Previous month:
August 2009
Next month:
October 2009

Another Inglourious Basterd: Roman Polanski

Harvey Weinstein, whose company co-released (with Universal) “Inglourious Basterds,” a film written and directed by Quentin Tarantino, now weighs in on the Roman Polanski matter … 

According to CNN News

“In the United States, powerhouse movie producer Harvey Weinstein is trying to recruit more supporters for Polanksi.”

"’We are calling every filmmaker we can to help fix this terrible situation,’ his company told CNN in a statement.”

Polanski’s terrible situation …

Polanski, a well-known, well-respected, wealthy and well-represented movie director allegedly raped a 13-year old girl using alcohol and drugs during a pre-arranged photo shoot at Jack Nicholson’s house. 

As with all “terrible situations” involving wealthy people, the victim was compensated and the records of the settlement hidden behind confidentiality agreements. As a result of a now uncooperative witness, Polanski was apparently allowed to plead down the charges of raping a thirteen year-old girl under the influence of Polanski-supplied alcohol and drugs to “unlawful sexual intercourse.” He was jailed for 42-days while he underwent a psychiatric evaluation. Facing sentencing by a Judge who was said to be considering a harsher penalty (in light of scathing public opinion) than that agreed to in a plea bargain, Polanski unlawfully fled the United States and took up residence in France.

Unfortunately, after 30-years on the lam, Polanski announced that he would be accepting a film festival award in Switzerland which has an extradition treaty with the United States. The Los Angles District Attorney, acting through the U.S. State Department, sought an extradition warrant to be served in Switzerland. Polanski is now jailed in Switzerland awaiting an extradition hearing.

Polanski’s fate is an ongoing affair …

According to Swiss authorities, Roman Polanski has filed an appeal against his extradition to the United States, expected to be heard by Swiss authorities within the next few weeks.

Polanski, a wealthy man highly regarded in the international film community, has reportedly engaged the services of Reid Weingarten who is a close friend and associate of United States Attorney General Eric Holder; possibly to see if the extradition can be quashed at the federal level so Polanski can return to France. Or perhaps they are seeking to prepare a defense against an additional federal charge arising from the crossing of state lines and U.S. boundaries in his flight to avoid arrest and prosecution?

“He’s Brilliant:” Hollywood’s defense of a rapist …

Often characterized by shallow-minded democrat limousine liberals whose operational “don’t do as I do, do as I say” philosophy seems to permeate today’s political thinking, one can wonder why Hollywood would support a man who raped a thirteen year-old girl?

  • Perhaps for the same reason they supported Teddy Kennedy, a drunk lecher who left an innocent girl to die horribly, suffocating in a submerged car awaiting the help that never came – while Kennedy sobered up and contemplated his political future in the company of high-powered advisers?
  • Perhaps, based on political correctness?
  • Perhaps based on the “For the grace of God, there go I” theory?
  • Perhaps because Hollywood is basically an immoral jungle of predators who regard sex, drugs and young women as just another job perk?
  • Perhaps just as another self-serving publicity stunt to further cement their credentials and relationships with other powerful people?
  • Or perhaps based on pity that the perpetrator had a notably bad experience previously in his life. Something which would be consistent with their defense of stone-cold cop killers and other assorted criminals.

Whatever the personal or professional reasons, Polanski’s supporters have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are morally bankrupt – something which should be remembered when they weigh in on other political legislation.

What should happen …

If Polanski was treated as a normal person, he would be facing a long jail term and the need to register as a convicted sex offender for the rest of their life. But this is not a normal person – but a rich celebrity of note. Obviously, at least in the minds of his colleagues, a brilliant man who has suffered greatly – having been cut off from the Hollywood mainstream parties, award ceremonies and hoopla for 30 or so years.

The individual celebrities who have come out to support Polanski should now be viewed in a new light. Now we know why they are liberal democrats – because they eschew family values and personal accountability, often while spinning even outlandish events to their own benefit.

And the mainstream media game continues while they ignore other significant world events which will affect us all. Without shame or apology, they further the cult of celebrity which is driving society further toward the abyss.

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

-- steve

_______________________________________________

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



Going after the real killers -- the politicians!

It is with great sadness that I note that the number of stupid people with strange ideas are being feted in the media – mostly by far-left liberals who care nothing about humanity and everything about raw political power. With them, it is a game of controlling the law-abiding taxpaying citizens for political gain.

As an example of utter and complete idiocy, let us consider the new proposed ban on handgun ammunition. Starting with the self-evident facts.

1.  Self-defense is a God-given right and nobody or nothing should stand in the way of being able to protect yourself and your family. Whether or not to use deadly force to protect your property is debatable.

2.  You can not protect society against psychopaths and others who have cognitive dysfunction – whether attributable to physiological disease or the impairment that results from drugs and alcohol. There will always be crazies walking the streets, seemingly normal until they snap and turn deadly.

3.  Criminals, by the very nature, do not respect the laws that they break and will do anything in their power to obtain the weapons they need to intimidate, injure of kill their intended victims.

4.  The duly constituted authorities cannot be everywhere they are needed, when they are needed. In fact, the police and other first responders are charged only with maintaining an orderly society and dealing with egregious situations as they develop. In most cases, their duty is to society and not the individual. You cannot sue the police for not protecting you, seeking redress for your injuries or incapacitation and your estate cannot recover damages for your death.

5.  The Second Amendment was not written to protect the rights of hunters or the sporting use of firearms. It was not even written to protect man’s right to put food on the table. It was written to protect individuals against government tyranny and egregious abuse of power.

6.  There are always people who are immune from the rules and regulations that their demand be imposed on others. Insulated from the problems of day-to-day living by their wealth, power, position or other circumstances. These are often the far-left limousine liberals who live in gated communities, have access to armed bodyguards and somehow believe that they are “special.”

7.  These are the liberals that confuse crime control with gun control. The very same people who are championing a stone cold cop killer as a misunderstood political activist. The people who march to protect the rights of criminals – assuming they are the right color – because they must be oppressed victims of society.

8.  And there are the politicians whose egregious and imperious actions make them afraid of the public – the public which elected them as the representatives of the people, to do the people’s work and to benefit their constituency. They are afraid of the people, especially when their actions, allegedly in the people’s name, were self-serving: personally, professionally and politically. These are the people who want to most disarm the public and render them helpless against duly constituted authority.

9.  And finally, and hard as it is to believe, there are people among us who do not wish the United States well. Our enemies, both foreign and domestic, want to see America suffering from chaos, lawlessness and anarchy. The believe that significant disruption – whether from illegal alien gangs, militant environmentalists or other activists – will advance their agenda of big government, tighter control and, eventually, a societal turn towards socialism.

It is against this background, that I see those who are attempting to impose gun control by the back door – by controlling ammunition rather than the weapons themselves.

To this end, we find the media lying about gun death statistics – failing to note that most people involved with weapons die because they decided to take their own life, point a weapon at a police officer or simply are killed by someone protecting their own lives. Statistically speaking, accidental gun deaths are far less than is being reported. The proponents of gun control have been caught, time-and-time again, fudging the numbers … numbers which are reported without critical examination my a corrupt and complicit media.

Consider the sheer idiocy of the following media report …

“A bill regulating sales of ammunition for handguns would save lives.”

The same could be said for the regulation of tobacco, drugs, alcohol and automobiles.

“’Guns don't kill people, it's true. Bullets do.’ ‘Without ammo, a handgun is only good for pistol-whipping someone,’ notes Assemblyman Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles). ‘Ammo is the lifeblood of a handgun.’"

This from a man who supports giving taxpayer money and support to illegal Mexican aliens. Perhaps instead of making it harder for law abiding citizens to protect themselves from the burgeoning Mexican criminal gangs and their drug-dealers, de Leon should be demanding harsher sentences for gang bangers caught with weapons. Or, at the very least, mounting a campaign against the growing public menace of illegal alien gangs.

“On Sept. 11, the last day of this year's regular legislative session, De Leon narrowly won final passage of a bill to regulate sales of handgun ammunition.”

Disarming his own constituency – in favor of the illegal alien gangs which prey upon his own people.

