The 2012 Check List for America’s Survival

Many people make resolutions to start the year, but I think a list of things that must be done to protect and preserve the Republic should be tallied…

1. President Obama must be defeated in 2012 and the obstructionist Democratic Party must lose power in the Senate to ensure both houses of Congress will be Republican and in a position to initiate real change.
2. The Environmental Protection Agency must be reined in with increased Congressional oversight and legislative limits on its rule-making capacity. Having fulfilled its 1970 mandate to clean the nation’s air and water, it should be scaled back to the maintenance of these functions.
3. Americans, despite the administration’s efforts to redefine and distract us, must keep clearly in mind the threat of Islam to the nation and the world. A Middle East in turmoil lays ahead for 2012.
4. To jump-start the economy, taxes and spending must be reduced across the board. A tax on consumption, rather than income would be a good start. Only 49% of Americans currently pay income taxes, the lowest in decades.
5. Obamacare must be repealed should the Supreme Court fail to rule that the Commerce Clause takes precedence over its requirement that Americans must purchase health insurance or be fined for not doing so.
6. A serious restructuring of Social Security and Medicare must be undertaken. Older Americans who have paid into the system—it is involuntary—must be ensured their benefits will be paid, but younger citizens should have the freedom and responsibility to structure their own retirement and health plans.
7. Access to the nation’s vast reserves of coal, natural gas, and oil should be increased and encouraged. Oil companies should be encouraged to build more refineries via tax credits and removal of “environmental” obstacles.
8. Congress needs to identify and fund the repair to the nation’s aging infrastructure.
9. Utilities should be encouraged via tax credits and other incentives to expand the national “grid” for the distribution of electricity.
10. Term limits for Senators and Representatives should be added to the U.S. Constitution in the same fashion the presidency is limited. Salaries, pensions, and perks should be capped. A permanent political class is a danger to citizens.
11. The Federal government should be downsized with the elimination of the Departments of Education, Labor, and Energy, along with the Environmental Protection Agency. These powers should be returned to the individual States. (10th Amendment)
12. The nation’s military which has been significantly reduced in size and structure should be expanded with attention to the upgrade and increase of its naval fleet and aircraft.
13. Congress should reject and rescind all legislation based on “global warming” or “climate change” as the former has been demonstrated to be a hoax and the latter is meaningless insofar as the climate is beyond the control of humans.
14. The United States should significantly reduce its contribution to the United Nations and refuse to ratify any of its treaties.
15. Tort reform should be instituted to reduce the costs of health care.
16. The corporate tax rate should be significantly reduced from its present rate, one of the highest in the world, to increase expansion, new jobs, and competitiveness.
17. Public service unions should be illegal. The federal government does not permit such unionization and neither should states.
18. National Public Radio should no longer be funded. The “government entities” of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be eliminated.
19. The federal government should be restricted or significantly limited from the acquisition of more of the nation’s landmass.
20. Strenuous efforts must be undertaken to reduce the national debt and deficit. A devalued dollar impoverishes everyone.

These are just a few changes which, if implemented, would go a long way to reducing the ills associated with a federal government grown too large, subject to crony capitalism, and corruption.

As John Adams said, “Let us disappoint the men who are raising themselves upon the ruin of this Country.”

© Alan Caruba, 2012

Alan Caruba  -  Most recent columns

Alan has a daily blog called Warning Signs. His latest book is Right Answers: Separating Fact from Fantasy.

Alan can be reached at acaruba@aol.com  -  Canada Free Press
Older articles by Alan Caruba

And prepare yourself for the worst and to help others!! – Preparedness and Survival

British Paper: If White House Really Wanted to Cut Spending They’d Rein in Michelle Obama

$10 million worth of free advice.

From left to right: the first lady’s mother Marian Robinson, Assistant Minister of Finance and Development Planning Gloria Somolekae, Obama, nephew Avery Robinson, daughter Sasha, niece Leslie Robinson and daughter Malia in Botswana. (BET)

Nile Gardiner at The Telegraph offered the White House some advice today. If the Obama Administration really wanted to cut spending they could start by reining in on Michelle Obama.
The Telegraph reported:

With the United States facing a national debt of more than $14 trillion, the largest since World War Two, wouldn’t it make sense for the White House itself to start trimming its own spending? A good place to begin cutting would be Michelle Obama’s rather generous vacation programme. Keith Coffler, who edits the influential White House Dossier, notes that Michelle Obama spent no less than 42 days on vacation over the past year – that’s one in every nine days:

Her vacations, the cost of which are mostly borne by taxpayers, include trips to Panama City, Fla., Martha’s Vineyard, Hawaii, South Africa, Latin America, Vail, Colo., and her visit this week to her brother in Corvallis, Ore.

The total does not include a nine day sojourn in Martha’s Vineyard that the Obamas will enjoy this month. Nor does it include a trip she made to Ireland and Great Britain in May, which I’m counting as official travel.

As Coffler points out, there is a significant cost to the public purse:

Taxpayers pick up most of the cost of transporting the first lady and her extensive entourage – including Secret Service and her staff – to her various destinations. While she may in some cases pay some of the tab for her personal expenses and travel, the amount is dwarfed by the overall cost to the public.

It is unclear what the total cost to the taxpayer actually amounts to. According to one estimate provided by the Daily Mail, the First Lady stands accused by sources inside the White House of spending “$10 million of US taxpayers’ money on vacations alone in the past year.” Judging by the amount of vacation time Michelle Obama has taken and the level of security and staffing that she has, this sounds like a plausible figure. It would be in the public interest to have the exact numbers provided by the White House so that Americans know precisely how much of their money is being spent on vacations.

There does appear to be an unhealthy sense of entitlement on the part of the First Lady, which seems in poor taste at a time when 14 million Americans are out of work, the housing market is collapsing, and the United States is facing the strong possibility of a double-dip recession.

Meanwhile, Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information request to obtain records related to Michelle Obama’s trip to South Africa and Botswana.
The Washington Examiner reported:

Judicial Watch is filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) against the United States Air Force to obtain records related to the June 21-27, 2011, trip taken by First Lady Michelle Obama, her family, and her staff to South Africa and Botswana.

Earlier reports suggested that the cost for air travel cost taxpayers $430,000, but Judicial Watch believes that additional Secret Service officers and White House staff security tallied further expenses.

“How much did the American people spend to send the First Lady on a family outing in Africa? That’s what we want to know,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “On the surface, the trip seems to have been totally unnecessary and was as much an excuse for the Obama family to go on a safari as it was a mission intended to advance the nation’s business in Africa.”

Doug Ross has more on Michelle O’s expensive tastes.

Source:  Gateway Pundit

Related:

The Real Truth About Michelle Obama and Sarah Palin… Two Very Different Women! OUCH!!

Send This Letter to Your Congressman and Senator: 9,000,000,000,000 Ways to Balance the Budget

This is a letter that Dr. Coburn sent to all of his Senate colleagues on the 27th:

July 27, 2011

9,000,000,000,000
Ways to Balance the Budget

Dear Colleague,

Nearly everyone in Washington agrees we must reduce the deficit, but few offer any specifics as to how to do it. Last week, I released a report, BACK IN BLACK, outlining thousands of detailed budget options within every federal department and nearly every major program that, if taken together, would result in savings of more than $9 trillion over the next decade.

I do not expect anyone to agree with everything recommended in this report, but I expect everyone will find things with which they agree. With negotiations stalemated, I wanted to bring your attention to some very simple commonsense ideas I believe most of us—and most Americans—regardless of party or ideology could support that would save at least $355 billion.

