U.S. Budget Deficit Hit Record $1.4 Trillion in 2009 - Political News - FOXNews.com: "WASHINGTON -- The federal budget deficit tripled to a record $1.4 trillion for the 2009 fiscal year that ended last week, congressional analysts said Wednesday.
The Congressional Budget Office estimate, while expected, is bad news for the White House and its allies in Congress as they press ahead with health care overhaul legislation that could cost $900 billion over the next decade.
The unprecedented flood of red ink flows from several factors, including a big drop in tax revenues due to the recession, $245 billion in emergency spending on the Wall Street bailout and the takeover of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Then there is almost $200 billion in costs from President Obama's economic stimulus bill, as well as increases in programs such as unemployment benefits and food stamps.
The previous record deficit was $459 billion and was set just last year.
The Obama health plan would be 'paid for' with new revenues and curbs in spending. But the overhaul effort would eat up tax increases and spending cuts that could be used to bring the deficit down.
Obama has attributed the nation's dismal fiscal situation to the financial and economic crises he inherited. White House Budget Director Peter Orzsag is overseeing the administration's efforts to tackle the soaring deficit next year.
'As part of the fiscal 2011 budget, we will be putting forward proposals that return us to a fiscally sustainable path and that have lower deficits in the out-years,' Orszag said in a recent Associated Press interview."
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Counter-Terrorism Expert: U.S. Needs Strong Presence In Afghanistan – Talk Radio News Service
Counter-Terrorism Expert: U.S. Needs Strong Presence In Afghanistan – Talk Radio News Service: "During testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, former CIA counter-terrorism official Robert Grenier said that a strong U.S presence in Afghanistan could be useful in fighting Al-Qaida.
Wednesday’s hearing was set against the backdrop of the national debate on the U.S.’s military policy in Afghanistan. President Obama is currently under pressure to decide whether or not to send more troops to Afghanistan as requested by General Stanley McChrystal.
In his remarks, Grenier said that a “robust presence” of forces is needed in Afghanistan."
Wednesday’s hearing was set against the backdrop of the national debate on the U.S.’s military policy in Afghanistan. President Obama is currently under pressure to decide whether or not to send more troops to Afghanistan as requested by General Stanley McChrystal.
In his remarks, Grenier said that a “robust presence” of forces is needed in Afghanistan."
At least five killed, 15 injured in Iraq attacks
At least five killed, 15 injured in Iraq attacks: "BAGHDAD - At least five people were killed and 15 others injured Wednesday in violence around Iraq, police told DPA.
In the northern city of Mosul, two policemen were killed by a bomb as they patrolled the neighbourhood of al-Zahra. Three others were wounded in that attack.
In the district of al-Mosul al-Jadida, a second bomb killed a policeman and wounded three of his colleagues, while soon after in the al-Wahda neighbourhood, militants fatally shot an unarmed man.
Mosul and its environs, among Iraq’s most ethnically and religiously diverse areas, remain plagued by near-daily deadly attacks.
In the western Baghdad suburb of Abu Ghraib, two civilians were dead and nine injured, including a policeman when a bomb targeted a police patrol in the market area, police there told DPA."
In the northern city of Mosul, two policemen were killed by a bomb as they patrolled the neighbourhood of al-Zahra. Three others were wounded in that attack.
In the district of al-Mosul al-Jadida, a second bomb killed a policeman and wounded three of his colleagues, while soon after in the al-Wahda neighbourhood, militants fatally shot an unarmed man.
Mosul and its environs, among Iraq’s most ethnically and religiously diverse areas, remain plagued by near-daily deadly attacks.
In the western Baghdad suburb of Abu Ghraib, two civilians were dead and nine injured, including a policeman when a bomb targeted a police patrol in the market area, police there told DPA."
U.S. Lawmakers Agree to Guantanamo Prisoner Transfer - NYTimes.com
U.S. Lawmakers Agree to Guantanamo Prisoner Transfer - NYTimes.com: "WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers reached an agreement Wednesday that would allow the Obama administration to bring more terrorism suspects from the Guantanamo Bay prison to the United States to face trial.
The agreement removes one of many roadblocks the administration faces as it tries to empty the internationally condemned prison by January.
The measure will face a tough vote in the House of Representatives, which voted last week to keep suspects held at the detention centre at the U.S. naval base in Cuba off U.S. soil entirely.
Democratic negotiators from the House and Senate included the language in a $42.8 billion (26.8 billion pound) bill that would fund the Homeland Security Department for the current fiscal year over the objection of Republicans. It must still pass both chambers before President Barack Obama can sign it into law."
The agreement removes one of many roadblocks the administration faces as it tries to empty the internationally condemned prison by January.
The measure will face a tough vote in the House of Representatives, which voted last week to keep suspects held at the detention centre at the U.S. naval base in Cuba off U.S. soil entirely.
Democratic negotiators from the House and Senate included the language in a $42.8 billion (26.8 billion pound) bill that would fund the Homeland Security Department for the current fiscal year over the objection of Republicans. It must still pass both chambers before President Barack Obama can sign it into law."
Richard Cohen - Obama Needs More Than Personality to Win in Afghanistan - washingtonpost.com
Richard Cohen - Obama Needs More Than Personality to Win in Afghanistan - washingtonpost.com: "Barack Obama's trip to Copenhagen to pitch Chicago for the Olympics would have been a dumb move whatever the outcome. But as it turned out (an airy dismissal would not be an unfair description), it poses some questions about his presidency that are way more important than the proper venue for synchronized swimming. The first, and to my mind most important, is whether Obama knows who he is."
This business of self-knowledge is no minor issue. It bears greatly on the single most crucial issue facing this young and untested president: Afghanistan. Already, we have his choice for Afghanistan commander, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, taking the measure of his commander in chief and publicly telling him what to do. This MacArthuresque star turn called for a Trumanesque response, but Obama offered nothing of the kind. Instead, he used McChrystal as a prop, adding a bit of four-star gravitas to that silly trip to Copenhagen by having the general meet with him there.
This is the president we now have: He inspires lots of affection but not a lot of awe. It is the latter, though, that matters most in international affairs, where the greatest and most gut-wrenching tests await Obama. If he remains consistent to his rhetoric of just seven weeks ago, he will send more troops to Afghanistan and more of them will die. "This is not a war of choice," he said. "This is a war of necessity. Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al-Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans."
White House's botched 'op'
White House's botched 'op'
WASHINGTON -- President Obama yesterday rolled out the red carpet -- and handed out doctors' white coats as well, just so nobody missed his hard-sell health-care message.
In a heavy-handed attempt at reviving support for health-care reform, the White House orchestrated a massive photo op to buttress its claim that front-line physicians support Obama.
PHOTOS: OBAMA'S BOTCHED PHOTO OP
OBAMA LIFTS HEALTH CARE ADDRESS -- FROM HIMSELF
A sea of 150 white-coated doctors, all enthusiastically supportive of the president and representing all 50 states, looked as if they were at a costume party as they posed in the Rose Garden before hearing Obama's pitch for the Democratic overhaul bills moving through Congress.
EPA
OOPS! A crowd of 150 doctors gathers in the Rose Garden to support the health-care overhaul -- as White House staffers scramble to hand out camera-ready white coats to those who forgot their own.
The physicians, all invited guests, were told to bring their white lab coats to make sure that TV cameras captured the image.
But some docs apparently forgot, failing to meet the White House dress code by showing up in business suits or dresses.
So the White House rustled up white coats for them and handed them to the suited physicians who had taken seats in the sun-splashed lawn area.
All this to provide a visual counter to complaints from other doctors that pending legislation is bad news for the medical profession.
"Nobody has more credibility with the American people on this issue than you do," Obama told his guests.
The president was flanked by four white-coated doctors at a podium as he delivered his pep talk.
Terry Jeffrey : Not a Death Panel, a Death Mandate - Townhall.com
Terry Jeffrey : Not a Death Panel, a Death Mandate - Townhall.com: "If you are someone who believes killing unborn children is a right that should be legally protected and made available to all pregnant women, and that the government should eventually take over the U.S. health care system, then you must believe that the government should get into the business of killing unborn babies.
And if you believe that, then you believe that the law must compel certain government officials to cooperate in the killing of innocents.
In a government-run or government-funded health care system that guarantees access to abortion, there must be people in government responsible for making sure unborn babies get killed."
And if you believe that, then you believe that the law must compel certain government officials to cooperate in the killing of innocents.
In a government-run or government-funded health care system that guarantees access to abortion, there must be people in government responsible for making sure unborn babies get killed."
ACORN: Congress can't hurt us - Michael Falcone - POLITICO.com
ACORN: Congress can't hurt us - Michael Falcone - POLITICO.com: "Any successful efforts by Congress to cut off federal funding to scandal-plagued ACORN would have little effect on the community organizing group’s overall operations, its chief executive officer said on Tuesday.
“We didn’t have government funding for years,” said ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis. “We may not have government funding in the future.”
Lewis said ACORN typically receives about $2.5 million to $3 million annually from the federal government – roughly 10 percent of its $20 million to $25 million annual budget. Member dues and private sources make up a much larger chunk of the budget, she said.
After a series of undercover videos surfaced showing ACORN employees giving advice to conservative activists posing as a prostitute and a pimp, opponents in Congress have sought to cut the group’s sources of federal money. In recent weeks, both the U.S. Census Bureau and the Internal Revenue Service have also ended partnerships with ACORN.
But Lewis, who spoke Tuesday at Washington’s National Press Club, called the congressional actions a case of “modern day ACORN McCarththyism,” and she dismissed a report by the Republican staff of the Senate Finance Committee alleging that ACORN used some charitable funding for political purposes.
Last month, the group suspended new intakes to its service programs throughout the country, pending the results of an independent review led by former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger."
“We didn’t have government funding for years,” said ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis. “We may not have government funding in the future.”
Lewis said ACORN typically receives about $2.5 million to $3 million annually from the federal government – roughly 10 percent of its $20 million to $25 million annual budget. Member dues and private sources make up a much larger chunk of the budget, she said.
After a series of undercover videos surfaced showing ACORN employees giving advice to conservative activists posing as a prostitute and a pimp, opponents in Congress have sought to cut the group’s sources of federal money. In recent weeks, both the U.S. Census Bureau and the Internal Revenue Service have also ended partnerships with ACORN.
But Lewis, who spoke Tuesday at Washington’s National Press Club, called the congressional actions a case of “modern day ACORN McCarththyism,” and she dismissed a report by the Republican staff of the Senate Finance Committee alleging that ACORN used some charitable funding for political purposes.
Last month, the group suspended new intakes to its service programs throughout the country, pending the results of an independent review led by former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger."
Obama, General McChrystal and the Afghan War - WSJ.com
Obama, General McChrystal and the Afghan War - WSJ.com: "Democrats have found someone worth fighting in Afghanistan. His name is Stan McChrystal.
The other night, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi went after the commander of U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan, 'with all due respect,' for supposedly disrespecting the chain of command. Around the Congressional Democratic Caucus, we're told Members refer to General McChrystal as 'General MacArthur,' after the commander in Korea sacked by Harry Truman."
White House aides have fanned these flames with recent leaks to the media that "officials are challenging" his assessment asking for more troops. In the last two days, the White House National Security Adviser and the Secretary of Defense have both suggested that the general should keep his mouth shut. President Obama called him in Friday for a talking-to on the tarmac at Copenhagen airport.
Though a decorated Army four-star officer, the General's introduction to Beltway warfare is proving to be brutal. To be fair, Gen. McChrystal couldn't know that his Commander in Chief would go wobbly so soon on his commitment to him as well as to his own Afghan strategy when he was tapped for the job in AprilWe're told by people who know him that Gen. McChrystal "feels terrible" and "had no intention whatsoever of trying to lobby and influence" the Administration. His sense of bewilderment makes perfect sense anywhere but in the political battlefield of Washington. He was, after all, following orders.
The other night, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi went after the commander of U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan, 'with all due respect,' for supposedly disrespecting the chain of command. Around the Congressional Democratic Caucus, we're told Members refer to General McChrystal as 'General MacArthur,' after the commander in Korea sacked by Harry Truman."
White House aides have fanned these flames with recent leaks to the media that "officials are challenging" his assessment asking for more troops. In the last two days, the White House National Security Adviser and the Secretary of Defense have both suggested that the general should keep his mouth shut. President Obama called him in Friday for a talking-to on the tarmac at Copenhagen airport.
Though a decorated Army four-star officer, the General's introduction to Beltway warfare is proving to be brutal. To be fair, Gen. McChrystal couldn't know that his Commander in Chief would go wobbly so soon on his commitment to him as well as to his own Afghan strategy when he was tapped for the job in AprilWe're told by people who know him that Gen. McChrystal "feels terrible" and "had no intention whatsoever of trying to lobby and influence" the Administration. His sense of bewilderment makes perfect sense anywhere but in the political battlefield of Washington. He was, after all, following orders.
Feingold hits Obama's use of 'czars' - Washington Times
Feingold hits Obama's use of 'czars' - Washington Times: "A top Senate Democrat said just because other presidents have created 'czars' to carry out administration policy does not mean President Obama is right to follow their lead - and warned that Congress may have to step in and keep White House appointees in check.
Senators say the arrangement goes against the Constitution because many czars are never vetted by Congress, even though they have a major role in making policy.