“The assemblyman has a long list of gang shooting horror stories from his district, which stretches from Hollywood to the Alhambra city line and includes Echo Park, Lincoln Heights and part of East Los Angeles.
Stray bullets from gang crossfire have killed a 9-year-old girl playing in the kitchen, a 14-year-old girl as she sat in the back seat of her family's SUV and a 4-year-old boy while walking with his sister outside their home. Plus there has been a barrel-load of gangbanger assassinations.”

So how does regulating ammunition for law-abiding people stop criminal gangs from buying ammunition out-of-state or out-of-country? 

On the surface, it sounds reasonable …

De Leon's bill, AB 962, would make it illegal to knowingly sell handgun ammunition to criminals. Strangely, De Leon says, it's against the law for criminals to possess ammo but not for someone to sell it to them knowing they are criminals. The bill also would prohibit hard-core gang members -- those under court injunction restrictions -- from possessing handgun bullets.”

It is already against the law for an illegal alien or alien to possess a firearm. It is against the law to possess a weapon when drunk or under the influence of drugs. None of which seems to stop those bent on intimidation or worse.  

Now consider the implementation: which only goes to prove that the devil is in the details …

“And -- the more controversial part -- it would require:
* Ammunition dealers to keep bullets out of easy reach of potential shoplifters, similar to cigarettes.
* Dealers to check a purchaser's identification, take a thumbprint and make the records available to local law enforcement. There'd be no waiting period before delivery of the ammo, as there is with firearms.
* Handgun owners to buy their bullets face-to-face from a licensed dealer. They could order through the Internet or by mail, but they'd have to pick up the ammo at a store, just as they now must when buying a gun.”

Spinning the story …

What can you expect from the liberal Los Angeles Times and columnist George Skelton? Spinning the story into a tale of inconvenience while noting that the law creates a “de facto” gun registration program along with a new massive government database of gun owners. Worrisome, because here in California you can be turned into a criminal and prosecuted as a felon just because a gun “looks” bad and may have the wrong type of grip. Other less evil-looking guns with identical functionality are somehow judged to be “ok” for sale to the public. And most of these guns are legally allowable – notably in states not ruled by far-left liberal democrats.

“Opponents -- Republican legislators and the gun lobby -- complained about inconveniencing law-abiding citizens.
"I'd rather be inconvenienced and alive than have criminals convenienced and be dead," says Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, one of many law enforcement officials who support De Leon's bill.”

County Sheriff Lee Baca, it should be remembered, is more of a politician than Sheriff. Often threatening to release criminals from jail if the people to not pass a tax increase.

"’The problem is the criminals' easy access to ammunition because of the overemphasis on not inconveniencing law-abiding citizens,’ the sheriff adds. ‘The price we all pay is random violence. A safer society will also be a somewhat more inconvenienced society. . . . Those of us in the crime-fighting business need more solutions to control criminal violence.’"

Sheriff Baca is lying … there is no polite way to say it. The violence is not random – it is localized in gang-infested, crime-ridden areas. It involves mostly drug dealers protecting their turf or addicts attempting to rob their fellow citizen. Had Lee Baca been an honest broker, he might have noticed that the greatest deterrent to violent crime is tough gang enforcement, a tougher judicial system which removes violent offenders from the streets and keeps them locked away for long periods of time; and an armed citizenry. Criminals are far less likely to attack if they do not know if their victim may be armed.

For liberals to demand schools, shopping malls, housing projects and other areas be labeled as “gun free zones” is tantamount to saying “here is a pool of victims waiting to be robbed.”

Demand that Governor Schwarzenegger veto the bill …

We know that Schwarzenegger is termed out, looking for his next political gig and there are no special interests that will pay for his cooperation. But we can shun him and all of his ventures should he not do the right thing and veto this poor excuse for legislation.

“Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has not signaled a position on the bill. But he vetoed another version by a different author five years ago. In the veto message, Schwarzenegger pointed out that the federal government once had a similar law and concluded it "was simply unworkable and offered no public safety benefit."
The federal law existed from shortly after Robert F. Kennedy's assassination in 1968 until President Reagan signed the repealer in 1986 -- a prehistoric era before the Internet and high-tech databases.”

No public benefit! Unworkable! You bet! Because the criminals will always find ways to obtain banned weapons and ammunition. Leaving the citizens to be taxed and harassed by the politicians and their feel-good policies.

Modern technology is not an answer …

“Since then -- and since Schwarzenegger's veto -- several California cities have proved that, with modern technology, they can use dealers' records as a crime-fighting weapon. They're able to track down felons and other people -- spousal abusers, the criminally insane -- who have violated the law by obtaining ammunition.”

This is the database I mentioned! This statement is pure and utter bullshit. One, law enforcement does not inspect dealer records to find those who are criminally insane or are spousal abusers. This information may be developed after the fact for prosecution purposes, but as for proactive law enforcement – forget it. The justice departments, at local, state and federal levels cannot even provide uniform records on the criminals who have been processed through the system, let alone engage in proactive crime control. In the County of Los Angeles, the rape kits with DNA are still facing a backlog and there are certainly more purchasers of ammunition than rapists.

“Los Angeles, Sacramento and 12 other cities -- including Beverly Hills, Carson, Inglewood, Pomona, Santa Ana, Santa Monica and West Hollywood -- have adopted ordinances requiring dealer record-keeping of ammo purchases.”

“In a 17-month period, L.A. police arrested 25 people; confiscated 20 weapons, including a machine gun; and seized more than 2,900 rounds of ammunition, according to Deputy Chief Charlie Beck.”

Considering the million or so people in the vicinity, this statistic is absolutely meaningless. They do not tell you under what conditions these weapons were found. They do not tell you anything about the people who were found with these weapons and ammunition. In fact, the story only juxtaposes paragraphs which lead you to believe that the results cited somehow were connected with dealer record-keeping. I just don’t believe it.

“Sacramento has California's most comprehensive ammo-control program. In less than 20 months, it found that ammunition had been illegally purchased by 229 people, including 173 felons. The district attorney filed charges against 190, trial was set for 136 and all but eight pleaded guilty. Seized were 160 firearms, including seven assault weapons and eight explosive devices.”

Again, the statistics and the conclusion is misleading. The real question one must ask is: were these people found via the ammunition control program or was it found that these people had purchased ammunition after they were arrested for crimes or on other circumstances such as parole violation. There is also something funny about claiming they found “eight explosive devices.” Were these bombs? Dynamite? Or fireworks?

“Police Capt. James Maccoun, who heads the Sacramento gun detail, says dealers file their information to the department electronically. Every transaction is checked against a database of people prohibited from possessing weapons.”

Go to MacArthur Park and buy what appears to be a valid driver’s license and you can buy anything you want. Just ask the illegal aliens who purchase such documentation on a routine basis.

Whoops … loophole!

The dilemma for Sacramento, L.A. and the other cities is that when criminals learn about the dealer record-keeping, they can drive into another community and load up on bullets.
’We don't catch the smart ones,’ Maccoun says.”

Another banned article that will promote a vigorous black market in out-of-state ammunition and insure that there is more revenue pumped into criminal activity. And if you can’t catch the smart ones, what’s the point in inconveniencing everyone.

I am naturally cynical and believe that this measure is more about the coming restrictive taxation than it is about crime control. Taxing bullets as heavily as tobacco in order to feed an out-of-control legislature who engages in supporting illegal aliens at the expense of legal and law-abiding citizens.

More liberal statistics pulled from their collective asses …


“Beck says L.A.'s law ‘would be 10 times more effective if it were statewide.’ The L.A. ordinance covers all ammunition, including shotgun shells. De Leon's bill would cover only handgun bullets, a concession to hunters.”

This proves the political perfidy … “a concession to hunters?” If they were serious, why would they exempt anything. Of course, political expedience still reigns supreme! They seem to be afraid of alienating hunters – but care not one whit for the man trying to protect himself and his family.

