Witch Doctor Obama’s Health Insurance Math Scam Vote

Update: CNN pretends to discover the Hillary that we know:



Hillary is no witch-doctor.
——————————————————————————————————

Want to know how big a math scam the Obama health insurance scam is? Politico wrote about the big “math” scam but buried the big news in a long article filled with bad news. Here is the key paragraph of the Politico article which is buried in the 21st and 22nd paragraphs of a 23 paragraph article.

These, in fact, may be the most suspect part of the whole math exercise. For the first 10 years, CBO credits the Senate bill with reducing the deficit by $130 billion, but over half of this is because of added premiums collected from a new voluntary program for long-term-care insurance.

The “savings” of $72 billion will be short lived, since the money is being collected in anticipation of future payments to provide the promised care.

Add to this bill the Medicare fix for doctors of about $250 billion, the lag between collection of revenues and actual implementation in 2019, the looting of Medicare by at least $450 billion, and the looting of American families for the benefit of Big PhaRma and insurance companies by the Frank Nitti IRS enforcer and the Obama health insurance scam is a Chicago style mugging.

And remember this is no longer about health care, it is about health insurance and how to bring in more Americans into a bad system. The bad system is not targeted for “reform”. American taxpayers will be forced by Frank Nitti the IRS to tithe to the temples of crime for little to no benefits.

* * * * *

Tonight’s vote and the votes this year, as we previously discussed is now beside the point. In another article Politico describes the puff of smoke which tonight’s vote to begin debate on the insurance scam represents:

In many ways, Saturday’s vote is the real kickoff to Campaign 2010 for the Senate. Republicans will begin sharpening their attacks into what will become familiar refrains over the next year should reform pass.

Jay Cost at RealClearPolitics is correct when yesterday he described tonight’s vote as an “anticlimax”.

Three big reasons:

(a) “Keep the Ball Rolling”. [snip]

(b) No Harm For Yea. [snip]

(c) Lots of Harm for Nay. [snip]

Final point. The fact that these Democratic moderates are actually spending time “pondering” whether to vote against starting debate is a sign that they are very skittish about this bill. My guess is that this deliberation is just a dog and pony show for the folks back home – what’s noteworthy is that these senators feel they must do this. The reason why is pretty clear. Take the nationwide net approval/disapproval of this bill, then subtract 10 to 20 points. That will put you in striking distance of what the voters in Arkansas, Louisiana, and Nebraska think of it. Then remember that Blanche Lincoln is up for reelection next year, Ben Nelson is up in three years, and Mary Landrieu has yet to develop much electoral security in her increasingly Republican state. She’s up in 2014 – and if Obama wins reelection, she would have to stand before the voters of Louisiana in one of the roughest macro environments around (incumbent party’s second midterm).

In the first Politico article we quoted from, the dog and pony math scam is outlined:

But just around the corner next month, Reid’s Democrats face immediate new challenges, including a $925 billion debt ceiling increase and a social safety net that’s unraveling even as unemployment has topped 10 percent.

Expanded federal jobless benefits — hastily authorized under the economic recovery bill last February — are due to expire in January and will cost $85 billion to renew for the coming year. And this says nothing about a backlog of year-end spending bills and President Barack Obama’s decision on the Afghanistan war, which threatens to eat up whatever savings are coming from the troop withdrawals from Iraq.

For the first time, Democrats are talking seriously about going back and rechanneling portions of their $787 billion stimulus bill to help jump-start job-creation initiatives — such as a long-delayed highway bill.

The Obama flim-flam scams are not yet at high tide. The devastating tsunami wave is merely gathering force:

By any measure, the numbers are staggering. The debt ceiling increase will bring the new limit to about $13 trillion, yet with unemployment at 10.2 percent, Democrats see no choice but to push ahead with jobless benefits. Down the road, the same math faces lawmakers as state governments prepare their 2011 budgets next summer and see a drop-off in the emergency funds — to help pay teachers or Medicaid bills — provided under the recovery bill last winter.

Hundreds of thousands of state government jobs face cutting next unless there is yet more federal largess, via China, drained to state governments to forestall even more unemployment:

The debate over highway funding illustrates this problem. Washington has its own set of fiscal problems given the drop in gas tax revenues for federal trust funds. But states are in such bad shape that many governors can’t make their 20 percent match to get the construction funds — and generate the jobs that Democrats need.

It’s the economy, but Obama is busy spending, spending, spending – without a coherent plan that considers all areas of the economy but instead focuses on sectors of the economy.

Democrats like us used to mock the Karl Rove electoral “math”. Now the Obama Dimocrats applaud the fraudulent math of Obamanomics. Obamanomics, to borrow from George H.W. Bush, is “voodoo economics”.

These, in fact, may be the most suspect part of the whole math exercise. For the first 10 years, CBO credits the Senate bill with reducing the deficit by $130 billion, but over half of this is because of added premiums collected from a new voluntary program for long-term-care insurance.

The “savings” of $72 billion will be short lived, since the money is being collected in anticipation of future payments to provide the promised care.

Exactly the kind of math that — after so many years — makes December such a challenge.

It’s “voodoo economics” from Obamathe Third George W. Bush Term.

Voodoo kills. Obama’s health insurance scam is authored by witch doctors. Voodoo kills.

Share

48 thoughts on “Witch Doctor Obama’s Health Insurance Math Scam Vote

  1. We are embarrassed to quote David Broder. But…

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/20/AR2009112002618.html

    This poll may not be as famous as some others, but I know the care and professionalism of the people who run it, and one question was particularly interesting to me.

    It read: “President Obama has pledged that health insurance reform will not add to our federal budget deficit over the next decade. Do you think that President Obama will be able to keep his promise or do you think that any health care plan that Congress passes and President Obama signs will add to the federal budget deficit?”

    The answer: Less than one-fifth of the voters — 19 percent of the sample — think he will keep his word. Nine of 10 Republicans and eight of 10 independents said that whatever passes will add to the torrent of red ink. By a margin of four to three, even Democrats agreed this is likely.

