obama's comportment in bowing to Japanese royalty and the leadership style of former President Ronald Reagan.
"There is where his steel spine strengthened our entire nation," she said of the Republican icon. "The leadership he provided, where he allowed us to believe in ourselves as a superpower — not in an abusive way as a superpower, but as a power and a light and a hope for the rest of the world.
“That allowed us to be a healthier, safer, and more generous nation to help other nations. So those things that Ronald Reagan did . . . he said on national security issues, he said you know: 'We win. They lose.' Leadership like that we need today. [It] allows a very clear path in front of us we'd be foolish not to follow."
In criticizing the bow, Palin underscored the distinction between Reagan's view of American exceptionalism and President Obama's efforts to cast America as but one member of the community of nations.
"That [bow] made me and many of us uncomfortable, and I don't think it was just an accidental breach of protocol, because we've seen it before with one of the Saudi leaders, too," Palin told Newsmax. "I think it goes along with that same mode of operation that was apologizing for who America is. In order to build relationships with other countries and strengthen our allies and allow more alliances across the globe, we don't need to apologize for who we are. In fact, I think we would be respected to an even greater degree if we exerted more of the diplomatic power that, again, Ronald Reagan did."
Palin, who was a lightning rod for criticism during the presidential campaign, warned that America is in "a dangerous place economically" because Congress is debating healthcare reforms that would affect up to one-sixth of the U.S. economy, without keeping the public informed about exactly what provisions are being proposed. And she doesn't think that void of information is accidental, either.
"There are so many questions right now that I'm like every other American," Palin told Newsmax, "just kind of scratching my head saying, 'When are we going to get the answers so that we can debate this very responsibly and very intelligently?'
"I think it's purposeful that some in Washington, D.C., don't want us to have all of the answers, so that the debate is more nebulous and puts more of the generalities out there. Even knowing what we do know about it though, I think it is a very dangerous place for Americans to be, to be told that the only solutions to the healthcare challenges in our country . . . is that government has to take it over."
Palin, whose book was a runaway best-seller before it was even released, charged that Obama has broken his promise to take a transparent, bipartisan approach to governance.
She noted the efforts of GOP Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner and Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., and others in Congress: "They're saying, 'Hey, we've got some common-sense conservative solutions that we've put forth and were shut out of the discussions.
"That's a broken promise of Obama's and others in Congress, who promised an open, transparent, bipartisan approach to finding these solutions, and that's unfortunate. But these common-sense conservatives have put forth solutions suggesting the intra- and interstate competition amongst healthcare providers, and the tort reform, and the waste and fraud measures that can help address the rising cost problems right now.
"Those things aren't even being considered in the bills pending before Congress. Very frustrating for a lot of us as Americans, saying wait a minute, this isn't what we've bargained for."
Palin also gave Newsmax a behind-the-scenes account of her candid reaction after she saw the controversial, critical Newsweek cover story, which she has criticized as "out of context" and "sexist." The magazine took an image of Palin posing in short running shorts, which she did for Runners World magazine to promote the benefits of exercise, and splashed it on its recent cover.
Palin told Newsmax she was mortified.
"I fired off an e-mail to my daughters, to my sisters and my mom, and I said you know I almost feel like I have to apologize for some of these surprises that happen in our lives here," she told Newsmax. "I don't know why I felt like I had to apologize because I didn't do anything wrong with it, but I didn't like it. But it was a bit of a shot there by Newsweek that I thought was unnecessary and I didn't like it."
Asked why some journalists in the mainstream media have attacked her, she responded: "Maybe some people are really threatened by just a normal everyday average American who is very blessed to have a megaphone right now, and doesn't want to squander or blow this opportunity to get a common-sense conservative message out there heard across the nation. I'm very blessed to have the opportunities that I have in speaking up for normal Americans."
Palin predicted that, in the 2010 mid-term elections, Americans will look back at what Reagan did for the country and vote against big-spending incumbents.
Hoyer Says Conservatives Agree With Him and Holder That Terrorists Should Be Tried in Civilian Courts
By Matt Cover, Staff Writer
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=57299
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., at an Oct. 29, 2009 news conference on Capitol. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
(CNSNews.com) – House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said at a press briefing on Tuesday that there was “bipartisan support” for Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to prosecute four prominent terrorists, including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in civilian court in New York City.
Hoyer pointed to "three very conservative observers"--former Libertarian Party presidential candidate and U.S. Rep. Bob Barr (R.-Ga.), American Conservative Union Chairman David Keene and Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist--who he said agreed with Holder's decision.
Hoyer also said that while he thought Abd al-Nashiri--who allegedly orchestrated the terrorist bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in 2000 that killed 17 U.S. sailors--would get a fair trial at a military tribunal, Kalid Sheikh Mohammed would also get a fair trial in a civilian court instead of a military tribunal for his role in 9/11.
Hoyer cited a letter signed by Barr, Keene and Norquist that said civilian courts were the “proper forum” for terrorism trials.
The letter was issued by the anti-Guantanamo Bay Constitution Project. Hoyer read portions of the letter at his weekly press briefing on Tuesday and referred to the letter again when answering a question from CNSNews.com during the event.
The portion that Hoyer cited reads: “Civilian federal courts are the proper forum for terrorism cases. Civilian prisons are the safe, cost-effective and appropriate venue to hold persons convicted in federal courts. Over the last two decades, federal courts constituted under Article III of the U.S. Constitution have proven capable of trying a wide array of terrorism cases, without sacrificing either national security or fair trial standards.”
“Likewise, the federal prison system has proven itself fully capable of safely holding literally hundreds of convicted terrorists with no threat or danger to the surrounding community,” Hoyer read from the letter.
These arguments led Hoyer to conclude that there is now “bipartisan support” for the Obama administration’s decision to try top terrorists in federal court in New York City.
“So, obviously there is, I would say, bipartisan support for the actions that the attorney general has determined are in the best interest of bringing these--what I think all of us would agree are heinous criminals who created heinous acts--to justice and that Keene and Norquist and Barr all agree with the attorney general and the president that this can be done consistent with the safety and security of the United States,” said Hoyer.
However, not all of the al Qaeda terrorists currently being held at Guantanamo Bay are being tried in civilian courts. Five other detainees will be tried by military tribunals, including Abd al-Nashiri, the mastermind of the October 2000 attack on the U.S.S. Cole, which killed 17 American sailors.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed Sept. 11 mastermind, shown shortly after his capture in Pakistan in this March 1, 2003 photo. He and four other Guantanamo Bay detainees will be sent to New York to face trial in a civilian federal court. (AP File Photo)
Despite his support for trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in civilian court, Hoyer did say that the military was perfectly capable of giving terrorists like al-Nashiri a fair and constitutionally acceptable trial.
When CNSNews.com asked, “Do you think that al-Nashiri can get a constitutionally legitimate and fair trial in a military tribunal?” Hoyer said, “Yes.”
Hoyer was then asked why, if the military can give al Qaeda terrorists a fair and constitutionally acceptable trial, it should not try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who planned the attack on the Pentagon, where military personnel were also killed.
Hoyer said he did not disagree with Holder’s decision to try some terrorists in military tribunals, but added that he thought, like the three conservatives he had cited, that civilian courts were better for prosecuting terrorists than military courts.
CNSNews.com asked: “If we can give a fair trial in a military tribunal to the alleged mastermind of the U.S.S. Cole [bombing] then why not try the mastermind of the attack on the Pentagon, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in a military tribunal as well?”
Hoyer said: “I think that probably would be possible. Again, let me reference--with which I happen to agree--Barr, Norquist, and Keene, very conservative observers who believe in this case, Holder has made the right decision.”
“I don’t disagree with his [Holder] decision in the other case,” said Hoyer. “I think the military commission, particularly as it has been changed and revised by the Obama administration, can in fact in that [al-Nashiri] case act appropriately.”
The other Al Qaeda terrorists who will be tried by military tribunals include the following:
-- Omar Ahmed Khadr, charged with war crimes for the murder of Army Sergeant First Class Christopher Speer, and conspiracy, material support for terrorism, and spying. Khadr, a Canadian citizen, spent his formative years traveling with his family in Afghanistan, often spending the Muslim holiday of Eid with Osama bin Laden.
-- Ibrahim al Qosi, a former bin Laden bodyguard captured fighting U.S. troops at Tora Bora in Afghanistan.
-- Mohammed Kamin, an al Qaeda terrorist and weapons supplier captured in Afghanistan in 2003 after launching missiles at U.S. troops.
-- Noor Uthman Muhammed, the director of an al Qaeda terrorist training camp who personally trained al Qaeda recruits in small arms and missile training until his capture in Pakistan in 2002.
The United States has always prosecuted war criminals and others accused of unlawful combat in war tribunals, most notably in the case of eight Nazi saboteurs captured in the United States during World War II.
All were tried by military tribunal on the order of then-President Franklin D. Roosevelt and six were put to death. The two who were not put to death had their sentences commuted by Roosevelt because they had turned themselves in to the FBI and had aided in the capture of their co-conspirators.
The case was eventually appealed to the Supreme Court, where the court unanimously upheld that military tribunals were the proper place to try unlawful combatants.That case is known as Ex Parte Quirin.
Keene, Norquist and Barr did not respond to requests for comment on this story
DON'T KEEP CUT ONIONS!
Written by Zola Gorgon - author of several cookbooks.
http://www.cafemom.com/journals/read/1454634/DON_T_KEEP_CUT_ONIONS
Watch out for those spoiled onions...
I had the wonderful privilege of touring Mullins Food Products, makers of mayonnaise. Mullins is huge, owned by brothers and sisters in the Mullins family. My friend, Jeanne, is the CEO.
Questions about food poisoning came up, and I wanted to share what I learned from a chemist.
The man who gave us our tour is named Ed. He's one of the brothers. Ed is a chemistry expert involved in developing most of the sauce formula..(He's even developed sauce formula for McDonald's.)
Keep in mind that Ed is a food chemistry whiz. During the tour, someone asked if we really needed to worry about mayonnaise. People are always worried that mayonnaise will spoil. Ed's answer will surprise you.
He said that all commercially-made Mayo is completely safe.
"It doesn't even have to be refrigerated. No harm in refrigerating it, but it's not really necessary." He explained that the pH in mayonnaise is set at a point that bacteria could not survive in that environment. He then talked about the quintessential picnic with the bowl of potato salad sitting on the table and how everyone blames the mayonnaise in it when someone gets sick.
Ed says that when food poisoning is reported, the first thing the officials look for is when the victim last ate ONIONS and where those onions came from (in the potato salad?). He says it's not the mayonnaise (as long as it's not homemade Mayo) that spoils in the outdoors. It's probably the onions, and if not the onions, it's the POTATOES. He explained that onions are a huge magnet for bacteria, especially uncooked onions.
You should never plan to keep a portion of a sliced onion. He says it's not even safe if you put it in a zip-lock bag and put it in your refrigerator. It's already contaminated enough just by being cut open and out for a bit that it can be a danger to you. (And doubly watch out for those onions you put on your hotdogs at the baseball park!)
Ed says if you take the leftover onion and cook it like crazy,you'll probably be okay, but if you slice that leftover onion and put it in your sandwich, you're asking for trouble. Both the onions and the moist potato in a potato salad will attract and grow bacteria faster than any commercial mayonnaise will even begin to break down.
So, how's that for news? Take it for what you will. I (the author) am going to be very careful about onions from now on. I see a lot of credibility in this info, coming from a chemist and a company that produces millions of pounds of mayonnaise every year.
(Dogs should never eat onions.. Their stomachs cannot metabolize them.)
UPDATE:
http://www.snopes.com/food/tainted/cutonions.asp - Says Undetermined
Check out what "Ed" says in regards to this. I think it is worth taking note of... I am sticking to what I said before... I will not eat or use onions that have been cut up and sat out, even after they have been refrigerated.
"The e-mail Bag"
MELANIE (age 5) asked her Granny how old she was. Granny replied she was so old she didn't remember any more. Melanie said, 'If you don't remember you must look in the back of your panties. Mine say five to six.'
STEVEN (age 3) hugged and kissed his Mom good night. 'I love you so much that when you die I'm going to bury you outside my bedroom window.'