“But that still didn't attract any Republican legislative support. The measure passed each house with no votes to spare.”
"’This bill is going after rural communities like no other gun bill has,’ declared Assemblyman Joel Anderson (R-San Diego), whose district covers rural areas. ‘So all I ask is: Why can't you just let my people go?’  That drew some chuckles. But most of the half-hour Assembly debate produced predictable opposition verbiage with seemingly little real passion. Republicans complained about infringing on 2nd Amendment rights, which Democrats vehemently denied.”

Conflating the issue …

"’As a law-abiding citizen, staunch supporter of 2nd Amendment rights, a Little League coach who is required to have a thumbprint to coach and required to provide a thumbprint for a driver's license, I rise to support this bill,’ said new Assemblyman Steve Bradford (D-Gardena).”

Bradford is an ass if he does not realize that the activities cited, driving and coaching Little League, are not fundamental rights like self-protection and are not activities to protect an individual from an existential threat.

The big lie …

“Schwarzenegger should sign the measure. Sheriffs and police chiefs want it.

It's a crime-fighting tool that doesn't stomp on the rights of lawful gun owners. And it would keep loaded weapons out of the hands of some criminals and gangbangers.”

I call bullshit.

This legislation does impinge on the rights of lawful gun owners and puts them at more risk of violent crime should the security and privacy of the ammunition list be compromised as well as the increased risk of additional taxation and future weapons confiscation.

They are lying: nothing will keep loaded weapons out of the hands of criminals and gangbangers. In fact, it will do the opposite and make weapons more desirable as the population is discouraged from obtaining weapons and ammunition – as well as incentivizing the black market dealing of unregistered ammunition.

And, by the way, aren’t these some of the same Sheriffs and police chiefs who hand out badges and gun permits to celebrities and high-powered executives with known drug,   alcohol, spousal and anger issues? Aren’t these the same Sheriffs and police chiefs who have subverted the system for their own personal and political gain. One need only look at Mike Carona, the former Orange County Sheriff, and his cadre of friends to see what these people do to favor the rich and powerful. While denying ordinary citizens the same rights of self-protection.

The article cleverly  ends …

“Target the bullets.”

To which I reply, target the asshat politicians who confuse crime control with gun control. People who do meaningless and ineffective things to advance their personal and political objective. Perhaps we should spend more time demanding that politicians keep airtight records of their campaign expenditures and funding sources. And then prosecute them for failing to keep adequate records – instead of allowing them to file amended returns. This might save more lives, property and reduce crime than a meaningless ammunition control bill.

Capture2-11-2009-6.54.19 PM

Our America is under assault – at the local, state and federal levels – from far-left liberals who cite an unachievable perfect world as the reasons for their actions and who use false and misleading science and statistics to advance their controlling political agenda. Their heads are buried so far up their corrupt asses that they don’t see the harm they are causing to the legal, law-abiding citizens who have elected them to office.

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

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links:

Going after the real killers -- latimes.com


“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



Obamacare: killing seniors and containing costs one crisis at a time ...

Death panels and state and federal secrets … 

… participants suggested that the names of triage officers charged with making life and death choices among patients at each hospital should be kept secret. The secrecy would be needed, participants said in interviews, to avoid pressure and blame from colleagues caring for patients who were selected to be taken off life support. (see below)

A glimpse at Obamacare – the Socialist doctor?

Imagine medical decisions based on Marxist principles: from each according to their ability, to each according to their need … or in terms of Obamacare: “best practices.”

Just wondering if politicians and union leaders get preference over corporate executives and ordinary citizens?

ProPublica is reporting … 

Flu Nightmare: In Severe Pandemic, Officials Ponder Disconnecting Ventilators From Some Patients

With scant public input, state and federal officials are pushing ahead with plans that -- during a severe flu outbreak -- would deny use of scarce ventilators by some patients to assure they would be available for patients judged to benefit the most from them.

Obamacare in brief: adding millions of patients to the system without a corresponding increase in physicians, facilities and equipment which would lead to denial of care, rationing and prioritization by rules which will create a corrupt healthcare system.

Playing God

“The plans have been drawn up to give doctors specific guidelines for extreme circumstances, and they include procedures under which patients who weren’t improving would be removed from life support with or without permission of their families.”

They laughed when Sarah Palin spoke of “death panels” and high-ranking Obama advisors spoke of involuntary organ harvesting.

“The plans are designed to go into effect if the U.S. were struck by a severe flu pandemic comparable to the 1918 outbreak that killed an estimated 50 million people worldwide. State and federal health officials have concluded that such a pandemic would sicken far more people needing ventilators than could be treated by the available supplies.”

Simulating Obamacare when patients will exceed the resources needed for proper medical care.

The death panel …

“Many of the draft guidelines, including those drawn up by the Veterans Health Administration, are based in part on a draft plan New York officials posted on a state web site two years ago and subsequently published in an academic journal. The New York protocol, which is still being finalized, also calls for hospitals to withhold ventilators from patients with serious chronic conditions such as kidney failure, cancers that have spread and have a poor prognosis, or "severe, irreversible neurological" conditions that are likely to be deadly.

Suspending the Constitution?

“New York officials are studying possible legal grounds under which the governor could suspend a state law that bars doctors from removing patients from life support without the express consent of the patient or his or her authorized health agent.”

Want to speak of anarchy, armed resistance and all of the other violent remedies against state and federal tyranny … makes it more obvious why local, state and officials want to disarm law-abiding Americans and increase the para-military capabilities of their police departments.

A Government-created crisis to seize power?

The words of Rahm Emanuel about never letting a crisis go to waste when it can be used to advance a political agenda and those ideas of his brother, Ezekiel “E-Z-Kill” Emanuel regarding “end of life” procedures are echoing in my head.

State and federal officials involved with drafting the plans say they have been disquieted by this summer’s uproar over whether Medicare should pay for end-of-life consultations with families. They acknowledged that the measures under discussion go far beyond anything the public understands about how hospitals might handle a severe pandemic.”

Hope is not a plan …

“By every indication, state and federal officials expect to weather this year’s flu season without having to ration ventilators. That assumes that the H1N1 virus will not mutate into a more serious killer, the vaccines against it and the other seasonal flus will continue to prove effective, and any dramatic surges in the number of patients in need of ventilators will occur in different parts of the U.S. at different times.”

Rehearsing the death panel … 

“In recent months, New York officials have met three times with physicians, respiratory therapists and administrators to rehearse how their plan might play out in hospitals in a severe epidemic. In one of those ‘tabletop exercises,’ participants suggested that the names of triage officers charged with making life and death choices among patients at each hospital should be kept secret. The secrecy would be needed, participants said in interviews, to avoid pressure and blame from colleagues caring for patients who were selected to be taken off life support.”

“When they posted their plan on the web in coordination with a video conference in 2007, New York officials promised to solicit public input. Since then, they have consulted with medical and legal professionals and other experts, but few members of the general public. They declined to make the comments they have gathered immediately available for review, and those comments are not published on the Health Department's Web site.”

Another oxymoron: transparency in government …

“In the initial proposal, officials called public review ‘an important component in fulfilling the ethical obligation to promote transparency and just guidelines.’”

This is pure socialism, based on “collective” decisions made for the benefit of society (the government) and which does not recognize the rights of individuals. In fact, this implies the belief of our government and its elected officials that they, and they alone, own all of the critical infrastructure facilities and can dictate their usage based on government needs.

Targeting senior citizens …

There is no doubt in my mind that senior citizens comprise the most vulnerable target audience of any proposed government actions.

I wonder if some elected officials consider the targeting of senior citizens to be a win-win proposition in terms of saving retirement funds and ongoing medical costs?

“Beth Roxland, the current executive director of the New York State Task Force on Life and the Law, said the ethicists included in the state's planning process focused largely on vulnerable populations. ‘Even if we didn’t have direct input from vulnerable populations,’ she said, ‘their interests have been well accounted for.’ Roxland said that public comment solicited when the ventilator plan was posted on the Health Department Web site was ‘sparse.’"

We need a crisis …

Dr. Guthrie Birkhead, Deputy Commissioner of the Office of Public Health for New York State said he wondered whether it was possible to get the public to accept the plans. ‘In the absence of an extreme emergency, I don’t know. How do you even engage them to explain it to them?’"