    That fear contributed directly to the fact that, by a 16-point margin, the majority in this poll said they oppose the legislation moving through Congress. [snip]

    Holtz-Eakin cites a long list of Democratic-sponsored “budget gimmicks” that made it possible for the CBO to estimate that Reid’s bill would reduce federal deficits by $130 billion by 2019.

    Perhaps the biggest of those maneuvers was Reid’s decision to postpone the start of subsidies to help the uninsured buy policies from mid-2013 to January 2014 — long after taxes and fees levied by the bill would have begun.

    Even with that change, there is plenty in the CBO report to suggest that the promised budget savings may not materialize. If you read deep enough, you will find that under the Senate bill, “federal outlays for health care would increase during the 2010-2019 period” — not decline. The gross increase would be almost $1 trillion — $848 billion, to be exact, mainly to subsidize the uninsured. The net increase would be $160 billion.

    But this depends on two big gambles. Will future Congresses actually impose the assumed $420 billion in cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and other federal health programs? They never have. [snip]

    The challenge to Congress — and to Obama — remains the same: Make the promised savings real, and don’t pass along unfunded programs to our children and grandchildren.

  2. Republican Holtz-Eakin, who we don’t agree with much on:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704888404574547492725871998.html

    Finally, the bills are fiscally dishonest, using every budget gimmick and trick in the book: Leave out inconvenient spending, back-load spending to disguise the true scale, front-load tax revenues, let inflation push up tax revenues, promise spending cuts to doctors and hospitals that have no record of materializing, and so on. [snip]

    In short, any combination of what is moving through Congress is economically dangerous and invites the rapid acceleration of a debt crisis. It is a dramatic statement to financial markets that the federal government does not understand that it must get its fiscal house in order.

  3. Admin,

    So, would people who qualify for subsidies be exempt from the mandates in the early years until the subsidies kick in? Or are we looking at lower income families having to pay their insurance premium without the subsidies?

  4. Admin:

    Here are 2 videos about Obama’s Health Care Plan in direct conflict with what he’s said and what 1s:

    youtube.com/watch?v=p-bY92mcOdk&feature=player_embedded

    youtube.com/watch?v=U0XCl6OHgiM&feature=player

  5. Basement Angel, we corrected the first link to point to the article referenced.

    The link is here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29751.html

    The “plan” is still in flux. The article has this:

    And in refining his health care bill, an important part of Reid’s concerns was to make coverage more affordable for middle-income families, even while seeming to ignore poorer, working-class households.

    Families earning between 300 percent and 400 percent of poverty — about $60,000 to $80,000 — would no longer be expected to pay up to 12 percent of their income, as first proposed in the Senate Finance Committee bill. Instead, the limit is set at 9.8 percent —a nearly one-fifth reduction that set in motion its own math exercise: finding the savings to help pay for these added premium credits or subsidies.

    It’s a revealing glimpse into the choices behind shaping such a massive bill. A first step was simple: delaying the start-up of the insurance exchanges to 2014 instead of to mid-2013. But also a variety of more subtle changes were made to cheapen the cost of alternative health plan options or invite more people to take cheaper options.

    Younger individuals up to 30 would now be permitted to enroll in stripped-down catastrophic health plans to satisfy the requirement that they get some coverage. And the so-called bronze health plan in the Senate Finance bill demanded that the plan cover about 65 percent of costs; this was reduced to 60 percent.

    Less relief is promised working-class families with income in the $30,000-to-$40,000 range, and the House-passed bill remains significantly more generous than the Senate Democrats on this score. In fact, among the very poorest families, one of the revisions made would effectively lock those households before 133 percent of poverty into Medicaid — a cheaper alternative for the government than allowing them the choice of participating in the exchanges.

    The same middle-class math can be seen in the adjustments Reid’s bill makes on the revenue side of the health care ledger. The Senate Finance panel relied heavily on a new excise on high-premium so-called Cadillac health plans that encourage excessive spending but are a sensitive topic for not just the rich but also organized labor. Teacher, firefighter and autoworker unions have often negotiated such packages as an alternative form of tax-subsidized compensation for their members. And Reid helped himself with labor allies by raising the cost threshold to protect more of these middle-income workers.

    This cost him more than $50 billion in 10-year revenues, and he broke new ground by raising Medicare payroll taxes for the wealthy and then added a last-minute provision taxing elective cosmetic medical procedures.

    The payroll tax is not insignificant, both from a policy and revenue point of view. It represents an almost one-third increase for those affected, raising the levy to 1.95 percent and yielding an estimated $54 billion in revenue that would help the financially troubled trust fund. And House Democrats are interested in the proposal because it is akin to their own — much larger -— proposed surtax on income taxes to help pay for health care.

  6. Admin,

    Thank you for the CNN clip. I wonder what will happen if the media (or at least a decent size of media) turns against him and starts reporting responsibly. It’s never too late…lol…

  7. So, the working class voters who supported Clinton in the primaries, will bear the brunt of the changes. This is going to be a disaster for Democrats. It’s the people who make 150% to 300% of the poverty line (iow, a single mom with two kids bringing home between $27k and $48k) who are going to get clobbered by this.

    I’ve had this feeling that the goal of the bill is to kick lower income people out of the health care market. They’ll (that is, we’ll) be required to buy insurance that we cannot afford if we want to live indoors and eat on a daily basis. Because we elect to spend our money on food and housing, we’ll be health care outlaws. The fear of being nailed with a fine will prevent such people from seeking health care until it is the very last minute.

    This is simply another version of “die sooner”.

  8. November 22, 2009

    Barack Obama dream fades as China visit fails to bring change

    Even his allies feel let down by the president’s lack of progress both in Asia and at home

    Tony Allen-Mills in New York

    Gazing serenely from the Great Wall of China last week, President Barack Obama appeared to be making the most of one of the supreme perks of White House occupancy — a private guided tour of Asia’s most spectacular tourist destination.

