Sarah Palin: Socialist Perfect Storm; Bogus Baucus Bill and Obama Breaks His Promises to America… Again and Again

palin flag background and polar bear pin

Unintended consequences always result from top-down big government plans like the current health care proposals, and we can’t afford to ignore that fact again.

Let the Left Fringe Loonies step away from their childish PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome)  and deal with Issues Facing This Country.

On second thought… it is beyond their abilities… and unfortunately for them PDS is not covered by ObamaCare. lol

From the Desk of Sarah Palin is issued a calling out of the Majority in Congress and a calling out of the President of the United States.

Yesterday, Sarah published this article…

…in which she exposes the con game being perpetrated on the American Public by the Socialists bent on a Fundamental (Socialist) Transformation of America.

The following is excerpt calling out the financial show stoppers being hushed up by the Socialists in Congress and by the White House…

The [Baucus] bill prohibits insurance companies from refusing coverage to people with pre-existing conditions and from charging sick people higher premiums. [1] It attempts to offset the costs this will impose on insurance companies by requiring everyone to purchase coverage, which in theory would expand the pool of paying policy holders.

However, the maximum fine for those who refuse to purchase health insurance is $750. [2] Even factoring in government subsidies, the cost of purchasing a plan is much more than $750. The result: many people, especially the young and healthy, will simply not buy coverage, choosing to pay the fine instead. They’ll wait until they’re sick to buy health insurance, confident in the knowledge that insurance companies can’t deny them coverage. Such a scenario is a perfect storm for increasing the cost of health care and creating an unsustainable mandate program.

Next is an excerpt calling out President Obama on lack of Promised Transparency…
In January 2008, presidential candidate Obama promised not to negotiate behind closed doors with health care lobbyists. In fact, he committed to “broadcasting those negotiations on C-SPAN so that the American people can see what the choices are. Because part of what we have to do is enlist the American people in this process. And overcoming the special interests and the lobbyists…” [12] However, last February, after serving only a few weeks in office, President Obama met privately at the White House with health care industry executives and lobbyists. [13] Yesterday, POLITICO reported that aides to President Obama and Democrat Senator Max Baucus met with corporate lobbyists in April to help “set in motion a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign, primarily financed by industry groups, that has played a key role in bolstering public support for health care reform.” [14] Needless to say, their negotiations were not broadcast on C-SPAN for the American people to see.

Presidential candidate Obama also promised that he would not “sign any nonemergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House Web site for five days.” [15] PolitiFact reports that this promise has already been broken three times by the current administration. [16] We can only hope that it won’t be broken again with health care reform.

Sarah Palin’s complete Article:

Now that the Senate Finance Committee has approved its health care bill, it’s a good time to step back and take a look at the long term consequences should its provisions be enacted into law.

The bill prohibits insurance companies from refusing coverage to people with pre-existing conditions and from charging sick people higher premiums. [1] It attempts to offset the costs this will impose on insurance companies by requiring everyone to purchase coverage, which in theory would expand the pool of paying policy holders.

However, the maximum fine for those who refuse to purchase health insurance is $750. [2] Even factoring in government subsidies, the cost of purchasing a plan is much more than $750. The result: many people, especially the young and healthy, will simply not buy coverage, choosing to pay the fine instead. They’ll wait until they’re sick to buy health insurance, confident in the knowledge that insurance companies can’t deny them coverage. Such a scenario is a perfect storm for increasing the cost of health care and creating an unsustainable mandate program.

Those driving this plan no doubt have good intentions, but good intentions aren’t enough. There were good intentions behind the drive to increase home ownership for lower-income Americans, but forcing financial institutions to give loans to people who couldn’t afford them had terrible unintended consequences. We all felt those consequences during the financial collapse last year. Unintended consequences always result from top-down big government plans like the current health care proposals, and we can’t afford to ignore that fact again.

Supposedly the Senate Finance bill will be paid for by cutting Medicare by nearly half a trillion dollars and by taxing the so-called “Cadillac” health care plans enjoyed by many union members. The plan will also impose heavy taxes on insurers, pharmaceutical companies, medical device companies, and clinical labs. [3] The result of all of these taxes is clear. As Douglas Holtz-Eakin noted in the Wall Street Journal, these new taxes “will be passed on to consumers by either directly raising insurance premiums, or by fueling higher health-care costs that inevitably lead to higher premiums.” [4] Unfortunately, it will lead to lower wages too, as employees will have to sacrifice a greater percentage of their paychecks to cover these higher premiums. [5] In other words, if the Democrats succeed in overhauling health care, we’ll all bear the costs. The Senate Finance bill is effectively a middle class tax increase, and as Holtz-Eakin points out, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation those making less than $200,000 will be hit hardest. [6]

With our country’s debt and deficits growing at an alarming rate, many of us can’t help but wonder how we can afford a new trillion dollar entitlement program. The president has promised that he won’t sign a health care bill if it “adds even one dime to our deficit over the next decade.” [7] But his administration also promised that his nearly trillion dollar stimulus plan would keep the unemployment rate below 8%. [8] Last month, our unemployment rate was 9.8%, the highest it’s been in 26 years. [9] At first the current administration promised that the stimulus would save or create 3 to 4 million jobs. [10] Then they declared that it created 1 million jobs, but the stimulus reports released this week showed that a mere 30,083 jobs have been created, while nearly 3.4 million jobs have been lost since the stimulus was passed. [11] Should we believe the administration’s claims about health care when their promises have proven so unreliable about the stimulus?

In January 2008, presidential candidate Obama promised not to negotiate behind closed doors with health care lobbyists. In fact, he committed to “broadcasting those negotiations on C-SPAN so that the American people can see what the choices are. Because part of what we have to do is enlist the American people in this process. And overcoming the special interests and the lobbyists…” [12] However, last February, after serving only a few weeks in office, President Obama met privately at the White House with health care industry executives and lobbyists. [13] Yesterday, POLITICO reported that aides to President Obama and Democrat Senator Max Baucus met with corporate lobbyists in April to help “set in motion a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign, primarily financed by industry groups, that has played a key role in bolstering public support for health care reform.” [14] Needless to say, their negotiations were not broadcast on C-SPAN for the American people to see.

Presidential candidate Obama also promised that he would not “sign any nonemergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House Web site for five days.” [15] PolitiFact reports that this promise has already been broken three times by the current administration. [16] We can only hope that it won’t be broken again with health care reform.

All of this certainly gives the appearance of politics-as-usual in Washington with no change in sight.

Americans want health care reform because we want affordable health care. We don’t need subsidies or a public option. We don’t need a nationalized health care industry. We need to reduce health care costs. But the Senate Finance plan will dramatically increase those costs, all the while ignoring common sense cost-saving measures like tort reform. Though a Congressional Budget Office report confirmed that reforming medical malpractice and liability laws could save as much as $54 billion over the next ten years, tort reform is nowhere to be found in the Senate Finance bill. [17]

Here’s a novel idea. Instead of working contrary to the free market, let’s embrace the free market. Instead of going to war with certain private sector companies, let’s embrace real private-sector competition and allow consumers to purchase plans across state lines. Instead of taxing the so-called “Cadillac” plans that people get through their employers, let’s give individuals who purchase their own health care the same tax benefits we currently give employer-provided health care recipients. Instead of crippling Medicare, let’s reform it by providing recipients with vouchers so that they can purchase their own coverage.

Now is the time to make your voices heard before it’s too late. If we don’t fight for the market-oriented, patient-centered, and result-driven reform plan that we deserve, we’ll be left with the disastrous unintended consequences of the plans currently being cooked up in Washington.

– Sarah Palin

[1] See http://tinyurl.com/yjs3mgf
[2] See http://tinyurl.com/yfuw3k3
[3] See http://tinyurl.com/yfxq8ca
[4] See http://tinyurl.com/ykefsk6
[5] See http://tinyurl.com/ygf42fj
[6] See http://tinyurl.com/ykefsk6
[7] See http://tinyurl.com/lkvgsp
[8] See http://tinyurl.com/nx4nh6
[9] See ibid.
[10] See http://tinyurl.com/yhhr56v
[11] See ibid.
[12] See http://tinyurl.com/yhzhkvg and http://tinyurl.com/lhyr9o
[13] See http://tinyurl.com/yksd6h3
[14] See http://tinyurl.com/yl9gg27
[15] See http://tinyurl.com/yknpxd6
[16] See http://tinyurl.com/d2k5hb
[17] See http://tinyurl.com/yf8qmfh

__________________________________________________

Socialist articles in Celebration of a Government Health Care Industry Takeover…
(wonky/wonkish is defined as: rickety: inclined to shake as from weakness or defect; “a rickety table”; “a wobbly chair with shaky legs”; “the ladder felt a little wobbly”; “the bridge still stands though one of the arches is wonky”)

Washington in 60 Seconds: Palin’s Wonkish Turn; Kerry Calls for Surge — Patricia Murphy – The Capitolist

That’s about all the Socialists seem to have to say… the rest is exhibitions of crazed bouts of PDS… but, for a laugh, here is an example:

McCain’s Latest Palin Lie — Geoffery Dunn — Huffington Post

And, a commentary on the Fringe Media’s bouts with PDS…

Sarah’s Web Brigade: Hotair.com 2012 Poll Sarah Palin 63%, Cheney

Advertisements

About VotingFemale

I am a female voter, as my blog name implies. I vote for conservatives. I am a political opponent of Leftists, Progressives, Socialists, Marxists, and Communists.
This entry was posted in Conservatism, ObamaCare, Pelosi, Sarah Palin, Tea Party Protests and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

189 Responses to Sarah Palin: Socialist Perfect Storm; Bogus Baucus Bill and Obama Breaks His Promises to America… Again and Again

  1. woow girl, great post!!!!

    The road to hell is paved with “good intentions”.

  2. VotingFemale says:

    Thanks Warrant! Where ya been? We been missing ya. You are due for serious tickling! tee-hee

  3. Foxwood says:

    I thought you’ve been avoiding me WG! I promise I’ve been washing off the funk!

  4. samiam60 says:

    I just love what you have done with the place VF.

    Foxwood put down some really good stuff here today. He and Tellit sure are good at finding things like this.

  5. VotingFemale says:

    The 2012 Conservative Contenders Facebook Poll based on followers:

    Palin is a Clear Land Slide Winner

    Palin – 82%

    Huckabee – 11%

    Romney – 7%

    Based on tabulation of the three’s combined total of followers: 1,133,000

    See:

    http://texas4palin.blogspot.com/2009/10/why-does-sarah-palin-prefer-facebook.html

    Why does Sarah Palin prefer Facebook?
    Monday, October 19, 2009

    Chris Cillizza at The Fix notes that since she resigned as governor of Alaska July 26, Sarah Palin has pushed Twitter onto the back burner and now uses Facebook almost exclusively to get her message out:

    All told, Palin has written 20 “notes” on Facebook since mid-August on a variety of subjects ranging from a statement on the death of Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), a plug for conservative talk show host Glenn Beck and, of course, the now-infamous post raising concerns about end-of-life care contained within the Obama plan.

    At the same time, Palin, who was once a dynamic user of Twitter — she posted 14 tweets on July 23 alone — has gone largely dormant as a presence on that hottest of social networking sites.

    Why has the former governor adopted Facebook as her medium of choice? Cillizza asked around:

    “Facebook itself is a true testament to American ingenuity and the entrepreneurial spirit; it will remain one of many great sources through which the governor will communicate directly with Americans,” said Meg Stapleton, a spokeswoman for Palin.

    Several operatives who count themselves as friends of the former governor offered their own thoughts on the “why” behind Palin’s attraction to the medium.

    Fred Malek, a major Republican donor, suggested that for a politician with very little staff, Facebook’s ease of use may well appeal to Palin. “Facebook has benefit of simplicity,” he added.