How do you tell an older person that they will be denied life-saving medical care in order to save the life of a person judged more worthy by a state or federal bureaucrat?

Situational ethics and political expediency …

“Even so, other states, hospital systems and the Veterans Health Administration—which has 153 medical centers across all states -- have drafted protocols that are based in part on New York’s plan. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for access to ventilators, however, are different. For example, under the current drafts, a patient on dialysis would be considered for a ventilator in a VA hospital in New York during a severe pandemic, but not in another New York hospital that followed the State’s plan, which excludes dialysis patients. The VA’s exclusion criteria are looser because the patient population it is charged with serving is typically older and sicker than in other acute care hospitals. Different states, reflecting different values, have also established different criteria for who gets access to lifesaving resources.”

“Altered standards of care” – hiding the true intent of an evil practice by using Orwellian language …

“The Institute of Medicine, an independent national advisory body, is expected to release a report on Thursday morning, at the request of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, that will recommend broad guidelines to help guide planners crafting altered standards of care in emergencies.”

Warning: Obamacare cedes tremendous power to the Secretary of Health and Human Services and as yet unnamed bureaucrats governing agencies which do not exist.

The Governor as God?

New York officials said they were currently working out legal options for implementing the plans, such as gubernatorial emergency declarations or emergency legislation.”

The clear and present danger …

“’You can take something today that’s not necessarily active and overnight flip the switch and make it into something that has those teeth in it,’ said Dr. Powell, who served on the committee that drafted the plan. Dr. Powell cautioned that it is critically important to maintain flexibility in the guidelines. Any rationing measures taken in a disaster must be calibrated to need and severity.”

Perhaps we need some additional laws …

“Some states, including Louisiana and Indiana, have adopted laws that immunize health professionals against civil lawsuits for their work in disasters. Other states, including Colorado, have drawn up a series of relevant executive orders that could be applied to address these issues.”

Instead of blanket immunity for government officials, bureaucrats and healthcare personnel, maybe the public should demand a law which makes it a felony – punishable with a mandatory jail time – for anyone giving preference to elected officials, government employees or other “special people” such as the wealthy or the politically well-connected.

Highlighting the clear and present danger …

“Dr. Carl Schultz, a professor of emergency medicine at the University of California at Irvine and co-editor of the forthcoming textbook, Koenig and Schultz’s Disaster Medicine (Cambridge University Press), is one of the few open critics of the establishment of altered standards of care for disasters. He says the idea ‘has both monetary and regulatory attractiveness’ to governments and companies because it relieves them of having to strive to provide better care. “The problem with lowering the standard of care is where do you stop? How low do you go? If you don’t want to put any more resources in disaster response, you keep lowering the standard.”

From the people who brought you the disaster response to Hurricane Katrina and who have decimated our healthcare system …

“Federal officials disagree. ‘Our goal is always to provide the highest standard of care under the circumstances,’ said Ann Knebel , deputy director of preparedness and planning at the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Department of Health and Human Services. ‘If you don’t plan, then you are less likely to be able to reuse, reallocate and maximize the resources at your disposal, because you have people who’ve never thought about how they’d respond to those circumstances.’”

What they will not talk about?

Want to see a politician squirm? They talk about hard decisions -- demand that they create a rule that in times of emergencies, American citizens take precedence over illegal aliens. Not that this is right or moral in terms of human behavior – but it does make politicians squirm.

Bottom line …

Perhaps, we need to establish and maintain regional supplies of medical equipment. Perhaps using the equipment in depressed areas. There is no doubt that we need to re-tool our healthcare system and our disaster planning capability.

But we need honest brokers and honest politicians to deal with the matter. NOT A CORRUPT POLITICIAN LIKE OBAMA AND HIS DEMOCRAT MINIONS who plan to use every crisis and every piece of legislation to further advance their socialist agenda and further secure their political control over the nation.

Let’s elect some honest people and then reform the system.

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links:

Flu Nightmare: In Severe Pandemic, Officials Ponder Disconnecting Ventilators From Some Patients - 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



Obama team encourages people to lie to promote Obamacare ...

The truth is evident …

1.  There is no legislative bill – all of the information circulating consists of draft copies of “proposed” legislation.

2.  The devil is in the details – much of the power to implement rules and regulations is ceded to the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the politically-appointed heads of bureaus, panels and commissions which are not in existence at the present time. This is a wild card and can result in the implementation of rules and regulations which are not now contained in the current draft copies of the legislation – possibly because they would generate adverse political consequences.

3.  No matter what the President may say, no one knows exactly what this proposed legislation will cost or its impact on the deficit and the national debt. The non—partisan Congressional Budget Office has told Congress that they will need the final bill – with all of its technical provisions – to be able to score the bill adequately.

Against this background of facts, we find the Obama team encouraging people to lie for the cause of Obamacare.

In their own words … 

Capture9-28-2009-12.02.09 AM


In many ways, the fight for health insurance reform comes down to a battle over information. The more people know about how broken the system is and the President's plan to fix it, the more they want change. But there are an awful lot of lies to cut through, and a whole lot of truth to get out. 

So today, we're proud to announce a powerful new way for you to help: Organizing for America's Health Reform Video Challenge.
This is your chance -- you ingenious, insightful, funny people out there -- to make a 30-second ad telling the story about why the status quo has got to go, or explaining how the Obama plan will ensure we get the secure, quality care we need without breaking the budget.
The top submissions will be voted on by the public and a panel of experts, with the winning ad aired on national television. This is your opportunity to add your voice and creativity to the debate, get some great exposure for your work, and make a huge difference.

No experience is needed -- if you have an idea, we want you to give it a shot. And if you know someone who is especially handy with a camera, please forward this note along right away. Just make sure you submit your ad by October 18th.

Your video could be as simple as you talking straight into the camera, as complex as a full-blown production with a script and special effects, or anything in between.

We're looking for serious videos: You can tell your personal story about how the broken health insurance system has affected you. You can illustrate the big picture about what's wrong now and how the President's plan will help with animations, charts, and facts.

We're looking for funny videos: You can parody those trying to scare us into inaction (between the lying pundits and the insurance company spin doctors, they've given us some good stuff to work with).

And we're looking for new ideas we never would have thought of but we know will blow us all away.

We know that compelling videos can touch people in a way that words alone simply cannot. The messages that regular people put together will make a bigger difference than any false smears or slick ads the other side can dream up. And who knows -- your creative, powerful, or touching video could help tip the balance in favor of health reform.

So go get started today! I can't wait to see what you come up with,

Natalie

Natalie Foster
New Media Director

More truth?

“In many ways, the fight for health insurance reform comes down to a battle over information.”

This is literally true. But the Obama Administration cannot clearly tell the American public what is in the Obamacare bill and what it will cost without causing a further uproar by those who realize that Obama’s plan will destroy the current system which serves 85% of Americans in order to add an approximate 20 million people to the system. Hardly fair at all.  

“… explaining how the Obama plan will ensure we get the secure, quality care we need without breaking the budget.”

Qualified medical professionals, expert economists and other highly-trained people can not explain the present bill. Neither can the Obama Administration. So it seems very disingenuous to  believe that any ordinary person could actually explain what is contained in the draft copies of the legislations and what is contained in the parts that are not even written. This is a manipulative technique to get people to buy into the Obamacare plan without knowing the intimate details of the program.

“You can illustrate the big picture about what's wrong now and how the President's plan will help with animations, charts, and facts.”

Where ordinary people will be able to access facts and figures which are not even available to the Congressional Budget Office on an ill-defined plan is beyond comprehension. As we have said before, this is an engagement ruse to gin up support for a failing program that cannot possibly succeed based on what is contained in the draft legislation.

“You can parody those trying to scare us into inaction (between the lying pundits and the insurance company spin doctors, they've given us some good stuff to work with).”