End Unemployment Payments to Millionaires
Savings: $186 million over ten years
Nearly 3,000 households with incomes of $1 million or more were paid a total of $18.6 million in unemployment insurance benefits in 2008. Those earning $1 million a year do not need and should not qualify for unemployment compensation.

Stop Payments to Dead People
Savings: Over $1 billion over ten years.
Washington sent over $1 billion to more than 250,000 deceased individuals over the past decade. The federal government paid for dead people’s prescriptions and wheelchairs, subsidized their farms, helped pay their rent, and even chipped in for their heating and air conditioning bills. Some of these payments were fraud, some were incompetence, and some were intentionally required by law. Congress should end payments to the dead and federal agencies should ensure beneficiaries and participants of government payments are, in fact, alive.

Eliminate Duplication
Savings: At least $50 billion over ten years
In March, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report examining just 34 missions of the federal government and identified hundreds of duplicative and overlapping programs costing more than $215 billion a year. These included 47 separate job training programs, 88 economic development programs, 82 teacher quality programs, and 56 financial literacy programs. “Reducing or eliminating duplication, overlap, or fragmentation could potentially save billions of taxpayer dollars annually and help agencies provide more efficient and effective services,” GAO concluded. Another independent study identified at least 180 economic development programs within more than a dozen different agencies costing taxpayers about $17.9 billion annually. Duplication within the federal bureaucracy should be consolidated.

Eliminate Sweet Heart Deals for Government Contractors
Savings: At least $2 billion over ten years
The federal government pays over $500 billion annually to contractors. In 2009, $170 billion worth of contracts were awarded without competition. Competitive bidding for government contracts helps ensure the highest-quality services for the lowest cost, while no-bid contracts waste billions of dollars with little apparent benefit to anyone other than contractors. No bid contracts should be eliminated.

Collect Unpaid Taxes Owed by Federal Employees
Savings: $1 billion over ten years
Nearly 100,000 civilian federal employees were delinquent on their federal income taxes in 2008. These federal employees owe a total of $962 million in unpaid federal income taxes. The IRS should collect these overdue taxes.

Reduce Congress’ Spending on Itself
Savings: $3.82 billion over ten years
Since 2001, Congress has boosted its own budget by 55 percent. At the same time, the average American wage increased by only 23 percent. In real dollars, the budget of the House and Senate has grown by more than $1 billion over the last decade. Congress must lead by example and do more with less. Congress’ spending on itself should be reduced by at least 15 percent.

Stop Overpaying Drug Companies
Savings: $480 million over ten years
The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) overpays pharmaceutical companies nearly a million dollars a week. According to the Government Accountability Office, drug companies were overpaid $3.9 million in a single month! HRSA should be required to routinely monitor prices to ensure taxpayers are not being overcharged and take immediate corrective action to recoup any excess payments.

Reduce Unnecessary Government Printing
Savings: $4.9 billion over ten years
Federal agencies – excluding the Department of Defense – spend nearly $1.3 billion a year on routine office printing. A third of this printing is unnecessary, according to an independent analysis. Agencies should put an end to this wasteful habit and administrative accounts of each department should be reduced accordingly.

Eliminate Unnecessary Printing of Congressional Documents
Savings: $312.2 million
In the digital age, printed copies of Congressional reports and other documents are as likely to grace a landfill as a bookshelf. In 2010, nearly $100 million was allocated for Congressional Printing and Binding account. A representative of the Government Printing Office (GPO) recently testified, “70 percent of the GPO’s funds are used to digitize legislation, schedules and other federal records, while 30 percent is used to print hard copies.” Reducing the Congressional Printing account by 30 percent would put an end to the wasteful practice of printing and distributing congressional documents that are almost immediately thrown away. The documents would still be available online and users could decide whether or not to print hard copies.

Get Rid of Unneeded Federal Properties
Savings: $15 billion over ten years
The federal government has over 63,000 buildings that are underutilized and not utilized at all. This number has increased by more than 12,000 from only two years ago. It costs over $1.2 billion every year to operate these properties. The federal government should dispose of all excess properties within five years. According to the Obama Administration, at least $15 billion could be saved if the federal government gets rid of its unneeded properties.

End Subsidy for Ethanol Blending
Savings: $2 billion one time savings
Ethanol producers reap the benefits of a vast array of government assistance, including tax credits, grants, loans, loan guarantees, federally-directed markets, and a federal minimum usage mandate. The Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit provides a 45-cent-per-gallon federal tax credit to producers who blend ethanol with gasoline. Ethanol-blended fuel is nearly a third less efficient than gasoline, has contributed to the increased price of corn, and can cause engine damage. Ethanol subsidies are outdated, duplicative, and have failed to meet the intended goals of greater energy independence with a cleaner fuel alternative. The ethanol tax credit should be eliminated immediately.

Reduce the Number of Limousines Owned by the Government
Savings: $115.5 million over ten years
In the past two years, the federal government’s limousine fleet has grown by 73 percent. The federal government had 238 limos in 2008 and that number reached 412 last year. The number of limos owned by the federal government should be reduced to its previous level.

Reduce Federal Vehicle Fleet
Savings: $5.6 billion over ten years
Federal agencies own or lease over 662,000 cars, vans, sport-utility vehicles, trucks, buses and other vehicles. Since 2006, the federal vehicle fleet has grown by five percent and the cost of maintaining and servicing those vehicles has grown over 25 percent, to $4.6 billion. These vehicles consume about a million gallons of fuel per day. The General Services Administration will purchase more than 100 more vehicles this year. Instead, the number of vehicles in the federal fleet should be reduced by at least 20 percent.

Reduce Junkets and Unnecessary Travel
Savings: $43.3 billion over ten years
The federal government spends $15 billion on travel every year. All travel that is not mission-critical should be ended.

Reduce Advertising by the Federal Government
Savings: $5.6 billion over ten years
The federal government spent almost $1 billion on advertising last year. While some advertising may be needed, much of it is wasteful and unnecessary and this amount should be cut in half.

Limit the Amount Spent to Host Government Conferences
Savings: $1 billion over ten years
The federal government spent at least $2 billion on conferences between 2000 and 2006. Some conferences may provide important venues for exchanging ideas or providing training. Others appear to be little more than government funded vacations at beachside resorts and other exotic destinations. Traveling to meetings and hosting conferences are, in large part, no longer necessary with the availability of teleconferencing. Total spending on conferences should not exceed $100 million annually and conferences should only be held when other options are not feasible.

Use Better Measure of Inflation to Determine Increases in Benefit Payments
Savings: Approximately $180 billion over ten years
Many government benefits are automatically increased for inflation every year, based on the consumer price index (CPI). For more than 15 years, many budget experts have agreed the current CPI mechanism outpaces actual inflationary growth, causing the cost of government programs to rise rapidly. The Bureau of Labor Statistics developed a more accurate measure of inflation, known as Chained CPI, which over the last ten years has grown at a slightly slower rate than the current measure for CPI. Congress should adopt the recommendation of the President’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform to transition to Chained-CPI government wide to ensure this automatic spending increase is as accurate as possible to avoid uncontrolled automatic spending increases in federal programs.

Eliminate Hollywood Liaisons
Savings: $34.4 million over ten years
Many federal agencies have offices and programs to assist Hollywood movie producers and television execs, often with the goal of ensuring a positive portrayal of the federal government. The agencies have at least 14 employees costing $1.2 million. These should be eliminated.

Stop Purchasing Excess Land
Savings: $4.1 billion over ten years
The federal government has spent more than $430 million to purchase additional land since the start of the recent recession and more than $2.3 billion over the past decade. At the same time, the Department of the Interior maintenance backlog on public lands has surged to as high as $19.9 billion, resulting in serious risk to visitors and deteriorating conditions of important national treasures. The National Mall, for example, has been so neglected it has been called a national disgrace. Until the federal government can afford to take care of the land it already owns, it should be prohibited from purchasing additional land.

