Swine Flu Shots, The Final Verdict.

I've posted before about the swine flu shot. The last time I talked about it I talked about the government considering forcing you to get the shot by law. I of course opposed it then as I do now.

I never told anyone not to get the shot as I don't believe it's my place to do so. In fact what I said in my last post about the swine flu was this:

"If you choose to get the flu shot then that's fine as long as YOU CHOOSE."

My position has not changed there. We're hearing stories from both sides of this issue regularly. Legitimate doctors on one side will say you're crazy if you get the shot while other's say you're crazy if you don't.

I was critical of President Obama for not getting the shot and for not having his kids get the shot. While the president still hasn't since he claims to want "priority" people to get it first. His children have now gotten the swine flu shot.

In a previous post about Obama's health care plan I mentioned that my mother is an RN so I called her to get her opinion about the swine flu shot.

Here's the deal. Do not get the inhaler version of the virus, the injection is safer. The inhaled version is mostly for people terrified of needles. The injection is a dead version of the virus and the inhaled vaccine is a live version of the virus.

I've heard about some people getting rashes etc. from the vaccine and she explained the most possible explanation for that as well. The vaccine is made inside of eggs, (don't ask me how since I have no idea), therefore it's possible for people to have an allergic reaction to the vaccine. It's actually a reaction to the eggs used in making the vaccine, an allergic reaction to eggs may cause an allergic reaction to the vaccine.

If you get the vaccine and still end up with the flu it's most likely that you had the flu to begin with but it can be in your body for several days before you come down with the symptoms. You'd be in worse shape without the vaccine.

The biggest risk for those of you with kids are whether or not they are in school. I have one in school and due to all of the interactions with other kids and germs in general it puts children in school at higher risk.

If you have children who are too young to be in school the risk comes from the risk of an older sibling who is attending school or you getting the virus at work etc. and bringing it home.

Now that I've been given this information from a source I trust I will be getting the swine flu shot's for my kids. I can't tell you to do the same any more than I could tell you not to. It's your family and therefore it's your choice. I can only pass on the information I've received and give you my thoughts on the subject.

I asked about the vaccine in the '70's making more people sick than the actual virus and was assured that the advances in medicine make the current vaccine safer so we shouldn't have to worry about a repeat of the past with this one.

This vaccine was tested on children around 5 years of age whose parents were doctors and the testing was successful. While I've now made up my mind to give my children the vaccine I have another problem....supply.

Remember the outrage over the seasonal flu shot shortage during the Bush administration? Example.

"This may be Bush's Waterloo!"

That's just one example and of course there are many. Even though that vaccine wasn't developed in America and we got a bad batch. Besides that was just for the seasonal flu.

Now the government has scared the crap out of everybody convincing us all that our kids will die if we don't get them the swine flu shot and when many of us actually listen we show up to hear that there aren't any vaccines available. In fact the Obama administration is millions of doses behind schedule.

"But the administration, and in particular Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, have come in for strong criticism from those who say they created a false sense of expectations with overly optimistic predictions about the availability of the vaccine."

Bush was criticized for the shortage of the flu vaccine before and it's rather amusing to see the Obama administration take the same kind of heat. What's not amusing is the fact that people, especially children, are dying because of the swine flu incompetence of this administration.

Mr. Obama is learning rather fast what we've known for years. To criticize an administration you oppose, (like Bush's), is easy. To defend your own failures is much harder.

This administration has spent months worrying us about the swine flu. They've spent months warning us to get the vaccine and especially to give it to our kids. They claimed there would be plenty of vaccines in the previous link I provided.

Early on, Mr. Obama told his aides he wanted them to “learn from past mistakes,”

The biggest question to ask is this:

If the government can't handle distributing a flu vaccine they had several months to build a supply of and prepare for do you really think they can handle controlling the entire health care system of the country?

I don't.

This post wasn't about the health care debate but I think that last question is one that had to be asked.

Read more...

MoveOn.org's Godfather Tactics

Dear MoveOn member,

$3,578,117!

That's how much progressives pledged this week to fund primary challenges against any Democratic senator who blocks an up-or-down vote on health care reform with a public option.

It's a huge sum, and the clearest signal yet that any Democrat who helps Republicans filibuster health care reform will face an enormous backlash from the grassroots.

Here's another way to make sure conservatives think twice before joining with Republicans: Many of these senators hold coveted committee chairmanships that give them significant power within the Senate.

Our friends at Democracy for America have launched an open letter urging Senate Democrats to strip committee chairmanship from any Democrat who filibusters health care. Will you join in? Clicking below adds your name:

http://pol.moveon.org/norewards/o.pl?id=17815-17182837-6INyX.x&t=3

The message of the letter is simple. It says, "If ANY member of the Democratic Caucus joins a Republican filibuster of health care reform with a public option, the Caucus must immediately strip that Senator of all Committee Chairmanships."

In the Senate, the majority caucus has control over who chairs committees. Committee chairmanships are highly coveted because the chairperson has a lot of power over which bills get considered and what's in them.


But chairing a committee is a privilege, not a right. So if a member of the Democratic Caucus joins with Republicans on the most important vote in a generation, then they certainly don't deserve a position of power controlled by Democrats. The Democratic Caucus needs to make that clear to its members.

The fact that 66,000 MoveOn and Democracy for America members pledged more than $3.5 million to a primary challenge makes clear just how angry they'd be with any Democrat who helps Republicans doom health care reform. But as conservative Democrats decide what they're going to do, they should know that it's not just the grassroots they'd have to worry about if they filibuster, but also their colleagues.

Can you sign the open letter to the Democratic Caucus? Clicking below will add your name.

http://pol.moveon.org/norewards/o.pl?id=17815-17182837-6INyX.x&t=4

Thanks for all you do.

–Justin, Laura, Kat, Daniel, and the rest of the team

-----------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't know Don Corleone was advising moveon.org. Obviously I didn't add my name to the letter but I figured you'd all like to read this one.

"It's a huge sum, and the clearest signal yet that any Democrat who helps Republicans filibuster health care reform will face an enormous backlash from the grassroots."

I think that after the recent elections where 2 out of 3 major races were lost by the Liberals, Conservative Democrats, (yes, they do exist), are a little more worried about this grassroots movement.

Great job raising your $3,578,117 MoveOn.org but anyone can send a $54.21 check to you, (that's the average given by the 66,000 members), and claim they represent the country.

However, real grassroots shows when thousands of people attend town hall meetings to voice their concerns to representatives. It shows when thousands attend tea parties to show discontent with government. It shows with D.C. rallies and protests. It shows when the President's approval rating drops 15 points in 9 months, and it showed last Tuesday when voters turned against the "progressives".

The fact that New Jersey went Republican even though Obama repeatedly campaigned for Corzine and he lost is huge. New Jersey is a Liberal state that voted for Obama yet the Liberals lost. The president and company can pretend it means nothing all he likes if it puts a smile in front of the camera but I think he's too smart to see what's happening and not think it matters.

2010 will be the real test of Obama's agenda and the "progressive" agenda in general. Many seats are up for grabs in 2010 and if we see a repeat of '94 then perhaps the Liberals will start to pay attention.

The "progressives" have pushed us far enough......

all of the tea parties etc. have scared them into calling us extremist for one simple reason......

they are seeing how strong our conservative message can be, and they are realizing how powerful the Conservatives can be when we push back.

---------------------------------------------------------

By the way I know it's been awhile since there's been anything new on this blog and I apologize for that. We have families too. Besides, even a political junkie like me needs a brain break for the sake of sanity once in awhile.