    White House aides exulted that perfectly choreographed pictures of this moment would make front pages around the world. Yet an experience Obama declared to be “magical” turned sour as he returned home to a spreading domestic revolt that is fanning Democratic unease.

    It was not just that the US media have suddenly turned a lot more sceptical about a president with grand ambitions to reshape politics at home and abroad — even one previously friendly newspaper noted dismissively: “Obama goes to China, brings home a T-shirt.”

    Nor was the steady decline in the president’s approval ratings — which fell below 50% for the first time in a Gallup poll last week — the main cause of White House angst. Obama remains more popular than either Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton a year after their elections, and both presidents eventually cruised to second terms.

    The real problem may be Obama’s friends — or rather, those among his formerly most enthusiastic supporters who are now having second thoughts. The doubters are suddenly stretching across a broad section of the Democratic party’s natural constituency. They include black congressional leaders upset by the sluggish economy; women and Hispanics appalled by concessions made to Republicans on healthcare; anti-war liberals depressed by the debate over troops for Afghanistan; and growing numbers of blue-collar workers who are continuing to lose their jobs and homes.

    Obama’s Asian adventure perceptibly increased the murmurings of dissent when he returned to Washington last week, having failed to wring any public concessions from China on any major issue. For most Americans, the most talked-about moment of the trip was not the Great Wall visit but his low bow to Emperor Akihito of Japan, which the president’s right-wing critics assailed as “a spineless blunder” and excessively deferential.

    While some commentators acknowledged that behind-the-scenes progress may have been made on issues such as North Korea, financial stability and human rights, even the pro-Obama New York Times noted in an editorial yesterday that “the trip wasn’t all that we had hoped it would be”.

    Nor have the president’s domestic policies proved everything Congressman John Conyers wanted. The prominent liberal black Democrat startled colleagues last week by launching a direct assault on Obama’s handling of healthcare reforms, which were facing an important Senate vote last night. Asked on Thursday if Obama had provided sufficient leadership on so divisive an issue, Conyers responded tartly: “Of course not … bowing down to every nutty right-wing proposal about healthcare … is doing a disservice to the Barack Obama that I first met.”

    Tension over healthcare and what many Democratic legislators now view as neglect of economic issues reached an unexpected breaking point when members of the Congressional Black Caucus — previously regarded as unshakeable Obama loyalists — staged a startling rebellion over what they regarded as a lack of economic support for the AfricanAmerican community.

    A vote on proposed financial reforms had to be shelved at the last minute as black caucus members threatened to oppose it as a protest against broader economic policy. The revolt came as new reports showed that one in seven Americans were struggling to pay for food; that mortgage delinquencies are continuing to rise with almost 2m homeowners more than three months overdue on their payments; and that unemployment rose to 10.2% in October.

    While many Democrats remain unswervingly loyal to Obama — and would rather blame President George W Bush for most of America’s ills — there has been no escaping a damaging sense of disappointment in liberal circles that a historic presidency is failing to deliver on its promises. Others are disturbed that the president’s promises to clean up Washington’s “politics as usual” have dissolved in a familiar murk of cronyism and political patronage.

    Susan Johnson, president of the American Foreign Service Association, noted last week that the age-old tradition of presidents handing out ambassadorships as rewards for campaign donors had continued undiminished under Obama, who has so far rewarded more than 40 of his key fundraisers with plum diplomatic jobs. “There is a bit of disappointment, largely because expectations were raised by the ‘change’ theme of Obama’s campaign,” said Johnson.

    Perhaps most depressing of all for a small number of influential Washingtonians was the little-noticed resignation of Gregory Craig, Obama’s former White House counsel, who is widely believed in legal circles to have been made a scapegoat for the administration’s difficulties in resolving the future of Guantanamo Bay. Craig was a key campaign aide to Obama and played the role of Senator John McCain in rehearsals for television debates. Charged with implementing the president’s instruction to close the terrorist prison at Guantanamo, he fell foul of Obama aides who had failed to predict the wave of public hostility to the prospect of Al-Qaeda inmates being shipped to American soil.

    Elizabeth Drew, a presidential biographer and member of the Council on Foreign Relations, described the effective dumping of Craig as “the shabbiest episode of Obama’s presidency”. Drew blamed the “small Chicago crowd” that surrounds the president for undermining Craig’s position with a series of anonymous leaks — notably suggesting that the lawyer was “too close to human rights groups”.

    This kind of White House infighting is par for the course in most presidencies — but Obama was not supposed to be the kind of man who jettisons old friends at the first hint of trouble.

    All this provides the Republicans with an unexpected propaganda bonanza. “We don’t need to slam Obama — his own folks are doing it for us,” one gleeful conservative declared. The Republicans’ own divisions — magnified now that Sarah Palin, the defeated vice-presidential candidate, is crossing middle America with a new conservative manifesto under her arm — are nonetheless going largely unexamined as the Democrats implode. Last week Republican governors meeting in Texas talked openly of winning all the states due for midterm elections next year.

    The news is not all bad for Obama — America remains enchanted with his family, and many Democrat insiders are convinced that the party’s internal squabbling will melt away at the first hint of real economic recovery. “Do Democrats have to worry about turnout and voter intensity? You bet,” said Peter Hart, a leading pollster. “But it’s nothing that lowering unemployment by two points can’t solve.”

    TOP FLOPS

    Israel — Obama wanted: A freeze on settlement building as a precondition for the resumption of Palestinian peace talks.

    He got: An Israeli brush-off. Construction of a new Jewish housing complex began last week.

    Iran — Obama wanted: A deal to ship low-enriched uranium to Russia to curb Iran’s ability to make nuclear weapons.

    He got: Another brush-off. Tehran reneged last week.

    China — Obama wanted: Concessions on climate, currency rates, trade and human rights.

    He got: A bland statement with no firm commitments and no mention of internet censorship or Tibet.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6926987.ece

  9. Further to Admin’s article yesterday…

    November 21, 2009
    Another snub to American Jews
    Lauri Regan

    Apparently Barack Obama has decided that he no longer needs the support of American Jews. And why should he. Despite the fact that his campaign was boosted financially through the support of vast numbers of liberal Jewish donors, they aren’t nearly as powerful a voting block as other organizations he has to pay back over the next four years. And he knows he still has the vast majority of Jews in his corner since there are no other liberals running against him in the foreseeable future.