    John Coale, a Democratic trial attorney and personal friend of the governor’s suggested three reasons for her Facebook focus:
    “1. No editors
    2. Beats Twitter
    3. She has a zillion Facebook friends.”

    As of press time, Palin’s Facebook site had nearly 930,000 supporters and each of her posts typically draw thousands of comments on what she has written, comments that are broadly supportive of her.

    By way of comparison, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (R) has 82,000 Facebook supporters while former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee (R) has 121,000.

    – JP

    Posted by Josh Painter at 8:09 AM
    Labels: facebook, palin, sarah, sarah palin, the fix, twitter

  6. VotingFemale says:

    So do you, Mr Patriot Who Loves His Country!

    samiam60 says

    Foxwood put down some really good stuff here today. He and Tellit sure are good at finding things like this.

  7. Foxwood says:

    I would say your a SUPER PATRIOT, Sami!

    I never for a moment thought Obutthole would be transparent or truthful with us, VF.

  8. Pingback: Palin-82%, Huckabee–11%, Romney–7%; Facebook Friends Have Spoken « VotingFemale Friends Speak!

  9. samiam60 says:

    We are all SUPER PATRIOTS for sure. The time we all devote to fighting for our Freedoms here on this blog do not go un-noticed.

  10. VotingFemale says:

    Transparent? Only by accident or by socialist brain fart…

    Foxwood says

    I would say your a SUPER PATRIOT, Sami!

    I never for a moment thought Obutthole would be transparent or truthful with us, VF.

  11. VotingFemale says:

    It had one or more tasks it could not interrupt in order to shut it down…

    next time do a Ctrl-Alt-Del

    and use the task manager to kill a problematic task…

    samiam60 says

    VF my computer would not shut down as you advised. I think this computer is a Hal 2000 because I think I heard a voice saying

    What are you doing Sam

    as I tried to shut it down. I ended up pulling the plug while downloading the updates.

    After rebooting the Microsoft updates have come back to life and are attempting again to download those updates.

    I don’t know what else to do with this machine?

  12. VotingFemale says:

    Look at the mug on Obutthole’s face… as Biden says Obutthole is an Obutthole lol

  13. Foxwood says:

    “and use the task manager to kill a problematic task…”

    A 45 does a pretty good job of killing a task also…

  14. samiam60 says:

    Thanks for the tips VF and Foxwood.
    I turned off automatic updates and will let it sit overnight and then turn the Automatic updates back on in the morning. This computer has a mind of its own.

  15. VotingFemale says:

    the update task had a bug… a loop, without a timeout loop break and without a conditional check for an exit request, which was waiting for a response from a broken connection to the ftp site.

    dang programmers lol

    samiam60 says

    Thanks for the tips VF and Foxwood.
    I turned off automatic updates and will let it sit overnight and then turn the Automatic updates back on in the morning. This computer has a mind of its own.

  16. VotingFemale says:

    I write software….

  17. VotingFemale says:

    The only thing needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing! -Edmund Burke

  18. Foxwood says:

    I find intimidation does work with computers, Sami.

    Trust me… half of my computers have dents in them… The other half work.

  19. Foxwood says:

    What do you write with? I had Visual Basic 6 and Visual C until I converted all of my machines to Linux.

  20. Foxwood says:

    “The only thing needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing! -Edmund Burke”

    Obutthole is going to legalize pot… there will be a lot of people doing nothing.

  21. samiam60 says:

    Thanks for the tips there VF and Foxwood.

    I have had a discussion with my Hal 2001 and it has turned into a chess game.

    He don’t know it but I will be pulling his plug tonight.





















    i wouldn’t do that sam ;;;;;;_________

  22. Foxwood says:

    Hal 2001 to Sami: You won’t stand a chance if I turn off the anti-gravity in your house, Sam…

  23. Where did five hours go?

    Hey everybody, I’ve missed you guys and the fellowship too.

    Really blogwood, I never thought you were funky, just musty…. Ahahahahaha

    Not to worry, I’ll be back one day and thanks for the kind words friends; they are appreciated.

  24. Foxwood says:

    If you would use the “Conservative Blog Network” tag for your posts, WG, you would get more hits…

  25. m2 says:

    It’s time for Eric Holder to step in. It’s time for Eric Holder to “man-up” and bring charges against the CEO and Directors of the largest health insurer in the Country.

    How long can Eric Holder sit idly by while the CEO and Directors raise rates and reduce benefits and blatantly lie about what they’re doing? How long can Eric Holder watch the CEO and Directors embezzle and divert policyholders’ premiums? How long can Eric Holder ignore the rampant fraud and corruption that are destroying the health care system?

    Well, when the insurer is Medicare, the CEO is Barack Obama and the Directors are Congress then eternity appears to be the answer.

    …. That was a comment on AT today that I thought was funny…. Yeah, wordpress is being glitchy for me today!

  26. samiam60 says:

    PLEASE STAND BY FOR IMPORTANT NEWS!!

  27. samiam60 says:

    Top White House Official Says Obama Team ‘Controlled’ Media Coverage During Campaign
    White House Communications Director Anita Dunn is seen in a video from January talking about how the Obama campaign exercised absolute “control” over media coverage.

  28. samiam60 says:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/19/white-house-official-says-obama-team-controlled-media-coverage-campaign/

    The Obama campaign’s press strategy leading up to his election last November focused on “making” the media cover what the campaign wanted and on exercising absolute “control” over coverage, White House Communications Director Anita Dunn told an overseas crowd early this year.

    In a video of the event, Dunn is seen describing in detail the media strategy used by then-Sen. Barack Obama’s highly disciplined presidential campaign. The video is footage from a Jan. 12 forum hosted by the Global Foundation for Democracy and Development in the Dominican Republic.

    “Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn’t absolutely control,” Dunn said, admitting that the strategy “did not always make us popular in the press.”

    The video drew attention after Dunn kicked off a war of words with Fox News last Sunday, calling the network “opinion journalism masquerading as news.” The White House stopped providing guests to “Fox News Sunday” in August after host Chris Wallace fact-checked controversial assertions made by Tammy Duckworth, assistant secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Dunn complained about the fact-checking last Sunday. In the January forum, she provided details about the lengths to which the Obama campaign went to control the media message.

    She explained that the campaign favored live interviews so that Obama’s words could not be edited — “so that what the voters heard we determined, as opposed to some editor in a TV station.”

    She said Campaign Manager David Plouffe put out Web videos so the campaign could avoid talking to reporters and focus the media message.

    “Whether it was a David Plouffe video or an Obama speech, a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it,” she said. “One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters. … We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it.”

  29. samiam60 says:

    THIS HAS BEEN A NEWS BULLETIN, thank you

  30. samhenry says:

    From Sami

    We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it.”

    Obama can only work with people who are an extension of his so-called well controlled self. He had to maintain that kind of control or else the Rev. Wright and Sol Alinsky connections would have killed his candidacy.

    RE Computer problems. I’ve had that update problem and have had to bypass and to to the Microsoft site. The site is sneaky. It says you have to have their browser to download but I have found out how to get around that on their site.

    My new tankless water heater (had no business buying such a thing) is computerized. It had trouble really getting under way when it was first installed. Put in a call for service but then got inventive. I consideret it was probably a computer – unplugged it and plugged it back in and viola – success. A friend’s car was acting up and I told her to turn it on and off and it cleared the electrical problem it was having. I tell you, I’m a hottie on the platform – the computer platform!

  31. arlenearmy says:

    This is what I want to know. Why are the republican governor-candidates not asking for Palin’s help on the campaign trail? I’m speaking of the republican candidates in New Jersey & Virginia.

  32. arlenearmy says:

    SamI
    See, Plouffe was doing all those written speeches online during the campaign. Now that Obama is in the WH, he think he’s still on the campaign trail.

    It’s no secret that Obama won because of the internet. But now that he’s in the WH he wants to restrict the internet.

    I hear that something is going down on this internet stuff on Thurs. I hear that it’s not good.

  33. samhenry says:

    Where is something going down, Arlene.

    I had read somewhere where there was a move to restrict the use of or create rules for campaigns that use the internet. That may be a good thing. It may have to do with taking e-mail addresses without permission and spamming like Obama has done.

  34. samhenry says:

    There are laws or regs on the books that already give the President powers over the internet. Obama wants to clarify these and perhaps to enhance them. He is not seeking new powers – he doesn’t have to – he can just bend what is already there.

  35. samhenry says:

    CNET has this:

    Bradley Smith says that the freewheeling days of political blogging and online punditry are over.

    In just a few months, he warns, bloggers and news organizations could risk the wrath of the federal government if they improperly link to a campaign’s Web site. Even forwarding a political candidate’s press release to a mailing list, depending on the details, could be punished by fines.

    Smith should know. He’s one of the six commissioners at the Federal Election Commission, which is beginning the perilous process of extending a controversial 2002 campaign finance law to the Internet.

    In 2002, the FEC exempted the Internet by a 4-2 vote, but U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly last fall overturned that decision. “The commission’s exclusion of Internet communications from the coordinated communications regulation severely undermines” the campaign finance law’s purposes, Kollar-Kotelly wrote.

    Smith and the other two Republican commissioners wanted to appeal the Internet-related sections. But because they couldn’t get the three Democrats to go along with them, what Smith describes as a “bizarre” regulatory process now is under way.

    CNET News.com spoke with Smith about the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, better known as the McCain-Feingold law, and its forthcoming extrusion onto the Internet.

    Q: What rules will apply to the Internet that did not before?
    A: The commission has generally been hands-off on the Internet. We’ve said, “If you advertise on the Internet, that’s an expenditure of money–much like if you were advertising on television or the newspaper.”
    Do we give bloggers the press exemption?

    The real question is: Would a link to a candidate’s page be a problem? If someone sets up a home page and links to their favorite politician, is that a contribution? This is a big deal, if someone has already contributed the legal maximum, or if they’re at the disclosure threshold and additional expenditures have to be disclosed under federal law.

    Certainly a lot of bloggers are very much out front. Do we give bloggers the press exemption? If we don’t give bloggers the press exemption, we have the question of, do we extend this to online-only journals like CNET?

    How can the government place a value on a blog that praises some politician?
    How do we measure that? Design fees, that sort of thing? The FEC did an advisory opinion in the late 1990s (in the Leo Smith case) that I don’t think we’d hold to today, saying that if you owned a computer, you’d have to calculate what percentage of the computer cost and electricity went to political advocacy.

    It seems absurd, but that’s what the commission did. And that’s the direction Judge Kollar-Kotelly would have us move in. Line drawing is going to be an inherently very difficult task. And then we’ll be pushed to go further. Why can this person do it, but not that person?

    How about a hyperlink? Is it worth a penny, or a dollar, to a campaign?
    I don’t know. But I’ll tell you this. One thing the commission has argued over, debated, wrestled with, is how to value assistance to a campaign.

    Corporations aren’t allowed to donate to campaigns. Suppose a corporation devotes 20 minutes of a secretary’s time and $30 in postage to sending out letters for an executive. As a result, the campaign raises $35,000. Do we value the violation on the amount of corporate resources actually spent, maybe $40, or the $35,000 actually raised? The commission has usually taken the view that we value it by the amount raised. It’s still going to be difficult to value the link, but the value of the link will go up very quickly.

    Then what’s the real impact of the judge’s decision?
    The judge’s decision is in no way limited to ads. She says that any coordinated activity over the Internet would need to be regulated, as a minimum. The problem with coordinated activity over the Internet is that it will strike, as a minimum, Internet reporting services.