As always thanks for reading and following this blog. It helps to know there are those of you out there who support what we do here at he counted wrong.

Read more...

Republicans vs. Conservatives Welcome To NY

We're hearing a lot about the 23rd district in NY about the current disagreements between the Republicans and Conservatives. I find it fitting that they have started acting as if they are 2 different parties. I'm a Conservative first and a Republican second.

I have been listening to the debate in these last few days regarding this race and figured I may as well give my thoughts about this race, (everyone else is). I'm worried about all the faith being given to the polls regarding this race.

First thing we should do is read this story. Note the first 2 words in the title of that article, "Conservative Pollster". That's where the problems begin.

The polls being used in Hoffman's defense that show him in the lead were all conducted by groups that back Hoffman. While more independent polls show him in third.

"the Minuteman PAC -- which is supporting Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman -- finds Hoffman in first place, and the moderate Republican Dede Scozzafava in third."

"This runs contrary to independent polls, which have put Owens in first, Scozzafava second, and Hoffman third, while it's consistent with a poll from the Club For Growth (which also supports Hoffman)."

Do you see my concern here? The polls that show Hoffman gaining the most in New York are being conducted by groups that have backed Hoffman. I'm worried that the bias they understandably have may be clouding their judgement of how well Hoffman is in fact doing.

Hoffman is no doubt gaining steam on the national stage since conservative heavy hitters like Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck have publicly backed Hoffman but this race isn't about the national stage, it's about the 23rd district in NY. I'm no big fan of Scozzafava but if she ends up split with Hoffman and the Democrats win, it will present 2 major problems between the Republicans and Conservatives.

1. The Democrats will treat this as though the party is divided when it isn't.

Remember how great it was to see Hillary Clinton and President Obama going after each other in the debates? We are giving the Democrats the same kind of satisfaction that we had watching those debates.

2. Conservatives are presenting an image that there is no room for moderates in the Party.

That is the angle Newt Gingrich is trying to point out. The next year leading up to the 2010 elections will be played out much like a political chess game. In some areas we have to help moderates where Conservatives are likely to lose. The Conservative criticism of Scozzafava will be remembered by her. In that regard it's good that this controversy exists, if she wins she will remember how disappointed the conservatives are with her and how close she's being watched by the party.

I agree with the conservative critics of Scozzafava on some of the things she supports. Card check being one of the worst. However, one thing you can be sure of is that if we hand this election to the Democrats because of this rift between the Conservatives and the more moderate Republicans, then you can be sure that everything you dislike about Scozzafava and more will be supported by Bill Owens.

Given the fact that so many of you backed McCain in '08, even if it was only for Palin it looks hypocritical. Remember this? The point of showing you that reminder is simply that we will never get a perfect candidate.

The same could be said for Romney fans, remember Romneycare? Glenn Beck is a vocal critic of Romneycare in MA yet he was backing Romney for president. How about Ronald Reagan? He had to work with the Democrats for the good of the country since they were in control. Newt Gingrich had the same experience with Bill Clinton. I think it's that experience that is guiding his decision here.

You can bet that Newt Gingrich hasn't abandoned conservatism. After all, he stepped down as speaker and formed American Solutions because he saw Republicans shifting from conservatism, (and other reasons). He was right. The Republican party did abandon conservatism.

The leaders of the Republican party must be conservative but think of this. I mentioned earlier in this post that the next year must be played like a political game of chess. Let me explain that.

Think of the pawns in a chess game. They are the weakest pieces on the board but if cleverly used they can set up the win with the more powerful pieces. I think that Newt, and John Boehner by the way, are trying to place Scozzafava in Congress to act as a pawn. If cleverly used against the Liberals it can set up a Conservative victory in the bigger and more important races in the future.

I'd love to be able to elect all conservatives across the board but it's not possible. Without some moderates helping in more Liberal areas we will lose.

Many Conservatives stood up for principles in the November election and cost McCain a few states by voting for Bob Barr. It wouldn't have won him the election but it did make a point. Standing up against the "moderate" may have sent a good message to the party about returning to conservatism in '08 but did that make you feel any better when you realized that Obama had been elected?

Read more...

Palin Endorses Doug Hoffman in NY-23

Sarah Palin has endorsed Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman in the NY-23 congressional race. Hoffman is running against liberal Democrat Bill Owens and liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava.

Doug Hoffman is the only conservative in the race. See his website here.

More to come soon...

Read more...

Swine Flu Shots Or Jail!!!

As previously stated by me several times on this blog I'm no fan of Deval Patrick of MA, my home state unfortunately. If Deval signs the new law, which he has already stated that he will, the repurcussions will be grave.

This goes out to other Mass residents specifically. Are we going to put up with this? There should be outrage over this and EVERYBODY whether you're a Republican, Democrat, Liberal, or Conservative should be calling, protesting, blogging, e-mailing, and anything else you can think of to stop this. Even if your not from MA we may just be a testing ground for what's to come in your state.

This should be considered political suicide for ALL legislators of MA and for Deval Patrick as well. I don't think Deval wants to keep his job though since Obama probably has something lined up for him in D.C. so it's up to all of us. I wonder if the police have the courage to stand against this law. Will police, who are charged with serving and protecting the citizens really come to our houses and force vaccinations on us? I pray that they will stand by people like myself who refuse to accept this blatently communist law.

This video from fox shows what I'm talking about.

If you don't trust Fox with this that's fine. CNN has reported about forced vaccines for healthcare workers. It looks like a good start for NY to inch it's way closer to the Mass law.

Here are some tips from Dr. Russell Blaylock about swine flu and the vaccine.

Meanwhile, Obama says he'll wait to get the swine flu shot! He claims to want "priority groups" to get the shot first. Isn't the president a priority?!!

If this law is passed in MA then I think the legislators and Devil PaTRICK, (Misspelled on purpose of course), should have to get it first. Don't pass laws on others unless you're willing to be first in line to comply with your own law.

We know legislators don't abide by their own tax laws etc. that they impose on us but this is far more serious. This is about injecting a largely untested new type of flu shot into our bodies. If they are going to try and force us to take the vaccine by a law we didn't get to vote on and they passed regardless of public opinion then it's only fair to ask for them to take it first.

I know Deval won't read this but I wish he would. It would be nice to have a governor that listens to the people. As a former lawyer, like most politicians unfortunately, he should be among the first to speak out against such a radical law.

"Every dictator who ever lived has justified the enslavement of his people on the theory of what was good for the majority." - Ronald Reagan

Isn't that basically the logic of Deval and company for forcing the flu shots on Mass residents?

If you choose to get the flu shot then that's fine as long as YOU CHOOSE. Remember these are the same folks who thought President Bush wiretapping suspected terrorists violated people's rights.

If you thought wiretapping was a violation of rights then what do you call this? Where are you now? What's worse? Listening to phone calls or forcing injections of a new form of flu shot under threat of jail and removal from your children?

All that's left is to see if the Liberal majority in this state will stand against this law that is so clearly a violation of our rights. Standing up for our individual rights as citizens is what's really best for the majority. I just wonder if the majority will remain silent here in MA with passive acceptance or will there be enough of a reaction to make a difference? I guess we'll find out soon enough.

Read more...

Health Care Lobbyists, Unions, Special Interests, and Politicians...Where Do We Fit In?

The health care debate has become less and less focused on health care in recent months. Lobbyists and special interest have always been the focus of health care reform to many in Washington D.C.