End Payments for Coal Cleanup When Projects Have Been Certified as Being Completed
Savings: $1.23 billion over ten years
The federal government continues to send funds intended for the cleanup up abandoned coal mines to several states and tribes that have already been certified as completing their work. The funds are unrestricted and have essentially become slush funds. These dollars should be used only for their intended purpose and directed to states with abandoned sites, with excess amounts should be returned.

Suspend the Automatic Pay Raise for Members of Congress
Savings: $6 million over three years
Members of Congress typically receive an automatic pay raise every year. Congress voted to freeze the salary of its member for the past two years at $174,000. The pay for members of Congress should be frozen for at least three more years.

Get the Department of Defense Out of Education and the Grocery Store Business
Savings: $19 billion over ten years
The Department of Defense currently operates hundreds of grocery stores and dozens of elementary schools in the United States. These grocery stores are in the same communities that have Wal-Mart, Costco, Safeway, and other choices for military personnel. Instead of paying our soldiers more money and allowing them to choose where to shop, we subsidize thousands of federal employees to work in grocery stores around the country. Similarly, the Department of Defense employs thousands of teachers in a unique school district called the Department of Defense Education Activity. Under the Pentagon’s management, taxpayers are spending more than $50,000 per student enrolled in these schools. The Pentagon should shut down its education bureaucracy, send much of this money to bolster local public schools, and return the rest for debt reduction.

Terminate HHS’s Community Economic Development Program
Savings: $38 million over ten years.
The mission of the Community Economic Development program (CED) duplicates 180 other government development programs, has a very low success rate, and does not fit within the mission or expertise of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). According to HHS’s most recent report to the Congress, only one out of five funded projects within the CED program were successful. Due to its lack of success, duplicative nature, and inappropriate placement within HHS, CED should be eliminated.

End Federal Subsidies to Wealthy Doctors and Hospitals for Health Information Technology
Savings: $15.6 billion over ten years.
The federal government mandates and subsidizes the use health information technology (IT) for doctors and hospitals, despite scant evidence doing so will lower costs. Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize the purchase of health IT by doctors and hospitals.

Stop Medicare Payments for Uncovered Services
Savings: $1.97 billion over ten years.
Medicare currently only pays for medically necessary chiropractic services, but a HHS Inspector General report found the program improperly spent $178 million on chiropractic services in 2006. Implementing and enforcing current policies, along with more careful reviews of documentation, could save taxpayers nearly $2 billion over a decade.
This list is just a handful of the savings options contained within BACK IN BLACK. I would encourage you to review the thousands of other recommendations. I would also be interested in hearing other debt reduction ideas you might have.

Sincerely,
Tom A. Coburn, M.D.
U.S. Senator

Next Round in Debt Crisis Battle

Video:  Boehner to Dems:  Put Something On the Table

House Approves Speaker Boehner's Revised Debt Plan

Senate plans to vote to kill House bill as early as tonight

The U.S. House has passed its version of a bill to raise the debt ceiling.  The final vote was 218 to 210.  22 Republicans voted against it, because Boehner’s either bill didn’t go far enough in cuts or a guaranteed trigger for them to support it, and no Democrats voted in favor of the plan.

Here are the Republicans who voted against the bill (Freshman members are in bold):  Amash (MI), Bachmann (MN), Broun (GA), Chaffetz (UT),Cravaack (MN), DesJarlais (TN), Duncan (SC), Graves (GA) Gowdy (SC), Huelskamp (KS), Johnson (IL), Jordan (OH), King (IA), Latham (IA), Connie Mack (FL), McClintock (CA), Mulvaney (SC)Ron Paul (TX), Tim Scott (SC), Southerland (FL), Walsh (IL), Wilson (SC).

This was the third version of a debt plan House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) produced this week in an attempt to garner enough Republican votes to pass it. The bill now heads to the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has said he has enough votes to table, or discard, it immediately. And, if the Senate successfully tables Boehner’s bill, the body is likely to move onto Sen. Reid’s version, which lifts the debt ceiling through 2012 and cuts $2.2 billion in spending.

Senate Democratic leaders said they could hold a procedural vote on Senator Reid's proposal to lift the debt ceiling as early 1 am ET Sunday.

In remarks this morning, President Obama said Mr. Boehner's bill "does not solve the problem." The President pointedly called out Speaker Boehner's efforts to appease members of the Tea Party. "What’s clear now is that any solution to avoid default must be bipartisan.  It must have the support of both parties that were sent here to represent the American people -– not just one faction," he said.

Today's sequence of events came after the House was minutes away Thursday evening from voting to lift the debt ceiling and cut $900 billion in spending. But Republican leaders pulled the bill from the floor after Speaker Boehner spent the evening attempting to finalize support for his bill but fell short.

The road to lifting the debt ceiling has been rocky. Negotiations between a bipartisan group of lawmakers and Vice President Biden failed. So did talks between the President and Speaker Boehner, as did subsequent talks between the President and Congressional leaders.

No agreement between Republicans and Democrats and the House and Senate means the path forward is still uncertain with the August 2^nd deadline imposed by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner fast approaching. 

House Democrats encouraged the President to invoke the 14^th amendment to the U.S. Constitution to unilaterally lift the debt ceiling without Congressional authorization. The White House continues to reject that option.  (This is a completely unviable option considering that the 14^th Amendment does not apply here. Per Judge Andrew Napolitano: The provisions in the 14th Amendment were written to deal with unique issues caused by the Civil War and the execution of the Emancipation Proclamation that freed the slaves. The left keeps distorting the facts and the Constitution and wrongly applies the provisions to allow them to do whatever they want… not what is legal, Constitutional or what the American People want!! Read more at: Review: The Debt Ceiling and Economic Crisis Debate Rages On.)

July 28, 2011

Curious to know the impact Obama’s budget would have on America’s fiscal future? The chart below provides a rather painful preview of the next decade under the President’s budget alternative.

Picture this — Obama’s budget for America

As Heritage’s Mike Brownfield explains, ”Obama’s budget would set America on a dangerous fiscal course that leads to massive deficits well into the future—hitting $1.2 trillion in 2012 and, after dipping slightly, rising back to $1.2 trillion again by 2021.”

According to the Congressional Budget Office’s projections, the President’s budget would more than double the national debt in 10 years – totaling approximately $9.5 trillion.

Paul Ryan Destroys Reid Bill in Blistering Speech; ‘Let’s Cover the Moon with Yogurt!’

Live Blog:  The U.S. Debt Battle

The tea party… which means “We the People” are not happy.  A Balanced Budget Amendment and no raising of the debt ceiling is what most people want.  That is what they voted for in 2010.  The problem is when you only control half a branch of government, it is a tough battle and when you have people like Harry Reid and the President running interference, telling tales and controlling the mainstream media it is even tougher!!

75% of Americans support a balanced budget Amendment

66% of American support Cut, Cap and Balance

Most people say they don’t care if we go into so-called default, mind you we won’t really go into default… there are funds to pay what is most important to Americans as well as the interest on our debt.

And the powers that be feel that America’s Credit Rating will be down-graded from AAA status to AA status even if we raise the debt-ceiling.

Regardless whether you are happy or not with the outcome… the GOP has passed 3 plans in the House and Boehner, like the results or not, tried his best to work a compromise.  (And Republican Senator Mitch McConnell has another last ditch bill ready in the Senate.)  The Dems have passed nothing, finally proposed one bill that is a ruse and have run interference for the President… who also has put ‘no’ deal on paper.  If we lose our AAA credit rating and go into pseudo default it will be President Obama and the Democrats fault… not the GOP’s and not the tea party’s.