But there may be few options for reeling them in. Experts told Sen. Russ Feingold, the Wisconsin Democrat who convened a hearing on the issue, that the tools available are either to cut off funding for the positions or write laws to control how much authority Congress gives the president.
'While there is a long history of the use of White House advisers and czars, that does not mean we can assume they are constitutionally appropriate,' said Mr. Feingold, chairman of the Judiciary Committee's Constitution subcommittee.
Controversy has swelled in recent weeks as conservative commentators such as Fox News' Glenn Beck and Republican lawmakers have challenged the practice. The White House and its Democratic allies have hit back, arguing that many of the positions existed under previous administrations."
Senators say the arrangement goes against the Constitution because many czars are never vetted by Congress, even though they have a major role in making policy.
But there may be few options for reeling them in. Experts told Sen. Russ Feingold, the Wisconsin Democrat who convened a hearing on the issue, that the tools available are either to cut off funding for the positions or write laws to control how much authority Congress gives the president.
'While there is a long history of the use of White House advisers and czars, that does not mean we can assume they are constitutionally appropriate,' said Mr. Feingold, chairman of the Judiciary Committee's Constitution subcommittee.
Controversy has swelled in recent weeks as conservative commentators such as Fox News' Glenn Beck and Republican lawmakers have challenged the practice. The White House and its Democratic allies have hit back, arguing that many of the positions existed under previous administrations."
CNSNews.com - Reid ‘Likely’ to Make Entire Health Bill an Amendment to Unrelated Tax Bill That House Passed in March
CNSNews.com - Reid ‘Likely’ to Make Entire Health Bill an Amendment to Unrelated Tax Bill That House Passed in March: "(CNSNews.com) -- A senior aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told CNSNews.com that it is “likely” that Reid will use H.R. 1586—a bill passed by the House in March to impose a 90-percent tax on bonuses paid to employees of certain bailed-out financial institutions—as a “shell” for enacting the final version of the Senate’s health care bill, which Reid is responsible for crafting.
Under the procedure, the substance of House Resolution 1586 would be removed and replaced with the entire Senate health care package. The maneuver would initially require the support of 60 senators to vote for cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 1586 (i.e., end debate on the congressional procedure and move forward).
If Reid wins 60 votes, then debate begins on his health care package. Reid could then decide to block all amendments and attempt to get a vote on the entire package.
However, a senator could filibuster the final vote, requiring another 60-vote majority to move forward. But if Reid decides to allow any amendments, each amendment could be filibustered, requiring a 60-vote majority to move to a final vote on each of them. An amendment that has the support of more than 50 but less than 60 senators could end up stopping the bill if neither side backs down. But if Reid is able to structure the debate so that all 60 senators who caucus with the Democrats stick with the party on cloture votes, he can pass the bill and send it to back to the House--where it originated as an entirely different bill in substance.
If the House were to then vote on the bill as passed by the Senate without amending it, it could be sent directly to the president for his signature without going through a House-Senate conference committee and another round of votes in each chamber."
Under the procedure, the substance of House Resolution 1586 would be removed and replaced with the entire Senate health care package. The maneuver would initially require the support of 60 senators to vote for cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 1586 (i.e., end debate on the congressional procedure and move forward).
If Reid wins 60 votes, then debate begins on his health care package. Reid could then decide to block all amendments and attempt to get a vote on the entire package.
However, a senator could filibuster the final vote, requiring another 60-vote majority to move forward. But if Reid decides to allow any amendments, each amendment could be filibustered, requiring a 60-vote majority to move to a final vote on each of them. An amendment that has the support of more than 50 but less than 60 senators could end up stopping the bill if neither side backs down. But if Reid is able to structure the debate so that all 60 senators who caucus with the Democrats stick with the party on cloture votes, he can pass the bill and send it to back to the House--where it originated as an entirely different bill in substance.
If the House were to then vote on the bill as passed by the Senate without amending it, it could be sent directly to the president for his signature without going through a House-Senate conference committee and another round of votes in each chamber."
Obama's Gitmo blame game - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com
Obama's Gitmo blame game - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com: "Greg Craig, the top in-house lawyer for President Barack Obama, is getting the blame for botching the strategy to shut down Guantanamo Bay prison by January — so much so that he’s expected to leave the White House in short order.
But sources familiar with the process believe Craig is being set-up as the fall guy and say the blame for missing the deadline extends well beyond him.
Instead, it was a widespread breakdown on the political, legislative, policy and planning fronts that contributed to what is shaping up as one of Obama’s most high-profile setbacks, these people say.
The White House misread the congressional mood – as it found out abruptly in May, when the Senate voted 90-6 against funds for closing the base after Republicans stoked fears about bringing prisoners to the U.S. The House also went on record last week opposing bringing Gitmo detainees here.
The White House misread the public mood – as roughly half of Americans surveyed say they disagree with Obama’s approach. A strong element of NIMBY-ism permeates those results, as Americans say they don’t want the prisoners in their backyards.
But most of all Obama’s aides mistook that political consensus from the campaign trail for a deep commitment in Washington to do whatever it takes to close the prison.
“The administration came in reading there to be wide support for closing Guantanamo at home and abroad, and I think it misread that attitude,” said Matthew Waxman, a Columbia law professor who held Defense and State Department positions on detainee policy. “In general, they were right….but there was very little willingness to accept the costs and risks of getting it done.”
The White House declined to make Craig available for an interview, or discuss the Gitmo deliberations in detail, but several allies and even some critics scoffed at suggestions that Craig bears the main responsibility for the missteps."
But sources familiar with the process believe Craig is being set-up as the fall guy and say the blame for missing the deadline extends well beyond him.
Instead, it was a widespread breakdown on the political, legislative, policy and planning fronts that contributed to what is shaping up as one of Obama’s most high-profile setbacks, these people say.
The White House misread the congressional mood – as it found out abruptly in May, when the Senate voted 90-6 against funds for closing the base after Republicans stoked fears about bringing prisoners to the U.S. The House also went on record last week opposing bringing Gitmo detainees here.
The White House misread the public mood – as roughly half of Americans surveyed say they disagree with Obama’s approach. A strong element of NIMBY-ism permeates those results, as Americans say they don’t want the prisoners in their backyards.
But most of all Obama’s aides mistook that political consensus from the campaign trail for a deep commitment in Washington to do whatever it takes to close the prison.
“The administration came in reading there to be wide support for closing Guantanamo at home and abroad, and I think it misread that attitude,” said Matthew Waxman, a Columbia law professor who held Defense and State Department positions on detainee policy. “In general, they were right….but there was very little willingness to accept the costs and risks of getting it done.”
The White House declined to make Craig available for an interview, or discuss the Gitmo deliberations in detail, but several allies and even some critics scoffed at suggestions that Craig bears the main responsibility for the missteps."
Obama Skips Afghanistan on List of Places We're Fighting Al-Qaeda
Obama Skips Afghanistan on List of Places We're Fighting Al-Qaeda: "RUSH: All right, Fort Bragg, let's go to the phones, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, this is Robert, great to have you with us, sir, and hello.
CALLER: Rush, I've been listening to you for 20 years, dittos, and I've tried to get through so many times, it's wonderful to actually be able to speak with you.
RUSH: Thank you, sir, very much.
CALLER: If I may, may I thank the person, whoever it is, that is paying for my subscription to your website? I just got back from Afghanistan and I cannot tell you how important it was for me to be able to get a daily dose of sanity by downloading the podcasts there.
RUSH: That was the Adopt-A-Soldier Program at RushLimbaugh.com. That's great. I'm glad that you were able to be part of the program.
CALLER: It was a lifesaver, I cannot say that enough. What I called about is that having just gotten back from Afghanistan and having served a couple of tours, I know from personal experience that the moment that you do not feel, as an officer and a commander if I don't feel that I have the support and backing of those above me, I start thinking real hard that I may not be doing the right mission or it may be time for me to --
RUSH: You might be doing a smart thing is what you start thinking about.
CALLER: Yeah.
RUSH: Gosh, have I made the right decision? Now, you're not talking about McChrystal. Are you talking about Obama?
CALLER: I'm talking about General McChrystal and his dealings with the administration in general. It feels to me as though they refused to support him, and if they refused to support him, at what point does he no longer support me? It all rolls downhill.
RUSH: I totally understand, and we've had parents of guys like you in Afghanistan worried to death about this. Understand that your buddies are in Afghanistan to help Obama get his health care passed.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: We got three sound bites here, Obama at the Counterterrorism Center where he was hunting down Jack Bauer to try to arrest him. Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to get back to your phone calls here el quicko, but you gotta hear these, especially the third sound bite. He goes over there to the National Counterterrorism Center and is speaking to their employees. Listen to the first bite.
OBAMA: I just received an extraordinary briefing from some of your colleagues. Uh, I have to tell you I was surprised to see how young everybody is around here. It is a sign of my age that everybody is starting to look young. Uh, but the capacity and the dedication that's on display, uh, was remarkable. And, look, all of you have some of the most important work, uh, that is done in this country, uh, you're doing it. These big screens I understand, uh, are not just to watch Sports Center.
RUSH: (pause) Yeah, you heard it. The big screens are not just to watch Sports Center. Yes, it's some of the most important work done in the country, and you're doing it. It speaks for itself. Here's the next one."
CALLER: Rush, I've been listening to you for 20 years, dittos, and I've tried to get through so many times, it's wonderful to actually be able to speak with you.
RUSH: Thank you, sir, very much.
CALLER: If I may, may I thank the person, whoever it is, that is paying for my subscription to your website? I just got back from Afghanistan and I cannot tell you how important it was for me to be able to get a daily dose of sanity by downloading the podcasts there.
RUSH: That was the Adopt-A-Soldier Program at RushLimbaugh.com. That's great. I'm glad that you were able to be part of the program.
CALLER: It was a lifesaver, I cannot say that enough. What I called about is that having just gotten back from Afghanistan and having served a couple of tours, I know from personal experience that the moment that you do not feel, as an officer and a commander if I don't feel that I have the support and backing of those above me, I start thinking real hard that I may not be doing the right mission or it may be time for me to --
RUSH: You might be doing a smart thing is what you start thinking about.
CALLER: Yeah.
RUSH: Gosh, have I made the right decision? Now, you're not talking about McChrystal. Are you talking about Obama?
CALLER: I'm talking about General McChrystal and his dealings with the administration in general. It feels to me as though they refused to support him, and if they refused to support him, at what point does he no longer support me? It all rolls downhill.
RUSH: I totally understand, and we've had parents of guys like you in Afghanistan worried to death about this. Understand that your buddies are in Afghanistan to help Obama get his health care passed.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: We got three sound bites here, Obama at the Counterterrorism Center where he was hunting down Jack Bauer to try to arrest him. Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to get back to your phone calls here el quicko, but you gotta hear these, especially the third sound bite. He goes over there to the National Counterterrorism Center and is speaking to their employees. Listen to the first bite.
OBAMA: I just received an extraordinary briefing from some of your colleagues. Uh, I have to tell you I was surprised to see how young everybody is around here. It is a sign of my age that everybody is starting to look young. Uh, but the capacity and the dedication that's on display, uh, was remarkable. And, look, all of you have some of the most important work, uh, that is done in this country, uh, you're doing it. These big screens I understand, uh, are not just to watch Sports Center.
RUSH: (pause) Yeah, you heard it. The big screens are not just to watch Sports Center. Yes, it's some of the most important work done in the country, and you're doing it. It speaks for itself. Here's the next one."
PRUDEN: Obama dithers and dithers - Washington Times
PRUDEN: Obama dithers and dithers - Washington Times: "Only a wreck on the highway is more exciting than watching a president argue with himself. Not even the gruesome sight of presidential gore can overcome the instinct to stare at the gloomy and ponder the morbid.
Barack Obama, like the 'progressives' he represents, is proud of a mind so open that his brains are forever at risk of falling out. He first said the war in Afghanistan was a war the West could not afford to lose. But that was way back when, and he changed his mind. Then he changed it again, and now nobody, maybe not even the president himself, knows what he thinks. This president's resolve, crucial though it is to the nation's security and survival, is always a work in progress.
All presidents are fond of saying the door to the Oval Office is always open, advice is welcome from all, no point of view will be ignored, the opinion of every American is valued, blah, blah, blah. This is happy talk, usually sufficient only as a strategy for dithering and delay. A Praetorian guard can make sure that anyone who takes the happy talk for the real stuff is kept far, far away from a president absorbed in his indecision.
This definitely includes the leader of the soldiers whom the commander in chief put in harm's way in Afghanistan. You might think the president talks frequently with Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the commander of both U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan. But if you think that, you don't understand how this president works. Gen. McChrystal's five-page Commander's Summary of what's going on in Afghanistan, prepared for the president, came forcefully to the president's attention with the leak of the document, in which the general warned that 'failure to gain the initiative and reverse momentum in the near-term (next 12 months) - while Afghan security capacity matures - risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible.'"
Barack Obama, like the 'progressives' he represents, is proud of a mind so open that his brains are forever at risk of falling out. He first said the war in Afghanistan was a war the West could not afford to lose. But that was way back when, and he changed his mind. Then he changed it again, and now nobody, maybe not even the president himself, knows what he thinks. This president's resolve, crucial though it is to the nation's security and survival, is always a work in progress.