"Labor unions, business organizations and conservative and liberal advocacy groups have timed advertising and grassroots campaigns to coincide with the Senate Finance Committee’s 14-9 vote that approved the bill."

"Groups such as Working America and Health care for America Now (HCAN), a coalition of liberal groups and labor unions, plan to intensify grassroots campaigns."

I don't think liberal groups and labor unions represent grassroots movements. Average citizens questioning politicians at town hall meetings about real concerns that affect their lives represent grassroots movements.

While some people are thinking of real health care reform others are just playing games.

It gets better.

"There are other massive earmarks in this bill. Up to $10 billion will go to VEBA, such as the underfunded retirement health care package of United Auto Workers retirees. This may or may not be a good idea, but it clearly does not belong in this legislation."

"Most importantly, and this is what the legislation is really about, the Baucus bill will transfer power from the American people to Washington elites — a power grab far more massive than it appears. Just think about it, the fiction (yes, some would call it lies) you're hearing about today is happening while people are watching."

"Imagine what will happen with earmarks, political favoritism and social engineering when the details are negotiated by government bureaucrats, lobbyists and the Obama administration's "health czar" behind closed doors."

The above comments come from this story.

It's amazing how little these elitist politicians have learned. Despite our growing outrage and their plummeting poll numbers they still don't seem to care about what's truly best for the country. It has become Washington D.C. (District of Corruption).

It's time to start voting many of these overpaid reckless elitist out of office. I'm tired of hearing campaign speeches about getting lobbyists and special interests out of Washington from politicians whose campaign's were funded by those same lobbyists and whose bills take care of the special interests.

We pay for it all and, like always, we end up with the short end of the stick. Left with nothing to show for all the money of ours that Washington wastes. CNN reported today that 30,383 jobs have been saved by stimulus. How about the millions that have lost their jobs? For all the money we're spending 30,000 jobs is a joke.

One last thing to think about. We keep hearing from the Obama administration that recovery will be slow etc. Some even claim as late as 2013. That unemployment will remain high until 2013 etc. Do you think that President Bush would have gotten away with saying in 2001 that we will have rising unemployment etc. until 2005? It would have been the end of him.

Every time we hear bad economic news while Obama's in office it turns into the argument that it would've been much worse if we didn't pass his stimulus plan. What do you think they'll say when health care doesn't go as planned? Something along the lines of "we'd have even worse health care if we didn't act". Will you let them off the hook with that kind of excuse?

Where's the lobbyist for the American people? Where's the working middle class special interest? As the title of this post asks.....where do we fit in?

Read more...

Future Inflation Worries

I've wanted to bring up a few things about inflation for awhile. Maybe you've been thinking about it and maybe you haven't. After all, we've yet to see rampant inflation hit us yet. I for one think it's coming.

I'm going to approach inflation starting with a story from when I was a bit younger. I remember when I was an early teenager my father would always be yelling at the news. I didn't care as much then but I sure understand the frustration now that I'm probably following it even more than he ever did.

Not understanding much about inflation or economics at the time I innocently asked my father, who has a master's degree in accounting, why can't we just print money if we need it? After all to me at the time a dollar was a dollar. Why wouldn't a candy bar be .50 cents anymore just because of some more money circulating out there?

The answer I got was simple and made perfect sense to me. "If we just print more dollars then the dollar becomes worth less because there's more of it." It's a pretty simplified answer to inflation but one that explains it perfectly.

What makes a rare baseball card or stamp worth so much?...The fact that it's rare. The more dollars we print then the less rare a dollar is. Therefore, the less rare a dollar is the less it's worth. We haven't increased our supply of anything, (like gold), that can back our dollar up. We just keep increasing our supply of dollars.

Now, we do have to print money at a certain controlled pace because of a growing population and a growing cost of living. We can't have more and more people chasing the same few dollars. However our monetary policy has to be sound and carefully controlled. At the moment our monetary policy is nothing short of insane and never mind controlled, the government for the most part doesn't even know where a lot of the money is going.

"We know from centuries of evidence in countless economies, from ancient Rome to today's Zimbabwe, that running the printing press to pay off today's bills leads to much worse problems later on. The inflation that results from the flood of money into the economy turns out to be far worse than the fiscal pain those countries hoped to avoid."

Source.

Notice that this is from June of last year. It's the Democrat controlled congress and former president Bush.

Ok, so that's a story worried about inflation and here's one from Paul Krugman that isn't, gotta love the NY Times.

And the United States itself emerged from World War II with debt exceeding 120 percent of G.D.P. In none of these cases did governments resort to inflation to resolve their problems.

Mr. Krugman forgets some major factors that make the difference between FDR's New Deal America and today's Obama New Deal 2 America. For one thing during WW2 the dollar began to stand out as the top world currency. Other countries involved in the war invested in the dollar which made the dollar strong despite heavy deficits.

We took gold etc. and they took dollars. We have the opposite happening now. Instead of the world turning to the dollar and thus helping to stabilize our money, many like BRIC, (Brazil, Russia, India, and China), are thinking about what to do about the decline of the dollar.

The only thing helping to stop rampant inflation of the dollar is the fact that so many other countries like BRIC are so heavily invested in the dollar, especially China. They are currently trying to think of a way out of it.

"The Chinese see that America’s economic policy could drastically reduce the value of their holdings in dollars. China cannot completely abandon the U.S. dollar without severely damaging the value of U.S. dollar assets that it already holds.

But now that America is creating trillions of dollars of more debt, China’s U.S. investments are going to get damaged anyway. With that realization, China is thinking about spending its money elsewhere."

China stops buying U.S. debt.


Some of Obama's economic advisers, who convince me more and more each day that they got degrees in economics out of cereal boxes or Cracker Jacks, helped cause this mess even though they take no credit for it now.

"As treasury secretary in 2000, Mr. Summers championed the law that deregulated derivatives, the financial instruments — a k a toxic assets — that have spread the financial losses from reckless lending around the globe. He refused to heed the critics who warned of dangers to come."

"Mr. Geithner, currently the president of the Federal Reserve Bank in New York, also has helped shape the Bush administration’s erratic and often inscrutable responses to the current financial meltdown, up to and including this past weekend’s multi billion-dollar bailout of Citigroup."

Full article.

Does any of that give you confidence in President Obama's economic advisory team?

The problem is that so many believe in the myth of FDR. Many think that FDR's New Deal helped end the great depression. Even Newt Gingrich, who I'm a big fan of, has stuck up for FDR. The problem most seem to ignore is that as a wartime president FDR fought to win and he was obviously a good wartime president. After all he fought to win, unlike Obama plans too.

Before WW2 though FDR was a catastrophe. His economic policies failed miserably and unemployment skyrocketed to 25% with the New Deal in effect. Obama seems to embrace all of the economic failures of FDR but none of his wartime will to win.

Here's a great book about the New Deal. As I read it I was amazed how much compares to President Obama's current policies. If President Obama's New Deal 2 yields the same kinds of results as the previous one we may be in more trouble than anyone realizes.

Many Americans today have never lived under a true depression, myself included. If our dollar collapses then this current recession will seem like the tip of the iceberg. I for one would rather not be on that ship.

World War 2 truly ended the great depression. I hope for all of our sakes that World War 3 isn't necessary to end this one. Sorry to end on such a grim note, but like all of you I fear for the future we may be handing to our children.

Read more...

Obama Loses the Olympics, Or Did He?

