This'n'That; September 1st[Irondequoit;StateRetirement;SIRI]

"Progressives[Read:Socialists]" Are EVERYWHERE!! By comparison....Small, little Town of Irondequoit, N.Y., on the northern border of Rochester; between that city and Lake Ontario, seems to be full of 'em!!! There's now a fuss between the town board and any and all contractors who do work for the town. The town "bored" now has this really terrific Marxist idea of requiring those contractors to have an apprenticeship program in place to bid and be awarded work for the town.

• This essentially would allow ONLY UNION EMPLOYERS/CONTRACTORS to bid/be awarded work for the town.
• This will force all the "Mom'n'Pop" companies to seek work elsewhere; They'll not be allowed to bid or be awarded work in that township.
• What little, "one-horse" company can afford to establish an apprenticeship program?
• A better question is: Why would it be necessary?

The answer probably is--if the "bored" members would admit it--that it will give any unionized company preferential treatment in the bidding/award process; LESS COMPETITION!!! Some local critics of the "bored's" members say the board is purposefully holding off on any legislation until the November elections; JOB PRESERVATION!!! Guvner Dave: Time To Change State Retirement Plan [When there were "good times," [remember them??] New York's local, county and state governments just kept pissing money away and balancing their unit's budget on the backs of the population. The tax rates slowly escalated as time went on; during which time, they slowly drove out numbers of taxpayers, some larger than most. Remember Tom Golisano? The Paychex founder took over $16,000 PER DAY in tax payments to Florida, where there is no personal income tax!!!

• New York's local, county and state employees have a retirement plan which is a DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN {definition below}.
• I {and you, most probably} work for a company with a DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN {definition below}.
• Contributions by local governments: 2010-7.4% of total payroll; 2011-11.5% of total payroll.
• Taxpayers currently pay $2.5 Billion per year to state pension system.
• Taxpayers will pay $3.38 Billion per year to the state pension system by 2011.

Many minicipal workers pad their final 3-5 years with as much overtime as possible to increase the figures used to determine their pensions-State Troopers are notorious for doing this {Many taxpayers are unaware that by contract the troopers have several hours of overtime per month; they're paid for it-even if they don't work it!!}. "Double-Dealin' " Dave has to pretend he has a modicum of concern for the taxpayers and start union negotiations to change the system for future hires. Defined benefit pension plan A traditional defined benefit (DB) plan is a plan in which the benefit on retirement is determined by a set formula, rather than depending on investment returns. In the US, 26 U.S.C. § 414(j) specifies a defined benefit plan to be any pension plan that is not a defined contribution plan (see below) where a defined contribution plan is any plan with individual accounts. A traditional pension plan that defines a benefit for an employee upon that employee's retirement is a defined benefit plan. Traditionally, retirement plans have been administered by institutions which exist specifically for that purpose, by large businesses, or, for government workers, by the government itself. A traditional form of defined benefit plan is the final salary plan, under which the pension paid is equal to the number of years worked, multiplied by the member's salary at retirement, multiplied by a factor known as the accrual rate. The final accrued amount is available as a monthly pension or a lump sum, but usually monthly. The benefit in a defined benefit pension plan is determined by a formula that can incorporate the employee's pay, years of employment, age at retirement, and other factors. A simple example is a Dollars Times Service plan design that provides a certain amount per month based on the time an employee works for a company. For example, a plan offering $100 a month per year of service would provide $3,000 per month to a retiree with 30 years of service. While this type of plan is popular among unionized workers, Final Average Pay (FAP) remains the most common type of defined benefit plan offered in the United States. In FAP plans, the average salary over the final years of an employee's career determines the benefit amount. Defined contribution plan In a defined contribution plan, contributions are paid into an individual account for each member. The contributions are invested, for example in the stock market, and the returns on the investment (which may be positive or negative) are credited to the individual's account. On retirement, the member's account is used to provide retirement benefits, sometimes through the purchase of an annuity which then provides a regular income. Defined contribution plans have become widespread all over the world in recent years, and are now the dominant form of plan in the private sector in many countries. For example, the number of defined benefit plans in the US has been steadily declining, as more and more employers see pension contributions as a large expense avoidable by disbanding the defined benefit plan and instead offering a defined contribution plan. Money contributed can either be from employee salary deferral or from employer contributions. The portability of defined contribution pensions is legally no different from the portability of defined benefit plans. However, because of the cost of administration and ease of determining the plan sponsor's liability for defined contribution plans (you don't need to pay an actuary to calculate the lump sum equivalent that you do for defined benefit plans) in practice, defined contribution plans have become generally portable. Is Sirius/XM [SIRI] Worth Another Look? [Several years ago {'00, '01} I bought Sirius Satellite Radio for about sixty-six CENTS a share, only because XM Radio stock was in the $10-12/share range. I kept it for 3 or 4 years while it ran up to a high in the $8.50 range. I sold out at $7.70.... for a heluva profit!!! In November of last year, I bought a bunch at $0.215/share. The close on 08/31/009 was $0.6735/share!!! After reading the article below, others might be inclined to take a flyer on SIRI] As we have watched Sirius XM (SIRI) begin to shed its bashed and tarnished negative image and start to show real promise again in the metrics of the company, there are still media people out there willing to try and take a stab at some condescending commentary. It is truly amazing how perceptions are so polarizing and opposite with this company. The truth usually lies somewhere in the middle, and as a shareholder I see a glass half full but there are many who see a glass half empty. What I find most annoying is the stories that come out with a negative slant are only a half hearted attempt at providing real information. Below I have several excerpts from articles which appeared this week and included Sirius XM with what I perceive to be negative connotations. Negatives that are not justifiable, just attempts to scare off the average person thinking about dabbling in Sirius stock at this point. Below are the excerpts I choose to highlight this week. The following is from a Mike Santoli article in Barron’s entitled ”Don’t Sweat the Junky Stuff.” For sure, the market won’t keep going up an average of 0.4% a day, as it has since July 13. And aside from the above-mentioned financial stocks, there has been some recent frothy speculation in lottery-ticket stocks such as Vonage (VG) and Sirius Satellite (SIRI), which should serve as a caution flag. Apparently, Mr. Santoli knows nothing about Sirius XM, and follows the Mad Money windbag of opinion known as Jim Cramer, whose comments have ranged from Sirius should not even be a stock, to Sirius stock should be given to the bond holders. That last part is kind of funny. Why would you say worthless common stock should be given to the holders of the company’s debt…..but I digress. This article uses the exact same language in fact that Jim Cramer used this past week….word for word! It’s nothing less than plagiarism of a joke television show offered as expert financial advice. Barron’s editors should take note. A pink slip is in order. This next little tidbit is from a Rick Munnariz article at Motley Fool entitled “Apple Fails Sirius XM Again.” I’m a satisfied iPhone owner. I subscribe to both Sirius and XM. Convergence — at a premium — is no slam dunk. Apple is a developer magnet, with thousands of apps shouting “pick me!” in the App Store. It’s hard to get noticed in a crowd, especially when you’re competing in a realm of fierce, no-cost rivals.” iPhone owners are paying AT&T $20 to $30 a month for unlimited data plans that give them access to free apps including Pandora, imeem, and Time Warner’s (TWX) AOL Music. Wireless isn’t the future for satellite radio. XM has offered limited programming at discounted prices for years through its XM Radio Mobile platform. It’s available through Alltel (AT), AT&T (T), and select models of Research In Motion’s (RIMM) BlackBerry. What no cost rivals are you speaking of Mr. Munnariz? Pandora is charging $36 dollars a year right now for their ”FREE” service to not have annoying advertising pop ups coming at subscribers. Slacker charges $3.99 a month for unlimited skipping of songs you don’t want to hear and no banner or pop up advertising. Neither sounds free to me, and neither has the content quality and variety you get with Sirius XM. IMEEM and AOL music are a stretch to even include as competition. As for wireless not being the future of Sirius XM, I’ll give you a half correct on that one..but Sirius XM is getting down to business with the internet version of their service. It has a price, but it also has much better content and variety than imeem and AOL music. There are also some terrific radios out there from Tivoli and Grace to take advantage of the premium Sirius internet stream, and a new table top wireless radio was just introduced by Sirius XM on Wednesday last week. Last but not least, my favorite comment for this past week from “Beware of Penny Stock Profits” by Anders Bylund at Motley Fool. Moreover, many of these and other penny-stock winners are still extremely speculative. Sirius may still collapse under a capital-intensive business model. I will simply counter with this, as Mr. Bylund apparently didn’t do his homework before writing Sirius XM into his article. The 2nd Quarter saw a surprise in reduction of sub losses, at a time where the economy was still horrible for the most part, and GM and Chrysler were going through Bankruptcy proceedings. Sirius XM also has managed to pay off its loans from Liberty with new offerings at significantly lower interest than Liberty was, and Sirius XM paid no penalties or fees for terminating the Liberty loans early. In addition, Cash for Clunkers has done nothing but help Sirius XM’s subscriber numbers leading into the 3rd Quarter. Synergies of the combined company are providing real cost savings, and by his own admission Mel Karmazin was cautiously optimistic based on a very good month of July numbers wise. Now add in the Sirius App for Apple (AAPL) iPhone and the iPod touch, the just revealed skydock, and the ability to pass royalty payments to subscribers, which though slightly negative, is only fair. Think about any cell phone bill and all the government fees. Shouldn’t music artists get paid for giving us enjoyment? When you put these factors together, along with the fact that Sirius XM has moved most of its debt out to at least 2013, saying Sirius may still collapse and is extremely speculative sure seems like a stretch. As Sirius XM continues to implement its strategies and cost cutting measures it is my contention that Sirius XM will survive and thrive, but what do I know, I look at the facts. Til Nex'Time....

