Previous month:
June 2009
Next month:
August 2009

The compromise of Obama's transparency and accountability that never was?

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT:      Transparency and Open Government

My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government.  We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government. – Barack Obama <Source>

Lobbyists win out over citizen’s need to know …

The Hill.com is reporting …

“White House eases stimulus lobbyist restrictions”

“In a significant change, the Obama administration will now allow lobbyists to meet and have telephonic discussions with government officials regarding economic recovery projects.”

“The lifting of the ban comes after K Street has cried foul for months and has challenged the White House on its restrictions.”

Nothing in politics trumps the man with the cash and the offer of voter support …

“In March, President Obama announced that government officials would not be allowed to consider the views of lobbyists regarding specific stimulus projects unless the requests are put in writing. The materials also had to be posted on an agency’s website within three business days of receipt.”

Lobbyists have said that the policy was one more example of the administration's disdain for their industry.

Disdain for their industry: organized corruption of the government and the promotion of practices which may be harmful to citizens and consumers? I did not know that prostitution was legal in Washington D.C. and that you could buy a politician as easily as you could buy a hooker’s attention for an hour.

New guidance …

“Now, the just-revised rules will allow government personnel to accept meetings and calls from federally registered lobbyists on the implementation of stimulus projects. The head of the Office of Management and Budget, Peter Orszag, issued a new guidance late Friday regarding the administration's communications with registered lobbyists about economic recovery funds.”

“Lobbyists can make their cases -- and agency officials can listen to them – at ‘widely attended gatherings.’ Government officials have to ask whether the person they are talking to at such events is a federally registered lobbyist speaking on behalf of a client.”

“Agency officials are required to promptly disclose on the Internet all oral and written communications with lobbyists concerning policy or projects funded under the recovery act. They also have to disclose any written communications with lobbyists regarding pending applications for competitive funding.”

“The one caveat, however, is that lobbyists can talk to agency representatives only about logistical issues or general questions regarding stimulus grants. Agency officials have to document any discussion with a lobbyist that veers toward advocacy of stimulus policy or a particular project.”

Government officials are still banned from talking to lobbyists representing companies that have already applied for grants and are awaiting a competitive decision. In those cases, agency officials are allowed to accept ‘oral communication’ only if the matter is purely logistical.”

The far-left meets the special interests … 

“Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the American League of Lobbyists (ALL) joined forced to advocate that the White House revise its rules. ALL informed its members Saturday morning of the changes.”

I find it extremely interesting that CREW, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, is described as: 

"Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is a watchdog group founded in 2003. Its stated mission is to 'promote ethics and accountability in government and public life by targeting government officials - regardless of party affiliation - who sacrifice the common good to special interests.' CREW advances its mission by engaging in litigation, public advocacy, Freedom of Information Act requests, media outreach and official complaints to government agencies such as the Federal Election Commission and the Internal Revenue Service."

Apparently, its objective nature is somewhat questionable when one considers the statement of its communications director.

"We are progressive," said Naomi Seligman, the group's deputy director and communications director. "We do work within a larger progressive infrastructure." Seligman suggested her group is the progressive counterweight to Judicial Watch. <Source>

And there is very little doubt in my mind that the ACLU represents a threat to our freedoms and is openly representing those who would destroy the American way of life, both foreign and domestic.

Why?

We know, understand and honor the openness of the lobbyists – paid advocates of their clients – where it is all about money, power and quid pro quo favoritism.

But with far-left organizations that purport to represent and protect the people, it is all about advancing their political ideology – and in this case, one that might prove toxic, or even fatal, to American citizens.

What the lobbyists said to there members …

"Essentially, you will be able to once again meet and have telephonic conversations with personnel in charge of the projects and be able to provide your subject matter expertise to them to help them make the best ‘merit based’ decisions possible for the stimulus projects," Dave Wenhold, the president of ALL, wrote in an e-mail message to members.”

"Getting us back to the table and ensuring that we are treated equally has been the main goal for ALL. We are also thankful to our partners in this effort, especially the Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington (CREW) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Between the main three groups and others, we made a diverse and strong coalition that advocated for these revisions."

A coalition against the American citizen and taxpayers is about the only way I can describe organizations which promote harmful legislative initiatives and administration policies to support their own political ideology and/or profits. As an advocate of free speech, I also support their right to have their voice heard… just not their undisclosed whispers in the ear of influential policy makers in some dark back room.

Bottom line …

Once again we find the special interests: the wealthy, the powerful,the politically-connected and the ideologically-driven, calling the shots through their lobbyists and lawyers who are busy collecting promises of campaign cash and voter support for the upcoming 2010/2012 election cycle which may prove to be one of the most contentious political contests in the history of the United States. An Orwellian contest between those who are attempting to redefine good and evil, truth and falsity, black and white, responsibility and political ideology.

In the final analysis, nothing about the Obama Administration has been open and transparent. All clouded with the taint and stink of politics where perception often trumps reality.

-- steve

____________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links …

TheHill.com - White House eases stimulus lobbyist restrictions

The Offical Memorandum|White House OMB


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Obama continues to play the race card: interrupts press briefing to explain his comments on the local Cambridge police controversy involving charges of racism ...

This may not be what it seems ...

I find it deeply disturbing that the President of the United States finds it necessary to continue to interfere in a local police affair – which has caused charges of racism to be leveled on both sides of the controversy.

No, not on the racial issue -- but on a scheme to distract the mainstream media from the fact that Obama has just been handed a major defeat on his deeply flawed healthcare initiative which will not be passed as fast as the democrats might want. This looks like a Rahm Emanuel moment; possibly complete with some overnight polling and a little spin-testing before Obama decided to interrupt the daily press briefing? 

Imagine the duplicity of the White House to actually use racial stereotypes to drive attention from their enormous failure?

The Machiavellian distraction: in Obama’s own words …

Defusing a major problem: the President of the United States defended a self-described “victim of racism” against the police, who appeared to be professional and acting in the best interests of the community and who he originally described as acting stupidly.

A teachable moment …

Civilians should be respectful of police officers at all times – saving their anger for the official complaint which they are entitled to file – and trying to do everything in their power to provide a quick resolution to the matter at hand.

In the present case, we know that the eyewitness described that there were two alleged perpetrators of a potential crime. One man answers the door and allegedly refuses to answer when the officer asks if there is someone else present in the residence. How does the officer know that there is not a perpetrator holding a gun on the person being interviewed? He doesn’t and needs to proceed accordingly to insure his safety and that of the interviewee.

Additionally, the officer was well within his rights to have the interviewee step outside of the house. Who knows what weapons may have been concealed or cached in the residence; potentially putting the officer’s life at risk.

For those who claim that even a blind man could have seen that the professor represented no danger due to his age, appearance and his background; one should consider that many a con man have portrayed themselves as innocent victims when being questioned by the police and that others “of that certain age” have pulled weapons and fired at officers.

The lesson is simple – shut up, comply and then file a grievance after the fact, if you are so inclined. Trying to pull rank, demonstrate your importance or to do otherwise, for a person of any color – be it white, black, blue, orange – is to invite trouble. That is the teachable moment.