BRITTANY (age 4) had an ear ache and wanted a pain killer. She tried in vain to take the lid off the bottle. Seeing her frustration, her Mom explained it was a child-proof cap and she'd have to open it for her. Eyes wide with wonder, the little girl asked: 'How does it know it's me?'
SUSAN (age 4) was drinking juice when she got the hiccups. 'Please don't give me this juice again,' she said, 'It makes my teeth cough.'
DJ (age 4) stepped onto the bathroom scale and asked: 'How much do I cost?'
CLINTON (age 5) was in his bedroom looking worried when his Mom asked what was troubling him, he replied, 'I don't know what'll happen with this bed when I get married. How will my wife fit in it?'
MARC (age 4) was engrossed in a young couple that were hugging and kissing in a restaurant. Without taking his eyes off them, he asked his dad: 'Why is he whispering in her mouth?'
TAMMY (age 4) was with her mother when they met an elderly, rather wrinkled woman her Mom knew. Tammy looked at her for a while and then asked, 'Why doesn't your skin fit your face?'
JAMES (age 4) was listening to a Bible story. His dad read: 'The man named Lot was warned to take his wife and flee out of the city but his wife looked back and was turned to salt.' Concerned, James asked: 'What happened to the flea?'
Thursday, November 19, 2009
ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20091119
Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
"Daily Motivations"
"Age wrinkles the body. Quitting wrinkles the soul." -- Douglas MacArthur
Just as your car runs more smoothly and requires less energy to go faster and farther when the wheels are in perfect alignment, you perform better when your thoughts, feelings, emotions, goals, and values are in balance. -- Brian Tracy
Leading to Top-Notch Customer Service
Here are two facts you can take to the bank: 1) Superior customer service is critical to your business success, and 2) As a leader, you have an important role in making it happen. So, what can you do to foster the kind of service your organization wants and needs? The following ideas should help:
The first step in providing good customer service is to hire the right people. Make your selection process part of your customer service strategy. During interviews, ask questions like: “If you get this job, describe the kinds of things you will do to provide superior customer service.” Also, pose hypothetical customer service situations and ask candidates to explain how they would handle them.
Clarify your expectations about customer service. Condense them to 3-5 key principles, give them a label (e.g., “The Big Four” or “The Game Plan”), and communicate them to everyone. Then, have follow-up meetings with employees to ensure that they know exactly what is expected of them.
Provide training, resources, and coaching to help your people develop customer service skills. Make sure all training reinforces your specific service expectations.
Remember that people do what’s EXpected when it’s INspected! Include “customer service” in all performance evaluations and feedback sessions. Prior to conducting evaluations, ask team members to submit a list of the specific things they’ve done to help provide superior customer service.
Celebrate successes! Recognize and reward employees who provide exceptional service. Share their stories with others. This will help motivate the entire team. Motivated employees go above and beyond for your customers … and for the organization.
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
I, even I, am the one who comforts you. (Isaiah 51:12)
Perhaps you remember the film The Hiding Place. It tells the story of my dear friend Corrie ten Boom and her sister, Betsy. They were sent to Ravensbruck concentration camp because they protected Jewish people during World War II.
One night several women were gathered around Betsy as she led a Bible study. One of them suddenly spoke up bitterly. "If your God is such a good God," she said, "why does He allow this kind of suffering?" She slowly opened her hands to reveal broken, beaten fingers. "I'm the first violinist of the symphony orchestra. Did your God will this?"
Corrie looked sadly at the woman's hands. "We can't answer that question," she said with compassion. "All we know is that our God came to this earth, became one of us, suffered with us, and was crucified and died. And He did it for love."
The Holy Spirit is the One who comes to us today with tender comfort and encouragement. He is the ideal companion when we are beset by misery and grief. He knows us deeply, intimately, better than we know ourselves. He knows exactly what kind of encouragement we need, and He has the power to strengthen and heal us.
It is a wonderful truth to contemplate: we need never again be alone. Where could you go to escape the companionship of the Holy Spirit? What pain could you feel that He would not understand and comfort? Wherever you are, whatever trial you may be facing, the Comforter is right there beside you
Your View of God Really Matters …
If you are suffering, ask God to walk with you and comfort you in the midst of your pain through His Spirit. And after He has brought you safely through, allow Him to use you to comfort someone else.
"The Patriot Post"
"Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have grown not only gray, but almost blind in the service of my country." -- George Washington, upon fumbling for his glasses before delivering the Newburgh Address, 1783
Insight
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse." -- John Stuart Mill
"A really great people, proud and high-spirited, would face all the disasters of war rather than purchase that base prosperity which is bought at the price of national honor." -- Theodore Roosevelt
"Wars may be fought with weapons, but they are won by men. It is the spirit of the men who follow and of the man who leads that gains the victory." -- George S. Patton
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." -- Sir Winston S. Churchill
"It is, in a way, an odd thing to honor those who died in defense of our country ... in wars far away. The imagination plays a trick. We see these soldiers in our mind as old and wise. We see them as something like the Founding Fathers, grave and gray-haired. But most of them were boys when they died, and they gave up two lives -- the one they were living and the one they would have lived. When they died, they gave up their chance to be husbands and fathers and grandfathers. They gave up their chance to be revered old men. They gave up everything for their country, for us. All we can do is remember." -- Ronald Reagan
Dezinformatsia
Gratuitous Christian bashing: "It's looking more and more like [Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan] was just, sort of, a religious nut. And you know Islam doesn't have a majority -- or the Christian religion has its full, you know, full helping of nuts too." -- CBS's Bob Schieffer
What was the tragedy again? "It really is tragic that he was a Muslim." -- NPR's Nina Totenberg
"I cringe that he's a Muslim. I mean, because it inflames all the fears. I think he's probably just a nut case. But with that label attached to him, it will get the right wing going and it just -- I mean these things are tragic, but that makes it much worse." -- Newsweek's Evan Thomas
PC virus: "We cannot call him the shooter until we have a trial. That's the way we work here, you know, that's how it works in America." -- Chris Matthews
Commie apologist: "Many who were raised in the East are still adjusting to the harsh economic realities, especially during this economic downturn." -- NBC's Tom Brokaw, taking the opportunity of the anniversary Berlin Wall's demise to trash capitalism
Because America totally didn't have anything to do with it: "I know, I think it may be a little egocentric but I think most Americans look at that event and they think of it as an American victory." --NBC's Matt Lauer
Sometimes the get it right: "The U.S. government is making a costly and open-ended commitment. Let's not pretend that it isn't a big deal, or that it will be self-financing, or that it will work out exactly as planned. It won't. What is really unfolding, I suspect, is the scenario that many conservatives feared. The Obama Administration ... is creating a new entitlement program, which, once established, will be virtually impossible to rescind." -- New Yorker columnist John Cassidy
Short Cuts
"President Obama taped a speech to show to the crowd at the Berlin Wall gala Monday. He reminded the viewing audience he too made history as the first black president. The earth wobbled on its axis from the gravitational pull of three billion people rolling their eyes simultaneously." -- comedian Argus Hamilton
"At 69, Pelosi stands a good chance of facing a death panel before she leads a majority of this size again." -- Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto
"Waiting weeks to get an MRI to find out why you are sick, and then waiting months for an operation, as happens in countries with government-run medical systems, can be not only painful but dangerous. You can be dead by the time they find out what is wrong with you and do something about it. But that will 'bring down the cost of medical care' because you won't be around to require any." -- economist Thomas Sowell
"Diversity is good. Maybe not as good as the ability to shoot straight, though in the modern, politically correct Army, you never can tell." -- columnist Wesley Pruden
"The Web"
Recovery.gov - Track the Money
http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/home.aspx
Recovery.gov is the U.S. government’s official website providing easy access to data related to Recovery Act spending and allows for the reporting of potential fraud, waste, and abuse.
From Rep. John Boehner (R-West Chester, Ohio) released the following today:
http://www.examiner.com/x-19303-Dayton-Crime-Examiner~y2009m11d17-Stimulus-money-going-to-10-Ohio-congressional-districts-that-dont-exist
A lot has been made of the non-existent congressional district in Arizona that the White House claimed received “stimulus” money. So today, we went to Recovery.gov to find out how the state of Ohio - a state with 18 congressional districts - fared. Guess what we found: TEN congressional districts in the Buckeye State that DO NOT exist received stimulus money.
In fact, Ohio has never had more than 24 Members of Congress.
Not soon after the “stimulus” was signed into law in February of this year, stories about “stimulus” funds going to to Wisconsin for a bridge to Rusty’s Backwater Saloon; to North Carolina where “stimulus” funds were reportedly used by one town to hire a new worker whose job is to apply for more “stimulus” funds from Washington; to pay for bonuses for AIG executives, a turtle crossing in northern Florida, install skylights in Montana’s state-run liquor warehouse - and on and on and on.
Congressman John Boehner (R-West Chester) said in a statement to the Cleveland Plain Dealer today:
Not only has the ’stimulus’ not produced jobs the Administration promised, but now we learn that the Administration’s reports intended to track the effectiveness of government spending are riddled with errors and gross inaccuracies. How many more mistakes have been made? How are Ohioans supposed to take the Administration seriously on the economy when its own Web site credits jobs saved or created in districts that don’t even exist?
The latest example - claiming credit for creating jobs in Ohio Congressional districts that don’t even exist - is just one more sign the “stimulus” isn’t working.
A Message From Shirley Dobson, of Focus On The Family
Thanks and blessings to you.
Fwd: Mom's lawsuit for NDP is next week
From Shirley Dobson, as efforts are being made to do away with the National Day of Prayer!
Tuesday, I am being deposed by the Freedom from Religion Foundation made up of atheists and agnostics. They are sending two lawyers to depose me and the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) are sending two lawyers to defend me. I will be sitting there in the Board Room being grilled and trying to be trapped, starting at 8:30AM until 4:30PM. Looks like this is our time of testing.. My National Area Leaders were on a conference call today and prayed for me. And, of course, my NDP team will be in prayer. Their purpose is to keep us from asking anyone in government i.e., President - Governors, etc., for proclamations to proclaim a day of prayer in their states or in the nation and from participating in the National Day of Prayer in anyway. They want to take away our freedom to gather, to worship and to pray in the public square. I pray that I will be a witness to them, that I will be calm and cautious in what I say. The victory is the Lord's.
ObamaCare: Show Me the SEIU Money!
by Liberty Chick
http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/17/obamacare-show-me-the-seiu-money/
Throughout the debate over health care reform, there has been a great deal of discussion over the role of special interests in influencing the votes of lawmakers. Liberal democrats, progressive think tanks and mainstream media have repeatedly accused anyone who opposes government run health care of standing with special interests instead of with needy Americans, painting them as greedy and selfish. And now that a bill has passed in the House and is on its way to the Senate, big government proponents of a ‘public option’ are already attacking their fellow Democrats’ own bill, insisting that it may as well have been written by special interests.
Funny they should mention that. Because, just like the stimulus bill,
http://apolloalliance.org/feature-articles/data-points-comparing-senate-and-house-versions-of-stimulus/ it was written by special interests.
While it’s true that Republicans certainly receive their fair share of donations from the health industry, the surprising truth is that Democrats actually receive more. Because there’s one giant special interest sector that everyone seems to be leaving out: Big Labor. And in the monarchy of labor these days, there is one queen that’s at the top of the money chain, and that’s the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the top billing union in its parent coalition, Change to Win. Especially when it comes to the issue of health care.
Let’s start first by breaking down the numbers.
Labor union PACs account for about $305 million in campaign contributions from 2000 to the current 2010 election cycle, 90% of which has gone to Democrats.
Add to that just the top 20 contributing 527 groups, and it throws at least another $470 million into the pot; the majority of which came from big labor and their front groups like “America Votes” and “America Coming Together“.
So, when combined with the health industry donations that are so often the only numbers cited, this paints a bigger – and more accurate – picture and adds at least another $638 million that went to Democrats since 2000, thanks entirely to Big Labor. And that’s actually an understated figure, since I didn’t even include most of the 527 groups (just the top 20).
'SEIU alone has spent at least $187 million through combined lobbying, PAC and 527 group donations and expenses on candidates and policy issues – nearly 100% of which went to liberal policy initiatives and candidates.