This'n'That August 31st[AIGInvestment;FluffyCarePolls;PhattKennedy]

AIG: Did You Buy In? [If you bought AIG after it failed, this might be the time to sell!! The porkulus bill propped it up to the tune of a September '008 bailout of $85Billion; followed by another $70Billion, late in 2008. In early March, '009 another $30Billion was added. That's "a tidy sum" of free [read: Taxpayer's] money!! It appears from the article below that the senior management doesn't seem to know how to manage this wealth; now may be time to dump the stock in favor of profits over a tax write-off!!] Shares of AIG (AIG) have surged 53% in the last week, but Barron's Andrew Bary warns the stock's spectacular gains can't erase the fact that the company's likely to face continuing troubles. The government has an 80% equity stake in the insurer and shares look overpriced. The current rally is likely a combination of a short squeeze, hope for a larger role for former CEO Hank Greenberg and optimism that a recovering market will help AIG's portfolio improve. Given its complicated financials and limited communication from management, it's difficult for investors to evaluate the financial health of AIG. After backing out the government's $42B in preferred stock, AIG's common equity falls to $15B, or $21.80 per share. Stripping out $6.4B of goodwill assets and around $14B of a "prepaid commitment asset" connected to the government's backstop of AIG, Barron's calculates the company has negative tangible common shareholder equity. Investors interested in AIG would do better to consider the company's debt, rather than its common stock. In particular, AIG has 8.25% bonds due in 2018 trading for around 80 cents on the dollar, for a yield of 11.84%. AIG also has junior subordinated debentures (AVF) that yield 13% and are senior to the government's preferred shares, though they rank below senior debt. In early July, Joshua Shanker, then with Citigroup, wrote there was a "70% chance that the equity at AIG is zero" and cut his price target to $14. New CEO Robert Benmosche has promised to repay the government in full and still turn a profit for shareholders. However, the fact that AIG used $2.4B from recent asset sales to improve the capital position of its property-casualty unit rather than paying down some of its government debt raises questions about the insurer's ability to repay its bailout. Benmosche previously served as MetLife's (MET) chairman and CEO, and is still a MetLife shareholder. This could spell trouble for talks about a potential deal to sell AIG's Alico unit to MetLife. American Opinions: Fluffycare Public support for the health care reform plan proposed by Fluffy obama and congressional Democrats has fallen to a new low as just 42% of U.S. voters now favor the plan. That’s down five points from two weeks ago and down eight points from six weeks ago.

• A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that opposition to the plan has increased to 53%, up nine points since late June.
• More significantly, 44% of voters strongly oppose the health care reform effort versus 26% who strongly favor it. Intensity has been stronger among opponents of the plan since the debate began.
• Sixty-seven percent (67%) of those under 30 favor the plan while 56% of those over 65 are opposed.
• Among senior citizens, 46% are strongly opposed.
• Predictably, 69% of Democrats favor the plan, while 79% of Republicans oppose it.
• Yet while 44% of Democratic voters strongly favor the reform effort, 70% of GOP voters are strongly opposed to it.
• Most notable, however, is the opposition among voters not affiliated with either party. Sixty-two percent (62%) of unaffiliated voters oppose the health care plan, and 51% are strongly opposed. This marks an uptick in strong opposition among both Republicans and unaffiliateds, while the number of strongly supportive Democrats is unchanged.