Obama: maybe I didn’t explain it correctly …

“The fact that this has garnered so much attention I think is a testimony to the fact that these are issues that are still very sensitive here in America. And to the extent that my choice of words didn’t illuminate, but rather contributed to more media frenzy, I think that is unfortunate.”

Excusing his own behavior …

Referring to those of us who have complained about Obama’s insertion into this troubling matter.

“The fact this has become such a big issue I think is indicative of the fact that race is still a troubling aspect of our society. Whether I were black or white, I think that me commenting on this, and hopefully contributing to constructive as opposed to negative understandings about the issue, is part of my portfolio.”

 Gates: inherent racial bias or the arrogance of a self-important professor?

Professors, especially those who teach at prestigious schools often have an arrogance born of  a combination of elitism, superior intellect and conditioned by the deference shown to them by their students and others on campus. Perhaps the professor was just being an elitist who resented questioning by someone in authority who did not defer to his “higher standing” in the community?

Or perhaps, as with Reverends Jackson and Sharpton, Gates’ entire professional career has been associated with black victimhood and racial matters and is pre-conditioned to believe that any questioning on his own property by a white police officer is offensive and must be racially motivated.

Given the exact duties of the professor as the “Alphonse Fletcher University Professor and the Director of the W. E. B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research at Harvard University,” perhaps charges of an arrogant and condescending demeanor are not so far from the truth.

Capitalizing and commercializing this unfortunate encounter is abhorrent to me …

Reinforced by the professor’s continued charges of “racially-motivated” police actions on the talk show circuit where he claims to be contemplating a civil lawsuit and the creation of a documentary on the incident. To me, this is a form of crass commercialism and attempt to promote his private agenda through the media. Which leads me to, once again ask ..

Is it any wonder that I think he views everything through the prism of race?

And is it any wonder that I think he may try to capitalize on his newfound notoriety: appearing on program after program repeating his charge of racism against the police officer who appears to be doing his sworn duty in a competent and professional matter. 

Obama: distraction from his Administration’s failures?

Obama did not need this grief in his life. Unfortunately, I believe that underneath his polished, well-spoken exterior, lies a cauldron of repressed rage at a system who he believes is racist. Never once have I heard him claim that our America is great. Never once have I heard him claim that our healthcare system, as flawed as it may be, is the best in the world. Perhaps he mirrors the sentiments of his wife, Michelle, who claimed in a Milwaukee speech, “"for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback."

With all of the problems with the failing banks, failing corporations, rising unemployment, a deeply troubled economy and a lack of a coherent energy and foreign affairs policy, one would think that Obama would concentrate on his own duties and leave local matters to local politicians. But then again, considering the duplicitous and devious nature of the Obama White House, I would not put it past him to attempt to manipulate the news media to distract the public from the cratering economy, rising unemployment and the damage he has wrought with his toxic healthcare and economy-busting global warming cap-and-trade legislation. Or the fact that his "historic" healthcare initiative has hit the shoals of public understanding.

Bottom line: a masterful "head fake" ...

Professor Gates appears to be an extremely well-educated and scholarly man who knows his subject matter well. It should also be noted that the police officer seems to represent himself in a professional and competent manner. Were it not for the President of the United States playing the race card, the matter might have been settled with little or no drama in a court of law or left to die without further comment. To conflate this matter into a national media storm speaks of other motives. Distraction from the healthcare debacle and the internal dissention within the ranks of democrats for one.

Obama refuses to let it die …

The Boston Globe is reporting that Professor Gates has accepted Obama’s offer to share a beer at the White House with Officer Crowley…

“Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. said this evening that he would accept President Obama's invitation to meet with him and Cambridge Police Sergeant James M. Crowley at the White House.”

“Gates said in an email to the Globe that he was pleased to talk to the president today and to be asked to meet with Crowley, adding, ‘I said I would.’"

"’My entire academic career had been based on improving race relations, not exacerbating them. I am hopeful that my experience will lead to greater sensitivity to issues of racial profiling in the criminal justice system. If so, then this will be a blessing for our society. It is time for all of us to move on, and to assess what we can learn from this experience,’ he said.

“Obama extended the invitation today in phone calls to the two men as he sought to calm a national debate over racial profiling that reached a fever pitch after news broke of the white officer's arrest of the black scholar at his home last week.”

“Crowley and the president discussed ‘he and I and professor Gates having a beer here in the White House,’ Obama said in a White House news conference. ‘We don't know if that's scheduled yet -- but we may put that together.’ The White House issued a statement later, noting that Obama had also called Gates.”

You may ask yourself what message is being sent to the world – that the police were, at the very least, partially wrong and insensitive when they arrested Professor Gates. I think that Officer Crowley has been placed in a compromising position which undercuts his authority and the authority of the police department in Cambridge, MA.

But most of all, I think that the mainstream media has been masterfully conned into almost ingoring Obama's healthcare debacle while this racial garbage plays out. And I am extremely pissed that Obama's involvement in this matter has held the United States of America up before the international community as still being racist and that the President is needed to redress the grievance.

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Quote of the day: "When you respond to a 911 call of a potential burglar in process, it is not racial profiling -- it is good police work." -- steve


Reference Links …

Obama Holds Impromptu Briefing: He, Sgt. Crowley and Gates May Have a Beer Together | Online | Mediaite

Gates accepts White House meeting offer - Local News Updates - The Boston Globe


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Potential political corruption in the judiciary?

We have seen how the democrats savage judicial nominees for high judicial office. Nominees Bork, Thomas and Roberts suffered through contentious Senate confirmation hearings. All based on their support of political ideologies and not their personal competence and suitability to assume a position on the highest court in the land.

Now we are witnessing the political charade of the Sotomayor hearings. Acting as if Sotomayor has somehow distanced herself from the very words which indicate an unacceptable history of judicial activism. Another Ruth Bader Ginsberg in the making. A potentially divisive presence on the bench that  might prove to be insurmountable for people of the “wrong color” seeking justice before a blind bench committed to reviewing the facts, the law and rendering a fair and just opinion without resorting to any overt or covert biases. Someone who may view profit-making corporations as evil and give undue weight to environmentalists who want to use our own legal system to drag the United States into a third-world environment.

But troubling as this may see, we are now seeing a more troubling event on the judicial horizon …

As reported by Law.com, we are seeing:

Federal Judges Turn to Democratic Lobbyists

“It turns out that confirmation isn't the only thing judges want from Congress. Federal judges are hoping a new set of lobbyists with strong Democratic ties will be able to push their agenda on Capitol Hill, including laying the groundwork for what judges view as a long-overdue salary increase.”

Lobbyists not only act in the best interests of their clients, but often introduce stink and taint into the political process by engaging in subtle, but legal, “quid pro quo” deals with legislators.

Can we now trust a judiciary who might be beholden to certain members of Congress who may have provided key votes in affecting judicial salaries? In spite of the loud protestations of the judiciary, might we see a more prevalent pattern of corruption from the bench?

“The Federal Judges Association, together with one group representing U.S. magistrate judges and another representing U.S. bankruptcy judges, hired Patton Boggs partner Jonathan Yarowsky, a former general counsel to the House Judiciary Committee, as of April 1, according to a lobbying disclosure form filed earlier this month. The judges' groups also hired Steve Elmendorf of Elmendorf Strategies, a one-time aide to then-House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt. Also on the team are four other Elmendorf lobbyists with Democratic ties, including Robert Cogorno, a former staffer for House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md.”