It was announced late this morning that Chicago was eliminated from hosting the 2016 Summer games. This was a surprising turn of events, especially given that President Obama traveled to Copenhagen to lobby for the games. Allahpundit from HotAir has analysis here. This has been viewed by many conservatives as being a disaster for the Obama administration, attributing it to his inability to earn the respect of the rest of the world.

I am not a conspiracy theorist. But on a day when the U.S. loses another quarter of a million jobs, with the official unemployment rate skyrocketing to 9.8%, could this have been intentional? Think about it. Obama goes to Denmark to lobby for the games, generating media coverage of his move. If he gets the games; he looks like a hero. We now know that he didn't, but he seems to have won a consolation prize. Virtually all of the media is spending time talking about his failure to get the games, not the skyrocketing unemployment rate. We all know which story should be more important to the American people who are struggling to get by each day.

You aren't fooling me, Barack. And the number of Americans you are able to fool decreases every day. See you in 2012, chump.

Read more...

2010 (Read: 1994) Update

It appears that things have gotten even worse for the Democrats in next year's midterm elections. Most alarming, however, is that independents are breaking for the Republican candidate in a general election matchup by wide margins in most cases.

Connecticut:

Chris Dodd is being crushed by the front runner for the Republican nomination, Rob Simmons, 49% to 39% in deep blue Connecticut. He is in a statistical tie with my personal favorite candidate, hardline libertarian Republican Peter Schiff. Schiff has little name recognition outside of hardcore political junkies and Ron Paul fans, so for him to be tied with an incumbent speaks volumes about how dissatisfied Connecticut voters are with Dodd.

Nevada:

Harry Reid is truly out of touch with voters in his home state of Nevada. Nevada has trended blue over the last two election cycles, but evidence suggests that that may be coming to an end. Reid loses by 7 points to businessman Danny Tarkanian, and 10 points to former Nevada GOP Chairperson Sue Lowden, who declared her candidacy today.

Colorado:

Appointed Democratic Senator Michael Bennet's bid to win the seat on his own is in jeopardy. He loses the seat to former Lt. Governor Jane Norton by 9.


New Hampshire:

It looks as if Republicans have a good chance of holding the seat being vacated by retiring senator Judd Gregg. Republican Kelly Ayotte leads Democratic Rep. Paul Hodes by 7 in the ARG poll and by 8 in the Rasmussen poll

Arkansas:

Conservative Democrat Blanche Lincoln seems to be in trouble in Arkansas. Arkansas has moved hard to the right in recent years, but traditionally elects Democratic senators. Lincoln loses by narrow margins to 4 hypothetical contenders One of the people she loses to is Tom Cox, who is the head of the TEA party in Arkansas. Certainly not to denigrate Mr. Cox, but this is a clear sign that people in Arkansas are simply going to vote Republican. Lincoln is in more trouble than these numbers suggest. Expect her to move fairly hard to the right over the next year to attempt to hold the seat. This makes it seriously unlikely that she supports ObamaCare.

More soon....

Read more...

Obama's Latest CBC Speech

Perhaps you saw President Obama's speech at the CBC, (Congressional Black Caucus), the other day. If not you can view it here split into 2 parts. I'm going to discuss a few things he said in this speech on this post. Including parts where I both agree and disagree.

I will provide the exact times in his speech where you can find exactly what I'm talking about without having to watch the whole thing. Feel free to watch it all if you wish though. I will say either part 1 or 2 then the minute and second of that part where Obama mentions the issue I'm talking about. I will then put part of the quote up to center each issue I have on that particular section of speech. Here we go.

part 1 3:35

"Some folks seem to have forgotten how bad things were when I took office. They seem to be exercising some selective memory"

Actually, our memory is just fine, we remember that you didn't fall from the sky and were a part of the do-nothing congress whose earmarks and misguided legislation helped cause this recession.

part 1 4:03

"Our entire financial system was poised on the brink of collapse."

Now thanks to misguided bailouts due to both Bush and Obama it's our currency, government, and therefore our entire country poised on the brink of collapse. Just ask Arthur Laffer, Reagan economist.

part 1 4:36

"We're cutting taxes for 95% of working families. Not for the rich folks but for ordinary folks."

What good is a few bucks for the folks when your Cap and Trade bill will make our "energy prices skyrocket"? Those are your words Mr. President and you should stop slapping the public across the face by talking about your fake tax cuts. The things your making more expensive in our lives are far more than any supposed "tax cut" you think you passed.

part 1 4:49

"We're extending and increasing unemployment insurance for 12 million Americans to help them weather this economic storm."

The best tool to weather an economic storm is a job. How about you stop talking about "saved jobs" because they mean nothing if unemployment keeps rising rather than decreasing. Start creating real jobs by working with (rather than against) businesses. A stable job will help someone much more than "increasing unemployment insurance".

part 1 5:11

"We are saving the jobs of teachers and police officers that Americans rely on all across the nation"

Nothing wrong with this one, except for the fact that it's taxpayers in local communities whose taxes help pay for teachers and police officers salaries. If you create more private sector jobs then the tax revenue from those jobs will increase and there will be enough money to save teachers and cops from being fired without a "stimulus" check.

5:25

"with the largest investment in our infrastructure since the interstate highway system was built in the 1950's"

Then why aren't we repairing the roads where it's most needed?

part 1 6:05

"This recession has hit communities of color with particular ferocity"

Aren't most of those same communities run mostly by Democrats? Haven't they been run by Democrats for years? Just an observation. Weren't the ghetto's still ghetto's in the 90's? Obama was a community organizer in Chicago and aren't crime and poverty still relatively high there? I hope he has better success with the nation than he had in Chicago but so far I'm not impressed.

part 1 6:32

"we all know that these problems have been there for a long time"

Exactly.

"That's why my administration under the leadership of Eric Holder is serious about enforcing our civil rights laws and tearing down barriers to equal opportunity"

Who isn't?!! We should all be in favor of enforcing our civil rights laws but these "barriers to equal opportunity" within the African American community can only be solved by leaders within those communities. Business leaders to create jobs and loving parents pushing morals, values, hard work, and serious schooling to the children of those communities. An embracement of personal responsibility and tough policies against crime. For crime brings with it poverty and destruction to any community regardless of race.

Part 2 1:17

"your trying to make sure everyone has health care and they're putting a Hitler mustache on you that doesn't make sense to me explain that to me"

Anyone who does that is an idiot. However, it's also not wise for Obama and others on the left to label anyone who disagrees with them "extremist".

Part 2 2:00

"It will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition"

I'm not against this, just like I'm not against it being illegal to deny coverage based on race etc.

Part 2:11

"It will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it the most. They won't be able to place some arbitrary cap on how much coverage you receive in a given year or a lifetime."

That's great, but the government will be able to do all of these things, and senior citizens will bear the brunt of it.

He mentions requiring insurance companies to cover preventative care at no extra cost.

Part 2 2:50

"There's no reason we shouldn't be catching diseases like breast cancer before they get worse."

I agree again, but it will be very expensive because of all the extra preventative tests. Aren't they currently criticizing the insurance companies for this. If there's no compensation for these tests yet they are required then it will severely damage the insurance companies. That's of course the hidden agenda because if private insurance goes down and you can't change insurance (remember you can keep your insurance but you can't change it, Obama only likes to mention the first part of that), not being able to change your insurance is in the bill.

Part 2 3:56

"They said the same thing when we tried to pass Social Security. They called FDR all kinds of things." "They said the same thing about Lyndon Johnson when he tried to pass Medicare."