Phatt Kennedy--A "Closet Communist?" In the spring of 1983, during perhaps the tensest moment in the Cold War since the Cuban missile crisis — having called the Soviet Union the evil empire that it was, Reagan was preparing to deploy Pershing missiles in Europe — Kennedy sent a message to Soviet leader Yuri Andropov. This would be the same Yuri Andropov who had been the director of the KGB and had played central roles in both the crushing of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution and the suppression of the 1968 Prague Spring. Arguing that Reagan, not Andropov, threatened world peace, Kennedy offered to help Anropov contain Reagan by manipulating American opinion. Teddy Kennedy did indeed prove charming — irresistibly so. But let’s look at the record whole. If Kennedy had had his way, he wouldn’t have stopped at charming Reagan. He’d have rendered Reagan utterly ineffective. Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy. "On 9-10 May of this year," the May 14 memorandum explained, "Sen. Edward Kennedy's close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow." (Tunney was Kennedy's law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) "The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov." Kennedy's message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. "The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations," the memorandum stated. "These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign." Kennedy made Andropov a couple of specific offers. First he offered to visit Moscow. "The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA." Kennedy would help the Soviets deal with Reagan by telling them how to brush up their propaganda. Then he offered to make it possible for Andropov to sit down for a few interviews on American television. "A direct appeal ... to the American people will, without a doubt, attract a great deal of attention and interest in the country. ... If the proposal is recognized as worthy, then Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y.V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interviews. ... The senator underlined the importance that this initiative should be seen as coming from the American side." Kennedy would make certain the networks gave Andropov air time--and that they rigged the arrangement to look like honest journalism. Kennedy's motives? "Like other rational people," the memorandum explained, "[Kennedy] is very troubled by the current state of Soviet-American relations." But that high-minded concern represented only one of Kennedy's motives. "Tunney remarked that the senator wants to run for president in 1988," the memorandum continued. "Kennedy does not discount that during the 1984 campaign, the Democratic Party may officially turn to him to lead the fight against the Republicans and elect their candidate president." Kennedy proved eager to deal with Andropov--the leader of the Soviet Union, a former director of the KGB and a principal mover in both the crushing of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution and the suppression of the 1968 Prague Spring--at least in part to advance his own political prospects. In 1992, Tim Sebastian published a story about the memorandum in the London Times. Here in the U.S., Sebastian's story received no attention. In his 2006 book, The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism, historian Paul Kengor reprinted the memorandum in full. "The media," Kengor says, "ignored the revelation." "The document," Kengor continues, "has stood the test of time. I scrutinized it more carefully than anything I've ever dealt with as a scholar. I showed the document to numerous authorities who deal with Soviet archival material. No one has debunked the memorandum or shown it to be a forgery. Kennedy's office did not deny it." Why bring all this up now? No evidence exists that Andropov ever acted on the memorandum--within eight months, the Soviet leader would be dead--and now that Kennedy himself has died even many of the former senator's opponents find themselves grieving. Yet precisely because Kennedy represented such a commanding figure--perhaps the most compelling liberal of our day--we need to consider his record in full. Doing so, it turns out, requires pondering a document in the archives of the politburo. When President Reagan chose to confront the Soviet Union, calling it the evil empire that it was, Sen. Edward Kennedy chose to offer aid and comfort to General Secretary Andropov. On the Cold War, the greatest issue of his lifetime, Kennedy got it wrong. Til Nex'Time....

This'n'That; August 27th[Paterson;Trust;Health/IRS;FluffyCareLies]

Whinney Ass! Double-Dealin' Dave's latest whine is that everyone's down on him cuz he's black! What a unique concept!! New York's gubner Paterson is forgetting that nearly every-thing he's done as gubner has been a collosal flop!! Black ain't got nuthin' ta do with it-HE'S AN INCOMPETENT BOOB!! Is Trust Important In Politics? Does the public need to have trust in a particular leader for that leader to be a competent one? I-for one-think that trust should be THE foremost trait of a politician's character!! Check this out; the printed audio from a video clip of then-candidate Fluffy obama:

Let me tell you who I associate with. On economic policy, I associate with Warren Buffett and former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker. If I'm interested in figuring out my foreign policy, I associate myself with my running mate, Joe Biden, or with Dick Lugar, the Republican ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, or General Jim Jones, the former supreme allied commander of NATO. Those are the people, Democrats and Republicans, who have shaped my ideas and who will be surrounding me in the White House.

Contrary to the aforementioned paragraph, here's some of the "ACORN-Style" thugs Fluffy obama is surrounding himself with:

• Anthony "Van" Jones, the Green Czar: An admitted, current Communist.
• John Holdren, the Science Czar: This is the guy who proposed compulsary sterilization and forced abortion to control population.
• Cass Sunstein, the Regulatory Czar: This weinie proposed banning hunting and eating meat. Proposed that dogs have legal representation in court. Proposed a fairness doctrine for the Internet.
• Carol Browner, the Global Warming Czar: A member of Socialist International -a group promoting "global governance."
• Ezekiel Emmanual, HealthCare Czar: Proponent of the "Complete Lives System" which puts values on human lives based primarily on age.

I don't know about you, but..... Fluffy's appointment of every Marxist and Communist within shouting distance certainly promotes my trust in him...

N-O-T!!!!

Cash For Fridges? [Here we go again.... Can't anyone work anymore? When my fridge became a liability-in both function and effeciency, I went to Lowe's and bought one! I worked for the money and didn't rely on the gubmint to provide me a bonus for replacing it!] Beginning late this fall, the program authorizes rebates of $50 to $200 for purchases of high-efficiency household appliances. The money is part of the broader economic stimulus bill passed earlier this year. Program details will vary by state, and the Energy Dept. has set a deadline of Oct. 15 for states to file formal applications. The Energy Dept. expects the bulk of the $300 million to be awarded by the end of November. (Unlike the clunkers auto program, consumers won't have to trade in their old appliances.) "These rebates will help families make the transition to more efficient appliances, making purchases that will directly stimulate the economy," Energy Secretary Steven Chu said in a statement announcing the plan. Only appliances covered by the Energy Star seal will qualify. In 2008, about 55% of newly produced major household appliances met those standards, which are set by the Energy Dept. and Environmental Protection Agency.

DemocRATic Health Care Bill Divulges IRS Tax Data (AP)One of the problems with any proposed law that's over 1,000 pages long and constantly changing is that much deviltry can lie in the details. Take the Democrats' proposal to rewrite health care policy, better known as H.R. 3200 or by opponents as "obamacare."

• Section 431(a) of the bill says that the IRS must divulge taxpayer identity information, including the filing status, the modified adjusted gross income, the number of dependents, and "other information as is prescribed by" regulation.
• That information will be provided to the new Health Choices Commissioner and state health programs and used to determine who qualifies for "affordability credits."
• Section 245(b)(2)(A) says the IRS must divulge tax return details -- there's no specified limit on what's available or unavailable -- to the Health Choices Commissioner.
• The purpose, again, is to verify "affordability credits."
• Section 1801(a) says that the Social Security Administration can obtain tax return data on anyone who may be eligible for a "low-income prescription drug subsidy" but has not applied for it.
• Over at the Institute for Policy Innovation, Tom Giovanetti argues that: "How many thousands of federal employees will have access to your records?
• The privacy of your health records will be only as good as the most nosy, most dishonest and most malcontented federal employee....
• So say good-bye to privacy from the federal government. It was fun while it lasted for 233 years."
• Presumably inserting limits on information that can be disclosed -- and adding strict penalties on misuse of the information kept on file about hundreds of millions of Americans -- is at least as important as fretting about Facebook's privacy policy in Canada.)
• A better candidate for a future privacy crisis is the so-called stimulus bill enacted with limited debate early this year.
• It mandated the "utilization of an electronic health record for each person in the United States by 2014," but included only limited privacy protections.
• It's true that if the legislative branch chooses to create "affordability credits," it probably makes sense to ensure they're not abused.
• The goal of curbing fraud runs up against the goal of preserving individual privacy. If we're going to have such significant additional government intrusion into our health care system, we will have to draw the privacy line somewhere.
• This vignette should be reason to be skeptical of claims that a massive and complex bill must be enacted as rapidly as its backers would have you believe.