All presidents are fond of saying the door to the Oval Office is always open, advice is welcome from all, no point of view will be ignored, the opinion of every American is valued, blah, blah, blah. This is happy talk, usually sufficient only as a strategy for dithering and delay. A Praetorian guard can make sure that anyone who takes the happy talk for the real stuff is kept far, far away from a president absorbed in his indecision.
This definitely includes the leader of the soldiers whom the commander in chief put in harm's way in Afghanistan. You might think the president talks frequently with Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the commander of both U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan. But if you think that, you don't understand how this president works. Gen. McChrystal's five-page Commander's Summary of what's going on in Afghanistan, prepared for the president, came forcefully to the president's attention with the leak of the document, in which the general warned that 'failure to gain the initiative and reverse momentum in the near-term (next 12 months) - while Afghan security capacity matures - risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible.'"
It’s Not Just the Public Option by Deroy Murdock on National Review Online
It’s Not Just the Public Option by Deroy Murdock on National Review Online: "The Senate Finance Committee’s Obamacare legislation is as interesting for what it lacks as for what it contains.
On Tuesday, committee members rejected two amendments that would have created a government option for health insurance. These decisions — in which five Democrats voted with Republicans — lower the pulse on a full-scale federal takeover of the health-care industry. However, the House or Senate suddenly could defibrillate this concept. So, advocates of limited-government health-care reform must remain vigilant. Unfortunately, Finance Committee Democrats have rejected numerous GOP amendments that would have infused this bill with a modicum of fiscal restraint and common sense. As a group, the specific amendments that nearly all Democrats have dismissed preview how Obamacare might look in practice, if enacted.
Rather than save taxpayers’ money by asking women to finance their abortions without federal dollars (as the Hyde Amendment has mandated since 1976), Finance Committee Democrats (minus North Dakota’s Kent Conrad) rejected Utah Republican Orrin Hatch’s amendment to prevent Obamacare’s budget from funding elective abortions or health plans that cover feticide. In the Age of Obama, Uncle Sam pays for everything."
On Tuesday, committee members rejected two amendments that would have created a government option for health insurance. These decisions — in which five Democrats voted with Republicans — lower the pulse on a full-scale federal takeover of the health-care industry. However, the House or Senate suddenly could defibrillate this concept. So, advocates of limited-government health-care reform must remain vigilant. Unfortunately, Finance Committee Democrats have rejected numerous GOP amendments that would have infused this bill with a modicum of fiscal restraint and common sense. As a group, the specific amendments that nearly all Democrats have dismissed preview how Obamacare might look in practice, if enacted.
Rather than save taxpayers’ money by asking women to finance their abortions without federal dollars (as the Hyde Amendment has mandated since 1976), Finance Committee Democrats (minus North Dakota’s Kent Conrad) rejected Utah Republican Orrin Hatch’s amendment to prevent Obamacare’s budget from funding elective abortions or health plans that cover feticide. In the Age of Obama, Uncle Sam pays for everything."
US cutoff of funding to Iran human rights cause signals shift - The Boston Globe
US cutoff of funding to Iran human rights cause signals shift - The Boston Globe: "WASHINGTON - For the past five years, researchers in a modest office overlooking the New Haven green have carefully documented cases of assassination and torture of democracy activists in Iran. With more than $3 million in grants from the US State Department, they have pored over thousands of documents and Persian-language press reports and interviewed scores of witnesses and survivors to build dossiers on those they say are Iran’s most infamous human-rights abusers."
Snowe and Lincoln will determine everything - TheHill.com
Snowe and Lincoln will determine everything - TheHill.com: "Watch how Maine Republican Olympia Snowe and Arkansas Democrat Blanche Lincoln vote in the Senate Finance Committee on the Baucus version of the Obama healthcare plan. As Snowe and Lincoln go, so will the Congress.
The Democrats need Snowe’s vote desperately, to convince wavering moderate Democrats that they can offer a veneer, however thin, of bipartisanship to the health proposal. If Snowe, their last chance at a Republican vote, opposes the Obama/Baucus proposal, there is no hope of a bipartisan fig leaf for the package."
The Democrats need Snowe’s vote desperately, to convince wavering moderate Democrats that they can offer a veneer, however thin, of bipartisanship to the health proposal. If Snowe, their last chance at a Republican vote, opposes the Obama/Baucus proposal, there is no hope of a bipartisan fig leaf for the package."
Senate Health Bill Imposes $29B More in Taxes - Political News - FOXNews.com
Senate Health Bill Imposes $29B More in Taxes - Political News - FOXNews.com: "WASHINGTON -- California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger praised President Barack Obama's drive to overhaul the nation's health care system on Tuesday and urged fellow Republicans to join in efforts to finish the job this year.
The new Republican support for Obama's top domestic priority came as a potential setback emerged for Senate health legislation: Congressional tax experts reported that the bill would impose $29 billion more in taxes on health care industries than originally thought -- levies that could be passed on to consumers in the form of higher premiums.
That could be troublesome news for an overhaul bill facing a crucial vote in the Senate Finance Committee this week, and with Republican senators already complaining that the legislation contains too many taxes.
Although Schwarzenegger stopped short of embracing a Democratic bill, his words of encouragement came on the heels of similar statements from other Republicans outside Congress, including former Senate Republican leader Bill Frist. The White House and Democrats highlighted them as evidence of momentum and division within GOP ranks.
Schwarzenegger, who two years ago tried but failed to pass a universal health care plan in California, said in a statement that he appreciated Obama's partnership with the states and his effort to hold down costs and improve quality. He urged lawmakers from both parties to 'move forward and accomplish these vital goals for the American people.'
Congressional Republicans responded that they have been calling for health care improvements for months -- just not the kind that Democrats are offering.
'Americans want commonsense reform,' Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in a speech on the Senate floor, arguing that Democratic plans would expand government control, raise taxes on the middle class and cut Medicare benefits.
Tommy Thompson, who headed the Health and Human Services Department under President George W. Bush, said Monday the Senate Finance Committee bill 'is another important step toward achieving the goal of health care reform.' Frist, a heart surgeon, told Time magazine he would vote for the committee bill if he were still in Congress. However, both Frist and Thompson said they thought the bill could be improved.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a political independent first elected as a Republican, said Monday that health care legislation deserves support across the political spectrum.
Questioned about the disparate Republican voices, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said, 'I hope that Republicans in Washington hear the message of Republicans all over the country that it's time to come in off the sidelines and actively get involved in making some serious progress on health care reform this year.'
On the tax issue, the Joint Committee on Taxation said in a memo prepared for Finance Committee Republicans that drug companies, medical device manufacturers and insurers would pay $121 billion over 10 years as a result of fees in the committee's bill. That compares with $92 billion originally calculated."
The new Republican support for Obama's top domestic priority came as a potential setback emerged for Senate health legislation: Congressional tax experts reported that the bill would impose $29 billion more in taxes on health care industries than originally thought -- levies that could be passed on to consumers in the form of higher premiums.
That could be troublesome news for an overhaul bill facing a crucial vote in the Senate Finance Committee this week, and with Republican senators already complaining that the legislation contains too many taxes.
Although Schwarzenegger stopped short of embracing a Democratic bill, his words of encouragement came on the heels of similar statements from other Republicans outside Congress, including former Senate Republican leader Bill Frist. The White House and Democrats highlighted them as evidence of momentum and division within GOP ranks.
Schwarzenegger, who two years ago tried but failed to pass a universal health care plan in California, said in a statement that he appreciated Obama's partnership with the states and his effort to hold down costs and improve quality. He urged lawmakers from both parties to 'move forward and accomplish these vital goals for the American people.'
Congressional Republicans responded that they have been calling for health care improvements for months -- just not the kind that Democrats are offering.
'Americans want commonsense reform,' Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in a speech on the Senate floor, arguing that Democratic plans would expand government control, raise taxes on the middle class and cut Medicare benefits.
Tommy Thompson, who headed the Health and Human Services Department under President George W. Bush, said Monday the Senate Finance Committee bill 'is another important step toward achieving the goal of health care reform.' Frist, a heart surgeon, told Time magazine he would vote for the committee bill if he were still in Congress. However, both Frist and Thompson said they thought the bill could be improved.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a political independent first elected as a Republican, said Monday that health care legislation deserves support across the political spectrum.
Questioned about the disparate Republican voices, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said, 'I hope that Republicans in Washington hear the message of Republicans all over the country that it's time to come in off the sidelines and actively get involved in making some serious progress on health care reform this year.'
On the tax issue, the Joint Committee on Taxation said in a memo prepared for Finance Committee Republicans that drug companies, medical device manufacturers and insurers would pay $121 billion over 10 years as a result of fees in the committee's bill. That compares with $92 billion originally calculated."
Firefighters lose large U.S. grant to ACORN - Washington Times
Firefighters lose large U.S. grant to ACORN - Washington Times: "Nearly $1 million in Homeland Security funding typically earmarked for fire departments has been awarded to ACORN, despite a clear signal from Congress that it intends to cut off federal funding to the embattled group.
The grant to ACORN's Louisiana office became public on Oct. 2, less than three weeks after the House and Senate voted to cut off ACORN funding after employees were caught on video advising a fake prostitute and pimp on scams.
It was one of only three such grants issued to the state and made up almost 80 percent of the firefighting money earmarked for Louisiana, prompting one of the U.S. senators from the state to demand that the funds be taken back.
'I request that you rescind this grant based on a history of abuse of federal dollars by ACORN and their clear lack of expertise in this area,' said Sen. David Vitter, Louisiana Republican.
The group has headquarters in Louisiana."
The grant to ACORN's Louisiana office became public on Oct. 2, less than three weeks after the House and Senate voted to cut off ACORN funding after employees were caught on video advising a fake prostitute and pimp on scams.
It was one of only three such grants issued to the state and made up almost 80 percent of the firefighting money earmarked for Louisiana, prompting one of the U.S. senators from the state to demand that the funds be taken back.
'I request that you rescind this grant based on a history of abuse of federal dollars by ACORN and their clear lack of expertise in this area,' said Sen. David Vitter, Louisiana Republican.
The group has headquarters in Louisiana."
Family Security Matters » Publications » Losing Liberty
Family Security Matters » Publications » Losing Liberty: "There is a shift occurring in the United States, a tectonic shift that is imposing statism in a land predicated on limited government.
In the past, the not very distant past, mediating structures served as a barrier against managerial despotism. But these structures have been under assault for decades and are showing signs of weakness and decay.
The family has been undermined by divorce and illegitimacy. Schools have eroded rigor and standards. Churches resemble social institutions more than religious centers. And associations like Rotary and Lions are suffering from insufficient enrollment and a lack of interest.
The America Tocqueville described in mid-19th century is largely gone, a testament to the past when national identity was being refined. Not only is the culture unable to orchestrate the competing interests of government and the individual, it contributes to the widespread belief that if liberty must be modified for the sake of security that is a trade-off the public is willing to accept. The New Hampshire slogan “Live free or die” is great for license plates, but not for contemporary politics.
Some would argue that big government is a natural consequence of living in a bigger and more complex nation that was the case a hundred years ago. Needless to say, this is obvious. But what is not so obvious is that incrementally the government has assumed the position of granting rights to citizens instead of having citizens grant rights to the government. During this onset of the recession, it was believed by members of both parties that extending government power was essential in dealing with the economic vicissitudes of the moment. In doing so, however, the politics of grievance has emerged. If the government uses its largesse to address social woe, how are rights determined and who allocates the benefits? A government insistent on hand-outs will be a government that encourages grievance."
In the past, the not very distant past, mediating structures served as a barrier against managerial despotism. But these structures have been under assault for decades and are showing signs of weakness and decay.
The family has been undermined by divorce and illegitimacy. Schools have eroded rigor and standards. Churches resemble social institutions more than religious centers. And associations like Rotary and Lions are suffering from insufficient enrollment and a lack of interest.
The America Tocqueville described in mid-19th century is largely gone, a testament to the past when national identity was being refined. Not only is the culture unable to orchestrate the competing interests of government and the individual, it contributes to the widespread belief that if liberty must be modified for the sake of security that is a trade-off the public is willing to accept. The New Hampshire slogan “Live free or die” is great for license plates, but not for contemporary politics.
Some would argue that big government is a natural consequence of living in a bigger and more complex nation that was the case a hundred years ago. Needless to say, this is obvious. But what is not so obvious is that incrementally the government has assumed the position of granting rights to citizens instead of having citizens grant rights to the government. During this onset of the recession, it was believed by members of both parties that extending government power was essential in dealing with the economic vicissitudes of the moment. In doing so, however, the politics of grievance has emerged. If the government uses its largesse to address social woe, how are rights determined and who allocates the benefits? A government insistent on hand-outs will be a government that encourages grievance."
Family Security Matters » Publications » Spin Doctors for Obamacare
Family Security Matters » Publications » Spin Doctors for Obamacare: "Lights, camera, agitprop! The curtains opened on yet another artfully staged performance of Obamacare Theater this week. One hundred and fifty doctors took their places on the plush lawn outside the West Wing -- many acting like 'Twilight' groupies with cameras instead of credible medical professionals. The president approved the scenery: 'I am thrilled to have all of you here today, and you look very spiffy in your coats.'
