OBAMA IS GOOD AT CALLING AMERICANS NAMES

In 2006 when Obama was still in the Senate he made a trip to Africa, and had these words to say: “When the heavy hand of the state is imposed on the press, all of us lose,” He told a group of Kenyan journalists during an August 2006 trip to Africa. “The media does not have a formal role in the government, but it serves a critical function in providing information to the public so that they can hold the government accountable,” he said.Somebody should point out to the main stream media that Obama does not want them to be a propaganda arm of his government, or do his words only apply to foreign countries?

Mr. Obama’s remarks implied he supports the First Amendment. His comment that “Democracy can’t function properly without a free press,” suggested he understood the importance of robust scrutiny of elected officials. Yet, when given the opportunity, Mr. Obama’s recent actions have contradicted his own statements.

The Obama campaign launched a multipronged assault on the First Amendment when it threatened television and radio stations airing content critical of Mr. Obama. The first targets were TV stations running an advertisement that has proven embarrassing to the presidential candidate. The ad focuses on Mr. Obama’s 13-year relationship with Bill Ayers, a key member of the 1970s domestic terrorist group, the Weather Underground. The Weathermen bombed at least 12 locations, including the U.S. Capitol in 1971, the Pentagon in 1972 and the State Department in 1975. A 1970 San Francisco bombing killed one police officer and blinded another. The same year, three Weathermen perished in a Greenwich Village townhouse explosion. Unrepentant, Mr. Ayers told a New York Times reporter in remarks published on Sept. 11, 2001: “I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.”

And when people opposed his health care proposal, he called them a "mob" controlled by the Insurance Industry. President Obama took direct aim at the vocal opponents who’ve been filling congressional town halls on health care last Tuesday, saying despite all the “yelling and the shouting and the noise,” health reform will improve the lives of Americans with and without insurance now.Never mentioned the cost in increased taxes did he!

Obama said special interests who oppose health reform always “try to scare the heck out of folks, and they’ll create boogeymen out there that just aren’t real” to prevent change. He even sought to rebut directly one of the most widespread rumors — that the bills in Congress include so-called death panels to decide how much coverage people can receive. It is rather strange that the Senate has said they will remove that provision from their proposed bill! Who is lying here, you be the judge!!

And even if there is not a provision in the over 1000 page bill the house passed that refers to a government panel that will decide when end of life occurs. Where in the Constitution is the federal government granted the authority to implement a national public health care system? Where, in our founding document that all other freedoms, restraints, and rights are written out, does it give Washington the power to steal from me to fund health care for you? If you can just tell me that, then we can start to discuss the specifics of the actual bill.

Obama said “Where we disagree, let’s disagree over things that are real, not these wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to what’s been proposed.” Maybe somebody should remind Obama that it is not the Conservative"mob" that is running adds on the Internet to solicit people who can disrupt town hall meetings.

So who are the contrived activists showing up at town hall meetings looking for confrontations? Is it the "whacked out" conservatives who want congress and President Obama to legislate according to the U.S. Constitution or is it the union thugs(SEIU) and community organizers(ACORN) with pre-printed signs. We've not heard of any conservative groups running ads for "rent-a-mobs", but not so with the Obama leftists. Apparently they are running ads at craigslist thus, " Wanted: Obama health care reform volunteers willing to be paid $15 an hour".

And to add insult to the injurious statements Obama has made to citizens who fear for their lives and freedoms if Obamacare is passed. Our president at a joint press conference with Mexican President Felipe Calderon and the Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Guadalajara, Mexico on Monday, President Barack Obama referred to American opponents of amnesty for illegal aliens as
“demagogues.”
There are going to be demagogues out there who try to suggest that any form of pathway for legalization for those who are already in the United States is unacceptable. And those are fights that I'd have to have if my poll numbers are at 70 or if my poll numbers are at 40. That's just the nature of the U.S. immigration debate.

Why doesn't somebody remind the president that rewarding people who entered the USA illegally are felons and do not deserve to be rewarded with amnesty!? But then there has never ben a president that appointed a Communist to a cbinet level position as Obama has with his appointment to the position of Czar!

The media gave virtually no attention to the political beliefs of Van Jones, the man President Obama has named “Green Jobs Czar”?

Jones is William Ayers without the bombs. Here’s how the East Bay Express described the “Green Jobs Czar’s” background:

Jones had planned to move to Washington, DC, and had already landed a job and an apartment there. But in jail, he said, “I met all these young radical people of color — I mean really radical, communists and anarchists. And it was, like, ‘This is what I need to be a part of.’” Although he already had a plane ticket, he decided to stay in San Francisco. “I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary.” In the months that followed, he let go of any lingering thoughts that he might fit in with the status quo. “I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th,” he said. “By August, I was a communist.”

Network television news? Hello? Hello? Hello? Anybody out there?

PAY FOR QUALITY NOT QUANTITY?

Obama misleads us by denying that bureaucrats would "meddle" in our health care decisions or with the doctor-patient relationship. Yet in almost the same breath, he boasts that he would bundle payments to doctors based on the quality, not the quantity, of the services they provide -- such quality to be determined by his bureaucratic boards. The House bill is replete with provisions conferring such decisions on government bureaucrats.

Obama misleads us when he and his minions cavalierly dismiss the public's genuine concern about the government, under his plan, insinuating itself into end-of-life decisions. Instead of responding to provisions of the bill legitimately generating such concerns, he puts words into our mouths, saying we claim that the bill would require "euthanasia." Even some of Obama's state-run media fact checkers suggested that Reps. Thaddeus McCotter and John Boehner made that claim. In fact, they said provisions of the bill "could create ... a more permissive environment for euthanasia ... and physician-assisted suicide." Someone needs to check the fact checkers.

Of course there are legitimate concerns here, and it insults our intelligence to suggest otherwise. The bill would immediately impose a monumental conflict of interest on government bureaucrats by tasking them to cut costs drastically while simultaneously empowering them to "counsel" people about their end-of-life (and other) medical care. Such a conflict of interest -- over life and death itself -- is unconscionable and unthinkable in the United States of America.

According to a recent analysis by the Lewin Group, the nation's most prominent health policy econometrics firm, assuming full implementation of the House bill, 103.9 million Americans would be covered under the public plan, and 83.4 million people would no longer be covered by private health insurance.Moreover, a federally designed health insurance exchange would consolidate federal control over the financing and delivery of Americans' medical services.

Initially, Americans may respond positively to the idea of a national health insurance exchange, but they are almost certainly unclear about its functions, how it would affect them, or which health policy problems it would solve. The legalese double talk language used in the health care debate can conceal as much as convey the true meaning of proposals embodied in the complex provisions of the mammoth House and Senate health care bills.