This is a classic Saul Alinsky technique to make fun of and denigrate the opposition with the goal of rendering them impotent and irrelevant. Unfortunately, many of the scarier aspects of the proposed Obamacare legislation are factual and the insurance companies which are being demonized have already struck a deal with the Obama Administration to insure that they get their portion of the profit pie. How can the Obama Administration demonize the drug industry, the durable medical goods industry, the insurance industry – when they have already cut deals protecting these special interests? Only the foolish or naive would believe that a tactic used by socialist community organizers following the Alinsky rules would succeed in the face of a single fact: America’s senior citizens are being placed a great risk by the Obamacare plan. Try to prove me wrong – but start with Obama’s own statements about funding Obamacare by cutting the Medicare Advantage Program used by 25 –33% of senior citizens.

“The messages that regular people put together will make a bigger difference than any false smears or slick ads the other side can dream up.”

As sincere as these videos may be, they cannot replace or alter the simple truth: Obamacare is more about a toxic socialist political agenda and controlling almost every aspect of American’s lives than it is about healthcare or healthcare insurance. President Obama is a dishonest broker for what may be one of the most evil, anti-American legislative initiatives crafted in the history of the United States.

Bottom line …

By encouraging ordinary citizens to parrot the Obamacare lies and misinformation, the Obama Administration is making liars out of ordinary well-intentioned citizens. And as we have seen with the stimulus package and the spending bills which were not read by the legislators before being passed, the devil is both in the details and the White House.

Capture7-22-2009-11.10.07 PM

Capture8-20-2009-12.56.52 PM

Capture9-3-2009-1.17.29 PM

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

-- steve

_______________________________________________

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



Another hidden tax, another reason for poor bank interest rates …

We are encouraged to save our money, for purchases we want, for a rainy day, for retirement and for our children. But the banks took our money to fund imprudent investments and then rewarded themselves with large executive bonuses.

Currently, the Federal Reserve is loaning money to the banks at one-quarter of one-percent. The yield on our savings is abysmal and well below the erosive effects of inflation. The banks do not feel that they need to pay more for capital, so they restrict the yield on depository accounts.

And now we find the FDIC, headed by Sheila Bair, is proposing that regulated banks prepay three years of regular FDIC assessments to replenish the shrinking insurance fund used to make customers of failed banks whole – at least up to the limits of the FDIC insurance.

Bearing in mind that corporations do not pay taxes and fees – they are paid by the financial institution’s customers in the form of a reduced return on their savings or additional fees on banking services – this latest move is simply another tax on your savings.

Perhaps it is time to take another look at the FDIC and its leadership?

One, the FDIC almost tripled their exposure to bad debts when they moved the amount insured from $100,000 per covered account to $250,000 per covered account. This is a self-inflicted would; ostensibly done to allay depositor’s fears and keep the money in the failed and failing banks.

Two, why would the FDIC insure up to $139 billion of  General Electric capital debt? How could this possibly benefit the consumer?

It should be noted that a high-ranking official, possibly with permission from his superiors, allegedly illegally backdated deposits at the failed Indy Mac bank to convey a false sense of soundness while the FDIC was negotiating a resolution deal to stem the consequences of Indy Mac’s failure. I haven’t heard that he has been prosecuted as of this date.

It should also be noted that the FDIC may have mislead the public in announcing an assets purchase by a private financial organization. Misstating the purchase price of the assets by not noting that part of the funds being used may have come from the FDIC itself and that the net amount of money put into the new entity was far less than advertised.

Reuters is reporting …

“U.S. bank regulators are expected to propose on Tuesday that banks prepay three years of regular assessments to replenish the dwindling deposit insurance fund, according to a source familiar with the matter.”

Such an option would give the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp more liquidity to deal with the sharp increase in bank failures, while banks would not be required to report the expense of the fees until they would normally be due.”

Something stinks …

The FDIC traditionally has a strong ratings system known as CAMELS (Capital, Assets, Management, Earnings, and Liquidity) and now seems to have no answer to why banks are failing.

Using CAMELS and deficiency letters, the FDIC knows what is going on and should be taking action to mitigate the damage to the consumer and the American taxpayer. So unless the FDIC is engaged in playing politics – a distinct possibility as Sheila Bair struggles to save her job and keep the funding and influence of her agency – perhaps the FDIC needs to further explain its request for prepaid  assessments made on thin-air projections.

“The source, speaking anonymously because the regulator discussions have been private, said the FDIC would likely propose for the banking industry to prepay $12 billion per year in assessments, for a total of $36 billion.”

While this is not quite wealth redistribution – from those who have money to those who have lost theirs – it is a tax on the deposits of the American consumer; further reducing their ability to earn a satisfactory return on their deposits. At a time when the Obama Administration is talking about problems with Social Security and potential cutbacks in Medicare, older Americans need their money to be safe and earning a fair return.

“The board of the FDIC is meeting on Tuesday to propose alternatives to charging the banking industry hefty emergency fees to avoid having the balance of the insurance fund hit zero.”

“The industry has said such upfront fees could hurt banks just as their balance sheets are starting to recover from the recent financial crisis.”

From one pocket or another …

Whether or not it comes from the consumers in form of reduced yields on their investments or borrowed directly from the consumer via the U.S. Treasury, the result is the same. The consumer gets screwed!

“FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair has said the agency is considering alternatives to the upfront ‘emergency’ fees, including prepayments of regular assessments, tapping the FDIC's $500 billion line of credit with Treasury, and borrowing from healthier banks to rebuild the fund.”

Is this the same Sheila Bair who is selling of problematical debt to private investors at deep discounts? Using the very same mechanism that was used to bailout the Savings and Loans?

“It is unclear what combination of options the FDIC board will propose to put out for public comment on Tuesday, as it seems regulators have narrowed the menu of options.”

“So far this year 95 U.S. banks have failed, compared with 25 last year and only three in 2007.”

“Those failures have whittled the balance of the insurance fund down to $10.4 billion at the end of the second quarter from $45 billion a year earlier. The FDIC notes it has an additional $32 billion in reserves to handle failures over the next year.”

It is my personal belief that recently enacted accounting reforms have allowed the banks to appear healthier than they really are in order to attract depositor’s money and to sell bank shares to the investing public.

Be well, be safe and take care of yourself and your family first. Treat all transactions on a profit an loss basis. Judge risk carefully. And above all, forget about loyalty to any financial institution – no matter how friendly they seem, you remain just another number in the quest to wring profits from your money.

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links:

FDIC to propose banks prepay 3 years of fees: source | Reuters


“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



Is Meg Whitman another Manchurian candidate? (Updated)

UPDATE: 10-02-09 MEG WHITMAN ENDORSED BARBARA BOXER ... ONE OF THE MOST LIBERAL AND STUPID SENATORS DRIVING GLOBAL WARMING LEGISLATION ...

"Former eBay executive Meg Whitman , the 2010 gubernatorial candidate who has recently portrayed herself as a 'darned good' conservative Republican, endorsed Democratic U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer in 2003, records show. "'Whitman contributed $4,000 to Boxer in the 2004 reelection campaign -- and endorsed Boxer as a part of Technology Leaders for Boxer,'' confirmed Boxer aide Rose Kapolczynski today."  <Source>

Whitman is looking more and more like an opportunistic RINO (Republican In Name Only) whose policies as California's Governor might be similar to those of current failure Arnold Schwarzenegger. Listening to Barbara "Call Me Senator" Boxer is almost painful. Arguably one of the most stupid and liberal Senators -- pushing toxic policies while California sinks into the abyss of corrupt politics and political correctness.

Original Blog ...

Can we afford to elect a liberal posing as a fiscal conservative?

Readers know that I am a Reagan conservative and despise RINOs (Republicans in Name Only) who only appear to be Republicans while voting with far-left and liberal democrats. The prime example being the tough-talking fraud, Arnold Schwarzenegger, who couldn’t wait to appoint a life-long democrat, liberal, lesbian who was the former chief of staff to Gray Davis, the free-spending, tax-raising recalled Governor whom Schwarzenegger replaced. It should be noted that Schwarzenegger was soon to out-fundraise Gray Davis who was famous for his non-stop fundraising and pandering to the special interests.