How much longer until they decide to be unionized and come under the influence of corrupt public service employees unions and engage in unethical events to further their own cause; thus further compromising the Founding Father’s creation of co-equal branches of government?

Now before someone waffles on about the independence of the judiciary and the fine and noble work that judges do, one might take the time to regard the ever increasing number of judges that are being sanctioned for inappropriate behavior, if not outright corruption.

“The Senate spent last week on its highest-profile task related to the judicial branch: confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. But Congress also controls the federal purse strings, which means members control decisions about the judicial branch's budget and resources, including salaries, benefits and staff. Judges also warily watch for legislation they say could infringe on the judiciary's independence, such as appointment of an inspector general.”

"’We do have some legislative things that are important to us, and as they become important to us, we are going to direct our Washington representatives to act on our behalf,’ said Chief Judge Wiley Daniel of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. Daniel is president of the Federal Judges Association, which he said represents more than 900 federal district and appeals court judges. ‘This is broader than pay. It includes anything that will impact our economy and independence.’"

“The judges' groups have otherwise been without a lobbyist since the first quarter of 2008, when they ended their relationship with the Livingston Group and former Rep. Bob Livingston, R-La. The choice of the new lobbyists, with their heavily Democratic ties, reflects the political shifts in Washington, where Democrats now control both houses of Congress as well as the White House.”

The democrats often play hardball, exacting quid pro quo arrangements for their support. Such is the way of politics; but do we want to further inject politics into the judicial process? Might jurists be inherently biased when deciding cases which are representative of democratic law firms? While we would like to think that our judiciary is without taint, the Sotomayor hearings prove differently. That certain democrat elements of Congress are more likely than not to overlook certain ideological proclivities to put an activist judge on the bench.

The further creation of a pampered, political class of elite lawyers …

“So far, the new lobbying team has seen some success. The judges' groups strongly back a bill that would give judges another chance to enroll in a benefits plan known as the Judicial Survivors Annuities System, which pays an annuity to any dependents after a judge's death. Currently, the only opportunity judges have to elect to participate in the plan is when they are confirmed to the bench or promoted. The bill would create a one-time six-month enrollment window for current judges -- essentially a second chance. David Sellers, a spokesman for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, said the plan is funded by member contributions, and the bill doesn't require any new government spending.”

If you can believe that the government is not providing some funding or implicit guarantees, perhaps you should invest in real estate being offered in Afghanistan. Ordinary people purchase insurance to protect their families. So what’s up with these special policies? And, if they are cost free to the government, why do they need Congressional approval? All insurance is technically financed by member contributions (premiums) … so what is so special about this plan? Perhaps we should remember that senior judges tend to be older and represent greater health risks due to the amount of stress that might be encountered on the bench. But as for special coverage, I think not. 

“Daniel said the judges will depend on the lobbyists to keep them abreast of legislation on which they need to weigh in. For instance, he said, Congress had previously considered appointing an inspector general for the judiciary, and the judges objected, arguing that it would compromise judicial independence.”

Perhaps someone should be keeping an eye on the independent judiciary? Normally this was a task of the mainstream media who would point out egregious examples of judicial misconduct and crazy rulings. But it seems that the mainstream media has compromised their journalistic ethics and have given themselves over to becoming propagandists for the democrat regime – perhaps in return for the corporate survival of their parent organizations.

Bottom line …

I am all for compensating judges commensurately with the skills and abilities they bring to the bench. For the stress and strain of dealing with a difficult workload. To insure that the judiciary has the resources to function in this era of increasing workloads and reduced budgets. I want to see an independent judiciary not beholden to some political party, individual politicians or lobbyists. I want to go back to an era, if it really existed, blind justice where those before the bench could get a fair and impartial hearing and that the laws were interpreted in light of original intent – not the social and political demands of today’s rather corrupt society.

I believe that the employment of lobbyists is potentially more damaging to the independence of the judiciary than the appointment of an inspector general to investigate cases of wrongdoing arising from personal or professional misconduct on and off the bench. Leaving the judiciary to investigate its own has proven to be somewhat ineffective as judges are rarely prosecuted to the full extent of the law after betraying their oath of office and the trust of the people who may have elected them to office. I also believe that there should be a judicial training program before on ascends to the bench and periodic exams to insure competency. I also believe that there should be term limits imposed on the Supreme Court to keep senility (dementia) from affecting rulings. We need to make our judiciary more accountable to the precepts of justice and impartial rulings.

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links:

Law.com: Federal Judges Turn to Democratic Lobbyists

FEDERAL PENSIONS: Judicial Survivors’ Annuities System Costs|GAO Congressional Report (2002)

“For the 3 years covered by our review, the judges’ contributions represented more than the 50 percent of the JSAS normal costs for fiscal year 1999, but less than 50 percent for fiscal years 2000 and 2001. The participating judges paid 61 percent of JSAS normal costs during fiscal year 1999 and approximately 48 percent of JSAS normal costs during fiscal years 2000 and 2001. On the basis of data from plan years 1999, 2000, and 2001, the participating judges contributed, on an average, approximately 52 percent of JSAS normal costs; the government’s share amounted to, on an average, approximately 48 percent. While the judges’ contribution rate remained fixed at 2.2 percent and 3.5 percent of salaries for active and retired judges, respectively, the government’s contribution rate increased from 1.5 percent of salaries in fiscal year 1999 to 2.6 percent of salaries in
fiscal years 2000 and 2001. The increase in the government’s contribution was a result of an increase in normal costs resulting from a decline in the market value of assets held in JSAS, as well as an increase in plan benefits
being paid over the period
.”

Wonder what those costs might be like after the meltdown of our financial system?

S. 1107 ES:  Judicial Survivors Protection Act of 2009 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by Senate) -- “To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide for a limited 6-month period for Federal judges to opt into the Judicial Survivors' Annuities System and begin contributing toward an annuity for their spouse and dependent children upon their death, and for other purposes.”


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Race Relations: Move over Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, here comes Professor Henry Louis Gates, Junior!

It is one thing to be the victim of racism and racial profiling, but quite another to view everything through the prism of race, outrage and victimhood.

What started off as a routine police investigation of a citizen-reported breaking and entering has now escalated to a national controversy because of President Obama’s imprudent remarks on racial relations at press conference designed to promote his healthcare agenda.

What we know …

Henry Louis Gates, Junior arrived home and allegedly found his front door stuck. A neighbor witnessing his attempts to muscle the door open call ed the police as any good neighbor might do. The police arrived after Gates was already in the house and requested identification as per police policy.

What we don’t know …

We do not know what the police officer said and his tone of voice. We do not no what Henry Louis Gates said and his tone of voice.

What happened …

For some reason, as yet unknown, the police officer placed Professor Henry Louis Gates under arrest for disorderly conduct after allegedly “exhibiting loud and tumultuous behavior, in a public place, directed at a uniformed police officer who was investigating a report of a crime in progress.” According to the police report Gates allegedly became belligerent over racial politics.