White House wardrobe assistants guaranteed the 'spiffy.' As the New York Post's Charles Hurt reported, the physicians 'were told to bring their white lab coats to make sure that TV cameras captured the image.' President Obama's aides hastily handed out costumes to those who came in suits or dresses before the doc-and-pony show began.
But while Halloween came early to the Potomac, these partisan single-payer activists in White House-supplied clothing aren't fooling anyone.
Obama's spin doctors belong to a group called Doctors for America (DFA), which reportedly supplied the white lab coats. The White House event was organized in conjunction with DFA and Organizing for America, Obama's campaign
outfit."
White House wardrobe assistants guaranteed the 'spiffy.' As the New York Post's Charles Hurt reported, the physicians 'were told to bring their white lab coats to make sure that TV cameras captured the image.' President Obama's aides hastily handed out costumes to those who came in suits or dresses before the doc-and-pony show began.
But while Halloween came early to the Potomac, these partisan single-payer activists in White House-supplied clothing aren't fooling anyone.
Obama's spin doctors belong to a group called Doctors for America (DFA), which reportedly supplied the white lab coats. The White House event was organized in conjunction with DFA and Organizing for America, Obama's campaign
outfit."
Family Security Matters » Publications » Progressives Back Obama Push for Global Tax
Family Security Matters » Publications » Progressives Back Obama Push for Global Tax: "While policymakers debate a few million dollars for ACORN and a few hundred billion dollars more for health care reform, those committed to one-world government are moving ahead with plans for a global tax that could extract trillions of dollars out of Americans’ already depleted IRAs and stock holdings.
One can’t exclude the possibility of such a tax being slipped into a health care or cap-and-trade bill that the Congress or the public could not have time to read before passage.
Bob Davis of the Wall Street Journal deserves a journalism prize for taking the time to read the recent communiqué issued by the G-20 countries meeting in Pittsburgh. He found they had assigned the International Monetary Fund (IMF) the job of studying how to implement a global tax on America and the rest of the world.
“The IMF assignment from the G-20 has been widely overlooked,” Davis noted. His article ran under the headline, “IMF Mulls Global Bank Tax.”"
One can’t exclude the possibility of such a tax being slipped into a health care or cap-and-trade bill that the Congress or the public could not have time to read before passage.
Bob Davis of the Wall Street Journal deserves a journalism prize for taking the time to read the recent communiqué issued by the G-20 countries meeting in Pittsburgh. He found they had assigned the International Monetary Fund (IMF) the job of studying how to implement a global tax on America and the rest of the world.
“The IMF assignment from the G-20 has been widely overlooked,” Davis noted. His article ran under the headline, “IMF Mulls Global Bank Tax.”"
CNSNews.com - Gibbs: Obama Has Only ‘Read a Decent Part’ of Health Care Bill
CNSNews.com - Gibbs: Obama Has Only ‘Read a Decent Part’ of Health Care Bill: "(CNSNews.com) – President Obama has spent some time in the past few months rebutting critics of the health care legislation being debated in Congress, and telling Americans what he insists it does or does not say about certain issues such as abortion and whether people will be able to keep their current health insurance plans. But the president has only read “a decent part” of the legislation he is describing, White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs revealed yesterday.
When a reporter noted at Monday's press briefing that there had been some discussion on Capitol Hill about whether members of Congress would read the text of the health care bill before voting on it, and then asked Gibbs whether the president would read the bill himself before he signs it into law, Gibbs said: “Well, I think he's read a decent part of the legislation that's been bandied around right now, and we should address this as with members of Congress when we have closer to a final piece of legislation.”
The question of whether lawmakers actually read the laws they enact has been a matter of public controversy this year, with people at town hall meetings this summer exhorting their congressional representatives to read the health care bill being debated in Congress.
In February, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) told CNSNews.com that none of his colleagues would be able to read the 1,071-page stimulus bill before voting on it. The final text of that bill was not made available to members of Congress or the public until late at night the day before it was voted into law.
“No, I don’t think anyone will have the chance to [read the entire bill],” Lautenberg had told CNSNews.com."
When a reporter noted at Monday's press briefing that there had been some discussion on Capitol Hill about whether members of Congress would read the text of the health care bill before voting on it, and then asked Gibbs whether the president would read the bill himself before he signs it into law, Gibbs said: “Well, I think he's read a decent part of the legislation that's been bandied around right now, and we should address this as with members of Congress when we have closer to a final piece of legislation.”
The question of whether lawmakers actually read the laws they enact has been a matter of public controversy this year, with people at town hall meetings this summer exhorting their congressional representatives to read the health care bill being debated in Congress.
In February, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) told CNSNews.com that none of his colleagues would be able to read the 1,071-page stimulus bill before voting on it. The final text of that bill was not made available to members of Congress or the public until late at night the day before it was voted into law.
“No, I don’t think anyone will have the chance to [read the entire bill],” Lautenberg had told CNSNews.com."
What The Left Really Pledges Allegiance To « NewsReal Blog
What The Left Really Pledges Allegiance To « NewsReal Blog: "As the Olympics head to Rio, unemployment edges toward ten percent, and Tehran barrels toward a nuclear weapon, the Left continues its “Question the Patriotism of Conservatives” tour ‘09. In one of the more unlikely scenarios of recent television history, MSNBC’s “The Ed Show” compared President Obama’s perpetual criticism of his country favorably against Rush Limbaugh. The episode was outstanding for its audacity and the light it shed on where the Left really pledges its allegiance.
Shortly after slamming conservatives’ “lack of patriotism” and insisting opposition to Obama’s myopic focus on the Chicago Olympics “rivals Jane Fonda sitting on a gun in North Vietnam,” Ed Schultz decided to talk patrotism with Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-IL, who enjoys a cozy relationship with the Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America…
Schultz played a clip of Rush ascribing part of the Olympic Committee’s rejection of Chicago’s bid to the fact that the president has “been running around the world for nine months telling everybody how much our country sucks.” Schakowsky replied, “How dare Rush Limbaugh – how dare he say that this president goes around talking about how bad our country is? [Obama] has finally been able to establish us as real participants in the world community.”
Blithely unaware what she said is itself an anti-American slur (America was not a “participant” in the world community B.B.O. – Before Barack Obama? America is only good if it is held in check by UN regulations?), she not only ignored the president’s harsh rhetoric; she confirmed it."
Shortly after slamming conservatives’ “lack of patriotism” and insisting opposition to Obama’s myopic focus on the Chicago Olympics “rivals Jane Fonda sitting on a gun in North Vietnam,” Ed Schultz decided to talk patrotism with Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-IL, who enjoys a cozy relationship with the Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America…
Schultz played a clip of Rush ascribing part of the Olympic Committee’s rejection of Chicago’s bid to the fact that the president has “been running around the world for nine months telling everybody how much our country sucks.” Schakowsky replied, “How dare Rush Limbaugh – how dare he say that this president goes around talking about how bad our country is? [Obama] has finally been able to establish us as real participants in the world community.”
Blithely unaware what she said is itself an anti-American slur (America was not a “participant” in the world community B.B.O. – Before Barack Obama? America is only good if it is held in check by UN regulations?), she not only ignored the president’s harsh rhetoric; she confirmed it."
Marc Lamont Hill isn’t Just An Admirer of Cop-Killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, He’s His Publisher « NewsReal Blog
Marc Lamont Hill isn’t Just An Admirer of Cop-Killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, He’s His Publisher « NewsReal Blog
Keeping The Cable Guys Honest
Marc Lamont Hill isn’t Just An Admirer of Cop-Killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, He’s His Publisher
2009 October 6
Another one of Marc Lamont Hill's "Freedom Fighter" heroes
Click here for a summary of NewsReal’s ongoing coverage of the radical politics of Marc Lamont Hill.
Not only is Fox News Contributor Marc Lamont Hill an admirer of convicted cop killer and radical icon Mumia Abu-Jamal, he’s also his publisher.
AIM’s Cliff Kincaid discovered that Abu-Jamal had been promoted on Hill’s now-deleted myspace account. Well it goes even further than Kincaid initially reported.
One of NewsReal’s astute readers just informed me of even more disturbing (though not particularly surprising) facts:
For two years, I read Hill’s blog daily. His views are indeed radical. He frequently praised Castro and Khallid Muhammad, along with other criminals and dictators.
For awhile, he even allowed Mumia Abu Jamal to guest post on a weekly basis.
Here’s Abu-Jamal’s warm introduction by Hill and here’s a post from as recent as September 9. When reading Hill’s enthusiastic endorsement of a radical murder be sure and keep in mind that supporting Abu-Jamal is a cause that’s even too fringe and ridiculous for Michael Moore:
What China Demands, Obama Provides « NewsReal Blog
What China Demands, Obama Provides « NewsReal Blog:
Last April, after the Dalai Lama–the spiritual leader of Tibet–announced his intention to travel to the United States in October, the Communist Chinese gave President Barack Obama a stern warning against meeting with him. China’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu made it quite clear that the Chinese, who invaded Tibet and have ruled it with an iron fist since 1950:
Firmly oppose the Dalai’s engagement in separatist activities in any country under whatever capacity and under whatever name. We have made representations to the United States urging the U.S. to honor its commitments and not allow the Dalai to engage in separatist activities in the United States.
This is not the first time the Chinese have threatened another country over meeting with the Tibetan spiritual leader.
Last year, the Chinese issued a similar threat to French President Nicolas Sarkozy. The French President was not intimidated, however, and did not hesitate to meet with the Dalai Lama, dismissing Chinese objections as unfounded. “The Dalai Lama,” said Sarkozy, “is not dangerous and is a man of peace.” The Chinese retaliated by cancelling a major economic summit with the European Union and organized a boycott of French products.
Sarkozy did the right thing and the French maintained their pride in the face of Chinese economic retaliation.
How has Barack Obama, President of the United States and leader of the free world, dealt with the same Chinese threat? Did he emulate Sarkozy and put human rights before economic blackmail?
He did not."
Last April, after the Dalai Lama–the spiritual leader of Tibet–announced his intention to travel to the United States in October, the Communist Chinese gave President Barack Obama a stern warning against meeting with him. China’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu made it quite clear that the Chinese, who invaded Tibet and have ruled it with an iron fist since 1950:
Firmly oppose the Dalai’s engagement in separatist activities in any country under whatever capacity and under whatever name. We have made representations to the United States urging the U.S. to honor its commitments and not allow the Dalai to engage in separatist activities in the United States.
This is not the first time the Chinese have threatened another country over meeting with the Tibetan spiritual leader.
Last year, the Chinese issued a similar threat to French President Nicolas Sarkozy. The French President was not intimidated, however, and did not hesitate to meet with the Dalai Lama, dismissing Chinese objections as unfounded. “The Dalai Lama,” said Sarkozy, “is not dangerous and is a man of peace.” The Chinese retaliated by cancelling a major economic summit with the European Union and organized a boycott of French products.
Sarkozy did the right thing and the French maintained their pride in the face of Chinese economic retaliation.
How has Barack Obama, President of the United States and leader of the free world, dealt with the same Chinese threat? Did he emulate Sarkozy and put human rights before economic blackmail?
He did not."
Director’s Blog » Blog Archive » How Slower Growth in the Labor Force Could Affect the Return on Capital
Director’s Blog » Blog Archive » How Slower Growth in the Labor Force Could Affect the Return on Capital: "The labor force in the United States is expected to grow much more slowly in the coming decades for several reasons: a long-term decline in fertility rates, the leveling off of a substantial increase in women’s labor force participation, and the aging and retirement of baby-boomers. CBO projects that the growth of the labor force, which averaged 1.6 percent per year from 1950 to 2007, will slow to about half a percent per year over the next 20 years. Although slower growth in the workforce might affect the U.S. economy and budget in many ways, CBO examined—in a background paper released today—what could happen to the rate of return paid on assets (such as stocks and bonds) and to wages.
Most mainstream economic models predict that the slowdown is likely to make the rate of return on capital—as reflected in the rate of interest on bonds or other borrowing, and the rate of return on stocks—lower than might otherwise be expected, by between 0.8 and 2.6 percentage points. Wages will be higher than would otherwise be the case, although that effect will be much smaller than the increase in wages that is projected to result from productivity growth.
Shifts in wages and rates of return on capital would have budgetary implications, both for the overall federal budget and for individual programs such as Social Security. The lower interest rates that would result from a slowdown in labor force growth would tend to reduce federal interest payments and slow the growth of debt relative to output. Lower interest rates would also reduce the interest income of the Social Security trust fund and increase the actuarial imbalance of the system (because future deficits in the system would be “discounted” at a lower rate of interest), although the accompanying higher wages would tend to increase payroll tax revenues somewhat."
Most mainstream economic models predict that the slowdown is likely to make the rate of return on capital—as reflected in the rate of interest on bonds or other borrowing, and the rate of return on stocks—lower than might otherwise be expected, by between 0.8 and 2.6 percentage points. Wages will be higher than would otherwise be the case, although that effect will be much smaller than the increase in wages that is projected to result from productivity growth.
Shifts in wages and rates of return on capital would have budgetary implications, both for the overall federal budget and for individual programs such as Social Security. The lower interest rates that would result from a slowdown in labor force growth would tend to reduce federal interest payments and slow the growth of debt relative to output. Lower interest rates would also reduce the interest income of the Social Security trust fund and increase the actuarial imbalance of the system (because future deficits in the system would be “discounted” at a lower rate of interest), although the accompanying higher wages would tend to increase payroll tax revenues somewhat."