If we keep letting Obama spend and up the national debt… it is all our faults!

Within hours after the House passed their second bill dealing with the debt crisis in about a week, Harry Reid again tabled the discussion and the vote on this bill.  My question is, if you are so sure you are right and the people and your party are with you, Harry… why won’t you allow a vote on these bills?  And if Obama really wanted to make this go away, all he and the Dems needed to agree to was to begin the process of a balanced budget amendment that 75% of the American people want.  So why not do it?  After all Obama will either be long out of office before that amendment goes into affect, or he will be a dictator and it won’t matter anyway.

So, why not? Because destroying the the economy of the United States has always been part of Obama and his handlers’ plan! And that is the elephant in the room that nobody is willing to discuss!!

Best Quote I’ve heard this week is: “The tea party is the Dem’s new George Bush, so no matter what you don’t like… it’s their fault!”

Ask Marion~

Tweets of the Day:

• If 3rd World Dictator Obama is pres after Jan-20, 2013, an AA rating will be a memory
• How can they put a man with Dementia in charge of the Senate?
• Rubio: "Compromise that's not a solution is a waste of time."

Related:

As the Party of Socialism tries to convince the GOP that is it not the Party of Reagan, but the Party of Surrender, Harry Reid is desperately searching for sixty votes in the Senate so he can get his “I want to destroy the American economy bill” passed.

Can it be passed? - The Search for 60

House Defense: Hardliners Slam Reid Debt Plan, Obama - Video: Reid’s Gimmicks Unmasked

Harry Reid Filibustering His Own Bill?

NYT: Coming Soon: ‘Invasion of the Walking Debt’

RS: In Defense of Holding the Line

Congressional Leaders Struggle to Work Out Bi-Partisan Debt Deal

Balanced Budget… Balanced Budget Amendment… The Only Sane Idea

Thomas Sowell: Ideals Versus Realities

Reid Wants to Give Obama Blank Check for Rest of Presidency

Debt Crisis: NYT’s Graph Glitch

Senator Tea Party: DeMint Drives Conservative Direction on Debt and Deficit

As Predicted: Call for Obama’s Impeachment on the Table

Video: Michele Bachmann on the debt limit. I like her! Left hates her because fights like a democrat!

Video: Screw Congress… I’ll Do It On My Own - The really scary part is all the clueless fools in the audience chanting, “Yes You Can!”

Obama called out GOP again today to compromise… Because $14.5 Trillion is not enough!!!!!!! Compromise!, and I guess neither were Boehner’s attempts?!?

No budget in 800 days? Liberals saying Democrats had a budget this year. Obama… that was rejected by all? Clueless how budgets get passed? However he is not clueless about raising the debt ceiling… without meaningful matching cuts and or a balanced budget amendment! Obama knows it would be another nail in the coffin of America and another step toward his plan to fundamentally transform America… into a second rate nation!

Many, including Trump, feel that the GOP doesn't know they are in the driver's seat. All they have to do is sit back & wait for Senate & Obama to pass #CCB. Tick, tick, tick... Time for the GOP to play poker!

Last Update: 07.30.11: 4:07p.m. ET - Reid’s Debt Ceiling Increase Bill defeated in the house. The vote was 246-173. Senior official confirms Pres Obama has summoned Dem Leaders Reid and Pelosi to WH meeting on debt limit stalemate… no Republicans. So Speaker Boehner and Senate Minority McConnell just appeared together in short press conference:

Pres. Obama needs to tell us what he can sign. We're in those discussions now. –McConnell

Boehner: It's time for the POTUS to tell us what he's for.

McConnell: "I think we all know that if the president decides to reach an agreement w/ us, the Democrats...will fall in line."

Boehner says POTUS has driven Congress into cul-de-sac

Former Fox News White House Correspondent Major Garrett: Remember that driving metaphor from POTUS and 2010 campaign (reverse/forward)? The press would be a lot more credible if they treated POTUS the way they treat Boehner and McConnell. Amen

**Unnamed conservative reporter at Boehner/McConnell press conference said it appears that Obama and Reid might be getting the message that the tide is changing and they they will get the deserved blame for this debacle they’ve created, so my be talking compromise now.**

***At the end of the day, the most amazing thing to me is how many people are still completely disengaged… clueless. Jon Stossel went out in the street… Leno Jay-Walking style and asked people what the debt ceiling was, how much it was and who John Boehner is and most didn’t have a clue and many said they did care. I can only pray that those people choose not to vote!!***

Ask Marion~

August 3: Day of Reckoning

On Tuesday evening, President Obama was being interviewed by Scott Pelley, who asked the President whether he could guarantee that Americans would get their Social Security checks if the debt ceiling weren't raised:

Can you tell the folks at home that, no matter what happens, the[ir] Social Security checks are going to go out on August the 3rd?

Obama:  Well, this is not just a matter of Social Security checks. These are folks on disability and their checks. There are about 70 million checks that go out each month.

Pelley: Can you guarantee, as president, that those checks will go out on August the 3rd?

Obama: I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3rd if we haven’t resolved the [debt] issue, because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it.

A howl of protests that the President was being disingenuous, at best, went up immediately. On Wednesday morning, Terence Jeffrey, writing for CNSNews.com, noted that according to the Daily Treasury Statement for June 30 there was plenty of income to cover all the government’s expenses for the month, with a little left over. Peter Morici, an economist at the University of Maryland, said, “You do not have to default and you don’t have to shut down the government if you choose not to.” Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) was quick to point out that the President’s doubts about being able to pay the country’s bills and consequently being forced to default were a “misnomer:”

This is a misnomer that I believe the president and the treasury secretary have been trying to pass off on the American people, and it’s this: That if Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling by $2.5 trillion, that somehow the United States will go into default and we will lose the ‘full faith and credit’ of the United States. That is simply not true.

Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) charged the President with bullying: “My concern is that we have a president who is not willing to do his job, and that is to prioritize the spending, that he is digging in his heels, being very intransigent, and he’s being a rigid ideologue.” Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) came close to suggesting that the President was lying:

We know from the House rules that the president never lies, but he is taking advice and information from somebody apparently who is willing to lie, because it’s just not true. The fear mongering needs to stop.

In the event that the debt ceiling debate is not resolved by Friday, July 22, there would be no time to avoid the drop dead date of August 3, and the Treasury would appear to face some daunting decisions. Jay Powell, former Undersecretary of the Treasury under President George H.W. Bush, has published an analysis of the options facing the Treasury on August 3 without a debt ceiling resolution. According to Powell, August revenues to the government will be $172 billion, while payments are expected to total $306 billion, with a shortfall of $134 billion. At least three interactive tools have been developed for those willing to make the decisions of who to pay and who to stiff have been developed here, here, and here.

No matter which one is selected, the numbers, if they are to be believed, are grim, and the choices limited. The Treasury could spend all of its revenue on just six bills that are due in August: interest on the national debt ($29 billion), Medicare ($28.6 billion), Medicaid ($21.4 billion), Social Security ($49.2 billion), defense vendor payments ($31.7 billion), and unemployment insurance ($12.8 billion). That would leave unpaid Active Military Duty pay ($2.9 billion), Veterans Affairs programs ($2.9 billion), IRS tax refunds ($3.0 billion), food stamps ($7.1 billion), federal government employees’ salaries ($14.2 billion), Departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development, Energy, and Environmental Protection ($31.3 billion), the Federal Highway Administration ($4.5 billion), the General Services Administration ($41.7 billion), the Justice Department ($1.4 billion), and “other spending” ($42 billion). In addition there would be no funds for the Small Business Administration, the Department of Labor, the Federal Transit Administration, Health and Human Services grants, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Department of Homeland Security, NASA, or the Centers for Disease Control.