Update August 27 11 a.m: Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy Information Center says in e-mail: "We would oppose section 431(a) of the bill because it violates the intent of the Privacy Act which generally requires agencies to obtain information directly from individuals and not from other agencies." EPIC still hasn't updated their Web site to reflect this sentiment, but it's good to know that other folks have concerns too.

democRAT Lies On FluffyCare [As compiled by Ann Coulter writing at www.humanevents.com ]

(1) National health care will punish the insurance companies.

• You want to punish insurance companies? Make them compete.
• That's why we need a third, fourth and 45th competing insurance company that will undercut them by offering better service at a lower price.
• Tiny little France and Germany have more competition among health insurers than the U.S. does right now. Amazingly, both of these socialist countries have less state regulation of health insurance than we do, and you can buy health insurance across regional lines -- unlike in the U.S., where a federal law allows states to ban interstate commerce in health insurance.
• U.S. health insurance companies are often imperious, unresponsive consumer hellholes because they're a partial monopoly, protected from competition by government regulation. In some states, one big insurer will control 80 percent of the market. (Guess which party these big insurance companies favor? Big companies love big government.)
• Liberals think they can improve the problem of a partial monopoly by turning it into a total monopoly.
• That's what single-payer health care is: "Single payer" means "single provider."
• It's the famous liberal two-step: First screw something up, then claim that it's screwed up because there's not enough government oversight (it's the free market run wild!), and then step in and really screw it up in the name of "reform."
• You could fix 90 percent of the problems with health insurance by ending the federal law allowing states to ban health insurance sales across state lines. But when John McCain called for ending the ban during the 2008 presidential campaign, he was attacked by Joe Biden -- another illustration of the rule that the worst Republicans are still better than allegedly "conservative" Democrats.

(2) National health care will "increase competition and keep insurance companies honest" -- as Fluffy obama has said.

Government-provided health care isn't a competitor; it's a monopoly product paid for by the taxpayer.

Consumers may be able to "choose" whether they take the service -- at least at first -- but every single one of us will be forced to buy it, under penalty of prison for tax evasion. It's like a new cable plan with a "yes" box, but no "no" box.

obama himself compared national health care to the post office -- immediately conjuring images of a highly efficient and consumer-friendly work force -- which, like so many consumer-friendly shops, is closed by 2 p.m. on Saturdays, all Sundays and every conceivable holiday.

But what most people don't know -- including the president, apparently -- with certain narrow exceptions, competing with the post office is prohibited by law. Expect the same with national health care. Liberals won't stop until they have total control. How else will they get you to pay for their sex-change operations?

(3) Insurance companies are denying legitimate claims because they are "villains."

• Obama denounced the insurance companies in last Sunday's New York Times, saying: "A man lost his health coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because the insurance company discovered that he had gallstones, which he hadn't known about when he applied for his policy. Because his treatment was delayed, he died." Well, yeah. That and the cancer.
• Assuming this is true -- which would distinguish it from every other story told by Democrats pushing national health care -- in a free market, such an insurance company couldn't stay in business. Other insurance companies would scream from the rooftops about their competitor's shoddy business practices, and customers would leave in droves.
• If only customers had a choice! But we don't because of government regulation of health insurance. Speaking of which, maybe if Mr. Gallstone's insurance company weren't required by law to cover early childhood development programs and sex-change operations, it wouldn't be forced to cut corners in the few areas not regulated by the government, such as cancer treatments for patients with gallstones.

(4) National health care will give Americans "basic consumer protections that will finally hold insurance companies accountable" -- as Der Fluffmeister claimed in his op/ed in the Times.

• You want to protect consumers? Do it the same way we protect consumers of dry cleaning, hamburgers and electricians: Give them the power to tell their insurance companies, "I'm taking my business elsewhere."

(5) Government intervention is the only way to provide coverage for pre-existing conditions.

• The only reason most "pre-existing" conditions aren't already covered is because of government regulations that shrink the insurance market to a microscopic size, which leads to fewer options in health insurance and a lot more uninsured people than would exist in a free market.
• The free market has produced a dizzying array of insurance products in areas other than health. (Ironically, array-associated dizziness is not covered by most health plans.) Even insurance companies have "reinsurance" policies to cover catastrophic events occurring on the properties they insure, such as nuclear accidents, earthquakes and Michael Moore dropping in for a visit and breaking the couch.
• If we had a free market in health insurance, it would be inexpensive and easy to buy insurance for "pre-existing" conditions before they exist, for example, insurance on unborn -- unconceived -- children and health insurance even when you don't have a job.
• The vast majority of "pre-existing" conditions that currently exist in a cramped, limited, heavily regulated insurance market would be "covered" conditions under a free market in health insurance.

(6) There will be no rationing under national health care.

• Anyone who says that is a liar. And all Democrats are saying it. (Hey, here's two-thirds of a syllogism!)
• Apparently, promising to cut costs by having a panel of Washington bureaucrats (for short, "The Death Panel") deny medical treatment wasn't a popular idea with most Americans.
• So liberals started claiming that they are going to cover an additional 47 million uninsured Americans and cut costs ... without ever denying a single medical treatment!
• For you newcomers to planet Earth, everything that does not exist in infinite supply is rationed.
• In a free society, people are allowed to make their own rationing choices. Some people get new computers every year; some every five years.
• Some White House employees get new computers and then vandalize them on the way out the door when their candidate loses. (These are the same people who will be making decisions about your health care.)
• Similarly, one person might say, "I want to live it up and spend freely now! No one lives forever." (That person is a Democrat.) And another might say, "I don't go to restaurants, I don't go to the theater, and I don't buy expensive designer clothes because I've decided to pour all my money into my health."
• Under national health care, you'll have no choice about how to ration your own health care. If your neighbor isn't entitled to a hip replacement, then neither are you.
• At least that's how the plan was explained to me by our next surgeon general, Dr. Conrad Murray.

(7) National health care will reduce costs.