Introducing Leftist Agitator Deepak Bhargava « NewsReal Blog
Introducing Leftist Agitator Deepak Bhargava « NewsReal Blog
On his TV show, Glenn Beck looked at the role that former ACORN official Deepak Bhargava is playing in influencing the Obama administration.
Bhargava is executive director of the radical left-wing community organizing group, the Center for Community Change (CCC). Founded in 1968, the group is dedicated to defending welfare entitlements and leftist anti-poverty programs.
CCC bases its training programs on techniques expounded by the famed radical organizer Saul Alinsky. Following Alinsky’s blueprint for establishing “grassroots” organizations to agitate for social change, the Center claims it has “nurtured thousands of local groups and leaders” across the United States.
Bhargava was shown giving a speech in December last year. He said that “big and bold solutions” were needed for America and that community organizers were going to be involved in “building a new economy for shared prosperity and expanding our democracy.”
Of course when radical leftists use the term democracy they don’t mean what regular Americans mean when they use the term. To the far left, it is a code word for socialism itself.
Bhargava also said that the socialist agenda is now moving forward by stealth.
The Center for Community Change is a member of the United for Peace and Justice anti-war coalition, which is led by Leslie Cagan, a longtime committed socialist who aligns her politics with those of Fidel Castro’s Communist Cuba.
The Center is financially supported by such foundations as the Ahmanson Foundation, the Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, the Fannie Mae Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Joyce Foundation, the Scherman Foundation, the Open Society Institute, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Public Welfare Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Surdna Foundation, and the Woods Fund of Chicago.
Claire Shipman's Bizarre Logic: 'Olympic Loss Actually a Boost for Obama'
Claire Shipman's Bizarre Logic: 'Olympic Loss Actually a Boost for Obama': "According to ABC correspondent Claire Shipman, the botched Olympic bid by Barack Obama is actually a 'good' thing for the President. Writing an online column for True/Slant, Shipman (see file photo at right) bizarrely spun, 'It would have been great had he come home a winner. Great for all of us. But maybe not so much for him. Why? Because then he would have then [sic] really irked his critics.'
Continuing this theory that a loss by Obama will calm some sort of seething rage, the Good Morning America reporter added, 'They’re [critics] already secretly and not so secretly peeved that he’s been voted the world’s prom king. Another victory would have just started a wave of dangerous, uncontrollable seething.' [Emphasis added.]
Who voted him the world’s prom king? Could it be journalists such as Shipman who, in January of 2007, referred to Obama’s campaigning as 'fluid poetry?' So, it’s not surprising that she would try to find some silver lining for the President. Additionally, her husband is Jay Carney, the Communications Director to Vice President Joe Biden. Shipman raised this point in the column, even as she tried to see the upside to Obama’s embarrassing failure at Copenhagen:"
Continuing this theory that a loss by Obama will calm some sort of seething rage, the Good Morning America reporter added, 'They’re [critics] already secretly and not so secretly peeved that he’s been voted the world’s prom king. Another victory would have just started a wave of dangerous, uncontrollable seething.' [Emphasis added.]
Who voted him the world’s prom king? Could it be journalists such as Shipman who, in January of 2007, referred to Obama’s campaigning as 'fluid poetry?' So, it’s not surprising that she would try to find some silver lining for the President. Additionally, her husband is Jay Carney, the Communications Director to Vice President Joe Biden. Shipman raised this point in the column, even as she tried to see the upside to Obama’s embarrassing failure at Copenhagen:"
House Refers Rangel Resolution to Ethics Committee - washingtonpost.com
House Refers Rangel Resolution to Ethics Committee - washingtonpost.com: "Rep. Charles B. Rangel's (D-N.Y.) Democratic colleagues blocked a move to strip him of his powerful committee chairmanship on Wednesday amid numerous allegations of violating congressional ethics rules.
A Republican-sponsored resolution said Rangel was unfit to chair the Ways and Means Committee, which writes Congress's tax laws, while he is under investigation by the House ethics committee. But Democrats prevented debate on the resolution and, on a 246 to 153 vote, instead sent it to the ethics committee for consideration.
Six Republicans voted with the Democrats, while two members of Rangel's party sided with the Republicans. More than a dozen others abstained because they are on the ethics committee and investigating allegations that Rangel failed to disclose rental income from a villa he owns in the Dominican Republic, improperly used a rent-controlled New York City apartment for a campaign office, and attended a congressional trip that was funded by lobbyists.
The resolution, sponsored by Rep. John Carter (R-Tex.), amounted to a withering indictment of Rangel, referring constantly to newspaper articles listing the alleged violations by the Harlem congressman and to editorials ripping him."
A Republican-sponsored resolution said Rangel was unfit to chair the Ways and Means Committee, which writes Congress's tax laws, while he is under investigation by the House ethics committee. But Democrats prevented debate on the resolution and, on a 246 to 153 vote, instead sent it to the ethics committee for consideration.
Six Republicans voted with the Democrats, while two members of Rangel's party sided with the Republicans. More than a dozen others abstained because they are on the ethics committee and investigating allegations that Rangel failed to disclose rental income from a villa he owns in the Dominican Republic, improperly used a rent-controlled New York City apartment for a campaign office, and attended a congressional trip that was funded by lobbyists.
The resolution, sponsored by Rep. John Carter (R-Tex.), amounted to a withering indictment of Rangel, referring constantly to newspaper articles listing the alleged violations by the Harlem congressman and to editorials ripping him."
Does Obamacare Turn Your State Into A Medicaid Monster? » The Foundry
Does Obamacare Turn Your State Into A Medicaid Monster? » The Foundry
Each of the health care bills in Congress expands Medicaid by making the taxpayer-funded benefits available to all adults with incomes at or below 133 percent of the poverty line. The change would dramatically multiply eligible recipients, with 33 states seeing increases of at least 30%, including 10 posting jumps of 50% or more — including Nevada (82.1%), Montana (80.7%) and Texas (76.9%).
View a larger version of chart here.
When the Senate Finance Committee finished marking marking up its bill, Heritage fellow Dennis Smith explained:
Just hours after the Senate Finance Committee completed its mark-up of its version of health care reform, Committee staff released a statement that announced, “[i]n a letter sent to Congressional leaders yesterday, Democratic governors affirmed their shared commitment to expanding health care coverage to millions of low-income Americans through the Medicaid program.”
Worried Governors
The press release, however, overstates the case. The governors’ letter does not even mention Medicaid. The very general sentiments expressed in the governors letter such as “… the status quo is no longer an option …” and “[s]kyrocketing health care costs hurt families …” are broadly if not universally shared. Democratic governors from 21 states signed the letter, of which 8 will be out of office before the Medicaid expansion even begins. One Democratic governor who did not sign the letter, Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen warns, “I can’t think of a worse time for this bill to be coming. I’d love to see it happen. But nobody’s going to put their state into bankruptcy or their education system in the tank for it.”
Health Care: At What Price? » The Foundry
Health Care: At What Price? » The Foundry: "Food or health care? For many of the poorest working families, that may no longer be an option should Senator Max Baucus’ health care bill become law. Through an individual mandate enforced by tax punishments, all adult Americans will be required either to purchase a health care plan or pay a fine. While only a nuisance for more affluent families, this has the potential to injure low-wage workers by decreasing real wages, increasing layoffs and reducing job opportunities. Should the poorest American workers be responsible to fund health care form?
Baucus’ plan would require all Americans between 133% and 400% of the Federal Poverty Level to pay a sliding percentage of their income for health care, increasing as the worker earns more. For an individual earning $19,915 annually, they would be required to spend as much as $1,145 on health insurance premiums, the rest to be covered by their employer. Based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey, an individual in this salary range spends roughly $268 per month on food. That comes to over four months of food, spent instead on mandatory health insurance.
Of course, this same individual could opt out of health insurance, but they would be responsible for a tax of $750 for a service that they do not receive. These numbers are mimicked even for a family of four at 300% of the Federal Poverty Level earning almost $70,000, which could be responsible for an $8,337 mandatory health plan. With BLS data, this sum could feed this family for almost a year, but should this family opt out they could be on the hook for a $3,800 fee to remain uninsured. Never before have Americans been obligated to pay so much for nothing."
Baucus’ plan would require all Americans between 133% and 400% of the Federal Poverty Level to pay a sliding percentage of their income for health care, increasing as the worker earns more. For an individual earning $19,915 annually, they would be required to spend as much as $1,145 on health insurance premiums, the rest to be covered by their employer. Based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey, an individual in this salary range spends roughly $268 per month on food. That comes to over four months of food, spent instead on mandatory health insurance.
Of course, this same individual could opt out of health insurance, but they would be responsible for a tax of $750 for a service that they do not receive. These numbers are mimicked even for a family of four at 300% of the Federal Poverty Level earning almost $70,000, which could be responsible for an $8,337 mandatory health plan. With BLS data, this sum could feed this family for almost a year, but should this family opt out they could be on the hook for a $3,800 fee to remain uninsured. Never before have Americans been obligated to pay so much for nothing."
What’s Next? They Are Not Felons, They Are ‘Impacted Persons’ » The Foundry
What’s Next? They Are Not Felons, They Are ‘Impacted Persons’ » The Foundry: "If you are up to date on your PC lingo, you already know that Columbus Day is imperialist and racist and that we should all be celebrating Indigenous Peoples Day instead. Now the left has come up with a new PC name for felons too.
Next Tuesday, the Justice Roundtable is hosting Legislative Breakfast and Luncheon Briefings for House and Senate staff. Among the featured speakers at both events is Lawrence Garrison who was convicted of convicted of conspiracy to distribute cocaine and crack cocaine and sentenced to 188 months in prison in 1998. Lawrence has since been released, but the Justice Roundtable does not identify him as a felon. Instead he is referenced as a “impacted person.”
So when you are in polite company and find the need to refer to a convicted criminal, remember, they are not called convicts are felons anymore. They are “impacted persons.” You’ve been warned."
Next Tuesday, the Justice Roundtable is hosting Legislative Breakfast and Luncheon Briefings for House and Senate staff. Among the featured speakers at both events is Lawrence Garrison who was convicted of convicted of conspiracy to distribute cocaine and crack cocaine and sentenced to 188 months in prison in 1998. Lawrence has since been released, but the Justice Roundtable does not identify him as a felon. Instead he is referenced as a “impacted person.”
So when you are in polite company and find the need to refer to a convicted criminal, remember, they are not called convicts are felons anymore. They are “impacted persons.” You’ve been warned."
Congress’ Secret Plan to Pass Obamacare - CONFIRMED » The Foundry
Congress’ Secret Plan to Pass Obamacare - CONFIRMED » The Foundry: "Leaders in the House and Senate have a plan to pass President Barack Obama’s sweeping health care plan by Thanksgiving without any significant participation by the American public. CNS News has confirmed the details in our September 22nd titled “Passing a Shell of A Bill: Congress’ Secret Plan to Ram Through Health Care Reform.” Nicholas Ballasy reports “a senior aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) told CNSNews.com that it is ‘likely’ that Reid will use H.R. 1586—a bill passed by the House in March to impose a 90-percent tax on bonuses paid to employees of certain bailed-out financial institutions—as a ‘shell’ for enacting the final version of the Senate’s health care bill, which Reid is responsible for crafting.”
This story confirms the four part scenario that would railroad the bill through the Senate using a very unusual closed door procedure to craft the bill with no input from the American people.
The four stage plan to pass Obamacare has been publicly confirmed and is ready to be implemented. The following is a comprehensive update:
Step One: “The Senate Finance Committee will finish work on the marking up of Senator Max Baucus’ (D-MT) conceptual framework for legislation by this Friday.” Progress on this had been stalled and the bill was not passed by the end of last week. Foxnews.com is reporting that the Congressional Budget Office score of the bill will be released later today and a high score may further stall progress on the Committee’s Vapor Bill. Senate Finance Committee’s progress on passing something out of committee – INCOMPLETE."
This story confirms the four part scenario that would railroad the bill through the Senate using a very unusual closed door procedure to craft the bill with no input from the American people.
The four stage plan to pass Obamacare has been publicly confirmed and is ready to be implemented. The following is a comprehensive update:
Step One: “The Senate Finance Committee will finish work on the marking up of Senator Max Baucus’ (D-MT) conceptual framework for legislation by this Friday.” Progress on this had been stalled and the bill was not passed by the end of last week. Foxnews.com is reporting that the Congressional Budget Office score of the bill will be released later today and a high score may further stall progress on the Committee’s Vapor Bill. Senate Finance Committee’s progress on passing something out of committee – INCOMPLETE."
The Lesson of State Health-Care Reforms » The Foundry
The Lesson of State Health-Care Reforms » The Foundry: "Peter Suderman, associate editor for Reason Magazine, has an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal on the track record of Obamacare like reforms at the state level. The full article is posted below and as an added service we found all the studies mentioned and provided links to view them:
Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously envisioned the states serving as laboratories, trying “novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.” And on health care, that’s just what they’ve done.
Like participants in a national science fair, state governments have tested variants on most of the major components of the health-care reform plans currently being considered in Congress. The results have been dramatically increased premiums in the individual market, spiraling public health-care costs, and reduced access to care. In other words: The reforms have failed.