Credit rating agencies Moody’s and Standard and Poor’s have stated that the United States faces a possible credit downgrade if the government is allowed to default. As the White House Press Secretary put it: “You would have to make heinous choices about which bills you would pay.”

In an effort to inform about (some would say lend support for) raising the debt ceiling, Powell’s study was presented to several Republican Senators on Wednesday evening.

A careful reader should take note of three points. First, the numbers in the Powell study have not been vetted and are merely informed estimates of revenue flow for August. Second, in the perspective of an economy that is generating nearly $15 trillion of goods and services annually ($1.25 trillion a month), the alleged estimated shortfall of $134 billion for the month of August is small change). And remember that June numbers showed revenues exceeding expenses. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, the government finds itself in the same position as a family whose primary breadwinner has just lost his job, and they now have to cut their standard of living by 40 percent overnight. It seems somehow just, proper, and right that the profligate government would now be faced with the same situation if the debt ceiling weren’t raised. The adjustment, long overdue, would be painful, but necessary. Extending additional credit to the family (or the government) to “get over the hump” merely pushes the day of reckoning off into the very near future, when the financial difficulty will be even more painful to resolve.

Related:

How about we start tightening our belt by skipping “O’s” Lavish B-day Party?

Krauthammer:  Call Obama’s Bluff

What Happened to the $2.6 Trillion Social Security Trust Fund? (Madoff would be proud)

Republicans to Vote on $2.4 Trillion in Cut With Debt Ceiling Increase  -  Obama and Dems… Still No Plan Offered~

UN Reveals Its Master Plan for Destruction of Global Economy

Debt Crisis, Ron Paul, the Fed and the IMF  

Return of the Gold Standard as world order unravels (Gold has already replaced the dollar)

Boehner Verses the Freshmen:  Debt Ceiling Battle Lines Are Drawn

Video: (you gotta see this one!)  Juan Williams Pwned: Sean Hannity Makes Williams Look Like Complete A$$  -  Sean Hannity completely pawned Juan Williams last night on Hannity. Sean asked Williams to respond to Eric Cantor's comments on raising the debt ceiling. When Juan got through trashing Cantor, Hannity told him that actually those were Obama's comments from 2006. Watch Juan Williams' expression when he finds out he got totally pawned.

Video:  Congressman Joe Walsh:  The Obama Movie – Stop Lying

And as usual there is Sheila Jackson Lee… playing the race card!:  Jackson Lee:  Congress Complicating Debt Ceiling Because… Obama IS Black  -  Am hearing a lot of gag reflexes out there!!

 

We Need Leadership… What We Got Was: The Tantrum in a High Chair (and Then Fear Mongering to Seniors)

Every mom who has ever been at her wit’s end recognizes Barack Obama. The president who earlier nagged Congress that it was time for Americans to “eat our peas” finally threw his own peas to the floor and banged his spoon on his supper dish. Such a tantrum in a high chair is a familiar sight in a lot of kitchens.

“Enough is enough,” the president cried, frustrated by the tense budget talks at the White House. “Don’t call my bluff,” he told his Republican tormentors. “I’m going to the American people.”

If a pout and a sulk is familiar to Mom, every 2-year-old in town can understand the president’s angry frustration. Throwing your peas on the floor, particularly if they’re of the English variety, tasting of copy paper and sliding down a tiny throat like un-lubricated ball bearings, is the instant gratification every tantrum-thrower yearns for. But it’s a presidential strategy we haven’t seen before

These are not the cheers and hosannas the prince of Hyde Park imagined for himself when he agreed to step down from on high to assume the presidential purple. It’s going on three years and the natives are restless. They keep asking impertinent questions. Rep. Eric Cantor, the leader of the Republican House majority, ignited the president’s ire when he suggested the president and the Democrats take a smaller budget deal than His Excellency wants. The president—“he got very agitated,” in the telling of Mr. Cantor, who was there—did not appreciate such lack of respect for royalty.

Harry Reid, the president’s liege man in the Senate, wanted to boot Mr. Cantor from the talks. “He shouldn’t even be at the table,” the majority leader said. No tea and cookies for him. Some Democrats disputed the details in the Republican account, but there was general agreement that Mr. Obama lost his celebrated cool. And why not? So far the budget talks have been a classic standoff between the president, who is determined to raise taxes to make the welfare state grow, and the Republicans, who are determined to cut the bipartisan spending that threatens to spin the economy into an abyss of unknown depth.

The president’s tantrum can have a positive effect, however, if it captures the full attention of the public. Talk of the economy makes the average voter’s head hurt, his teeth itch, and his Jockey shorts bunch up under his belt. The economy has always been like algebra, difficult to grasp, and voters have been willing to leave the algebra to the advocates for the tax-eaters. That may be changing, as one and all begin to recognize that the good life is at risk—the car, the boat, college for the kids, tropical vacations in Maui. The exceptional nation may be at risk of becoming like the toy nations of Europe.

President Obama plays the empty threat to withhold Grandma’s Social Security check. Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, warns of “a huge financial calamity” if Congress refuses to raise the debt limit. This echoes the lamentations of Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner as well as the new chairman of the International Monetary Fund. Moody’s, the financial service that measures such things, piles on, with the dire threat that U.S. bonds could be downgraded. Maybe. It all smells like a contrived campaign to put pressure on the Republicans to cave, just as they have the attention of the president and his frightened Democrats.

The scheme of Sen. Mitch McConnell, the leader of the Republicans in the Senate, to give the president the authority to raise the debt limit without serious cuts and bear the consequences, looks better to the Republicans than it did when he introduced it and for his trouble was scorched by some conservatives as the usual Republican sell-out artist. Democrats squealed like stuck pigs. They naturally don’t want this responsibility because they understand the eventual consequences of continuing to live it up like pigs in the slop-house. Mr. Obama wants Republicans to share the “credit” for his incompetent management of the economy.

The verdict of history, though on the way, is not quite at hand. The verdict of 2012 soon will be, and looms over everything. It’s enough to make a president, swaddled with a bad situation he made much worse, bang his supper dish with his spoon and throw his peas on the floor.

Life, Health, Prosperity,  Diane G.

h/t to Deonia Copeland and Jean Stoner

And Here is the Latest The latest demagoguery from AARP… The Senior Group That Sold Out Their Members for Profit… 

Wake up Seniors… Join One of the Other Groups!

I'm No Pushover

Congress Must Prevent Harmful Cuts to Social Security and Medicare

AARP ^ | 7/12/2011 | Government Affairs and Campaigns

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2011 9:42:50 PM by Mangia E Statti Zitto

Right now, President Obama and Congress are considering a deal to pay the nation's bills that could cut the Social Security and Medicare benefits seniors have earned through a lifetime of hard work.

(Excerpt) Read more at aarp.org ...

Post #23
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2749323/posts?page=23#23

To: Mangia E Statti Zitto; All

Seniors may not get cost of living raises anymore and have their SS checks withheld, but Omuslim is going to take care of his muzzie bros and throw himself a big 50th B-Day party!

THIS is the sh*t that should be cut!

BILLIONS FOR JIHAD!

Obama’s 2009 Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Pandemic Flu was revised and “passed by the full committee.”
It gives billions http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/obamas-supplemental-bill-passes-gives-billions-to-enemies/  of U.S. taxpayer dollars to countries and entities that support Sharia law and/or harbor, hide and support those who want to destroy the U.S. and our allies.

Read the summary from David Obey’s office that was quietly released last week with nary a word from any media.