Wait a minute …

Just because the alleged arrestee was black and the police officer was white – and the Professor is a well-regarded Harvard professor – does not automatically make the alleged victim right and the police officer wrong --- except among racists who want to use this rather routine incident to promote their own racial agenda. Especially since the police officer as a distinguished history and is extremely aware of racial relations.

Why I am suspicious …

The professor – who coincidently is said to be one of the foremost scholars on race in America – appears to be capitalizing on his newfound fame and his association with Barack Obama who denounced the police department at his press conference.

I find it extremely curious that the professor has reportedly said that the confrontation is inspiring him to consider making a documentary film about racial profiling.

President Obama and democrat victimhood …

And I find it disgustingly cowardly that the politicians controlling the police department have decided, apparently to prevent a routine incident from raging into a major time and money-consuming legal matter and unwanted media attention, have dropped the charges. I also find it extremely disturbing that the President of the United States would comment on the racial aspect of the matter without having all of the facts, waiting to see if Professor Gates files a formal complaint with the police department and would divert attention from his healthcare agenda to “editorialize” about an issue which he knows little or nothing about.

Obama: ready, fire, aim …

But that’s President Obama’s history: ready, fire, aim … promoting victimhood and race – ever the community activist and failing to rise to the higher calling, ethics and behavior required of the President of the United States.

After reading about the background of the police office and reading the original police report, my money says a tired and cranky professor started to become verbally abusive and that the only way he could extricate himself from this unfortunate situation is to play the race card.

By all means, let this matter play out in a court of law and then decide who was right, who was wrong or if both parties experienced a momentary and passionate exchange of words.

Welcome to the world of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and the rest of the racist democrats.

As for President Obama’s healthcare initiative –- can we really trust his judgement in serious matters that affect all of our lives, our very health and well-being? I think NOT!

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links …

*Full Arrest Report...

Officer at eye of storm says he won’t apologize - The Boston Globe 

Audio: 'I know what I did was right'...

Says Obama 'way off base'...

Video...

Sgt. James Crowley is police academy expert on racial profiling!

Police union condemns president's comments...

Bill Cosby 'shocked' at Obama's statement...

White House qualifies president's remark...


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Obama's healthcare press conference highlights the flaws in his plan ...

I watched President Obama’s press conference with a sense of wonder…

I wondered how the President even knew what was in the legislation considering much of it was still under construction (even after 1000+ pages of  three versions of preliminary drafts were released) by the House and the Senate – subject to additional re-writes, amendments and the famous back-room, closed door reconciliation process between the House version and the Senate version.

“I realize that with all the charges and criticisms that are being thrown around in Washington, a lot of Americans may be wondering: What's in this for me? How does my family stand to benefit from health-insurance reform? So tonight I want to answer those questions, because even though Congress is still working through a few key issues, we already have rough agreement on the following areas.”

“If you have health insurance, the reform we're proposing will provide you with more security and more stability.”

This is an overly broad statement that cannot universally be true. The government cannot provide anyone with more security and stability if they do not even know what is in the bill, how it will be implemented and what the Secretary of Health and Human Services may decide to do given the broad latitude to modify the healthcare program once it is passed. We also do not know anything about the technical corrections and amendments which will surface in the days, months and years to come.

Warning: big lie coming …

It will keep government out of health care decisions, giving you the option to keep your insurance if you're happy with it.”

This is a big lie.  The entire purpose of the healthcare legislation is to insert the government deeper into every healthcare decision. Consider that the healthcare proposal will offer you a chance to select your health insurance policy from an exchange. Unfortunately, what Obama is not saying is that your present insurance company must jump through numerous and costly hoops just to be listed. And considering the number of programmatic changes which will be required in insurance policies, your insurance company may decide to drop your coverage rather than suffer tremendous losses after implementing Obama’s mandates. Of course, there will always be the alternative of the government insurance program which can be priced so low as to drive your insurance carrier out of business. Leaving no competition and no choice except the government plan.

“It'll prevent insurance companies from dropping your coverage if you get too sick.”

All current policies have some form of coverage limits. Here is where the government can make policy coverage so expensive that your insurance carrier may leave the marketplace.

“It will give you the security of knowing that if you lose your job, if you move, or if you change your job, you'll still be able to have coverage.”

You may have access to coverage through the proposed insurance exchange, but will it be more affordable and provide superior coverage to the government plan?

“It will limit the amount your insurance company can force you to pay for your medical costs out of your own pocket.”

Government interference in pricing? Nah!

“And it will cover preventive care, like check-ups and mammograms, that save lives and money.”

Government interference in coverage? Nah!

“Now, if you don't have health insurance, or you're a small business looking to cover your employees, you'll be able to choose a quality affordable health plan through a health insurance exchange, in a marketplace that promotes choice and competition.”

Competition against a government insurance policy that will be artificially priced while other insurance policies must be fully-costed to earn a return for shareholders? Nah!

“And finally, no insurance company will be allowed to deny you coverage because of a preexisting medical condition.”

Government interference in underwriting standards? Nah! (You might consider what relaxed underwriting standards and government interference in the mortgage marketplace wrought: an almost complete collapse of the housing market and major damage to our national economy.

Warning a bigger lie coming …

“I've also pledged that health-insurance reform will not add to our deficit over the next decade, and I mean it.”

How this President can maintain a straight face and lie to the American public is beyond me. Perhaps because he is simply reading words off a TelePrompTer and not considering what he is saying. Of course, his pledge means little or nothing if Congress determines otherwise. And he will probably be gone in four years, eight at the most – so he has managed to kick the Z”responsibility” can down the road by ten years.

Blaming Bush …

“In the past eight years, we saw the enactment of two tax cuts, primarily for the wealthiest Americans, and a Medicare prescription program, none of which were paid for. And that's partly why I inherited a $1.3-trillion deficit.”

The way I remember it, Bush inherited a recession from Clinton <Source>, was faced with 9/11 and its aftermath consequences in Afghanistan and Iraq. Not that I give Bush and his Administration a passing grade, but I do give him credit for doing the best he could under the circumstances. In any event, I never wondered about former President Bush’s patriotism or if he was deliberately sabotaging our nation in order to promote European socialism.

A critical and deadly flaw in the Obama Healthcare program … 

“… More importantly, insurance companies right now are making those decisions. And part of what we want to do is to make sure that those decisions are being made by doctors and medical experts based on evidence, based on what works

Basing treatment options on “best practices” often results in the denial of care to aging patients and those who just might benefit from a high-risk/low success procedure. According to the Obama plan, this approach will lead to rationed healthcare and the denial of care to certain aging and sick American citizens. – All on a cost control, rather than compassionate, basis.

“Because that's not how it's working right now. That's not -- that's not how it's working right now.”

Thank Heaven that Medicare will provide dialysis for an older patient to prolong life. Should we say, NO – you are too old and likely to be dead in six months? That’s what best practices does.

Obama cannot see medical malpractice and criminality when it is readily apparent …

I wonder if Obama considered what he was saying when he described doctors who would be guilty of medical malpractice and criminal fraud when he explained how he thought the system might work.