And it is obvious to anyone who watches closely the reaction of the media and the Obamanites, to the conservative protests to Obamacare at the Town Hall meetings. That what those who want to push the socialisation of our national health care system is to confuse the issue by calling those who are afraid of Obamacare, Nazis,unamerican and mobs paid by the Insurance industry. Thus attempting to deflect attention of a uninformed public from the myriad of problems with Obamacare, that they refuse to answer, to issues of peoples actions not the facts!

A perfect example of the double talk that Obama is using in his scripted Town Hall meetings is his statement in New Hampshire that the health insurance we now have is broken, immoral and must be fixed. Then he said if you have health insurance and are happy with it you will be able to keep it! Why would he allow people to keep a plan that he says is immoral?

And if that isn't bad enough it was learned that the young girl(11 years old) who asked a question of Obama at his last Town Hall meeting was not just an inquisitive young lady. She was the daughter of a women who has been a big supporter and contributor of Obama. In fact she ran an Obama for president office in Mass. And the really dishonest part of an Obama session was the woman who misrepresented herself as a pediatrician who was not even a doctor!
Is this the Change we can believe in?

A panicked President Obama has resorted to Chicago-style politics of intimidation by essentially declaring war on those who refuse to go along with his "plan". First, he publicly smeared and insulted them like he did Sergeant Crowley on TV when the police man arrested a surly Harvard professor. He called them “angry mobs” and their protests “manufactured.” At a political rally in Virginia last Friday, he referred to those who opposed his plans as the “folks who created the mess” and said that they shouldn’t “do a lot of talking.”

Then, in an act of blatant hypocrisy, he ordered up his own organized army of union members and Democrats to combat those citizens who were doing nothing more than legally expressing their views about the health care bills. Obama gave his troops their marching orders: “punch back twice as hard” at their opponents. Presumably that language was meant to be metaphorical, but it is indicative of a hostility on the part of the White House toward fellow Americans that is wholly unacceptable and unbecoming in their chief executive.

It seems, though, that some of Obama’s supporters in Service Employees International Union (SEIU) took that order literally when they physically assaulted a peaceful Black protester in St. Louis and put him in the hospital. What is especially disturbing is that the day after the attack, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius held a conference call with members of SEIU. She called them her “brothers and sisters,” praised their actions, and told them to “keep doing what you’re doing.” But perhaps Obama’s greatest indignity is his insidious snitch program that encourages his supporters to report their neighbors, family members, and friends when they publicly, whether through blog posts, emails, or in casual conversation, dare to dissent from the Obama party line on health care.And they call the people who are opposed to Obamacre, Nazis!!

Sources: The Heritage Foundation and Pajamas Media.com

OBAMACARE MAY BE BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH!!

There are too many reasons why I think Obamacare is a bad deal for Americans, but there is one thing hidden in the House bill that we refer to as Obamacare that really should scare anyone who is over 55 years of age.
The language in the House bill establishes a panel that has the authority to decide what treatments will be included in The Government "option" health plan.And there is the implication that they can forbid certain expensive treatments to senior citizens.
Every country that has National health care has rationing of care for seniors and the "infirmed" people who are not considered "productive" citizems!

It is a fact of basic economics that you cannot increase the number of people covered by health care without increasing the cost of operating the program.
The present medicare and medicaid programs are in effect bankrupt. So how can we add more people to the government health care programs without limiting access to care or raising taxes prohibitively.

An example of what rationing might do is seen in the case of one of President Obama's Medal of Freedom recipients.
If Stephen Hawking, an Honorary fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, had been treated in a country that rationed care to the infirmed, he would not have survived to be awarded his Presidential Medal of Freedom yesterday.
They would have said in his youth that the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, was essentially worthless!. That was the thundering verdict of the Investor's Business Daily on our National Health Service and Mr Obama's plans to introduce what Republicans term "socialised" medicine.

Professor Hawking, who is completely paralysed by motor neurone disease, has been treated by the NHS throughout his 67 years, and points out indignantly that he would not have lived without its care.Stephen Hawking,is a astro-physicist and professor at the University of Cambridge.

In England, government health officials have decided that "$22,750 is how much six months of life is worth. Under their socialised system, if a medical treatment costs more, you're out of luck. That's wrong for America."Apparently they have excepts for outstanding academics and politicians much like our U.S> Congress that has thei own health plan and refuses to give it up and participate in the plan they propose for US!

The figure comes from Britain's National Institute for Clinical Evidence, which evaluates treatments in terms of the average increase in life expectancy. If the cost of prolonging someone's life for a year exceeds more than £30,000, then the NHS will not pay for that treatment. In other words, although there are no "death panels", the fundamental point is correct. The NHS does decide that some treatments are too expensive. And if that means you die? Our condolences, says the Government. Dr.Hawkins apparently was a special case!

Despite the myths from the Left, and Obama, about the American system,that you have to take your credit card to the emergency room, and if you can't pay you won't be treated. This is a blatant lie and he knows it because federal law forbids emergency rooms from denying treatment!

It is beyond dispute that treatment in the US is better than in any country that has socialised medicine. Diagnosed with prostate cancer and want to survive for the next five years? In Britain you have a 74 per cent chance. In the US, it is 98 per cent. For leukaemia, the American survival rate is close to half, while in Europe it is a third.

Ability to pay, of course, is central to the American system. If you have good insurance, you will get the very best treatment in the world – and the money spent by Americans ensures that the boundaries of medicine are constantly being expanded.This country developed statins, most high blood pressure medicines and the twentieth century saw a remarkable upsurge of research on drugs, with major advances in the treatment of bacterial and viral infections, heart disease, stomach ulcers, cancer, and mental illnesses. These, along with the introduction of the oral contraceptive, have altered all of our lives.

On Monday, Mr Obama promised: "You will not be waiting in any lines." That statement will prompt a wry smile for anyone who has used the NHS. He also said that his proposals had the support of the American Association for Retired People, and that he had never been a supporter of the British-style "single payers" system – both things demonstrably not true. His campaign vow not to raise middle-class taxes to pay for health care reform is already being quietly put to one side.SOURCE:TELEGTAPH.CO.UK

And that is why I oppose the passage of Obamacare!

DISINFORMATION IN THE CONGO AND IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

While Secretary of State Hillary was telling an audience in the Democratic Republic of the Congo that government should own business, the president was spreading his disinformation to a partisan crowd in New Hampshire.

His pack of disinformation is too long for this blog, so I will include just the fist two falsehoods that the president spun for not only the crowd in the school but a National Television audience. After all, that is the purpose of these type meetings. Not to convince an adoring audience of Democrats , but to get more propaganda out to the nation watching the "show" on TV!!