• $3.6 billion, matching the request, to expand and improve capabilities of the Afghan security forces

• $400 million, as requested, to build the counterinsurgency capabilities of the Pakistani security forces

• Afghanistan: $1.52 billion, $86 million above the request

• West Bank and Gaza: $665 million in bilateral economic, humanitarian, and security assistance for the West Bank and Gaza

• Jordan: $250 million, $250 million above the request, including $100 million for economic and $150 million for security assistance

• Egypt: $360 million, $310 million above the request, including $50 million for economic assistance, $50 million for border security, and $260 million for security assistance

• Pakistan: $1.9 billion, $591 million above the request

• Iraq: $968 million, $336 million above the request

• Oversight: $20 million, $13 million above the request, to expand oversight capacity of the State Department, USAID, and the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan to review programs in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq

• Lebanon: $74 million

• International Food Assistance: $500 million, $200 million above the request, for PL 480 international food assistance to alleviate suffering during the global economic crisis… for people who hate us

• Refugee Assistance: $343 million, $50 million above the request, …including humanitarian assistance for Gaza. Funding for the UN Relief and Works Agency programs in the West Bank and Gaza is limited to $119 million (Note: Gaza = Hamas)

• Disaster Assistance: $200 million to avert famines and provide life-saving assistance during natural disasters and for internally displaced people around the world, including Somalia, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, the Middle East and South Asia

•Peacekeeping: $837 million for United Nations
peacekeeping operations, including an expanded mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and a new mission in Chad and the Central African Republic

• Department of Justice: $17 million, matching the request, for counter-terrorism activities and to provide training and assistance for the Iraqi criminal justice system
The mainstream media remains silent on this but the International News has now picked up the story http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=22164
— and then there is Obama’s $108 billion IMF bailout scheme http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/13/obamas-100-billion-imf-bailout-scheme/
in addition to the Supplemental.

And THIS is what Obama is doing to American taxpayers:

THE BIGGEST TAX HIKE IN AMERICAN HISTORY:
http://www.atr.org/days-thebr-largest-tax-hikes-history-a5370
PDF Version:
http://www.atr.org/files/files/090310pr-jan2011taxes.pdf
Obama gives your tax dollars to rebuild Muslim mosques around the world
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/26990#

ACCORDING TO THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WILL GIVE AWAY NEARLY $6 MILLION OF AMERICAN TAX DOLLARS TO RESTORE 63 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL SITES, INCLUDING ISLAMIC MOSQUES AND MINARETS, IN 55 NATIONS. See the State Department document here.
http://exchanges.state.gov/media/pdfs/office-of-policy-and-evaluations/ambassadors-fund/afcp2010list.pdf

23 posted on Friday, July 15, 2011 10:14:11 PM by patriot08

Notes From Dr. Charles Krauthammer’s Speech to the Center for the American Experiment

Last Monday was a profound evening, hearing Dr. Charles Krauthammer speak to the Center for the American Experiment. He is brilliant intellectual, seasoned & articulate. He is forthright and careful in his analysis, and never resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fearmonger nor an extremist in his comments and views. He is a fiscal conservative, and has a Pulitzer prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox News and writes weekly for the Washington Post. The entire room was held spellbound during his talk. I have shared this with many of you and several have asked me to summarize his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically and internationally. Even 2 Dems at my table agreed with everything he said! If you feel like forwarding this to those who are open minded and have not ‘drunk the Kool-Aid’, feel free...

...A summary of his comments:

1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming individual. He is not to be underestimated. He is a ‘cool customer’ who doesn't show his emotions. It's very hard to know what's ‘behind the mask’. Taking down the Clinton dynasty from a political neophyte was an amazing accomplishment. The Clintons still do not understand what hit them. Obama was in the perfect place at the perfect time.

2. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan and Clinton. He has a way of making you think he's on your side, agreeing with your position, while doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch what he DOES!

3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. He did not come to Washington to make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including dismantling capitalism. He can’t be straightforward on his ambitions, as the public would not go along. He has a heavy hand, and wants to ‘level the playing field’ with income redistribution and punishment to the achievers of society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain or Canada.

4. His three main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, & NATIONAL HEALTHCARE by the Federal government. He doesn't care about the auto or financial services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap and trade will add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE college education is his goal. Most scary is his healthcare program, because if you make it FREE and add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type single-payer system, the costs will go through the roof. The only way to control costs is with massive RATIONING of services, like in Canada. God forbid.

5. He’s surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types. No one around him has ever even run a candy store. But they’re going to try and run the auto, financial, banking and other industries. This obviously can’t work in the long run. Obama’s not a socialist; rather he's a far-left secular progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a moderate, but will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not what he says.

6. Obama doesn’t really see himself as President of the United States, but more as a ruler over the world. He sees himself above it all, trying to orchestrate & coordinate various countries and their agendas. He sees moral equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in Germany and England was a prime example of how he sees America, as an imperialist nation that has been arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made errors. This is the first President ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies!

7. He’s now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) will not ‘come due’ until after he’s reelected in 2012. He’d like to blame all problems on Bush from the past, and hopefully his successor in the future. He has a huge ego, and Mr. Krauthammer believes he is a narcissist.

8. Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge strong. We’re ‘pining’ for another Reagan, but there’ll never be another like him. Krauthammer believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty & Bobby Jindahl (except for his terrible speech in February) are the future of the party. Newt Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and intelligent, but needs to really be seriously boning up on facts and info if she’s to be a serious candidate in the future. We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong national defense, and states’ rights.

9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous. We’re spending trillions that we don’t have. This could lead to hyper inflation, depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. The media is giving Obama, Reid and Pelosi a pass because they love their agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the huge bailouts didn’t work, nor will the stimulus package. These were trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama’s allies, unions and the Congress to placate the left, so he can get support for #4 above.

10. The election was over in mid-September when Lehman brothers failed. fear and panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was grinding on indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people are in pain, and the mantra of ‘change’ caused people to act emotionally. Any Dem would have won this election; it was surprising it was as close as it was.

11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans will be swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dems continue to roll. If it's between 8-10%, it’ll be a dogfight. It’ll all be about the economy.

I hope this gets you really thinking about what's happening in Washington and Congress. There’s a left-wing revolution going on, according to Krauthammer, and he encourages us to keep the faith and join the loyal resistance. The work will be hard, but we’re right on most issues and can reclaim our country, before it's far too late.

Source: Knowledge Creates Power

Posted: Daily Thought Pad

Related Articles:

• Hovering on High: Obama Surveys the World
• Catastrophe – ITS TIME TO TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY
• Power Grab
• Gingrich’s Group Offers 12 Solutions for America
• Liberty and Tyranny
• American Progressivism

Doctors Boo Obama In Chicago… Analysis: Tough Road Ahead

WASHINGTON (AP) — Barack Obama isn't used to hearing boos.

For all the young president's popularity, the response he got Monday from doctors at an American Medical Association meeting was a sign his road is only going to get rockier as he tries to sell his plan to overhaul the nation's health care system.

The boos erupted when Obama told the doctors in Chicago he wouldn't try to help them win their top legislative priority — limits on jury damages in medical malpractice cases.

But what could they expect? If Obama announced support for malpractice limits, that would set trial lawyers and unions — major supporters of Democratic candidates — on the attack. Not to mention consumer groups.

Every other group in the health care debate has a wish list and a top priority. Insurers don't want competition from the government. Employers don't want to be told they have to offer medical coverage to their workers. Hospitals want to stave off Medicare cuts. Drug companies want to charge what the market will bear.

Obama can't give all of them what they want. Instead, he's got to figure what's just enough to keep as many groups as possible on board — without alienating others. It's a fine line for him — and sometimes for them.

