Why anyone with sense opposes ObamaCare

From Ace of Spades

The CBO report:

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10781/11-30-Premiums.pdf


A snippet of analyisis here:

Individual insurance premiums would increase by an average of 10 percent or more, according to an analysis of the Senate healthcare bill.
The long-awaited report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) also concluded that subsidies provided by the legislation would make coverage cheaper for those who qualify. …
Though Republicans will seize on the projections that insurance premiums for individuals would increase, Democrats will highlight the conclusion that the legislation would lower premiums by 56 to 59 percent for those individuals who would receive subsidies to buy insurance on the exchange created by the legislation. Of those who participate in the exchange, 57 percent would be eligible for subsidies. The subsidy would cover about two-thirds of their premiums, the report says.

Ace's analysis:

This is played as if the higher premiums are offset by subsidies. Which is absurd. There is no offsetting here. Those with insurance will pay more for it. Those without insurance will get subsidies from those who have it. There is no "offsetting;" the people paying the bills don't get the subsidies.


There are winners and losers here. If you've got insurance, you're a loser: Congratulations, you will now basically have a complete stranger's health care added to your premiums as if he's a member of your family, because you can afford it.

If you don't have insurance, you may be a winner... sort of. As regards primary effects you come out ahead -- free money! -- but there will be secondary effects, too, as all health care overall is driven to a lower quality.


Broken record time:

This is and always was about only one thing. A fairly direct transfer of wealth, and the services that wealth buys, from the middle class to the lower class. There is plenty of reason for the uninsured and poor to support this plan; there is no reason for anyone middle-class and insured to support it.

For the latter, there are no benefits whatsoever, and only costs -- except for the benefit of knowing you have basically added a stranger as a family member to your plan, and you can now enjoy the satisfaction of knowing all the extra money you're paying, and all the treatments you'll personally be denied, are going to help someone else. Maybe.


Ed goes on to note that even this analysis is broken, because the plan counts on reaping a lot of tax money from "gold-plated" insurance plans. No. The tax will kill gold-plated insurance plans, and thus that windfall will never accrue.

I should note that Obama and the liberals pushing this on us make two or three contradictory claims about what that "gold-plated" tax will do.


First they tell us that that tax will drive people away from such plans, thus supposedly reducing the overutilization of health care resources, which will then "bend the curve" of costs down by reducing demand.


Then they tell us that the additional resources will be freed up to be used for other people.

And then they tell us that this plan will be funded in part from the extra taxes on such premium plans.


Note that all three assertions are mutually contradictory.


If the uninsured and poor now use the supposedly "overutilized" resources that the premium insureds now use, then there can be no "bending the curve," as demand is unchanged -- the demand has simply been shifted from one group of users to another.

Further, you obviously cannot talk up how your tax will discourage buying such premium plans and then start counting all the money that will be rolling in when people continue buying these plans and pay the tax on them.

One or the other, guys. One or the other.


I remember taking the LSATs. Or the GMATs. There was a section about logical flaws. One of the questions -- designed to be a gimme, an early, easy question -- offered the hypothetical of environmentalists imposing a hefty tax on roads that ran through forests, in order to cut down on traffic running through them, and also proposed that at current rates of highway usage, they'd get x dollars in new revenues, which could then be used to make additional improvements to the environment.

What's the flaw?, the question asked. Well, duh: You can't both claim you're going to reduce something from current levels and then calculate the taxes that will flow in based on current levels.

Again: This was a gimme. One of the first five questions (questions are arranged in order of increasing difficulty), offered, basically, to distinguish the merely dim from the truly stupid.
And now your President and your Congress offers it to you.

Which tells you they consider you truly stupid.

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

Actually, Ace...on this I'm not so sure....I think Obama and Congress are too stupid to have noticed this themselves.

He effed up Harvard's finances, so then Obama hired him

to run his economic team!!! What could possibly go wrong???




http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/11/29/harvard_ignored_warnings_about_investments/?page=full

GREAT. Now he's pre-empting Charlie Brown Christmas

My God, the ONE thing I look forward to watching on TV all year, and he has to pick that day to give his 10 millionth speech, the gist of which is already known....he'll give the general half the troops he asked for, and start ordering the trumpets to sound retreat.

For this I have to give up the greatest monologue ever written???


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pn10FF-FQfs

King of the World sells us down-river yet again

He just can't stand that we're allowed to be in charge of anything, can he? I cannot inmagine how ugly this is going to get....hopefully, it'll take awhile before it starts falling apart.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/sep/30/icann-agreement-us

She looked MAH-velous!!!!!!

Michele out did herself last night!!!

I have not much cared for her clothes thus far, but she was exquisite last night......and as always, he looks like he could just eat her with a spoon, which tickles me no end..

Y'all may have noticed that I am not much of a fan of the President, but I have alway said that his obvious love for his family melts my heart. God bless and keep our First Couple, and their darling, darling babies, too!

The first recommendation from the Death Panels

I have been slow to post on this, because I was so shocked when I read it, that I was certain they would come back out and clarify that they really didn't mean what was published.

I am speaking about the new recommendations for mammograms.

In all fairness, I am not 100 percent sure this is directly from the Obama administration; it could all be bad timing. But I doubt it.