“I have not said that I was a single-payer supporter.” This is directly contradicted by candidate Barack Obama’s own website which quotes Obama at a rally in Ames, Iowa form 2008: “If I were designing a system from scratch I would probably set up a single-payer system. … So what I believe is we should set up a series of choices….Over time it may be that we end up transitioning to such a system.” So there you have in one paragraph the true purpose of Obama’s public option: a vehicle to slowly transition all Americans out of private coverage and into a government-run single payer health care system. This Trojan Horse view of the public option has been reaffirmed by Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein, and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.

“Under the reform we’re proposing, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” This statement is also plainly false. Again, as demonstrated above, the true purpose of Obama’s public option is to move Americans out of their private coverage and into government run health care. Independent, non-partisan analysis from the Lewin Group has confirmed the House bill, H.R. 3200, will do exactly that: About 88.1 million workers would see their current private, employer-sponsored health plan go away and would be shifted to the public plan.

And because I am a senior citizen chronologically, I have to include this: "“We have the AARP on board because they know this is a good deal for our seniors.” This is just plain false. The AARP released a statement late yesterday directly contradicting the President: “While the President was correct that AARP will not endorse a health care reform bill that would reduce Medicare benefits, indications that we have endorsed any of the major health care reform bills currently under consideration in Congress are inaccurate.”

“I just want to be clear, again: Seniors who are listening here, this does not affect your benefits. This is not money going to you to pay for your benefits; this is money that is subsidizing folks who don’t need it.” Under the current system, more and more seniors are discovering that it is becoming harder and harder to find and keep doctors who will accept Medicare patients.

A 2008 survey found that 29% of the Medicare beneficiaries it surveyed who were looking for a primary care doctor had a problem finding one to treat them. Obamacare will only make this problem worse by cutting $313 billion in Medicare reimbursements to health care providers over the next 10 years. This will only force more doctors to stop seeing Medicare patients. Obama also mentioned yesterday that he wants to pay for subsidized health care by killing the Medicare Advantage program. Medicare Advantage plans cover all of the traditional Medicare benefits and much more, including co or?dinated care and care-management programs for enrollees with chronic conditions as well as additional hospitalization and skilled nursing facility stays. 22% of all Medicare patients, which translates to 10.5 million seniors, are currently enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans.

Apparently Obama does not know how to sell his health Care dismantling plan, so he must resort to the one thing he is good at "spin"! Some would call it lying!!
But the fact remains that the four facts that are listed above are just some of the falsehoods and misinformation peddled by President Obama yesterday. It doesn’t even include his choice to sell Obamacare as The “Post Office” of Health Care Plans. No wonder so many Americans are skeptical.

According to a new Gallup poll, 66% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say they would tell their member of Congress to vote against Obamacare, while only 59% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents would do the same.
Source: Conn Carroll of the Heritage Foundation

WITH ACCESS TO NSA COMPUTERS, WHY THE REQUEST FOR ANTI-OBAMACARE EMAILS??

There has been a lot of "barn yard droppings" coming out of the White House and their spokesperson Gibbs, but probably the "topper" was uttered by Gibbs yesterday.
When asked by a White House press corps member why the White House was asking for anyone who received an email that was against Obamacare, to send it to their website.

Gibbs answered that they were just trying to correct any erroneous information about the health Care plan that Congress is trying to pass, because there is a lot of erroneous information out there!

The words are not a direct quote, but essentially illustrate the point that Gibbs was making. They were not gathering a list of opponents of Obama Care.OH,NO!!
And to reinforce that position the new director of media for the White House said this: "There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care,” wrote Macon Phillips, director of New Media for the White House in a blog posting.

“These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain e-mails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an e-mail or see something on the Web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.”

The big lie is that they even need these emails, the NSA, Secret Service and numerous other government agencies controlled by the president are gathering information 24/7 with the intent of locating any email or printed material that is threatening to the president.NSA spying programs track personal phone and Internet communications daily!There is no need for this snitch plan except to make a list to hand over to some government agency like the IRS to stop dissent!!

At least one member of the U.S. Senate was not satisfied with the answers coming from Gibbs and the White House, Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) wrote a letter to the president expressing that the White House request for flagging opposition to the health care plan was alarming to him. His letter asked Obama to “cease this program immediately.”

“By requesting that citizens send ‘fishy’ e-mails to the White House, it is inevitable that the names, e-mail addresses, IP addresses and private speech of U.S. citizens will be reported to the White House,” Cornyn’s letter said. “You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program. As Congress debates health care reform and other critical policy matters, citizen engagement must not be chilled by fear of government monitoring the exercise of free speech rights.”

Comments by Obama have circulated through the Internet. In a 2003 speech posted on the Internet, Obama said, “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan.”

“But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately, because first we've got to take back the White House, and we've got take back the Senate, and we've got to take back the House,” Obama said.

Cornyn wanted to know how restating what the president said six years ago, when he was an Illinois state legislator, was disinformation. He also asked the White House to explain how they “intend to use the names, e-mail addresses, IP addresses, and identities of citizens reported to have engaged in ‘fishy’ speech?”

Cornyn also wanted to know if the White House would notify citizens who were reported for “fishy” speech, and, “What action do you intend to take against citizens who have been reported for engaging in ‘fishy’ speech?”

One can only imagine the level of justifiable outrage had president Bush asked Americans to forward e-mails critical of his policies to the White House.
The media and ACLU would be screaming "totalitarian tactics" in condemning such a program.

To illustrate the hypocracy of what has been put in place by the White House. I am including an article from the ACLU web site that illustrates how the Left reacts to any attempt to monitor suspected terrorists.

"HELENA, MT – The American Civil Liberties Union of Montana today filed a Freedom of Information Act request on behalf of eight Montana grassroots organizations that fear they may have been monitored because they have questioned federal policies including the war in Iraq.

“These Montana organizations have real concerns that their civil liberties are being violated by sweeping and overbroad government eavesdropping on their legitimate political activities,” said ACLU of Montana Executive Director Scott Crichton. “We want to help them determine whether their meetings have been monitored and their members targeted for surveillance by one of several agencies of the government.”

The request was filed simultaneously with the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Defense seeking records collected by the surveillance and monitoring of legitimate grassroots organizations exercising their constitutional rights to meet, associate, and organize.

The groups, including the Montana ACLU, are the Helena Peace Seekers; the Billings Peace Seekers; the Butte-based TAPS (Taking Action for Peaceful Solutions); the Helena-based “Just Don’t Go”; the Missoula-based University of Montana Students for Peace and Justice and the Jeannette Rankin Peace Center; and the Hamilton-based environmental group Friends of the Bitterroot.

“NSA spying programs tracking personal phone and Internet communications are deeply troubling, but they are only the tip of the iceberg,” Crichton said. “We are inquiring of multiple agencies because we know, for example, that the Pentagon’s Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA) has been keeping tabs on organizations speaking against the pre-emptive war in Iraq, with complete disregard for human rights and the rule of law.”
Apparently what is going on in the Obama White House is O.K. ,but when Bush was in the White House everyone on the Left was appalled!

THE BIG LIE ABOUT OBAMACARE

It is a fact that president Obama said in 2003, when he was campaigning for a seat in the U.S. Senate, that he desires/wants a single payer health care system.
He said: "I don't think we're going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There's going to be, potentially, some transition process: I can envision a decade out, or 15 years out, or 20 years out."

Despite the president's statement, the lying Democrats keep telling the people that their plan will allow all people who have health insurance to keep it. What they do not tell you is that no insurance company can compete with a program that is priced so low that employers and individuals will be forced by economics to switch to the government plan.

Why can the government run a health plan that is actuarially unsound? Because they do not pay for the losses, the tax payer does! This has been happening for decades with the Social Security System and the Medicare and Medicaid plans. Not one of the three is actuarially sound or solvent!!
Looking at the costs of Medicare, Medicare is not controlling costs. Rather, it is allowing costs to grow faster than costs for private insurance, but balancing this by shifting an increasing share of those costs onto other payers, including the (seniors)beneficiaries themselves!

Despite the claims of "public plan" proponents, the available evidence from the nation's largest and oldest public plan does not indicate that a new or expanded public plan modeled on Medicare could provide Americans with health care that is comparable to that offered by existing private plans, much less at a lower cost.

The rationale for creating a new public program modeled on Medicare is based on four erroneous beliefs: 1. that Medicare, compared to private-sector health plans, provides comparable access to health care at costs that grow more slowly than those of the private sector; 2. that Medicare has lower administrative costs than private insurance; 3. that Medicare uses superior bargaining power to reduce health care costs without harm to patients; and 4. that public health plans are more innovative, whereas private health plans only follow the government's lead.

All of these assertions are verifiable false. Contrary to the claims of public plan advocates, and the president!

Total per-beneficiary health care costs are growing faster for Medicare patients than for private insurance patients. Medicare's per-beneficiary patient care costs appear to grow more slowly than costs in the private sector only if one ignores the fact that Medicare is paying a rapidly shrinking share of its beneficiaries' total health care costs. Total per-beneficiary patient care costs for Medicare patients are growing faster than total costs for patients with private insurance. However, spending by the Medicare program is growing more slowly than private insurance because much of the growth in health care costs for Medicare beneficiaries is offset by increased out-of-pocket spending by beneficiaries and other sources of private-sector funding.

Medicare's per-beneficiary administrative costs are substantially higher than the administrative costs of private health plans. The illusion that Medicare's administrative costs are lower comes from expressing administrative costs as a percentage of total costs, including patient care. Medicare's average patient care costs are naturally higher because its beneficiaries are by definition elderly, disabled, or end-stage renal disease patients, so its per-person administrative costs are spread over a larger base of health care costs.

Medicare has no "bargaining power." To the extent that the prices that Medicare pays health care providers are lower than prices paid by private health plans, it is because of the government's regulatory power, not because it reduces the actual costs of providing care or has superior bargaining power. Furthermore, lobbyists for physicians have persuaded Congress in each of the past seven years to intervene to block scheduled reductions in the prices that Medicare pays for physician services--and in six of those seven years to replace the reduction with an increase. This experience suggests that Medicare does not in fact have any bargaining power that would enable it to lower prices further, or even to maintain prices at current levels.

Historically, public plans have more often been followers, not leaders, in health care delivery innovation. It is private-sector organizations that have introduced new quality-improvement methods and new customer services, as well as disease management and coverage of preventive care.

A public health care plan would not improve the current health care situation and would likely make matters worse. Far from saving enough to cover the uninsured, it would increase the cost of covering even the presently insured at the current standard of care. A public plan could reduce overall spending only at the cost of substantial harm to patients by rationing or denial of care.

Why do the Democrats and their sycophants like AARP not want these facts known to the "mob" that is attending their propaganda sessions that they call Town Hall meetings?
As the Heritage Foundation's Robert A. Book states in his recent article: "by its nature, any public plan would be driven by congressional interventions, bureaucratic processes, and lobbying rather than by incentives to innovate in the financing and delivery of quality, efficient health care. This same phenomenon was evident with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, "public plan" mortgage companies that were established to compete with private lenders to "keep them honest" and increase levels of home ownership. Driven by congressional interventions, an implicit government guarantee, and lending policies at odds with economic reality, these public mortgage companies collapsed and threw the entire financial system into chaos. A "Freddie Doc" would eventually produce similarly disastrous results".Source:Heritage Foundation

There is a good reason why the "goons" of SEIU and ACORN have shown up at meetings about health Care reform. The Union movement has invested heavily in the passage of Obama Care.
Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi received union contributions that totaled the second-largest amount of labor PAC cash, getting $144,000. The California Democrat was followed by another, Rep. George Miller, the Education and Labor chairman, who received $119,540. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., was next. His campaign committee collected $115,500.
Trevor Potter, president of the Campaign Legal Center and a former FEC chairman, said it is not surprising that labor leads the pack in giving this year.

“The unions have an agenda in this Congress, and they are trying to move legislation,” Potter said. He added that unions, which give overwhelmingly to Democrats, also may be trying early in the election cycle to shore up the majority party in Congress, particularly its vulnerable members.

Speaking out for what you believe and then you are called a Nazi or a stooge for the Insurance Industry, and be threatened and possibly assaulted by union bullies is something out of the history of tyrants!

Democrats apparently only believe in freedom of speech when you agree with them. They are as intolerant as the Bolshevist thugs who ruled Russia for over 60 years.

Silence is acceptance! Speak out loudly and often. We want our country back! Stop National Health care! Stop Cap and Trade!
Or live with the dire consequences!!

HILLARY CLINTON IS THREE YEARS TOO LATE!!

The news Sunday is about Secretary of State Clinton talking to the leaders of Angola regarding an oil deal.The problem is she is three years too late!
China has already been there and invested heavily in the exploration and production of crude oil. They made the big investment in June of 2006 as this article in the BBC news will illustrate.

"As Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao visits Angola, the BBC's Piers Scholfield examines what links the two nations.

One of the worst of the countless conflicts that has blighted Africa in recent times is that of Angola.


Most Angolans haven't seen the benefits of the oil billions

But a peace deal signed four years ago - and huge oil reserves - are now giving the Angolans hope as the country tries to rebuild its devastated infrastructure.

Recently China, scouring the globe for raw materials to feed its booming economy, has been drawn to Africa as an abundant source of minerals, and has started investing heavily in countries like Angola.

Africa, however, has been here before - and ended up as the victim.

Ever since its first contacts with western powers, the continent been plundered for its manpower and resources.

And until now it has had little to show for it, except phenomenal debts and rampant poverty.

But now there is a tangible air of optimism about the future.

Chinese revolution

An oil boom, set to see Angola overtake Nigeria as the continent's biggest oil supplier, is pouring billions into the government's coffers.

The Afro-China relation is a win-win one. China is more pragmatic than the Western world

China and Africa: Who benefits?

The country's national budget has recently almost doubled - from $13bn (£7bn) to $25bn.

China is at the forefront of this revolution.
In the rush for resources, China has no qualms about dealing with countries that the west has criticised or shunned, such as Zimbabwe and Sudan.

China says it has a strict policy of non-interference in other nations' affairs.

It won't tell the countries it deals with what to do and vigorously defends its policy in Africa.

"Sudan is a sovereign country and I'm sorry that we do not develop relations according to US or UK or any other country's instruction," said Zhou Yuxiao, chargé d'affaires at the Chinese embassy in South Africa.

"Developing normal relations with a country does not mean that we approve every policy of that nation."


Angola's colonial legacy lives on in some of its buildings

He went on to say that China was doing a great deal to help African countries such as Angola.

"We are cancelling debt owed by the least developed countries, building more schools and hospitals.

"We have brought and will continue to bring great opportunities to all parts of the world including Africa."

WILL BILL CLINTON GO TO IRAN NEXT?

Ex-president Bill Clinton was successful in his trip to North Korea to obtain the release of two American women that worked for Al Gore's TV station. The women were serving 12 year sentences in a North Korean jail.
What type of concessions were given to North Korea by Bill Clinton will probably not be known ever.Yjis is because the transparency promised by Obama pre-election, have never materialised! But I am glad these two women were freed!

But what about the three women who are held prisoner in Iran's jail as potential spies? Will this result in another "diplomatic" trip that Mr.Clinton takes in place of his Secretary of State wife?

The American hikers were detained by Iran after allegedly straying across the border, and now have been moved to Tehran, according to a report from ABC News. This may be a signal that their ordeal will continue if the USA does not intercede.

Kurdish officials in Iraq, said the three contacted a colleague to say they had entered Iran by mistake on Friday and were surrounded by troops. Iran's state television countered this claim later, saying the Americans were arrested after they did not heed warnings from Iranian border guards.

A newscaster on state television also cast doubt on whether they were hikers who had lost their way, saying Western media had also reported some of them were journalists.
And as reported in the San Francisco Chronicle; they are! Source:KRONTV.com

Sarah Shourd of Oakland and Shane Bauer who graduated from U.C. Berkeley are two of the three Americans being held after they accidentally crossed into Iran while hiking in Northern Iraq. Joshua Fattal from Oregon is the third U.S. detainee.
Shourd is a writer and teacher based in the Middle East. She's written for the Matador Pulse. Bauer, a fluent Arabic speaker, is a correspondent for New America Media. He's also written for the San Francisco Chronicle and other U.S. papers.

So far our State Department has only contacted the Swiss to "confirm" (the arrest) reports with Iranian authorities and, if true, to seek consular access" to the two men and one woman.

The U.S. does not have diplomatic relations with Iran, and the Swiss represent U.S. interests there.

My suggestion is that since Obama has already extended his offer to meet with the "little tyrant" Ahmadinejad with no pre-conditions, he now negotiate the release of these three Americans.

The following story explains the present situation going on in Iran.
"Iraq has appealed to Iran for information about the detention of three Americans who crossed the border while hiking in the Kurdish north, the foreign minister said Saturday.

The request came as the three entered their second week in captivity facing the possibility of an investigation on spying charges despite the insistence of U.S. and Kurdish authorities that they accidentally went astray.

Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said he raised the issue Thursday during a meeting with Iran's ambassador to Iraq.

"He did confirm that they have been arrested for entering the country without proper visas and they are now being interviewed to determine more details," Zebari told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.

The ambassador, Hassan Kazemi Qomi, promised to pass the request for more information to his government, Zebari said.

Iranian lawmakers were scheduled to discuss the case Sunday during the weekly meeting of parliament's foreign policy committee, according to Press TV, the English language Iranian state television.

"We will discuss the additional information (handed to us) and the details of the case," said Hossein Sobhaninia, the deputy chair of the commission, in a report on the channel's Web site.

While these American citizens languish in a Tehran prison, there is a trial ongoing that is unlike any other trial in Iran's judicial history.

A young French academic and local employees of the British and French embassies appeared before an Iranian judge Saturday along with dozens of opposition figures accused of involvement in the country's postelection unrest that turned violent in the streets.

The extraordinary mass trial in Tehran's Revolutionary Court demonstrates the government's resolve to discredit Iran's pro-reform movement as a tool of foreign countries. Particularly Britain and the United States, who allegedly are trying to spark a revolution to topple Iran's Islamic system. It sounds to me like a good time for Obama to demonstrate if his silvery tongue works as well on our known enemies as it does on the people who put him in the Oval Office!

WE CANNOT JUST TALK OUR ENEMIES TO STOP THEIR ATTACKS

No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism...Winston Churchill

You would not know it if you relied on the Obama propaganda network, aka:major newspapers and TV networks,but we are still fighting two wars. Iraq and Afghanistan, with North Korea rattling the nuclear sabres and an Iran that is rapidly approaching nuclear weapon capability. We can little afford to ignore the military needs of our country. After all that is one of the main reasons why we have a federal government!
President Obama is not commander in chief of our health care and economy. He is Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces. acting like he is the designate to destroy our military preparedness. Never in the history of my life and it has been a long and lucky life has a president chosen to reduce spending on our defense in a time of war!

But as this report submitted in the Heritage Foundation web site by William Rivers will illustrate, that is what our POTUS is doing!

"President Obama’s purportedly “flat” defense budget is in actuality a declining budget, beginning with 3.81 percent of GDP in 2010 but dropping to 3.01 percent by 2019. Considering that research and development for new weapons programs is taking the brunt of the blow, the United States is staring at a repeat of the 1990’s Clinton procurement holiday from which the military still hasn’t recovered.

Now in 2009, after seven years of war in Afghanistan and Iraq, personnel and essential equipment have suffered tremendous strain. The Obama Administration celebrates its victory over cutting seven F-22s from the defense budget, but in 2008 the Air Force had to ground over 300 F-15s in response to an incident where one of the aged fighters “broke in half” during a training exercise. Never mind that the F-22 was supposed to replace those legacy fighters, we’ve still got the F-35. Right?

Already over a trillion dollars, the F-35 program is $38 billion over budget and 27 months behind schedule according to the GAO. And now, Pentagon leaders may decide to make cuts to that program, as well. So after killing the F-22 on the grounds that the F-35 is the silver bullet solution, now we’re eyeing the F-35 for future cuts? What exactly are America’s airmen and women supposed to use, paper planes?

The solution is simple. Heritage has advocated that President Obama commit to spending four percent of the nation’s GDP on core defense programs—excluding funding for Iraq and Afghanistan. Mr. Obama has already promised three percent of GDP to ‘science,’ so defense would hardly be a stretch. Protecting Americans is the first job of the federal government. A commitment to a larger defense budget will ensure that the military can buy enough next-generation equipment to fight and win for the next 40 years".

Obama was once quoted as saying that "if they bring a knife to a fight we will bring a gun".Well, apparently he doesn't feel that strong about the men and women who go to fight his wars. He might as well send them to battle with sticks and stone for their sling shots!

This man must be stopped by the voters in the voting booths in 2010 and then sent out to write more books in 2114!!

CONSERVATIVE MOB MEET THE UNION THUGS

"When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'present' or 'not guilty.'" --President Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919)
Roosevelt could just as well included the Democrats in the House of Representatives, and some RINOs who know that the Health Care plan they are trying to pass will cost more, limit choices and ration care, even though they all are mouthing the party line straight from the Obama insiders. They are equipped with a "canned" speech that is scripted to push the plan without answering any questions from those who question the specifics of the plan.

First speaker of the House Pelosi, called the people in Denver who asked questions at the Town hall meetings, "a mob carrying swastikas and symbols like that". Then Obama said in Virginia; "I don't want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking. I want them to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess."
And Barack Obama told a crowd of supporters in Philadelphia back in 2008, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” He added, “That’s the Chicago way.”Is that the Change we wanted?

Last night in St. Louis, Missouri, a local conservative found out firsthand about the “Chicago way.” Kenneth Gladney, a black conservative from the city, was handing out “Don’t Tread On Me” flags after a Russ Carnahan town hall meeting on health care in Mehlville. This didn’t go over well with the Obama supporters and union thugs who attended the meeting. They punched him in the face, kicked him in the head, and stomped on him on the pavement. So much for hope and change.



If that was not enough intimidation and character assassination of regular folks trying to get politicians to answer their questions, and when they were given the run around, got loud! This was said by White House deputy chief of staff, Jim Messina in a meeting with Democrat Senators who have to go home and face voters who are unhappy with Obamacare.
He told senators to do more prep work than usual for their public meetings by making sure their own supporters turn out.

Then he uttered this questionable statement despite the fact that there have been no reported violence at Town hall meetings up to now!
“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” Messina said. And apparently the "heavys" at SEIU heard the call to action!

And as if by magic the Union thugs of SEIU and Acorn started showing up yesterday at scheduled health care town hall meetings.
In one meeting they beat up a Black man who was just selling buttons and flags.He ended up in the hospital.And at another meeting a man was ruffed up by large burly men who wore SEIU shirts in Tampa Florida.

In St.Louis six people were arrested at a demonstration Thursday evening outside a forum on aging called by U.S. Rep. Russ Carnahan, D-St. Louis.

"Two of the people were arrested on suspicion of assault, one of resisting arrest and three on suspicion of committing peace disturbances, police say.

The forum drew an overflow crowd of several hundred to Bernard Middle School gym in south St. Louis County. Dozens of people, many carrying signs about the health care debate, were kept out because of the turnout. The back and forth between factions within the crowd created a carnival-like atmosphere inside and out between members of the movement opposing President Barack Obama's policies and groups who came to show support for the president's proposals.

The six people were arrested after confrontations outside the school, said county police spokesman Rick Eckhard. Carnahan was gone when the ruckus started, Eckhard said.

Post-Dispatch reporter Jake Wagman, who was covering the event and shooting video for Stltoday.com, was arrested for interference".
According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the police showed up toward the end of the forum held by Democratic Rep. Russ Carnahan. One Black conservative(Kenneth Gladney) interviewed at a local emergency room where he was being treated for injuries, said he was attacked by some of the individuals, who were eventually arrested, as he was selling "Don't tread on me" flags. He was hit in the face repeatedly and when he fell they kicked him in the head. He was interviewed today on Neil Cavuto's TV show and said the people who hit him were SEIU members!
Source:Saint Louis Post Dispatch

Ken Spain, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, called such remarks evidence that Democrats are "desperate to climb their way out of message quicksand."

"Here's some free advice for the Democrats: When you are attacking the voters, you are losing," he said. "Conjuring up 'villains' and making elitist remarks about middle-class Americans isn't a strategy, it's a prayer. And I will add it is a prayer to the wrong Diety!

THE TURNING POINT FOR OUR REPUBLIC AND OUR FREEDOM

"An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation." --John Marshall

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently warned Congress, again, that the trajectory of the federal budget is on an unsustainable course.[v] For fiscal years 2009 and 2010, the federal government will reach the largest deficits--annual budget short falls--as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) since the close of World War II.[vi] The national debt--the sum of all previous deficits--is set to reach 60 percent of GDP by the end of fiscal year 2010.[vii] The CBO warns that these "Large budget deficits would reduce national savings, leading to more borrowing from abroad and less domestic investment, which in turn would depress economic growth in the United States. Over time, the accumulation of debt would seriously harm the economy."
A country burdened by such a massive debt must be dependent on foreign Countries to support that debt, and some who now hold our "paper" are not what I would call friends. Communist China for example!
While the deficit and debt is driven largely by entitlement spending--Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security--the proposed spending by the Youth PROMISE Act and all other new programs being advocated in Congress only move the nation closer to fiscal insolvency. Not including "such sums as necessary" authorizations for the PROMISE Implementation Grants (Section 215) and "Mynisha's Law" (Section 505), the five-year cost of the Act is just shy of $1.3 billion from fiscal years 2010 to 2014. However, the version of the Youth PROMISE Act from the 110th Congress (H.R. 3864) set the budget authority for the Implementation Grants at $2 billion per year. Therefore, a more credible estimate of the cost of the act is $11.3 billion from fiscal years 2010 to 2014. This estimate does not include the cost of "Mynisha's Law" that funds comprehensive gang prevention and relief areas.

Too often, the focus of Congress and grant-making bureaus is the easy and wide dissemination of grants to constituents. As a result, the number of mediocre programs funded under the Youth PROMISE Act will vastly outnumber the number of exceptional programs receiving funding. In addition, the Office of Justice Programs has had difficulty monitoring and evaluating grant-funded programs to ensure that the funding is not being wasted.

Congress should contemplate the fact that government's intervention in the lives of youth can cause more harm than good. SOURCE:THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION
Then we have the distinct possibility of a militarist Russia as was demonstrated by the presence of at least two Akula class nuclear submarines two hundred miles off the coast of Georgia. Who knows how close they came to our coast line only GOD knows!