"It's a coalition issue," said Robert Blendon of the Harvard School of Public Health, an expert on public opinion and the politics of health care. "No major group is able by itself to sink health reform. But if numbers of them come together for different reasons, it could really hurt the direction the president wants to go in."

The doctors were only Obama's first house call. He'll be making his case to the other groups — and to the nation at large — in an increasingly energetic campaign to get a bill passed by the end of his first year in office.

AMA insiders shouldn't have been surprised by Obama's upfront refusal to consider malpractice caps.

The group couldn't get that idea passed by a Republican Congress and president a few years ago. Some states have such curbs, but anyone who can count votes knows the chances for national limits are slim to none with Democrats in charge of Congress.

Instead, Obama left the door open to some kind of compromise on malpractice.

The president said he's willing to explore alternatives to taking doctors to court. In the past, he supported special programs in which hospitals and doctors are encouraged to admit mistakes, correct them and offer compensation. Studies have shown the approach can work, because doctors' refusal to acknowledge mistakes is one reason many families file suit.

Doctors have special reasons to be wary of the president's plans to overhaul the health care system.

Not long ago, doctors' decisions were rarely questioned. Now they are being blamed for a big part of the wasteful spending in the nation's $2.5 trillion health care system. Studies have shown that as much as 30 cents of the U.S. health care dollar may be going for tests and procedures that are of little or no value to patients.

The Obama administration has cited such findings as evidence that the system is broken. Since doctors are the ones responsible for ordering tests and procedures, health care costs cannot be brought under control unless they change their decision-making habits.

"Change is scary," said Dartmouth University's Dr. Elliott Fisher, a doctor turned costs researcher. "I think there is a fear of loss of autonomy, that someone is going to tell you what to do." Fisher collaborated on research that showed wild differences in health care spending around the country — and no signs of better health in the high-cost areas.

But Obama did not blame the doctors. Instead, he tried to woo them, much as he has done with recalcitrant foreign leaders.

"It's the equivalent of international diplomacy. He's got to make them feel like it's possible to have dialogue about what the future looks like," said Blendon. "I think he's starting out with the AMA, but before the summer's over he's going to reach out to a lot of the other groups."

Obama assured the doctors that his plan would provide them with objective information on what treatments work best, with new computerized tools to better manage their patient case loads, and with support for harried solo practitioners to form networks.

He promised that Washington would not dictate clinical decisions. And he asked the doctors to imagine a world in which nearly every patient has insurance coverage and they can devote their full attention to the practice of medicine.

"You did not enter this profession to be bean-counters and paper-pushers," Obama said. "You entered this profession to be healers — and that's what our health care system should let you be."

That line got him an ovation.

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR – 2 hours ago - reports on health care policy for The Associated Press.

Obama needs to take time and give Congress and the American People time to examine all the options and do the needed research about American Healthcare Reform, not push through another nightmare (costing 1 Trillion Dollars over 10-years), like the TARP and Omnibus Bills without reading or researching with the gun of immediacy to all our heads. Obama also needs to stop rewarding the organized labor, who spent $80 Million dollars getting Obama and the Democrats elected. Doing something just to fulfill your uninformed campaign promises is not a good enough reason to spend another Trillion Dollars and to do this wrong!! This time around is everyone's job to get this right and to stand up to the Obama Administration and Congress to get it right, or let it go until we have our ducks in a row and can afford the needed decisions. - Ask/Marion – Daily Thought Pad

--------------------

OBAMA BOOED BY DOCTORS IN ILLINOIS TODAY

Seems pretty funny to me that doctors booed the Obama and it was told by CNN today and it's not on the internet yet. Doctors in Illinois didn't like what he had to say and it was big on CNN. Thought I'd look into the Liberal side and see what was happening.

Oh, and what he meant about having it costing less as it goes along - is the Government going to make sure the elderly get their coverage or operations or whether they will tell them to go home and die is that what they mean about costing less as it goes along. Makes one wonder, doesn't it?

Seems a lot of doctors feel this will be offensive to them - and NO CAPS on the way people sue doctors looks to me that less men or women will want to be doctors in the future.

By: Teatime1 on AARP.org/blog

Posted: Daily Thought Pad

Related Articles:

• Obama challenges GOP healthcare critics
• House Health-Care Proposal Adds $600 Billion in Taxes
• How To Stop Socialized Health Care
• Democrats Set to Rush Through Government-Run Healthcare
• Understanding the House Democrat’s Health care bill
• What a Week With Healthcare
• Kennedy Healthcare Plan Meets Resistance – Full of Pork
• Healthcare: You Think Michael Moore Will Contribute? Don’t Hold Your Breath
• Here Comes Rationing Healthcare
• Rights, Responsibilities and Healthcare
• British HealthCare - Don't Treat The Old!! - And Senator Coburn Warns Same For USA
• Universal Health and Old People
• Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look
• Conservatives for Patient's Rights
• Obama's Attack on Medical Civil Liberties
• Socialized Medicine in cartoon form.
• Voters Steer Europe to the Right – Why… Because Socialism Isn’t Working
• Progressivism – The Progressive Movement Is A Cancer – How We Got Here

House Health-Care Proposal Adds $600 Billion in Taxes (Update-2)

What we are looking at:

$600 Billion in tax increases and $400 Billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid as the number of Babyboomers added to the rolls increases daily… while we already owe a Trillion in interest on the money the government (Obama Administration) has already borrowed and printed to this point, before this nationalized health-care proposal.

June 12 (Bloomberg) -- Health-care overhaul legislation being drafted by House Democrats will include $600 billion in tax increases and $400 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel said.

Democrats will work on the bill’s details next week as they struggle through “what kind of heartburn” it will cause to agree on how to pay for revamping the health-care system, Rangel, a New York Democrat, said today. The measure’s cost is reaching well beyond the $634 billion President Barack Obama proposed in his budget request to Congress as a 10-year down payment for the policy changes.

Asked whether the cost of a health-care overhaul would be more than $1 trillion over a decade, Rangel said, “the answer is yes.” Some Senate Republicans, including Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, say the costs will likely exceed $1.5 trillion.

House Democrats plan to release their legislation next week. Obama is working with Congress to get legislation to his desk by October.

Democrats in the House and Senate are crafting legislation that would require all Americans to have health insurance, prohibit insurers from refusing to cover pre-existing conditions and place other restrictions on the industry.

Online Exchanges

The legislation would establish online exchanges for individuals to purchase insurance and would require employers to provide health benefits to workers or pay a penalty. Some Democrats also are backing creation of a government-run program to expand coverage to the uninsured. The issue is the subject of bipartisan negotiations with Republican who oppose the so-called public option.

Rangel said Democrats are still considering options for tax increases that might be in the bill, including a possible end to the income tax exclusion for employer-paid health benefits.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat, is considering a proposal to apply income taxes to health-care plans if they are significantly more expensive than the basic health plan for federal employees -- $13,000 for a family of four.

Rangel said House Democrats want to avoid the deeper cuts to projected spending under Medicare and Medicaid that Obama has been putting forth. House Democrats want to achieve cost-savings by cuts in payments to private insurance plans under Medicare.

Covering the Costs

Obama has pledged that health-care changes won’t add to the deficit. To accomplish that, he’s proposed getting about $600 billion by reducing tax deductions available to the wealthy, and by trimming Medicare payments to insurance companies.

That won’t be enough to cover the overhaul costs. Obama said this week he plans in the coming days to disclose more proposals for raising “additional sources of revenue.” In a letter last week to Senate Democrats drafting legislation he said he will be proposing between $200 billion and $300 billion in further Medicare and Medicaid cuts.

