September 5, 2009
Do You Even Understand the Proposed Healthcare Policy?
President Obama assured us of change as one of his campaign promises, but the only thing he did not bother to mention was if the change would be positive or negative. The USA today is a beleaguered nation, one whose people are reeling in debt, out of jobs, and now, forced to pay through their noses for healthcare. Now I know it is not right to blame all the ills that this nation is going through on Obama, but you must admit that he has stirred a hornet’s nest with his healthcare reforms.
But before we cast another brickbat at the President, let’s take a moment to analyze if we really understand the policy and what change it will bring about in our lives, because the way I see it, people are just going with the flow and supporting the opinion they want to without knowing what exactly the reforms entail.
The rumors are flying thick and fast, with people even going to the extent of claiming that the new policy will put old people to sleep, just like we do with dogs and other pets that cannot be treated or looked after anymore as it is an added financial burden. While this is definitely not true, there does exist a clause that states that if people are ill and that if the cost of treating them exceeds a certain limit, and if is known that the treatment is not going to cause any significant improvement in the condition of the patient, then your doctor will probably discuss the option of going off the treatment with you. What people are actually afraid of is that they may not be given the option to choose to live by continuing the treatment, even though it may not be life-saving. So does the government decide whether you extend your life or just wait to die?
Ok, so you are allowed to choose if you want to stay with government insurance or spend your own money on private options. But what if your employer pays for your healthcare and decides to go with the reformed plan?
The bottom line (although it hasn’t been inked in permanently yet) is that if you have the money to go with a private insurance healthcare policy, you’re not going to have to worry about being affected by the reforms proposed by Obama and team. If not, and if you have a medical condition that does not fall in the realm of diseases that are easily curable or that are terminal, then you’re in for a rough ride, because the government may just get to decide on the level of treatment that you’re entitled to, and the quality of life you’re going to lead henceforth.
This guest article was written by Adrienne Carlson, who regularly writes on the topic of online degree . Adrienne welcomes your comments and questions at her email address: firstname.lastname@example.org
September 4, 2009
By Warner Todd Huston
You see it all the time, Democrats in any particular state or county government proposing to raise sales taxes to raise “much needed” revenues — I say “much needed” because spending cuts are never considered an option for what ails a government budget. But these money-hungry Democrats never once consider the harm they are doing to the businesses in their own jurisdictions especially when surrounding states (or counties) happen to have lower sales taxes than the new, higher level being introduced by Democrat tax hikers. These tax-mongering Democrats simply assume that raising the taxes will raise the revenues and that people will not flee business in their own area and travel to where things might be bought cheaper.
The reality is, though, even as such tax-loving Democrats raise taxes on their fellows and with wide-eyed innocence claim they are doing right by their constituents, businesses lose business to surrounding communities that have lower taxes. Naturally, tax raising Democrats refuse to acknowledge this singular economic fact.
It turns out that we can thank State Rep. Michael Rodrigues of Westport, Massachusetts for giving us one of the most perfect examples of how states lose business due to tax raising Democrats.
Oh, it isn’t because Rodriques was economically astute enough to understand reality. No, it’s because this tax-raising pol proved that even he will flee his high tax state to buy goods in a neighboring state where taxes are lower.It happens that Representative Rodrigues thought it was a great idea to vote “yes” to raise sales taxes by twenty-five percent in his home state of Massachusetts. Of course, that didn’t mean he intended to pay those taxes himself, of course.
This week alert citizens caught the tax-hiker across the border in New Hampshire loading his state vehicle with cheap booze so that he could avoid Massachusetts State sales taxes.
Meanwhile as this tax avoiding Mass. Pol spirits cheap spirits across the border in his state vehicle, his constituents are losing business due to higher taxes.
This time they take out a couple of radio towers...
The presidency – which we elect by a general vote of the population every 4 years
The Supreme Court – which are justices appointed by the president and approved by….
Congress – both senators, which serve 6 year terms and are elected by citizens of individual states
Reps, which serve 2 year terms, again elected by citizens of individual states.
When I first started asking questions of how our government works, I was always asking “Which is more powerful?”
The president – who’s in charge of the armed forces and sets policy?
Congress – which represents the will of the people?
Supreme court justices – who are appointed for life?
It took me until middle school to reconcile the whole “checks and balances” thing.
But today we are in a new era of mostly hope and change and I find myself once again struggling with the hierarchy of power!
Maybe one of you astute readers can help:
Is a congressman more powerful than a czar?
Who sets policy – the president or the czars he appoints?
Do the czars – who number more than Supreme Court justices – represent the will of the people, or the will of a man?
Seeing as how czars face no congressional approval and have no term limits, I would guess they are more powerful than congress and the supreme court.
But I’m not elite, so I’m only guessing.
September 3, 2009
Customers protest closing of Muskego GM dealership
Muskego -- More than 100 people showed up on a postcard-perfect September afternoon Tuesday to protest General Motors' decision to not renew the franchise of E.J. Salentine Buick Pontiac.
As third-generation members of the Salentine family prepared for life after GM - they plan to remain in business - longtime customers voiced their displeasure about the use of taxpayer dollars for a bailout of GM and the company's subsequent dropping of the dealership.
The gathering didn't feature the anger that often characterized health care town hall meetings, but it wasn't exactly quiet.
Two staff members from U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan's office listened to residents just outside the dealership's empty showroom, promising to give a full report to their boss about the displeasure among his constituents.
"Our federal tax dollars are bailing these people out," one man said of GM. "They need to be held accountable."
"We need to keep the local businesses, not lose them," another said.
"What's going on here is sinful," said Bernie Lemon of New Berlin, who worked at the dealership for 37 years.
Andrew Bogut, the Milwaukee Bucks player who is featured in the dealership's advertising, was at the event. So was Joe Spankowski of Tichigan.
"They're a vital part of the community," Spankowski said.
"They're getting a raw deal," said Garrie Hainer of Muskego.
"Do you realize how valuable these people have been to the community?" said Mary Lemaster of Muskego.
She added that she wrote a letter to GM about three weeks ago urging it to reconsider the decision to drop Salentine.
Salentine family members said their business will go on, at least as an automobile service shop, with or without GM.
"We are not closing," Sue Sorensen, general manager and one of the family owners, told the assembled crowd. "We're going to continue servicing your vehicles as we have for 86 years."
"Other dealerships in the country and the area have been reinstated," she added. "We want to be, too."
Read the entire report here.
NEW: Stillwater reacts to Mercury flip flop
By Monique HeadleyStillwater NewsPress
While workers and the community pound the mat to signal enough, Mercury Marine takes a step back on its commitment to move forward.
Is Mercury Marine bringing more jobs to Stillwater from Fond du Lac, Wis.?
After declaring Wisconsin union members' window of opportunity closed and announcing plans to expand its Stillwater MerCruiser plant, on Tuesday Mercury Marine management announced its decision to allow a union revote. The vote is set to take place Thursday and Friday. The announcement comes after a perhaps indicative return on Monday to union discussions.
Though shocked, commerce and legislative members of the Stillwater team vowed to renew their unwavering efforts to reel in the slippery catch.
According to correspondence issued by Mercury, " ... due to questions surrounding the voting process, Mercury informed the union that its membership can continue to consider the original proposal through the voting on Sept. 4." Until now, the deadline repeatedly confirmed by Mercury management for the union to accept the company's "best and final" proposal in exchange for retaining jobs in Fond du Lac was midnight last Saturday. When union members gathered Saturday night for an 11th-hour second vote, Mercury stepped in and said it was too late. That's no longer the case for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers."
Hundreds of employees expressed a desire to voice their true feelings, and that's something we can't ignore," said Mark Schwabero, president of Mercury Marine. "Obviously this is a difficult situation for all employees in Fond du Lac and Stillwater."
Difficult may be a mild term to some in Stillwater. "I'm just very upset. It's just not fair ... How many times do they get to vote? It's like they can vote until they get it right ... They are playing with our lives. I feel like they used us," said MerCruiser worker Diane Wingfield.
From citizens to politicians, many find the news disagreeable."I think we are all a little bit frustrated ... Why they decided to go back after proclaiming their intent to move is only a question that can be answered by Schwabero," said Rep. Cory Williams, D-Stillwater, who has been among those working to attract Mercury Marine to Oklahoma. "It's like Fond du Lac gets two chances and Stillwater gets none."
Unwilling to relent, Stillwater Chamber of Commerce President Larry Brown said, "This is not over ... We are not giving up ... We are extremely disappointed. Their decision was a surprise ... We are licking wounds and trying to patch over bruises but we are not dead yet. We need to visit with Mercury management to make sense out of this decision and try to move forward."
Read the rest of the Stillwater view here.
September 2, 2009
What is it GM & Chrysler have in common?
Skipping to the ending...
Consumers are expected to steer clear of dealers this autumn now that the clunker rebates are no longer available.
Really? You mean a one month giveaway did not actually stimulate the industry? But but but Keith said it did.
Lie #1: 'You Keep Your Doctor, You Keep Your Insurer'
This is a complete fabrication.
Under plans Obama has backed in the House and the Senate, almost any business can opt their employees into the "public option" — the government health plan.
That means you could lose your insurer. And if your doctor is worth his salt, you'll lose him or her as well.
Why? Because great doctors probably will not want to get the very low rates the government will pay private doctors who are part of the new government system.
So, without your consent, you very easily could lose your insurer and your doctor.
Lie #2: The Elderly Will Not Face Rationing or Medicare Cuts
In fact, just last week, The New York Times, a very liberal and very pro-Obama newspaper, admitted that fears of rationing for elderly patients are "not irrational."
The truth is that Obamacare would almost 50 million new patients to government care.
Who would pay for it. You would!
Seniors on Medicare will be the first hit.
Here's what the Times reported: "Bills now in Congress would squeeze savings out of Medicare, a lifeline for the elderly, on the assumption that doctors and hospitals can be more efficient."
This means that faceless bureaucrats will decide the type and quality of your care.
It is a very dangerous thing to give your life and well-being over to government bureaucrats!
Imagine if you or a loved one is older than 80 years and critically needs heart surgery.
Instead of getting the heart procedure, you or that loved one could be informed that you are simply too old.
We at the League of American Voters have been warning of this danger and have a powerful TV commercial exposing the risks to seniors.
You can see the ad by Going Here Now
Lie #3: There Will Be No "Death Panels."
Sure, they don't call them "death panels" in the legislation, but that's what their job will be.
These committee members will set guidelines with which faceless bureaucrats will make decisions about you and your healthcare.
They will decide who lives and who dies. They decide who gets critical procedures and expensive medicines.
Again, according to the New York Times, the Democratic plans call for saving money by creating new oversight committees.
The Times says that Medicare and insurers would be expected to follow "advice from a new federal panel of medical experts on 'what treatments work best.'"
Again, this very liberal paper concluded: "The zeal for cutting health costs, combined with proposals to compare the effectiveness of various treatments and to counsel seniors on end-of-life care, may explain why some people think the legislation is about rationing, which could affect access to the most expensive services in the final months of life."
Expose the lies — Go Here Now.
Lie #4: The Obama Plan Contains Costs
The Obama plan will cost more than $1 trillion in new federal outlays, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
This past weekend, Sen. Joe Lieberman claimed that most of this cost comes from adding 50 million people, currently uninsured, to the government health system.
But as Lieberman pointed out, we just don't have the money to do this right now.
You can add only so many people to the government system by cutting medical care to seniors on Medicare and raising taxes.
Democrats clearly plan to do both.
Lie #5: Illegals Are Not Covered by Obamacare
President Obama has stated time and again that illegal aliens are not covered under his new plan.
Still, Democrats say they want to add almost 50 million uninsured. Yet almost one-quarter of these uninsured are illegal aliens.
None of the Democratic plans excludes illegal aliens.
In fact, when Republicans proposed an amendment to the House plan to block illegals from getting free government healthcare, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her minions soundly defeated the motion.
September 1, 2009
“All 50 States are coordinating in this – as we fight back against our own Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists who are subverting the American Democratic Process, whipped to a frenzy by their Fox Propaganda Network ceaselessly re-seizing power for their treacherous leaders.”
So this is where it is, to Obama's minions, if you oppose them in any way you are a Right-Wing Domestic Terrorist.
And you have not the ability to think for yourself, the evil Fox Propaganda Network is somehow controlling your thoughts.
You haven't heard the worst of it, what they are promoting is phone banking on 9-11 to promote Obama's health care plan. On a day when people should be remembering those who lost their lives, Obama and his minions are playing politics, how completely innapropriate.
Thousands of Americans died on 9-11, how soon the left forgets.