The last thing California needs in these desperate times is a chameleon, some one who appears to be a tough-talking Republican but who can morph into a touchie-feelie liberal who is willing to allocate funding to illegal aliens over repairing and replacing the crumbling infrastructure which affects all legal taxpaying citizens of California.

It would not be the first time to find a RINO running for high office …

There have been numerous documented incidents where liberal democrats changed parties in order to be elected to a high government position. Mostly for reasons of convenience; they did not need to compare credentials with other older, more established candidates in their traditional party; they could more easily access funding in a less crowded race – and they could more easily win the vote because they seemed “moderate” and in touch with more of the electorate.

Notwithstanding the fraud that they perpetrated on their newly chosen party, the people that donated time, effort and money to the campaign and the voters who believed that they were who they said they were, these quislings were able to work from inside their new party to advance a political agenda that would be unpalatable to their new supporters had the candidate openly declared their intentions.

Another billionaire, Michael Bloomberg, comes to mind.

“A lifelong Democrat before seeking elective office, Bloomberg switched his registration in 2001 and ran for mayor as a Republican, winning the election that year and a second term in 2005. He was frequently mentioned as a possible independent candidate for the 2008 presidential election and fueled that speculation when he left the Republican Party in June 2007 to become an independent.” <Source>

I have my doubts about Meg Whitman who is running for the governorship of California …

First, I have an inborn suspicion of rich, bay area women who seem to be naturally predisposed to a liberal agenda. Yes they talk tough, appear in the beginning to be fiscally conservative – but, in the end, morph into liberals supporting a liberal agenda.

Can we afford Meg Whitman and/or Carly Fiorina in California politics? |One Citizen Speaking

Second, I read Meg Whitman’s quote where she openly and effusively praised Van Jones, a radical activist who was forced to resign from the Obama Administration for his prior radical utterances that called into question his impartiality and ability to execute the duties of his office without invoking a radical agenda.

“He [Van Jones] has been praised from leaders ranging from Al Gore to former eBay CEO (and Republican) Meg Whitman, who in May said  that Jones is doing ‘a marvelous job… I’m a huge fan of his. He is very bright, very articulate, very passionate. I think he is exactly right.’”

Remember: this is the radical that claimed he was a communist, assisted in the formation of STORM (Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement) which has roots in Marxism and Leninism, and signed a petition suggesting that George W. Bush may have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war.

Update: here is Meg Whitman in her own words praising communist Van Jones …

A convenient Republican?

And third, we now find that the Sacramento Bee is reporting that Meg Whitman refuses to address the issue that “there was no evidence that she had ever registered to vote before 2002 and she had not registered as a Republican until 2007.”

CBS News is reporting …

“Meg Whitman Under Fire Over Voting Record”

“Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman sought to redirect attention from her spotty voting record Saturday as she promoted a platform of fiscal discipline to the party faithful.”

“Speaking to the state Republican Party convention near Palm Springs, the billionaire former CEO of the online auction company eBay Inc. outlined a program of severe austerity for state government if she is elected next year.”

“She promised to slash an additional $15 billion in spending and reduce the state government work force by 40,000, reiterating points she made earlier in the week when she formally announced her candidacy. She provided no details about how she would achieve those goals.”

Campaign promises in the Barack Obama Mold?

“Whitman told GOP delegates that California simply can no longer afford the level of government service it has been providing.
‘If elected, I will identify and implement at least $15 billion in permanent spending cuts from the state budget. I'll eliminate redundant and underperforming government agencies and commissions,’ she said.”

“Eliminating waste and abuse also has been a theme for the governor she hopes to succeed, fellow Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, who must leave office next year due to term limits. His efforts to do so have achieved only modest success in providing savings to the state.”

"’The issue is not money. There's plenty of money. It's how the money is spent,’ Whitman said.”

“Whitman's speech did not touch on questions that have surrounded the campaign for days, after The Sacramento Bee published the results of an investigation into her voting record.

“Shortly after Whitman gave the state party $250,000 of her own money for voter-registration efforts, the Bee reported there was no evidence that she had ever registered to vote before 2002 and she had not registered as a Republican until 2007. “

“On Saturday, Whitman refused to answer repeated questions from reporters about the issue. ‘I did not vote. I should've voted. It is inexcusable,’ she said. ‘I've said what I'm going to say about it.’”

Was Whitman even a Republican, much less a conservative Republican, before announcing for the gubernatorial position?

"One of Whitman's opponents for the GOP nomination, state Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, has called on her to drop out of the race. He said Whitman's apparent failure to participate in elections for 28 years suggests a lack of engagement in politics and government.”

I have also been extremely critical of another rich candidate, Steve Poizner …

Poizner also faced questions from reporters about previous campaign donations to Democrats, including the presidential campaign of Al Gore. He said his wife is a Democrat and they share a joint checking account.”
"’The fact is, I've been a Republican since 1981 and I am married to someone who's been a Democrat her whole life. ... We've had some very interesting dinnertime conversations,’ he said.”

Sounds like Schwarzenegger and his life-long liberal democrat wife, Maria Shriver, daughter of the politician Sargent Shriver and Eunice Kennedy Shriver.

Bottom line …

I am still ambivalent about Meg Whitman. For all of her noteworthy success at eBay, one should remember that eBay often functions as a benevolent dictatorship ruling by unilateral fiat. And that it was not all sweetness and light; that there are a number of stories about high-handed and egregious behavior by eBay floating on the Internet.

But most of all, I am worried that we will elect another Arnold Schwarzenegger – someone who proclaims that they are “too rich to be bought by the special interests” only to invent new ways to solicit money from special interests while avoiding full disclosure. Someone who lacks the guts to stand up to the socialist paradise contemplated by the far-left democrat liberals in the Congress.

Whitman will face formidable odds – a potential Lieutenant Governor from another party, other elected officials who have ambitions and agendas of their own. And a toxic legislature containing both democrat and republican politicians who pander to illegal aliens, the unions and the special interests.

I fear that Meg Whitman will turn out to be as big a poseur as President Barack Obama or Arnold Schwarzenegger – someone who is politically naive and will supports a toxic liberal democrat agenda for California. Such as disarming law-abiding citizens, enacting economy-killing global warming initiatives based on false science and, of course, pushing for citizenship for illegal aliens.

The Governor’s office is not for sale on eBay – to the high-bidding billionaire willing to commit their own funds and make outrageous promises – saying or doing anything to get elected.

Let me know what you think.

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

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links …

Calif. Gubernatorial Candidate Meg Whitman Faces Questions Over Voting Record - cbs2.com


“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



ATTENTION IOC/USOC: CHICAGO DOES NOT DESERVE THE OLYMPICS ... (Updated)

UPDATE (4) 10-02-09  DID OBAMA COST CHICAGO THE OLYMPICS? 

After listening to Barack Obama's speech before the International Olympic Committee, I was struck by the fact that much of the speech was related to Obama. Basically, self-promoting himself first, Chicago second. Listen to the soaring rhetoric and put yourself in the voting member's shoes. My thoughts: "what a pompous ass, I am voting against Chicago on the first vote."  -- And that's what appears to have happened.  Read the official White House Transcript.

"I know you face a difficult choice among several great cities and nations with impressive bids of their own.  So I've come here today to urge you to choose Chicago for the same reason I chose Chicago nearly 25 years ago -- the reason I fell in love with the city I still call home.  And it's not just because it's where I met the woman you just heard from -- although after getting to know her this week, I know you'll all agree that she's a pretty big selling point for the city."

"And when I think of what these Games can mean to people all over the world, I think about people like my dad.  People who face seemingly insurmountable challenges, but never let go.  They work a little harder, but they never give up."

"Now, my dad didn't live to see the day that the Paralympic Games would become the force that they are today.  But if he had lived to see this day -- if he could have seen the Paralympic Games share a global stage with the Olympic Games, if he could have witnessed athletes who compete and excel and prove that nothing is more powerful than the human spirit, I know it would have restored in him the same sense of unbridled possibility that he instilled in me."

"We stand at a moment in history when the fate of each nation is inextricably linked to the fate of all nations -- a time of common challenges that require common effort.  And I ran for President because I believed deeply that at this defining moment, the United States of America has a responsibility to help in that effort, to forge new partnerships with the nations and the peoples of the world.