I had a scare myself this summer when I had my first mammogram (I was 45 at the time)....and YES, I was terrified, and I spent a VERY anxious week, in fact I had to ask my doctor for a few Xanax so I could sleep....scared beyond belief. It was a false positive...just a blur.

But understand this....I would gladly go through that anxiety ten times over again, so that the women who are not as lucky as I was can get their cancer detected AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE.


To sit there and claim that it is not worth needless anxiety over false positives when the alternative means other women will die because their cancers don't get detected early enough is so disgusting that I cannot even believe anyone will support this.

I have written all my elected officials, and I hope y'all will, too.

And note that there is not one Oncologist on this fucking panel.

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

Sorry for the long post, but I also wanted to post this, from Breath of the Beast; please check out the link, to see the human faces of this.... (bolding mine)


http://breathofthebeast.blogspot.com/2009/11/progressives-for-breast-cancer-preview.html


Progressives for Breast Cancer: A Preview of the Medical Gulag
Here is a little thought experiment for you. The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force has made a new set of recommendations for the diagnosis of breast cancer that have implied that breast self-examinations are of limited value and that women should begin getting a regular mammography at 50 years of age (rather than the old recommendation of 40) and then only every two years instead of every year.


Their report states that screenings between 40 and 49 years of age only turn up one cancer for every 1900 or so women. They express concern that “false positives” and unnecessary tests are a cruel source of anxiety and mental suffering for many women and that women would be much better off if they waited another ten years before they put themselves through all that turmoil. Oh, yes, they added that hat a great deal of money would be saved along with the angst of all those hysterical ladies.


Well, ok, false positives are a problem when you do screenings but what about the non-false positives that don’t get diagnosed? If you take their number of 1900 to 1 it doesn’t sound so bad, really. Until you think a little more about it…


Just consider that detected early, the five year survival rate for breast cancer victims is in the neighborhood of 98%. Detected late, that rate falls to about 26% a decrease in survival of 72%. And that doesn’t begin to cover the additional suffering from the treatments and dislocation of families when diagnosis is delayed.



But how bad is the problem? Let’s take Gillette Stadium for an example.

Gillette is where the New England Patriots play. Like a lot of stadiums, it has been used as a venue for all kinds of events, soccer games, rock concerts- all kinds of things. So let’s make up a hypothetical event to fill the stadium. Let’s just say that in the run-up to the last presidential election, candidate Obama wanted to solidify his support among one of his best “demographics”, younger women. His staff planed a big rally to which only women 49 and under are invited.
Now, Gillette’s official capacity is 68,756 people. So at a diagnosis rate of 1900 to 1 that means that 36 women there at the rally already have breast cancer. President Obama was a great draw in 2008 lets assume he would have filled the whole stadium so we can assume that there are 68,756 women in the seats.



Ok now picture a stage in the middle of the field. As the lights dim and the applause fades, a spotlight beam centers on the thin, serious figure of the future President of the United States and he lifts the microphone and pronounces his words very carefully.



“Ok, now, I have something to tell you that is very upsetting and I don’t want you to panic or get hysterical. Thirty-six of you women here tonight, and we don’t know who you are yet, are going to agree to reduce your chance of living for another five years by 72%. That means instead of 33 of you living at least five more years, only 9 of you will live. Not only that, you are going to give your consent to putting your self through a comparable amount more suffering and pain than you would otherwise have to endure. Also you will be saddling your husbands, parents, friends and children with infinitely more sorrow and desolation than they would have had to bear if you had not come to support my presidency tonight.”



In his usual style, the President is actually understating the case by a factor of ten. An astute friend of mine has pointed out that the 1900 to one ratio is a "yearly" crop of diagnoses based on yearly screening. so the actual loss of early diagnosis will be multiplied by the ten years of delay in receiving mammograms. This makes the actual death toll from that fateful rally more like 270 women.


It sounds like a non-starter doesn’t it? Do you think he would have gotten any of those women's votes that night? But the fact is that those 68,756 women (including the 36 doomed ones) have already been hoodwinked in to agreeing to that deal. Because, if Obama has his way and forces the single payer system down our throats, government then recommendations like these will assume the force of law for all but those are so wealthy that they can pay for medical services out of pocket.



These new recommendations are draconian, not just because it reminds us of how cold and callous a bureaucracy can be in its disregard for medical prudence and the value of an individual’s life but (even more) because it has given us an ominous forewarning of what the Medical Gulag of single payer, government run health care system would look like if the Blue Dogs and Republicans in congress don’t come to their senses soon and stop Obama’s high-pressure sales blitz for his “health care reform package”.


Just to put a human face on it, I have Googled "died of breast cancer", clicked on "Images" and selected a somewhat random sampling of the resulting pictures. I have posted 27 of them below to represent the first year's (remember there are another nine years worth of death, sorrow and suffering involved!) 27 extra deaths among the 68,756 rally attendee at that imaginary rally. Imagine that they are the ones upon whose bodies and families, Obama's health care reform would save all that money.



Reminder: this represents the first year's "beneficiaries" of the Obama "adjustment" to the mammogram regime. What other horrors will they come up with to make their takeover seem affordable?

And what is the money being saved for?