New York is exhibit A. In 1993, the state prohibited insurers from declining to cover individuals with pre-existing health conditions (”guaranteed issue”). New York also required insurers to charge those enrolled in their plans the same premium, regardless of health status, age or sex (”community rating”). The goal was to reduce the number of uninsured by making health insurance more accessible, particularly to those who don’t have employer-provided insurance."
Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously envisioned the states serving as laboratories, trying “novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.” And on health care, that’s just what they’ve done.
Like participants in a national science fair, state governments have tested variants on most of the major components of the health-care reform plans currently being considered in Congress. The results have been dramatically increased premiums in the individual market, spiraling public health-care costs, and reduced access to care. In other words: The reforms have failed.
New York is exhibit A. In 1993, the state prohibited insurers from declining to cover individuals with pre-existing health conditions (”guaranteed issue”). New York also required insurers to charge those enrolled in their plans the same premium, regardless of health status, age or sex (”community rating”). The goal was to reduce the number of uninsured by making health insurance more accessible, particularly to those who don’t have employer-provided insurance."
Morning Bell: The ‘Tax and Spend’ Left are Back with a Vengeance » The Foundry
Morning Bell: The ‘Tax and Spend’ Left are Back with a Vengeance » The Foundry: "According to exit polls, Americans who voted last November 4th described themselves as 34% conservative, 44% moderate and only 22% liberal. One third of new voters were independents — and about two-thirds of them voted for President Barack Obama. How did President Obama win over so many moderates and independents? By explicitly renouncing his party’s tax and spend past. Specifically, Obama promised to “cut taxes for 95% of workers and their families” and enact “a net spending cut” for the federal government. Not only has President Obama failed to keep these promises, but his leftist base is stepping up their campaign for massive new tax hikes and spending increases.
Obama’s ‘no tax increases on families making $250,000 a year or less‘ lasted exactly 15 days. On February 4th, the President signed into law a bill expanding the children’s health insurance program that was paid for with a 156% tax hike on tobacco. Since slightly more than half of today’s smokers (53%) earn less than $36,000 per year, there is no way this bill can not be considered a tax hike on the poor. Democrats in the House have also passed a trillion dollar energy tax hike, and the Senate is about to approve new taxes on individuals who don’t have health insurance, businesses that want to create jobs, and on families with high cost health insurance plans. But even all those new taxes are just the beginning. This past Monday on Charlie Rose, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said a new value-added tax (VAT) is “on the table” as well."
Obama’s ‘no tax increases on families making $250,000 a year or less‘ lasted exactly 15 days. On February 4th, the President signed into law a bill expanding the children’s health insurance program that was paid for with a 156% tax hike on tobacco. Since slightly more than half of today’s smokers (53%) earn less than $36,000 per year, there is no way this bill can not be considered a tax hike on the poor. Democrats in the House have also passed a trillion dollar energy tax hike, and the Senate is about to approve new taxes on individuals who don’t have health insurance, businesses that want to create jobs, and on families with high cost health insurance plans. But even all those new taxes are just the beginning. This past Monday on Charlie Rose, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said a new value-added tax (VAT) is “on the table” as well."
Jews Flout Obama, Lay Cornerstone for E. Jerusalem Homes - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News
Jews Flout Obama, Lay Cornerstone for E. Jerusalem Homes - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News: "(IsraelNN.com) Developers of a new Jewish neighborhood on privately-owned land in eastern Jerusalem plan to lay the cornerstone for the project Wednesday afternoon, ignoring U.S. President Barack Obama’s opposition to Jewish “settlers' in the area. Former Chief Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau and National Union Knesset Member Uri Ariel plan to be on hand for the ceremony which marks the development of 105 luxury units in Nof Tzion. A new Torah scroll also will be dedicated.
The project is located in the Jabel Mukabar neighborhood, home to several terrorists with Israeli identity cards who have carried out murderous attacks on Israelis, including the murder of eight students at the Merkaz HaRav yeshiva last year. Police are deployed to prevent violence that has spread throughout eastern Jerusalem this week.
The new development project is the second stage of the Nof Tzion neighborhood and “is the best answer to incitement and violence from extremist elements,” according to the Im Tirtzu (If You Will It) organization. Ninety-one residential units already have been built, and most of them have been sold."
The project is located in the Jabel Mukabar neighborhood, home to several terrorists with Israeli identity cards who have carried out murderous attacks on Israelis, including the murder of eight students at the Merkaz HaRav yeshiva last year. Police are deployed to prevent violence that has spread throughout eastern Jerusalem this week.
The new development project is the second stage of the Nof Tzion neighborhood and “is the best answer to incitement and violence from extremist elements,” according to the Im Tirtzu (If You Will It) organization. Ninety-one residential units already have been built, and most of them have been sold."
School asks pupils to bring own toilet roll | Oddly Enough | Reuters
School asks pupils to bring own toilet roll | Oddly Enough | Reuters: "DUBLIN (Reuters) - Irish parents struggling to buy schoolbooks and uniforms in the face of a deep recession may now have to worry about sending their children to school with a toilet roll as well as a packed lunch.
Pupils at a primary school in the southern county of Cork are being asked to bring their own toilet paper to school to help save money, one of the starkest examples yet of the death of Ireland's 'Celtic Tiger' economy.
'The letter was sent out just as a way of balancing books here in the school and not intended as a demand,' said Catherine O'Neill, principal at St John's Girls National School.
O'Neill said the request was made because of cuts to government grants for books and computers. She added that parents were responding well."
Pupils at a primary school in the southern county of Cork are being asked to bring their own toilet paper to school to help save money, one of the starkest examples yet of the death of Ireland's 'Celtic Tiger' economy.
'The letter was sent out just as a way of balancing books here in the school and not intended as a demand,' said Catherine O'Neill, principal at St John's Girls National School.
O'Neill said the request was made because of cuts to government grants for books and computers. She added that parents were responding well."
Basics Project
Basics Project: "Welcome to BasicsProject.org
It is difficult to value something when its worth is unknown. This truth brings to mind the old adage about two children who had received the same bike, one given the bike, the other made to earn the bike. Invariably, the child who was given the bike was more prone to neglecting it, not understanding its worth, while the child who was made to earn the bike, who understood its worth, maintained it. This basic truth applies to our American Heritage and the continued welfare of our nation. Without a solid understanding of the basic principles used by our Founding Fathers in establishing our Constitutional Republic it is sometimes difficult for Americans to recognize the worth of the American ideal. When the full value of freedom and liberty are not realized it becomes easy to incrementally relinquish rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Today, our country faces both a threat from abroad and a threat, in the form of ideological conflict, from within. While some among us choose to accentuate the imperfections of our nation, others condemn our culture or literally champion our nation’s defeat and demise. We at BasicsProject.org understand that there is a direct correlation between understanding the principles, ideology, history and meaning behind our founding documents – the Charters of Freedom – and the proclivity to value and, therefore, advance our American Heritage to the next generation and beyond.
We invite you to study, use and disseminate the information you find here at BasicsProject.org. As an IRS recognized 501(c)(3) tax-exempt entity we provide this basic knowledge -- and links to organizations and literature that provide a more in-depth analysis of the subjects -- free of charge. But like any non-profit organization we do need your financial support to maintain our programs and refine our research. Please consider making a tax deductible contribution or purchasing one of our educational CDs. And please, tell your like-minded and open-minded friends about us. Our goal is grassroots, fact-based education and you are a major part of what will make our endeavors successful."
I Found this site and I think some readers may appreciate the content.
It is difficult to value something when its worth is unknown. This truth brings to mind the old adage about two children who had received the same bike, one given the bike, the other made to earn the bike. Invariably, the child who was given the bike was more prone to neglecting it, not understanding its worth, while the child who was made to earn the bike, who understood its worth, maintained it. This basic truth applies to our American Heritage and the continued welfare of our nation. Without a solid understanding of the basic principles used by our Founding Fathers in establishing our Constitutional Republic it is sometimes difficult for Americans to recognize the worth of the American ideal. When the full value of freedom and liberty are not realized it becomes easy to incrementally relinquish rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Today, our country faces both a threat from abroad and a threat, in the form of ideological conflict, from within. While some among us choose to accentuate the imperfections of our nation, others condemn our culture or literally champion our nation’s defeat and demise. We at BasicsProject.org understand that there is a direct correlation between understanding the principles, ideology, history and meaning behind our founding documents – the Charters of Freedom – and the proclivity to value and, therefore, advance our American Heritage to the next generation and beyond.
We invite you to study, use and disseminate the information you find here at BasicsProject.org. As an IRS recognized 501(c)(3) tax-exempt entity we provide this basic knowledge -- and links to organizations and literature that provide a more in-depth analysis of the subjects -- free of charge. But like any non-profit organization we do need your financial support to maintain our programs and refine our research. Please consider making a tax deductible contribution or purchasing one of our educational CDs. And please, tell your like-minded and open-minded friends about us. Our goal is grassroots, fact-based education and you are a major part of what will make our endeavors successful."
I Found this site and I think some readers may appreciate the content.
The New Media Journal | Obama Spars with McCain on Afghanistan, Rejects 'Biden Option'
The New Media Journal | Obama Spars with McCain on Afghanistan, Rejects 'Biden Option': "President Obama has made it clear to key congressional power-brokers that his administration's rethink of US military strategy in Afghanistan will not see a significant reduction of troop numbers and a narrower counter-terrorist focus on al-Qaeda.
Mr. Obama met key Republican and Democrat leaders in the White House State Dining Room last night to discuss a request from his top commander on the ground for up to 40,000 extra troops to help defeat the Taliban insurgency.
The meeting, on the eve of the eighth anniversary of the first US air strikes against al-Qaeda targets in Afghanistan, were an attempt to make clear that the decision Mr Obama faces is one that transcends normal party politics.
But the meeting produced a sharp exchange of views between Mr. Obama and his former rival for the presidency, the Republican senator John McCain, who effectively accused the President of dithering while US troops remain under fire.
According to people at the meeting, Senator McCain told Mr. Obama that he should not move at a 'leisurely pace' while US commanders wait for a decision on troop levels. The comment drew a sharp response from the President, who replied that nobody felt more urgency than he did about the war and there would be nothing leisurely about his decision.
During a 90-minute discussion, Mr Obama did not show his hand on possible troop increases. But he did make clear that that the war would not be reduced to a narrowly defined counter-terrorism effort in the border areas with Pakistan, a strategy that has been linked with his Vice-President, Joe Biden...
Mr. Obama has already added 21,000 troops to the force in Afghanistan so far this year, raising the total to 68,000, and many Democrats are openly opposed to any further increase.
According to both Republican and Democratic aides, Mr Obama may be considering a more modest injection of troops – closer to 10,000 than 40,000 – but the White House insists that no decision has yet been made.
“We do recognize that he has a tough decision, and he wants ample time to make a good decision,” said House Republican leader John Boehner. “Frankly, I support that, but we need to remember that every day that goes by, the troops that we do have there are in greater danger.”"
Mr. Obama met key Republican and Democrat leaders in the White House State Dining Room last night to discuss a request from his top commander on the ground for up to 40,000 extra troops to help defeat the Taliban insurgency.
The meeting, on the eve of the eighth anniversary of the first US air strikes against al-Qaeda targets in Afghanistan, were an attempt to make clear that the decision Mr Obama faces is one that transcends normal party politics.
But the meeting produced a sharp exchange of views between Mr. Obama and his former rival for the presidency, the Republican senator John McCain, who effectively accused the President of dithering while US troops remain under fire.
According to people at the meeting, Senator McCain told Mr. Obama that he should not move at a 'leisurely pace' while US commanders wait for a decision on troop levels. The comment drew a sharp response from the President, who replied that nobody felt more urgency than he did about the war and there would be nothing leisurely about his decision.
During a 90-minute discussion, Mr Obama did not show his hand on possible troop increases. But he did make clear that that the war would not be reduced to a narrowly defined counter-terrorism effort in the border areas with Pakistan, a strategy that has been linked with his Vice-President, Joe Biden...
Mr. Obama has already added 21,000 troops to the force in Afghanistan so far this year, raising the total to 68,000, and many Democrats are openly opposed to any further increase.
According to both Republican and Democratic aides, Mr Obama may be considering a more modest injection of troops – closer to 10,000 than 40,000 – but the White House insists that no decision has yet been made.
“We do recognize that he has a tough decision, and he wants ample time to make a good decision,” said House Republican leader John Boehner. “Frankly, I support that, but we need to remember that every day that goes by, the troops that we do have there are in greater danger.”"
The New Media Journal | Secret EU Plans to Become New Global Power Revealed
The New Media Journal | Secret EU Plans to Become New Global Power Revealed: "The European Union has drawn up secret plans to establish itself as a global power in its own right with the authority to sign international agreements on behalf of member states.
Confidential negotiations on how to implement the Lisbon Treaty have produced proposals to allow the EU to negotiate treaties and even open embassies across the world.
According to one confidential paper, the first pilot ''embassies'' are planned in New York, Kabul and Addis Ababa.
A letter conferring a full ''legal personality'' for the EU has been drafted in order for a new European diplomatic service to be recognised as fully fledged negotiators by international bodies and all non-EU countries.
The move is highly symbolic in Britain as it formally scraps the European Community, the organisation that Britons originally voted to join in the country's only referendum on Europe 34 years ago.