    Furthermore, reformed and conservative rabbis across the nation proved their loyalty as they did his bidding when he easily convincing them that it was God’s commandment to plug Obamacare in their High Holiday sermons.

    I was not surprised when Obama blew off the General Assembly of North American Jewish Federations last week. Why speak at a conference of Jews in Washington when a vacation that weekend at Camp David would afford at least one golf game before jettisoning off to Fort Hood for the obligatory memorial service (getting out of that photo op would have been a bit too complicated and plus, Michelle wanted to wear her new bright blue coat with matching army boots and belt). And he had to pack for his big trip to Asia – perhaps the one part of the globe he hasn’t covered in his first year in office.

    But the President who has thrown away vast amounts of taxpayer dollars on party after party at the White House, date night junkets which shut down entire portions of cities at outrageous cost, phony Air Force One flyover picture ops, importing expensive chefs and gourmet foods from all over the world, and support staff for the First Lady rivaling in number those of the Queen of England, has now decided that the White House’s annual Chanukah party should be scaled back. With a different President living in the White House, we might believe that the prudent decision was made to cut costs in these tough economic times.

    However, according to an article in the Jerusalem Post, one Jewish organizational head suggested that “The Obamas want to have room for ‘natural growth’ of the list over the next few years,” adding, “They want it to be more intimate…the president and Mrs. Obama do not want to sit around for 800 photos.”

    Natural growth? Is that like the natural growth that Obama is prohibiting in the Israeli settlements? Furthermore, Obama had the audacity to declare to the 1500 troops he visited in South Korea, “You guys make a pretty good photo op.” So traveling half way across the globe for a “pretty good photo op” is worth it since it will serve as future propaganda for the Commander in Chief, yet having to appear with all those yids simply isn’t worth the hassle.

    The article does focus on the cost of the event however recognizing that “The issue, they noted, was exacerbated by the need to serve kosher food, with one official calculating that this increased the price tag by 33 percent.”

    I won’t ask how much all that kobe beef cost at the party the Obamas hosted earlier in the year although I have a feeling that the cost of kosher chicken and potato latkes would pale in comparison.

    The article continues with Nathan Diament of the Orthodox Union commenting: “As we know from Biblical times, we Jews are very good at complaining,” he said. “People shouldn’t complain. It’s very nice that President Obama is having a Hanukka [sic] party.”

    Mr. Diament failed to mention that we Jews are also a forgiving bunch. Perhaps Obama realizes this and knows that, by default, he’ll continue to receive Jewish support. After all, Obama dissed Netanyahu as well so we’re in good company as White House rejects.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/11/another_snub_to_american_jews.html

  10. Thank you for the CNN clip about Hillary. It is nice to see her receive some positive press.

    In regards to this health insurance debacle, it seems like most people’s taxes will be increasing. I know my taxes will increase. Another BO lie. This bill is a huge tax on the middle class.

  11. admin
    November 21st, 2009 at 4:27 pm
    As a pubic public service, we attach a link to some nude Levi Johnson pictures. Our readers are too high minded to go to the link ( ) but for those that take a peek, be forewarned that the link is to a gay site with mucho male nudity:
    ****************

    We will probably find a few pics of the Fraud there too

  12. Families earning between 300 percent and 400 percent of poverty — about $60,000 to $80,000 — would no longer be expected to pay up to 12 percent of their income, as first proposed in the Senate Finance Committee bill. Instead, the limit is set at 9.8 percent —
    *******************

    I know pay 450 per month on an emplyee HC program for my husband and I. It will go up at least 2500 dollars a year for much less coverage.

  13. I am aso disgusted by the HCR 3-ring circus I can’t beat to watch or read about it anymore.

    Gonzo, I feel for your predicament. I’m afraid my medical coverage is going to take a hit, too. My complete mistrust of Squat is what convinced me to do TX now, rather than wait.

    BTW, I’m finished. Not completely cured but it’s now manageable.

  14. Protestors gather at billboard comparing Obama to terrorists

    WHEAT RIDGE – The owner of a local auto dealership has gotten international attention after putting up a controversial billboard about President Barack Obama.

    Phil Wolf, the man behind the billboard and Wolf Interstate Leasing and Sales says he wishes he was better prepared for the flood of reaction to the sign.

    The sign asks if President Obama is a terrorist and if he’s really an American citizen by birth. Part of the sign also references the recent tragedy at Fort Hood.
    The question of Obama’s citizenship has been an issue since early in his presidential campaign.

    Hawaiian officials have inspected his original birth certificate, proving he was born in the United States. The conspiracy theory has persisted, in part, because Hawaiian officials won’t release the president’s original birth certificate. There’s other evidence out there that he was indeed born in Hawaii – birth announcements in both of Honolulu’s major newspapers in August 1961, and a teacher who says she discussed his birth with Dr. Rodney West, the obstetrician who delivered Obama.

    Wolf says he initially drew the billboard on a napkin and then had an artist paint it. The sign, which was completed Friday, is visible to drivers on Interstate 70. “I can’t say I expected everything that’s been going on with the responses we got,” Wolf said. He says his business has been overwhelmed with phone calls. Some callers have threatened both Wolf and his employees.

    Wolf says he’s accepting the risk and the backlash he may receive.
    “We’ve had calls as far as Canada to Florida. We’ve had calls all over the country,” Wolf said. “I didn’t expect employees to leave scared going home from work that were threatened, death threats and attempts to bomb the place. It’s been pretty crazy out there.”

    Wolf says his main reason for creating this billboard was to bring attention to the men and women who died at Fort Hood and to ask questions about Obama he says haven’t been answered. “It may be a little scattered. It says several things. It brings us several questions and I think they got to be answered,” Wolf said.

    The Anti-Defamation League says its problem with Wolf’s billboard is that it uses religious imagery to stereotype all Muslims, and the organization wants it removed. “It was the religious message that drew our attention,” Joyce Rubin with the ADL said. “By linking an image of a turban and a robe and a reference to the Fort Hood tragedy, the suggestion was made that this was somehow a Muslim responsibility and not the responsibility of an individual.”

    Wolf’s billboard has drawn both criticism and support since it went up. “I think the sign’s great. It’s showing what is true,” Leigh Ann Cross said.

    “There’s enough intolerance and hatred going around, We shouldn’t have it right here in Wheat Ridge as well,” Maggie Couch, a woman who came out to protest the sign, said.

    According to Wheat Ridge Police, Saturday afternoon a man was cited for disorderly conduct and criminal mischief after he allegedly threw a wooden pallet at a protest banner. The man told police it was an accident when he tripped and fell.

    Wolf says while he says he doesn’t want to risk the health of his business or employees, he is in no hurry to take it down. “I believe in it enough. I believe in America enough… that I think it’s worth the risk,” he said.

    http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=127481&catid=339

  15. Pingback: Twitted by PumaSF
  16. So, the working class voters who supported Clinton in the primaries, will bear the brunt of the changes. This is going to be a disaster for Democrats. It’s the people who make 150% to 300% of the poverty line (iow, a single mom with two kids bringing home between $27k and $48k) who are going to get clobbered by this.
    ——————————————————————-
    Sure. The people who live in small towns and cling to guns and religion. The people he refused to meet with at the conclusion of the primary. The people that CNN and Emauel call mobsters, racists, etc. The people who the rest of us call decent law abiding Americans. This is what ALWAYS happens when you get limosene liberals in charge. It never ever fails to occur.

  17. He lied!!!!!!!!!!!!! He promised us that he would sit down with the head of Iran without pre conditions in the first year of his presidency. I am sure there were alot of delusionals who voted for him—the entire washington press corp for stupid reasons like that. But damnit he made a promise and he needs to live up to it. He must meet with the Supreme Leader between now and January 20.

  18. Most people I work with haven’t followed all the details on the health care plan that is soon to be voted into law. It’s going to be a rude awakening when they face the reality of it all in their everyday lives.

    I wonder if the plan will be put up for vote at midnight on the day before Thanksgiving–it will happen when the least amount of people will be watching.

    As to Hillary, it’s fascinating to suddenly see her so visible. While I love it, I wonder what it all means…

  19. By 51 percent to 35 percent, the public opposes the reform legislation being considered right now by Congress. Last month, a majority opposed the health care legislation by a similar 54-35 percent (October 13-14, 2009
    ——————–
    Death wish of Dims

  20. I think it is pretty obvious to the ruling class that Obama is a disaster. He will not run in 2012. He wont want to and they wont want him to.

    I guess this Kyoto thing has collapsed.

  21. wbboei
    November 21st, 2009 at 11:19 pm
    I think it is pretty obvious to the ruling class that Obama is a disaster. He will not run in 2012. He wont want to and they wont want him to.
    ********************

    I think the plan was to damage America as quickly as possible. Probably never was an eight year plan. The destruction he is amassing, at the rate he is amassing…he will have done the devils work.

  22. Palin is making boondocks book promotions in W.Pa and the crowds are I must laugh when I see the bewildered pubs tying to run a middle aged Barbie Doll against Hillary.Hillary out shines any political figure on the globe withe her knowledge compassion caring and concerns for all people everywhere.Palin claim to fame is purely based on fast talk and a tug of the strings by the scandal torn Ted Stevens and the one that got away in time Merkowski.Stupid is as stupid does as forrest,s mother used to say.HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON must be elected POTUS and much sooner than expected or this country is in real and desparate danger of becoming the newest and largest modern “Banana Republic”ever.
    This all needs immediate action or life as we know it will just be a past memory for we elders to
    cherish and long for and spare the new generation the ordeal of living in poverty for all of their lives.

    By ABM90 I am willing to fight on. Are you?

    ==========================================================
    overstated.Mostly women wanting a $4.95 book with her autograph and hope.She is not campaigning but building up her stash against the time soon that she will be charged for past problems while gov.She is only political ploy to counter Hillary.Hill will clean her sled for the slide to oblivion.

    =====================================================================

  23. I guess Richardson finally got his reward. He was invited to the first state dinner, I think for India. I wonder if this was worth the betrayal. But then with the investigations going on, he was lucky to be invited to a state dinner.

  24. Making Israel disappear

    By Vincent Carroll
    11/22/2009

    If you sit down with Itamar Marcus, you had better brace yourself for a jarring refresher course on Mideast reality. That’s especially true if you tend to think like the current administrationif you believe, for example, that the Israeli-Palestinian impasse is all about borders and settlements and that the construction of 900 housing units in southern Jerusalem “could end up being very dangerous,” as President Barack Obama said last week.

    If it’s “very dangerous” to construct Jewish housing in a city that Israel will never, ever relinquish, what should we call the effort to brainwash children into believing that Israel itself doesn’t exist?

    How should we describe the claim that not only East Jerusalem — captured by Israel in the 1967 war — belongs to the Palestinians, but that every other Israeli city, from Haifa to Ashkelon, belongs to them, too?

    “In the world inhabited by Palestinian children,” Marcus tells me, “there is no Israel.” And if you give him time, the director of Palestinian Media Watch (palwatch.org) in Jerusalem will subject you to a barrage of depressing evidence for his contention. He’ll show you snippets from TV quiz shows for Palestinian kids predicated on the non-existence of Israel.

    Host: “Which mountain is the tallest in Palestine? …” Child contestant: “Mount Meron (in Israel).”

    On another show, a host asks, “Which Palestinian city is called ‘the flower of Galilee’?” and then names three Israeli cities!

    Then Marcus will show you school geography lessons that use maps on which Israel is missing. Do any Palestinian textbooks acknowledge the existence of Israel, I wonder. “No,” Marcus replies.

    The anti-Israeli content of Palestinian textbooks has been a longstanding concern for anyone who yearns for a permanent political settlement, but surely those books have improved since Yasser Arafat’s death in 2004. Not really, says Marcus. If anything, he says, they devote more space than ever to depicting conflict with Israel as a solemn religious duty aimed at liberating a Muslim land.

    Remember, we’re talking about textbooks chosen by the Palestinian government led by the allegedly moderate President Mahmoud Abbas, not the overtly jihadist Hamas. The Palestinian Authority media, meanwhile, are full of similar Islamist references that offer no room for compromise, and that honor terrorists and suicide bombers as national heroes.

    No less ominous is what Marcus describes as the Palestinian Authority’s “infrastructure of hate,” the relentless depiction of Jews as sinister and evil — as conspirators spreading AIDS, for example, or undermining the very foundations of the Al-Aqsa mosque.

    Naturally, Jews poisoned Yasser Arafat, too — or at least that is what children are told. In a TV tribute to Arafat earlier this month, one youngster unconsciously presented the essence of this paranoid vision: “He died from poisoning by the Jews. Well, I don’t know what he died from, but I know it was by the Jews.”

    “In 2008,” the State Department boasted this summer in a press release, “the U.S. was the single largest national donor to the Palestinian Authority . . . committing more than $600 million in assistance . . . .”

    And the fruits of this investment? A Palestinian public that remains in resolute denial about the reality of Israel more than 60 years after its founding. Surely that should worry us more than the expansion of a Jewish neighborhood in a capital whose Jewish roots extend back several thousand years.

    http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_13827921

  25. Iran launches war games to protect nuclear sites

    Sun Nov 22, 2009

    TEHRAN (Reuters) – Iran’s armed forces launched large-scale air defense war games on Sunday to show off the country’s deterrence capabilities in the face of pressure from the West over its nuclear program.

    The display of military muscle comes at a time of rising tension between Iran and six major powers, which fear Tehran’s nuclear program is aimed at producing nuclear weapons. Tehran denies this is the program’s purpose.

    Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards and military forces jointly started five days of maneuvers in various parts of the Islamic state, Brigadier General Ahmad Mighani said, according to state television. “It is the biggest war game, which takes place over an area 600,000 sq km (230,000 sq miles). The aim of this war game
    is to promote military power of the armed forces against any attack,” the television quoted Mighani as saying.

    The United States and Israel, which Iran does not recognize, say they want a diplomatic solution to the nuclear standoff, but refuse to rule out military action if diplomacy fails.

    Iran has warned of a “crushing” response to any military action against its nuclear facilities.
    “The aim of the drill is to display Iran’s combat readiness and military potentials,” Mighani said. “Defense policies, psychological operations and innovations during the war game are among the objectives of the drill.”

    Iran has staged several war games in the past, including firing long-range Shahab-3 missiles, which it says have a range of 2,000 km (1,250 miles), putting Israel or U.S. bases in the Gulf in range.

    World powers have urged Iran to reconsider its rejection of a U.N.-drafted deal which aimed to delay Tehran’s potential ability to make bombs by at least a year by divesting the country of most of its enriched uranium. The deal, brokered by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), calls on Iran to send some 75 percent of its low-enriched uranium to Russia and France, where it would be turned into fuel for a Tehran medical research reactor.

    Iran ruled out on Wednesday sending enriched uranium abroad for further processing, saying it would consider swapping it for nuclear fuel provided it remained under supervision inside the country.

    U.S. President Barack Obama has warned Tehran of a package of sanctions against the country within weeks. Iran has been hit by three rounds of U.N. sanctions over its refusal to halt sensitive uranium activities.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5AK0FZ20091122

  26. From of all people the execrable MoDo

    ” If we could see a Reduced Shakespeare summary of Obama’s presidency so far, it would read:

    Dither, dither, speech. Foreign trip, bow, reassure. Seminar, summit. Shoot a jump shot with the guys, throw out the first pitch in mom jeans. Compromise, concede, close the deal. Dither, dither, water down, news conference.”

    About sums it up…

  27. hmmm…bambi must be thrilled…

    —————

    Stephanopoulos Named Sawyer’s Substitute

    By Kevin Allocca on Oct 17, 2009

    ABC News has announced that once Diane Sawyer moves in to the “World News” anchor chair following Charlie Gibson’s retirement next year, “This Week” host George Stephanopoulos will be first in line subbing in for Sawyer when she’s off. Politico’s Mike Allen reports:

    “As Diane Sawyer prepares to assume her new role at ‘World News,’ George Stephanopoulos is also expanding his duties,” a network official said. “It’s just been established that George will be Diane’s primary substitute on ‘World News.’ In addition, he will also be at her side on set for all major ABC News special events coverage.”

    Stephanopoulos has anchored “World News” news in the past. Recently, he filled in for Gibson while Gibson was on vacation following his retirement announcement.

    http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/abc/stephanopoulos_named_sawyers_substitute_140475.asp

  28. Another great post Admin. My day is not complete until I’ve been here. You seem to hit the nail on the head every time. I don’t always feel the need to comment, you say it all. And about your last post, I used to feel sorry for Tinkerbell. Tinkerbell can go to hell along with Greg Craig.

  29. That clip from Saturday Night live had me gasping for air. Yes, that is going to get commentary. How dare they. However, SNL has become one of the journalistic outlets that has the near to do this.

  30. I hope that SNL might be getting back to what it once was.I stopped watching when they became Obama centric but perhaps they’ve seen the light…very funny skit..you won’t believe it until you see it…

  31. Admin says:

    For the first time, Democrats are talking seriously about going back and rechanneling portions of their $787 billion stimulus bill to help jump-start job-creation initiatives — such as a long-delayed highway bill.

    …The debate over highway funding illustrates this problem. Washington has its own set of fiscal problems given the drop in gas tax revenues for federal trust funds. But states are in such bad shape that many governors can’t make their 20 percent match to get the construction funds — and generate the jobs that Democrats need.