Incredibly, this is little more than part of a naked attempt to make it look "budget neutral" to take some of the excellent health care away from citizens who work, pay taxes and earn the right to have their own insurance and choose their own doctors and redistribute it to people many of whom are not even legal residents of our country. It is intended to rationalize the degradation of medical service for families that struggle to pay their own way in order to give an inferior but equal care to people who don't even value enough to work for it. It has even been proposed in the Health reform bill that the savings be used to increase the linguistic and cultural "sensitivity" of health care delivery in border regions to ease the lives of illegal aliens as they resist acculturation and assimilation.


If you are a woman, or care about women at all, picture that pro-Obama rally in Gillette stadium. Look at these pictures above and imagine these wonderful, unique, and irreplaceable people sitting side by side. They would occupy a little more that one row in an average section. Imagine them all dead within five years just because they voted for Obama. Then imagine ten more deadly swaths just like that over the next ten years. And that is just from the rally In Foxboro, Massachusetts. Fill all the football stadiums in the country and imagine eleven rows of breast cancer victims whose life is unnecessarily shortened because they invited government bureaucrats to decide on their cancer screening schedule. And even that would not approximate the real toll.


Whose picture do you want in that group?


Important Update:
The reader who corrected my numbers on the toll from the rally also stated this in relation to cutting the screenings down from every year to every two years:


It gets worse than that.Half of all screenings post-age-50 would be eliminated, meaning that half of all cancers discovered post-age-50 would have been incubating one extra year (and half of all cancers would post-age-50 would be detected as early as before).How many women post-age-50 get breast cancer and by how much would the death rate increase for that half of them with one extra year of incubation pre-treatment?Please correct your post accordingly. Best,
(I do not have permission to use his name yet)

Couldn't have said it better myself....

Amen, Haystack

(From Redstate)


It’s not even what’s IN this 2,000 page monstrosity of a healthcare bill that is at issue anymore, it’s what enacting it represents. Remember, it was only a couple hundred years ago that a King’s tyranny and despotism gave birth to a Nation of men and women more willing to die for liberty than live for the whims and fancies of an elite class hell bent on expanding their wealth and power on the backs of those having to live hand to mouth just to survive.


Rasmussen reports today that a meager 38% of us “favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats.” In fact, the article goes on to suggest that 56% actually oppose it. The aristocrats on the Hill, meanwhile, continue to push forward with the most un-American, un-Patriotic legislation presented to the American people…their BOSSES…since the New deal. ANY socialized Government-run system runs counter to everything our Founding Fathers fought and died for, and voting for it runs counter to everything being an “American” is supposed to represent.


We’ve given the ruling class Tea Parties, and they call us Nazis.

We’ve had protests and rallies and we’ve crashed their phone systems trying to tell them no, and they’ve thrown the race card in our face.


They’ve tried to define “we, the People” along party lines by suggesting the GOP is just the party of “no”, while the Democrats are the party “fulfilling an agenda of progress and change”. [For the record, I'll take "party of no" over "party of death" any day.]


The health care debate is not about health care, it’s not about what race you are, and it’s certainly not about which party you’re affiliated with. The health care debate is about who really runs this country. Is it the American taxpayer, or is it the power-monger on Capitol Hill?


Instead of buying each other’s votes they should be listening to each other’s concerns. Instead of deluding themselves and lying to the American people, they should take a big step backward and remember what their purpose in life is when they get to their office each morning. They are there at OUR pleasure, and they are expected to do OUR bidding.


They need to make some progress on the unemployment crisis, and change their attitude about taking over everything they think they can run better from on high. THEN, as Lee Iacocca once said, they can get the hell out of the way. When the money is in OUR hands it is ALWAYS more wisely spent..we know what to do with it better than they do.

More cover up by the media

Not sure how many of you heard about the big scandal at CRU in England...one of the main pushers of this stupid Global Warming crap.

Their computers were hacked, and hundreds of emails have been found showing how they have been fudging their data all these years, not running proper models, refusing to publish the models and data that show the earth temps have cooled over the last several years, and were directing people to delete all emails they may have sent referrencing how the data was not favorable to the agenda they are so vehemently pushing...

The sites reporting this are urging caution, and saying that it's possible this was a hoax, but somehow, I think it's true...

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/11/20/climate-cuttings-33.html



http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/hacker-releases-data-implicating-cru-in-global-warming-fraud/


http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/global-warminggate-what-does-it-mean/


Okay, I guess they have admitted the emails all all authentic...wonder how they're gonna spin it?????? Wonder what Al Gore will have to say about it???

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/hadley_hacked#63657

Health care so good Congress refuses to sign themselves up for it!!!

Woohooo!!! Can't wait til this shit becomes reality...they want everyone else to be forced to take it, and will bankrupt our country by forcing it through, but they refuse to have to have it themselves.



More than 200 amendments were rejected by the House Rules Committee ahead of Saturday's vote on the Democrats' health care bill, including 11 that would have required members of Congress and other government officials to be enrolled in the same federal insurance plan proposed for the American people.

Full story here:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/56897

More arrogance and ignorance on display...

Funny how the MSM isn'[t reportingt his....imagine if it had been Bush!




The Japanese media has reported that Obama’s recent state visit to their island nation was a big failure, but the U.S. media is mum on the mess that Team Obama made in Japan. He made multiple diplomatic gaffs and this is quite aside from the absurdly low bow that the incompetent president perpetrated upon greeting the Japanese Emperor Akihito.