So far just in 2009, SEIU has spent more than $2 million on direct lobbying, most of it for health care legislation, the stimulus bill, and the Employee Free Choice Act. And in 2009-2010 Congressional donations, they’ve surpassed $425,000, with 100% of that going to Democrats, especially those crucial to health care votes. And through their various other coalitions and campaigns, like Health Care for America Now and Divided We Fail (with AARP), they’ve expended even more in both financial and people resources. And who knows what those numbers look like when you add up all their coalitions and committees that don’t necessarily bear the SEIU name.
Outside of just health care, these have been some of the top 527s group recipients of their donations. SEIU funnels some of its indirect donations through these groups, among others. If you drill down on groups like America Votes, America Coming Together, and the Media Fund, you’ll also find some of SEIU’s regular financial collaborators, such as ACORN and George Soros:
Accountability Now PAC
Alliance for New America
America Coming Together (PAC)
America Coming Together (527)
America Votes
Campaign For California’s Future
Citizens for Progress (through Patriot Majority & America Votes)
Citizens for Strength and Security
Democracy for America (PAC)
Democratic Judicial Campaign Committee
Focus South Dakota
Grassroots Democrats - Keep Hope Alive PAC
Lantern Project
Majority Action
Media Fund
New Democrat Network
One America Committee
Partnership for America’s Families
Patriot Majority
Pioneer Majority
Senate Majority Project
September Fund
Uniting People for Victory
Click to view this report on OpenSecrets.org
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?lname=Service+Employees+International+Union&year=2009
In my prior post, “SEIU: Building a New American Health Care Empire?”, I discussed the hidden agenda behind WHY the big purple union is spending so much on political issues, primarily health care.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, now let’s talk about WHO some of these people are. Who is sharing the shadow with SEIU and helping to shape today’s policies? Just like cogs in a wheel, each is one of the teeth on that wheel that, when engaging the other teeth, sets the others in motion. And that in turn moves other wheels too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start with Christopher Jennings, former Clinton White House health care advisor and founder of Jennings Policy Strategies. A SEIU health care strategy presentation was given in November of 2007 by Jennings, who himself is an avid lobbyist for SEIU. Conveniently, Jennings also lobbies for AFL-CIO, General Motors, Federation of American Hospitals, the American Board of Internal Medicine, Siemens AG and many others with interests in health care and retirement benefits, representing a total of more than $440 million for the political process.
Click to view this report on OpenSecrets.org
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/firmsum.php?lname=Jennings+Policy+Strategies
Then of course, there is the power of purple in the White House, which certainly boosts their personal lobbying status on a number of fronts. As I mentioned before – like cogs in the wheel, they work together.
There’s Andy Stern, SEIU’s President. He’s had over twenty visits to the White House (even more, off-the-books), most of those for health care meetings, and he bragged in 2008 that the SEIU spent $60.7 million “to elect Barack Obama”. Stern is also President of the Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions, Director of the National Academy of Social Insurance, Aspen Institute trustee, Chair of the Center for Community and Corporate Ethics, and Director of Rock the Vote. Dennis Rivera, head of SEIU Health Care, has also been on several trips to the White House for discussions on health care with his SEIU colleagues and the President.
SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger is also chair of SEIU’s parent labor coaltion, Change to Win. She’s also a White House regular, as one of Obama’s personal appointees to the President’s Economic Recovery Board of Advisers (PERBA), where she works with other leaders, including AFL-CIO labor union President Richard Trumka and GE Executive Jeffrey Immelt to help determine the course for America’s economic recovery. (You can judge for yourself how well that’s working out).
Patrick Gaspard, former vice president of politics and legislation for Local 1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, now serves as the White House political director after serving as the national political director for Obama’s general election campaign. Gaspard also led lobbying efforts on behalf of SEIU on the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) in 2007. He’s also been very actively involved in the past with America Coming Together and Project Vote, and will deflect any ACORN or Working Families Party association, though the trail is all there, but that’s a post for another day.
John Sullivan, SEIU associate counsel, now sits on the Federal Election Commission, appointed by Obama earlier this year. Sullivan’s prior career has also included staunch support for Teamsters union bosses as their Election Officer Counsel, and legal counsel to SEIU and other labor unions on everything from election campaigning rules, to strikes, and union benefits agreements. Perhaps most notably though, under Sullivan’s legal watch, America Coming Together, a Soros & Stern funded 527 group that serves as a financial funnel for donations from big labor, received the largest fine in FEC history – $775,000. And now he helps run the FEC. Keep a close watch on SEIU’s lobbying reports from this point forward…(See this video from the National Right to Work Committee for a fantastic overview on Sullivan).
Craig Becker, associate general counsel of SEIU, was nominated by Obama to the National Labor Relations Board in July. Becker was instrumental in developing SEIU’s legal strategies for organizing informal workers, primarily home health care workers and similar health care industry workers, testifying on Capitol Hill in 2007 in support of unionizing such workers. There has also been separate concern over this appointment, relating to the Employee Free Choice Act and questions about the potential for Becker, whose public writings have stated that he believes “employers should be stripped of any legally cognizable interest in their employees’ election of union representatives”, to implement labor policies that would achieve the same outcome as the EFCA should that bill stall or fail in Congress. Senator John McCain has requested a hold on Becker’s hearings, so the outcome of Becker’s appointment is yet to be determined.
As we move further down this road into the health care debate, all eyes should remain on SEIU, the most special of all special interests. I’ve said it before and will say it again. Do not take your eyes off them. The big labor union has got tentacles into every area of this debate, and they reach from deep inside the communities of working Americans in every facet of our lives, all the way into Congress and the White House Oval Office. What you’ve just read is merely an overview of the money behind SEIU’s policy pushing arm. The people and the power behind the broader scope of SEIU are like pieces of a puzzle – put them each together just a little at a time, and the bigger picture will start to materialize.
Peter Ferrara: The Absolutely Worst Bill Ever
http://www.theacru.org/acru/peter_ferrara_the_absolutely_worst_bill_ever/
This column originally appeared on The American Spectator website on November 11, 2009.
"The Worst Bill Ever." That is the title the always calm and rational Wall Street Journal put on its editorial on November 1 about the government health care takeover bill that passed the House last week on virtually a party line vote, 220-215. But even this label doesn't fully communicate the outright assault on the American people involved in this legislation. The bill is a serious threat not only to your freedom and prosperity, but to your very life as well.
That is because at the heart of this bill is a cruel perversion. The bill labors mightily (though it actually fails) to expand insurance coverage to everyone (taking the most expensive route possible). But then it is devoted to taking away the very health care that you may need to save your life, or the life of a loved one.
Pelosi's Death Panels
The bill would create 118 new federal boards, bureaucracies, commissions, and programs, which as a group have the power to ration and deny you health care. These are the Pelosi death panels. They include the Health Choices Administration, the Health Benefits Advisory Committee, the Health Insurance Exchange, the Public Health Insurance Option, the Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research, the Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission, the Accountable Care Organization Pilot Program, the Community Based Medical Home Pilot Program, the Independent Patient Centered Medical Home Pilot Program, and many others.
One of the ways that health rationing would be carried out is through so-called "Comparative Effectiveness," where national health care bureaucracies will decide what health care treatments, procedures, therapies and drugs work best, and which don't. You would think that is what your doctor is for, using his medical knowledge and direct personal observation of your condition and health history to prescribe what is best for you. But liberal Democrats insist that faraway federal bureaucrats who don't know anything about you will know exactly what health care will work best, in all cases. The House bill says that the decisions of federal bureaucrats on comparative effectiveness "will be delivered to doctors electronically to guide their use of medical items and services," as Betsy McCaughey reports in the Wall Street Journal on November 7. If doctors don't take the hint, and use their own judgment as to your care instead, they will be penalized in their compensation under Pay for Performance.
That policy was explained in a June report from President Obama's Council of Economic Advisors (CEA), entitled "The Economic Case for Health Care Reform." That report says that 30% of health care in America is waste, and wise government bureaucrats are going to identify exactly whose health care is waste and cut it out. Another policy for accomplishing this is called "Cost Effectiveness," where wise government bureaucrats will decide whether your health care is worth the cost to society. The House health bill creates the bureaucracies with the power and authority to carry out these policies.
But it is far worse even than this. Through the Public Option, the Medicare cuts discussed below, and new rules and regulations imposed on compensation for doctors, hospitals, and other health providers more generally, the resources that sustain our highly advanced, sophisticated, cutting edge, high tech medical system will be sharply constricted. The incentives for investment in new innovations, advanced medical equipment, new miracle cure drugs, and first-rate hospital and clinic facilities will be decimated. Just when the rapid advancement of science and technology is opening up new vistas to counter disease, suffering, and death, self-congratulatory politicians and bureaucrats are stomping in and shutting it down.
In the future, when you or a loved one is struck with cancer, or heart disease, or your premature baby is struggling for life, the surgery, the machine, the pill that could have saved a life, will not be there. When the doctors come to tell you that there is nothing they can do, they are not going to explain whether that is due to medical science, or to politics and bureaucracy, and you will not know. But more and more likely over time, you will be a victim of the declining American standard of living imposed by ideological extremists, as reflected in part in the loss of the best health care possible.
Exactly to the contrary, our public policy should be focused on maximizing the advancement of health care in this new age of modern science by removing government burdens and barriers. We do need to control costs, but by introducing market incentives for patients, doctors and hospitals, so they can be in charge and make appropriate decisions, free of financially interested third party bureaucracies. It's called Patient Power, the true alternative to what Washington is doing now. Jim Pinkerton has been brilliantly making this case for months now on his Serious Medicine Strategy blog, though the argument goes all the way back to John Goodman's book, Patient Power.
But the left-wing extremists currently in complete control of Washington have no understanding of any of this. They are wedded, emotionally and religiously, to outdated ideological crusades of 100 years ago. This is a time of great challenge for the American people, like World War II, the Civil War, or the Revolutionary War. If you are not involved in the solution, then you are not only letting down America, but your family, and yourself.
Medicare Cuts
One confusion arising from the House bill is that its provisions are phased in over several years. Over the first 10 years of full operation, the House bill actually cuts Medicare by $800 billion, as scored by CBO. The cuts for Medicare Advantage plans will be close to $200 billion, and despite President Obama's phony shtick that if you like your health plan you can keep it, the Administration itself estimates that 8 million seniors will lose their Medicare Advantage plan as a result, 73% of those with such plans.
This is the beginning of health care rationing for seniors, as the payments to their doctors and hospitals for the care that currently maintains their health will be slashed back. In addition, as Betsy McCaughey explains in the Journal, the House bill
moves Medicare from a fee-for-service payment system, in which patients choose which doctors to see and doctors are paid for each service they provide, toward what's called a "medical home." The medical home is this decade's version of HMO restrictions on care. A primary care provider manages access to costly specialists and diagnostic tests for a flat monthly fee. The bill specifies that patients may have to settle for a nurse practitioner rather than a physician as the primary care provider. Medical homes begin with demonstration projects, but... HHS...is authorized to "disseminate this approach rapidly on a national basis."
What this means is that your doctor is paid a flat monthly fee for your care, and referring you to a specialist or for a diagnostic test effectively comes out of his pocket. So if you need an MRI or a CT scan to see if you have cancer, or to check if that pain in your chest is due to clogged arteries, or if you need to see a specialist to treat cancer or heart disease, the doctor has a financial interest to delay or deny it. Financially, if you are actually this sick, he will be better off if you die sooner rather than later. That is the result of the perverted, inverse incentives the House health bill creates for medical providers.
But the Obama Administration has already started the rationing for seniors on Medicare. The recently adopted Medicare payment rules for next year impose an 11% overall cut on cardiology and a 19% cut on radiation oncology (cancer treatment). Payments for basic tools and treatments for heart disease, such as stress tests and catherization, are slashed by 42% and 24% respectively. Payments for diagnostic imaging services like MRIs and CT scans that help identify cancer early are cut by 24%. Payments for antitumor radiation therapy will be cut by 44%.
AARP shamefully provides cover for this attack on the health care of seniors. That is in part because it has always been a liberal/left front group, like ACORN and SEIU, and it is standing up for its left-wing political allies. But it's also because AARP doesn't sell a Medicare Advantage plan, and it wants to drive out the competition to its overly costly Medigap plans.