When Social Security was passed by FDR under the economically catastrophic New Deal the average life expectancy for whites was 59 years old. For Black Americans the life expectancy was only 48!! You couldn't collect until you were 62. It was an FDR trick designed to take money from working people but never intended to pay them. Now that the life expectancy has greatly increased in this country, (thanks to our awful health care), the program is going broke. Therefore, critics of the Social Security program were right even if Obama disagrees.

Also, isn't Medicare riddled with fraud and waste? Obama's plan doesn't increase fraud prevention. What do you think will happen when millions of people are added to it?

At about 4:45 in part 2 he talks about education. I agree with most of what he says for the next few minutes about education. The only problem is that the teachers unions will prevent much of what he talks about, like getting rid of teachers that aren't performing well.

Part 2 7:00

"Government can't put away the Playstation, government can't put our kids to bed at a reasonable hour, government can't attend those parent/teacher conferences, government can't help them with their homework, government can't make sure they leave for school on time. These are things only a mother can do and a father can do. These are things that a parent can do."

I agree 100% with this as well as most that comes after it. I don't like the term "shared prosperity" at about 9:30 in the speech. Then he closes with the usual style we've become accustomed to with Obama. There's a quick skip toward the end and someone accused Fox of editing the speech. I watched it on Fox and there was no such edits.

One last point before I end this. We all know of Martin Luther King Jr's. famous I have a dream speech. I'd like to share some of that speech that you may not know.

"In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred."

"The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone."

President Obama and the CBC have great opportunity at this time to inspire the African-American communities in ways no other American leaders could before. Mr. President I agree with you when it comes to all of the things in this speech that talk about what the government can't do. You actually sent a very conservative message of personal responsibility toward the end of the speech.

Government has spent decades trying to fix our poorest communities. Government has spent decades trying to solve poverty and crime in the African-American communities. It's time to use your outstanding communication skills to inspire those communities to help themselves. After all:

"The government declared war on poverty and poverty won." Ronald Reagan

Read more...

Massachusetts Priorities

Massachusetts, like many other states is feeling this recession. It doesn't seem like that matters much to some of our legislators, they have bigger problems to worry about like picking our official state sandwich.

The Fluffernutter, a gooey combination of peanut butter and Marshmallow Fluff that has given countless children a sugar rush, is again being proposed as the state sandwich.

Shame-full story.

It's amazing that this is the state of the original Boston Tea Party.

Maybe when we're done talking about state sandwiches we can start talking about health care or the economy again. I think it's a little more important than establishing a state sandwich don't you?

Let's use Mass as an example for health care, it's making the recession worse here.

"some legislators believe the current law is unrealistic given current economic conditions and should be waived for the newly unemployed, but Democratic Governor Deval Patrick vows to continue the program and cut other spending to balance the budget instead."

Mass care increasing recession.

Now, some news on economics. A few months ago I attended a town hall meeting with Deval Patrick, I've posted about it previously. While he didn't pick me for a question at the event I did get to submit a Youtube question with one of his staffers after the event.

The question was never posted or answered, (no surprise there), even though I was assured when I called constituent services that even if it wasn't posted I'd at least get a phone call or e-mail answer. It's been 3 months and I'm still waiting.

First, read this.

Ok, now it's almost laughable that the title of that story was, "Tracking the recession: Stimulus helps revive summer youth jobs programs." However, the last line of the story was, "Don’t expect any growth in teen jobs until 2012."

So let me get this straight...stimulus is reviving summer job programs with no growth in summer jobs!! Was this story written by Joe Biden!!!

There's another point to this story though that ties directly into my question for Deval. All of the so called jobs being talked about by most stimulus supporters are funded with stimulus dollars, like the story you just read. What happens when the stimulus money runs out?

The way I put it to Deval in a question you'll never see him answer was something like this, I don't remember my exact words but I'll be pretty close here.

When you came out tonight Deval you started by talking about jobs being created here in MA. They were all stimulus jobs created with stimulus dollars. When the stimulus money runs out you'll be right back where we started, needing more stimulus dollars to keep funding those jobs.

I'd like to know how you plan to create long-term jobs in the private sector? It was JFK who said you decrease revenue when you increase taxes because you kill jobs.

I used JFK because I knew it would be harder for Deval to criticize a Democrat than a Republican like Reagan and Coolidge. For the record here's the JFK quote I was referring to. I doubt Deval knows it:

"Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large federal deficits on the other. It is between two kinds of deficits, a chronic deficit of inertia, as the unwanted result of inadequate revenues and a restricted economy, or a temporary deficit of transition, resulting from a tax cut designed to boost the economy, produce revenues, and achieve a future budget surplus. The first type of deficit is a sign of waste and weakness, the second reflects an investment in the future"

The economy here on a state level is much the same as the national level. Rising unemployment, decreasing revenue, tons of wasted money, and absolutely no quality leadership.

It's not all bad though. At least we may soon have an official state sandwich, the Fluffernutter. WOO HOO!!

Thanks for reading.

Read more...

I Reply To MoveOn.org, Regulation, and Critics Of We The People

Dear MoveOn member,


Dawn is a few years younger than me. She lives in Atlanta. She's an aspiring playwright. And four years ago, she was diagnosed with a rare, but treatable brain tumor.

Dawn's doctors are ready to treat the tumor, but they can't. CIGNA, her insurer, refuses to pay for the care she needs because the only hospitals qualified to treat her are out-of-network. And after years of fighting, Dawn just received her final denial letter.

For me, the scariest thing about Dawn's story is that it could happen to any of us—to a friend of mine, or someone in my family. After all, Dawn has insurance. But as long as private insurers are the only game in town, they'll continue to have the power to deny Americans the care they need.

Dawn is fighting back. And while CIGNA may be able to ignore Dawn, they won't be able to ignore millions of us standing together with her. I'm joining Dawn's fight to shine a light on Big Insurance's abusive tactics, get Dawn the care she needs, and make sure they don't do this to anyone ever again. Will you join me by signing a statement of support? Clicking below will add your name:


http://pol.moveon.org/dawnsmith/o.pl?id=17257-17182837-pwxAqdx&t=3

The statement says, "I stand with Dawn Smith. CIGNA must provide the treatment she needs and stop rejecting legitimate care for all the others who are suffering."

Unfortunately, Dawn's story isn't unique—she's one of the millions of Americans who are suffering—but what she's doing about her situation is. Instead of suffering in silence, she's sharing her painful, powerful story so that, as she says, "no one else has to go through what I have."

I've been really moved by Dawn's strength, given everything she's going through. She has terrible pain and sudden seizures that can knock her off her feet. She's had to move back in with her mom so she can have constant care. But through all that, she's kept her spirits up.

The heart-breaking part is that her condition is treatable. But CIGNA's refusal to treat her has brought her to "the end of my rope," as she puts it. CIGNA gladly accepts Dawn's premium payments, but when she needed care, they refused to pay for it, coming up with new reasons as they went.

Dawn's story is a symptom of a much bigger problem. But if we all rally behind her, we can help not just her, but everyone else who's suffering under our broken system, too. Together, we have the power to make Dawn's story different, and in the process, to remind Congress and the American people why we so desperately need health care reform.

I'm standing with Dawn. Will you join me? Clicking below will add your name:

http://pol.moveon.org/dawnsmith/o.pl?id=17257-17182837-pwxAqdx&t=4

Thanks for all you do.