This type of story-telling, favored by the democrats, seems to be somewhat ill-considered. Notice that Obama attempts to cite another group that would share a global stage with the Olympics. If I learned anything being close to the Los Angeles Olympics, it was that the Olympics does not share the stage with any other event and IOC members demand that they be treated as Olympic Gods. It's all about them, not all about Obama and his politics.

This type of tone deaf arrogance -- the very thing Obama tells other nations we are guilty of -- is probably what turned the vote overwhelmingly negative.  If anyone could be blamed for the loss of the 2016 Olympics, it would be President Obama and his sycophantic ideologs who believe they are "masters of the political universe." We lost big -- on the first vote -- with the IOC apparently disgusted with Obama. Something that is also happening as the taxpayer/citizens are faced with a toxic political agenda, burgeoning costs, and a TelePrompTer president who looks and sounds good -- but stands for nothing but the triumph of style over substance. An empty suit!

Is the rest of the world, especially Brazil laughing at us?

Capture10-2-2009-5.53.44 PM

You bet!

UPDATE (3) 10-02-09  SOCIAL JUSTICE: CHICAGO LOSES THE OLYMPICS TO RIO 

In one more example of punditry being wrong, the International Olympic Committe did not grant the 2016 Summer Games to Chicago, but selected Rio de Janeiro for the 2016 games. Considering the potential crime, corruption and apparent unwillingness of a large portion of Chicago residents to host the Olympics, I believe that the correct decision has been made. This is not so much a statement of a rejection of America as a suitable site, but the acknowledgement that all is not well in Obama's home town.

As for this being recorded as a personal failure for Barack Obama or the Obama Administration, we should regard this for what it is: the IOC selecting an appropriate venue whose residents supported the Olympic program and highly desired to host the games. By no means is Rio a perfect city, devoid of corruption and crime, but they are more than willing and able to put forth the required effort to support the games. It is anticipated that the games will be a net money loser. Look for all high government officials to travel to RIO to consult or observe ... especially the people associated with Homeland Security.

UPDATE (2) 10-01-09  IS THE FIX IN? 

Pundits are now claiming that Barack Obama would never risk his personal prestige to fly to Denmark unless he was sure that he would be bringing home the Olympics. If this is true, what could he have done to spin the situation to his advantage? Knowing that he is traveling with Chicago-style activists, is it possible that he used our intelligence agencies to research the lives of the IOC voters? Does Denmark have an ACORN or international far-left component which could help/pressure IOC members? Is something truly rotten in Denmark? We will wait and see.

UPDATE (1) 09-28-09 OBAMA HEADS TO DENMARK ...

Road Trip: President Obama and his merry band of Administration officials will be heading to Denmark with Oprah and his wife Michelle to convince the International Olympic Committee that Chicago would be a perfect venue for the 2016 Olympics.

Considering that the procession contains Mayor Daley, Rahm Emanuel, Valerie Jarrett,  Education Secretary Arne Duncan, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and other controversial, corrupt or complacent politicians -- perhaps we should lock the doors while they are gone to cut down on governmental corruption.

While there are majorly serious foreign policy issues being discussed, I find it amazing that the President has the time to pursue commerical interests abroad when his time coud be better utilized studying the potential effects of his toxic legislation ... or spent in crafting an energy independence plan which would return America to a more tenable position with regards to the Middle East.

I wonder how he will be received when he sets up his omnipresent TelePrompTers to deliver one of the pre-written, hand-crafter, stem-winder speeches which he believes will solve all problems?

-- steve

Original Blog Entry ...

Chicago does not represent the America I know and love …

Considering the impact of Chicago-style politics on America, it is my personal opinion that they should not reap the prestige or benefits from hosting the Olympics.

Chicago does not typify the America I know and love and it certainly represents the type of one-party corruption and criminal history that should not be put on display for the world to see.

And it appears that I am not alone …

“FOX-TV CHICAGO ORDERED NOT TO RUN ANTI-OLYMPICS STORY”

“A local TV station that reported on Chicagoans NOT wanting the Olympics has been told NOT to run the report again, insiders tell the DRUDGE REPORT!”

“The Chicago Olympic Committee told FOX Chicago that its broadcast ‘would harm Chicago's chances’ to be awarded the games. The station's news director ordered staff to hold fire after the report aired once last Thursday morning, claims a source.”

“Chicago, Madrid, Tokyo and Rio are mounting strong bids for the honor to host in 2016. The International Olympic Committee makes its decision on Friday. First Lady Michelle Obama will lead the in-person push.”

Most Chicago residents are good, hard-working people caught up in the world of one-party politics and the consequences of a corrupt political system.

Unfortunately, we are now seeing that same corrupt one-party mentality reflected in the Obama Administration and his slavish attention to his Chicago cronies, the unions and community activists.

Therefore, I would prefer that the world not perceive the United States through the prism of Chicago.

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links …

Chicago residents don’t support the bid for 2016 Olympics

“The group who is running the Chicago bid to host the 2016 Olympics certainly followed this rule.  Early on they made sure they had the support of President Barrack Obama and a plethora of other Olympic athletes, Chicago businesses and local celebrities.  This assembly have helped make Chicago one of the four finalists in the bidding process to host the 2016 Summer Games.”

“But the Chicago 2016 Bid Committee forgot to gain the support of one key group of individuals.  The residents of the City of Chicago.  A Chicago Tribune poll found that only 47% of Chicagoans were in favor of the city’s bid for the Olympics.  A huge 84% said they do not approve of using public money (i.e.- tax payer dollars) to fund the 2016 Summer Games in their city.  Chicago residents do not want to be on the hook for cost overruns or other infrastructure costs which may fall back on them.”

Obama pitches Olympics, but still not going to Denmark

32 Comments

Kris on September 16, 2009 11:00 AM

“I, for one do not think that President should take time out of his busy schedule to travel to Copenhagen. There are more urgent matters for the President; Economy, Health Insurance, and failing Banks. Obama's main focus now is to acquire affordable Health Insurance for citizens of United States, not too put money into Mayor Daley's cronies pockets, and not to mention the displacement of families in the surrounding areas where the site for the 2016 Olympics is slated to be...myself being one of the family members being displaced if Chicago wins the bid. My earnings is under $30,000 yearly, the new structure that are deemed for housing for the Olympics are suppose to be easily acquired by Chicagoans afterwards, but we all know that only a chosen few will be eligible, those with incomes of $50,000 or more. I am African America and I do not want Chicago to win the 2016 Olympic bid. We all know what happen in Atlanta to their economy before and after hosting. What is more important, the people of United States or Mayor Daley?


“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



Obamacare: Will Ferrell demonstrates far-left propaganda tactic ...

Here we have noted funnyman Will Ferrell clearly demonstrating one of the most effective far-left propaganda tactics used by community organizers – direct from the Saul Alinsky playbook.

The most effective way to deal with the opposition is to make fun of them and insert your own propaganda – it doesn’t even have to be the truth – into the plotline. Trivialize them out of existence and neutralize legitimate opposition with derision and humor.

Check out this Will Farrell hit piece which promotes Obamacare even though the legislation remains in draft form and great powers are conferred on the Secretary of Health and Human Services and un-named bureaucrats who will head as-yet-to-be-formed government agencies.

Will Ferrell spinning the story for Obama …  

What the hell does Will Farrell know and isn’t he the guy that exploited a young girl by having her mouth obscenities for laughs in a video?

A look at Will Ferrell’s America …

Truth be told … there is nothing funny about Obamacare. It is not a laughing matter. And it should be remembered that not only are the insurance companies in bed with politicians – but they are regulated on both the federal and state levels.

Perhaps Farrell should have used his prodigiously funny talents to ask a few important questions …

  • Why does the insurance industry refuse to support tort reform and lower the malpractice premiums for doctors in high-risk specialties such as neurosurgery and obstetrics?
  • Why does the insurance industry refuse to support national competition?
  • Why does the insurance company use highly-paid lobbyists to influence congressional legislation which is filled with self-protecting loopholes and exemptions?
  • Why did the insurance company apparently pre-negotiate with the Obama Administration some of the details in the draft copy of the Obamacare legislation?
  • And why is a Will Ferrell, a guy who made $31 million last year, making fun of the salaries of insurance executives? Just like the rest of the "don't do as I do, do as I say" limousine liberals.