Soaring Health Costs
The socialized medicine policies adopted in the House health bill will at the same time cause soaring health costs and health insurance premiums. The House bill provides that you or your employer will be forced to buy the health insurance plan specified by the government, regardless of what you want. This will include all of the politically correct benefits no matter how expensive, such as drug rehab, mental health, maternity benefits even if you are over 50, male, or gay. Coverage for abortion too will ultimately be required with politics involved in the decision, no matter what they say now. Many people today are wisely saving a lot of money with high annual deductibles, paying for routine expenses out of pocket. (Does your car insurance pay for oil changes and new tires?) Forget about that under the House bill.
The House bill further adds costly new regulations on health insurance, such as guaranteed issue, which requires coverage for all new applicants regardless of how sick they already are, and community rating, which requires the same premiums for new applicants regardless of health condition. This regulation is like requiring fire insurance companies to insure new applicants whose houses are already on fire, charging them no more than anyone else. Such regulations have caused health insurance premiums to soar even in the context of broader health reform, as we have seen in Massachusetts.
But health insurance premiums will also rise because of increased cost shifting to private insurance from the Medicare cuts, and from the Public Option. The House bill would also radically increase incentives to demand more health care, with the government paying for everything or paying for health insurance to pay for everything. It would also radically reduce the incentives to supply health care by clamping down more and more on payments to doctors, hospitals and other health providers for their services, as discussed above. Increasing demand while reducing supply will produce skyrocketing health costs, which will further increase health insurance premiums.
Readers of this column know I have been saying as much for months. But now comes expert confirmation in a study from WellPoint, which provides transparent insight from its own health insurance files and experience. Their study shows that health insurance premiums for the young and healthy will triple in some states! Average middle class families will see their premiums more than double. A previous study from Price Waterhouse showed quite similar results. These studies didn't even take into account all of the factors above.
Democrats and their allies have responded with name-calling and libel, with no substantive response. If they pass a final bill without a public option, when premiums do rise as a result for all of the above reasons, they will be back arguing this shows the Republicans were wrong about not needing competition from a public plan. You can't argue with religion.
By the way, the profits of the 10 largest health insurance companies last year totaled $8 billion, combined. That is less than one half of one percent of total health costs. It's not an issue, except for socialists.
Soaring Taxes and Deficits
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claims that the House bill is deficit neutral. But that is based on a 21.5% cut next year in payments to doctors under Medicare included in the bill. That is so ridiculous that even the Democrats don't believe in it. So in a separate bill they propose to restore $250 billion of those cuts, adding that entire amount to the deficit! So how can the House bill really be considered deficit neutral, based on a huge cut so ridiculous the Democrats themselves immediately reverse it in another bill? Has our government ever been this brazenly dishonest?
Over the first full 10 years of operation, CBO estimates that the bill will cost $1.8 trillion, not the $829 billion claimed by Speaker Pelosi, actually misrepresenting the CBO score. The actual costs counting all spending increases, which haven't been scored by CBO yet, will be $2.4 trillion to $3 trillion. The bill costs so much because with an overwhelming entitlement crisis already looming, the House bill insists on massively expanding Medicaid, adding 18 million more people, and adopting a new middle class entitlement providing subsidies to buy health insurance for those making up to $96,000 a year for a family of four in 2016.
The $700 billion in tax increases, plus the Medicare cuts, won't be enough to cover all those costs, adding hundreds of billions to the deficit. In particular, the bill relies on an income tax surcharge adding 5.4% to the top income tax rate. Along with the Obama tax rate increases already planned for 2011, the top marginal federal tax rate will soar to almost 48% from 35% today. Counting state income taxes, the average top income tax rate in America would climb to about 52%. The top U.S. income tax rate would then be higher than in France, Germany, Canada, and 23 other countries in the OECD. In five states dominated by Democrats, California, New York, New Jersey, Hawaii, and Oregon, the total top tax rate would be higher than in socialist Sweden. That top tax rate increase won't raise nearly the $460 billion CBO now projects because of its uncounted, counterproductive economic effects.
But the total spending and resulting deficits will be far higher than even this. CBO assumes that only 30 million will qualify for the middle class entitlement subsidies, with 162 million in employer provided coverage not eligible for the subsidies as a result. But with employers who drop their coverage subject to an 8% payroll tax, and less for small businesses, many will have an incentive to do precisely that, especially since the workers can then get the government subsidies. If your payroll averages $40,000, then 8% is only $3200 per worker, likely much less than the cost of current coverage. This could more than double the projected cost over the first full 10 years, as millions more lose their employer coverage and become eligible for the subsidies.
Finally, remember President Obama's ironclad election year promise not to raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 per year, in any form, which won him election? Under the House bill, which President Obama has now endorsed, workers who don't buy insurance will have to pay an income tax penalty equal to 2.5% of income, including those in the bottom 50% of income earners who don't pay any income tax now. If they do buy the mandated insurance, then they will bear costs for the premiums of 1.5% to 12% of income for those making less than $250,000. That is effectively a whole new payroll tax on workers.
President Obama, however, says this is not a tax. But, then, President Obama says lots of things we've learned we cannot believe in.
Who is Behind “Media Reform?” (Part Two)
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/who-is-behind-media-reform-part-two/
The biased programming contradicts the purposes of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967.
A professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Robert W. McChesney has said that "media reform" should be part of the march toward socialism in America and that capitalism has to be dismantled "brick by brick." Van Jones, the ousted communist "Green Jobs Czar" of the Obama Administration, served with McChesney on the board of Free Press, a George Soros-funded organization, in 2007 and 2008.
Despite its socialist orientation, Free Press is financially supported by extremely wealthy individuals such as George Soros, the leftist billionaire, and Marcy Carsey, one of the creators of The Cosby Show whose net worth has been estimated at $600 million. Carsey serves on the Free Press board and was a top Obama inauguration donor, having contributed $50,000 to the event.
Where is the Balance?
Jay Pearce, director of creative content of WILL Radio at the University of Illinois and executive producer of McChesney's radio show, declared, "That's a good question," when asked why the radical "media scholar" fails to include interviews with any identifiable conservatives on the air.
Mark Leonard, general manager of WILL, said, "It doesn't concern me," when asked about the complete lack of conservative guests. "What we celebrate is a diversity of points of view," he said, although he couldn't name one conservative on the air on WILL. He said he assumes that conservatives sometimes call into the "Media Matters" program, and that was good enough for him.
The biased programming contradicts the purposes of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, which created the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and requires objectivity and balance in programs funded by the CPB.
"From its advent more than four decades ago, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting has had a legal mandate to ensure 'strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature,'" the CPB says. "This principle is part of the bedrock of public broadcasting in America, a country built upon a foundation of lively and open political and social discourse."
These descriptions of some of his recent shows and guests provide an illustration of the one-sided news and information that he regularly puts on the air:
Wendell Potter speaks out on "the need for a fundamental overhaul of the American health care system..."
Glenn Greenwald "examines the manipulative electoral tactics used by the GOP and propagated by the establishment press."
John Wilson, author of "President Barack Obama: A More Perfect Union."
Robb Weissman examines "the activities of multinational companies."
Kevin Phillips talks about his book on "the global crisis of American capitalism."
Greg Mitchell, author of "Why Obama Won."
Matthew Rothschild, editor of The Progressive magazine, "which is one of the leading voices for peace and social justice in this country."
Interestingly, on February 18, 2007, McChesney interviewed Mark Lloyd, now the FCC chief diversity officer who was then a fellow at the Soros-funded Center for
American Progress. He urged more federal involvement in telecommunications policy, including more tax dollars for a "fully-funded" public broadcasting. McChesney said
Lloyd was so informative that he should be a "permanent guest." Lloyd returned the favor, saying, "Much of what I learned about public broadcasting, early years, came from reading you Bob."
The Partisan Political Agenda
While he postures as a "media scholar," McChesney is himself a political and partisan activist, as demonstrated in Federal Election Commission (FEC) records. These disclose thousands of dollars in financial contributions from McChesney to political candidates, all of them Democrats except for one Green Party nominee in Illinois, a retired visiting professor at the University of Illinois by the name of Carl Estabrook who was known for his far-left perspective on the Middle East.
McChesney used his radio show back in 2002 to promote Estabrook, who holds the view that Israel is "a wholly-owned subsidiary of the United States government" and a "pariah state" engaged in an illegal occupation.
McChesney contributed to Barack Obama in 2004, when he was running for the Senate in Illinois, and then-Rep. and now Senator Bernie Sanders, socialist from Vermont.
But in 2008, he supported Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who advocated a federal "Department of Peace," and former Senator John Edwards, later exposed as an adulterer. Back in 2000, McChesney contributed to Ralph Nader's run for president.
On the Senate level, McChesney contributed financially to Senators Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Jon Tester of Montana, and James Webb of Virginia, and Connecticut Senate candidate Ned Lamont. McChesney featured both Brown and Sanders on his radio show several times.
McChesney also contributed to the Progressive Patriots Fund, the leadership political action committee of Senator Feingold, and the campaigns of Reps. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (Illinois), Chet Edwards (Texas) and Donna Edwards (Maryland).
The Center for American Progress
McChesney's well-financed Free Press is not alone in the effort to transform the media along Marxist lines. Supporting the project is the so-called Center for American Progress (CAP), the Soros-funded group that employed Mark Lloyd before he went to work at the FCC as Associate General Counsel and chief diversity officer.
CAP itself released a proposal for "an independent and stable funding stream for public media" in its Change for America book project that was designed to influence the Obama Administration. The sources for the report included books and articles written by McChesney.
The author, Lauren Strayer, was a producer at Air America, the liberal radio network that went through bankruptcy in 2006.
Not surprisingly, Strayer would later surface as a contributor to the Free Press report, "Public Media's Moment," which urged "new public funding for new public media" and the creation of a "White House Commission on Public Media" to bring this about.
This same proposal was recently adopted by discredited former CBS Evening News anchorman Dan Rather, who called for a "White House Commission on Public Media" during an appearance before the Aspen Institute. Rather was a featured speaker at the 2008 conference of McChesney's Free Press and has become a hero of the progressive "media reform" movement
Lawmakers ask IRS to investigate CAIR
Group's lobbying activity illegal, members of Congress believe
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=116380
By Art Moore
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.
Prompted by evidence in a new book, a senator and five Congress members are urging the Internal Revenue Service to investigate the Council on American-Islamic Relations to determine whether the controversial Muslim group's lobbying activities on Capitol Hill violate its nonprofit status.
The letter to IRS Commissioner Douglas H. Shulman is signed by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and members of the House antiterrorism caucus, Reps. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., John Shadegg, R-Ariz., Trent Franks, R-Ariz., Paul Broun, R-Ga., and Patrick McHenry, R-N.C.
The Washington, D.C.-based CAIR – which had its relationship with the FBI cut off this year after being named an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-finance case in U.S. history – has been under increased scrutiny since the release of "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America," a WND Books publication by former Air Force special agent P. David Gaubatz and "Infiltration" author Paul Sperry. The authors present firsthand evidence CAIR is acting as a front for a well-funded conspiracy of the Muslim Brotherhood – the parent of al-Qaida and Hamas – to infiltrate the U.S. and help pave the way for Saudi-style Islamic law to rule the nation.
Get the book that exposed CAIR from the inside-out, autographed, from WND's Superstore!
The letter, also addressed to the House clerk, Senate secretary and Senate superintendent of records, points to evidence uncovered in "Muslim Mafia" that CAIR may be in violation of both the anti-excessive-lobbying provision of its 501(c)(3) nonprofit status and the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 by failing to register with Congress as a federal lobbying organization.
As CAIR's own website states, the group's Governmental Affairs Department "conducts and organizes lobbying efforts on issues related to Islam and Muslims."
CAIR says its department is "active in monitoring legislation and government activities and then, responding on behalf of the American Muslim community. CAIR representatives have testified before Congress and have sponsored a number of activities designed to bring Muslim concerns to Capitol Hill."