Obama is playing buddy buddy around the world with those who are pleased that we were attacked. Now his organization calls political rivals terrorists. This is working together?
There is no defense for this, none. This is what Obama meant about a new tone? This is how he reaches out? This is his volunteer arm, what melded out of his campaign organization, he himself is responsible for this.
Frankly I really don't know how to respond to this, I demand an apology, and that apology should come directly from the President. Whoever was responsible for that statement should be fired, immediately.
If you somehow feel a need to defend this behavior, don't.
Mr. Pelican Pants does it again.
ACORN Continues to Be Delinquent on Taxes
Agencies Now Owe IRS More Than $1 Million
By Steve Beatty
The Pelican Institute for Public Policy
The New Orleans-based national activist group ACORN has a habit of paying its federal payroll taxes months or even years late, even as the organization and its affiliates accept grants from the U.S. government.
ACORN and several closely related groups now owe more than $1 million in state and federal taxes, according to Orleans Parish court filings analyzed by The Pelican Institute for Public Policy. They also paid off more than $1.1 million in late bills since January of 2008.
The state attorney general’s office has opened an investigation into ACORN, but it has not disclosed the specifics of their probe.
Overall, groups affiliated with the Associations of Community Organizations for Reform Now have 10 federal tax bills of $1 million and four state tax bills of at least $28,000. One bill to ACORN itself is responsible for more than half that amount, at more than $545,000 for tax obligations dating back to 2004.
Citizens Consulting, the accounting arm of ACORN, had a state bill of more than $300,000 as recently as January of this year, though records indicate it has been paid. The organization had not paid withholding Louisiana taxes for many quarters since the fall of 2002.
From 2002 to 2006, ACORN agencies have received more than $5.4 million in grants from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development alone, according to a compilation of grants by the Washington Examiner news Web site.
The same agencies getting the grants weren’t necessarily the one facing the tax bills from the same period. But critics, as well as an ACORN attorney, have said the confederation of corporations may lack the internal financial controls to ensure that money granted to one group isn’t shared with another.
ACORN opponents and disaffected former board members have joined members of Congress in calling for an audit of the ACORN empire, which by some accounts has gotten more than $53 million in federal money since 1989.
Some, but not all, of the scores of ACORN organizations are tax-exempt non-profits, but that does not excuse them from paying payroll taxes, both the employer’s share and the amounts withheld from an employee’s check.
The ACORN family was responsible for at least 75 tax-related filings since Jan. 1, 2008. Most are related to liens, or claims made by the government against a taxpayer’s property and other holdings until the payment is satisfied.
ACORN officials did not reply to requests for comment.
MATTHEWS: Let's take a look at the former President Bill Clinton who really knows what he's talking about in politics, especially on this front, where he went through that Hell in '94. Here he is offering advice to the Left in saying this. Let's listen.
BILL CLINTON: I'm just telling you we need to pass a bill. It needs to be the best bill we can possibly get through Congress. But doing nothing is not only the worst thing we can do for the economy, and the worst thing we can do for health care, it's the worst thing we can do for the Democrats. And don't you think the Republicans don't know it.
MATTHEWS: That is the Voice of God sir, David Corn. That is the Voice of God because it's the voice of truth and experience. I completely buy what he said, completely. Because when you lose in politics you lose. And if you think you're gonna get any credit from the center, or from the right, or any of the commentators from that part of the world, for losing, you're crazy! The Democratic Left will be pounced on and blamed for defeat. So this idea you're waiting for the perfect bill or you won't go without the public option is suicidal.
The voice of God?
The voice of God?
I thought Obama was The Messiah?
Funny, my leg is not tingling.
August 31, 2009
9. My dog needs a haircut.
8. My flat screen TV is ONLY 32 inches, almost 2 years old and I do not have a Blue Ray player.
7. My car was a little too new to be considered a clunker.
6. My wife has an HGTV habit, remodeling is expensive.
5. I already work 2 jobs, I'm not sure I can manage another.
4. The free apps on my iPod Touch are truly sucky.
3. I have calculated the age at which I can retire, I'll never live that long.
2. I deserve my share of AIG bonus money.
And the number one reason I need a bailout is........
1. I am paying your mortgage.
really, really bad Trog.
I quit. Paul
Plastic pink flamingo. Owen
I have two city birds Jones.