    They’re exempt from regulation only because of the press exemption. But people have been arguing that the Internet doesn’t fit

    More Newsmakers

    See more CNET content tagged:
    Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, commission, exemption,

  36. samhenry says:

    From the Illinois Review

    Tuesday, October 06, 2009
    Obama Wants to Control the Web

    by Phil Kerpen

    If you thought Washington—which already took over banking and autos, and is fast-tracking attempts to take over health care and energy—would leave the Internet alone, you were dead wrong. The Internet (perhaps our greatest free market success story in recent years) is squarely in the cross-hairs of the administration and it’s not waiting for Congress to act.

    The charge is being led by an eager, ideologically committed White House staffer named Susan Crawford. Officially, she is the Special Assistant for Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy. Wired Magazine calls her, “the most powerful geek close to the president.” In recent weeks, bloggers and online activists have begun calling Crawford the “Internet Czar.” The shoe fits.

    As Bill Collier of Freedomist has reported, Crawford has known ties to ACORN, which is one of the participating organizations of her “OneWebDay” project. Crawford self-consciously modeled OneWebDay on Earth Day and the radical environmental agenda that it propelled forward. As Crawford explained her mission to The Wall Street Journal in April: “We should do a better job as a nation of making sure fast, affordable broadband is as ubiquitous as electricity, water, snail mail, or any other public utility.”

    In other words, the agenda of her organization is to transform access to the Internet into a government entitlement project, with all the necessary government intrusion and control in order guarantee it to everyone—in the world. Not surprisingly, listed alongside on the OneWebDay participating organizations list is a group called Free Press, which is the biggest advocacy organization pushing the Obama administration to adopt sweeping regulations of the Internet.

    Free Press was founded by Robert McChesney, an avowed Marxist who is Washington’s leading advocate of so-called network neutrality regulations who recently argued—on a Web site called SocialistProject.ca—that this type of Internet regulation is a prerequisite for a socialist revolution: “Instead of waiting for the revolution to happen, we learned that unless you make significant changes in the media, it will be vastly more difficult to have a revolution.”

    Crawford and McChesney apparently have the full support of the Obama administration and an FCC that is determined to move toward transforming the Internet into a Washington-controlled utility as quickly as possible. The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Julius Genachowski, recently announced his pursuit of precisely the regulations they want.

    The FCC isn’t pursuing this just because of orders coming from Obama’s Internet Czar. This goes all the way to the top—Obama himself said on the campaign trail last year: “I will take a back seat to no one in my commitment to net Neutrality.”

    It’s of no apparent concern to Obama, Crawford, and Genachowski that net neutrality regulations—which would require network operators to treat every bit of traffic the same way, regardless of whether that makes sense from an engineering or business standpoint—will result in a collapse of private investment in Internet infrastructure, because they regard private investment as unnecessary within their vision of government ownership and control.

    Proponents of net neutrality rely on the scare tactic that big bad cable and phone companies will block access to Web sites and cause other mischief unless the benevolent federal government rides to the rescue, and soon. But they’ve been ringing this alarm for the better part of a decade and none of the horrors they warn us about have happened. There is a simple reason—these companies are in an intense competition, especially in the wireless space, which is as cutthroat as any industry in America. If one company tried to block access to Web sites or engage in other mischief, they would lose their customers in droves to the competition.

    Net neutrality regulations would destroy private investment and we would end up with a government-owned and controlled network. We’ll have nowhere to go if the government turns out to be not quite as benevolent as some have hoped. That’s a frightening scenario and we should do everything we can to stop the net neutrality regulation that would start us down that path.

    Mr. Kerpen is director of policy for Americans for Prosperity. He can be contacted through PhilKerpen.com. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook. His free two-minute Podcast is available daily.

  37. samhenry says:

    Already scrubbed from the internet:

    The American Reporter Vol. 15, No. 3786W – October 11, 2009
    The complex relationship between government regulation and software … Companies excited about using the Internet to deliver this material — news, music, … Take content control. When the Communications Decency Act turned out to be a …
    http://www.american-reporter.com/3,786W/2399.html – Cached – Similar

  38. samhenry says:

    VF I can’t post

  39. samhenry says:

    I guess I just can’t post the cut/paste from another website

  40. samhenry says:

    August 28, 2009
    Proposed Bill to Give White House Authority to Control Internet in Emergency

    A proposed Bill in the U.S. Senate would give the White House control of the internet in the case of emergency. The bill, S.773 introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Sen. Olympia Snow (R-ME) is pretty vague, which is alarming to internet companies and civil rights groups alike.

    According to CNET, the bill would allow the White House to declare cybersecurity emergencies. It also allows the government to choose which internet companies they deem “critical.” These companies would then be subject to regulations surrounding hiring employees, information that would need to be disclosed and when the government could take over their network.

  41. samhenry says:

    Finally got it on. I think I did not realize that too much other matter on the web page copied with the quote and it overshot the comment box limit or whatever.

    Source of the above:
    http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/090828-152714

  42. samhenry says:

    Arlene – is a vote on the above scheduled for Thursday.

  43. arlenearmy says:

    SH
    Im not sure if there’s a vote on Thurs. I have to rewind my Tivo. I heard something on this on Beck.

    About the political blogging…… is that what we here on this blog are doing?

    Does that mean that politicians may not be able to tweet & have youtube?

    Before politicians knew what the internet really meant, folks have been getting all sorts of X-rated spams. Yet the government did nothing. Now all of a sudden, Obama realizes that the internet can be used against him, he wants to restrict it. It was the internet that got Joe Wilson those million $$ & I was one of many who cheerfully donated.

  44. samhenry says:

    Broadband, Congress, FCC
    Nothing ‘Neutral’ About This Debate

    More than 20 CEOs and founders of major Internet and technology companies wrote to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski on Monday in support of his controversial plan to begin considering new rules aimed at preserving and promoting consumers’ unfettered access to Web content. The letter from executives for Google, Facebook, Sony, Amazon, eBay, Twitter and other tech titans comes as the FCC prepares to vote Thursday on a proposal to expand and fortify its so-called neutrality regulations.

    “An open Internet fuels a competitive and efficient marketplace, where consumers make the ultimate choices about which products succeed and which fail. This allows businesses of all sizes, from the smallest startup to larger corporations, to compete, yielding maximum economic growth and opportunity,” they wrote. Lobbying on the topic reached a fevered pitch last week with Senate Commerce ranking member Kay Bailey Hutchison signaling she might pursue legislation to block new rules if Genachowski doesn’t modify his proposal to reflect her concerns.

    Also last week, 18 GOP senators — including John McCain of Arizona, a former chairman of the Commerce Committee — insisted in a separate document that the FCC’s proposed revisions “will be counterproductive and risk harming the great advancements in broadband speed and deployment that we have witnessed.” Yet another letter from 70 House Democrats urged Genachowski to “carefully consider the full range of potential consequences that government action may have on network investment.”

    http://techdailydose.nationaljournal.com/

  45. samhenry says:

    Arlene – I’m not sure how all of this will play out. It seems to me that the internet servers overseen by universities and other knowlege and research based institutions would be up in arms but we will have to see.

    I think all of this has been playing out under the radar of most citizens. It will be important to follow this and to see what develops.

    You are so on top of things – like on this issue. Do those chickens ever see you? LOL

  46. samhenry says:

    I know you will want this next, Arlene:

    What is the Internet?

    Many online sources offer varying definitions, but mostly everyone agrees that the Internet is a worldwide, publicly accessible network of interconnected computer networks that allows sharing or networking of files and information at remote sites from other academic institutions, research institutes, private companies, government agencies and individuals using the Transmission Control Protocol or Internet Protocol, and that communicate through phone and satellite. It is a three level hierarchy composed of backbone networks, mid-level networks, and stub networks. These include commercial, university and other research networks.
    Purpose of the Internet

    In the 1950’s, computers were still very rare, and computer science was in it’s infancy. Most technological advancements during this period, such as cryptography, radar and battlefield communication, were due to military operations during World War II , and government activities are at the base of the development of the Internet. Three decades ago, the RAND Corporation struggled with possible ways for US authorities to successfully communicate after a nuclear war. Their chief concern was that any central network control center might be destroyed by an enemy missile. In a plan made public in 1964, the RAND Corporation proposed that the new network have no central authority.

    ARPA was a response to the Soviets’ launch of Sputnik in 1957, man’s first foray into outer space, along with the U.S.S.R testing it’s first intercontinental ballistic missile. In 1958, when NASA was created, ARPA’s main focus became computer science and information processing. One goal was to connect mainframe computers at different universities around the country so that they would be able to communicate using a common language and protocol.
    Origin of the Internet

    The first record of social interaction enabled by networking is a series of memos written by J.C.R. Licklider from MIT in 1962, discussing his “Galactic Network” concept. Licklider was head of the computer research program at DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Program Agency), a program launched by the U.S. Department of Defense. RAND and NPL were also working on packet switching networks at the time, and their work developed in parallel without the researchers knowing about the other work.

    The word “packet” was adopted from the work at NPL, and by the end of 1969, four host computers were connected into the ARPANET, and the budding Internet was off the ground. Even at this early stage, the networking research incorporated both work on the underlying network and work on how to utilize the network. This tradition continues to this day.

    Read more: http://internet.suite101.com/article.cfm/origin_of_the_internet#ixzz0URyAtORq

  47. samhenry says:

    The strict regulation of the internet should NOT be the province of a single country. It should be the result of international agreement.

    Russia to control Internet resources following Astana’s example
    16 October 2009, 17:35

    CA-NEWS (TM) – Debate over the Law on Internet regulation continues, despite the fact that it entered into force. “Chinanization” of Internet resources in some CIS countries are also of interest.

    Radio Azattyk
    Arthur Nigmetov
    October 14

    President Nursultan Nazarbaev signed a law on June 12, 2009 that classifies Internet resources as mass media.

    The Law “On introduction of amendments and addenda to some legislative acts on information and communication networks” applies to online newspapers, news agencies’ websites and other analytical portals.

    Moreover, all websites without exceptions are subjects to the law on mass media. In addition, the state legitimized its right to block any website and set up a special body which, among other things, monitors compliance with the prohibition.

    Kyrgyzstan followed Kazakhstan’s initiative to limit the freedom of Internet resources. Kazakhstan’s example launched a second wave of intense debate in the neighboring country where such plan existed but was not implemented.

    Kyrgyz lawmakers could not decide whether to regulate the whole network or jut Internet mass media. Considering that the issue is more political than lawful, MPs chose the second option.

    However, the bill encountered stiff criticism from the opposition and civil activists and have not been adopted, but some Kyrgyz politicians continue lobbying.

    The issue of Internet control was also raised in Russia. In the end of September, 2009 the Ministry of Justice introduced a draft law on strengthening Internet control, which will force authorities to limit citizens’ access to the Internet. It is called Law “On amendments to certain legislative acts of Russia on the security of state information resources.”

    He bill requires providers to divulge information about the users and services they used. In case providers do not obey the law they will be fined.

    Some Russian experts believe that the limitation of Internet access contradicts the Constitution.

    Mikhail Fedotov, professor at the Higher School of Economics, in an interview with the Russian service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reported said that the bill may be useful and acceptable in terms of objectives. But, professor considers solutions proposed by the bill to be doubtful.

    Also, he said, restricting access to the Internet is technically impossible and very dangerous.

    This will stimulate creation of illegal Internet connection. On the other hand, it is necessary to ensure effective protection of the rights and interests of all stakeholders, who may be effected by violations in this sphere. Yet, we must take into account the transboundary nature of the Internet, Fedotov said.

    Dmitry Verhoturov, Russia’s network journalist, believes it is necessary to regulate the Internet, establish rights and guaranteed freedoms, mutual responsibility of sites’ owners, providers and users.