As WND reported last month, Myrick, Shadegg, Franks and Broun formally asked the House sergeant at arms to investigate evidence from "Muslim Mafia" that CAIR is conspiring to plant "spies" inside Congress targeting sensitive security-related committees. In another letter, to Attorney General Eric Holder, the House members ask the Justice Department to reveal to Congress members why CAIR was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-finance case in U.S. history.
"Muslim Mafia" points out CAIR, as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization, is severely restricted from lobbying and expressly prohibited from political campaigning.
By law, the book points out, CAIR must notify the IRS of any intent to lobby by filing a special form.
A 501(c)(3) organization "will lose its tax-exempt status and its qualification to receive tax-deductible charitable contributions if a substantial part of its activities are carried on to influence legislation," the IRS states in Form 5768.
Internal documentation and press releases obtained by "Muslim Mafia" authors suggest a substantial portion of CAIR's operations involve lobbying operations.
In its effort to repeal the Patriot Act antiterrorism law in 2005, for example, CAIR made 72 trips to Congress, according to internal documents. "Muslim Mafia" notes Congress met just 150 days that year.
CAIR also spends $25,000 a year to organize a national "lobby day on the Hill" in which its members nationwide come to Washington – armed with CAIR talking points on a single issue – to meeting with their representatives.
CAIR, which calls its governmental affairs department a "lobbying office," also has created databases to streamline its lobbying efforts, including one to automatically alert staffers on Capitol Hill about its policy issues.
IRS statutes also forbid CAIR from supporting or opposing anyone running for office, but CAIR has held political fundraisers benefiting Muslim U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., and other Democrats. The group also has used its resources to get out the vote for Ellison and Democrats in tight races.
In 2004, CAIR bused Muslim voters from mosques to polls to support Democrats in key Florida counties.
The IRS also prohibits CAIR from inviting Democrats to speak at its forums without extending formal invitations to Republicans. But with the exception of GOP Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, "Muslim Mafia" says, CAIR mostly has vilified Republicans rather than reach out to them.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, is suing "Muslim Mafia" co-author P. David Gaubatz and his son Chris over the evidentiary documents they obtained during Chris' six-month undercover penetration of the organization, which both the FBI and Justice Department have branded as a terror co-conspirator. As a result of revelations in "Muslim Mafia," the bipartisan Congressional Anti-Terrorism Caucus is calling for new, wide-ranging federal probes of CAIR. In the meantime, however, someone has to defend these two courageous investigators who have, at great personal risk, revealed so much about this dangerous group. WND has stepped up to the plate, procured the best First Amendment attorneys in the country and is paying for the Gaubatzes' defense – but we can't do it without your help. Please donate to WND's Legal Defense Fund now. Thank you.
Tea partiers brutally beaten by pro-amnesty group
Shocking! Illegal immigration protesters attacked, pushed into traffic
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=116347
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Che Guevara supporters with a radical pro-amnesty coalition viciously attacked and bludgeoned tea party protesters at a Florida anti-illegal-immigration rally, including a 62-year-old man who was beaten and kicked in the face.
Americans for Legal Immigration PAC called for "Tea Parties Against Amnesty and Illegal Immigration" to form quickly across the nation on Nov. 14. In less than 30 days, protests were scheduled for more than 50 towns and cities.
But two Fort Lauderdale, Fla., tea party protesters were brutally beaten by pro-amnesty activists on the day of the nationwide rally as they attempted to film Florida's Act Now to Stop War and End Racism Coalition counterprotest.
ANSWER members carried Che Guevara signs and other black and yellow placards that stated "Full rights for all immigrants." They shouted, "Amnesty yes, racists no!"
As the two men attempted to film the protest, an ANSWER member in a black tanktop and blue jeans lunged after one of the cameramen and beat him with a sign, pushing him into traffic. Another ANSWER member in a white T-shirt attacked the same cameraman while the victim defended himself with what appears to be a camera tripod.
A female tea party protester began screaming as Dave Caulkett of Floridians for Immigration Enforcement and the initial ANSWER attacker fought in the middle of the street.
The following is a video of the attack released by ALIPAC:
"Supporters of President Obama's amnesty plans attacked Tea Party Against Amnesty & Illegal Immigration demonstrators in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., on Saturday, Nov. 14, 2009. One of the men attacked is 62 years old," ALIPAC reported. "Dave Caulkett of FLIMEN is assaulted and then kicked in the face while he is down. The other cameraman from the tea party is hit with several signs."
ALIPAC revealed that ANSWER Florida sent out an e-mail invitation urging members to join its "protest to shut down racist anti-'amnesty' rally" in Fort Lauderdale prior to the event. ANSWER's letter stated the following:
The ANSWER Coalition is calling on all its members, allies, and friends to join us tomorrow to confront and shut down the racist "Anti-Amnesty Tea Party" in Fort Lauderdale.
The "Anti-Amnesty" rallies being held across the country tomorrow have been initiated by fascist, white supremacist organizations that include the Minutemen and the so-called Americans for Legal Immigration.
Recent months have shown a significant rise in extreme-right activity with hate crimes and attacks on immigrants skyrocketing. White supremacist and fascist organizations have boasted rapid growth since the onset of the economic crisis. The new administration has continued the government's anti-immigrant policies with "desktop raids" – the liberal response to the fascist like workplace raids of the Bush years.
Racism is like anything else in this world: in order to make it fall, you must smash it! That is why we are calling on all people to come out tomorrow, to organize a militant confrontation with the so-called "tea baggers." Beating back these forces will require us to organize together, take the streets, fight the racists wherever they show their faces and drive them out of every community. …
We are building a movement that will beat back racism so that working people of all nationalities can unite and fight against our one, shared enemy: capitalism. Amnesty, full rights for ALL immigrants, is a demand that should be raised not just by the immigrant communities, but by every working class community in our struggle to solve this crisis by our own means.
Join us tomorrow, and join us in building the movement against racism and capitalist exploitation!
As WND reported earlier, ALIPAC Chief William Gheen said his group had been calling for a "peaceful, political revolution and uprising in America."
"The e-mail Bag"
My Daddy is an Exotic Dancer!
One day a fourth-grade teacher asked the children what their fathers did for a living.
All the typical answers came up -- fireman, mechanic, businessman, salesman, doctor, lawyer, and so forth.
However, little Justin was being uncharacteristically quiet, so when the teacher prodded him about his father, he finally replied, 'Okay...
My father's an exotic dancer in a gay cabaret, and takes off all his clothes in front of other men and they put money in his underwear.
Sometimes, if the offer is really good, he will go home with some guy and stay with him all night for money.'
The teacher, obviously shaken by this statement hurriedly set the other children to work on some exercises and then took little Justin aside to ask him, 'Is that really true about your father?'
'No', the boy said, 'He actually works for the Democratic National Committee and helped get Barack Obama elected President last year,
"But I was too embarrassed to say that in front of the class.'"
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
"Daily Motivations"
"Age wrinkles the body. Quitting wrinkles the soul." -- Douglas MacArthur
Just as your car runs more smoothly and requires less energy to go faster and farther when the wheels are in perfect alignment, you perform better when your thoughts, feelings, emotions, goals, and values are in balance. -- Brian Tracy
Leading to Top-Notch Customer Service
Here are two facts you can take to the bank: 1) Superior customer service is critical to your business success, and 2) As a leader, you have an important role in making it happen. So, what can you do to foster the kind of service your organization wants and needs? The following ideas should help:
The first step in providing good customer service is to hire the right people. Make your selection process part of your customer service strategy. During interviews, ask questions like: “If you get this job, describe the kinds of things you will do to provide superior customer service.” Also, pose hypothetical customer service situations and ask candidates to explain how they would handle them.
Clarify your expectations about customer service. Condense them to 3-5 key principles, give them a label (e.g., “The Big Four” or “The Game Plan”), and communicate them to everyone. Then, have follow-up meetings with employees to ensure that they know exactly what is expected of them.
Provide training, resources, and coaching to help your people develop customer service skills. Make sure all training reinforces your specific service expectations.
Remember that people do what’s EXpected when it’s INspected! Include “customer service” in all performance evaluations and feedback sessions. Prior to conducting evaluations, ask team members to submit a list of the specific things they’ve done to help provide superior customer service.
Celebrate successes! Recognize and reward employees who provide exceptional service. Share their stories with others. This will help motivate the entire team. Motivated employees go above and beyond for your customers … and for the organization.
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
I, even I, am the one who comforts you. (Isaiah 51:12)
Perhaps you remember the film The Hiding Place. It tells the story of my dear friend Corrie ten Boom and her sister, Betsy. They were sent to Ravensbruck concentration camp because they protected Jewish people during World War II.
One night several women were gathered around Betsy as she led a Bible study. One of them suddenly spoke up bitterly. "If your God is such a good God," she said, "why does He allow this kind of suffering?" She slowly opened her hands to reveal broken, beaten fingers. "I'm the first violinist of the symphony orchestra. Did your God will this?"
Corrie looked sadly at the woman's hands. "We can't answer that question," she said with compassion. "All we know is that our God came to this earth, became one of us, suffered with us, and was crucified and died. And He did it for love."
The Holy Spirit is the One who comes to us today with tender comfort and encouragement. He is the ideal companion when we are beset by misery and grief. He knows us deeply, intimately, better than we know ourselves. He knows exactly what kind of encouragement we need, and He has the power to strengthen and heal us.
It is a wonderful truth to contemplate: we need never again be alone. Where could you go to escape the companionship of the Holy Spirit? What pain could you feel that He would not understand and comfort? Wherever you are, whatever trial you may be facing, the Comforter is right there beside you
Your View of God Really Matters …
If you are suffering, ask God to walk with you and comfort you in the midst of your pain through His Spirit. And after He has brought you safely through, allow Him to use you to comfort someone else.
"The Patriot Post"
"Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have grown not only gray, but almost blind in the service of my country." -- George Washington, upon fumbling for his glasses before delivering the Newburgh Address, 1783
Insight
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse." -- John Stuart Mill
"A really great people, proud and high-spirited, would face all the disasters of war rather than purchase that base prosperity which is bought at the price of national honor." -- Theodore Roosevelt
"Wars may be fought with weapons, but they are won by men. It is the spirit of the men who follow and of the man who leads that gains the victory." -- George S. Patton
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." -- Sir Winston S. Churchill
"It is, in a way, an odd thing to honor those who died in defense of our country ... in wars far away. The imagination plays a trick. We see these soldiers in our mind as old and wise. We see them as something like the Founding Fathers, grave and gray-haired. But most of them were boys when they died, and they gave up two lives -- the one they were living and the one they would have lived. When they died, they gave up their chance to be husbands and fathers and grandfathers. They gave up their chance to be revered old men. They gave up everything for their country, for us. All we can do is remember." -- Ronald Reagan
Dezinformatsia
Gratuitous Christian bashing: "It's looking more and more like [Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan] was just, sort of, a religious nut. And you know Islam doesn't have a majority -- or the Christian religion has its full, you know, full helping of nuts too." -- CBS's Bob Schieffer
What was the tragedy again? "It really is tragic that he was a Muslim." -- NPR's Nina Totenberg
"I cringe that he's a Muslim. I mean, because it inflames all the fears. I think he's probably just a nut case. But with that label attached to him, it will get the right wing going and it just -- I mean these things are tragic, but that makes it much worse." -- Newsweek's Evan Thomas
PC virus: "We cannot call him the shooter until we have a trial. That's the way we work here, you know, that's how it works in America." -- Chris Matthews
Commie apologist: "Many who were raised in the East are still adjusting to the harsh economic realities, especially during this economic downturn." -- NBC's Tom Brokaw, taking the opportunity of the anniversary Berlin Wall's demise to trash capitalism
Because America totally didn't have anything to do with it: "I know, I think it may be a little egocentric but I think most Americans look at that event and they think of it as an American victory." --NBC's Matt Lauer
Sometimes the get it right: "The U.S. government is making a costly and open-ended commitment. Let's not pretend that it isn't a big deal, or that it will be self-financing, or that it will work out exactly as planned. It won't. What is really unfolding, I suspect, is the scenario that many conservatives feared. The Obama Administration ... is creating a new entitlement program, which, once established, will be virtually impossible to rescind." -- New Yorker columnist John Cassidy
Short Cuts
"President Obama taped a speech to show to the crowd at the Berlin Wall gala Monday. He reminded the viewing audience he too made history as the first black president. The earth wobbled on its axis from the gravitational pull of three billion people rolling their eyes simultaneously." -- comedian Argus Hamilton
"At 69, Pelosi stands a good chance of facing a death panel before she leads a majority of this size again." -- Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto
"Waiting weeks to get an MRI to find out why you are sick, and then waiting months for an operation, as happens in countries with government-run medical systems, can be not only painful but dangerous. You can be dead by the time they find out what is wrong with you and do something about it. But that will 'bring down the cost of medical care' because you won't be around to require any." -- economist Thomas Sowell
"Diversity is good. Maybe not as good as the ability to shoot straight, though in the modern, politically correct Army, you never can tell." -- columnist Wesley Pruden
"The Web"
Recovery.gov - Track the Money
http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/home.aspx
Recovery.gov is the U.S. government’s official website providing easy access to data related to Recovery Act spending and allows for the reporting of potential fraud, waste, and abuse.