Right now, doctors, a lot of times, are forced to make decisions based on the fee payment schedule that's out there. So if they're looking and -- and you come in and you've got a bad sore throat, or your child has a bad sore throat, or has repeated sore throats, the doctor may look at the reimbursement system and say to himself, ‘You know what? I make a lot more money if I take this kid's tonsils out.’"

Putting a child at further risk for an unnecessary invasive procedure is medical malpractice. Altering the coding of an elective cosmetic rhinoplasty (nose job) to indicate correction for a deviated septum is fraud. Have you wondered why the government does not prosecute Medicare fraud more vigorously? Or simply provides a slap on the wrist for the large medical groups who overbill and bilk the government? To the extent that the fine is so small in relation to the profit that it is often considered a cost of doing business.

“Now, that may be the right thing to do. But I'd rather have that doctor making those decisions just based on whether you really need your kid's tonsils out or whether it might make more sense just to change -- maybe they have allergies. Maybe they have something else that would make a difference.”

According to Obama’s healthcare plan, it would be medicine by a non-medical committee and a checklist. Who is to say that the treatment specified by a doctor is not appropriate? If so, why is the government not poring over the medical records to root out potential fraud and questioning the healthcare providers? I don’t know, maybe because they have a strong lobby and provide tons of campaign cash?

Discovering a flaw in Obama’s electronic healthcare records …

If so many doctors were miscoding diagnoses to achieve higher reimbursement rates or ordering unnecessary tests, who can vouch for the validity of a patient’s electronic health record that will be stored in one of the most massive databases in the history of our nation. A database containing a citizen’s most intimate details of their lives and possible indiscretions. With no absolute safeguards and which may be accessed for political or profitable use without the patient’s permission. The idea that the computerization of health records will provide a large payback is false and misleading. Likewise, it might not even save lives – people are often given wrong transfusions, have the wrong limbs amputated, or are given dangerous drugs – in spite of the medical records. It’s called an accident. Some are preventable, but those made by distracted or fatigued personnel being pushed to the limit by a system which is adding millions of patients to an already burdened system without adding more facilities, diagnostic equipment and physicians – is potentially seeding yet another catastrophe waiting to happen.

Why healthcare is expensive -- Michelle Obama …

On January 9, 2009, Michelle Obama resigned her position at the University of Chicago Medical Center as she prepared to become the First Lady. So what, may we ask, did Michelle Obama actually do? 

“In 2002 she was hired to run ‘programs for community relations, neighborhood outreach, volunteer recruitment, staff diversity and minority contracting’ for $121,910.”

“In 2005 the hospital raised her salary from $121,910 to $316,962- nearly twice what her husband made as a Senator. Oh did we mention that her husband had just become a US Senator? He sure had. Requested a $1 million earmark for the UC Medical Center, in fact. Way to network Michelle!”

“But now that Mrs. Obama has resigned, the hospital says her position will remain unfilled. How can that be, if the work she did was vital enough to be worth $317,000?” <Source>

Bottom line …

Once again, President Obama read the words off his TelePrompTer in response to pre-arranged (?) questions. Saying little or nothing of substance while raising more doubt about his healthcare initiative which is currently undergoing modifications by the Senate, the House and a cadre of industry lobbyists.

Be afraid, very afraid. Be safe, be well and take care of yourself and your family first.

-- steve

Capture

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links …

Obama July 22, 2009 press conference. Transcript - Lynn Sweet


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


HEALTHCARE: The TelePrompTer President is lying -- the legislation is not completed and nobody has read it ... so why is he wasting our time tonight?

The telegenic President with his TelePrompTer cannot explain what is contained in the healthcare legislation that is still being crafted in the backroom by the democrat special interests. The fact is that he is lying to the American public if he claims he knows what the bill will do or what the bill will cost. He can speak to what he wants – but he has no credibility when it comes knowing what is contained in the bill.

-- steve

obamaprompter

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Healthcare: Obama's Happy Talk is empty rhetoric ...

I am sorry to say that our President, Barack Obama, is once again being disingenuous in describing his healthcare plan. A plan which is ill-defined and leaves much of the detail to the whims of the Secretary of Health and Human Services and various other money-sucking bureaucracies that will be created along the way. Simply put, the President and members of Congress do not, at this present time, understand the legislation well enough to explain it to the American people, much less vote on it.

Remember, we are playing with fire: a current healthcare system which is used by the great majority of Americans each and every year – even those who are in this country illegally and will be covered under this new plan.

From the White House …

Remarks by the President on Healthcare: Children's Hospital Washington, D.C.

“I just had the opportunity to talk to doctors, nurses, physician’s assistants, and administrators at this extraordinary institution.”

I find it hard to believe that you could even have a substantive conversation about serious healthcare matters in the time allotted for this photo-opportunity. I also find it impossible to believe that you would or even could modify the proposed legislation in light of what you may have learned. This is like the Hillary Healthcare Listening Tour that turns a deaf ear to all but what lobbyists and the special interests are saying.

“We spoke about some of the strains on our health care system and some of the strains our health care system places on parents with sick children.”

The new legislation does little more than create an additional costly bureacracy, it does not increase the number of medical facilities, high-technology scanners, or physicians to meet the demand of the larger population of patients that would be created under the President’s proposal. This will eventually lead to the rationing and denial of healthcare to some segment of the population – far from what the public imagines the legislation to accomplish.

There will always be stains on the parents of sick children and the elderly – in fact any single-parent family that must earn a living while their child is undergoing treatment represents a strain of almost unbelievable proportions. And this legislation does little or nothing to alleviate that stress and strain.

We spoke about the amount of time and money wasted on insurance-driven bureaucracy.”

This is ludicrous. The government inserted the insurance industry into the middle of Medicare and incentivized them to cut costs – which the insurance company often did by finding ways to deny care to premium-paying insured members. This legislation increases the bureaucracy, especially the federal bureacracy, far beyond what exists today. Truth be told, if we could isolate where the time and money is being wasted, it would have been sharply curtailed in order to improve the profitability of organizations providing health services and insure even larger executive bonuses.

“We spoke about the growing number of Americans who are uninsured and underinsured.”

This is a numbers game which hides a multitude of sins. First, counting illegal aliens who should not be eligible for healthcare other than on an emergency basis. Who is to say who is underinsured? The insurance companies and their lobbyists? The government pandering to a particular constituency?

“We spoke about what's wrong with a system where women can't always afford maternity care and parents can't afford checkups for their kids, and end up seeking treatment in emergency rooms like the ones here at Children's.”

I was unaware of the fact that maternity care and checkups were unavailable at county health facilities. What seems to be clogging the system is the number of illegal aliens hell-bent to have their multiple children on American soil at little or no cost. The same people who flood emergency rooms with sick, cranky children with colds, the flu and other minor maladies instead of waiting for community clinic openings. I have a great deal of sympathy for suffering children, not so much the illegal alien parents of multiple children who are clogging our facilities and running up the costs beyond reason.

“We spoke about the fact that it's very hard even for families who have health insurance to access primary care physicians and pediatricians.”