    Internet is an international space; therefore an international convention on the Internet, similar to the Convention on the Law of the Sea, should be adopted. National legislation will not be effective in this regard. I think that Kazakhstan’s attempt of regulation was vain, and in Russia it would be extremely unpopular, Dmitry Verhoturov said.

    Dmitry Verkhoturov associates attempt of Internet regulation by the Kazakh authorities with mentality of officials not yet accustomed to new technologies and inability of the authorities to defend its position and opinions.

    A couple of years ago the authorities in Kazakhstan could be freely criticized. There was no response. Today, a number of officials and politicians have learned to respond in the discussions. When this skill will be mandatory for each official, the “problem of the Internet” will disappear, Dmitry Verkhoturov beliefs.

    Many analysts attribute former Soviet countries’ activities regarding Internet control to the recent unrest in Moldova, Iran, Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China. People organized meetings and coordinated actions with help of such web communities as Facebook and Twitter.

    Kuanyshbek Yessekeyev, head of the newly created Agency for Informatization and Communication publicly stated that that the adoption of legal mechanisms to regulate the Internet in Kazakhstan was purely political in nature while introducing the bill in the Parliament on June 11, 2009.

    Director of the International Center for Journalism MediaNet, Adil Jalilov, does not consider fears of Kuanyshbek Esekeev unreasonable as the Internet is the least regulated part of the information space and is rapidly expanding.

    Adil Jalilov says the government is one step behind Internet developers in fighting the freedom in the Internet. Therefore, regulation is almost impossible, he believes. Main reason for the failure of full regulation of Internet resources in Kazakhstan will be technical suitability. Kazakhstan does not have enough technology for this purpose, he said.

    “Free Internet” movement coordinator Dmitry Shchelokov from Uralsk thinks that political regimes that falsify elections are afraid of accurate information on the Internet.

    Crisis also contributes to the escalation of social unrest. Information about protests does not reach television but becomes public via Internet. The authorities fear that this would result in social resistance through out the country. That is why they want to try bloggers who dared to disclose the information and limit Internet access of users without court sanctions, the coordinator said.

    If some countries intercept each other’s initiative to restrict the rights of Internet users, then the United States is a telling example. The government of this country has weakened the control of the Internet by signing an agreement with the regulator of the World Wide Web – the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on September 30, 2009.

    This agreement for the first time in the history of ICANN allows it to be more independent. The previous agreement allowed the US authorities to exercise tight oversight over the activities of ICANN, which led to criticism from other states.

    ICANN was created by the US government. It is a non-profit private organization, whose task is to control the most important components of the Internet, in particular – the top-level domain names that include com and uk.

    It recently decided to soften the rigid rules governing domain names, allowing corporations to include addresses of their brands in the network address, and individuals – their names.

    [NOTE – Didn’t Obama sign over the government role in creating ICANN names?] This administration is the gang that couldn’t shoot straight or often at all. Someone get those kids out of the White House, will ya?

    NOW DOG OVERBOARD

  48. samhenry says:

    Arlelne – I just gave you a blog post!

  49. samhenry says:

    We’ll have workarounds to internet freedoms. The skies will be so full of carrier pidgeons that the engines of planes will be threatened and the White House will at last be blanketed in shit!

    It is Obama and Rahmsees the Great really think they rule the world.

    Last year China was going to put software into every new computer that would give the government contol over internet usage. Well guess what, international opposition caused them to drop the idea. That the software even exists is troubling.

    Well the first step in my declaration of Independence will be to rid myself of yahoo and g-mail e-mail accounts and go back to my ISP!

  50. samhenry says:

    One final note: My blog has been hit bout 20 times in the past 2 days for my article with picture of the 9/11 firemen . I think I now have the source or reason:

    Pennsylvania Firefighter Suspended for U.S. Flag on Locker
    Saturday, October 17, 2009
    By Kellie, posted in News

    american-flag

    According to Myfoxphilly.com, a Pennslyvania firefighter was suspended without pay for refusing to remove an American flag sticker from his locker.

    James Krapf of Chester, Pa., violated a department policy that states personal items can only be posted inside employee lockers when he stuck the flag on the outside. The firefighters’ union warned 11 others to remove personal items or face similar suspensions, all without pay.

    The initial ban came after an incident in which some firefighters complained about a cartoon posted in the firehouse that they found racially offensive.

    Krapf was suspended Thursday, and so far is the only firefighter to be hit with the penalty.

    “I shouldn’t have to remove the flag of the country I believe in. I love my country,” Krapf told Myfoxphilly.com. “I love my job. I love helping people. I’ve been doing this 11 years in the City of Chester, so this is something I love to do.”

    Krapf said he wants to meet with the fire commissioner and the mayor to discuss the issue. The fire commissioner told local media outlets that banning all materials from locker doors was the simplest way to avoid bickering among the staff.

    Read more at Myfoxphilly.com:

    Related Articles: Pennsylvania Firefighter suspended

    This entry was posted on Saturday, October 17th, 2009 at 7:04 pm and is filed under News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
    Bookmark and Share

  51. samiam60 says:

    Good Morning my fellow Patriots.

    I thank you SamH and Arlene for your insights.

  52. samiam60 says:

    “And whose clock is that?” asked the man. “That’s Abraham Lincoln’s clock. The hand has moved twice indicating he only told two lies in his life,” replied St. Peter. “Where is Obama’s clock?” asked the man. St. Peter answered, “Obama’s clock is in Jesus’ office. He is using it as a ceiling fan.”

  53. Pingback: Freedom of the Internet IS Freedom of the Press – The Eagle’s Eye for October 20, 2009 « ON MY WATCH – the writings of SamHenry

  54. samhenry says:

    Very good joke, Sami

    Why did Obama cross the street with the chicken? He never goes anywhere alone.

    Why did Obama cross the street – because he plays both sides.

    Original mediocre material by SH

  55. Foxwood says:

    Sieg Heil und Guten Morgan fellow unAmerican Nazis!
    It’s time to unfurl the Confederate Swastika and fire the cannon!

  56. Foxwood says:

    Musta used too much powder…

  57. Foxwood says:

    I’ll just mingle though the crowd and disappear…

    Maybe I can just shower this off…

  58. samhenry says:

    Here is what Arlene Army referred to when she said something is going down Thursday:

    On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission will consider “a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on policies to preserve the open Internet.” That’s a long way of saying that the FCC, led by Julius Genachowski, Obama’s old friend from Harvard Law School, will take its first steps towards forcing through net neutrality, a controversial policy that critics say would amount to a government takeover of the internet.

    http://biggovernment.com/2009/10/19/even-left-groups-mobilize-against-a-government-takeover-of-the-internet/

  59. samhenry says:

    Add the above to Anita Dumb Dumb’s remarks about controlling media access and reporting during the Obama Campaign AND AFTER, this is a dirty business.

    Then remember the Federal Election Commission is grappling with rules to change how the internet is used during campaigns.

  60. samhenry says:

    As usual, Obama is moving on several fronts.

  61. tellitlikeitis says:

    Good Morning everyone!

    Obama Czar Agrees With Mao – Also Thinks Free Market is ‘Nonsense’

    http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-czar-agrees-with-mao-too-and-thinks-free-market-is-nonsense/

  62. tellitlikeitis says:

    OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
    White House boasts: We ‘control’ news media
    Communications chief offers shocking confession to foreign government

    TEL AVIV – President Obama’s presidential campaign focused on “making” the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was “controlled,” White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference.

    “Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn’t absolutely control,” said Dunn.

    “One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters,” said Dunn, referring to Plouffe, who was Obama’s chief campaign manager.

    “We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it,” Dunn said.

    Check out the hot new best-seller — “Muslim Mafia”

    Continued Dunn: “Whether it was a David Plouffe video or an Obama speech, a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was. … Making the press cover what we were saying.”
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=113347

  63. VotingFemale says:

    Good Morning Foxwood! SamHenry! Samiam!
    free speech by the socialists is going to garner a pushback from everyone I am thinking… from code pink to those supporting Sarah Palin.

    Obama wants to control “wrong thinking…”

    It is a signal that what we have been saying all along is true. Perhaps people in greater numbers will connect the dots.

  64. samhenry says:

    moderation info: comments with too many links gets flagged for moderation automatically.

    *
    * Search Marketing
    Topics arrow
    * Ratings & Stats
    * Members Area arrow
    * Webcasts
    * White Paper Library
    * Job Board
    * SES Events
    * Advertise on SEW
    * SEW Awards
    * About SEW

    Subscribe to Newsletters SUBSCRIBE

    Special thanks to:

    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *

    * Search The Blog

    * Blog Archives
    * Posts Today
    * Posts This Week
    * Posts This Month
    * Monthly Archive
    * October 2009
    * September 2009
    * August 2009
    * July 2009
    * June 2009
    * May 2009
    * April 2009
    * March 2009
    * February 2009
    * January 2009
    * December 2008
    * November 2008

    * Blog Feeds via
    * Subscribe Via My MSN
    Subscribe with Bloglines
    Subscribe in NewsGator Online
    Subscribe in Pluck RSS reader
    Add to My Yahoo!
    Add to Google

    Subscribe to SearchDay, our free daily e-mail summarizing the day’s Search Marketing News.
    E-mail:

    « Facebook to Update Privacy Practices in Response to Privacy Commissioner of Canada | Main | Microsoft Lobbyists Meet to Thwart Google; Politics as Usual Ensues »
    August 28, 2009
    Proposed Bill to Give White House Authority to Control Internet in Emergency

    A proposed Bill in the U.S. Senate would give the White House control of the internet in the case of emergency. The bill, S.773 introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Sen. Olympia Snow (R-ME) is pretty vague, which is alarming to internet companies and civil rights groups alike.

    According to CNET, the bill would allow the White House to declare cybersecurity emergencies. It also allows the government to choose which internet companies they deem “critical.” These companies would then be subject to regulations surrounding hiring employees, information that would need to be disclosed and when the government could take over their network.

    What do you think of this bill? Let us know by leaving a comment.

    Posted by Nathania Johnson on August 28, 2009 3:27 PM

  65. m2 says:

    Good morning everyone!

    Remember a year ago when we still had a Republic? Albeit the cancerous corrupted Democrats had infiltrated the corporate culture in order to broker deals with Schumer (banking hedge fund industry) and Barney Franks (HUD and GSA’s and mortgage broker industry)!!

    The cancer broke through the tumor! Just in time for socialist-marxist racist egg head doctor Obama to Kevorkian the entire country!

  66. Foxwood says:

    “It is a signal that what we have been saying all along is true. Perhaps people in greater numbers will connect the dots.”

    I have some pretty stupid commenters on my blog, VF.

  67. VotingFemale says:

    I just commented on your blog a while ago!

    HAHAHAHAHAHA

    yeah, my comment pending and spam folders have been overflowing with commenters coming in who dont have blogs and cant be vetted. I usually dont allow them in for that reason.

    Foxwood says

    I have some pretty stupid commenters on my blog, VF.

  68. VotingFemale says:

    The Bogus Baucus Bill has ballooned to 1,500 pages and it is one of five such bills.

    Discussions are now being held as to shut down a Socialist ObamaCare bill in the event it gets signed into law.

    Obama knows the public is increasingly turning against it… approval dropped two points last week… and Obama sees FOX News as the reason for that drop.

  69. Foxwood says:

    I will read the comment to see if it’s ok, but blacklist the email address so they don’t come back behind me and say something worse. I’ve learned the hard way someone will say they agree with you then come back later and blast you while your away.

  70. VotingFemale says:

    It is said “desperate times calls for desperate measures” and the Socialists are desperate for public approval for an ObamaCare bill that gives them the power they seek over the country.

    If they pass it without a public mandate, there are going to be a LOT MORE PISSED OFF AMERICANS than is presently the case.

    control so-called ‘Wrong Thinking’ and you control the perception of reality.