From Rep. John Boehner (R-West Chester, Ohio) released the following today:
http://www.examiner.com/x-19303-Dayton-Crime-Examiner~y2009m11d17-Stimulus-money-going-to-10-Ohio-congressional-districts-that-dont-exist
A lot has been made of the non-existent congressional district in Arizona that the White House claimed received “stimulus” money. So today, we went to Recovery.gov to find out how the state of Ohio - a state with 18 congressional districts - fared. Guess what we found: TEN congressional districts in the Buckeye State that DO NOT exist received stimulus money.
In fact, Ohio has never had more than 24 Members of Congress.
Not soon after the “stimulus” was signed into law in February of this year, stories about “stimulus” funds going to to Wisconsin for a bridge to Rusty’s Backwater Saloon; to North Carolina where “stimulus” funds were reportedly used by one town to hire a new worker whose job is to apply for more “stimulus” funds from Washington; to pay for bonuses for AIG executives, a turtle crossing in northern Florida, install skylights in Montana’s state-run liquor warehouse - and on and on and on.
Congressman John Boehner (R-West Chester) said in a statement to the Cleveland Plain Dealer today:
Not only has the ’stimulus’ not produced jobs the Administration promised, but now we learn that the Administration’s reports intended to track the effectiveness of government spending are riddled with errors and gross inaccuracies. How many more mistakes have been made? How are Ohioans supposed to take the Administration seriously on the economy when its own Web site credits jobs saved or created in districts that don’t even exist?
The latest example - claiming credit for creating jobs in Ohio Congressional districts that don’t even exist - is just one more sign the “stimulus” isn’t working.
A Message From Shirley Dobson, of Focus On The Family
Thanks and blessings to you.
Fwd: Mom's lawsuit for NDP is next week
From Shirley Dobson, as efforts are being made to do away with the National Day of Prayer!
Tuesday, I am being deposed by the Freedom from Religion Foundation made up of atheists and agnostics. They are sending two lawyers to depose me and the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) are sending two lawyers to defend me. I will be sitting there in the Board Room being grilled and trying to be trapped, starting at 8:30AM until 4:30PM. Looks like this is our time of testing.. My National Area Leaders were on a conference call today and prayed for me. And, of course, my NDP team will be in prayer. Their purpose is to keep us from asking anyone in government i.e., President - Governors, etc., for proclamations to proclaim a day of prayer in their states or in the nation and from participating in the National Day of Prayer in anyway. They want to take away our freedom to gather, to worship and to pray in the public square. I pray that I will be a witness to them, that I will be calm and cautious in what I say. The victory is the Lord's.
ObamaCare: Show Me the SEIU Money!
by Liberty Chick
http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/17/obamacare-show-me-the-seiu-money/
Throughout the debate over health care reform, there has been a great deal of discussion over the role of special interests in influencing the votes of lawmakers. Liberal democrats, progressive think tanks and mainstream media have repeatedly accused anyone who opposes government run health care of standing with special interests instead of with needy Americans, painting them as greedy and selfish. And now that a bill has passed in the House and is on its way to the Senate, big government proponents of a ‘public option’ are already attacking their fellow Democrats’ own bill, insisting that it may as well have been written by special interests.
Funny they should mention that. Because, just like the stimulus bill,
http://apolloalliance.org/feature-articles/data-points-comparing-senate-and-house-versions-of-stimulus/ it was written by special interests.
While it’s true that Republicans certainly receive their fair share of donations from the health industry, the surprising truth is that Democrats actually receive more. Because there’s one giant special interest sector that everyone seems to be leaving out: Big Labor. And in the monarchy of labor these days, there is one queen that’s at the top of the money chain, and that’s the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the top billing union in its parent coalition, Change to Win. Especially when it comes to the issue of health care.
Let’s start first by breaking down the numbers.
Labor union PACs account for about $305 million in campaign contributions from 2000 to the current 2010 election cycle, 90% of which has gone to Democrats.
Add to that just the top 20 contributing 527 groups, and it throws at least another $470 million into the pot; the majority of which came from big labor and their front groups like “America Votes” and “America Coming Together“.
So, when combined with the health industry donations that are so often the only numbers cited, this paints a bigger – and more accurate – picture and adds at least another $638 million that went to Democrats since 2000, thanks entirely to Big Labor. And that’s actually an understated figure, since I didn’t even include most of the 527 groups (just the top 20).
'SEIU alone has spent at least $187 million through combined lobbying, PAC and 527 group donations and expenses on candidates and policy issues – nearly 100% of which went to liberal policy initiatives and candidates.
So far just in 2009, SEIU has spent more than $2 million on direct lobbying, most of it for health care legislation, the stimulus bill, and the Employee Free Choice Act. And in 2009-2010 Congressional donations, they’ve surpassed $425,000, with 100% of that going to Democrats, especially those crucial to health care votes. And through their various other coalitions and campaigns, like Health Care for America Now and Divided We Fail (with AARP), they’ve expended even more in both financial and people resources. And who knows what those numbers look like when you add up all their coalitions and committees that don’t necessarily bear the SEIU name.
Outside of just health care, these have been some of the top 527s group recipients of their donations. SEIU funnels some of its indirect donations through these groups, among others. If you drill down on groups like America Votes, America Coming Together, and the Media Fund, you’ll also find some of SEIU’s regular financial collaborators, such as ACORN and George Soros:
Accountability Now PAC
Alliance for New America
America Coming Together (PAC)
America Coming Together (527)
America Votes
Campaign For California’s Future
Citizens for Progress (through Patriot Majority & America Votes)
Citizens for Strength and Security
Democracy for America (PAC)
Democratic Judicial Campaign Committee
Focus South Dakota
Grassroots Democrats - Keep Hope Alive PAC
Lantern Project
Majority Action
Media Fund
New Democrat Network
One America Committee
Partnership for America’s Families
Patriot Majority
Pioneer Majority
Senate Majority Project
September Fund
Uniting People for Victory
Click to view this report on OpenSecrets.org
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?lname=Service+Employees+International+Union&year=2009
In my prior post, “SEIU: Building a New American Health Care Empire?”, I discussed the hidden agenda behind WHY the big purple union is spending so much on political issues, primarily health care.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, now let’s talk about WHO some of these people are. Who is sharing the shadow with SEIU and helping to shape today’s policies? Just like cogs in a wheel, each is one of the teeth on that wheel that, when engaging the other teeth, sets the others in motion. And that in turn moves other wheels too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start with Christopher Jennings, former Clinton White House health care advisor and founder of Jennings Policy Strategies. A SEIU health care strategy presentation was given in November of 2007 by Jennings, who himself is an avid lobbyist for SEIU. Conveniently, Jennings also lobbies for AFL-CIO, General Motors, Federation of American Hospitals, the American Board of Internal Medicine, Siemens AG and many others with interests in health care and retirement benefits, representing a total of more than $440 million for the political process.
Click to view this report on OpenSecrets.org
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/firmsum.php?lname=Jennings+Policy+Strategies
Then of course, there is the power of purple in the White House, which certainly boosts their personal lobbying status on a number of fronts. As I mentioned before – like cogs in the wheel, they work together.
There’s Andy Stern, SEIU’s President. He’s had over twenty visits to the White House (even more, off-the-books), most of those for health care meetings, and he bragged in 2008 that the SEIU spent $60.7 million “to elect Barack Obama”. Stern is also President of the Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions, Director of the National Academy of Social Insurance, Aspen Institute trustee, Chair of the Center for Community and Corporate Ethics, and Director of Rock the Vote. Dennis Rivera, head of SEIU Health Care, has also been on several trips to the White House for discussions on health care with his SEIU colleagues and the President.
SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger is also chair of SEIU’s parent labor coaltion, Change to Win. She’s also a White House regular, as one of Obama’s personal appointees to the President’s Economic Recovery Board of Advisers (PERBA), where she works with other leaders, including AFL-CIO labor union President Richard Trumka and GE Executive Jeffrey Immelt to help determine the course for America’s economic recovery. (You can judge for yourself how well that’s working out).
Patrick Gaspard, former vice president of politics and legislation for Local 1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, now serves as the White House political director after serving as the national political director for Obama’s general election campaign. Gaspard also led lobbying efforts on behalf of SEIU on the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) in 2007. He’s also been very actively involved in the past with America Coming Together and Project Vote, and will deflect any ACORN or Working Families Party association, though the trail is all there, but that’s a post for another day.
John Sullivan, SEIU associate counsel, now sits on the Federal Election Commission, appointed by Obama earlier this year. Sullivan’s prior career has also included staunch support for Teamsters union bosses as their Election Officer Counsel, and legal counsel to SEIU and other labor unions on everything from election campaigning rules, to strikes, and union benefits agreements. Perhaps most notably though, under Sullivan’s legal watch, America Coming Together, a Soros & Stern funded 527 group that serves as a financial funnel for donations from big labor, received the largest fine in FEC history – $775,000. And now he helps run the FEC. Keep a close watch on SEIU’s lobbying reports from this point forward…(See this video from the National Right to Work Committee for a fantastic overview on Sullivan).
Craig Becker, associate general counsel of SEIU, was nominated by Obama to the National Labor Relations Board in July. Becker was instrumental in developing SEIU’s legal strategies for organizing informal workers, primarily home health care workers and similar health care industry workers, testifying on Capitol Hill in 2007 in support of unionizing such workers. There has also been separate concern over this appointment, relating to the Employee Free Choice Act and questions about the potential for Becker, whose public writings have stated that he believes “employers should be stripped of any legally cognizable interest in their employees’ election of union representatives”, to implement labor policies that would achieve the same outcome as the EFCA should that bill stall or fail in Congress. Senator John McCain has requested a hold on Becker’s hearings, so the outcome of Becker’s appointment is yet to be determined.
As we move further down this road into the health care debate, all eyes should remain on SEIU, the most special of all special interests. I’ve said it before and will say it again. Do not take your eyes off them. The big labor union has got tentacles into every area of this debate, and they reach from deep inside the communities of working Americans in every facet of our lives, all the way into Congress and the White House Oval Office. What you’ve just read is merely an overview of the money behind SEIU’s policy pushing arm. The people and the power behind the broader scope of SEIU are like pieces of a puzzle – put them each together just a little at a time, and the bigger picture will start to materialize.
Peter Ferrara: The Absolutely Worst Bill Ever
http://www.theacru.org/acru/peter_ferrara_the_absolutely_worst_bill_ever/
This column originally appeared on The American Spectator website on November 11, 2009.
"The Worst Bill Ever." That is the title the always calm and rational Wall Street Journal put on its editorial on November 1 about the government health care takeover bill that passed the House last week on virtually a party line vote, 220-215. But even this label doesn't fully communicate the outright assault on the American people involved in this legislation. The bill is a serious threat not only to your freedom and prosperity, but to your very life as well.
That is because at the heart of this bill is a cruel perversion. The bill labors mightily (though it actually fails) to expand insurance coverage to everyone (taking the most expensive route possible). But then it is devoted to taking away the very health care that you may need to save your life, or the life of a loved one.