• This claim comes from the same government that gave us the $500 hammer, the $1,200 toilet seat and postage stamps that increase in price every three weeks.
• The last time liberals decided an industry was so important that the government needed to step in and contain costs was when they set their sights on the oil industry.
• Liberals in both the U.S. and Canada -- presidents Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter and Canadian P.M. Pierre Trudeau -- imposed price controls on oil. As night leads to day, price controls led to reduced oil production, which led to oil shortages, skyrocketing prices for gasoline, rationing schemes and long angry lines at gas stations.
• You may recall this era as "the Carter years."
• Then, the white knight Ronald Reagan became president and immediately deregulated oil prices. The magic of the free market -- aka the "profit motive" -- produced surges in oil exploration and development, causing prices to plummet. Prices collapsed and remained low for the next 20 years, helping to fuel the greatest economic expansion in our nation's history.
• You may recall this era as "the Reagan years."
• Freedom not only allows you to make your own rationing choices, but also produces vastly more products and services at cheap prices, so less rationing is necessary.

(8) National health care won't cover abortions.

• There are three certainties in life: (a) death, (b) taxes, and (C) no health care bill supported by Nita Lowey and Rosa DeLauro and signed by Fluffy obama could possibly fail to cover abortions.
• Despite being a thousand pages long, the health care bills passing through Congress are strikingly nonspecific.
• (Also, in a thousand pages, Democrats weren't able to squeeze in one paragraph on tort reform. Perhaps they were trying to save paper.)
• These are Trojan Horse bills. Of course, they don't include the words "abortion," "death panels" or "three-year waits for hip-replacement surgery." That proves nothing -- the bills set up unaccountable, unelected federal commissions to fill in the horrible details.
• Notably, the Democrats rejected an amendment to the bill that would specifically deny coverage for abortions.
• After the bill is passed, the Federal Health Commission will find that abortion is covered, pro-lifers will sue, and a court will say it's within the regulatory authority of the health commission to require coverage for abortions.
• Then we'll watch a parade of senators and congressmen indignantly announcing, "Well, I'm pro-life, and if I had had any idea this bill would cover abortions, I never would have voted for it!"
• No wonder Democrats want to remind us that they can't be trusted with foreign policy.
• They want us to forget that they can't be trusted with domestic policy.

Til Nex'Time....

This'n'That; August 26th[FluffyDiscontent;MilkForum;ClunkerTax]

obama's Summer of Discontent The politics of charisma is so Third World. Americans were never going to buy into it for long. By FOUAD AJAMI [I do not have a well funded welfareRAT debit card so I must work for a living. In doing so, I'm not always available to listen to the various talkshows I'm interested in. I caught parts of Rush's reading of this letter during today's {08/25/009} show. Here are the first three or four paragraphs-the rest may be read at www.rushlimbaugh.com {listed in "Articles" highlighted in green}. Mr Ajami has presented a well thought out, well researched and well written article!]

• So we are to have a French health-care system without a French tradition of political protest. It is odd that American liberalism, in a veritable state of insurrection during the Bush presidency, now seeks political quiescence. These "townhallers" who have come forth to challenge ObamaCare have been labeled "evil-mongers" (Harry Reid), "un-American" (Nancy Pelosi), agitators and rowdies and worse.
• A political class, and a media elite, that glamorized the protest against the Iraq war, that branded the Bush presidency as a reign of usurpation, now wishes to be done with the tumult of political debate. President Barack Obama himself, the community organizer par excellence, is full of lament that the "loudest voices" are running away with the national debate. Liberalism in righteous opposition, liberalism in power: The rules have changed.
• It was true to script, and to necessity, that Mr. Obama would try to push through his sweeping program—the change in the health-care system, a huge budget deficit, the stimulus package, the takeover of the automotive industry—in record time. He and his handlers must have feared that the spell would soon be broken, that the coalition that carried Mr. Obama to power was destined to come apart, that a country anxious and frightened in the fall of 2008 could recover its poise and self-confidence.
• Historically, this republic, unlike the Old World and the command economies of the Third World, had trusted the society rather than the state. In a perilous moment, that balance had shifted, and Mr. Obama was the beneficiary of that shift.
• So our new president wanted a fundamental overhaul of the health-care system—17% of our GDP—without a serious debate, and without "loud voices." It is akin to government by emergency decrees. How dare those townhallers (the voters) heckle Arlen Specter! Americans eager to rein in this runaway populism were now guilty of lèse-majesté by talking back to the political class.

Why? They'll Do What Schumer Tells'um Anyway!! [Remember when "Double-Dealin' Dave" Paterson appointed Ms Gillibrand to fill the very large seat vacated by Hillary Rob'em Clinton [who accepted the ACORN-COI payoff for playing dead at the end of her presidential campaign]?? Prior to the appointment, Gillibrand--when she felt like it--represented a primarily rural constintuency in northeastern NYS. During that time, she was a supporter of individual gun-owners' rights. About 72 hours after her appointment she had her appearance to pay homage before "Chuckie-Cheese" Schumer. At that precise instant, she became a staunch advocate of federal gun control legislation [I wonder why??]! One of her co-conspirators... the one who's gonna VOTE FOR FluffyCare-NO MATTER WHAT his constituents want... Eric Massa.... yea, THAT ONE!!....... will be on the panel..... making all the appropriate noises to pacify the milk producers!! If he's gonna vote THE WAY HE WANTS on FluffyCare-taHell with what the public thinks..... why should the farmers think he'll do anything different in their case?!?! See, massa-Eric..... Your voting record does AND WILL matter!!!!]

• U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand has scheduled a hearing Thursday afternoon in Batavia to discuss the milk pricing system.
• Reps. Eric Massa and Chris Lee are also scheduled to attend the hearing, at 2 p.m. in the Forum at Genesee Community College, 1 College Drive.
• Gillibrand, D-N.Y., who sits on the Senate Agriculture Committee, has invited a panel of milk producers and a panel of economists and farm experts to discuss the pricing system. After a couple of bumper years for dairy farmers, the prices this year have fallen to a level below the production cost for many farmers.
• The panel of milk producers and processers will include Barb Hanselman, a dairy farmer from Delaware County; Robert Church, herd manager of Patterson Farms in Cayuga County; Robin Keller, a Byron, Genesee County, dairy farmer; Kim Pickard-Dudley, dairy economist for Upstate Niagara Co-op; and Bruce Krupke, executive vice president of the Northeast Dairy Foods Association.
• The other panel will include Dean Norton, president of the state Farm Bureau; Andrew Novakovic, director of the Cornell Program on Dairy Markets and Policy; Bob Wellington, chief economist for Agrimark; Ron McCormick, former representative to the National Dairy Board; and William Magee, chairman of the state Assembly Committee on Agriculture.
• Others who attend the hearing may offer testimony at the hearing, or submit it by e-mail to dairyhearing@gillibrand.senate.gov or mail to Gillibrand’s Rochester office at Kenneth B. Keating Federal Office Building, 100 State St., Room 4195, Rochester, NY, 14614.
• Gillibrand’s office said written testimony received within five days of the hearing will be made part of the official record of the hearing.

How's That "Hope And Change" Workin' For Ya?? Many of those cashing in on the clunkers program are surprised when they get to the treasurer's office windows. That's because the government's rebate of up to $4500 dollars for every clunker is taxable. They didn't realize that would be taxable, so they're not happy and kind of surprised when they find that out.

• The amusement here is how most states compute sales tax (charged when you register the vehicle.)
• When you buy a new car you pay tax on the difference between the new car's purchase price and the trade-in you present to the dealer.
• This is an intentional distortion in the law that is intended to favor dealers over private-party used car sales.
• If you sell your used car privately the new buyer pays sales tax but you do not get the offset on the purchase of your replacement vehicle - the only way to get that is to trade the car.
• Dealers use this, of course, in negotiations, effectively pocketing the sales tax.
• But the 'cash for clunkers' is not a trade-in. That's a $4,500 check from the government, basically," and that's in income that you have to pay tax on.

How's that "Hopeless" Change Workin' For Ya Now??

A-w-w-w-w.....Too Bad!! A Life of Special Treatment Edward M. [Ted; Phatt; Fat] Kennedy kicked off early on Wednesday, 08/26/009; with a rotten brain..... no really-NOT philosophically or politically.... cancer ate it up!! Having grown up in a priviledged family and their upper-crust society, Phatt always projected a feeling he deserved all the special consideration he demanded and got. Some highlights and lowlights from a life of priviledge: Kennedy earned C grades at the private Milton Academy. Admitted to Harvard as a "legacy" -- his father and older brothers had attended there, so the younger and dimmer Kennedy's admission was virtually assured. While attending, he was expelled twice, once for cheating on a test, and once for paying a classmate to cheat for him. While expelled, Kennedy enlisted in the Army, but mistakenly signed up for four years instead of two. His father, Joseph P. Kennedy, former U.S. Ambassador to England, pulled the necessary strings to have his enlistment shortened to two years, and to ensure that he served in Europe, not Korea, where a war was raging. Kennedy was assigned to Paris, never advanced beyond the rank of Private, and returned to Harvard upon being discharged. While attending law school at the University of Virginia, he was cited for reckless driving four times, including once when he was clocked driving 90 miles per hour in a residential neighborhood with his headlights off after dark. Yet his Virginia driver's license was never revoked. He passed the bar exam in 1959, and two years later was appointed an Assistant to the District Attorney in Massachusetts' Suffolk County. In 1962, at age 30 (constitutionally, the minimum age to hold a Senate seat) he ran for the Senate. His timing was perfect -- his brother John had given up the seat to become President, and Kennedy easily won the office. He was re-elected eight times to the office. In 1964, he was seriously injured in a plane crash, and hospitalized for several months. On 19 July 1969, Kennedy attended a party on Chappaquiddick Island in Massachusetts. At about 11:00 PM, he borrowed his chauffeur's keys to his Oldsmobile limousine, and offered to give a ride home to Mary Jo Kopechne, a campaign worker. Leaving the island via an unlit bridge with no guard rail, Kennedy steered the car off the bridge, flipped, and into Poucha Pond. He swam to shore and walked back to the party -- passing several houses and a fire station -- and two friends returned with him to the scene of the accident. According to their later testimony, they told him what he already knew, that he was required by law to immediately report the accident to the authorities. Instead Kennedy made his way to his hotel, called his lawyer, and went to sleep. Kennedy called the police the next morning. By then the wreck had already been discovered. Before dying, Kopechne had scratched at the upholstered floor above her head in the upside-down car. The Kennedy family began pulling strings, ensuring that any inquiry would be contained. Her corpse was whisked out-of-state to her family, before an autopsy could be conducted. Further details are uncertain, but after the accident Kennedy says he repeatedly dove under the water trying to rescue Kopechne, and he didn't call police because he was in a state of shock. In versions closer to the probable truth, it is widely assumed Kennedy was drunk, Kennedy was having an affair with Kopechne, Kennedy held off calling police in hopes that his family could fix the problem overnight. Since the accident, Kennedy's political enemies have referred to him as the distinguished Senator from Chappaquiddick, or worse. He pled guilty to leaving the scene of an accident, and was given a suspended sentence of two months [with that sentence, why bother??]. Kopechne's family received a small payout from the Kennedy's insurance policy, and never sued. There was later an effort to have her body exhumed and autopsied, but her family successfully fought against this in court. Kennedy's family paid their attorney's bills. In 1973, at the height of Nixon's Watergate scandal, Kennedy thundered from the Senate floor, "Do we operate under a system of equal justice under law? Or is there one system for the average citizen and another for the high and mighty?" In 1980, Kennedy challenged Carter, his own party's sitting President, for the Democratic nomination. Kennedy's bid was hampered by questions of Chappaquiddick. During an interview with CBS Newsman Roger Mudd, when asked the straightforward question, "Why do you want to be President?" Kennedy couldn't come up with a straightforward answer. To his credit, Phatt Kennedy was instrumental in Ronald Reagan winning the White House. In a late-1980s media profile, Kennedy was succinctly described as someone who "grew to manhood without learning to be an adult". He is rumored to have had several affairs while married to his first wife, and had often been seen in public while thoroughly tanked and/or behaving obnoxiously.

In 1987 he was caught in flagrante delicto [boinking; screwing in public] with an unidentified woman on the floor of a restaurant.

His public image since the early 1990s and during his second marriage has been more conservative and restrained. In 2001, Kennedy worked with President Bush to enact the No Child Left Behind Act. He later complained publicly that he had been hoodwinked, because the legislation did not include funding to pay for its requirements. Kennedy voted against the Iraq war in 2003

Kennedy said of it: "There was no imminent threat. This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. This whole thing was a fraud."

In 2004, Tom Ridge's Department of Homeland Security put Kennedy's name on the secret national "no-fly list", and he was barred from a shuttle flight from Washington to Boston. After a flurry of phone calls to Ridge's office, Kennedy's problem was described as "a clerical error [to protect stewardesses]", and solved within a few days.

Til Nex'Time....

This'n'That; August 25th[Slaughter;Lil'Bastard;DeathBook;SpoiledFluffy]