    This is coming closer and closer to a head as each day dawns… the Socialists are not backing down… and neither is Freedom Loving Americans who’s eyes are open.

  71. VotingFemale says:

    That is why I usually limit commenters to those I can vet by visiting their blog to see their track record.

    Foxwood says

    I will read the comment to see if it’s ok, but blacklist the email address so they don’t come back behind me and say something worse. I’ve learned the hard way someone will say they agree with you then come back later and blast you while your away.

  72. m2 says:

    Obama doesn’t care what the people think! And they would have marginalized (Alinakyed) Fox News regardless of healthcare takeover, because to have a dictatorship (i.e. One party domination) you have to contol the media message.

    I believe Rockefeller and Soros, and Obama are happy with everything I’m the works…

    That is my opinion 😉

    public approval won’t matter at all when you fix your party as a dictatorship, enslave the press, and fix elections.

  73. VotingFemale says:

    I dont mind opposing views and love a heated debate… it is just not productive to allow trolls to spew their crap and then leave.

  74. m2 says:

    I mean in not I’m the works…

    I truly believe they don’t care about the majority opinion, I guess we disagree VF 🙂

  75. VotingFemale says:

    Good Morning M2!!!

  76. m2 says:

    Morning!

    I presently have to take the little miss to school but will be back soon 😉

  77. tellitlikeitis says:

    VF said,

    This is coming closer and closer to a head as each day dawns… the Socialists are not backing down… and neither is Freedom Loving Americans who’s eyes are open.

    I agree. The socialists are going to steam roll health care through and going to push hard to make this a socialist country whether we like it or not. The shadow government (Czars) that Obama has set up behind the scenes is there to do an end run around congress and circumvent it’s authority. The public should demand that they be thrown out. Just cut off their funding. That should get rid of them. We don’t need unaccountable Czars.

  78. VotingFemale says:

    Disagree? just a different perspective on the same problem.

    What god does not want to be worshipped?

    I think it enrages the man-god, Mr Flashy RA Eyes to hell and back for people to dislike him and have the means to say so to others.

    The DEM party is fighting within itself… the moderates (who risk getting fired at election time) vs the Pelosis who can do no wrong in the eyes of their far left local base.

  79. tellitlikeitis says:

    Bring on the trolls! I haven’t had breakfast yet and I am hungry for troll meat this morning. lol

  80. VotingFemale says:

    Good Morning Tellit!

    lol @ a troll meat breakfast!

  81. samiam60 says:

    Good Morning VF, Tellit, M2, SamH, and Foxwood

  82. samiam60 says:

    I smell the blood of a troll, hum,hum, feed me.

  83. VotingFemale says:

    Good Morning Samiam!!!

    Them trolls are fun to bop though!

  84. samiam60 says:

    Hey libs, what about this:

  85. samiam60 says:

    VF, Why don’t you advertise Free Kool-Aid?

    They will flock over here.

  86. VotingFemale says:

    I have let in a few for you guys to deal with but alas they run away after a few bops.

    We need some worthy leftists to duel with… go and catch some!

  87. tellitlikeitis says:

    If they pass this 1500 page health care garbage package it doesn’t go into affect until 2013. That still allows time to dismantle it if we can get the right people in congress in 2010.

  88. VotingFemale says:

    Conservative or Liberal

    If a conservative doesn’t like guns, he doesn’t buy one.
    If a liberal doesn’t like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

    If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn’t eat meat.
    If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

    If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
    If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

    If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
    If a liberal is down-and-out, he wonders who is going to take care of him.

    If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels.
    If a liberal doesn’t like a talk show host, he demands that those he doesn’t like be shut down.

    If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn’t go to church.
    If a liberal is a non-believer he wants any mention of God and religion silenced – unless, of course, the religion is foreign!

    If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
    If a liberal decides he needs health care, he demands that the rest of us pay for his.

    If a conservative slips and falls in a store, he gets up, laughs and is embarrassed.
    If a liberal slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like he’s in labor and then sues.

    If a conservative reads this, he’ll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
    If a liberal reads this, he will delete it because he’s ”offended.”

  89. VotingFemale says:

    What will go into effect is the money to be spent on it…. that is the sham.

    Collect money for 10 years to pay for 6 years worth of Socialist take over of the Medical Industry.

    tellitlikeitis says

    If they pass this 1500 page health care garbage package it doesn’t go into affect until 2013. That still allows time to dismantle it if we can get the right people in congress in 2010.

  90. VotingFemale says:

    Anita the Dunn, explaining the Obama Socialist Control of the Fringe Media…

  91. VotingFemale says:

    I suggest downloading that video… it is likely to get scrubbed from youtube.

  92. Foxwood says:

    Foxwood said:
    “I have some pretty stupid commenters on my blog, VF.”

    Opps! Like I said the other day, VF, I have a habit of sticking my foot in my mouth… The commenters here and then come to my blog have a more that higher IQ.

  93. Foxwood says:

    Tho I am running a little slow…

  94. VotingFemale says:

    VotingFemale to AFSCME union: Welcome to the party, PAL!

    hahahahahaha

    AFSCME Labor Union goes postal when realizing FOX News is right and the Fringe Media been lyin’

    Break Out the Popcorn: Union Thugs vs. Obama

    This is like the Crips and Bloods: You just can’t root for either side. Oh wait, I can’t use that analogy, right? Our moral superiors have said mentioning the Crips and Bloods is raaaaacist. Sorry.

    Anyway, where were we? Oh yes, the detestable goons from AFSCME, big Obama supporters that they are, have finally snapped out of it and realize that ObamaCare is going to cost their members a bundle. Just like the rest of us. And the head thug isn’t happy.

    Labor vs ObamaCare: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/labor_vs_obamacare_SEwM2l9hos7rak411Z2uZL

    ere’s a new one: a union sounding the alarm about high taxes.

    Even stranger: The union’s target is President Obama and his health-care overhaul — specifically Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus’ bill.

    Now, when a union complains about taxes, you just know they must be over the top. Indeed, they are.

    Gerald McEntee, president of the 1.6 million-member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees warns that the Baucus bill’s tax hikes will hit the middle class hard.

    Specifically, he argues that the bill’s tax on medical-insurance plans amounts to “asking the middle class to pay for the health care of those who are currently uninsured.”

    And he vows that unless the bill is substantially altered, “we will oppose it.”

    Well, it’s not often that we find ourselves saying this to labor — but, hey: “Go for it!”

    Unions are supposed to be a key Obama ally. But McEntee is surely right to be concerned.

    Not surprisingly, the White House is privately blasting his “gratuitous slaps” and calling his language “outrageous and unacceptable.”

    But Obama’s aides would do better to forget the Chicago-style political street-fighting and take note of the labor leader’s objections — and the fact that opposition to ObamaCare now clearly crosses partisan and ideological lines.

    As McEntee said last week, “We would love to be on the exact same page as the White House, but we see ourselves as fighting for our members.”

    yes, and usually fighting for their members means fighting against taxpayers. Surprisingly they’ve now realized they too pay taxes. Welcome to the real work, Mr. McEntee.

    Speaking of the real world, support for this monstrosity is down to 42% and dwindling. Just imagine how low support would be if the media wasn’t hiding socialized healthcare horror stories like those in other countries?

  95. Foxwood says:

    Good morning to the cute little red haired girl…

  96. VotingFemale says:

    I was teasing you, dear! tee-hee

    I knew exactly what you meant! 😉

    Foxwood says

    Foxwood said:
    “I have some pretty stupid commenters on my blog, VF.”

    Opps! Like I said the other day, VF, I have a habit of sticking my foot in my mouth… The commenters here and then come to my blog have a more that higher IQ.

  97. Foxwood says:

    You might want to download this one also… Another Maoist working for Obutthole.

  98. samiam60 says:

    VF, that is the perfect comparison of the difference between the Liberal and the Conservative. That should be on the Sister Ship imo.

  99. tellitlikeitis says:

    Good morning to everyone again!

  100. samiam60 says:

    Well I turned Microsoft automatic updates back on and it is installing the same two updates it did before. Arggggggggggggggggggg

  101. samiam60 says:

    Good Morning Tellit, I think I missed you this morning. sorry 😦

  102. samiam60 says:

    Ok this is simply wediculus.

  103. VotingFemale says:

    Done: re: Ron Bloom vid

  104. VotingFemale says:

    gotta go do some errands… bbl dears!

  105. samiam60 says:

    Ok, I have got to go to the store and get away from these Microsoft updates before I get angry.

  106. tellitlikeitis says:

    Foxwood, They all agree with Mao because they are really closet communists. Obama has surrounded himself with closet communists and some are coming out of the closet now.

  107. samiam60 says:

    I am better now!

  108. Foxwood says:

    You know, Tellit. Troll meat is just a little too rancid for my taste.

    the oder is pretty rank also…

  109. tellitlikeitis says:

    Foxwood, I meant that figuratively not literally. lol

  110. Foxwood says:

    When I used to Troll hunt, we’d just burn them and keep downwind.

  111. samhenry says:

    Interesting aside about Obama Czar speaking at the Union League, NYC – That is a club founded by Union Soldiers after the Civil War. It was predominantly Republican. They must have a lot of new members!

  112. Foxwood says:

    guess I meant upwind… damn regenerating bastiches!

  113. tellitlikeitis says:

    More bad news on the economic front.

    Higher jobless rates could be new normal

    WASHINGTON – Even with an economic revival, many U.S. jobs lost during the recession may be gone forever and a weak employment market could linger for years.

    That could add up to a “new normal” of higher joblessness and lower standards of living for many Americans, some economists are suggesting.

    The words “it’s different this time” are always suspect. But economists and policy makers say the job-creating dynamics of previous recoveries can’t be counted on now.

    Here’s why:

    • The auto and construction industries helped lead the nation out of past recessions. But the carnage among Detroit’s automakers and the surplus of new and foreclosed homes and empty commercial properties make it unlikely these two industries will be engines of growth anytime soon.

    • The job market is caught in a vicious circle: Without more jobs, U.S. consumers will have a hard time increasing their spending; but without that spending, businesses might see little reason to start hiring.

    • Many small and midsize businesses are still struggling to obtain bank loans, impeding their expansion plans and constraining overall economic growth.

    • Higher-income households are spending less because of big losses on their homes, retirement plans and other investments. Lower-income households are cutting back because they can’t borrow like they once did.

    That the recovery in jobs will be long and drawn out is something on which economists and policy makers can basically agree, even as their proposals for remedies vary widely.

    Retrenching businesses will be slow in hiring back or replacing workers they laid off. Many of the 7.2 million jobs the economy has shed since the recession began in December 2007 may never come back.

    “This Great Recession is an inflection point for the economy in many respects. I think the unemployment rate will be permanently higher, or at least higher for the foreseeable future,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist and co-founder of Moody’s Economy.com.

    “The collective psyche has changed as a result of what we’ve been through. And we’re going to be different as a result,” said Zandi, who formerly advised Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and now is consulted by Democrats in the administration and in Congress,

    Even before the recession, many jobs had vanished or been shipped overseas amid a general decline of U.S. manufacturing. The severest downturn since the Great Depression has accelerated the process.

    Many economists believe the recession reversed course in the recently ended third quarter and they predict modest growth in the nation’s gross domestic product over the next few years. Yet the unemployment rate is currently at a 26-year high of 9.8 percent — and likely to top 10 percent soon and stay there a while.

    “Many factors are pushing against a quick recovery,” said Heidi Shierholz, an economist at the labor-oriented Economic Policy Institute. “Things will come back. But it’s going to take a long time. I think we will likely see elevated unemployment at least until 2014.”