Could it be that there are a declining number of primary care physicians and pediatricians in favor of higher-paying specialties? Even in a nation that demands “instant access,” I am not aware of significant access issues in cities, maybe in rural areas, by not in cities. The problem with Obama’s healthcare initiative, other than its impracticability and costs, is that it  demands that everyone go from an equal access system to an equal results system. And nothing can deliver those sort of results other than socialized, government-controlled medicine.

“In a city like Washington, D.C., you've got all the doctors in one half of the city, very few doctors in the other half of the city.

How many doctors want to risk their lives treating patients in the worst areas of the city using outmoded and out-dated facilities? Human nature dictates otherwise.

“And part of that has to do with just the manner in which reimbursement is taking place and the disincentives for doctors, nurses, and physicians assistants in caring for those who are most in need.”

Excuse me! Isn’t the Congress in charge of the reimbursement rates for each locale and facility – as a perk of office that attracts voter support and campaign funding? As for disincentives, why would a highly skilled worker want to work in a crap-hole facility, treating difficult (to say the least) patients for minimal wages?

“And we spoke about where we're headed if we once again delay and defer health insurance reform.”

Perhaps we should speak of the tremendous damage that will be done the America’s healthcare system if this legislation passes and is signed into law?Perhaps we should speak of ever escalating costs which will eventually bankrupt the system and the nation much in the same manner that Social Security and Medicare costs have been handled? And perhaps we should speak of a system controlled by politicians and bureacrats rather than physicians?

These health care professionals are doing heroic work each and every day to save the lives of America's children. But they're being forced to fight through a system that works better for drug companies and insurance companies than for the American people that all these wonderful health professionals entered their profession to serve.

Is Obama blind and stupid? This is the system created by the government who pandered to the lobbyists and special interests. Who wrote the rules that permitted outrageous charges for durable medical equipment such as wheelchairs and breathing devices. Who allows waste, fraud and manipulation of the system to be answered with “slap on the wrist” fines. Who allows illegal aliens to plunder the system at will and offsets their care costs with increases to the legal American taxpayer.

“And over the past decade, premiums have doubled in America; out-of-pocket costs have shot up by a third; deductibles have continued to climb. And yet, even as America's families have been battered by spiraling health care costs, health insurance companies and their executives have reaped windfall profits from a broken system.”

I wonder if President Obama is smart enough to notice that the government has decimated the worth of our dollar, where day-by-day its purchasing power declines drastically thus forcing prices spiraling upward? Or that the Federal Reserve has pumped trillions of dollars into our financial system to drastically inflate prices upward? Or noticed that the government was mostly responsible for the real estate bubble which resulted in decimating the personal finances of all Americans?  Or notice a broken healthcare system that was created by government for the special interests and a system which promises to become even more burdensome under the Obama healthcare plan.

Ready, shoot, aim …

Once again the resolution of America’s broken healthcare system is being positioned as a national emergency. A national emergency which requires an immediate infusion of trillions of dollars without a basic plan, any substantive controls on the spending and without requiring results.

“Now, we've talked this problem to death, year after year. But unless we act -- and act now -- none of this will change. Just a quick statistic I heard about this hospital: Just a few years ago, there were approximately 50,000 people coming into the emergency room. Now they've got 85,000. There's been almost a doubling of emergency room care in a relatively short span of time, which is putting enormous strains on the system as a whole. That's the status quo, and it's only going to get worse.”

How many of the people treated were true emergencies? How many were illegal aliens? How many were maternity cases? How many were the result of gang violence in the nation’s capital which features some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation?

The truth emerges …

“If we do nothing, then families will spend more and more of their income for less and less care.”

This is true of our local, state and federal governments. As the number of bureaucratic employees increases – with their union wages, benefits and retirements – more and more money goes for less and less actual service. 

“The number of people who lose their insurance because they've lost or changed jobs will continue to grow.”

Jobs lost due to a government-mismanaged economy which was allowed to run rampant due to lobbyists and special interest legislation, not to mention the corruption and complacency of our nation’s regulatory agencies. If we wanted to remedy this situation immediately, we would demand the insurance companies compete on price, offer open enrollment and spread costs over larger employment pools.

“More children will be denied coverage on account of asthma or a heart condition. Jobs will be lost, take-home pay will be lower, businesses will shutter, and we will continue to waste hundreds of billions of dollars on insurance company boondoggles and inefficiencies that add to our financial burdens without making us any healthier.”

Complete and utter bullshit – the problem is of the government’s making and the present legislation portends a healthcare system which appears to be worse than the present one.

“So the need for reform is urgent and it is indisputable. No one denies that we're on an unsustainable path. We all know there are more efficient ways of doing it.”

This is true. But the question is simply: Is the Obama Plan the right plan at the right time with the right financial and medical safeguards. I say NO and I am not alone.

This is more packaged crapola …

“ We just -- I spoke to the chief information officer here at the hospital and he talked about some wonderful ways in which we could potentially gather up electronic medical records and information for every child not just that comes to this hospital but in the entire region, and how much money could be saved and how the health of these kids could be improved. But it requires an investment.

As one who is familiar with information processing and medical systems, I am here to tell you that the conversion of paper records to an electronic system and to provide the exchangeability of electronic records and  interoperability of systems is a difficult and costly process that will take years and will never return the results being sold to the American public. This is an enlargement of the government bureacracy and a “big brother” intrusion into personal privacy of historical proportions – all without unassailable safeguards.

Stating the obvious -- like the President’s party is not the cheerleader for these special interests …

“Now, there are some in this town who are content to perpetuate the status quo, are in fact fighting reform on behalf of powerful special interests. There are others who recognize the problem, but believe -- or perhaps, hope -- that we can put off the hard work of insurance reform for another day, another year, another decade.”

Sounds like the democrats who have screwed up Social Security, Medicare and Veteran’s Medical care. Why should the American public believe that they can be trusted now?

Faux bi-partisanship …

Just like TARP (Troubled Assets Relief Program), the Stimulus Package, the Spending Package, the Climate Package and now the healthcare package – this is all democrat-driven legislation which features little or no input from the Republicans who represent 47% of the voting public.

Demonizing the opposition …

“Just the other day, one Republican senator said -- and I'm quoting him now -- "If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him." Think about that. This isn't about me. This isn't about politics. This is about a health care system that is breaking America's families, breaking America's businesses, and breaking America's economy.

The above statement exposes a lie of Orwellian proportions. It is about the toxic and socialistic ideology of one Barack Obama and his efforts to enlarge government, raise taxes, curtail individual choice and freedoms, turn the government towards a European Socialist model – and, yes, damage the United States by destroying our businesses and fatally destroying our economy. Communism 101 – bleed them dry – into capitulation.

“And we can't afford the politics of delay and defeat when it comes to health care. Not this time. Not now. There are too many lives and livelihoods at stake. There are too many families who will be crushed if insurance premiums continue to rise three times as fast as wages. There are too many businesses that will be forced to shed workers, scale back benefits, or drop coverage unless we get spiraling health care costs under control.”

Again, the truth is far different from Obama’s words. We cannot afford an ill-conceived, ill-defined and ill-executed plan than will bankrupt our nation while restricting healthcare to a much smaller segment of our population. Every condition mentioned by Obama is government caused and government controlled. We need to lower taxes, let the marketplace provide medical innovation. Reduce government intrusion into non-criminal matters.