Mark Francois, Conservative spokesman on Europe, said the plan showed why the British should have been given a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. ''As we have long warned, the Lisbon Treaty increases the EU's power at the expense of the countries of Europe,'' he said.
The decision, taken shortly before Ireland's referendum last week, will mean a new European diplomatic service with more than 160 ''EU representations'' and ambassadors across the world."
Confidential negotiations on how to implement the Lisbon Treaty have produced proposals to allow the EU to negotiate treaties and even open embassies across the world.
According to one confidential paper, the first pilot ''embassies'' are planned in New York, Kabul and Addis Ababa.
A letter conferring a full ''legal personality'' for the EU has been drafted in order for a new European diplomatic service to be recognised as fully fledged negotiators by international bodies and all non-EU countries.
The move is highly symbolic in Britain as it formally scraps the European Community, the organisation that Britons originally voted to join in the country's only referendum on Europe 34 years ago.
Mark Francois, Conservative spokesman on Europe, said the plan showed why the British should have been given a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. ''As we have long warned, the Lisbon Treaty increases the EU's power at the expense of the countries of Europe,'' he said.
The decision, taken shortly before Ireland's referendum last week, will mean a new European diplomatic service with more than 160 ''EU representations'' and ambassadors across the world."
The New Media Journal | Deficit, Disclosure Delays Senate Vote on Health-Care Plan
The New Media Journal | Deficit, Disclosure Delays Senate Vote on Health-Care Plan: "Senate Democrats are facing another round of delays in their effort to expand Americans’ access to health care because of concern over the cost of the plan and demands that they disclose more about it.
The Senate Finance Committee has yet to vote on its bill as it waits for the Congressional Budget Office to assess the cost. And a group of eight Democrats whose votes may be crucial to final passage urged that the public be given more time to read new drafts of the legislation.
Adding to the unease was the disclosure last night by a congressional panel that it underestimated the fees that drug companies, insurers and medical device makers would pay toward the overhaul. The industries would be assessed $29 billion more than first calculated, the Joint Committee on Taxation said.
“I want to wait until all the stuff is on the table” before deciding how to vote on the finance panel bill, Senator Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, said yesterday afternoon. He said he needs to see the CBO analysis first.
These obstacles may thwart plans by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to start debate in the full Senate next week and get the final legislation to President Barack Obama before the Nov. 26 Thanksgiving holiday. Reid is already coping with friction among fellow Democrats over issues such as whether to create a government-run program to compete with private insurers."
The Senate Finance Committee has yet to vote on its bill as it waits for the Congressional Budget Office to assess the cost. And a group of eight Democrats whose votes may be crucial to final passage urged that the public be given more time to read new drafts of the legislation.
Adding to the unease was the disclosure last night by a congressional panel that it underestimated the fees that drug companies, insurers and medical device makers would pay toward the overhaul. The industries would be assessed $29 billion more than first calculated, the Joint Committee on Taxation said.
“I want to wait until all the stuff is on the table” before deciding how to vote on the finance panel bill, Senator Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, said yesterday afternoon. He said he needs to see the CBO analysis first.
These obstacles may thwart plans by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to start debate in the full Senate next week and get the final legislation to President Barack Obama before the Nov. 26 Thanksgiving holiday. Reid is already coping with friction among fellow Democrats over issues such as whether to create a government-run program to compete with private insurers."
The New Media Journal | White House Distancing Itself from Vulnerable Democrats
The New Media Journal | White House Distancing Itself from Vulnerable Democrats: "The White House is stepping back from lending its heft to a bellwether gubernatorial race in Virginia, party strategists say, seeking to conserve its political capital and avoid close association with a candidate who might lose.
The November vote in Virginia, as well as one in New Jersey, is an early indicator of Democrats' likely fortunes in the 2010 gubernatorial and congressional elections. Virginia is a particular testing ground for Democrats -- President Barack Obama was the first Democratic candidate for president in four decades to win the state.
After one appearance earlier this year, Mr. Obama hasn't committed to any further engagements in the state, despite repeated requests by the campaign of Virginia state Senator Creigh Deeds. Mr. Obama will make a second appearance on behalf of New Jersey Democratic incumbent Jon Corzine, on a date yet to be announced.
'They're looking at movement in the polls and calculating how far out in this race they want to see the president go,' said a Democratic strategist involved in both races. 'In New Jersey the path to victory is a little clearer, but I think in both cases they're making the calculation on how much of the win or the loss are they willing to own.'
The White House says it remains supportive of Mr. Deeds. This week, Vice President Joe Biden will appear at fund-raisers on behalf of both Messrs. Deeds and Corzine."
The November vote in Virginia, as well as one in New Jersey, is an early indicator of Democrats' likely fortunes in the 2010 gubernatorial and congressional elections. Virginia is a particular testing ground for Democrats -- President Barack Obama was the first Democratic candidate for president in four decades to win the state.
After one appearance earlier this year, Mr. Obama hasn't committed to any further engagements in the state, despite repeated requests by the campaign of Virginia state Senator Creigh Deeds. Mr. Obama will make a second appearance on behalf of New Jersey Democratic incumbent Jon Corzine, on a date yet to be announced.
'They're looking at movement in the polls and calculating how far out in this race they want to see the president go,' said a Democratic strategist involved in both races. 'In New Jersey the path to victory is a little clearer, but I think in both cases they're making the calculation on how much of the win or the loss are they willing to own.'
The White House says it remains supportive of Mr. Deeds. This week, Vice President Joe Biden will appear at fund-raisers on behalf of both Messrs. Deeds and Corzine."
The New Media Journal | ACORN Leader Paints Group as 'Victim', Goes on Offensive
The New Media Journal | ACORN Leader Paints Group as 'Victim', Goes on Offensive: "Bertha Lewis, the head of ACORN, came to the National Press Club on Tuesday, ostensibly to report on the community group's 'internal probe' into the ACORN workers who were caught on tape advising people posing as a pimp and a prostitute. But Lewis made it clear that, far from apologizing, she was on a 'set-the-record-straight tour.'
The internal review by ACORN's board, disclosed this week by the Louisiana attorney general, that $5 million had been embezzled from the group rather than the $1 million previously alleged? 'This is speculation, completely false and not based on any documentation or any audit or anything other than two disgruntled former board members,' Lewis reported.
Accusations of voter fraud after ACORN workers filled out voter registrations for Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck and the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys? 'An utter fabrication and a work of fiction that was created by the people who wrote it.'
The report by Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee that ACORN created a 'shell game that funneled charitable funds to for-profit organizations'? 'Another stretch of allegations of how to pound on ACORN...It's just false.'
And, of course, the secretly recorded videos of ACORN workers providing help to people claiming they wished to set up an underage-prostitution business? 'These highly edited tapes,' Lewis said, 'don't tell the whole story.' ACORN's accusers 'have to stoop to break the law in order to create something sensational,' she added.
In creativity, the ACORN boss's denials were matched only by her assignments of blame. She blamed her predecessor: 'I don't think it's fair to judge me, as I'm cleaning up a previous administration.' She blamed the powerful: 'We've seen this play before, whether it was the civil rights movement or whatever, when you organize poor people to have real power, what you do is often turned against you.' And most of all, she blamed Republicans: 'The RNC . . . because we've been inflated as the boogeyman, raises almost $2 million a day, every day, and this form of modern-day ACORN McCarthyism has got to stop.'"
The internal review by ACORN's board, disclosed this week by the Louisiana attorney general, that $5 million had been embezzled from the group rather than the $1 million previously alleged? 'This is speculation, completely false and not based on any documentation or any audit or anything other than two disgruntled former board members,' Lewis reported.
Accusations of voter fraud after ACORN workers filled out voter registrations for Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck and the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys? 'An utter fabrication and a work of fiction that was created by the people who wrote it.'
The report by Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee that ACORN created a 'shell game that funneled charitable funds to for-profit organizations'? 'Another stretch of allegations of how to pound on ACORN...It's just false.'
And, of course, the secretly recorded videos of ACORN workers providing help to people claiming they wished to set up an underage-prostitution business? 'These highly edited tapes,' Lewis said, 'don't tell the whole story.' ACORN's accusers 'have to stoop to break the law in order to create something sensational,' she added.
In creativity, the ACORN boss's denials were matched only by her assignments of blame. She blamed her predecessor: 'I don't think it's fair to judge me, as I'm cleaning up a previous administration.' She blamed the powerful: 'We've seen this play before, whether it was the civil rights movement or whatever, when you organize poor people to have real power, what you do is often turned against you.' And most of all, she blamed Republicans: 'The RNC . . . because we've been inflated as the boogeyman, raises almost $2 million a day, every day, and this form of modern-day ACORN McCarthyism has got to stop.'"
The New Media Journal | Obamas Overhaul White House Art Collection
The New Media Journal | Obamas Overhaul White House Art Collection: "A cultural revolution is under way at the White House, where the Obamas are decorating their living quarters with modern and abstract artwork.
Out have gone traditional landscapes, portraits and still life paintings. In have come new pieces by contemporary African-American and Native American artists, with bold colors, odd shapes and squiggly lines.
Works by big names from the modern art world such as Jasper Johns and Mark Rothko rub shoulders with lesser-known artists such as Alma Thomas, an African-American abstract painter of the 1960s and 1970s.
One of the most striking – and apt, as Mr. Obama wrestles with his Afghanistan policy – is Edward Ruscha’s I Think I’ll..., a painting about indecision which superimposes phrases such as “I think I’ll ...” and “maybe ... no' and “wait a minute' on top of a blood red sunset.
Thomas’s Watusi (Hard Edge) now hangs in the East Wing, where Michelle Obama has her offices. The acrylic on canvas, on loan from the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, shows a jumble of geometric shapes in bright reds, blues and greens."
Out have gone traditional landscapes, portraits and still life paintings. In have come new pieces by contemporary African-American and Native American artists, with bold colors, odd shapes and squiggly lines.
Works by big names from the modern art world such as Jasper Johns and Mark Rothko rub shoulders with lesser-known artists such as Alma Thomas, an African-American abstract painter of the 1960s and 1970s.
One of the most striking – and apt, as Mr. Obama wrestles with his Afghanistan policy – is Edward Ruscha’s I Think I’ll..., a painting about indecision which superimposes phrases such as “I think I’ll ...” and “maybe ... no' and “wait a minute' on top of a blood red sunset.
Thomas’s Watusi (Hard Edge) now hangs in the East Wing, where Michelle Obama has her offices. The acrylic on canvas, on loan from the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, shows a jumble of geometric shapes in bright reds, blues and greens."
The New Media Journal | Louisiana AG: ACORN Embezzlement Was $5 Million
The New Media Journal | Louisiana AG: ACORN Embezzlement Was $5 Million: "Louisiana's attorney general has broadened the scope of an investigation of ACORN to include a possible embezzlement of $5 million a decade ago within the community organization, five times more than previously reported.
ACORN Chief Executive Officer Bertha Lewis said the new reported amount is 'completely false.'
Attorney General Buddy Caldwell has been conducting an investigation of ACORN since June. He issued subpoenas in August seeking documents related to former ACORN International President Wade Rathke and his brother Dale Rathke, who kept the group's books. Those subpoenas were focused on possible ACORN violations for non-payment of employee withholding taxes, obstructing justice and violating the Employee Retirement Security Act. No charges have been made.
The attorney general had inquired in June into an alleged embezzlement within ACORN that happened 10 years ago. The group last year dealt with an internal dispute and a lawsuit involving accusations that Dale Rathke made nearly $1 million in improper credit card charges in 1999 and 2000. The brother and a donor repaid the money.
Caldwell said last month that the statute of limitations presented obstacles to prosecutors taking action on the embezzlement, and that his investigation was not focused on that issue. The subpoena issued Monday changed the tone of the investigation and put a new emphasis on the embezzlement issue.
'Current high-ranking members of ACORN have publicly acknowledged that embezzlement did in fact occur, but the exact amount of the embezzlement was unknown until it was recently acknowledged in a board of directors meeting on Oct. 17, 2008, by Bertha Lewis and Liz Wolf that an internal review had determined that the amount embezzled was $5 million, ' the new subpoena says.
The subpoena says, 'It is still unclear if some of the monies embezzled are from state, federal or private funds.'"
ACORN Chief Executive Officer Bertha Lewis said the new reported amount is 'completely false.'
Attorney General Buddy Caldwell has been conducting an investigation of ACORN since June. He issued subpoenas in August seeking documents related to former ACORN International President Wade Rathke and his brother Dale Rathke, who kept the group's books. Those subpoenas were focused on possible ACORN violations for non-payment of employee withholding taxes, obstructing justice and violating the Employee Retirement Security Act. No charges have been made.
The attorney general had inquired in June into an alleged embezzlement within ACORN that happened 10 years ago. The group last year dealt with an internal dispute and a lawsuit involving accusations that Dale Rathke made nearly $1 million in improper credit card charges in 1999 and 2000. The brother and a donor repaid the money.
Caldwell said last month that the statute of limitations presented obstacles to prosecutors taking action on the embezzlement, and that his investigation was not focused on that issue. The subpoena issued Monday changed the tone of the investigation and put a new emphasis on the embezzlement issue.
'Current high-ranking members of ACORN have publicly acknowledged that embezzlement did in fact occur, but the exact amount of the embezzlement was unknown until it was recently acknowledged in a board of directors meeting on Oct. 17, 2008, by Bertha Lewis and Liz Wolf that an internal review had determined that the amount embezzled was $5 million, ' the new subpoena says.