    At best, many economists see an economic recovery without a return to moderate unemployment. At worst, they suggest the fragile recovery could lose steam and drag the economy back under for a double-dip recession.

    “We will need to grind out this recovery step by step,” President Barack Obama said earlier this month.

    Obama and congressional Democrats are having a hard time agreeing on how to keep the recovery going and help millions of unemployed workers — short of another round of stimulus spending amid rising voter alarm over soaring federal deficits.

    So far, they’ve been unable to win even a simple three-month extension of unemployment insurance for people in states with jobless rates above 8.5 percent.

    The extension easily passed the House earlier this month but is bogged down in the Senate over disputes over which states would get the funds. Hundreds of thousands of people have already lost their benefits or are about to lose them.

    The White House credits the president’s $787 billion stimulus plan passed in February for keeping job losses from becoming even worse. Since Obama took office in January, the economy has lost 3.4 million jobs.

    Republicans argue that the stimulus program has not worked as a job producer and is a waste of tax money. And last week, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce launched a multimillion advertising campaign to celebrate small business entrepreneurs — and to argue that further government intervention will not spur permanent job growth.

    Chamber leaders called for creation of more than 20 million new private-sector jobs over the next decade, saying it’s needed to replace jobs lost in the recession and to keep pace with population growth.

    “The government can support a few jobs in the short-run” while free enterprise is the only system that can create 20 million of them, said Thomas Donohue, the chamber president.

    To many economists, such a goal seems unreachable given today’s altered economic landscape.

    “It’s a new normal that U.S. growth is going to be anemic on average for years. Right now, the prospect is bleak for anything other than a particularly high unemployment rate and a weak jobs-creating machine,” said Allen Sinai, president of Decision Economics Inc. He says he doubts that unemployment will dip below 7 percent anytime soon.

    Many economists consider a jobless rate of 4 to 5 percent as reflecting a “full employment” economy, one in which nearly everyone who wants a job has one. After the 2001 recession the rate climbed to 5.8 percent in 2002 and peaked at 6.3 percent in 2003 before easing back to 4.6 percent for 2006 and 2007.

    Will unemployment ever get back to such levels?

    “I wouldn’t say never. But I do think it’s going to be a long time,” said Bruce Bartlett, a former Treasury Department economist and the author of the book “The New American Economy: The Failure of Reaganomics and a New Way Forward.”

    “The linkage between growth in the economy and growth in jobs is not what it was. I don’t know if it’s permanently broken or temporarily broken. But clearly we are not seeing the sort of increase in employment that one would normally expect,” said Bartlett.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091019/ap_on_bi_ge/us_vanishing_jobs

  114. VotingFemale says:

    What part of “economic disaster” does not play into the hands of the Socialists/Communists in Congress and the White House?

  115. samhenry says:

    Good morning all!

    VF has said:

    What god does not want to be worshipped?

    I think it enrages the man-god, Mr Flashy RA Eyes to hell and back for people to dislike him and have the means to say so to others.

    Obamanites do not realize that we “have no other gods before us, just this blog and it’s queencat, VF.

  116. samhenry says:

    We are in for…

    A double dip recession

    dollar demise = gold at $2,000

    Membersip in the South American/Central American Banana repubic Union with common currency and unfair trade. Sovereignty will be the main course at dinner each night. It will hit the toilet by morning.

  117. samhenry says:

    With double dip Depression and so many bills and regulations to push through Congress or an agency, Obama is really moving – he’s doing the ‘Bama Boogie.”

    His MO – keep issues going on all frunts.

  118. VotingFemale says:

    Foxwood, your “You might be a communist if” blogpost got noticed! lol

    check out

    Political Humor Shirt — Entries on Mark Twain Humorous Quotes

  119. VotingFemale says:

    The “Conservative Blog Network” Got noticed also at that site…

  120. tellitlikeitis says:

    Analysis: Courting doctors in health care battle

    WASHINGTON — In the special interest war over health care, the White House and congressional Democrats have the nation’s drug makers and hospitals generally on their side; the insurance industry, not so much.

    Now the bill’s supporters are making a play to lock in the American Medical Association, the organization that says it represents 250,000 doctors and medical students in every state and congressional district. The principal enticement, a $247 billion measure making its way to the Senate floor, aims to wipe out a scheduled 21 percent rate cut for doctors treating Medicare patients and replace it with a permanent, predictable system for future fee increases.

    The AMA, firmly in favor of higher pay for doctors, began airing ads last week saying the increase would “protect seniors’ access to quality care.” In case lawmakers need any inducement to act, a late 2008 study by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, which advises Congress, found that nearly 30 percent of Medicare patients looking for a new primary care doctor had trouble finding one.

    Yet the AMA won’t yet pledge support for the major health care bill that is the chief objective of the White House and congressional Democrats, despite a request that several officials say was made at a meeting last week with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

    Nor does it seem eager to soft-pedal another of its own top priorities, legislation to restrict medical malpractice payments.

    “We continue to press for significant medical liability reform because we know that is a very important contributor to unnecessary health care costs,” Dr. J. James Rohack, president of the AMA, said in an interview in which he declined repeatedly to say whether the organization had been asked to back off.

    Higher payments to doctors and curbs on medical malpractice awards “in my mind are separate issues. I can’t speak for how other people are putting this whole thing together,” he added.

    Evidently not in the minds of Democrats. Several officials say that request, too, was conveyed to the AMA and other doctor groups in last week’s session with Reid. Not coincidentally, any limitations in medical malpractice awards are anathema to trial lawyers, whom Democrats count as among their most reliable and generous campaign supporters.

    The dance is one of many in the long-running health care debate, the issue that has consumed Congress, the administration and a vast constellation of outside groups for months.

    Take the Senate Finance Committee, which last week approved a middle-of-the-road measure that may eventually prove a template for a compromise on an issue that has defied solution for decades. Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine drew headlines when she became the first Republican to support White House-backed health care legislation.

    But according to some of the bill’s supporters, a vote that occurred with little fanfare several evenings earlier was crucial to the legislation’s survival.

    It pitted the drug makers and the White House on one side and most of the committee’s Democrats on the other.

    At issue was a plan by Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., to sweeten drug benefits for certain Medicare beneficiaries — normally something all lawmakers can favor. In this case, Nelson proposed raising fees on drug companies by $106 billion over a decade to cover the costs. “Did PhRMA come to the table in the agreement with the White House with enough? A number of us feel that is not the case,” he said of the industry.

    But his approach happened to run afoul of a deal the industry made months ago with the White House and Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the committee’s chairman. Drug makers would cover $80 billion of the cost of the legislation over a decade, and the White House and Baucus would help shield them from attempts by other lawmakers to impose additional fees or taxes.

    Left undisclosed for weeks was a critical codicil — that the industry would bankroll an expensive advertising campaign to promote the bill’s passage, at a cost of $100 million or more.

    Passage of Nelson’s proposal “may well undermine our ability to pass comprehensive health care reform in this Congress and I think that would be a great tragedy,” Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., said shortly before the vote.

    Baucus, too, spoke against Nelson’s recommendation, although he added, “we have to find some other time and some other way to fill the doughnut hole,” a reference to a gap in coverage under the Medicare prescription drug program.

    Of Nelson, Baucus said, “I frankly wish the senator had decided not to push” for a vote.

    Not only Baucus, but also the White House had urged Nelson to drop his amendment, according to Senate sources who spoke on condition of anonymity. On the vote, the chairman, Carper and Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., joined all committee Republicans in opposing the plan, and it failed on a vote of 13-10.

    The drug deal was secure, and so, too, the bill.

    Special interest politics was also at play for the nation’s hospitals. They, too, have a side deal with the White House and Baucus, and they also received a measure of protection in the bill that cleared the committee.

    At the last minute, the chairman decided to shield them from any future cuts to be recommended by an independent commission charged with recommending savings in Medicare.

    The insurance industry?

    Reid made an unusual appearance at a Senate committee hearing recently to support repeal of 60-year-old antitrust laws that benefit insurance companies.
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i8RDSl65WFPHvC7xWMOPApdecI3QD9BEM6UG0

  121. Foxwood says:

    Yeah, no links tho… but I guess I’ll let it slide… 🙂

  122. samhenry says:

    CAT – I got on there, too

    Most Recent Posts on the Conservative Blog Network

    Stupid Net Tricks: The Obama-FOX War is Over – CNN Mercenaries Recalled – Beyond Belief for October 19, 2009
    Last Committee Vote Clears the Way for Senate Showdown

    You’re currently reading “Political Humor Shirt”, an entry on Mark Twain Humorous Quotes | Info

  123. VotingFemale says:

    ohh I got a goodie for the next blog post!

    And The Communists ain’t gonna Rike kit!

  124. Foxwood says:

    Man, I guess that was a big hit. I bet there will be more of that on other blogs…

  125. VotingFemale says:

    yesh a nother blogger notified me they reposted one of my blog posts, almost verbatum… I checked it out and they did not provide a link and credit to me for it… go figger…

    Foxwood says

    Yeah, no links tho… but I guess I’ll let it slide…

  126. samhenry says:

    Am I a ghost? Better get some breakfast so my bulk shows lol.

  127. VotingFemale says:

    I saw you got credited there, SamHenry! Your’re famous… hope the White House likes your blog posts else it’s off the the FEMA gulag for jouuz!

    lol

  128. samhenry says:

    Why did SamHenry cross the street – to cook and eat that chicken!

  129. VotingFemale says:

    ‘wrong thinking” amongst the collective is not tolerated by the Communists

  130. samhenry says:

    Ifin ya saw me there; I guess it waz not worth mention’? FOX is the FAV and I’m off to the gooolong.

  131. Foxwood says:

    DAMN! Don’t sneak up on me like that SamH!

    Thought I saw a ghost!

    🙂

  132. samhenry says:

    Gooooolong, been nice to know ya
    Gooooolong, been nice to know ya
    Booooolong, been nice to know ya
    Ya surlely are gang a’way (burns last two words).

  133. VotingFemale says:

    Why did the chicken cross the road?

    Because chickens think squirrels in the road know something they don’t.

  134. samhenry says:

    Sticks and stones can break my bones but cannons will fire right through me, FOX.

  135. Foxwood says:

    Uh… what’s a goolong? Should I ask? Anything with goo can’t be good.

  136. samhenry says:

    Why do squirrels cross the road?

    They are right wing nut jobs or rather jobbing for nuts! lol

  137. samhenry says:

    Why did Obama cross the road?

    He’s a god and he can part streams of traffic.

  138. samhenry says:

    Why did Sarah Palin cross the road?

    She knew she’d STOP traffic and they’d listen!

  139. Foxwood says:

    That’s why I never ate that spagetti sauce “Raw Goo”

  140. samhenry says:

    Gulag – spelling help great cat….

    Series of prisons in Siberia where Soviets imprisioned opposition.

  141. tellitlikeitis says:

    Poll: Only 34 percent of Californians approve of Pelosi’s performance

    By Jordan Fabian – 10/19/09 01:05 PM ET
    A poll released over the weekend shows that only 34 percent of Californians approve of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) job performance, down 14 points from March.

    The study, conducted by the Field Research Corportation, also showed that 44 percent of respondents disapproved of her job performance while 22 percent held no opinion. In the organization’s last poll in March, 48 percent of respondents approved of Pelosi’s job performance while 35 percent disapproved.

    Democrats approved of Pelosi’s performance as leader by a count of 51-23, with 26 percent expressing no opinion. Republicans overwhelmingly disapproved of her performance: 7 percent approved, 79 percent disapproved and 14 percent said they held no opinion.

    39 percent of “non-partisans” approved of her while 37 percent disapproved, with 24 percent responding that they had no opinion.

    Pelosi’s job approval had sunk to similar lows in October and December 2007 during President George W. Bush’s second term.