I call “bullshit!”

The reforms we seek would bring greater competition, choice, savings, and inefficiencies [sic] to our health care system, and greater stability and security to America's families and businesses.”

President Obama is full of crap: competition will decrease and government intrusion and regulation increases. The Obama healthcare system will be manipulated to drive out the private healthcare providers until only one system, the Obama system, remains.

“ For the average American, it will mean lower costs, more options, and coverage you can count on. It will save you and your family money, if we have a more efficient health care system. You won't have to worry about being priced out of the market. You won't have to worry about one illness leading your family into financial ruin. You won't have to worry that you won't be able to afford treatment for a child who gets sick.”

When has the government ever delivered on a promise as broad as this? When has any government delivered on such a promise? This is pie in the sky – unachievable under a free market system that is being slowly strangled by the Obama-led democrat socialists. If you think you can trust your financial and healthcare to the government, I want you to consider the following: 

  • Social Security
  • Medicare
  • Veteran’s Administration Medical Care
  • Native American Medical Care

Why not start reforming our current system and reducing the size of the bureaucracy, improving the quality of care, eliminating waste and corruption and attempting to make what we have better instead of further muddying the waters with a hybrid system doomed to failure?

We can -- and we must -- make all these reforms, and we can do it in a way that does not add to our deficits over the next decade.

Can you say: big, fat lie!!!

“I've said this before. Let me repeat: The bill I sign must reflect my commitment and the commitment of Congress to slow the growth of health care costs over the long run. That's how we can ensure that health care reform strengthens our national -- our nation's fiscal health at the same time.”

Can you say: bullshit!

There is a large difference between “next to impossible” and “won’t be easy” …

“Now, we always knew that passing health care reform wouldn't be easy. We always knew that doing what is right would be hard. There's just a tendency towards inertia in this town. I understand that as well as anybody. But we're a country that chooses the harder right over the easier wrong. That's what we have to do this time. We have to do that once more.”

So let's fight our way through the politics of the moment.”

The entire Obama Presidency and democrat reign of one-party terror is based on the “politics of the moment.” These people have no core values, will do or say anything to obtain and maintain power. And have openly said that they are willing to exploit any crisis to move their political ideology forward.

Oratorical flourishes – the big finish …

“Let's pass reform by the end of this year. Let's commit ourselves to delivering our country a better future -- and that future will be seen in a place like Children's Hospital, when young people are getting the care that they deserve and they need, when they need it, and we don't have an overcrowded emergency room just putting enormous burdens on this excellent institution. I think we can accomplish that, but we're going to have to do some work over the next few weeks and the next few months.”

Thank you very much everyone. (Applause.)

Bottom line …

Government intervention has resulted in creating problems where none exists – and preventing real-world solutions that may run counter to the interests of lobbyists and special interests. If the Obama Administration was serious about healthcare, let them clean up our Veteran’s Medical care to demonstrate their ability to turn-around a problematical system. Then and only then, let them take on larger projects. The key to success in the world is through a self-correcting phased implementation rather than an all-or-nothing trial run which has a high probability of failure and dire national consequences.

The only real solution …

Capture

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links:

The White House - Press Office - Remarks by the President on Health Care at Children's Hospital


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Democrats are buying Black and Hispanic votes with more costly entitlements -- including subsidizing illegal aliens until they are legal citizens ...

The devil is in the details …

Democratic House Leaders Conceal the Fact That Their Health Bill Covers Illegal Aliens

“Last week, Democratic leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives unveiled their health care reform legislation entitled, ‘America's Affordable Health Care Act of 2009.’  (Bill Text).  Despite the language in section 246 of the bill that states: ‘nothing… shall allow Federal payments [for] individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States,’ the bill actually raises more questions than it resolves with respect to whether the bill will burden American taxpayers by giving health care benefits to legal and illegal aliens.”

“Section 202 of this bill creates a Health Insurance Exchange (exchange) and states that "all individuals are eligible to obtain coverage" through the exchange.  The House Education & Labor Committee has produced a summary of the bill and explains that the exchange will allow individuals and employers to ‘comparison shop for coverage’ and that the bill creates "new affordability credits… for people purchasing [health coverage] through the exchange."  (Education & Labor Summary).”

“Under Section 242, all legal aliens will qualify for the affordability credit.  Subsection (d) states that the affordability credits ‘shall not be treated [as] a benefit provided under section 403’ of the Welfare Reform Act of 1996.  Under Welfare Reform, legal aliens are generally required to wait five years before becoming eligible for welfare or other taxpayer funded benefits.  The House health reform bill eliminates that 5-year waiting period for legal aliens as applied to taxpayer financed health insurance subsidies, such as the affordability credit.  Accordingly, legal aliens will become immediately eligible for this government handout — a handout that would be paid for by the American taxpayers.”

“Given the bill's language, illegal aliens are also likely to qualify for the affordability credit.  This is true because there are no provisions that would prevent an illegal alien from participating in the exchange or from receiving the credit.  Likewise, there are no requirements that a government agency verify eligibility, whether through the SAVE system or otherwise.  Accordingly, without these important safeguards, illegal aliens would probably receive this subsidy.  The bill does limit eligibility to individuals who are "lawfully present in a State in the United States," but that language would be ineffective to prevent handouts to illegal aliens.  (Sec. 242(a)(1)).  Under U.S. immigration law, someone's status as an illegal alien is not determined by lawful presence in a State.  As a result, this language will have no effect in preventing illegal aliens from receiving the credit

“Critics suggest that if the intent of the bill is to preclude illegal aliens from receiving this subsidy, the current language is woefully inadequate and would have to be dramatically revised.  For example, the bill could limit eligibility for the credit only to a ‘qualified alien’ as defined by the Welfare Reform Act, which would preclude illegal aliens from receiving any benefit.  In addition, including a provision that requires eligibility verification, with the SAVE system, for every applicant for the credit would likewise prevent illegal aliens from receiving the credit.”

Wake up …

This is a life or death situation: in a healthcare system in which healthcare will be rationed and possibly denied to older Americans, DO YOU WANT YOUR LIFE TO BE COMPROMISED BY ORGAN TRANSPLANTS AND MEDICAL SERVICES TO ILLEGAL ALIENS WHO HAVE NO LEGAL RIGHT TO SUCH SERVICES?

Bottom Line …

The supply will not cover the demand, especially as coverage is increased to millions of illegal aliens. Are you willing to gamble your healthcare coverage and access to lifesaving procedures based on some politician who is likely to receive (along with his family, friends and special interests) preferential treatment – just so his party can take over the United States of America? If you are older than 50 years old – you are at great risk from a system who might treat a younger illegal alien just because the outcome might be better and he might live longer and pay more taxes into the system.

Screw them all --

Capture2-11-2009-6.54.19 PM

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links:

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR): FAIR Legislative Update July 20, 2009#1


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Obama urges leftist bloggers to push his healthcare agenda -- admits he is not familiar with the House bill!

It is no surprise that President Obama, of all people, is not familiar with the provisions contained in a 1000+ page House bill supporting his healthcare initiative. Neither are the House Members who are expected to vote on this critical issue which will change healthcare forever – towards a socialized medicine solution patterned after European and Canadian systems which clearly feature rationing, poor service and the denial of care to the elderly as a means of cost containment.