Mr. Tannenbaum Man? Elliot.
Did you fart or was that a buck snort? Izzy.
Twelve years ago on this day, August 29, Skynet became self aware. Aaron.
thank goodness for xanax. Jimi.
Emerald ass borer. Tom
off the tractor. Kevin.
Cranial Rectal Inversion Syndrome. Peter.
tweet before and after games Amy.
Dreamed about it. CFR.
a dirty diaper. Peter
Spongebob loaf. LisaManna
It's Realdebate season! Egg
mastweetbation? Dr. Blogstein
Twizzlers are spared. E.M.
get neked. The Chad.
Hubba Hubba! TAB
I'm not easily frazzled. Blatz Liquor.
Whatever happens between "I do." and "happily ever after" Dean.
Open one of these. Pete.
Hardy was gone? Flapjackmorty.
I was talking about sex with monkeys Caughill.
A hit of crack. Jones.
Twitter is wonky. Bizymare
free to a good home. Carrie.
Is it to really get UBL? What are we doing to ensure this?
Oh, I’m not allowed to ask due to the covert nature of the mission? Should I wait for the NY Times to report on it, then?
Is it a reason to keep blaming Bush by saying “well the previous administration ignored it for so long…”
Ok, sure, ignored it…………SO WHATS YOUR FOCUS?
Friends I have that are serving there have no real clue, either.
How long before the M.S.M. declares the messiah refocus a quagmire?
Think they even know that word anymore?
Detainees Shown CIA Officers' Photos
Justice Dept. Looking Into Whether Attorneys Broke Law at Guantanamo
By Peter FinnWashington Post Staff Writer Friday, August 21, 2009
The Justice Department recently questioned military defense attorneys at Guantanamo Bay about whether photographs of CIA personnel, including covert officers, were unlawfully provided to detainees charged with organizing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to sources familiar with the investigation.
Investigators are looking into allegations that laws protecting classified information were breached when three lawyers showed their clients the photographs, the sources said. The lawyers were apparently attempting to identify CIA officers and contractors involved in the agency's interrogation of al-Qaeda suspects in facilities outside the United States, where the agency employed harsh techniques.
If detainees at the U.S. military prison in Cuba are tried, either in federal court or by a military commission, defense lawyers are expected to attempt to call CIA personnel to testify.
The photos were taken by researchers hired by the John Adams Project, a joint effort of the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, to support military counsel at Guantanamo Bay, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the inquiry. It was unclear whether the Justice Department is also examining those organizations.
Both groups have long said that they will zealously investigate the CIA's interrogation program at "black sites" worldwide as part of the defense of their clients. But government investigators are now looking into whether the defense team went too far by allegedly showing the detainees the photos of CIA officers, in some cases surreptitiously taken outside their homes.
ACLU Lawyers releasing the identities of actual covert CIA operatives.
August 30, 2009
Do you keep your toilet seat in the freezer? The Ol' Broad
He's my bitch. The Chad
It's a very narrow opening. Cindy
Was it something I said? Fred
I am completely unquotable. Egg (uh - guess not!)
It's Dooley's fault. CFR
Two bones and some lubricant. Carrie
I lost my husband. Mrs. RDW (and you're complaining why?)
Drop the gun, grab the cannoli. Still Unreal
I read it on the internet so it must be true. Amy
Your drawers can't be too hard to conquer. Emily
Your ass is where it's at. Carrie
Land sharks - look out for them. Mr. CFR
The only one allowed to hurt my husband is me. The Holly
He grabs his junk - a LOT. CFR
I'm not doing the tree. Cindy
I can't scratch my ass with my left hand. The Ol' Broad
My not so smart phone. The Chad
I miss your boobs. The Holly
Mmmmm - chili. Egg
We're all freebasin' on chili. Fred
Mickey Mouse butt. CFR
Once you are sober you will like it. Ms. Jones
I did not tinkle on the chair. The Ol' Broad
Do me. Still Unreal
I took the rest of your boobs. Carrie
If I caught an STD... Amy
I have a slight problem. Still Unreal (noooo - really?)
It's easier to just pollute. CFR
My name is Emily Kant Poo. Emily
Whose crack is that? Carrie
These people have no shame. Go ahead you lefties claiming the right is lying defend this.