Before we get to his other multiple fluffs and diplomatic errors, let’s explain what Obama was telling the Japanese people with his absurdly low bow. The sort of bow that Obama made is almost that of a “dogeza” bow. This is a sort of bow that is so low as to be considered a prostrated position. It is seen as an apology, a supplication, not a sign of respect. So, as we see, Obama once again showed that he wants to be known as the less-than president, that he is representing a prostrated people, and that he feels that to everyone he meets overseas he must apologize for this horrible U.S.A.


The inappropriate bow, however, wasn’t the only mistake that Obama committed in Japan.


According to the mainstream Japanese weekly magazine Shukan Bunshun the visit was termed “miserable,” and “the worst US-Japan summit meeting in history” by Japanese insiders. Worse, the Japanese government was so upset at the visit that it retaliated at various points issuing slights right back to President Obama during his stay on Japanese soil.

More at this link.....

http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/22/us-media-ignores-obamas-muffed-japan-visit/#more-35282

The President's ignorance, arrogance and bad international instincts are showing....

From Powerline:


We've noted the Obama administration's penchant for bullying America's allies and kowtowing to its adversaries. This Washington Post story presents another case-in-point -- our treatment of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

As Afghan presidents go, Karzai makes a good mayor of Kabul (in a bad year). Nonetheless, right now the U.S. needs Karzai and Karzai needs the U.S. Thus, in the words of one senior administration official, "it's not sustainable to have a 'War of the Roses' relationship [I assume he means the movie, not the real war] where we basically throw things at each other."

This, though, has been our relationship with Karzai since Barack Obama became president. As one senior Pentagon official put, "We've been treating Karzai like [Slobodan] Milosevic" and "that's not a model that will work in Afghanistan."


The reference to Milosevic is also a reference to Richard Holbrooke who played a major role in dealing with the former Yugoslavia and, under Obama, is a special envoy to Afghanistan. According to the Post, Holbrooke's "aggressive style has infuriated" Karzai.


But Holbrooke is not alone in this respect. Our vice president, Talkin' Joe Biden, reportedly became Shoutin' Joe Biden during a dinner with Karzai shortly before Obama's inauguration, as the two argued about Karzai's response to civilian casualties caused by U.S. and NATO operations. It doesn't seem to have dawned on "Slow Joe" that Karzai must strike a balance between his relations with the U.S. and his relations with various factions in his country.
Hillary Clinton did her part to stoke tensions. During her confirmation hearings shortly after Biden's outburst she referred to Afghanistan as a "narco-state" with a government "plagued by limited capacity and widespread corruption."


But at the root of our "arrogant" approach to Afghanistan has been President Obama himself. It was he who discontinued the bi-monthly videoconferences with Karzai that President Bush had instituted. It was he who appointed Holbrooke and granted him wide latitude to bully Karzai. And it was he who decided that Holbrooke should signal the administration's desire for many candidates to challenge Karzai in presidential elections.


But now, according to the Post, the administration is realizing that its "initial strategy may have done more harm than good, fueling stress and anger in a beleaguered conspiracy-minded leader whom the U.S. needs as a partner." That conclusion seems inescapable. As the Post notes, Karzai's fear that he no longer had U.S. support caused him to ally with figures the U.S. found even less desirable than the ones it had criticized him for associating with. And with the U.S. perceived as cultivating a number of candidates to oppose Karzai, the opposition never coalesced around a single figure, which played into Karzai's hands. By May, it seemed clear that Karzai would be re-elected, but the U.S. continued to send what Karzai took to be signals it wanted him to lose.


Now, at last, we're attempting a "reset." The CIA has sent a field officer who has strong relations with Karzai to be its Kabul station chief and Hillary Clinton - the Secretary of Reset - tried to charm Karzai at a dinner earlier this week. Meanwhile, Holbrooke is spending more time in Washington and has focused on obtaining international support of reconstruction projects and development programs. This sounds like his highest and best use.


It's nice that the administration has seen the error of its ways. But what are to make of a president who takes almost a year to figure out that alienating our partner in a war makes little sense?

The administration was correct in perceiving that Karzai has major limitations. But why did it conclude that trying to humiliate him was the answer? Why didn't it conclude, as apparently it has now, that cultivating a close working relationship is the best way to enable Karzai to fix at least some of his problems and to better achieve U.S. goals?


The administration's approach is so counter-intuitive that I don't think it can be attributed solely to inexperience. The answer has more to do with Obama's bad, even perverse, instincts as described at the beginning of this post. The real wonder, then, is not that Obama started out on the wrong track but that he's fixing to change course, if in fact he really is.

Our President's priorities are clear

He's opposed to arresting illegal aliens:

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/19/work-site-arrests-of-illegals-fall-dramatically/

But, by God, he will make sure Gibson doesn't use "endangered" wood when they make guitars!

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20091118/BUSINESS01/911180400/-1/NLETTER03?source=nletter-news

That just gives me SUCH confidence about what he feels are the most important issues in this country.


Hat tip to Redstate

Why is this so difficult for him to figure out????