Read for yourself the coverage of this conference call …

Morning Bell: Obama Admits He’s “Not Familiar” With House Bill

“With the public’s trust in his handling of health care tanking (50%-44% of Americans disapprove), the White House has launched a new phase of its strategy designed to pass Obamacare: all Obama, all the time. As part of that effort, Obama hosted a conference call with leftist bloggers urging them to pressure Congress to pass his health plan as soon as possible.”

“During the call, a blogger from Maine said he kept running into an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance. He asked: “Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?” President Obama replied: “You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about.” (quote begins at 17:10)

One of Obama’s big lies  …

“This is a truly disturbing admission by the President, especially considering that later in the call, Obama promises yet again: ‘If you have health insurance, and you like it, and you have a doctor that you like, then you can keep it. Period.How can Obama keep making this promise if he is not familiar with the health legislation that is being written in Congress? Details matter.”

Obama’s plan will regulate private health insurance out of existence …

“We are familiar with the passage IBD cites, and as we wrote last week, the House bill does not outright outlaw private individual health insurance, but it does effectively regulate it out of existence. The House bill does allow private insurance to be sold, but only ‘Exchange-participating health benefits plans.’ In order to qualify as an ‘Exchange-participating health benefits plan,’ all health insurance plans must conform to a slew of new regulations, including community rating and guaranteed issue. These will all send the cost of private individual health insurance skyrocketing. Furthermore, all these new regulations would not apply just to individual insurance plans, but to all insurance plans. So the House bill will also drive up the cost of your existing employer coverage as well.

The real goal: price ordinary healthcare insurance out of existence …

Until, of course, it becomes so expensive that your company makes the perfectly economical decision to dump you into the government plan.”

These leftist bastards will say or do anything to obtain control over America’s politics, finances, healthcare, industry and military …

It is truly frightening that the President of the United States is pressuring Congress in an all-out media blitz to pass legislation that he flatly admits he has not read and is not familiar with. President Obama owes it to the American people to stop making promises about what his health plan will or will not do until he has read it, and can properly defend it in public, to his own supporters.

Bottom Line …

Are you prepared to turn your country over to the socialists, anarchists and communists? We are being attacked by our enemies, both foreign and domestic and we watch as our political representatives and elected officials sell us out for the proverbial thirty-pieces of silver.

-- steve

Capture 

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links …

Morning Bell: Obama Admits He’s “Not Familiar” With House Bill » The Foundry


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Was California's downfall pre-engineered by a financial wizard or were California's elected officials incompetent?

California is in dire straights. The democrat legislators along with a complicit RINO (Republican In Name Only) governor for years attempted to paper-over California’s mounting deficit with financial legerdemain and borrowing. Primarily by shifting (stealing) internal funds and using the Wall Street Wizards to arrange financing. With nary a thought of what happened to Orange County when they declared bankruptcy in 1994.

The same Wall Street Wizards that finagled the conversion of restricted funds raised by bond issues into unrestricted funds which could be used for favored political projects without having to go to the public for funding.

The scheme was simple. The state and various municipalities purchased assets with the designated bond funds. They turned to the Wall Street Wizards to arrange for the assets to be sold to private investors in return for unrestricted funds. To complete the illusion of propriety the grand poobahs leased back the assets and placed them in public service. All while assuring the investors would receive a high-yield pay-back back with tax revenues, and sweetening the pot by insuring the revenue stream was guaranteed by collateral default swaps from companies like AIG.

Playing both sides of the trade – anything to earn a commission and a hefty executive bonus …

To add insult to injury, we are now finding that the same Wall Street wizards who were selling California bonds to investors, we also advising their clients to bet against California by purchasing collateral default swaps.

ProPublica is reporting …

“Earn Like Goldman Sachs, a ProPublica How-To”

“Goldman Sachs has proved once again that it knows how to make money. Wednesday’s announcement of a record quarterly profit of $3.44 billion  has spurred debate  over how the bank did it.”

“In addition to making money via its own trades, Goldman profits by advising clients about deals. Some of that advice has proved quite savvy.”

“As we reported last year, one of Goldman’s money-making strategies was to encourage some clients to bet on declines of the creditworthiness of a range of states — including California, New Jersey, New York and Florida. Goldman advised hedge funds to take the bets by buying credit default swaps, the insurance-like financial instruments that have been blamed for contributing to the financial meltdown last fall.”

The strategy angered California Treasurer Bill Lockyer because his state was paying Goldman millions to help market the same bonds that Goldman was advising other clients to bet against.”

This week’s announcement of huge profits — and the likelihood of near-record bonuses — at Goldman led us to wonder how much investors could have earned by following Goldman’s controversial advice.”

“Basically, if you had bought swaps against $10 million in California bonds in July 2008, it would have cost just under $80,000. Today, you could theoretically sell those swaps for $350,000 — making a 338 percent profit.”

But fundamentally, it looks as if Goldman was right to advise clients that betting against states was a good way to make money. California didn’t like it because, as Lockyer’s spokesman said at the time, drumming up bets against California bonds could further undermine confidence in the state’s ability to repay its debts. That, in turn, could force the state to pay higher interest rates to borrow money, and cost taxpayers tens of millions at a time when the state is facing one of the worst budget crises in its history.”

Let’s see: higher yields, more money, more commissions – it does appear that California’s finance experts were played by the Wall Street wizards.

“So who are the people who’ve promised to pay up if California, or other states, cities and municipal entities, default? There’s no way to know, because the swaps are still unregulated — though Congress is debating if and how to change that.”

How convenient? Where was the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodities Futures Protection Commission?  Unfortunately, it seems that AIG’s first act with the taxpayer’s bailout funds was to upstream a $13 BILLION  payment to Goldman Sachs at 100 cents on the dollar – imagine that! Especially when valuations have fallen and other players were paying off at 60-cents on the dollar.

“For the record, it doesn’t look as if many people followed Goldman’s advice, which the company said it stopped giving around October. Fewer than 200 contracts for swaps on California bonds are out, with a net value of just under $760 million, according to the Depository Trust and Clearing Corp. For Florida, there are 133 and for New York, there are 95.”

But can you really trust these numbers? And who is investigating which politicians and bureaucrats may have received campaign financing and other courtesies in return for being selected to assist California in selling its bonds?

There is something rotten in California politics and finance …

It’s not so much that I am concerned about Goldman Sach’s behavior, they simply did what comes natural to traders. It is the contempt I feel for our politicians whose free-spending ways and costly, unethical cover-ups that bothers me. We need to purge the professional politicians and ideologues that have ruined our state. The governor, the legislature on both sides of the aisle and all of the other elected officials. We lose nothing of value and have everything to gain.

I am especially miffed at California’s Treasurer, Bill Lockyer, who has filed to run for another term as Treasurer and is still rumored to be considering running for a position as California’s Governor. Considering his long service as a California finance official, during some of the roughest times imaginable, we should consider sending this professional democrat politician packing.

-- steve

Capture2-16-2009-6.02.35 PM

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links …

Earn Like Goldman Sachs, a ProPublica How-To - ProPublica


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS