If you are sick or have been hurt,and have come in contact with the present health care system.

You know that something has to be done.

As I write this,there is someone who has been in an accident,or being rushed to a hospital with an illness,and they have no idea the dollars and cents that they are about to incur for these incidents,and the kicker is that it may not be thier fault for being in this position.

What Obama said, last night, was, that by eliminating waste and fraud in Medicare and Medicaid, the cost savings would help fund his proposed health insurance plan. What Obama was really saying is, that by eliminating many legitimate testing and medical procedures, by categorizing them as waste and fraud, previously available to Medicare and Medicaid recipients, he would have the finances to promote his agenda. Nothing but smoke and mirrors. Obama was right about "change", at least for those of us covered by Medicare or Medicaid.

Again this president is lying and the stupid Rpublican Rep. apologizes for his outburst. It was right! Where is Obama's plan?? I ask again and again. It's not HR3200 which is the House plan. Where is HIS plan? He said when he took office his administration would be transparent. Well Obama where is YOUR plan? You say people are lying about YOUR plan but where is it? Prove people wrong Obama! Show us YOUR plan.

It was a relief for me to hear Obama state those points of reform we had only heard about from third-hand sources before. Barring private insurers from dropping the ill, ending yearly and lifetime cost limits, eliminating the pre-existing condition exclusion,-are by themselves lifesavers. My only concern is what private insurers will do to compensate for these greater costs and maintain their current profit margin. Double the premiums? Triple them? Hopefully the competitive threat to them provided by the public option will cause them to lower their expectations of what's an acceptable profit margin.

The very lowest cost insurance, that would cover every citizen, would be single-payer. But we can only get legislation from legislators, and they've been too much bought by private insurers to give us what they know inside is the smartest system. We're better off with the proposed regulations than we were before, and can still get more of a Medicare-style system in the hopefully not too distant future.

..Obama gave a good speech, BUT he is really getting by on lingo and speak/personality instead of fact at this point! Obama has a math problem!!

Fact - Last nite Obama changed the unisured number to 30 million (what happened to the 47 million?)

Fact - The bill wont start till 2013, whats the hurry to then wait 4 yrs makes no sense?

Fact - Illegals will still get FREE healthcare, there wont be a "crackdown" and wont be any checking for I.D., cards, etc

Fact - There will be "some" rationing, there will be more people with the same or even LESS doctors!

Fact - Obama said it will be deficit nuetral and wont add to the budget? - CMON WHO REALLY BELIVES THIS? Cmon whos he fooling? The CBO (Congressional Budget Office) said its its not true, sorry people its just MATHMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE!


..... I just felt it was a partison speech with no specifics, hes NOT INVOLVED in writing the bill - we need some REAL specifics and dialogue!

But not much truth to health talk:

September 10, 2009


President Obama wants to rewrite the calendar.
As far as he's concerned, the year has progressed from June to July to September. August is to be forever erased from our minds and our hearts.

His speech to a joint session of Congress was delivered as if the late unpleasantness of last month never happened, or as if it were all simply "bickering" and "games" on the otherwise smooth, consensual path to reordering one-sixth of the nation's economy in one fell swoop.

Sponsored Links
"Now is the season for action," Obama intoned.

In other words, please don't bother me with your inconvenient Congressional Budget Office reports, with your tiresome concerns about ballooning government in an era of exploding debt, with your facts -- yes, the House bill would end up covering abortion -- that I prefer to deny.

Now is the time for all good men to vote with me or get out of the way.

Obama mouthed his usual platitudes about drawing ideas from Republicans and seeking common ground.

By implication, he characterized Republican opposition to his plan as devoid of "facts and reason," even as he called for civil debate.

And he ended his speech with a long, heartfelt passage defending government activism as essential to the national character. This was the speech of an ideologue posing as a pragmatist.

Of course, it was an able and spirited performance. Obama with a TelePrompTer is like Yo-Yo Ma with a cello.

In the near term, the speech might even help him. But circumstances are different than his storied oratorical performances of the past. Now his rhetoric is tethered to 1,000-page legislation that bears little relation to his key representations.

For such a reputedly fine, nuanced policy mind, Obama can't get basic things right about his party's proposals.

Last night, he again insisted that the Democratic plans will reduce health-care costs when there is no serious mechanism to do so (outside eventual rationing, although Obama insists that will never happen).

Obama said more preventive care saves money, when it isn't so.

He relied on an intentionally misleading formulation to reassure people that they wouldn't have their current arrangements disrupted.

"Nothing in our plan [requires] you to change what you have," Obama said, twice. True enough, but note the cagey choice of words. It wouldn't be mandated by law, but the effect of the plans would be to detach millions from their current coverage.

Obama portrays the Democratic proposals as utterly cost-free. They won't add to the deficit and they will be paid for painlessly.

In language that will be closely parsed, Obama strongly defended the public option, but also said it's only one part of his plan. He wants to forestall a progressive revolt in the House over the public option, evidently doomed in the Senate.

But besides this, there was little the left wouldn't love. For weeks, it has urged the president to get more confrontational and adamant.

Last night, Obama signaled that he will happily bulldoze an opposition that he believes deserves its fate. So, in the face of a skeptical public, he and his Democrats will set about pushing through a massive, Great Society-style program all by themselves.

As they relegate August to the memory hole.

"You know that something has to be done."

I do not think that serious people dispute that. However, President spent most of his time re-stating the obvious. The issue is what "something" is to be done. He acts as though any change is an improvement.

"Where is HIS plan?"

The devil is in the details. The President's speech may have advanced the debate. However, we are still far from having a solution to the problem on which there is the same degree of agreement as there is on the problem. We are even further from a law that will implement that agreement.

We will live with the changes that we contemplate, and the unintended consequences that we cannot imagine, for generations. Let us take the time to get it right.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield are running ads saying the same exact things in Obama's speech.

Obama sold out to Wall Street.

This is what Obama should do!


Governor Rell Celebrates One-Year Anniversary of Charter Oak Health Plan as Enrollment Passes 10,00

August 14, 2009

Governor M. Jodi Rell today hailed the one-year anniversary of her landmark Charter Oak Health Plan, a ground-breaking initiative providing access to affordable health care now serving more than 10,000 Connecticut residents.

“A little over a year ago, I announced the start of a program I said would change the face of health care in Connecticut – change it for the better and change it forever,” Governor Rell said. “Today that program is covering 10,257 individuals and another 5,884 applicants are eligible for coverage as soon as they select from one of three contracted health plans and begin paying monthly premiums.

“That means more than 10,000 people who – a year ago – had no health coverage or could not afford the coverage they had now have affordable health care,” the Governor said. “That is an accomplishment worth celebrating. From routine checkups to treatment for life-threatening illness, the program is filling a critical gap. ”

On June 30, 2008, Governor Rell visited the Town Line Diner in Wethersfield to announce that the state would begin taking applications for Charter Oak the next day.

At that news conference, Governor Rell was joined by Andrea Bryant of Manchester, a long-time employee of the Wethersfield Diner on Silas Deane Highway who was one of the first people to sign up for Charter Oak. The Governor noted that the program was intended to help people like Ms. Bryant – employees of small businesses that cannot always afford to offer their staff a health care plan.

In the year since Charter Oak began, Ms. Bryant has become an informal ambassador of sorts for the program among her friends and customers.

“I tell people about how it has helped me and how they can apply like I did,” Ms. Bryant said as Charter Oak marked its first anniversary. “I guess I’m in the right business to talk to a lot of people who need this kind of coverage.”

While the great majority of Connecticut residents already have health coverage in some form, either through employer-sponsored programs or public programs such as HUSKY, Medicaid and State-Administered General Assistance, Charter Oak helps to cover a number of gaps, including people who cannot afford the high cost of COBRA coverage for workers who have recently lost their jobs.

“Charter Oak is also available to retirees too young to qualify for Medicare, and for young adults as they grow out of the HUSKY program or go off their parents’ health insurance,” Governor Rell said.

A critical element of the Charter Oak Health Plan is its acceptance of applicants regardless of their medical history or pre-existing conditions. In addition, the program offers the same benefits and cost structure to all members, in contrast to many health insurance products that “individually rate,” charging enrollees based on their medical history.

“Many people find that pre-existing medical conditions can prevent them from getting coverage in the first place or price it so far out of reach that it is effectively unavailable,” the Governor noted. “Charter Oak removes this barrier. I insisted on a program that would offer true access to health coverage for all of the uninsured, not just those in excellent health. As a result, we have been able to fill a gap in coverage and help many people who had nowhere else to go to protect their health and financial security.”

The Governor thanked Connecticut doctors, hospitals and other health care providers who have joined the growing networks in Charter Oak-contracted health plans over the past year. The plans are operated by Aetna Better Health, AmeriChoice by UnitedHealthcare and Community Health Network of Connecticut. Charter Oak plans are responsible for arranging and coordinating health care benefits for enrollees. Out-of-network services are approved when necessary.

“As more and more Connecticut residents enroll in Charter Oak, I believe we are showing that gradual, pragmatic approaches like the one Connecticut has pioneered have genuine value and potential, especially in this economy,” the Governor said.

There is no income test or asset limit to qualify for Charter Oak coverage. Enrollees earning more than 300 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) currently pay a flat, unsubsidized monthly premium of $259. Enrollees with incomes below 300 percent of the FPL pay reduced, subsidized premiums ranging from $75 to $200 monthly, depending on income and family size.

Charter Oak’s annual, income-based deductible ranges from $150 to $900. The deductible does not apply to primary and specialist doctor visits, ambulance and emergency room care, behavioral health services, pre- and post-natal care, prescription medications and certain other benefits.

The Charter Oak Health Plan is administered by the Department of Social Services. For information about benefits, costs and applying, the public can call 1-877-77-CTOAK or visit www.charteroakhealthplan.com.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090910/ap_on_go_co/us_illegal_immigrants_fact_check

FACT CHECK: Health coverage for illegal immigrants
======================================

WASHINGTON – Rep. Joe Wilson is wrong.

In his speech to Congress Wednesday, President Barack Obama said the changes to health care that he's proposing "would not apply to those who are here illegally." That prompted Wilson, a South Carolina Republican, to shout "You lie!" from his seat in the House chamber. Wilson later apologized for the outburst, but he didn't back down from his claim.

THE FACTS: The House version of the health care bill explicitly prohibits spending any federal money to help illegal immigrants get health care coverage. Illegal immigrants could buy private health insurance, as many do now, and they could also buy into a new government-run insurance plan if Congress creates one. But unlike legal residents, they wouldn't get federal subsidies to help them. The bill's exact language: "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully in the United States." Health care legislation in the Senate is also being crafted to exclude illegal immigrants from coverage.

However, Wilson is far from alone in thinking that the prohibition in the House bill doesn't go far enough. For him and other Republicans, the problem is not what's in the bill, it's what the bill leaves out. There's no provision for how the prohibition would be enforced, or any requirement for people to prove they are citizens or legal residents before getting health care benefits. In fact, Democrats on the Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means committees defeated Republican-offered amendments that would have required people to verify their legal status before getting care, with some Democrats saying such requirements would be unnecessarily burdensome for people legally entitled to coverage. Wilson cited the defeat of those two amendments Thursday when he discussed his outburst with reporters.

"I will tell you this, that it was spontaneous. It was when he stated, as he did, about not covering illegal aliens, when I knew we'd had those two amendments," Wilson said.

" – Rep. Joe Wilson is wrong.???

How can he be wrong if this paragraph from your own article proves him right?


However, Wilson is far from alone in thinking that the prohibition in the House bill doesn't go far enough. For him and other Republicans, the problem is not what's in the bill, it's what the bill leaves out. There's no provision for how the prohibition would be enforced, or any requirement for people to prove they are citizens or legal residents before getting health care benefits. In fact, Democrats on the Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means committees defeated Republican-offered amendments that would have required people to verify their legal status before getting care, with some Democrats saying such requirements would be unnecessarily burdensome for people legally entitled to coverage. Wilson cited the defeat of those two amendments Thursday when he discussed his outburst with reporters.

We’ve Seen This Trigger Before
Sep 10, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/l35gy9
After a summer of politics marked by esoteric phrases like co-ops and insurance exchanges, the newest kernel of ubiquitous arcana is the term trigger mechanism. This proposal, which is gaining momentum after President Obama’s speech to Congress, would have any national health legislation include provisions allowing a government-run “public option” only if certain parameters are met in the future. “It’s an obscure policy tool that isn’t even written,” reported the news service TalkingPointsMemo.com. “But somehow, a ‘trigger-mechanism’ is the talk of Washington right now. How did that happen?”
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090910_weve_seen_this_trigger_before/

BUSH REPUBLICANS ARE DELUSIONAL LIARS

Obviously you do not have a party who represents your views.

NOT ONE Republican voted against the legislation that states Obama was born in Hawaii.

Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Fox News are liars and propagandist.

Sincerely,
Josef Goebbels & Rep. Joe Wilson

Congress: Yes, Obama Was Born in Hawaii ( 378 - 0 )
July 28, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/lhngae
Yesterday, an innocuous-sounding resolution in honor of the 50th anniversary of Hawaiian statehood came up for vote on the House floor.

The resolution from Hawaii Democrat Neil Abercrombie, which Greg Sargent first reported, included this line: "Whereas the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii…"

Why is that notable? Because it's just the sort of claim that angers the birthers – the movement of folks who believe, against overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that President Obama was not really born in Hawaii, and is thus not a U.S. citizen.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/07/28/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5193422.shtml

Betraying our dead
Forgetting the vows we made:

September 11, 2009


Eight years ago today, our homeland was attacked by fanatical Muslims inspired by Saudi Arabian bigotry. Three thousand American citizens and residents died.

We resolved that we, the People, would never forget. Then we forgot.

We've learned nothing.

Instead of cracking down on Islamist extremism, we've excused it.

Instead of killing terrorists, we free them.

Instead of relentlessly hunting Islamist madmen, we seek to appease them.


Our enemies' work: Ground Zero a week after the terrorist attack. AP
see more videos
Sponsored Links
Instead of acknowledging that radical Islam is the problem, we elected a president who blames America, whose idea of freedom is the right for women to suffer in silence behind a veil -- and who counts among his mentors and friends those who damn our country or believe that our own government staged the tragedy of September 11, 2001.

Instead of insisting that freedom will not be infringed by terrorist threats, we censor works that might offend mass murderers. Radical Muslims around the world can indulge in viral lies about us, but we dare not even publish cartoons mocking them.

Instead of protecting law-abiding Americans, we reject profiling to avoid offending terrorists. So we confiscate granny's shampoo at the airport because the half-empty container could hold 3.5 ounces of liquid.

Instead of insisting that Islamist hatred and religious apartheid have no place in our country, we permit the Saudis to continue funding mosques and madrassahs where hating Jews and Christians is preached as essential to Islam.

Instead of confronting Saudi hate-mongers, our president bows down to the Saudi king.

Instead of recognizing the Saudi-sponsored Wahhabi cult as the core of the problem, our president blames Israel.

Instead of asking why Middle Eastern civilization has failed so abjectly, our president suggests that we're the failures.

Instead of taking every effective measure to cull information from terrorists, the current administration threatens CIA agents with prosecution for keeping us safe.

Instead of proudly and promptly rebuilding on the site of the Twin Towers, we've committed ourselves to the hopeless, useless task of rebuilding Afghanistan. (Perhaps we should have built a mosque at Ground Zero -- the Saudis would've funded it.)

Instead of taking a firm stand against Islamist fanaticism, we've made a cult of negotiations -- as our enemies pursue nuclear weapons; sponsor terrorism; torture, imprison, rape and murder their own citizens -- and laugh at us.

Instead of insisting that Islam must become a religion of responsibility, our leaders in both parties continue to bleat that "Islam's a religion of peace," ignoring the curious absence of Baptist suicide bombers.

Instead of requiring new immigrants to integrate into our society and conform to its public values, we encourage and subsidize anti-American, woman-hating, freedom-denying bigotry in the name of toleration.

Instead of pursuing our enemies to the ends of the earth, we help them sue us.

We've dishonored our dead and whitewashed our enemies. A distinctly unholy alliance between fanatical Islamists abroad and a politically correct "elite" in the US has reduced 9/11 to the status of a non-event, a day for politicians to preen about how little they've done.

We've forgotten the shock and the patriotic fury Americans felt on that bright September morning eight years ago. We've forgotten our identification with fellow citizens leaping from doomed skyscrapers. We've forgotten the courage of airline passengers who would not surrender to terror.

We've forgotten the men and women who burned to death or suffocated in the Pentagon. We've forgotten our promises, our vows, our commitments.

We've forgotten what we owe our dead and what we owe our children. We've even forgotten who attacked us.

We have betrayed the memory of our dead. In doing so, we betrayed ourselves and our country. Our troops continue to fight -- when they're allowed to do so -- but our politicians have surrendered.

Are we willing to let the terrorists win?

"'There's no provision for how the prohibition would be enforced...'"

Nonetheless, the bill DOES prohibit abuse by illegals, as Obama said. Ergo, Joe Wilson was wrong. Sure, put back into the bill the need for proof of citizenship, to minimize abuse. But lack of specific enforcement provisions is not lying about the prohibition.

Bush Republicans are antidemocratic with an attraction to authoritarianism.

Liberals are always trying to enfranchise citizens and Bush Republicans always try to block some citizens from voting.( BLACKS & Latinos )!

Liberals defend the Constitution and long standing institutions like Social Security and Medicare.

Bush Republicans want the USA to go back to the Gilded Age and privatize Social Security and undo “The New Deal”!

Most if not all Bush Republican supporters are not conservatives. They are Neo-Cons who are apologist for the wealthiest top 1% percentile.

They have been thoroughly bamboozled for the last 30 years of rightwing propaganda and corrupt corporate mainstream media filter, which they believe is liberal!

Sincerely,
Eric Arthur Blair

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

The Truth Behind Public Option
By Robert Reich / Video / http://tinyurl.com/n6ntpd
http://www.commondreams.org/video/2009/09/11

False claim: "Liberals are always trying to enfranchise citizens and Bush Republicans always try to block some citizens from voting.( BLACKS & Latinos )!"

Now the facts: Liberals and anti-Semite Nadar Progressives, regularly try to divide America by underhandedly envoking the race card, attempting to keep racism alive forever for cheap political gain.


False claim: "Liberals defend the Constitution and long standing institutions....."

Now the facts: Liberals and anti-Semite Nadar Progressives believe in re-writing the Constitution, erasing the values our forefathers had held dear for centuries.

False claim: "Liberals are always trying to enfranchise citizens and Bush Republicans always try to block some citizens from voting.( BLACKS & Latinos )!"

Now the facts: Liberals and anti-Semite Nadar Progressives, regularly try to divide America by underhandedly envoking the race card, attempting to keep racism alive forever for cheap political gain.


False claim: "Liberals defend the Constitution and long standing institutions....."

Now the facts: Liberals and anti-Semite Nadar Progressives believe in re-writing the Constitution, erasing the values our forefathers had held dear for centuries.

Bernie Kerik: The Trial of an American Hero

Friday, September 11, 2009

Overzealous federal prosecutors. A public figure who allegedly got home renovations as a gift. A massive federal investigation. A slew of charges. The target appears guilty, but a careful review of the evidence suggests otherwise.

9/11 aftermath New York City Police Commissioner Bernie Kerik is joined by Mayor Rudy Giuliani and President George W. Bush at ground zero.
This sounds like the case of former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, but it isn’t.

It is the ongoing legal saga of Bernard B. Kerik, the former New York City police commissioner and one-time Homeland Security secretary nominee.

Stevens was the sitting Alaska senator whose 2007 federal conviction for not reporting renovations to his home properly was overturned. In April 2009 a federal judge voided the verdict and ordered a criminal probe of six prosecutors involved in the case.

“In 25 years on the bench, I’ve never seen anything approaching the mishandling and misconduct that I’ve seen in this case,” U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said.

The Stevens case has become emblematic of the length federal prosecutors will go to convict their target — even if key evidence suggests innocence.

Federal Judge Stephen Robinson, who is overseeing the government’s case against Kerik, chided prosecutors for rummaging through his entire life to find some crime.

“It seems to me that it could fairly be said [that the complaint] is looking at the life of Mr. Kerik, and throwing everything at him,” Robinson said at a court proceeding earlier this year.

Kerik’s attorney, Barry H. Berke, also lambastes the government tactics in this case, especially the recent third indictment in a new jurisdiction, Washington, D.C.

“This is the third separate prosecution against him arising out of the same purported corruption allegations from 10 years ago — it is the latest example of the Department of Justice’s overzealous pursuit of high-profile public figures,” Berke explains in his offices at the prestigious New York firm of Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP. “The Justice Department’s own rules mandate that ‛the government bring as few charges as are necessary to ensure that justice is done,’” he adds.

Despite his legal woes, Kerik is still known as “America’s Top Cop” — New York’s police commissioner during the harrowing events of Sept. 11.

Bill F. and his neo-con Republican friends must be very happy that Obama is selling out to Wall Street just like Bush and Cheney did.

Bush/Paulson

Obama/Geithner

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

“All great truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
— Arthur Schopenhauer
German Philosopher

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

Who's Blocking Health Care Reform Now? Blue Dogs? Senate Dems? House Progressives? Or the White House Itself? / Obama is not liberal
09/02/2009 / http://tinyurl.com/ksxq3e
Anyone who can add knows Republicans are not blocking universal health care. The performances of Republican teabaggers at a few town halls notwithstanding, there are just not enough Republicans in the House and Senate to block anything. The president and his party can roll over Republican opposition any time they want to.
Blue dog Democrats aren't to blame for blocking the White House health care bills either. The political careers of many House blue dogs are the creation of White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, who as head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee dispensed them bags of corporate cash to win primary elections against left leaning Democrats. The interests that owned Rahm, and still do, own his successor at DCCC, so the blue dogs are White House puppies it can rein it any time it chooses.
If progressives like Donna Edwards can be blamed for blocking health care reform, it's only because they are choosing to follow the White House lead and settle for “health insurance reform” instead. The White House itself, and our First Black President are the biggest political obstacles to achieving health care for every American, along with the corporate media which controls the public debate.
http://blackagendareport.com/?q=content/whos-blocking-health-care-reform-now-blue-dogs-senate-dems-house-progressives-or-white-house

Obama’s Health Care Speech / Republican Joe Wilson Lied
We fact-check the president's address to Congress and the nation
September 10, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/n7rllk
Obama was correct when he said his plan wouldn’t insure illegal immigrants; the House bill expressly forbids giving subsidies to those who are in the country illegally. Conservative critics complain that the bill lacks an enforcement mechanism, but that hardly makes the president a liar.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/obamas-health-care-speech/

EXCLUSIVE: UnitedHealth Lobbyist Announces Pelosi Fundraiser As She Begins Backing Off Pub Option
Sep 11, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/lqsy56
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for the first time yesterday suggested she may be backing off her support of the public option. According to CNN, Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid "said they would support any provision that increases competition and accessibility for health insurance - whether or not it is the public option favored by most Democrats." When "asked if inclusion of a public option was a non-negotiable demand - as her previous statements had indicated Pelosi ruled out any non-negotiable positions," according to CNN. This was also corroborated by the Associated Press, and by Pelosi's own words, as quoted in those stories.
This announcement came just hours before Steve Elmendorf, a registered UnitedHealth lobbyist and the head of UnitedHealth's lobbying firm Elmendorf Strategies, blasted this email invitation throughout Washington, D.C. I just happened to get my hands on a copy of the invitation from a source - check out this OpenLeft exclusive:
http://www.openleft.com/diary/15066/unitedhealth-lobbyist-announces-big-fundraiser-for-pelosi-as-she-backs-off-public-option

"Nonetheless, the bill DOES prohibit abuse by illegals"

Get real! US Customs Laws prohibit crossing the border from Mexico into the United States too. Without enforcement there might as well be no law at all. Obama is a slime, as well as a liar! Many have now come to that realization on their own.

Did Someone Say Obama Wasn't a Liar?


---------------------------------------
Fact-checking Bam:

September 11, 2009

OK, President Obama has had his say on health care. Now let's look at some inconvenient truths.

Obama insisted Wednesday that his public-option plan would save tax dollars, while not adding "one dime" to the deficit. Moreover, he said, "nothing in our plan requires you to change what [health insurance] you have."

The first claim is demonstrably false; the second, profoundly misleading.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has reported that the House Democratic bills would add $220 billion to the deficit over the next decade -- and even more after that.

Meanwhile, Obama was technically correct when he said that no one would be required to change their current insurance coverage under his plan. But it doesn't guarantee that they'll be able to keep it, either.

That's a significant change -- in the wrong direction -- from his repeated 2008 campaign promise that "if you like your health-care plan, you'll be able to keep your health-care plan, period."

In fact, the added taxes and mandates that he would institute on private plans would so undercut private insurance that many employers surely would drop health-care coverage.

And that would end up dumping their employees into a public option -- especially if private insurance remains available primarily through employers.

There are many more points in which the president's claims are open to serious question -- including whether illegal aliens would be covered, whether health care inevitably would be rationed and just how serious he is about instituting tort reform to help bring down costs.

(Significantly, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, whom Obama named as his point person on tort reform, was the longtime director of the Kansas Trial Lawyers Association. So be warned.)

It's important, in other words, to approach the president's speech as one would approach anything involving insurance.

Read the fine print.

Of course Obama is a liar!

In Praise of Joe Wilson
What's Wrong with Calling Out Liars in Congress?
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/09/12-10

Open season on Black politicians
September 10, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/o8zmsj
It seems as though hunting season has begun, and it seems that politicians of color are the main targets. Or maybe they always have been.

But the reactionary and repressive forces in our society seem to be unleashing aggressive attacks on African-Americans—particularly men—who have amassed unprecedented political power and influence at state and national levels.
Suddenly, we are seeing an America for the first time with a number of Black men with real political power. It is not just the president, Barack Obama, or our own Governor David Patterson, but Governor Deval Patrick in Massachusetts, Cong. Charlie Rangel running the powerful Ways and Means Committee in the House and Cong. John Conyers running the equally powerful Judiciary Committee in the House,and Eric Holder as the top law enforcement official man for the country.

And unlike Clarence Thomas—who has sat on the Supreme Court for 19 years—and has never been an active voice for Black people or other minorities or women—in fact he is a mute, never asking questions in oral arguments or writing opinions supporting the issues of our community—these men have been active voices for minority and civil rights.
http://www.amsterdamnews.com/articles/2009/09/12/news/doc4aa92dd3a59a4148873602.txt

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


Van Jones's Resignation: Bad for the Country and Bad for Obama
by Rabbi Michael Lerner / http://tinyurl.com/n3nz3h
I signed the same statement on 9/11 that Van Jones signed, and there was nothing immoderate about it. It didn't say what the Right claimed it said (and the mainstream media chimed in without investigation). I'll explain below.
Jones's resignation is bad for the country and for the Obama administration. It's bad for America when progressive views are an excuse to purge someone from the administration while extremist right-wing views of past administrations were always given a "pass."
Van Jones's forced resignation is a huge defeat for the forces of sanity and humanity, and represents a deep failure of the Obama-ites to understand the nature of the challenge they face from an increasingly fascistic Right wing.
Jones was the first African American environmentalist to have become a national figure (his book became a national bestseller), and was brought into the administration to help enlist minority communities in the struggle to save the environment from decades of abuse.
Right-wingers pounced on him for a speech in which he allegedly called Right-wingers assholes, though he used the same word to describe himself and the Left. But what gave them a supposedly clinching argument was that he signed a statement calling for an objective investigation of 9/11. Scroll down to see the full text of what it really said -- not what the media claimed.
The forced resignation of Van Jones demonstrates the lack of backbone of the Obama administration.
Jones was a rare progressive appointment among the wide array of Wall Street sycophants and inside-the-Beltway pragmatists who have misled Obama into a path that has caused him to lose his initial popularity and severely endanger his presidency.
http://www.tikkun.org/article.php/20090908084856114

"It seems as though hunting season has begun, and it seems that politicians of color are the main targets. Or maybe they always have been."

Or maybe it's the political left trying out their underhanded and America destructive race card weapon, but once again.

Any space cadet, such as Jones that had ever signed on as a truther has no place in America's Government, although Al Qaeda or Ringling Brothers would probably love to hire him for their side shows.

Who’s Going to Jail for This? Economic Crisis: One Year Later
September 13, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/nhxagl
Americans have suffered for a year through the worst economic decline since the Great Depression.
Millions of people have lost their jobs. We're seeing people with very long-term unemployment. We are seeing older people who have lost their life's savings and are now worried about how they are going to retire with dignity. We have seen people lose their homes, and we've seen people lose their pensions. We've seen, in many ways, the collapse of the American middle class. / http://www.commondreams.org/video/2009/09/13

Bush’s Economic Performance: A Final Tally
September 13, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/mp97vp
Five years ago, Forbes magazine performed a worthy public service. The right-leaning business publication that dubs itself, "Capitalist Tool," published a set of criteria by which to judge the economic performance of 10 post-war presidencies. It then evaluated each presidency against that set of criteria.
The criteria themselves are straightforward. They include GDP growth, real disposable personal income, employment, unemployment, inflation, and deficit reduction. All are mainstream metrics of economic performance. Data for each are readily available from public sources and are regularly updated.
It is a measure of Forbes' integrity that it let the chips fall where they may. The top three performers were all Democrats: Clinton, Johnson, and Kennedy. The bottom three were all Republicans: Nixon, Eisenhower, and Bush I. The middle was a mixture of Republicans and Democrats: Reagan, Carter, Ford, and Truman.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/09/13

Stiglitz Says Banking Problems Are Now Bigger Than Pre-Lehman
Sept. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize- winning economist, said the U.S. has failed to fix the underlying problems of its banking system after the credit crunch and the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.
“In the U.S. and many other countries, the too-big-to-fail banks have become even bigger,” Stiglitz said in an interview today in Paris. “The problems are worse than they were in 2007 before the crisis.” / http://tinyurl.com/oc2ape
Stiglitz’s views echo those of former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, who has advised President Barack Obama’s administration to curtail the size of banks, and Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer, who suggested last month that governments may want to discourage financial institutions from growing “excessively.”
A year after the demise of Lehman forced the Treasury Department to spend billions to shore up the financial system, Bank of America Corp.’s assets have grown and Citigroup Inc. remains intact. In the U.K., Lloyds Banking Group Plc, 43 percent owned by the government, has taken over the activities of HBOS Plc, and in France BNP Paribas SA now owns the Belgian and Luxembourg banking assets of insurer Fortis.
While Obama wants to name some banks as “systemically important” and subject them to stricter oversight, his plan wouldn’t force them to shrink or simplify their structure.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aYdgQkXu9eBg

Charlie in rental di$order
Fails to report Harlem-pad income:

September 13, 2009

Rep. Charles Rangel reported no rental income for eight years on his rundown Harlem row house, even though public records show tenants were living there.