    In the last seven months, the House of Representatives has taken on a number of big-ticket issues. The lower chamber passed a cap-and-trade energy bill and has drafted sweeping healthcare reform legislation that includes a controversial public health insurance option.

    The economic stimulus bill was signed into law in February but critics of the legislation have pointed to high unemployment as a sign the bill has failed to achieve its goals. Democratic leaders and the Obama administration have defended the measure’s role in stabilizing the economic downturn.

    The study polled 1,005 Californians by phone from Sept. 18 to Oct. 5.

    http://thehill.com//blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/63689-poll-34-of-californians-approve-of-pelosis-job-performance#

  142. Foxwood says:

    Beck again says that Obutthole Mao stuff is being scrubbed.

  143. tellitlikeitis says:

  144. tellitlikeitis says:

    Foxwood the Mao genie is out of the bottle. It’s too late to try to put it back in. lol

  145. tellitlikeitis says:

    Get you Obama-Mao tee shirts here.
    http://www.tshirthub.com/obamaotshirts.html

  146. samhenry says:

    Hi, Tellit

    Forgot you came on board after my blanket hello.

    Need lunch.

    DOG OVERBOARD

  147. Foxwood says:

    Later SamH. I’m thinking flied lice for lunch.

  148. VotingFemale says:

    Glavnoye Upravleniye Lagere aka gulag

    lol

    samhenry says
    Gulag – spelling help great cat….

    Series of prisons in Siberia where Soviets imprisioned opposition.

  149. Foxwood says:

    Soggy lice not nice… I coulda had a V8.

  150. tellitlikeitis says:

    Pelosi Pushes Ahead With Calls for Government-Run Health Plan
    The House Speaker is standing her ground on demands for a government-run plan, even as President Obama’s advisers signaled over the weekend that the “public option” is just that — desirable, but not mandatory in the massive health care overhaul being debated in Congress.

    If a government-run health insurance plan winds up in the trash bin when all the debate in Congress is over, it won’t be due to any lack of effort on Nancy Pelosi’s part.

    The House Speaker is standing her ground on demands for a government-run plan, even as President Obama’s advisers signaled over the weekend that the “public option” is just that — desirable, but not mandatory in the massive health care overhaul being debated in Congress.

    The inclusion or disappearance of a government plan to compete with private insurers will leave one of the Democratic power-brokers basking in the credit — or blame — for the $1 trillion, 10-year government program that has divided Americans for months.

    If the “public option” is in the final bill, “Obamacare” could be re-labeled “Nancycare.”

    Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, said inclusion of the option will put Pelosi’s stamp on Obama’s biggest domestic policy proposal since taking office.

    “If the public plan passes, Pelosi has won because it’s obvious it’s not being pushed in the Senate and the White House,” Sabato told Foxnews.com.

    Not so, said Democratic strategist Bob Beckel, a Fox News contributor who managed Walter Mondale’s 1984 presidential campaign.

    “If it ends up being in there in some form, certainly the House was the one that pushed it, but ultimately it ends up in Obama’s lap,” Beckel said. “Obama is going to [have] ownership of the health care bill, whatever it is.”

    Pelosi has publicly remained a strong proponent of a government-run plan to compete with private insurance companies — even as Obama’s closest advisers say it is not the most important element of health care reform.

    White House adviser Valerie Jarrett said in an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that Obama believes the public plan is still the “best possible choice,” but she said he’s not insisting it be included in the final legislation.

    Similarly, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said the government-run option is “not the defining piece of health care.”

    Pelosi’s views on the necessity of a government-run plan “have not changed,” spokesman Nadeam Elshami told Foxnews.com Monday. “The House is committed to passing a public option and we will go to the negotiating table with a public option.”

    Stephanie Lundberg, press secretary to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Pelosi’s lieutenant, also said the House version will include the government-run option.

    “We are currently in the process of working out how that will be structured. They’re having discussions on the Senate side and it’s in one of their bills so it is a possibility that it will be included.”

    In a conference call with constituents last Thursday, Pelosi trumpeted the need for a “public option,” saying, “I think it’s very clear from our conversations with the members that the votes are there for a public option.” She added that she sent a “a number of versions” of a government-run plan to the Congressional Budget Office for cost estimates.

    Aides have said Pelosi is looking favorably upon one variation of a public plan — a Medicare plus 5 percent reimbursement rate for providers — but no agreement has been reached yet on the specific type of government program to be included in the House version of the bill.

    Pelosi’s view may be gaining traction. A slight majority of Americans now support the so-called public option, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll released Tuesday.

    The survey, conducted from from Oct. 15 to 19, found that 51 percent of respondents prefer some form of a government-run health insurance plan for people who cannot afford coverage, while 37 percent said they favor reform that does not feature a public option.

    The poll, which surveyed a random sample of 1,004 adults and had a margin of error of 3 percentage points, also showed that a government-run insurance plan has gained momentum among two key demographics — independents and seniors.

    While House Democrats appear confident, Senate Democrats are still debating. The Senate Finance Committee voted on a bill last week that does not contain a government-run health insurance plan or require employers to offer insurance to their employees. But a bill approved in July in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions includes the two fundamental provisions that the Finance Committee legislation does not.

    Congressional aides say that that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will work closely with Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., as well as health committee chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, in blending the two bills into one that can win in the Senate — and withstand defeat when the two chambers vote later this year.

    In an interview with FOXNews.com Monday, Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa., said he is confident Pelosi will aggressively fight for some form of a public option, but is concerned the Senate may triumph over the House.

    “We tend to have to default to the Senate too often and I’m fearful that’s going to happen in the conference,” Sestak said, adding that he wished Reid had been more vocal in his support for a government-run option.

    “Too many times the Senate has prevailed on issues over the House. I can’t say that in conference we’d prevail,” he said.

    The uncertainty of a government-run option surviving in Senate legislation is the key factor affecting the Obama’s administration’s strategy to diminish its necessity, Sabato said.

    “They’ve basically made an internal evaluation that it’s very unlikely this will pass because it won’t pass in the Senate,” he said.

    But Jacki Schechner, national communications director for Health Care for America Now, disagreed that the president is backing away at all, leaving Pelosi to steer the government ship.

    The White House has “not changed the way they’ve thought. It’s not the only essential element of reform,” she said, adding that the officials’ remarks this weekend are consistent with earlier support for a public option.

    Schechner added that her group doesn’t see a distinction between Pelosi’s and Obama’s stances.

    “We support what the president has put forth. We’re not lining up behind anyone in particular,” she said.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/19/white-house-downplays-need-public-option-pelosi-pushes-ahead-government-run/

  151. samhenry says:

    I just had a heavy pot hit my leg off the stove. I’ll never dance again; I’ll never cook lol. But I will have to stop blogging until I talk with the doc. Hot and cold compresses iniated; Advil taken.

  152. tellitlikeitis says:

    Traditional Americans are losing their nation

    ——————————————————————————–
    Posted: October 20, 2009
    1:00 am Eastern

    © 2009

    In the brief age of Obama, we have had “truthers,” “birthers,” tea party activists and town-hall dissenters.

    Comes now, the “Oath Keepers.” And who might they be?

    Writes Alan Maimon in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Oath Keepers, depending on where one stands, are “either strident defenders of liberty or dangerous peddlers of paranoia.”

    Formed in March, they are ex-military and police who repledge themselves to defend the Constitution, even if it means disobeying orders. If the U.S. government ordered law enforcement agencies to violate Second Amendment rights by disarming the people, Oath Keepers will not obey.

    “The whole point of Oath Keepers is to stop a dictatorship from ever happening here,” says founding father Stewart Rhodes, an ex-Army paratrooper and Yale-trained lawyer. “My focus is on the guys with the guns, because they can’t do it without them.

    “We say if the American people decide it’s time for a revolution, we’ll fight with you.”

    Prediction: Brother Rhodes is headed for cable stardom.

    And if the Pelosi-Reid progressives went postal over town-hall protesters, calling them “un-American,” “Nazis” and “evil-mongers,” one can imagine what they will do with the Oath Keepers.

    It’s not too late to rescue the nation! Read how in “Save America Now! The New Revolution to Save Freedom and Liberty”

    As with Jimmy Carter’s long-range psychoanalysis of Joe Wilson, the reflexive reaction of the mainstream media will likely be that these are militia types, driven to irrationality because America has a black president.

    Yet, the establishment’s reaction seems more problematic for the republic than anything the Oath Keepers are up to. For our political and media elite seem to have lost touch with the nation and to be wedded to a vision of America divorced from reality.

    Progressives are the folks who, in the 1960s, could easily understand that urban riots that took scores of lives and destroyed billions in property were an inevitable reaction to racism, poverty and despair. They could empathize with the rage of campus radicals who burned down the ROTC building and bombed the Pentagon.

    The “dirty, immoral war in Vietnam” explains why the “finest generation we have ever produced” is behaving like this, they said. We must deal with the “root causes” of social disorder.

    Yet, they cannot comprehend what would motivate Middle America to distrust its government, for it surely does, as Ron Brownstein reports in the National Journal:

    “Whites are not only more anxious, but also more alienated. Big majorities of whites say the past year’s turmoil has diminished their confidence in government, corporations and the financial industry. … Asked which institution they trust most to make economic decisions in their interest, a plurality of whites older than 30 pick ‘none’ – a grim statement.”

    Is all this due to Obama’s race?

    Even Obama laughs at that. As he told David Letterman, I was already black by the time I was elected. And he not only got a higher share of the white vote than Kerry or Gore, a third of white voters, who said in August 2008 that race was an important consideration in voting, said they were going to vote for Obama.

    With black voters going 24 to 1 for Obama, he almost surely won more votes than he lost because of his race.

    (Column continues below)

    Moreover, the alienation and radicalization of white America began long before Obama arrived. He acknowledged as much when he explained Middle Pennsylvanians to puzzled progressives in that closed-door meeting in San Francisco.

    Referring to the white working-class voters in the industrial towns decimated by job losses, Obama said: “They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

    Yet, we had seen these folks before. They were Perotistas in 1992, opposed NAFTA in 1993 and blocked the Bush-Kennedy McCain amnesty in 2007.

    In their lifetimes, they have seen their Christian faith purged from schools their taxes paid for, and mocked in movies and on TV. They have seen their factories shuttered in the thousands and their jobs outsourced in the millions to Mexico and China. They have seen trillions of tax dollars go for Great Society programs, but have seen no Great Society, only rising crime, illegitimacy, drug use and dropout rates.

    They watch on cable TV as illegal aliens walk into their country, are rewarded with free educations and health care and take jobs at lower pay than American families can live on – then carry Mexican flags in American cities and demand U.S. citizenship.

    They see Wall Street banks bailed out as they sweat their next paycheck, then read that bank profits are soaring, and the big bonuses for the brilliant bankers are back. Neither they nor their kids ever benefited from affirmative action, unlike Barack and Michelle Obama.

    They see a government in Washington that cannot balance its books, win our wars or protect our borders. The government shovels out trillions to Fortune 500 corporations and banks to rescue the country from a crisis created by the government and Fortune 500 corporations and banks.

    America was once their country. They sense they are losing it. And they are right.

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=113463

  153. Foxwood says:

    Quoting Fox News, Tellit? You know that’s not real news…

  154. tellitlikeitis says:

  155. tellitlikeitis says:

    Fosxwood, Thank God for Fox news! It’s real enough for me.

  156. Foxwood says:

    It’s the only reliable news, Tellit. Let’s hope Obutthole doesn’t silence it.

  157. Foxwood says:

    “I just had a heavy pot hit my leg off the stove. I’ll never dance again; I’ll never cook lol. But I will have to stop blogging until I talk with the doc. Hot and cold compresses iniated; Advil taken.”