The Groveler-In-Chief

I coudn't resist

When the term "teabagger" first started being used by the MSM to disparage my fellow Tea Partiers, I had no idea a), we were even being disparaged, and, b) what it meant.


Now that I know, I frankly find it kinda funny, though inappropriate for Presidents to be saying (and shame on you Bill and Obama if you did).

In the spirit of humor in politics, not to mention tit-for-tat, I bring you this cartoon, courtesy of Big Hollywood. Far more on-point for the Kool-Aid drinkers, as it touches on on their behaviour, rather than just the term, as Teabaggers does.

And I feel SO smug for knowing what it means without having to Google it!!

What Bush Inherited, and What He Left Behind

From The National Review

George W. Bush inherited a recession. He also inherited the Iraq no-fly zones, a Middle East boiling after the failed last-minute Clintonian rush for an imposed peace, an intelligence community wedded to the notion of Saddam's WMD proliferation, a Congress on record supporting "regime change" in Iraq, a WMD program in Libya, a Syrian occupation of Lebanon, Osama bin Laden enjoying free rein in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, a renegade Pakistan that had gone nuclear on Clinton's watch with Dr. Khan in full export mode, and a pattern of appeasing radical Islam after its serial attacks (on the World Trade Center, the Khobar Towers, U.S. embassies, and the U.S.S. Cole).

In other words, Bush inherited the regular "stuff" that confronts most presidents when they take office. What is strange is that Obama has established a narrative that he, supposedly unlike any other president, inherited a mess.

At some point, Team Obama might have at least acknowledged that, by January 2009, Iraq was largely quiet; Libya was free of WMD; Syria was out of Lebanon; most of the al-Qaeda leadership had been attrited or was in hiding; a homeland-security protocol was in place to deal with domestic terror plots; European governments were mostly friendly to the U.S. (unlike during the Chirac-Schröder years); and the U.S. enjoyed good relations with one-third of the planet in China and India.

The fact that in the Bush years we were increasingly disliked by Ahmadinejad, Assad, Castro, Chávez, Kim Jong Il, Morales, Ortega, and Putin, may in retrospect seem logical, just as their current warming to the U.S. may prove to be cause for alarm, given the repugnant nature of these strongmen.

Bottom line: Obama's second year as president is coming up, and it is long past time to move on and let historians judge the Bush years.

KSM collects his first virgin

From Don Surber




Khalid Sheikh Mohammed collected the first of his 72 virgins: Barack Obama.

This child — this spoiled brat who has been handed everything — who has never held a job — who has been told all his life how wonderful he is — who accepts no responsibility at all for anything — who blames others for all his problems — whose only accomplishment in life is not being George Bush — got rolled.

Big time.

President Obama’s decision to try KSM as if he were a purse-snatcher bares once and for all shows how shallow our president is. He is ignorant of history and of legal precedent. He would rather draw down the U.S. security forces to protect KSM so that KSM can have the world stage in New York City than trust his own military to try the man. The same military justice system that covers those soldiers he praised a few days ago should be good enough for this scum sucker, KSM.

From a correspondent in Washington who has no voice but must scream:

Kos is trying to claim that critics of President Obama’s plan to ship terrorists to New York City for trial are scared. I wonder if that includes Democrats like Sen. Barbara Mikulski and Majority Leader Harry Reid?

Kos fails to tell you about the disruptions that took place during the trial for terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui in Alexandria, VA:

The 450-inmate jail was locked down every time Moussaoui was moved to the back of the nearby courthouse in a heavily armed convoy. Traffic was stopped as snipers watched from rooftops.

Imagine the security that will be needed for these terrorist trials in one of the most famous cities in the world.

Then there’s also the risks to national security these trials would bring. Last month in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey noted that Osama bin Laden learned quite a bit from the trial of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman in 1995.

In a statement, Sen. Jon Kyl said, “Past trials of terrorists have proven that our civilian courts are not the appropriate venue to handle international terrorism trials. As a result of the trial of Omar Abdel Rahman, also known as the ‘Blind Sheik,’ al Qaeda obtained valuable information about U.S. intelligence sources and methods, thereby making the job of fighting terrorists tougher. Military tribunals –- which have been used by Presidents dating back to George Washington -– are the most appropriate, and secure, forum to try those who commit acts of war against the United States.”

I encourage you to push back on this typically childish Kos smear.

My final comment: Obama is a coward. A man would have held a press conference and announced it and defended his stand. He is in Asia instead. The media vetted Joe the Plumber better than the man who is now president. The result is feeble attempts to bully critics, a refusal to acknowledge the loyal opposition and a dithering foreign policy.

New York City, seriously?????

I am not sure if this is true yet, but CNN is reporting that Obama announced in Japan that they were going to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in NYC.


Are they intentionally trying to get him set free by way of appeal???? Do you seriously think his lawyers will not be able to say that it was impossible for him to get a fair trial in NYC???? Since he was not arrested per se, but captured, he was certainly not read his rights (and he is not a US citizen, so he is not entitled to rights under our Constitution) but can this entire case be dismissed on those grounds, since this IS a criminal court case now, not a military one? Does anyone know???

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE???????


Our only hope is that one of my patriotic redneck brethren is willing to take one for his country, and bring this terrorist piece of shit down before a verdict is reached.

Way to go, HillBuzz!

I am doing my best not to make any remarks about Hell Freezing Over, but this is an amazing post.

Maybe we all CAN just get along!

HillBuzz

Dither away, while the troops get slaughtered why don'tcha?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/11/official-obama-does-not-a_n_354784.html


Why the hell can't he just send some extra troops over there, while he makes up his mind??? Or grow a pair of balls, and admit he wants to retreat???

Are you fucking kidding me?? Too white and too male to carry our flag?

From CDR Slamander.....



The Potemkin Color Guard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have worked long and hard to reach a high profile position, as those who came before you had.

You did everything that was asked of you, and more. You believed in a system that told you all you had to do was work hard, pay attention to detail, excel in your efforts, show exceptional dedication, and demonstrate professionalism better than those around you. Do that, you were told, and you will be rewarded.

You understood that nothing was guaranteed - but you also knew that the system was a meritocracy based on fair, established rules that everyone agreed upon when they started.

Why wouldn't you believe that? Those in positions of authority, those whose word was gold, those who asked of you only what they demanded of themselves - they told you so. Because they said it was so, it must be true - it has to be true.

After countless hours of work, dedication, and sacrifice, you finally reached the position of service and honor you hoped for - you made it.

The team you are on is set to make a high profile appearance. You are ecstatic. Happy. You let those who are important in your life know, so they can watch you on TV and perhaps see the results of the hard work you put in for so long.

Then it happens.

The day prior to the event you are told that those in power decided to remove you and a friend from the position you worked so long and hard for. You wonder, "What did we do? Why?"


The reason is rather simple; those in positions of authority did not like your race and gender. Nothing that you did - no - not that. Nothing personal - just business, you know.


Simply by being born, you have been found wanting, and unworthy.

Crushed. Betrayed. Lied to. Those, perhaps, are just a few of the emotions you have.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, is the above a made up story, or a generalization to make a point?


No. True story from last week.

On 29 OCT, the USNA Color Guard made an appearance at the World Series. The day prior to their appearance, two Midshipmen were removed from the Color Guard by senior Commissioned Officers in leadership positions at Annapolis for one simple reason; they were white males. That isn't a guess on their part - that is what they were told.

Before I go further, I want to detail a couple of things. I didn't think about running this story after the first notification I received. However, I soon started to receive multiple tips from multiple contacts associated with Annapolis, alumni, and parents.

Over the last few days, working with over a half-dozen very reliable sources, the following story started to flesh itself out.

The day before their appearance, the two MIDN were notified that USNA senior leadership did not like the fact that the Color Guard was not diverse enough. As a result, they were to be removed and replaced with someone with a higher melanin content in their skin, and a female. Boom - there you go.

BZ to the two MIDN involved - word is that they have not taken this blatant racism lying down. Thing is - we don't know what is going on now because the entire Brigade via Company Commanders have been told to refer all questions to the PAO. That is what it is. I have an email in to the USNA PAO's office. Went out late yesterday and I doubt they will reply so soon - but if they do I will update this post appropriately.


I would love to discuss this with the MIDN - but I am not going to ask them to put themselves on report.

Oh, and in any case someone is wondering; I have had no direct contact with either of the two MIDN involved. Nor have I received or asked for information from any MIDN after the squelch order took place; so leave them alone. It isn't about them anyway - it is about a policy that would do this; and the people who execute the policy.


This wasn't a secret over the weekend - the story isn't going to die quickly. Two can keep a secret as long as one of them is dead. Things like this spread like wildfire.

I would like to hear the full story from the USNA side of the house - as this is just plain racism - red in tooth and claw.


It would be great if this was just some great paranoia - some collective misunderstanding and misremembering. That would be a much better thing than officially sanctioned racism, wouldn't it?

Here are some questions the MIDN should ask their leadership if given the chance - any MIDN:
- If the Navy discriminated against two people simply on the basis of their race - at what other times in their career can they expect to be discriminated against?
- In a zero-sum game - does senior leadership realize that to give to one, you have to take from another?
- Is overt racism a valid method to pick one over another? If so, why?

In addition to the integrity of the USNA, the institution it serves, the taxpayers who support it, and the two MIDN discriminated against, there are two other victims of this - the two Diverse selectees. I feel sorry for them as well.


Everyone knows they didn't get there because they were the best - they were there simply because they were good enough to help show a Potemkin image of Annapolis. To do that, they had to steal-by-proxy their position from others based on race and gender. Not something to brag about.

What kind of lessons do we want to teach our future leaders?
- Are hard work, dedication, and working by the rules not the keys to success? No?
- All you need to succeed is to be "good enough," and to be born into one of the protected classes? Really? Is that where we are in the 21st Century Navy?
- If a MIDN is not of a protected class as defined by the Diversity Directorate, then should he consider himself a second class citizen? An officer less worthy simply as a result of his birth?
- Do we tell our officers, "Some people, you see, are more equal than others." - is that where we are?

Sad. But don't go away sad.


No, there is humor to be found even in the worst stories. This little side-bar also has a happy ending ... of sorts.

One of the Diversity selectees showed why he wasn't on the A-Team that day. He forgot his cover and his shoes. A rookie mistake to be sure, but again - says a lot. As a result of the rookie mistake - one of the two MIDN who were discriminated against took his place during the ceremony.


Half full? Yes. However, if your glass is half full of wine and half full of bu11sh1t - it still tastes like bu11sh1t.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE: Late yesterday, I asked USNA Public Affairs the following questions:

(Summary of the above)Could you please confirm the above information is correct.

Additionally, could you also comment on what if any protests have been made formally or informally by the two white male MIDN?

Are there other occasions where changes have been made on "the public face" of USNA due primarily to race, creed, color, national origin, or gender?

Have the MIDN been told not to discuss this issue? If so, why?


This AM, USNA Public Affairs offered the following response:
- The Color Guard is a voluntary extra curricular activity. All members must meet high standards of performance to participate. Members go through extensive training and they are all considered qualified once they are accepted onto the team. 28 midshipmen from all four classes comprise the individual teams that are normally made up of 6 members, but the team size can be adjusted for different situations. Members are selected for events based upon availability, qualification and level of proficiency.

- Background into World Series Event/Decision:
On 28 October 2009, we learned that the Color Guard had been asked to carry the colors at World Series game number 2 at Yankee Stadium. We were excited at the opportunity to represent the Naval Academy in front of our nation and looked at a number of options to ensure our color guard members were fully qualified and available to participate. Upon reviewing the different options, a preliminary option was discussed, but later modified to have a color guard composition of 8 members that would honor the proud work of our team members and highlight the tremendous talents of our many Midshipmen.

Prior to the team's departure on 29 October 2009, this initial course of action was discussed with some specific Midshipmen and because of their valuable insights the final modified plan was developed. Unfortunately, upon arrival at Yankee Stadium, a uniform inventory problem was discovered and therefore, only six midshipmen were present on the field (as even numbers are required). One of the members of the team that did not participate is a second class midshipman that will have opportunities to participate in future events.

Our intent to have all team members participate was not met because one of the midshipmen inadvertently travelled without a required uniform item. While only 6 of the 8 participated in the ceremony, all 8 midshipmen did attend World Series Game2.

Well, there you go.

Lovely

From Big Govt

Dressed as ‘zombie soldiers’ killed in combat, ‘ghosts of war victims,’ witches and healthcare fairies, members of Code Pink menacingly paraded in front of a captive audience of children one block from the White House, who waited along the sidewalk in front of Decatur House just off Lafayette Park for a Halloween party hosted by President Obama.


Last Saturday, the President hosted several hundred military families for trick or treating. Also invited were children of White House staff and about 2000 children from eleven D.C. area elementary schools.

In a press release published at their website, key Obama ally Code Pink – a group co-founded by one of Obama’s top funders Jodie Evans, announced they were targeting military families for what can only be called psychological abuse by conducting a macabre protest of the war in Afghanistan as the families waited in line to enter the White House grounds.



This is not the first time Code Pink has waged psychological warfare on our troops and military families. Four years ago the group initiated a weekly protest at the main entrance to Walter Reed Army Medical Center where Code Pink held signs reading, “Maimed for a lie” and “Enlist here and die for Halliburton.” One Veterans Day, Code Pink protesters called the wounded warriors at Walter Reed war criminals and on other occasions have called them terrorists.

Video of the Halloween protest shows members of Code Pink, including co-founder Medea Benjamin and Condoleezza Rice stalker Desiree Fairooz emotionally waterboarding the children in front of their parents.

Benjamin, whose work prolonging the insurgency in Iraq with humanitarian aid and political support for the terrorists is believed by many military families to have led to the maiming and killing of thousands of American soldiers in Iraq, has now focused her energies on helping our terrorist enemies defeat America in Afghanistan by propagandizing against reinforcements for our troops.

Dressed in fatigues with a bloody bandage wrapped around her head, Benjamin loudly moaned as she emoted being a ‘zombie soldier’, while holding a black cut-out of a rifle and wearing a pink sign that read, “The White House is haunted by the ghosts of Bush’s war.”

That’s just what children of soldiers fighting for our freedom should see, yes? Well, if your intent is to wage psychological warfare on the families of our troops to aid our terrorist enemies then the answer would indeed be, “yes.”

Fairooz, convincingly portraying a witch (as the Buck Owens song says, all she had to do was ‘act naturally’), called out to the children, telling them she wanted “young blood” for the war. (1:25 mark in video.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOybQn7CCjY


Reuters was so disgusted by the display, the newswire’s photo caption accused Code Pink of taunting the children:


Members of the protest group Code Pink taunt local school children with chants about the war in Afghanistan as the children and their families arrive for a Halloween reception by U.S. President Barack Obama and his family at the White House in Washington, October 31, 2009. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst (UNITED STATES CONFLICT POLITICS SOCIETY)

Two days later, Reuters posted a blog entry responding to criticism of the caption by a Code Pink supporter:

“Nobody is paying us to ‘run such captions.’ Our photographer says the protesters said things to challenge and confront the children and their parents. For example, one protester dressed as a Wicked Witch was saying things like, ‘More pretties to die in my war! More pretties!’