–Justin, Marika, Daniel, Kat, and the rest of the team

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, first things first, I have Cigna insurance through my employer and for about $45 bucks a week they cover my wife, myself, and all 3 of our kids. I certainly can't complain about that coverage as I also find the co-pays reasonable.

Having said that it's also true that I don't have a brain tumor so I haven't had first hand experience with Cigna on how they handle such problems. So far though I trust my insurance company more than MoveOn.org don't you?

"CIGNA gladly accepts Dawn's premium payments, but when she needed care, they refused to pay for it, coming up with new reasons as they went." Think about that for a minute. It's truly a case for reform. Now take the same quote and replace the word CIGNA with The Government. Isn't that one of the major cases against the government takeover of health care?

The government will have the ability to deny care, especially to the elderly, by "coming up with new reasons as they want" also.

I don't disagree with the fact that we do need reform. What we don't need is a government takeover. Name one thing the government runs better than the private sector? Our military is amazing because the politicians largely stay out of it. They control funding etc. but when it comes to missions our military leaders are left largely in charge of what's done. THAT'S WHY OUR MILITARY IS SO AMAZING, THE POLITICIANS ARE NOT TELLING OUR MILITARY EXACTLY WHAT TO DO, THAT'S LEFT TO OUR MILITARY EXPERTS!!

Could you imagine if the likes of Nance Pelosi were in charge with our military? Are you ready to put her and others in congress like her in charge of health care?!!

Think about it....The government's case for taking over health care has never been weaker. Congress and Obama don't think that's the case but let me explain.

Even before Obama became president the government began getting involved in taking over more and more of our country and our personal lives. From Tarp, to Stimulus (1 and 2), Cash For Cars That Work Fine (Clunkers), the bankrupt Post Office, the ever-frustrating RMV, the "pork" added to various bills over the years from BOTH PARTIES,Cap and Trade (Energy Tax), and on and on and on.

Given that track record they dare to label opposition to the health care plan as a Republican conspiracy, they call us extremist, they think we're just being racist against the President. I know most people reading this are smarter than that, what's amazing is how few politicians are smart enough to understand that. How can they be so blind to the feelings of a majority of the people?

If disagreement was solely based on race then there's no way he would have won the election in November it's as simple as that. Were the African Americans who opposed the Bush policies labeled as racist extremists?...Of course not, American opposition and distrust of government is to a point natural and healthy for Democracy. It is one of the greatest things about our great country. Look at how Iran reacted to the protests by it's people.

This is not about right versus left, or black versus white. This is about right versus wrong. This is about average Americans from all areas, all races, and all political parties standing up to our elitist politicians.

We put our trust in the politicians long enough. We were betrayed by the parties enough times. The time has come for the politicians to put their trust back in we the people.

If we say no to trusting the government with our money then in the interest of representing we the people the government should take less of our money, not more. If we say no to trusting the government with our health then they shouldn't takeover the health care industry.

Ronald Reagan believed in deregulation, keeping the government from intruding as much as possible while still upholding the law. We should go after the Bernie Madoff's of the country, however, the fact that people like that do exist is no basis for labelling all investors as con-men criminals.

Obama is the anti-Reagan, he believes in regulating everything:

Ben Bernanke isn't waiting for Congress to expand the Fed's regulatory powers. Instead, he wants to put regulators directly inside banks to monitor (and possibly reject) pay packages.

The whole story.

Here's another:

The FCC rules "would bar Internet service providers such as Verizon Communications Inc., Comcast Corp. or AT&T Inc., from slowing or blocking certain services or content flowing through their vast networks," according to the AP.


But critics contend that the proposals are nothing more than a backdoor way for the FCC to tighten federal control over the Internet by beginning with the regulation of Internet service providers.

Full story

If we're extremist for being concerned about the power of government then every founding father of this great nation were extremists. If that's the case then I'll wear that label proudly.


"Every dictator who ever lived has justified the enslavement of his people on the theory of what was good for the majority." Ronald Reagan's CPAC speech 1974.

Read more...

IBD: 45% Of Doctors Would Consider Quitting If Congress Passes Health Care Overhaul

Very scary stuff indeed.

Two of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Washington, and hundreds of thousands would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if it were adopted, a new IBD/TIPP Poll has found.

The poll contradicts the claims of not only the White House, but also doctors' own lobby — the powerful American Medical Association — both of which suggest the medical profession is behind the proposed overhaul.

It also calls into question whether an overhaul is even doable; 72% of the doctors polled disagree with the administration's claim that the government can cover 47 million more people with better-quality care at lower cost.

Major findings included:

• Two-thirds, or 65%, of doctors say they oppose the proposed government expansion plan. This contradicts the administration's claims that doctors are part of an "unprecedented coalition" supporting a medical overhaul...

• Four of nine doctors, or 45%, said they "would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement" if Congress passes the plan the Democratic majority and White House have in mind.

More than 800,000 doctors were practicing in 2006, the government says. Projecting the poll's finding onto that population, 360,000 doctors would consider quitting.

• More than seven in 10 doctors, or 71% — the most lopsided response in the poll — answered "no" when asked if they believed "the government can cover 47 million more people and that it will cost less money and the quality of care will be better."

Read more here.

Read more...

When Will Our Politicians Learn From History?

By now I'm sure you've heard about Obama's tariff on Chinese tires. Well, that decision is of course being praised by those who refuse to learn the lessons of history.

"Today, the President courageously stood up and enforced fair trade rules that will save jobs and help our communities. Since China joined the WTO, American workers have not been assured that the government would defend them against unfair trade. With this 'Section 421' decision, President Obama has taken the side of American workers and manufacturers." - U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown

Read the story.

Ok, so now you've seen the typical type of talking points usually given when it comes to tariffs. "Trade safeguards that protect American manufacturers from excessive imports."

Wait a minute, I know I've seen this argument before. Another tariff about protecting manufacturing jobs. It was called the Smoot Hawley Tariff Act of 1930. The argument for this tariff in 1930 in part was this:

"The original intention behind the legislation was to increase the protection afforded domestic farmers against foreign agricultural imports". Sounds great right?

Well read what happened for yourself.

"It provoked a storm of foreign retaliatory measures". Now, why does that seem familiar. THIS IS WHY!!

"Those who refuse to learn from history are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana

I'll ask again as I did in the title of this post. When will our politicians learn from history?

Read more...

Remembering 9/11

I can't believe it's been 8 years since the attacks of 9/11/01. We honor those who were taken from us on that day as well as all of those who have paid the ultimate price since.

It is my hope that we can all remember the unity seen in this country in the weeks following the 9/11 attacks. We watched the partisan bickering subside in this country for awhile. Even the politicians put aside party differences and united for awhile in our time of shock and mourning.

Regardless of personal political beliefs we became unified in the common love of our country and families. That is the message of remembering 9/11. We saw that our greatest strength comes to us when we stand together. We are strongest when we stand as the United States of America. Acting like the divided states of the parties have become our greatest weakness. George Washington warned about the danger the party system poses to our country. Rather than follow the politics of right and left we must look at issues through the prism of right and wrong.

Whether you agree with the wars or not doesn't matter today. Today is about the heroes of United 93. The heroes of NYC who ran to the Twin Towers in an attempt to save lives. To those at the Pentagon who dealt with that attack. Never forget how you felt on that day. Never forget how you felt in the days, weeks, months, and years since that day. And never forget that we are the UNITED STATES of AMERICA.

God bless those lost on 9/11 as well as all who have been lost since, God bless the families of those lost, and may God continue to bless The United States of America.

Read more...