    How’d I miss this? You ok SamH?

  158. Foxwood says:

    Chump Media get’s Hoaxed Twice!
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/19/chamber-statement-announcing-support-climate-hoax/

    Chamber of Commerce Says Statement Announcing Support for Climate Bill a Hoax

    A fake press release, which declared the Chamber of Commerce had done an “about-face on climate policy” following the defection of prominent members, was briefly picked up by Reuters and several other media organizations.

    FOXNews.com

    Monday, October 19, 2009

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce on Monday said that a press release declaring the group had dropped its opposition to climate change legislation was a hoax.

    The fake press release, which declared the Chamber had done an “about-face on climate policy” following the defection of prominent members, was briefly picked up by Reuters and several other media organizations.

    But the Chamber sent out a counter-release setting the record straight.

    “Public relations hoaxes undermine the genuine effort to find solutions on the challenge of climate change,” spokesman Thomas Collamore said. “These irresponsible tactics are a foolish distraction from the serious effort by our nation to reduce greenhouse gases.”

    He said the group would call for law enforcement to investigate.

    But Politico.com reported that the liberal activist group The Yes Men took responsibility for the hoax — apparently part of a broader effort to undermine the Chamber in its opposition to cap-and-trade legislation and other Obama administration priorities.

    Politico.com reported Monday that Democrats in Congress and the White House are doing an end run around the Chamber of Commerce to weaken their political influence by dealing directly with individual CEOs.

    White House adviser Valerie Jarrett told Politico.com that the officials “prefer the approach,” because it allows them to deal with people “on the front lines, running businesses.”

    But the Chamber accused the White House of a divide-and-conquer strategy.

    Collamore said in his statement Monday that the Chamber would continue to “seek opportunities” to engage in the discussion about climate change policy, and that “the U.S. Chamber believes that strong climate legislation is compatible with the goals of improving our economy and creating jobs.”

  159. samhenry says:

    Fox – you are so nice – I came to the computer to get my doctor’s number. We are watching it. As you know y ou can get a blood clot from this kind of thing. I think I will be OK. I will check back with them later in the day. I did have so much to do today. Fates – WTF!

    Did you hear about the super collider?

    Large Hadron Collider ‘Being Sabotaged from the Future’

    Monday, October 19, 2009

    * Print
    * ShareThis

    FOX News

    Scientists claim the giant atom-smashing Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is being jinxed from the future to save the world.

    In a bizarre sci-fi theory, Danish physicist Dr Holger Bech Nielsen and Dr Masao Ninomiya from Japan claim nature is trying to prevent the LHC from finding the elusive Higgs boson. Called the “God particle,” the theoretical boson could explain the origins of mass in the universe — if physicists can find the darn thing.

    The scientists say their math proves nature will “ripple backward through time” to stop the LHC before it can create the God particle, like a time traveller who goes back in time to kill his grandfather.

    “One could even almost say that we have a model for God,” Dr Nielsen says in an unpublished essay. “He rather hates Higgs particles, and attempts to avoid them.”

    “While it is a paradox to go back in time and kill your grandfather, physicists agree there is no paradox if you go back in time and save him from being hit by a bus,” Dannis Overbye wrote in the New York Times.

    “In the case of the Higgs and the collider, it is as if something is going back in time to keep the universe from being hit by a bus.”

    “It must be our prediction that all Higgs producing machines shall have bad luck,” Dr Nielsen told the New York Times.

    European science agency CERN designed the world’s biggest particle accelerator to shoot beams around a freezing 27km concrete ring underground near Geneva, smashing atoms together in search of the elusive “God particle” believed present at the Big Bang.

    The multi-billion-dollar machine, built over almost 20 years, was set to launch in late 2008 but broke down after it overheated during a test run.

    The relaunch was pushed back to late 2009 as more parts had to be replaced, and CERN was recently scandalised when a LHC scientist was found to have approached al-Qaeda for work.
    Links

    * SLIDESHOW: World’s Largest Atom Smasher

    The LHC – which features in sci-fi plots such as Dan Brown’s Angels and Demons and the new TV show FlashForward – has been dubbed a “doomsday device” with claims it will open black holes.

    Last year, Professor Brian Cox of Manchester University told the UK Telegraph that LHC scientists had received threatening emails and phone calls demanding that the experiment be halted.

    But Prof Cox, ex-keyboardist for 1990’s pop group D:REAM, dismissed the hysteria in rock-star style.

    “Anyone who thinks the LHC will destroy the world is a tw—,” he said.

    The LHC is set to start up again next month.

    – with Reuters

    * See Next Story in SciTech

  160. Foxwood says:

    SamH, I am so into Relativity and Quantum physics. Even as leftist Einstein was, he believed in science and God. I do as well. Sometimes I think it’s God that doesn’t want us to discover him with these theories and that is what the CERN problem is.

    Hope I didn’t piss Sami off with that thought, but I don’t think science replaces God, as some scientists do.

  161. tellitlikeitis says:

    Excuses wearing thin for Obama, media pals

    BY STEVE HUNTLEY
    Have you heard the news? President Obama inherited an economic mess from the Bush administration.

    You say that’s hardly news? But it’s been the message sounded over and over by the White House. Top Obama adviser David Axelrod said on one of the Sunday news shows, “He walked in the door, we had the worst economy since the Great Depression.” In San Francisco, Obama talked of being “busy with our mop.” White House heavy hitter Rahm Emanuel used the worst-economy-since-the-Depression line on a public TV news show.

    CAST YOUR VOTE
    Do you approve of the job President Obama has done so far?
    Yes
    No

    Excuses wearing thin for Obama, media pals

    RELATED STORIES
    White House advisers say Fox News is not news
    Wholesale inflation dips unexpectedly in September
    September housing construction rises 0.5 percent
    Obama welcomes second vote in Afghanistan
    You’d think it’s October 2008, the final month in the Obama presidential candidacy, rather than October 2009, nine months into the Obama presidency. Yet the Obama White House is in full campaign mode — maybe because it needs to mask the shortcomings of the Obama presidency.

    Take, for example, all the talk of inheriting the worst economy since the 1930s crisis. That came in response to the news that the federal deficit hit $1.4 trillion.

    Yet just a few months ago, the Obama camp was singing a little different tune. It was under criticism for the $787 billion stimulus package it bulldozed through Congress on grounds that massive spending was needed to keep the unemployment rate from breaching 8 percent. When joblessness hit 9.5 percent in June, Vice President Joe Biden said, “We misread how bad the economy was.”

    They inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression, or the economy turned out to be worse than they thought. Which is it? It can’t be both — unless your brain is completely addled by the Obama charisma.

    Obama is still popular, but polls show the public losing faith in his policies. Another indicator was a ”Saturday Night Live” skit lampooning Obama for the major accomplishments of his administration — “jack and squat.” If the honeymoon is ending with the American voter, it isn’t for obsequious elements of the mainstream media. CNN prostrated itself by fact-checking the ”SNL” comedy skit.

    But that’s harmless compared to the virulent campaign against Obama critics carried out by the denizens of MSNBC. Its Obama acolytes seek to demonize opponents of Obama’s policies by focusing on most marginal corners of right-wing politics like, for example, the “birthers” who deny Obama is a natural born citizen. The larger scheme is to imply Obama critics are racists.

    That’s the backdrop to the story of Rush Limbaugh getting booted from a group bidding to buy the St. Louis Rams. He was smeared on CNN and MSNBC with false accusations of making two racist comments. He is an abrasive critic of Obama, so he must be racist, or so goes the left-wing story line. I wouldn’t defend everything Limbaugh has ever said, but lies were used to blacklist him from professional football for his political views.

    Recently an MSNBC personality accused the U.S. Chamber of Commerce of lobbying for policies that amount to being “treasonous to this country.” Remember how liberals roared in outrage at any hint of their patriotism being questioned for criticizing the Iraq War? Well, it’s the left that doesn’t shy from attacking the patriotism of those it dislikes. Recall the repulsive Moveon.org “General Betray-us” ad against Iraq commander Gen. David Petraeus. Recent opposition to Chicago’s Olympic bid was cast as a sign of a lack of patriotism among Obama critics.

    The MSNBC blast against the chamber appears to dovetail with what the Politico newspaper reports is a White House and Democratic effort “to marginalize” the business organization. That echoes the administration assault on the Fox News Channel: It says Fox isn’t a news organization.

    The White House trying to dictate who’s a news organization. Democrats out to gut a business group. Obama media allies damning Americans as racist, unpatriotic and treasonous. Is this the America Obama promised when he campaigned to end the cynical and divisive politics of the past?

    Comment at suntimes.com.

  162. samhenry says:

    FOX has said”

    Sometimes I think it’s God that doesn’t want us to discover him with these theories and that is what the CERN problem is.

    I would like to think this is so. It makes senseI don’t think the godhead will ever be into transparency in intergalactic affairs.

  163. samhenry says:

    Why did President Karzhi (spelling) of Iraq cross the road?

    He was being chased by Obama yelling at him about the election returns.

    Finally – movement. NOW, Obama, make up you mind. Your general keeps telling you delay is dangerous.

  164. samhenry says:

    Late to bed for a rest. I’ll be nearby in my bunk below decks.

  165. Foxwood says:

    Why did Fox cross the road?

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    The chicken was on the other side!

  166. m2 says:

    Hey you guys! Is this blog different or is it just me? I’m still on mobile Internet, but the format is totally different… Better for my mobile browser! I wonder if it’s wordpress making a browser for mobile Internet.

    Any body listening to Rush today? He’s fired up, but fatalistic. He might leave us soon. He says he’ll do that when he’s lost all hope.

  167. m2 says:

    SH this is very serious! Do get rest, don’t stress and monitor the situation with a critical eye. Best of luck, I hope the injury goes into healing!

  168. m2 says:

    Friends, I was just today at husbands office doing some work for a media project. I was to find a picture of the American flag on the moon (Armstrong and such), to which husband asks me: “Is that why Obama bombed the moon? To bomb the flag off?”

    and me knowing it was a joke, couldn’t help suppresing a shudder of fear of that truth. Afterall, in Obama’s country, America is no longer an exceptional nation and we can’t be thought of as flaunting our country, right?

  169. Foxwood says:

    Multi Millionaire Jim Rogers has already left the States… I think he knows something considering he used to be a partner of Soros’.

  170. Foxwood says:

    The blog looks the same to me, M2.

  171. Pingback: Going Rogue: Sarah Palin Is Booked to Appear on Oprah « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  172. Pingback: Palin Power: Sarah Palin Turns the DNC into Prissy, Flaky, Lying High School Girls… “No BFFs on Facebook, ‘K?” (video) « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  173. Pingback: Sarah Palin: Says To Her Facebook Friends “Keep Your Powder Dry,” Leftist Media Going WILD to Rip Her Book ‘Going Rogue’ to Shreds « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  174. Pingback: Palin’s Still Under Their Skin… How Many Fact-Checking Editors at AP Scrutinized Either of Obama’s Books? Rush Limbaugh’s Take on Palin’s Book (video) « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  175. Pingback: FIFY: Hey, Newsweek… Fixed Your Palin Cover for You. You’re Welcome. « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  176. Pingback: Why Sarah Palin resigned is now becoming clear to the Socialists, and why they are so utterly fearful « VotingFemale Speaks!

  177. Pingback: Sarah Palin is The One « VotingFemale Speaks!

  178. Pingback: Video of Palin-Winfrey Interview… HuffPo Reports Oprah’s Ratings Jump to 2-Year High, Thanks to Sarah Palin (5-part video) « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  179. Pingback: Sarah Palin has Reloaded while Rabid Lib’s continue to spew lame lying rhetoric « LisaInTX's Blog

Comments are closed.