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

    looks like the gig is up…the plot to withhold all the money and spring it at 2010 election time seems to be backfiring…

    **********************************
    Admin continues:

    It’s “voodoo economics” from Obama – the Third George W. Bush Term.

    Voodoo kills. Obama’s health insurance scam is authored by witch doctors. Voodoo kills.

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

    …and let us not forget that the Bush admin had a DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS signing off on all that spending they are now blaming the repubs for…the DEMS were in control of the congress…they bare just as much responsibility for the economica mess we are in for submitting the legislation and bills to the Bush WH…

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

    note the natives are getting restless…the gig is up…the convoluded sham slush fund is being exposed:

    DeFazio: It is pretty embarrassing that dems are now identified with Wall Street

    huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/20/peter-defazio-dem-rep-its_n_365463.html

    One of the loudest populist voices in the Democratic Caucus predicted on Thursday that the party may have to forcefully challenge the White House on economic matters if it wants to hold on to power after the 2010 elections.

    One day after calling on Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to resign, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) told the Huffington Post that there were a lot of Democrats who were “upset and nervous with” the handling of the economy by the administration.

    “It is pretty embarrassing for a Democratic administration and a Democratic Congress to be identified with total attention to Wall Street and nothing for Main Street and jobs,” he said. “There are a lot of Democrats who… want to see something more effective done to create employment.”

    DeFazio insisted that President Obama and, by extension, the Democratic Party were hampered by Geithner’s policies for economic recovery. He pointed to the inability of the administration to spur small business lending and the lack of effective TARP oversight as particularly egregious examples of mismanagement. More than anything else, the Oregon Democrat deemed it untenable for the president to continue employing his current economic team given the taint of Wall Street that clings to many of those advisers.

    “I have had a number of people say to me, ‘I feel the same way you do but I’m not going to say it.’ People are worried it will rub off on the president who still enjoys popularity,” he said. “I tell them I still support the president. I just think he is being poorly served by his economic team.”

    “The truth of the matter,” DeFazio added, “is that we have not changed the way the money is being used. It is not being used for the purpose it was supposed to be used for. We are not creating jobs and we have not aggressively taken on the culture of Wall Street.”

    At this juncture, the notion of Obama dumping Geithner remains far-fetched. Officials at the White House say that the Treasury Secretary still has the trust of the president and argue that he has played an instrumental role in righting the nation’s economy. At Treasury, meanwhile, aides are acutely aware of the frustration over small business lending. They note that they have increased caps on small business loans, cut taxes for small business and changed the structure of the TARP to make it more open for community banks. If not for the poor reputation of the program, they argue, these banks would be more willing to take the government’s money.

    For DeFazio, however, the issue is as much one of perception as it is about policy. One of his chief concerns was that the president appeared enamored with the lords of finance. “The administration has, thus far, not threaded the needle here,” he said. “They have taken care of Wall Street but not the rest of the country.”

    There is, the congressman concluded, “an anger” among the working class that could be a major factor in 2010. And without a new focus on jobs and small business from the White House, DeFazio warned, “a faux populist” Republicanism will fill the void.

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

    …and DeFazio says that with complete Democratic control of the Congress and the WH…nice!

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

    admin…as for Levi Johnson…it is all downhill for him from now on…the exploiters have had their fun with him…they used the poor, stupid kid for every rating and buck they could suck out of him…he will be a hasbin (sp) (and forever a joke) before he is 20…of course, he was awarded a ‘porn’ award for straddling the gulf between entertainment and porn…and his mother just got a three years prison term…if Levi were not so mean spirited I might feel sorry for him…but he deserves what he will get in the big picture scheme of things…he certainly showed no genuine concern or care for his son…his son is a tool for Levi’s self exploitation…

  32. Disappointed about vote..why did Lieberman vote to proceed as he said he will filibuster any public option???

  33. Hostility between British and American military leaders revealed
    The deep hostility of Britain’s senior military commanders in Iraq towards their American allies has been revealed in classified Government documents leaked to the Daily Telegraph.

    Andrew Gilligan
    22 Nov 2009

    In the papers, the British chief of staff in Iraq, Colonel J.K.Tanner, described his US military counterparts as “a group of Martians” for whom “dialogue is alien,” saying: “Despite our so-called ‘special relationship,’ I reckon we were treated no differently to the Portuguese.”

    Col Tanner’s boss, the top British commander in the country, Major General Andrew Stewart, told how he spent “a significant amount of my time” “evading” and “refusing” orders from his US superiors. At least once, say the documents, General Stewart’s refusal to obey an order resulted in Britain’s ambassador to Washington, Sir David Manning, being summoned to the State Department for a diplomatic reprimand – of the kind more often delivered to “rogue states” such as Zimbabwe or the Sudan.

    The frank statements were made in official interviews conducted by the Ministry of Defence with Army commanders who had just returned from Operations Telic 2 and 3 – the first, crucial year of “peacekeeping” operations in Iraq, from May 2003 to May 2004.
    A set of classified transcripts of the interviews, along with “post-operational reports” by British commanders, has been leaked to the Daily Telegraph.

    The disclosures come the day before the Chilcot inquiry is due to begin public hearings into Britain’s involvement in Iraq. Among the issues it will investigate is the UK-US relationship. The leaked documents paint a vivid picture of the clash between what General Stewart described as “war-war” American commanders and their British counterparts, who he said preferred a “jaw-jaw” approach.

    General Stewart bluntly admitted that “our ability to influence US policy in Iraq seemed to be minimal.” He said that “incredibly,” there was not even a secure communication link between his headquarters in Basra and the US commander, General Rick Sanchez, in Baghdad.

    Col Tanner said that General Sanchez “only visited us once in seven months.” Col Tanner also added that he only spoke to his own US counterpart, the chief of staff at the US corps headquarters in the Green Zone, once over the same period.

    Top British commanders angrily described in the documents how they were not even told, let alone consulted, about major changes to US policy which had significant implications for them and their men.