Too Many Patients For Too Few Doctors And Constitutional Questions

For the last few weeks Dick Morris has been covering how Obama's health care plan will lead to rationing.

The fundamental question that the Obama Administration has never answered is a simple one: How can they treat 50 million new patients with no extra doctors?

A new report from the American Association of Medical Colleges underscores the urgency of this concern. The Association notes that the United States now suffers from a shortage of 15,000 doctors - a shortfall that is expected to grow to 125,000 in fifteen years. And, the Association reports, if universal health insurance is passed, the shortage will grow to over 150,000 by 2025.

Read the full story.

My mother is an RN and has talked for years about what a high demand job hers is. She can relocate practically anywhere she wants because so many more RN's and MD's are needed. Dick Morris mirrors that point of view in his article yesterday. Obamacare will create a far greater shortage of doctors and nurses than we already have. Obama hasn't mentioned a word on how he plans to increase the amount of doctors and nurses to handle the massive increase in patients he'll be forcing into the system with his government run health care plan. His refusal to clarify that has become part of the argument regarding rationing.

The other point to think about comes from Andrew Napolitano regarding the Constitutionality of government-run health care. See his point regarding this issue here.

Look away from the teleprompter for a minute Obama and listen up. Most Americans aren't lawyers. Most of us keep the language pretty simple when we're sitting at home yelling at our TV's while watching the news. When I was a kid I remember my father yelling at the news in frustration and I didn't get it. Now it's my kids watching me get frustrated at the news. I didn't understand the big deal then but I sure do now.

Obama thinks this is a right wing conspiracy. He doesn't seem to realize that we the people have been screaming at our TV's not only since his election, but for the last few years. We got sick of partisan politics putting our government on pause. Congress' approval rating has been dismal far longer than Obama's been president.

We are tired of watching the government treat our opinions like they don't matter. We were against TARP, against stimulus 1 (Bush's) and 2 (Obama's), against Omnibus (with it's 9,000 earmarks), against Cash For Clunkers (which the government failed to run effectively), and now we are against this massive health care overhaul. This health care issue is the largest of all the programs I just mentioned. We have good reason to be angry at the town hall meetings and good reason not to trust the government with health care.

It was the Liberals championing the "don't trust government" attitude during the Bush years. It is natural for Americans not to trust the government when it intrudes into our lives. That was the whole premise behind the Constitution. Stimulus is not life and death.....health care is. If you can't be trusted with our money, how can you be trusted with our health?

Read more...

President Obama's "Hail Mary"

Last evening, Sarah Palin penned an OP/ED for the Wall Street Journal regarding health care. Hours before President Obama's speech to a joint session of Congress, the White House released a series of talking points, and one of them was particularly notable:

On Gov. Palin's Attacks

Every non-partisan organization that has looked at her claims say they are false. And the ideas in her op-ed are both scary and risky. Eliminating Medicare and giving our seniors vouchers instead is a bad idea that we shouldn't adopt.

Some points:

-Sarah Palin stated nothing in her OP/ED about eliminating Medicare.

-Medicare already funds optional private insurance for seniors under the Medicare Advantage (Part C) program.

-Stating her ideas are "both scary and risky." What would be so scary and risky about tort reform and opening up insurance competition across state lines?

These are the same old talking points we have seen for months. This is a feeble attempt to blame someone else for incompetent leadership both in Congress and by the White House. The president will have 60 Senate seats once Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick appoints a Senator to replace Ted Kennedy.

So with the votes, why has his plan failed? It has failed because his attempt to rush it through before the August recess brought tremendous negative attention to the plan. Why would a president want to rush something through in a panic when he has 60 votes? Quite obviously, it was rushed because the American people would soon realize what total garbage this plan is. And they did.

Thanks to the works of people like Gov. Sarah Palin and others, the truths of what ObamaCare would be, and, even worse, what it could turn into. This is where the death panels come in. No bill would ever use the term "death panels"; that would be political suicide. The "death panels" would be simply a negative externality resulting from the passage of the bill. Economics is the study of how a society allocates its scarce resources. The very nature of the laws of supply and demand guarantee that there will be rationing. "Death panels" was a way to describe what rationing is to the average American. It worked, and, dare I say it; it seems to be rather accurate as well.

Even scarier, are the rambling ideas that are being floated around in congress. Public Option, CO-OPS, triggered public option, etc. These are all nonsensical terms and no one knows how bad the effects of these programs could be. As we have seen over the last month, the American people do not want them. The inability to stand on principle is staggering, and also quite scary.

And most comical is this notion floating about that Palin did not write today's OP/ED. Noted Palin-obsessed lunatic Geoffrey Dunn is perpetuating this insane notion. This was hilarious enough on its own, in that The Huffington Post would actually publish his response. Now, even the White House is getting on board with it!

From Politico:

"Even Gov. Palin in the essay that, I don’t know, she wrote herself" - the official wryly continued, drawing laughter from reporters - "as she considered all of the complexities of this issue, acknowledged at the front end that there is a significant health care crisis. That alone is important."

Is this a joke? This is what the White House has turned into? They are either totally incompetent, or absolutely terrified of this woman. For the White House to question the authorship of a piece written by a former governor with a degree in journalism, simply because they think she talks funny is truly amazing.

Their Pravda style propaganda is sickening.

Obama and his cronies have no clue what being president is about, and it is sickening.

Read more...

Paging Ashley Judd.... This is the United States Calling....

Welcome C4P readers. I hope you enjoy the blog. We are just starting out and if you could stick around... we would greatly appreciate it.

We may all recall a low-budget, internet-only commercial that actress Ashley Judd sponsored a while back condemning Gov. Sarah Palin's authorization of predator control methods in the state of Alaska. This was repeatedly proven to be a bit of a political attack against Palin, not against the program of wolf hunting, as many states use the program to control predators and maintain a steady supply of animals suitable for hunting and food consumption. It was an attempt primarily to polarize Palin rather than condemn wolf hunting. We all knew it, and now we essentially have proof.

Here we have an article that describes wolf hunting procedures in the ULTRA-CONSERVATIVE state of Oregon. This article was dated September 5th, 2009. The time of this writing is the evening of September 7th, 2009. It begins:

U.S. Department of Agriculture officials shot and killed two wolves today that were linked to five attacks on livestock in the Keating Valley area of Baker County. The wolves were shot after nonlethal efforts failed to keep them from killing livestock again. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife then authorized Agriculture's Wildlife Services to kill the animals, one of which was wearing a tracking collar, from a fixed-wing aircraft.

Interesting. That sounds an awful lot like the same program that occurred up in our 49th state. In defense of the United States Department of Agriculture, they did make attempts to resolve this issue using nonlethal means, which, surprisingly, did not work:

After the first incident, Oregon Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Defenders of Wildlife and the landowners worked together to try nonlethal measures to keep the wolves from killing livestock again.

Those measures included placing a radio collar on one of the wolves so it could be monitored, installing fladry (flagged fencing that can be a wolf deterrent), using a radio-activated-guard box that makes noise when a radio collar approaches, double-penning livestock, keeping livestock near homes at night, burying carcass piles and using guard dogs.

It should be noted that the killing of these wolves was not carried out by the State of Oregon. Rather, it was carried out by the United States Department of Agriculture, meaning that someone in the Obama Administration would have had to authorize this themselves. Ironically, Ashley Judd does not seem to have so much of a problem when it is Obama who kills the wolves...no. She only has a problem when Sarah Palin does it. Psst.... Ashley!.... your hypocrisy is showing!