A Spineless Creature Just think: If Louise MacIntosh Rodham Slaughter had a spinal column, she could stand upright in front of the "huddled masses" at her very own healthcare reform townhall meeting!! Partially because of the "spineless thing" and partially because she wouldn't recognize her constituency if we figuratively "slapped her in the head" she's decided to do a telephone townhall meeting. Jis'tween you 'n' me.... I think she's afraid of her constituents figuratively handing her "her ass on a silver platter!!" "Lil' Bastard" Update [This article appeared in the 08/24/009 edition of the local rag, the Democrat and Chronicle] After providing backup help to other Rochester police officers who answered a complaint about drug activity on Dayton Street, rookie Officer Anthony DiPonzio started walking back to his patrol car. A gunshot rang out and DiPonzio fell to the snow-covered ground from the impact of a .22-caliber bullet that hit him in the back of his head, critically wounding him. In a spontaneous decision that trauma surgeons said saved DiPonzio's life, his fellow officers packed him into the back seat of a cruiser and rushed him 1½ miles to Rochester General Hospital, where he underwent emergency surgery. Seven months after the Jan. 31 shooting, DiPonzio, 24, will walk into court to testify in the trial of teenager Tyquan L. Rivera, 15, who is charged with attempted second-degree murder and first-degree assault. Jury selection begins at 2 p.m. Tuesday before state Supreme Court Justice Joseph D. Valentino. Depending on how long it takes to choose a jury of 12 regular jurors and at least two alternates, jurors could hear opening statements by opposing lawyers and testimony from the first witnesses later this week or early next week. Veteran defense lawyer Culver K. Barr said his strategy is simple. "Our defense is going to be that Tyquan did not shoot the gun," he said. District Attorney Michael C. Green declined to characterize what evidence he'll present in an attempt to show that Rivera intentionally attempted to commit murder and to inflict serious physical injury. Both charges allege that DiPonzio was shot while Rivera was allegedly trying to hit him or another person, leaving open the possibility that DiPonzio wasn't the intended target. "I'm looking forward to putting this case before a jury," Green said. "We have a very good handle on what happened." The injury Among the witnesses will be DiPonzio, who had been a police officer for a year when he suffered a wound that surgeons said typically kills 85 percent of the people who suffer it. DiPonzio has little memory of what happened but will testify to show jurors that he suffered a life-threatening wound that has left him with protracted injuries from which he is still recovering, Green said. DiPonzio is living with his parents in Greece while he undergoes three hours of physical rehabilitation daily. His father, Anthony DiPonzio, a longtime court deputy at the Monroe County Hall of Justice, said his son has a firm goal of returning to active duty with the police department. "It's not something he's hoping; he knows he's going back," DiPonzio's father said. "There's no hesitation on that. He wants to go back." He said he and his wife, Joanne, have been amazed at the miraculous recovery their son has made. "Prayers are huge," he said. "We're very spiritual people. God smiled on him the whole way. "Everything just fell into place." The defendant Rivera, who has made no admission about the shooting and has pleaded not guilty to the charges, was 14 and a runaway from a home for troubled youths when DiPonzio was shot. A Family Court judge had placed Rivera at St. Joseph's Villa in Greece after his mother, Wanda Lise, asked the court to intervene because her son was unmanageable. Rivera stayed at St. Joseph's from October 2007 to April 2008, when he didn't return from a visit to his home at 65 Dayton St. Over the next nine months, Rivera stayed often at his home with his mother and two brothers. But Lise, who allegedly told police that her son came and went as he pleased and caused her nothing but trouble, apparently never asked Family Court or police to have her son returned to St. Joseph's Villa. On the afternoon of Jan.31, police officers went to Dayton Street, in northeast Rochester, after neighbors complained of drugs being sold there. Police said they talked to people on the street but made no arrests and were leaving when DiPonzio was shot. Police cordoned off the neighborhood and allegedly intercepted Rivera as he attempted to leave the street in a van with an unknown woman and an infant. Although an officer testified at a pretrial hearing that he directed the three to leave the van and report to officers behind him about whether they knew anything about the shooting, it's unclear whether the other officers followed through. Rivera, whom officers said they had identified previously as someone who served as a lookout for drug sellers and also sold drugs on his street, quickly became the prime suspect but couldn't be found. Lise consented to a search of her home and officers allegedly found the rifle used in the shooting in the basement. Three days later, Rivera turned himself in to Rochester police, accompanied by his first lawyer, George W. Conaty Jr., who has since died. Barr, a former County Court judge who was Conaty's associate, took over the case. The case Barr said he doesn't intend to challenge some evidence. "I can see an awful lot of sympathy for Officer DiPonzio; he was just doing his job," Barr said. "I know his father well. His father has worked in the Hall of Justice for years and I've seen him on a daily basis. We're certainly friends. "It's going to be very difficult and we're certainly not going to debate any point about whether he (Officer DiPonzio) was shot or how he was injured. We'll just hopefully have a jury that can stay under control and not let the strong feelings of this case govern them." Barr, who has no obligation to offer evidence, said he might call his client to the stand to testify. "If we present a defense, it would be the defendant and one or two family members," he said. Shortly after Rivera turned himself in, a Rochester radio station read aloud an e-mail from an unidentified person who claimed to have been present at the shooting. The writer claimed Rivera shot at officers in retaliation after being roughed up and thrown down stairs in his home when officers searched for drugs. Barr, however, said he has no indication the claim is true. "I have seen a printout of that (e-mail), and I think there was a follow-up on that, but I don't think there was anything more that was developed," he said. "If that person has identified himself in any way, I'm not anticipating that person being called as a witness. But that's something I'd definitely be prepared for." VA "Death Book" Page 21: Instructions To help others make sense out of your answers, think about the following questions and be sure to explain your answers to your loved ones and health care providers. [The reader {veteran} is instructed to check a box to the right of each question/statement. Those boxes are labeled:

Difficult, but acceptable Worth living, but just barely Not worth living Can't answer now

This booklet was pulled off the internet by President Bush's administration and returned to the internet by ACORN-COI. This is what America's seniors have to look forward to with obama's "death panels." When the death panel asks me, I intend to check the "Can't answer now" box...] If you checked "worth living, but just barely" for more than one factor, would a combination of these factors make your life "not worth living?" If so, which factors? If you checked "not worth living," does this mean that you would rather die than be kept alive? If you checked "can't answer now," what information or people do you need to help you decide?

• a. I can no longer walk but get around in a wheelchair.
• b. I can no longer get outside—I spend all day at home.
• c. I can no longer contribute to my family's well being.
• d. I am in severe pain most of the time.
• e. I have severe discomfort most of the time (such as nausea, diarrhea, or shortness of breath).
• f. I rely on a feeding tube to keep me alive.
• g. I rely on a kidney dialysis machine to keep me alive.
• h. I rely on a breathing machine to keep me alive.
• i. I need someone to help take care of me all of time.
• j. I can no longer control my bladder.
• k. I can no longer control my bowels.
• l. I live in a nursing home.
• m. I can no longer think clearly-I am confused all the time.
• n. I can no longer recognize family/friends
• o. I can no longer talk and be understood by others.
• p. My situation causes severe emotional burden for my family (such as feeling worried or stressed all the time).
• q. I am a severe financial burden on my family.
• r. I cannot seem to “shake the blues.”
• s. Other (write in):

A Spoiled College Kid-Lookin' For A Place To Be

Fluffy obama doesn't seem to grasp the concept of "recession"...."deficit spending"... "middle class".... and many other phrases that are the common vernacular to you and I. Although he's making "a muddy mess of the pool," Fluffy tries to be all things to all the thugs that bought his job for him.

• Fluffy has no concept of foreign policy-The rest of the world leaders just "point-and-laugh!"
• Fluffy has no concept of domestic economic policy-He just keeps spending money that our grandchildren "haven't even paid taxes on yet!"
• Fluffy has no concept of deficit spending-His thugs just keep printing money and selling securities to China and Japan, who will eventually own more of America than Americans do!
• Fluffy has no concept of recession-He and "The Chin" are at a Marxist Vineyard palatial retreat on a 2-5 million-dollar vacation while many Americans have no jobs and can't afford to feed their families.