“He said they were not just protesting the war in general but were, in effect, telling these families that their children were going to die at war. That sounds pretty much like taunting to me: GBU Editor”

In the press release issued last Friday about their Halloween protest at the White House, Code Pink explicitly stated they were targeting military families:

“While the Obamas host a Halloween Party outside the White House for military families, peace activists will also don costumes and call on Obama to oppose the surge in Afghanistan and end the wars… The activists will be dressed as zombie soldiers, ghosts of war victims, a monstrous Obama’s Afghanistein and more.”

The video of the protest shows the shocked and bewildered looks on the faces of the children in reaction to the real-life ghouls from Code Pink.

One wonders what will it take for President Obama to renounce the support of Code Pink and Jodie Evans. A commander-in-chief who truly cared about the troops and their families wouldn’t have to be told to do the right thing. It would come naturally

Sometimes, Miss Ann Coulter nails it right on the head

In modern America, the guilty are sanctified, while the innocent never stop paying – including with their lives, as they did at Fort Hood.

Before shooting up a medical facility on that Army base, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan reportedly shouted “Allahu Akbar.”

While Hasan gave a shout-out to Allah before shooting, President Obama gave a shout-out to "Dr. Joe Medicine Crow” before getting around to mentioning the massacre on the day it happened.

President Obama's response to abortionist George Tiller was “I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller.”

President Obama’s response to the slaughter of 13 Americans by a Muslim at a U.S. military installation was to instruct Americans not to “jump to any conclusions.”


The rest of the article is here

So much for The Land of The Free

Buy $15,000 Insurance Policy or Go To Jail


Your only two options for ObamaCare, as near as I can tell.


According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.


Criminal penalties

Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:

• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.

• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]

Something we can ALL, Liberal or Conservative, get behind!

From Power Line:


Calling All Bloggers


I'm delighted to be collaborating with Joe Trippi, one of my favorite liberals, on a bipartisan project to support America's veterans. The project is called the Eleven Eleven campaign; the objective is to get 11 million Americans to contribute $11 apiece to support America's vets. The campaign will be internet-driven, and all bloggers are invited to participate. Here is a description of the campaign:

This Veterans Day marks the beginning of The Eleven Eleven Campaign -- a nationwide campaign by BeyondTribute.org to change the way America honors its Veterans.

The objective of the campaign is simple: to get 11 million Americans to donate $11 to support America's Veterans. We've made giving back to our Vets simple through a national Text to Give Campaign (simply text "VETS" to 85944 to contribute).

Contributions are distributed directly to Beyond Tribute's 11 coalition partners, who specialize in providing direct services and advocacy for Veterans of all eras and conflicts, including World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, Persian Gulf War, and the present day conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We're asking bloggers from around the web and across the political spectrum to join us in making this Veteran's Day a holiday not about sales in the stores, but about making a difference in the lives of our Veterans.

To that end, we'd like to invite you to a special campaign announcement call for bloggers this Monday, November 9th at 8 pm ET/5 pm PT. Join Gold Star Mother Ruth Stonesifer, Democratic political consultant Joe Trippi and Power Line blogger John Hinderaker to learn more about the campaign and how you can help make this November 11th a day when bloggers come together to support our Vets.

Please RSVP to the conference call here:

http://action.eleven-eleven.org/t/5400/signUp.jsp?key=2817

Dial-in Number: 1-213-289-0500

Participant Access Code: 4670471

The Eleven Eleven Campaign begins on Veterans Day, 2009 - but it continues every day until our goal is reached: bringing 11 million Americans together to change the way America honors its Veterans - moving beyond tribute to action and support.

The organizations that will receive support from the campaign include groups like American Gold Star Mothers, the Wounded Warriors Project, the VFW Foundation, and more. If you have a web site, please join us on the conference call tomorrow at 5 Pacific, 8 Eastern for more information. Thanks!


http://www.eleven-eleven.org/

I don't know whether to laugh or cry

ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates -- The U.S. Homeland Security secretary says she is working to prevent a possible wave of anti-Muslim sentiment after the shootings at Fort Hood in Texas.

Janet Napolitano says her agency is working with groups across the United States to try to deflect any backlash against American Muslims following Thursday's rampage by Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a Muslim who reportedly expressed growing dismay over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

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

REALLY??? The Department of Homeland Security is on red-alert to protect Muslims in this country?? I find that astonishing, given that as Mark Steyn so succinctly points out, right now the body count from this incident stands at:

Non-Muslims 13
Muslims 0


Maybe they should focus more on Muslims in the military who are conflicted about deploying to Muslim countries, and quit ignoring BIG, GIANT RED FLAGS in the name of Political Correctness!!!

A Tale of Two Presidents

Class

Complete lack thereof:


11:25AM THE PRESIDENT addresses the House Democratic Caucus - Cannon House Office Building
2:30PM THE PRESIDENT makes a statement to the press on Health Care - Rose Garden
2:45PM THE PRESIDENT and THE FIRST LADY depart The White House en route Camp David - South Lawn


Camp David...not Fort Hood? Seriously?? He is their Commander in Chief!!!!


And do not even get me started on his comments......the asswipe who was so quick to judge the Cambridge cop in the Gates case is now saying: "We don't know all the answers yet. And I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts," Obama said in a Rose Garden statement...

I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and say if the assasin had been a Pro-Life activist, or had a Palin sticker on his car, he and the press both would be jumping to so many conclusions that their teeth would be rattling in their collective heads.