Obama plans to give a speech Monday in Chicago to the American Medical Association as part of his campaign to build up support for what could be the biggest changes to healthcare policy since Medicare was established in 1965.

Rangel said that while House Democrats will likely release more details about health policy changes in their legislation next week, the package of offsetting tax increases and spending cuts likely will come later. Democrats, he said, want to put forth the more-positive aspects of an overhaul first. Rangel also wants to let lawmakers have time to study and weigh in on proposed offsets.

“We have a problem in not wanting to attract enough negative attention to the bill in terms of the pay-fors,” he said. “Let them get a good feel for the coverage.”

By: Laura Litvan in Washington at: llitvan@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: June 12, 2009 19:05 EDT

Source: Fox Nation

Posted: Daily Thought Pad

Related Articles:

• How To Stop Socialized Health Care
• Democrats Set to Rush Through Government-Run Healthcare
• Understanding the House Democrat’s Health care bill
• What a Week With Healthcare
• Kennedy Healthcare Plan Meets Resistance – Full of Pork
• Healthcare: You Think Michael Moore Will Contribute? Don’t Hold Your Breath
• Here Comes Rationing Healthcare
• Rights, Responsibilities and Healthcare
• British HealthCare - Don't Treat The Old!! - And Senator Coburn Warns Same For USA
• Universal Health and Old People
• Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look
• Conservatives for Patient's Rights
• Obama's Attack on Medical Civil Liberties
• Socialized Medicine in cartoon form.
• Voters Steer Europe to the Right – Why… Because Socialism Isn’t Working
• Progressivism – The Progressive Movement Is A Cancer – How We Got Here

Stop the Insanity!!

Updated: If you'd like to contact Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, here's the contact information that you'll need.

Contact info for Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi

Please contact your representative, your Senator and Speaker Pelosi on this matter and others as they arise (almost daily these days).

OBAMA'S ISSUES CRUMBLING

At last, there is convincing evidence that Obama's poll numbers may be descending to earth. While his approval remains high -- and his personal favorability is even higher -- the underlying numbers suggest that a decline may be in the offing. Even as he stands on his pedestal, the numbers under his feet are crumbling.

According to a Rasmussen poll, more voters now trust Republicans more than Democrats to handle the economy, by a margin of 45-39. Scott Rasmussen notes that "this is the first time in over two years of polling that the GOP has held the advantage on this issue." Last month, he had the Democrats holding a one-point lead, but they lost it in June's polling.

And the Democratic leads over Republicans on their core issues are also dropping. Particularly interesting is the Democratic decline over healthcare, from an 18-point lead in May to only 10 points now.

A Gallup poll also confirms that the president's personal ratings are high, but the underlying data less so. While 67 percent of voters give Obama personal favorable ratings and 61 percent approve of his job performance (Rasmussen has his job approval lower, at 55 percent), they give him much lower ratings on specific issues.
Gallup shows Obama getting only 55 percent approval on his handling of the economy (down from 59 percent in February) and finds that only 45 percent approve of his handling of federal spending while 46 percent approve of his treatment of the budget deficit.

As it becomes clearer that the deficit caused by spending has landed us in a new economic crisis, entirely of Obama's own making, his popularity and job performance are likely to drop as well.

The old recession -- that the public says was caused by Bush -- shows signs of winding down. But the new recession and/or inflation -- triggered by Obama's massive deficits -- is just now coming upon us.

If Obama refuses to cut back on his spending/stimulus plans (despite convincing evidence that Americans are not spending the money), he has three options:

a) He can raise taxes, which will trigger a deeper recession;
b) He can print money, which will trigger huge inflation;
c) He can pay more interest to borrow money, which will send the economy diving down again.

The blame for these outcomes will fall squarely on Obama's deficit and spending policies. The fact that Americans are aware of these issues, and already disapprove of Obama's performance on them, indicates that they will be increasingly receptive to blaming him for the "new" recession.

Interestingly, Obama's polling is now the exact opposite of President Clinton's in the days after Monica Lewinsky. Back then, the president's approval for handling specific issues was his forte, while his job approval remained high but his personal favorability lagged 20 points behind. Ultimately, it is a politician's performance on specific issues that determines his electability. Personal favorability withers in the face of issue differences. Obama is about to find out that you cannot rely on image to bolster your presidency when the underlying issues are crumbling.

All this data suggests that Obama might run out of steam just as he gets to his healthcare agenda. As unemployment mounts, month after month, and Obama's claims of job creation (or savings) ring hollow, it is possible that he will not have the heft to pass his radical restructuring of the healthcare system. The automaton Democratic majority may pass it anyway, but it will be a one-way ticket to oblivion if they do.

By EILEEN MCGANN AND DICK MORRIS – Dick Morris.com – Dick’s new book: Catastrophe

Posted: Daily Thought Pad

WHAT'S KEEPING OBAMA UP? - THE ULTIMATE REALIZATION THAT THE CURE WAS WORSE THAN THE DISEASE

The Rasmussen poll conducted over the weekend of May 30-31 asked a key question designed to give us perspective on Obama's current popularity. The question was whether the current problems "are due to the recession that began under the Bush administration or to the policies Obama has put in place since taking office." In other words, who's to blame, Bush or Obama?

(For now) By 62-27, voters say Bush is still the culprit.

As long as this opinion remains prevalent, Obama will continue to enjoy high popularity. But when it changes, as it inevitably must, we will see him begin a long, long fall.

And this is the key measurement to watch.

The real recession -- dating from the stock market collapse -- began four months before Bush left office. And it is now four months since Obama was inaugurated. From this vantage, it still looks to voters like Bush's recession.

But it will become increasingly obvious that the large deficit Obama has incurred while pursuing his cure for the recession is, on its own, causing more problems than it solves. As high interest rates and, most likely, inflation, begin to set in -- with no relief in unemployment -- it will be obvious that Obamanomics isn't working and is, in fact, aggravating the economic trouble.

Obama, recognizing the danger, has recently begun to speak out -- without even cracking a guilty smile -- against the huge budget deficit he created. He is trying to blame the deficit, too, on Bush. But voters will not overlook the huge spending sprees of January and February, when Obama quadrupled the 2009 deficit. They will come to see that spending as a huge mistake and will shift their blame to the new president who proposed it.

Obama now faces a choice of poisons.

He can leave taxes as they are and take the poison of high interest rates, rapid inflation and a new recession, all caused by the massive borrowing he has forced on the Treasury. If the Treasury cannot sell enough bonds at a reasonable interest rate, it will, of course "monetize the deficit" -- economics-speak for printing money so that there will be enough to buy the Treasury debt at moderate interest rates. But the process of so vastly expanding the money supply (or even just leaving the current expansion in place without trying to soak up the extra money) will cause its own runaway inflation.

Or Obama can break his pledge and raise taxes on everybody. His soak-the-rich approach will not be enough to cover the deficit. Especially when one factors in his healthcare proposals, big tax increases on the middle class become an increasing likelihood. And when we consider his cap-and-trade legislation, huge increases in utility rates also loom.

Either poison will make it clear that the economy is suffering from the medicine Obama administered, rather than the original disease that started under Bush.
And, of course, while we cannot predict precisely the start date of the Obama-generated misery, it's pretty clear that it will be a long-lasting pain. Neither inflation nor the pain of higher taxes is going to go away soon. And either approach will probably kindle a new recession.

Some economists think we will have an L-shaped recession from which we do not emerge for years and years. Others think it will be a W-shaped recession (not Bush's W) in which we emerge briefly and then go back down again. But a U-shaped recession, in which we go down and then come bouncing back, probably cannot happen with Obama's deficits now firmly in place. Then it will become clear that the cure was worse than the disease.

By: DickMorris – Dick’s new book: Catastrophe