Pelosi's Death Panels
The bill would create 118 new federal boards, bureaucracies, commissions, and programs, which as a group have the power to ration and deny you health care. These are the Pelosi death panels. They include the Health Choices Administration, the Health Benefits Advisory Committee, the Health Insurance Exchange, the Public Health Insurance Option, the Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research, the Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission, the Accountable Care Organization Pilot Program, the Community Based Medical Home Pilot Program, the Independent Patient Centered Medical Home Pilot Program, and many others.
One of the ways that health rationing would be carried out is through so-called "Comparative Effectiveness," where national health care bureaucracies will decide what health care treatments, procedures, therapies and drugs work best, and which don't. You would think that is what your doctor is for, using his medical knowledge and direct personal observation of your condition and health history to prescribe what is best for you. But liberal Democrats insist that faraway federal bureaucrats who don't know anything about you will know exactly what health care will work best, in all cases. The House bill says that the decisions of federal bureaucrats on comparative effectiveness "will be delivered to doctors electronically to guide their use of medical items and services," as Betsy McCaughey reports in the Wall Street Journal on November 7. If doctors don't take the hint, and use their own judgment as to your care instead, they will be penalized in their compensation under Pay for Performance.
That policy was explained in a June report from President Obama's Council of Economic Advisors (CEA), entitled "The Economic Case for Health Care Reform." That report says that 30% of health care in America is waste, and wise government bureaucrats are going to identify exactly whose health care is waste and cut it out. Another policy for accomplishing this is called "Cost Effectiveness," where wise government bureaucrats will decide whether your health care is worth the cost to society. The House health bill creates the bureaucracies with the power and authority to carry out these policies.
But it is far worse even than this. Through the Public Option, the Medicare cuts discussed below, and new rules and regulations imposed on compensation for doctors, hospitals, and other health providers more generally, the resources that sustain our highly advanced, sophisticated, cutting edge, high tech medical system will be sharply constricted. The incentives for investment in new innovations, advanced medical equipment, new miracle cure drugs, and first-rate hospital and clinic facilities will be decimated. Just when the rapid advancement of science and technology is opening up new vistas to counter disease, suffering, and death, self-congratulatory politicians and bureaucrats are stomping in and shutting it down.
In the future, when you or a loved one is struck with cancer, or heart disease, or your premature baby is struggling for life, the surgery, the machine, the pill that could have saved a life, will not be there. When the doctors come to tell you that there is nothing they can do, they are not going to explain whether that is due to medical science, or to politics and bureaucracy, and you will not know. But more and more likely over time, you will be a victim of the declining American standard of living imposed by ideological extremists, as reflected in part in the loss of the best health care possible.
Exactly to the contrary, our public policy should be focused on maximizing the advancement of health care in this new age of modern science by removing government burdens and barriers. We do need to control costs, but by introducing market incentives for patients, doctors and hospitals, so they can be in charge and make appropriate decisions, free of financially interested third party bureaucracies. It's called Patient Power, the true alternative to what Washington is doing now. Jim Pinkerton has been brilliantly making this case for months now on his Serious Medicine Strategy blog, though the argument goes all the way back to John Goodman's book, Patient Power.
But the left-wing extremists currently in complete control of Washington have no understanding of any of this. They are wedded, emotionally and religiously, to outdated ideological crusades of 100 years ago. This is a time of great challenge for the American people, like World War II, the Civil War, or the Revolutionary War. If you are not involved in the solution, then you are not only letting down America, but your family, and yourself.
Medicare Cuts
One confusion arising from the House bill is that its provisions are phased in over several years. Over the first 10 years of full operation, the House bill actually cuts Medicare by $800 billion, as scored by CBO. The cuts for Medicare Advantage plans will be close to $200 billion, and despite President Obama's phony shtick that if you like your health plan you can keep it, the Administration itself estimates that 8 million seniors will lose their Medicare Advantage plan as a result, 73% of those with such plans.
This is the beginning of health care rationing for seniors, as the payments to their doctors and hospitals for the care that currently maintains their health will be slashed back. In addition, as Betsy McCaughey explains in the Journal, the House bill
moves Medicare from a fee-for-service payment system, in which patients choose which doctors to see and doctors are paid for each service they provide, toward what's called a "medical home." The medical home is this decade's version of HMO restrictions on care. A primary care provider manages access to costly specialists and diagnostic tests for a flat monthly fee. The bill specifies that patients may have to settle for a nurse practitioner rather than a physician as the primary care provider. Medical homes begin with demonstration projects, but... HHS...is authorized to "disseminate this approach rapidly on a national basis."
What this means is that your doctor is paid a flat monthly fee for your care, and referring you to a specialist or for a diagnostic test effectively comes out of his pocket. So if you need an MRI or a CT scan to see if you have cancer, or to check if that pain in your chest is due to clogged arteries, or if you need to see a specialist to treat cancer or heart disease, the doctor has a financial interest to delay or deny it. Financially, if you are actually this sick, he will be better off if you die sooner rather than later. That is the result of the perverted, inverse incentives the House health bill creates for medical providers.
But the Obama Administration has already started the rationing for seniors on Medicare. The recently adopted Medicare payment rules for next year impose an 11% overall cut on cardiology and a 19% cut on radiation oncology (cancer treatment). Payments for basic tools and treatments for heart disease, such as stress tests and catherization, are slashed by 42% and 24% respectively. Payments for diagnostic imaging services like MRIs and CT scans that help identify cancer early are cut by 24%. Payments for antitumor radiation therapy will be cut by 44%.
AARP shamefully provides cover for this attack on the health care of seniors. That is in part because it has always been a liberal/left front group, like ACORN and SEIU, and it is standing up for its left-wing political allies. But it's also because AARP doesn't sell a Medicare Advantage plan, and it wants to drive out the competition to its overly costly Medigap plans.
Soaring Health Costs
The socialized medicine policies adopted in the House health bill will at the same time cause soaring health costs and health insurance premiums. The House bill provides that you or your employer will be forced to buy the health insurance plan specified by the government, regardless of what you want. This will include all of the politically correct benefits no matter how expensive, such as drug rehab, mental health, maternity benefits even if you are over 50, male, or gay. Coverage for abortion too will ultimately be required with politics involved in the decision, no matter what they say now. Many people today are wisely saving a lot of money with high annual deductibles, paying for routine expenses out of pocket. (Does your car insurance pay for oil changes and new tires?) Forget about that under the House bill.
The House bill further adds costly new regulations on health insurance, such as guaranteed issue, which requires coverage for all new applicants regardless of how sick they already are, and community rating, which requires the same premiums for new applicants regardless of health condition. This regulation is like requiring fire insurance companies to insure new applicants whose houses are already on fire, charging them no more than anyone else. Such regulations have caused health insurance premiums to soar even in the context of broader health reform, as we have seen in Massachusetts.
But health insurance premiums will also rise because of increased cost shifting to private insurance from the Medicare cuts, and from the Public Option. The House bill would also radically increase incentives to demand more health care, with the government paying for everything or paying for health insurance to pay for everything. It would also radically reduce the incentives to supply health care by clamping down more and more on payments to doctors, hospitals and other health providers for their services, as discussed above. Increasing demand while reducing supply will produce skyrocketing health costs, which will further increase health insurance premiums.
Readers of this column know I have been saying as much for months. But now comes expert confirmation in a study from WellPoint, which provides transparent insight from its own health insurance files and experience. Their study shows that health insurance premiums for the young and healthy will triple in some states! Average middle class families will see their premiums more than double. A previous study from Price Waterhouse showed quite similar results. These studies didn't even take into account all of the factors above.
Democrats and their allies have responded with name-calling and libel, with no substantive response. If they pass a final bill without a public option, when premiums do rise as a result for all of the above reasons, they will be back arguing this shows the Republicans were wrong about not needing competition from a public plan. You can't argue with religion.
By the way, the profits of the 10 largest health insurance companies last year totaled $8 billion, combined. That is less than one half of one percent of total health costs. It's not an issue, except for socialists.
Soaring Taxes and Deficits
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claims that the House bill is deficit neutral. But that is based on a 21.5% cut next year in payments to doctors under Medicare included in the bill. That is so ridiculous that even the Democrats don't believe in it. So in a separate bill they propose to restore $250 billion of those cuts, adding that entire amount to the deficit! So how can the House bill really be considered deficit neutral, based on a huge cut so ridiculous the Democrats themselves immediately reverse it in another bill? Has our government ever been this brazenly dishonest?
Over the first full 10 years of operation, CBO estimates that the bill will cost $1.8 trillion, not the $829 billion claimed by Speaker Pelosi, actually misrepresenting the CBO score. The actual costs counting all spending increases, which haven't been scored by CBO yet, will be $2.4 trillion to $3 trillion. The bill costs so much because with an overwhelming entitlement crisis already looming, the House bill insists on massively expanding Medicaid, adding 18 million more people, and adopting a new middle class entitlement providing subsidies to buy health insurance for those making up to $96,000 a year for a family of four in 2016.
The $700 billion in tax increases, plus the Medicare cuts, won't be enough to cover all those costs, adding hundreds of billions to the deficit. In particular, the bill relies on an income tax surcharge adding 5.4% to the top income tax rate. Along with the Obama tax rate increases already planned for 2011, the top marginal federal tax rate will soar to almost 48% from 35% today. Counting state income taxes, the average top income tax rate in America would climb to about 52%. The top U.S. income tax rate would then be higher than in France, Germany, Canada, and 23 other countries in the OECD. In five states dominated by Democrats, California, New York, New Jersey, Hawaii, and Oregon, the total top tax rate would be higher than in socialist Sweden. That top tax rate increase won't raise nearly the $460 billion CBO now projects because of its uncounted, counterproductive economic effects.
But the total spending and resulting deficits will be far higher than even this. CBO assumes that only 30 million will qualify for the middle class entitlement subsidies, with 162 million in employer provided coverage not eligible for the subsidies as a result. But with employers who drop their coverage subject to an 8% payroll tax, and less for small businesses, many will have an incentive to do precisely that, especially since the workers can then get the government subsidies. If your payroll averages $40,000, then 8% is only $3200 per worker, likely much less than the cost of current coverage. This could more than double the projected cost over the first full 10 years, as millions more lose their employer coverage and become eligible for the subsidies.
Finally, remember President Obama's ironclad election year promise not to raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 per year, in any form, which won him election? Under the House bill, which President Obama has now endorsed, workers who don't buy insurance will have to pay an income tax penalty equal to 2.5% of income, including those in the bottom 50% of income earners who don't pay any income tax now. If they do buy the mandated insurance, then they will bear costs for the premiums of 1.5% to 12% of income for those making less than $250,000. That is effectively a whole new payroll tax on workers.
President Obama, however, says this is not a tax. But, then, President Obama says lots of things we've learned we cannot believe in.
Who is Behind “Media Reform?” (Part Two)
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/who-is-behind-media-reform-part-two/
The biased programming contradicts the purposes of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967.
A professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Robert W. McChesney has said that "media reform" should be part of the march toward socialism in America and that capitalism has to be dismantled "brick by brick." Van Jones, the ousted communist "Green Jobs Czar" of the Obama Administration, served with McChesney on the board of Free Press, a George Soros-funded organization, in 2007 and 2008.
Despite its socialist orientation, Free Press is financially supported by extremely wealthy individuals such as George Soros, the leftist billionaire, and Marcy Carsey, one of the creators of The Cosby Show whose net worth has been estimated at $600 million. Carsey serves on the Free Press board and was a top Obama inauguration donor, having contributed $50,000 to the event.
Where is the Balance?
Jay Pearce, director of creative content of WILL Radio at the University of Illinois and executive producer of McChesney's radio show, declared, "That's a good question," when asked why the radical "media scholar" fails to include interviews with any identifiable conservatives on the air.
Mark Leonard, general manager of WILL, said, "It doesn't concern me," when asked about the complete lack of conservative guests. "What we celebrate is a diversity of points of view," he said, although he couldn't name one conservative on the air on WILL. He said he assumes that conservatives sometimes call into the "Media Matters" program, and that was good enough for him.
The biased programming contradicts the purposes of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, which created the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and requires objectivity and balance in programs funded by the CPB.
"From its advent more than four decades ago, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting has had a legal mandate to ensure 'strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature,'" the CPB says. "This principle is part of the bedrock of public broadcasting in America, a country built upon a foundation of lively and open political and social discourse."