The subpoena says, 'It is still unclear if some of the monies embezzled are from state, federal or private funds.'"
CNSNews.com - Hoyer Won't Rule Out Voting on Senate Health Bill Without Changes and Sending it Directly to President
CNSNews.com - Hoyer Won't Rule Out Voting on Senate Health Bill Without Changes and Sending it Directly to President: "(CNSNews.com) – House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) won't rule out having the House vote on the Senate health-care bill without making any changes in it, which would allow the bill to go directly to President Barack Obama without having to pass through a House-Senate conference committee and another round of votes in the House and Senate--and a longer period of public scrutiny of what the text of the proposed law actually says.
“I won’t rule it out or in because I don’t know what the package is,” Hoyer told CNSNews.com on Tuesday.
'However, content will be critical in what action the House takes,” he added a moment later.
Under the proposal, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) would offer the Senate’s version of health reform as an amendment to a House-passed bill, H.R. 1586, which levies a 90-percent tax on bonuses received this year by employees of financial institutions that took at least $5 billion in government bailout money. Reid's amendment would strip out the substance of H.R. 1586 as passed by the House and replace it with the entirety of the Senate health care bill.
As a senior aide to Reid explained to CNSNews.com, this would be done because the Constitution only allows the House to initiate revenie bills, and since the Senate health care bill contains revenue provisions it technically cannot be initiated in the Senate. By being amended into the 'shell' of H.R. 1586, which is a House-initiated revenue bill, the Senate health care bill would technically become a House bill.
If Reid can muster enough votes (60) to overcome a filibuster of this maneuver and filibusters of any amendments subsequently made to the bill, Senate Democrats could pass their health care bill and send it back to the House, where it nominally originated. See related story here."
“I won’t rule it out or in because I don’t know what the package is,” Hoyer told CNSNews.com on Tuesday.
'However, content will be critical in what action the House takes,” he added a moment later.
Under the proposal, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) would offer the Senate’s version of health reform as an amendment to a House-passed bill, H.R. 1586, which levies a 90-percent tax on bonuses received this year by employees of financial institutions that took at least $5 billion in government bailout money. Reid's amendment would strip out the substance of H.R. 1586 as passed by the House and replace it with the entirety of the Senate health care bill.
As a senior aide to Reid explained to CNSNews.com, this would be done because the Constitution only allows the House to initiate revenie bills, and since the Senate health care bill contains revenue provisions it technically cannot be initiated in the Senate. By being amended into the 'shell' of H.R. 1586, which is a House-initiated revenue bill, the Senate health care bill would technically become a House bill.
If Reid can muster enough votes (60) to overcome a filibuster of this maneuver and filibusters of any amendments subsequently made to the bill, Senate Democrats could pass their health care bill and send it back to the House, where it nominally originated. See related story here."
CNSNews.com - Reid ‘Likely’ to Make Entire Health Bill an Amendment to Unrelated Tax Bill That House Passed in March
CNSNews.com - Reid ‘Likely’ to Make Entire Health Bill an Amendment to Unrelated Tax Bill That House Passed in March: "(CNSNews.com) -- A senior aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told CNSNews.com that it is “likely” that Reid will use H.R. 1586—a bill passed by the House in March to impose a 90-percent tax on bonuses paid to employees of certain bailed-out financial institutions—as a “shell” for enacting the final version of the Senate’s health care bill, which Reid is responsible for crafting.
Under the procedure, the substance of House Resolution 1586 would be removed and replaced with the entire Senate health care package. The maneuver would initially require the support of 60 senators to vote for cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 1586 (i.e., end debate on the congressional procedure and move forward).
If Reid wins 60 votes, then debate begins on his health care package. Reid could then decide to block all amendments and attempt to get a vote on the entire package.
However, a senator could filibuster the final vote, requiring another 60-vote majority to move forward. But if Reid decides to allow any amendments, each amendment could be filibustered, requiring a 60-vote majority to move to a final vote on each of them. An amendment that has the support of more than 50 but less than 60 senators could end up stopping the bill if neither side backs down. But if Reid is able to structure the debate so that all 60 senators who caucus with the Democrats stick with the party on cloture votes, he can pass the bill and send it to back to the House--where it originated as an entirely different bill in substance."
Under the procedure, the substance of House Resolution 1586 would be removed and replaced with the entire Senate health care package. The maneuver would initially require the support of 60 senators to vote for cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 1586 (i.e., end debate on the congressional procedure and move forward).
If Reid wins 60 votes, then debate begins on his health care package. Reid could then decide to block all amendments and attempt to get a vote on the entire package.
However, a senator could filibuster the final vote, requiring another 60-vote majority to move forward. But if Reid decides to allow any amendments, each amendment could be filibustered, requiring a 60-vote majority to move to a final vote on each of them. An amendment that has the support of more than 50 but less than 60 senators could end up stopping the bill if neither side backs down. But if Reid is able to structure the debate so that all 60 senators who caucus with the Democrats stick with the party on cloture votes, he can pass the bill and send it to back to the House--where it originated as an entirely different bill in substance."
CNSNews.com - Medicaid Fraud More than $63 Million in 5 States Alone, GAO Report Finds
CNSNews.com - Medicaid Fraud More than $63 Million in 5 States Alone, GAO Report Finds: "(CNSNews.com) – A California man took on the name of a dead person to receive taxpayer-funded health care for more than three years, charging $200,000 to the Medicaid system, including $2,870 to buy controlled substances under an assumed identity.
A Houston-area physician’s assistant kept on signing the name of the doctor who once employed her after that doctor had died. The prescriptions, many of which were also covered by Medicaid, were also for prescription pain killers.
More than 1,800 prescriptions were filled for people who are dead and another 1,200 prescriptions were written with the signatures of deceased doctors, according to an investigation of five states by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). And those were only two of the startling findings in a report that discovered $63.2 million in waste in five states alone."
A Houston-area physician’s assistant kept on signing the name of the doctor who once employed her after that doctor had died. The prescriptions, many of which were also covered by Medicaid, were also for prescription pain killers.
More than 1,800 prescriptions were filled for people who are dead and another 1,200 prescriptions were written with the signatures of deceased doctors, according to an investigation of five states by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). And those were only two of the startling findings in a report that discovered $63.2 million in waste in five states alone."
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
CPUSA Online - CPUSA 2008 Electoral Policy
CPUSA Online - CPUSA 2008 Electoral Policy
Archive 
Press Releases
The Communist Party USA views the 2008 elections as a tremendous opportunity to defeat the policies of the right-wing Republicans and to move our country in a new progressive direction.
The record turnout in the Democratic Presidential primary races shows that millions of voters, including millions of new voters, are using this election to bring about real change. We wholeheartedly agree with them.
While we do not endorse any particular candidates, we do endorse and join in the anti-Bush/anti-right wing sentiments that are driving so many people to activism.
The fact that the Democratic frontrunners are an African American and a woman speaks volumes on how far the country has come. Hillary Clinton’s campaign has attracted large numbers of supporters, especially women. Other Democratic contenders presented some excellent proposals to reverse the devastation caused by the Bush administration’s policies.
Barack Obama’s campaign has so far generated the most excitement, attracted the most votes, most volunteers and the most money. We think the basic reason for this is that his campaign has the clearest message of unity and progressive change, while having a real possibility for victory in November.
As we see it, however, this battle is bigger than the Democrats and Republicans, even though those parties are the main electoral vehicle for most voters today. Our approach is to focus on issues and movements that are influencing candidates and parties.
We will work with others to defeat the Republican nominee and to end right-wing control of the new Congress.
The activism growing out of this election will help guarantee a progressive mandate no matter who is elected. It is critical to our country’s renewal and future.
We think this election is a great opportunity to bring an early withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. It can mean job creation and relief for those who are losing their homes or unable to pay their bills.
This election can set the stage to advance the interests of working people; of those excluded because of race, gender, sexual orientation and immigration status.
This election can begin to turn the tide: it can help bring universal health care, save the environment and start the restoration of our democratic rights. This election can strengthen democracy for all.
In the long run, we see the need for an independent “people’s party” -- an electoral party that will unite labor and all democratic forces. We also are working for a political system and government whose priority is to watch the backs of working families, not fill the pockets of the corporate fat cats. Our slogan, “people before profits” and our goal of “Bill of Rights socialism” say it all.
Sounds oh so very familiar .....
CPUSA 2008 Electoral Policy | |
Archive Press Releases
 |
| |
The record turnout in the Democratic Presidential primary races shows that millions of voters, including millions of new voters, are using this election to bring about real change. We wholeheartedly agree with them.
While we do not endorse any particular candidates, we do endorse and join in the anti-Bush/anti-right wing sentiments that are driving so many people to activism.
The fact that the Democratic frontrunners are an African American and a woman speaks volumes on how far the country has come. Hillary Clinton’s campaign has attracted large numbers of supporters, especially women. Other Democratic contenders presented some excellent proposals to reverse the devastation caused by the Bush administration’s policies.
Barack Obama’s campaign has so far generated the most excitement, attracted the most votes, most volunteers and the most money. We think the basic reason for this is that his campaign has the clearest message of unity and progressive change, while having a real possibility for victory in November.
As we see it, however, this battle is bigger than the Democrats and Republicans, even though those parties are the main electoral vehicle for most voters today. Our approach is to focus on issues and movements that are influencing candidates and parties.
We will work with others to defeat the Republican nominee and to end right-wing control of the new Congress.
The activism growing out of this election will help guarantee a progressive mandate no matter who is elected. It is critical to our country’s renewal and future.
We think this election is a great opportunity to bring an early withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. It can mean job creation and relief for those who are losing their homes or unable to pay their bills.
This election can set the stage to advance the interests of working people; of those excluded because of race, gender, sexual orientation and immigration status.
This election can begin to turn the tide: it can help bring universal health care, save the environment and start the restoration of our democratic rights. This election can strengthen democracy for all.
In the long run, we see the need for an independent “people’s party” -- an electoral party that will unite labor and all democratic forces. We also are working for a political system and government whose priority is to watch the backs of working families, not fill the pockets of the corporate fat cats. Our slogan, “people before profits” and our goal of “Bill of Rights socialism” say it all.
Sounds oh so very familiar .....
CPUSA Online - Change is Here, Change is Coming
CPUSA Online - Change is Here, Change is Coming: "I make no attempt to be comprehensive in these remarks. My aim is much more modest, as you will see.
Let me begin with a simple observation: If the last 30 years were an era of reaction, then the coming decade could turn into an era of reform, even radical reform. Six months into the Obama presidency, I would say without hesitation that the landscape, atmosphere, conversation, and agenda have strikingly changed compared to the previous eight years.
In this legislative session, we can envision winning a Medicare-like public option and then going further in the years ahead.
We can visualize passing tough regulatory reforms on the financial industry, which brought the economy to ruin.
We can imagine the troops coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan while U.S. representatives participate in a regional process that brings peace and stability to the entire region.
In the current political climate, the expansion of union rights becomes a real possibility.
Much the same can be said about winning a second stimulus bill, and we sure need one, given the still-rising rate, and likely long term persistence, of unemployment.
Isn’t it possible in the Obama era to create millions of green jobs in manufacturing and other sectors of the economy in tandem with an attack on global warming?
Can’t we envision taking new strides in the long journey for racial and gender equality in this new era, marked at its beginning by the election of the first African American to the presidency?
And isn’t the overhaul of the criminal justice and prison system – a system steeped in racism – no longer pie-in-the sky, but something that can be done in the foreseeable future?
All these things are within reach now!
I make this observation because in the ebb and flow of the first six months of the Obama presidency, it is easy to lose sight of the overall dynamics and promise of this new era.
Obama’s role
The new conditions of struggle are possible only – and I want to emphasize only – because we elected President Obama and a Congress with pronounced progressive and center currents."
Let me begin with a simple observation: If the last 30 years were an era of reaction, then the coming decade could turn into an era of reform, even radical reform. Six months into the Obama presidency, I would say without hesitation that the landscape, atmosphere, conversation, and agenda have strikingly changed compared to the previous eight years.
In this legislative session, we can envision winning a Medicare-like public option and then going further in the years ahead.
We can visualize passing tough regulatory reforms on the financial industry, which brought the economy to ruin.
We can imagine the troops coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan while U.S. representatives participate in a regional process that brings peace and stability to the entire region.
In the current political climate, the expansion of union rights becomes a real possibility.
Much the same can be said about winning a second stimulus bill, and we sure need one, given the still-rising rate, and likely long term persistence, of unemployment.
Isn’t it possible in the Obama era to create millions of green jobs in manufacturing and other sectors of the economy in tandem with an attack on global warming?
Can’t we envision taking new strides in the long journey for racial and gender equality in this new era, marked at its beginning by the election of the first African American to the presidency?
And isn’t the overhaul of the criminal justice and prison system – a system steeped in racism – no longer pie-in-the sky, but something that can be done in the foreseeable future?
All these things are within reach now!
I make this observation because in the ebb and flow of the first six months of the Obama presidency, it is easy to lose sight of the overall dynamics and promise of this new era.
Obama’s role
The new conditions of struggle are possible only – and I want to emphasize only – because we elected President Obama and a Congress with pronounced progressive and center currents."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)