Remington Steele: Liberal hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Read more...

1963 Communist Goals

In the Congressional Record, Florida congressman Albert Herlong Jr. submitted the "Communist Goals of 1963. I'd like to share them with you. This is from "The Real America". See if some of these sound familiar to what's happening today in America.



1963 Communist Goals

1. US acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. US willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament by the U.S. would be a demonstration of "moral strength".

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long term loans to Russia and Soviet Satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China, and admission of Red China to the UN.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the Germany question by free elections under supervision of the UN.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the US has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet Satellites individual representation in the UN.

11. Promote the UN as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with it's own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the UN as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the US Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the US.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken the basic American institutions, by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for Socialism, and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers associations. Put the party line in text books.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all form of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings," substitute shapeless, awkward, and meaningless form.

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography, and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as "normal, natural, and healthy."

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the grounds that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American founding fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man".

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of "the big picture": Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture-education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand or treat.

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks, and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special interest groups should rise up and make a "united force" to solve economic, political, or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally Reservation so the US can not prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike.

How many of these Communist goals look like Liberal goals to you?

See them for yourself.

Read more...

MoveOn.org Thinks They're Winning The Healthcare Debate

Dear MoveOn member,

After a few weeks of health care craziness, there's good news: we're winning on the ground. Lots of town halls are now dominated by supporters of health care reform. The vast majority of Americans want the choice of a public plan.1 And a powerful bloc of progressives in the House is standing strong on real reform.

The really bad news? The media's still acting like President Obama's health care plan is on the skids. If we don't turn the conventional wisdom around before Congress begins voting on health care, we could be in big trouble.

We've got a plan to make it happen. It starts tomorrow with major vigils across the country to bring the media's focus back to the real people suffering under the current health care system.
And then we'll shake up the media story again by going on the offensive against Republicans, with a new series of tough ads that call them out for their ties to the health insurance industry.
But to actually make a big splash, we need to raise $185,000 today—and that's going to take at least 3 donations from people in (location withheld). Can you chip in $20 right now to help out?
https://pol.moveon.org/donate/healthcare_ads.html?id=17087-17182837-TBEBBJx&t=3
Right now, Republicans in Congress think they can get away with viciously slandering President Obama's plan for a public health insurance option—even though 77% of Americans say they want to have the choice of a public plan.2

These Republicans need a reality check. Every member of Congress should know that opposing health care reform isn't just morally wrong—it's politically dangerous and unpopular.
That's why we're planning some very tough new TV ads. They'll let voters know exactly how much money their representatives have taken from the insurance industry, whose top goal this year is to kill the public option.

These ads are a surefire way to put Republicans on the defensive, and show that Americans want their representatives to stop siding with insurance companies by obstructing health care reform.

To hit our goal of $185,000 and get these ads on the air, we need at least 3 people in (location withheld) to step up. Can you chip in $20 right now to help out?
https://pol.moveon.org/donate/healthcare_ads.html?id=17087-17182837-TBEBBJx&t=4
Thanks for all you do.
–Nita, Kat, Stephen, Joan and the rest of the team
Source:
1, 2. "New Poll: 77 Percent Support 'Choice' Of Public Option," The Huffington Post, August 20, 2009. http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51799&id=17087-17182837-TBEBBJx&t=5
Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 5 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, first of all I'd like to thank MoveOn.org for the comic relief they regularly provide me with. As I stated earlier I've been reading the health care bill for myself, unlike most of the people who act like they know what's in the bill. If you want to check any of this info you can read the bill for yourself here.

It's actually not as hard to read as you may think, however I'm certainly not saying it's easy or fun to read either. As long as you take your time and read it carefully, I've had to read several parts 2 or 3 times just to make sure I'm understanding what it says. Unlike MoveOn.org and their partisan polls and routine of misinformation I don't want to spread misinformation. I actually encourage all who read this to try and read some of the bill for themselves.

It's easy to be lied to by both sides to sell an agenda. On health care though it's Obama, (who hasn't read the bill), and groups like MoveOn.org, (who also haven't read the bill), that are misleading the public the most. Why won't they read the bill?....It's quite simple. They know this bill was written by the progressive left. They are progressive left so they trust the bill. This provides them with the belief that they don't have to read the bill. After all they trusted Pelosi and company with the cap and trade (tax) and stimulus. Haven't they turned out great?!!!

One thing in this bill that worries me the most is the unprecedented regulatory power of the "commissioner".

Section 141 - (a) In General- There is hereby established, as an independent agency in the executive branch of the Government, a Health Choices Administration (in this division referred to as the `Administration').

(b) Commissioner- (1) IN GENERAL- The Administration shall be headed by a Health Choices Commissioner (in this division referred to as the `Commissioner') who shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

I can't wait to see who Obama appoints to be the commissioner.

This commissioner is talked about all throughout this bill, and so is the HHS (health and human services) secretary. One thing apparent in this bill is that these 2 individuals are going to be granted unprecedented regulatory power over PRIVATE AND PUBLIC insurance companies.

I've already posted a story explaining abortions being covered in the health care bill so I won't get into that again. Obama likes to say, "if you like your insurance keep it". He's not lying about that. You do get to keep your insurance. The problem is that you aren't allowed to CHANGE your insurance, funny coming from the president of Change. The only change you'll be allowed to do under this bill is CHANGE from your current insurance to the government plan.

He doesn't talk about the business taxes in this bill either. Including excise taxes (can you say New Deal 2?). Explanation: Under FDR's "New Deal" most government revenue came from various excise taxes.

Businesses can pay an 8% tax, (8% of total payroll), rather than provide insurance to it's workers. Well from a business standpoint if the current cost of providing health care to workers is more than 8% of payroll then businesses will choose to pay the tax rather than provide the insurance. Since you can't change your insurance plan this would force you onto the government plan.

Smaller businesses have an even greater incentive to push it's workers onto the government plan. If total payroll is between $350K and $400K then the tax is only 6%, $300 - $350 = 4%, $250 - $300 = 2%, and under $250K = 0%.

This is essentially just another way for government to squeeze more tax dollars out of businesses. While at the same time getting more and more people pushed onto the government plan. I'm sure the job creation that will cause will be fantastic.

Do not be fooled by the new, "do it for Ted (Kennedy)" attitude either. Keep in mind that Kennedy OPPOSED welfare reform under Clinton and Gingrich. He even called it "legislative child abuse".

He was part of "No Child Left Behind" with Bush. Teachers now complain that they have to teach students specifically based on passing this test. I'm not going to launch a personal attack on his character there are plenty of others that will waste their time with that. I will admit that as a MA resident I won't miss him as one of my senators. Good thing he stopped Deval from being able to appoint himself. I'll see you at the special election on Jan. 19th.

As for health care I could go on and on about different problems in this bill but it would take forever and this is a blog, not a book. Remember we will be stuck with this bill once it passes. After Stimulus, Cap and Trade, Cash For Clunkers, and TARP, not to mention all the "pork" in the various bills in recent years are you really ready to trust the same congress responsible for the failures mentioned above with taking over our health care system?

They can call me an extremist if it makes them feel better. If you're reading this blog regularly then you're probably an extremist in their eyes also. Unlike those who would criticize me everything I've said above is a matter of fact. What have I said that's extreme here? Hitler also described his critics as "extremist". Who proved to be the real extremist? Having opposing views of others, especially critical views of government, doesn't make you an extremist...........it makes you an American.

Read more...