These descriptions of some of his recent shows and guests provide an illustration of the one-sided news and information that he regularly puts on the air:
Wendell Potter speaks out on "the need for a fundamental overhaul of the American health care system..."
Glenn Greenwald "examines the manipulative electoral tactics used by the GOP and propagated by the establishment press."
John Wilson, author of "President Barack Obama: A More Perfect Union."
Robb Weissman examines "the activities of multinational companies."
Kevin Phillips talks about his book on "the global crisis of American capitalism."
Greg Mitchell, author of "Why Obama Won."
Matthew Rothschild, editor of The Progressive magazine, "which is one of the leading voices for peace and social justice in this country."
Interestingly, on February 18, 2007, McChesney interviewed Mark Lloyd, now the FCC chief diversity officer who was then a fellow at the Soros-funded Center for
American Progress. He urged more federal involvement in telecommunications policy, including more tax dollars for a "fully-funded" public broadcasting. McChesney said
Lloyd was so informative that he should be a "permanent guest." Lloyd returned the favor, saying, "Much of what I learned about public broadcasting, early years, came from reading you Bob."
The Partisan Political Agenda
While he postures as a "media scholar," McChesney is himself a political and partisan activist, as demonstrated in Federal Election Commission (FEC) records. These disclose thousands of dollars in financial contributions from McChesney to political candidates, all of them Democrats except for one Green Party nominee in Illinois, a retired visiting professor at the University of Illinois by the name of Carl Estabrook who was known for his far-left perspective on the Middle East.
McChesney used his radio show back in 2002 to promote Estabrook, who holds the view that Israel is "a wholly-owned subsidiary of the United States government" and a "pariah state" engaged in an illegal occupation.
McChesney contributed to Barack Obama in 2004, when he was running for the Senate in Illinois, and then-Rep. and now Senator Bernie Sanders, socialist from Vermont.
But in 2008, he supported Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who advocated a federal "Department of Peace," and former Senator John Edwards, later exposed as an adulterer. Back in 2000, McChesney contributed to Ralph Nader's run for president.
On the Senate level, McChesney contributed financially to Senators Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Jon Tester of Montana, and James Webb of Virginia, and Connecticut Senate candidate Ned Lamont. McChesney featured both Brown and Sanders on his radio show several times.
McChesney also contributed to the Progressive Patriots Fund, the leadership political action committee of Senator Feingold, and the campaigns of Reps. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (Illinois), Chet Edwards (Texas) and Donna Edwards (Maryland).
The Center for American Progress
McChesney's well-financed Free Press is not alone in the effort to transform the media along Marxist lines. Supporting the project is the so-called Center for American Progress (CAP), the Soros-funded group that employed Mark Lloyd before he went to work at the FCC as Associate General Counsel and chief diversity officer.
CAP itself released a proposal for "an independent and stable funding stream for public media" in its Change for America book project that was designed to influence the Obama Administration. The sources for the report included books and articles written by McChesney.
The author, Lauren Strayer, was a producer at Air America, the liberal radio network that went through bankruptcy in 2006.
Not surprisingly, Strayer would later surface as a contributor to the Free Press report, "Public Media's Moment," which urged "new public funding for new public media" and the creation of a "White House Commission on Public Media" to bring this about.
This same proposal was recently adopted by discredited former CBS Evening News anchorman Dan Rather, who called for a "White House Commission on Public Media" during an appearance before the Aspen Institute. Rather was a featured speaker at the 2008 conference of McChesney's Free Press and has become a hero of the progressive "media reform" movement
Lawmakers ask IRS to investigate CAIR
Group's lobbying activity illegal, members of Congress believe
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=116380
By Art Moore
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.
Prompted by evidence in a new book, a senator and five Congress members are urging the Internal Revenue Service to investigate the Council on American-Islamic Relations to determine whether the controversial Muslim group's lobbying activities on Capitol Hill violate its nonprofit status.
The letter to IRS Commissioner Douglas H. Shulman is signed by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and members of the House antiterrorism caucus, Reps. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., John Shadegg, R-Ariz., Trent Franks, R-Ariz., Paul Broun, R-Ga., and Patrick McHenry, R-N.C.
The Washington, D.C.-based CAIR – which had its relationship with the FBI cut off this year after being named an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-finance case in U.S. history – has been under increased scrutiny since the release of "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America," a WND Books publication by former Air Force special agent P. David Gaubatz and "Infiltration" author Paul Sperry. The authors present firsthand evidence CAIR is acting as a front for a well-funded conspiracy of the Muslim Brotherhood – the parent of al-Qaida and Hamas – to infiltrate the U.S. and help pave the way for Saudi-style Islamic law to rule the nation.
Get the book that exposed CAIR from the inside-out, autographed, from WND's Superstore!
The letter, also addressed to the House clerk, Senate secretary and Senate superintendent of records, points to evidence uncovered in "Muslim Mafia" that CAIR may be in violation of both the anti-excessive-lobbying provision of its 501(c)(3) nonprofit status and the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 by failing to register with Congress as a federal lobbying organization.
As CAIR's own website states, the group's Governmental Affairs Department "conducts and organizes lobbying efforts on issues related to Islam and Muslims."
CAIR says its department is "active in monitoring legislation and government activities and then, responding on behalf of the American Muslim community. CAIR representatives have testified before Congress and have sponsored a number of activities designed to bring Muslim concerns to Capitol Hill."
As WND reported last month, Myrick, Shadegg, Franks and Broun formally asked the House sergeant at arms to investigate evidence from "Muslim Mafia" that CAIR is conspiring to plant "spies" inside Congress targeting sensitive security-related committees. In another letter, to Attorney General Eric Holder, the House members ask the Justice Department to reveal to Congress members why CAIR was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-finance case in U.S. history.
"Muslim Mafia" points out CAIR, as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization, is severely restricted from lobbying and expressly prohibited from political campaigning.
By law, the book points out, CAIR must notify the IRS of any intent to lobby by filing a special form.
A 501(c)(3) organization "will lose its tax-exempt status and its qualification to receive tax-deductible charitable contributions if a substantial part of its activities are carried on to influence legislation," the IRS states in Form 5768.
Internal documentation and press releases obtained by "Muslim Mafia" authors suggest a substantial portion of CAIR's operations involve lobbying operations.
In its effort to repeal the Patriot Act antiterrorism law in 2005, for example, CAIR made 72 trips to Congress, according to internal documents. "Muslim Mafia" notes Congress met just 150 days that year.
CAIR also spends $25,000 a year to organize a national "lobby day on the Hill" in which its members nationwide come to Washington – armed with CAIR talking points on a single issue – to meeting with their representatives.
CAIR, which calls its governmental affairs department a "lobbying office," also has created databases to streamline its lobbying efforts, including one to automatically alert staffers on Capitol Hill about its policy issues.
IRS statutes also forbid CAIR from supporting or opposing anyone running for office, but CAIR has held political fundraisers benefiting Muslim U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., and other Democrats. The group also has used its resources to get out the vote for Ellison and Democrats in tight races.
In 2004, CAIR bused Muslim voters from mosques to polls to support Democrats in key Florida counties.
The IRS also prohibits CAIR from inviting Democrats to speak at its forums without extending formal invitations to Republicans. But with the exception of GOP Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, "Muslim Mafia" says, CAIR mostly has vilified Republicans rather than reach out to them.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, is suing "Muslim Mafia" co-author P. David Gaubatz and his son Chris over the evidentiary documents they obtained during Chris' six-month undercover penetration of the organization, which both the FBI and Justice Department have branded as a terror co-conspirator. As a result of revelations in "Muslim Mafia," the bipartisan Congressional Anti-Terrorism Caucus is calling for new, wide-ranging federal probes of CAIR. In the meantime, however, someone has to defend these two courageous investigators who have, at great personal risk, revealed so much about this dangerous group. WND has stepped up to the plate, procured the best First Amendment attorneys in the country and is paying for the Gaubatzes' defense – but we can't do it without your help. Please donate to WND's Legal Defense Fund now. Thank you.
Tea partiers brutally beaten by pro-amnesty group
Shocking! Illegal immigration protesters attacked, pushed into traffic
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=116347
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Che Guevara supporters with a radical pro-amnesty coalition viciously attacked and bludgeoned tea party protesters at a Florida anti-illegal-immigration rally, including a 62-year-old man who was beaten and kicked in the face.
Americans for Legal Immigration PAC called for "Tea Parties Against Amnesty and Illegal Immigration" to form quickly across the nation on Nov. 14. In less than 30 days, protests were scheduled for more than 50 towns and cities.
But two Fort Lauderdale, Fla., tea party protesters were brutally beaten by pro-amnesty activists on the day of the nationwide rally as they attempted to film Florida's Act Now to Stop War and End Racism Coalition counterprotest.
ANSWER members carried Che Guevara signs and other black and yellow placards that stated "Full rights for all immigrants." They shouted, "Amnesty yes, racists no!"
As the two men attempted to film the protest, an ANSWER member in a black tanktop and blue jeans lunged after one of the cameramen and beat him with a sign, pushing him into traffic. Another ANSWER member in a white T-shirt attacked the same cameraman while the victim defended himself with what appears to be a camera tripod.
A female tea party protester began screaming as Dave Caulkett of Floridians for Immigration Enforcement and the initial ANSWER attacker fought in the middle of the street.
The following is a video of the attack released by ALIPAC:
"Supporters of President Obama's amnesty plans attacked Tea Party Against Amnesty & Illegal Immigration demonstrators in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., on Saturday, Nov. 14, 2009. One of the men attacked is 62 years old," ALIPAC reported. "Dave Caulkett of FLIMEN is assaulted and then kicked in the face while he is down. The other cameraman from the tea party is hit with several signs."
ALIPAC revealed that ANSWER Florida sent out an e-mail invitation urging members to join its "protest to shut down racist anti-'amnesty' rally" in Fort Lauderdale prior to the event. ANSWER's letter stated the following:
The ANSWER Coalition is calling on all its members, allies, and friends to join us tomorrow to confront and shut down the racist "Anti-Amnesty Tea Party" in Fort Lauderdale.
The "Anti-Amnesty" rallies being held across the country tomorrow have been initiated by fascist, white supremacist organizations that include the Minutemen and the so-called Americans for Legal Immigration.
Recent months have shown a significant rise in extreme-right activity with hate crimes and attacks on immigrants skyrocketing. White supremacist and fascist organizations have boasted rapid growth since the onset of the economic crisis. The new administration has continued the government's anti-immigrant policies with "desktop raids" – the liberal response to the fascist like workplace raids of the Bush years.
Racism is like anything else in this world: in order to make it fall, you must smash it! That is why we are calling on all people to come out tomorrow, to organize a militant confrontation with the so-called "tea baggers." Beating back these forces will require us to organize together, take the streets, fight the racists wherever they show their faces and drive them out of every community. …
We are building a movement that will beat back racism so that working people of all nationalities can unite and fight against our one, shared enemy: capitalism. Amnesty, full rights for ALL immigrants, is a demand that should be raised not just by the immigrant communities, but by every working class community in our struggle to solve this crisis by our own means.
Join us tomorrow, and join us in building the movement against racism and capitalist exploitation!
As WND reported earlier, ALIPAC Chief William Gheen said his group had been calling for a "peaceful, political revolution and uprising in America."
"The e-mail Bag"
My Daddy is an Exotic Dancer!
One day a fourth-grade teacher asked the children what their fathers did for a living.
All the typical answers came up -- fireman, mechanic, businessman, salesman, doctor, lawyer, and so forth.
However, little Justin was being uncharacteristically quiet, so when the teacher prodded him about his father, he finally replied, 'Okay...
My father's an exotic dancer in a gay cabaret, and takes off all his clothes in front of other men and they put money in his underwear.
Sometimes, if the offer is really good, he will go home with some guy and stay with him all night for money.'
The teacher, obviously shaken by this statement hurriedly set the other children to work on some exercises and then took little Justin aside to ask him, 'Is that really true about your father?'
'No', the boy said, 'He actually works for the Democratic National Committee and helped get Barack Obama elected President last year,
"But I was too embarrassed to say that in front of the class.'"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)