The way the far-left continues to demonize those that they have already cut deals with: the drug industry, the pharmaceutical industry, the durable medical equipment industry and the insurance industry, is downright dishonest and extremely damaging to the taxpaying citizens of America.

In the same way that they poke fun at others, let us consider the following bumper stickers …

Capture

Capture6-16-2009-12.52.53 AM

Capture6-16-2009-12.54.14 AM

Capture7-22-2009-11.10.07 PM

Capture8-11-2009-9.30.43 PM

Capture8-20-2009-12.56.52 PM

 Capture9-3-2009-1.17.29 PM

Bottom line …

Government propaganda aided and abetted by Hollywood’s flawed individuals should not be accepted … read the legislation, check it out for yourself. Its your future and your life on the line.

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

-- steve

_______________________________________________

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



The Alinsky method: A demonstration of using humor as a weapon against a position …

Here we have a perfect example of an attack on a religious position that is being expounded  Kirk Cameron … child star turned minister …

“Angry Romanian Blogger Takes On Kirk Cameron Propaganda”

A viral video …

As you can see, we have a confrontation between science and religion.

From the far-left Huffington Post …

“Kirk Cameron's 'Origin Of Species' Plan: Ex-Actor To Distribute 50,000 Altered Darwin Books”

“Kirk Cameron, best known for his role in the 1980s sitcom Growing Pains, now spends much of his time advocating for far-right Christian evangelical causes.”

“In a video posted recently to YouTube, Cameron lays out a plan to subvert 'Darwin Day' on November 22, 2009 -- a date marking the 150th anniversary of the publishing of Charles Darwin's "Origin of Species." Cameron says that he and like-minded activists plan to deliver 50,000 copies of an altered version of Darwin's book to students at dozens of U.S. universities.”

“Cameron explains that this ‘very special’ edition of the ‘Origin of Species’ will include an introduction explaining ‘Adolf Hitler's undeniable connection’ to the theory of evolution, and highlighting ‘Darwin's racism’ and "his disdain for women." Cameron's edition also exposes the ‘many hoaxes’ of evolutionary theory, while presenting a ‘balanced view of Creationism.’ (There's a pdf of this introduction here.)”

The Cameron video …

What, you might ask, is the purpose of these videos? I leave the answer up to you ….

Could it be that those who embrace a socialistic state want to erase all references to religion and morality in society and replace them with allegiance to the government?

Could it be that those who have a philosophic view of science and rationality want to paint those who use faith as a comfort to understand the unknown in a poor light?

Could it be that those who are promoting a “cult of political personality” want you to believe that there are no higher cause and no higher figures of authority?

What do you believe is the purpose of these two videos? Drop me an e-mail using the e-mail link under my picture or entering a comment below.

I do have a fundamental objection …

While it is legal to reproduce the original Darwin book, I do believe that it is immoral and unethical to alter the original work by adding a 50-page insert to make a point. If the tract’s author wants to distribute his work, it should be inserted into the book, but not bound into the book.

As a cynical side note, the distribution of this book is also part of an extensive fundraising and media campaign  promoting Kirk Cameron and his fellow evangelist Ray Comfort. 

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

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Origin of Stupidity -- Viral Video at Youtube

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/22/kirk-camerons-origin-of-s_n_294349.html

Origin of Species – 50-page Insert

Origin Into Schools – Cameron


“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



GM: Money Back Deal: A reader’s response

Sometimes, my readers amaze me. What started out as a one-line “you sir, are a fucking moron” comment to my blog entry on General Motors and their money-back guarantee,  followed by my response to the commenter, turned into an enlightening e-mail exchange which I believe advances the conversation and adds an additional perspective to the issue.

Here is the e-mail exchange …

The top line is the commenter’s original response to my blog entry on the General Motors Money Back Guarantee. The plain text below the equal signs are my comments. The reader’s comments in response are in red italics.  Nothing was edited -- which accounts for the errors in the response. 

you sir, are a fucking moron
=====================================
While the urge to reply in kind is great, perhaps I can serve the greater good by pointing out two things: one, you did not pose any real objection or refute what I wrote; and two, you do not seem to understand that my motivation was to inform my readers that if they truly believed a money-back offer was being extended, it could cost them thousands of dollars should they decide to exercise their option to return the vehicle.

“while its nice to bash them for a stupid program, which it is, the program isnt a scam, its in fact backed by an insurance group, which probably is federally backed. the dealer actually wants you to return the car because they get to purchase it for 67% of the invoice from gm or return it to gm. this means that on a 57k truck with a 50k invoice the dealer would get the truck into the used car inventory for 33k and some change. what dealer wouldn't want to have cars in there inventory at that type of discount. this is a very profitable proposition for the dealer.”

1 -- they were to ONLY receive a refund on the actual vehicle, not any dealer-installed or after market options;

“no one buys dealer installed options, but if they did and included it on the line one sales price it would still be refunded.”

2 -- they were not going to get their financing charges and any pre-payment penalty returned; they were still on the hook for any dealer "payoff payments" made on their behalf;

“gmac has no prepayment penalty and have 0% interest on everything anyway. if you were truly just renting a car then sign up for this and have a good time.”

3 -- they remained on the hook for all the title, license and vehicle taxes -- the sales tax would be returned;

“all this adds up to less than a few hundred dollars in the majority of states, and im sure the dealer would negotiate into the original deal a check back to the customer for that amount just to close a deal”

4 -- they needed to adhere to all of the terms and conditions and it was not as simple as driving the vehicle back to the dealer.

“the dealer is going to be more than willing to help fill out a form to get a car back with a couple thousand miles on it for 67% of invoice. this could actually negatively affect the value of a year or 2 old model.”

5 -- the transaction could appear as a voluntary repossession or return on their credit report. 

“there is no way possible this is going to show up as a repo, gm has bought an insurance policy on each deal and the loan will be paid. that is the bottom line.”

... as well as other gotchas -- like their trade-in being gone.

“that is usually a good thing, i read your article because i plan on scamming the program. if you have a trade in that you are 5k upside down in and your payoff is 30k and you were buying the 57k truck i mentioned earlier, if you structured the deal right, you could get a truck for a month and walk away from the deal owing nothing to anyone and then go buy whatever you want, including the truck you turned back in. you just have to put a business or a spouse as the line one buyer when you purchase the vehicle back used.”

“the dealer would over allow you on your trade and show the sales price as msrp. you could still stipulate that they cut you an additional check back to cover anything at the turn in period. the still make a little money on the first deal, they make money when they sell your trade, then you agree to pay them a few k profit when you buy your "used" truck back.”

“hope this makes sense. the point is, that its really a good program and any dealer anywhere would be more than happy to take a car back because it only HELPS them financially.”

“your gripe should be, that somewhere along the line, the government is footing the bill for all this mess. the insurance company has estimated that less than 3% of people buying will actually return the car. in most cases, my friend that owns a gmc dealer has told me, that the customer is just opting for the extra $500 anyway.”

This was a great response – and sure beats calling me a fucking moron. However, I have no way of verifying his assertions with respect to dealership actions and must take the GM “fine print” as it was originally offered. Without a doubt, this is the guy I want to negotiate my next car purchase. And while I do not believe in scamming the system, gaming the system to your own advantage is permissible.

One final cautionary note – the devil is in the details and not all dealers may be willing to go along with the program. Seek professional advice if necessary. Again, the buyback percentages may vary with the type of vehicle and other factors. This information is being offered only to further the discussion and does contain information that I cannot verify.

But, the reader does raise an interesting point about the transaction being financially beneficial to dealers. Perhaps this is the actual intent and that the dealer is planning to game the system themselves. Oh well, Karma is a bitch.

Again, this is the guy I want to negotiate my next car purchase.

-- steve


“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