The powerful chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee said he received nothing from 1993 to 2000 on the six-unit building, according to federal financial disclosure forms.

But one current tenant told The Post she had lived at the building for 20 years -- and paid rent during that period.

Another said her former boyfriend called 74 W. 132nd St. home for many years, paying about $500 a month in rent.

While Rangel claims to have taken in not a dime in eight years, at least four tenants lived in the building during that time, The Post found.

His nephew, Christopher Rangel, still lives there.

The Democratic lawmaker, who is being probed by the House Ethics Committee for a laundry list of alleged financial misdeeds, has had a hard time keeping his story straight on the apartment building.

Rangel's grandfather bought the red-brick house in 1923. Rangel's sister transferred the property to the congressman's wife, Alma, in 1973 for $10,000, city records show. Rangel sold it in 2004 for $410,000 -- a hefty profit -- to the First AME Church Bethel.

He filed amended disclosure forms last month showing that in 2004 he failed to reveal between $500,001 and $1 million in capital gains and rent from the building.

Rangel's reporting of his yearly rental income for the building has swung widely -- from nothing to up to $50,000, the federal disclosure forms show.

* In 1987, he claimed the building brought in between $5,001 and $15,000.

* In 1991, he amended his 1990 form to say the property produced a loss.

* Less than a month later, he said the gross rent was between $15,000 and $50,000, the same amount he reported in 2002.

* In 1993 and 1994, he failed to enter anything about the property's income.

* From 1995 to 2000, he checked a box to show he earned no income.

* In 2001, Rangel claimed income for the building, reporting between $2,501 and $5,000 a year. He did the same in 2002 and 2003, then amended the reports to show income between $15,000 and $50,000.

Even if expenses on the building brought his take to nothing in certain years, he was required to report the gross rent.

A Rangel spokesman did not directly address the apparent lapses in the congressman's rental record, saying the lawmaker had taken care of any mistakes on his disclosure forms by filing amendments last month.

But the amendments covered only 2002 to 2006, not the eight years when he claimed no rent. The amendments revealed his failure to report millions of dollars in assets.

Last year, The Post revealed Rangel's failure to declare $75,000 in rental income on his villa in the Dominican Republic.

The Ethics Committee is also taking a hard look at Rangel's claim on a 1989 mortgage document that the row house was his primary residence.

As The Post reported last month, Rangel was then living across the street in at Lenox Terrace. He also, at that time, claimed a primary residence in Washington.

"Without enforcement there might as well be no law at all."

Sure, I don't argue with that. But when Obama said that the bill bars illegals, he was essentially reading from the text of the bill. So he was not lying about what the bill says. But this conflict in interpretation only demonstrates differences in thought processes. Some people are very linear in their thought processes, which is helpful in logic, science, math, etc, and some people are random, which makes them better multi-taskers, if not particularly logical.

"So he was not lying about what the bill says..."

That is how they reason in the political Chicago South Side world from where Obama came from and you know what the rest of America says about Chicago politics. As far as the rest of us, God gave us a brain along with reasoning abilities. Use it or lose it!

prodigious entry you get hands on

What a lovely day for a 4866764! SCK was here

What a lovely day for a 150094! SCK was here

Awsome blog! I am loving it!! Will come back again. I am bookmarking your feeds also

Howdy! Do you know if they make any plugins to protect against hackers? I'm kinda paranoid about losing everything I've worked hard on. Any recommendations?

Hallo! Informativer Blog! Informationsseite Fatburner Kapseln sind behilflich beim wirksamen Abbau von Depotfett! Herzlichen Dank!

Today, with the fast life-style that everyone leads, credit cards get this amazing demand throughout the market. Persons from every arena are using credit card and people who are not using the credit cards have arranged to apply for 1. Thanks for revealing your ideas about credit cards.

Excellent blog here! Also your site loads up very fast! What host are you using? Can I get your affiliate link to your host? I wish my website loaded up as fast as yours lol

I will immediately clutch your rss as I can not in finding your e-mail subscription hyperlink or e-newsletter service. Do you've any? Kindly permit me know in order that I could subscribe. Thanks.

I have read a few of the articles on your website now, and I really like your style of blogging. I added it to my favorites blog site list and will be checking back soon. Please check out my site as well and let me know what you think.

Pretty section of content. I just stumbled aloft your blog and in accession capital to assert that I acquire in fact enjoyed account your blog posts. Any way I will be subscribing to your augment and even I achievement you access consistently rapidly.

Family members Eating places in Delhi

Meals And Drinks – Br Excellent In Prepacks Meals

Very interesting article. I waiting to more informations from you.