    When the Americans decided, in March 2004, to arrest a key lieutenant of the Shia leader Muqtada al-Sadr – an event that triggered an uprising throughout the British sector – “it was not co-ordinated with us and no-one [was] told that it was going to happen,” said the senior British field commander at the time, Brigadier Nick Carter. “Had we known, we would at least have been able to prepare the ground.” Instead, “the consequence [was] that my whole area of operations went up in smoke… as a result of coalition operations that were outwith my control or knowledge and proved to be the single most awkward event of my tour.”

    Among the most outspoken officers was Col Tanner, who served as chief of staff to General Stewart and of the entire British division during Operation Telic 3, from November 2003 to May 2004. He said: “The whole system was appalling. We experienced real difficulty in dealing with American military and civilian organisations who, partly through arrogance and partly through bureaucracy, dictate that there is only one way: the American way. “I now realise that I am a European, not an American. We managed to get on better…with our European partners and at times with the Arabs than with the Americans. Europeans chat to each other, whereas dialogue is alien to the US military… dealing with them corporately is akin to dealing with a group of Martians.
    “If it isn’t on the PowerPoint slide, then it doesn’t happen.”

    Gen Stewart was more diplomatic, but said: “As the world’s only superpower, they [the US] will not allow their position to be challenged. Negotiation is often a dirty word.” Gen Stewart added: “I spent a significant amount of my time ‘consenting and evading’ US orders… Things got sticky…when I refused to conduct offensive operations against [al-Sadr’s] Mahdi Army as directed [by the US]. This resulted in the UK being demarched by the US, by [Paul] Bremer [the US proconsul in Iraq] through State [the US State Department] to the UK Ambassador in Washington.”

    A “demarche” in this context was a formal diplomatic reprimand of a kind not normally handed out to friendly allies such as Britain. Gen Stewart said that the US military “were mortified” that it had got so far and said he “was always fully supported in the UK by the Chief of Defence Staff and Chief of Joint Operations.”

    Yesterday the Sunday Telegraph told how leaked “post-operational reports” detailed major shortcomings in the planning and execution of the war and peacekeeping phases. Most of the documents – apart from some which might compromise sources – referred to yesterday and today are published online at Telegraph.co.uk

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6631239/Hostility-between-British-and-American-military-leaders-revealed.html

  34. Another take on the healthcare vote…
    ————-
    Obama faces bruising battle with his own party as radical healthcare bill passes major hurdle

    By David Gardner
    22nd November 2009

    President Obama is facing a bruising battle with moderates in his own party after the Democrats narrowly avoided a humiliating setback in their bid to overhaul America’s healthcare system.

    Two women senators took party leaders right down to the wire before finally agreeing to back the bill.

    The strictly partisan 60-39 vote allowed the Democrats to squeak through a key procedural hurdle to clear the way for a full debate on the £513 billion health reforms in the US Senate. The Democrats needed at least 60 votes to overcome a Republican-led ‘filibuster’ – a delaying tactic designed to block consideration of the landmark bill indefinitely.

    The White House said last night that President Obama was ‘gratified’ by the vote. The healthcare plan has been the centrepiece of his domestic agenda since coming to power in January and its success or failure in Congress is likely to define his first term as President.

    White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said: ‘It brings us one step closer to ending the insurance company abuses, reining in spiralling health care costs, providing stability and security to those with health insurance, and extending quality health coverage to those who lack it.’
    The bill will extend health insurance to 31 million Americans who are uninsured. But it still faces a rocky road through Congress.

    Fears over claims that the new law would effectively nationalise the US health system and subsidise abortions have raised the hackles of centrist Democrats as well as Republicans eager to inflict a body blow on the president.

    Democrat congressional leaders, who got a healthcare bill through the House of Representatives a fortnight ago, are struggling to move legislation through the Senate by Christmas. Both houses must agree on a bill before it can be delivered to Mr Obama to sign into law.

    The Senate Democrats only prevailed on Saturday night after tense day of brinkmanship by senators Blanche Lincoln and Mary Landrieu. Both finally agreed to vote with their Democrat colleagues and two independents only after winning key concessions in the bill.

    Senator Landrieu won millions more government money for her home state of Louisiana and Senator Lincoln demanded the removal of the ‘nationalisation’ clause.

    Both represent traditionally right-wing Republican states where Mr Obama’s health reforms are unpopular. They maintained yesterday that their vote at the weekend did not necessarily mean they would be backing the bill after the full Senate debate, which is likely to take up much of next month. Senator Lincoln said Saturday’s vote would ‘mark the beginning of consideration of this bill by the US Senate, not the end.’

    One of the most controversial issues will be a provision for a government-run insurance plan that would compete with traditional private insurance companies. The House plan included the so-called public option, but it was cut from the Senate bill at Senator Lincoln’s insistence.

    Democrats are also nervous over Republican claims that government funding for health insurance will mean state subsidisation for abortions, a hot button issue in the US.

    The White House is increasingly wary of any further delays to the passage of the reforms, worrying that they would push it into an election year with Democrats afraid of a voter backlash for a plan that draws decidedly mixed reviews in the polls.

    The Senate drama came as it was revealed that Mr Obama is considering setting a provisional target for cutting America’s greenhouse gas emissions. US officials are said to be seeking agreement from Congress on a figure before next month’s UN global warming summit in Copenhagen.

    With China, the US is responsible for 40 per cent of the world’s greenhouse gasses and is the only major developed nation yet to table an emission target. By agreeing to a provisional target of reducing greenhouse gases by 14-20 per cent over the next decade, Mr Obama would resurrect hopes for a global climate change agreement in Copenhagen.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1230027/Obama-faces-bruising-battle-party-Democrats-narrowly-avoid-setback-bid-overhaul-U-S-healthcare-system.html#

  35. OMG- The SNL tops all for insulting the lying sack taking up valualbe space in our WH-

    The groundbreaking ridicule coming from SNL should set the couched comments coming from castrated journalists scared of losing their job into a frenzy, following suit with insult after insult until Obama cries: “Uncle George, Get Me Outta Here. I can’t take it anymore!!” 🙂

Comments are closed.