To combat the threat of a belligerent Putin led Russia,a nuclear North Korea, and a very soon nuclear Iran. We must have the best available nuclear and stealth submarines in the world.
Most countries have the missile capability of destroying any surface ships we send to combat any aggressor, but the nuclear sub can deliver more fire power than a fleet of air force bombers, by launching it's nuclear missiles.
Unfortunately many of our first line attack submarines are old by today's standards.

The U.S. submarine fleet has declined by 41 percent in just a decade. Only by upholding the long-held SSN standard and moving to a two-per-year built rate by the next fiscal year will the Navy's submarine fleet meet combatant commander requirements that have only increased since 9/11.
The Heritage foundation's recommendation to the Defense Department is that Congress appropriate monies for one new SSN submarine be built in 2010 and then two be built each year after until our submarine fleet is capable of defending our freedom and our allies, if we still have any!

The U.S. Navy's requirement for its undersea fleet is 48 nuclear attack submarines (SSNs); however, the backbone of this fleet, the Los Angeles-class boat, is aging quickly, while overall SSN numbers are projected to drop to the low 40s by the 2020s

If we have 3 billion dollars to spend on supporting the automobile dealers in the "clunkers" scheme, we sure should have enough money to defend ourselves when, not if, an enemy attacks the USA! One Virginia class submarine costs 3.4 billion dollars, and they last a lot longer than any car, and will save us when we need saving!

If Congress doesn't stop spending like our tax dollars are MONOPOLY money, the days of freedom from oppressive taxation and Federal Government regulations will come to a grinding halt, and we will be like any other third World Country whose citizens rely on government largess for scraps of our daily bread!!

LIBERAL HYPOCRACY RAISES IT'S UGLY HEAD

In May of 2005 the Left wingers were up in arms because a Republican had the temerity to suggest that American citizens could help fight drug addiction.
The following post was listed on the web site AlterNet with the title "SPY Vs Spy"!

"A senior congressman, James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), is working quietly but efficiently to turn the entire United States population into informants--by force. Sensenbrenner, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee Chairman, has introduced legislation that would essentially draft every American into the war on drugs. H.R. 1528, cynically named "Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act," would compel people to spy on their family members and neighbors, and even go undercover and wear a wire if needed. If a person resisted, he or she would face mandatory incarceration. Here's how the "spy" section of the legislation works: If you "witness" certain drug offenses taking place or "learn" about them, you must report the offenses to law enforcement within 24 hours and provide "full assistance in the investigation, apprehension and prosecution" of the people involved. Failure to do so would be a crime punishable by a mandatory minimum two-year prison sentence, and a maximum sentence of 10 years.

Taking time to talk to your relative about treatment instead of calling the police immediately could land you in jail. In addition to turning family member against family member, the legislation could also put many Americans in danger by forcing them to go undercover to gain evidence against strangers. Even if the language that forces every American to become a de facto law enforcement agent".

Now fast forward to today, and check out the directive that is posted on the Democrat web site,"Obama White House" and you will find that the left is asking Americans to do the same thing that Hitler told German children they should do if they heard any negatives about Der Fuhrer from their parents!

"At RedState.com. Here's the headline: "If you oppose Obamacare, even in casual conversation, the White House wants to know about it." Jeff Emanuel put this up 1:45 this afternoon. "If you see anybody publicly opposing President Obama’s plan to implement a government-centric overhaul of the health care system, the White House wants you to report that person (or persons) ASAP.
There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain e-mails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an e-mail or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to Flag@WhiteHouse.gov."

And they opposed the Patriot Act!!

So the White House is asking its supporters, these Obama groupies that hang on their website, if they get an e-mail, they hear anybody talking about fishy stuff, disinformation about the health care plan, send their name, send a copy of their e-mail to the White House.

The problem with this claim of disinformation about health insurance reform, control of personal finances to end of life care, the White House has gotta understand, people have read the House of Representatives bill. It's all in there! None of this is being made up.

There's a parallel going on in the world right now to this bunch that's running this country and the parallel is Iran. They supposedly had a fair election. The people of Iran didn't think it was fair. They think it was a fraudulent election and they started protesting in the streets. Even the people of Iran, this was too much to swallow, the mullahs were just putting one over on them, they wanted a reform candidate to win, they didn't like any of this, they didn't think Ahmadinejad was the legitimate winner, they started protesting, and what was the result"? Death in the streets!!

Apparently, it is not enough to resort to Sal Alinsky' method of targeting your enemies and then demonizing them, as Speaker Pelosi has so adroitly demonstrated by calling the Health Insurance industry the villains, and those who oppose the health Care bill as part of a MOB!! She's got to be the most distrusted politician in the country. And the competition for that dubious distinction is something fierce among he fellow Democrats!

Now they want their diminishing supporters to snitch on any one who has the temerity to question Obama's programs. After all they are just paid mob participants in an organized effort to bring down Obama. SAYS THEM!!

OBAMA'S BIG MISTAKE: TO TRY TO DESTROY PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE!!

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

While Canada has a publicly funded system of medical and physician services, life and health insurers play an important role throughout the country in funding health services not covered under government programs. These services include extended health care benefits, dental insurance, travel insurance, disability income insurance and accidental death and dismemberment benefits. Canada’s life and health insurance companies provide over 90 per cent of Canada’s private health insurance, with the remainder provided by some property and casualty companies. In 1999, fully 22 million Canadians had extended health care insurance, 15 million Canadians had dental insurance and nearly 8 million were covered by disability income insurance. Much of this insurance is provided through benefit plans provided by employers for their workers.

Wellpoint, {A COMPANY I WORKED FOR FOR 7 YEARS} (Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield’s parent company) has put together a very informative report on the cost drivers for health insurance premiums. The dollar bill visual representation that they included is particularly eye-opening, in terms of detailing where our health insurance premiums go. A lot of the report centered around what we already know: health care costs are what drive health insurance premiums. But I was especially interested to read that a full 60% of consumers surveyed thought that profit margins for health insurance companies are more than 20%, and 25% of consumers pegged insurers’ profits at more than 40%!

This is astounding to me. If we look at all industries, only two show profits greater than 20% for 2007 (network/communication equipment, and mining/crude oil production). Further down the list we see “Insurance: Life, Health (stock)”, with profits at 10.6% of revenues.
AFLAC stands out as a recognizable player in the health insurance industry, but their product is supplemental, and not designed to be stand-alone health insurance coverage (and they also focus on disability and life insurance products). From what I could determine, three other companies on the list provide some type of health insurance coverage (but seem to be mainly focused on other insurance products): Conseco, Torchmark, and American National. Conseco and Torchmark both sell supplemental and “a la carte” policies. American National is still a mystery after my few minutes of researching. Their website says that they sell major medical plans as well as accident and sickness plans. But they don’t provide any plan details that I could find, and instead direct consumers to an 800 number to talk to a sales rep. I don’t know for sure, but I’m going to hazard a guess that health insurance isn’t their mainstay if that’s how they’re marketing it.

The industry as a whole chalked up a profit margin of more than 10% in 2007, but that was carried by the life insurance side of the industry. Health insurance companies don’t fare nearly as well when it comes to making profits. Far more of their revenues are eaten up by claims, which continue to grow year after year as health care costs increase, and the Congress passes regulations that demand that previously not covered services be included in the health plans!

Like all of Obama's plans to shape America in his idea of a Utopian socialist country. He has not mentioned, or even considered the unintended consequences of destroying private health insurance by putting in place a National health plan!

My research turned up these statistics about a state larger than many European countries, California. The state has 484 companies that offer disability, long time care and health insurance.
These companies employ 244,000 people and will pay to the state in taxes in 2009-10,2.1 billion dollars! They also have invested 29.2 billion dollars in California municipal bond, and have a payroll that also is subject to individual taxation of 1.6billion dollars! Source: ACLHIC annual report

I do not have the national statistics, but if you admit that on average, most states will have one half the income and one half the investment as California, times 49states. You have some real money!!
And Obama wants to destroy this money making machine for the states and the federal government! Is he crazy?? If you doubt me, just look up how many speeches he made on the campaign trail where he said his objective is a SINGLE PAYER HEALTH CARE SYSTEM TO REPLACE THE INEFFICIENT AND COSTLY PRIVATE INSURANCE INDUSTRY!!

He is either a Marxist or a very dumb lawyer who is getting very bad advice!

CASH FOR CLUNKERS IS BAD FOR THE POOR AND FIRST TIME CAR BUYER

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood is predicting the Senate will pass legislation adding $2 billion to save a financially strapped "clash-for-clunkers" car-buying program.

LaHood said Monday that the program has been "wildly popular" and argued that it is good for the economy as well as the environment. In an interview broadcast on MSNBC, LaHood declined to discuss administration options if the Senate does not act before it goes on its summer recess at the end of the week.

LaHood said, "We're encouraging senators to listen to their car dealers and the people they represent. If they do that, it will pass the Senate

THIS BUREAUCRAT DOESN'T BOTHER TO MENTION THAT A LARGE PORTION OF THE TAX PAYERS MONEY BEING SPENT IN THE "CLUNKER" PROGRAM, IS GOING TO THE NEW GENERAL MOTORS. NOW OWNED BY THE GOVERNMENT!
This despite that the economy is performing worse than hoped, and revised White House figures point to deepening budget deficits, with the government borrowing almost 50 cents for every dollar it spends this year.
The deficit for the current budget year will rise by $89 billion to above $1.8 trillion — about four times the record set just last year. The unprecedented red ink flows from the deep recession, the Wall Street bailout, the cost of President Obama's economic stimulus bill, as well as a structural imbalance between what the government spends and what it takes in.

Like all legislation that is passed hurriedly, the clunker scheme has many unintended consequences!
This program could decimate the used car market that was before this debacle was instituted, the source of cheap transportation for the POOR and the young who just need a car to get to work or school!

It will also reduce the pool of spare parts used to repair existing older cars that are involved in accidents. Thus hurting another business, the 'fix-a-wreck" business.
This program is a joke. It is taking affordable vehicles for the poor off the road and giving away taxpayer money to those who would buy a car anyway. All it is doing is pushing auto sales forward by a few months. Once the program ends auto sales will be lower than ever.

LOOK OUT MIDDLE CLASS, THE TAX MAN IS COMING FOR YOU!!

So much for campaign promises. It appears that another betrayal of trust of American voters who were confused by the silvery tongue of Obama, is about to happen.
Remember Obama the "Messiah" demonizing rich people and corporations who give large bonuses, who were the Target of massive tax hikes to pay for his myriad of social programs.
Well, they found out there is not enough money to pay for his socialization of America even if he takes all the money the "rich" have. Even if he begins with people who make 250K a year. The middle class small business owners! The back bone of the middle class.


Appearing on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” Sunday, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner floated President Obama’s next big move: a tax increase on middle-class Americans.

Geithner made it clear during the interview that the administration believes that new federal revenues are needed, and he declined to rule out raising taxes on Americans earning less than $250,000 per year to get those revenues.

During the interview, host George Stephanopoulos pointed out to Geithner that the “Congressional Budget Office estimates that your budget will add $9 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.”

Stephanopoulos also noted that former Clinton Administration Deputy Treasury Secretary Roger Altman has said that a tax increase is needed.

“Independent analysts also say ... you're going to have to find new government revenues,” said Stephanopoulos. “The former deputy treasury secretary, Roger Altman, said: ‘It is no longer a matter of whether tax revenues must increase, but how.’ Is he right?”

Geither did not disagree with Altman.

“George it is absolutely right and very important for everyone to understand that we will not get this economy back on track, recovery will be not strong and sustained, unless we are--can convince the American people that we're going to have the will to bring these deficits down once recovery is firmly established,” said Geithner.

Geithner said the country is going to have to face what he called “a very difficult challenge: in getting the size of the deficit down.

“And the necessary path to fiscal responsibility, the necessary path to getting this country living within our means again is not just health care reform, to bring down those costs, but we're going to do a range of other things,” Geithner said. “And that's going to be a very difficult challenge to this country. We can do this, it just requires the will to act.”

Asked Stephanopoulos:”Including new revenues?”

“Well, we're going to have to look at--we're going to have to do what is necessary,” said Geithner. “Remember the critical thing is people understand that when we have recovery established, led by the private sector, and we have to bring these down, deficits down very dramatically. We have to bring them down to a level where the amount we're borrowing from the world is stable at a reasonable level. And that's going to require some very hard choices. And we're going to have to try to do that in a way that does not add to the--unfairly to the burdens that the average American already faces.”

Stephanopoulos then tried to get Geithner to rule out a tax increase, which Geithner would not do.

“So revenues are on the table as well?” asked Stephanopoulos.

“Again, we're not at the point yet where we're going to make a judgment about what it's going to take,” said Geithner.

“But you're not ruling it out. You can't rule it out,” said Stephanopoulos.

“Well, I think that what the country needs to do is understand we're going to have to do what it takes,” said Geithner. “We're going to do what's necessary".
SOURCE:CNSNEWS/COM

The 2008 OECD study found that the US taxed the top 10% more than all other OECD countries. Yes, more than Sweden, France, etc). If they're going to spend money like water, it's almost inevitable the tax revenue extracted from the middle class had to increase. What's ironic is that the Obama administration keeps claiming health reform is needed to address budget deficits!