Fluffy is a spoiled college kid who has rarely if ever, been denied anything!

He has managed to "skate through life."

He has never had a position where he had to make a payroll.

He has never had a non-governmental position which was not funded by government grants.

He has been a life-long "Saul Alinsky disciple."

He has a total of 142 DAYS of federal legislative experience.

Given all this, it's understandible that he has problems in grasping concepts which require him to serve the interests of others rather than the interests of the thugs who bought him his current job.

Til Nex'Time....

This'n'That; August 24th[Thugocracy]

Elections Have Consequences!! This formadible statement illustrates that no politician should be trusted!! The KoolAid Drinkers are finding this statement to be true, beyond their wildest imaginations!! In his short time in office, Fluffy obama has evolved our beloved representative republic into a "thugocracy!!" This thugocracy has a "second-level cabinet.... ACCOUNTABLE TO NO ONE BUT FLUFFY!! Primary to that concept are the 33 or so, members of Fluffy's "czar-bazaar."

• These czars are soley appointed by Fluffy.
• These czars come primarily from those radical organizations Fluffy has been involved with.
• Fluffy ALONE, names their pay rate.
• Fluffy ALONE, determines their jobs.
• Czars ARE NOT grilled, confirmed by the Congress.

Take for example, Anthony "Van" Jones, Fluffy's "green czar:"

• Mr Jones was and is a member of ACORN-COI and RAW-It's ultra-radical, ultra-militant arm.
• While in jail, Mr Jones became enchanted with communists and anarchists he met there; joined the communist party several months later. Prior to his "czarship," Mr Jones worked with the communists for 10 years.
• Jones is a founding board member of Color of Change, but Color of Change doesn’t want you to know that. Maybe having an avowed America-hating radical on the group’s board is bad public relations.
• The group deleted references to Jones on its “about” page. That page used to say, “James Rucker and Van Jones came together in the wake of [Hurricane] Katrina to use the organizing power of the Internet to give Black Americans and our allies a renewed and strengthened political voice.” But now it doesn’t.
• The old page still exists in the Google cache. (The cache will eventually be cleared, so for safekeeping, I made a PDF of the page here.) The 501(c)(4) group’s 2006 and 2007 tax returns (IRS Form 990) show Jones as a director.
• Jones was also on the board of the Apollo Alliance, a hard-left environmentalist group that is now running large chunks of the Obama administration.
• On its website, Color of Change invited people to sign a petition to spare the life of convicted multiple murder Stanley Tookie Williams.

From the petition: Stanley Tookie Williams has become a true asset to our community. As a co-founder of the Crips, Tookie created untold suffering and death. There is nothing romantic or glamorous about the kind of violence the Crips unleashed. But Williams has taken responsibility for the harm he’s done. And since then, he has saved the lives of countless young Black males. He will continue to do the same—but only if he’s allowed to live. It would be senseless for the State of California to kill a man who is working every day to stop the madness of gang violence. Mass murderers don’t usually get clemency. Williams was executed in 2005.

• The race-baiting conspiracy theorists of Color of Change appear to be enjoying some success in their campaign to convince advertisers to boycott the “Glenn Beck Program,” which airs at 5 p.m. Eastern time on weekdays.
• The group’s co-founder James Rucker gloats in an op-ed at the Huffington Post that Progressive Insurance and several other advertisers have dropped Beck’s show since Color of Change started promoting a boycott. Of course it’s not all that surprising that Progressive Insurance dropped Beck. After all, the company was founded by left-wing philanthropist Peter B. Lewis.
• Rucker is a former MoveOn.org organizer.
• He is also a co-founder of the Secretary of State Project, the group that helped to elect Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie.
• Ritchie, a former community organizer who has worked hand in hand with ACORN, helped set the stage for Sen. Al Franken (D-ACORN) to steal the 2008 Senate election in Minnesota.

Til Nex'Time....

This'n'That; August 18th[FluffyCare]

Fluffy obama "On The Ropes?" Analysis: Liberals tired of health care compromise WASHINGTON – Frustrated liberals have a question for President Fluffy obama and democRATic lawmakers: Isn't it time the other guys gave a little ground on health care? What's the point of a bipartisan bill, they ask, if we're making all the concessions? A case in point: Sen. Charles Grassley, a key Republican negotiator on health care, was on a winning streak as Congress recessed for August, having wrung important concessions from Democrats, including an agreement not to tax employer-provided health insurance and a limit to demands on drug companies. How did Grassley reciprocate? With an attack that struck Democrats as stunning and baseless. Grassley told an Iowa crowd he would not support a plan that "determines when you're going to pull the plug on Grandma." For liberals supporting far-reaching changes to the nation's health care system, it was another sign that months of negotiations have been a one-way street. It's time to move on without Republicans, they say. On Tuesday, liberals were fuming over obama's recent remarks suggesting he might also yield on the federally run insurance option he's been promoting. Many saw it as a huge concession that could leave them with nothing more than watered-down insurance cooperatives. "It is clear that Republicans have decided 'no health care' is a victory for them," Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, said in an interview. "There is a point at which bipartisanship reaches a limit, and I would say it's reaching that limit." The growing liberal unhappiness sets a difficult stage for obama this fall. Political pragmatists want him to keep seeking a middle ground that will attract at least a few RepublicRAT lawmakers as well as moderate democRATs who could prove crucial to passage in the House and Senate. Even modest achievements, such as preventing insurers from refusing to cover pre-existing medical conditions, would allow obama to claim a victory and perhaps try for more later, they say. For now, obama seems on the defensive. He spent valuable time this month knocking down claims that democRATic plans could lead to euthanasia of the elderly. And his chief spokesmen spent much of Monday and Tuesday insisting that obama still supports a government-run health insurance option despite mixed signals from the administration. On Saturday, obama told a Colorado crowd, "The public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform. This is just one sliver of it." While liberals are discouraged, the endgame remains unclear. Some still hope that obama and congressional DemocRATic leaders will use all their parliamentary powers — which could prove especially divisive in the Senate — to pass a far-reaching bill that would include a public option for health insurance and more palatable consumer costs for prescription drugs and other needs. The pivotal decisions will be made this fall, with administration officials saying the debate cannot lapse into the midterm election year of 2010. What seems clear is that the room for compromise between republicRATs and democRATs is shriveling to almost nothing. Some democRATs found Kyl's remarks particularly galling. Even if democRATs manage to produce a health care bill that won't increase the federal deficit over 10 years, Kyl said, "that doesn't mean RepublicRATs would support it." And Grassley has said he's uninterested in a compromise that draws only three or so Senate republicRATs' votes. The continued outreach to republicRATs, meanwhile, is testing democRATs' unity. This week, more than 50 House democRATs issued a letter saying: "Any bill that does not provide, at a minimum, for a public option with reimbursement rates based on Medicare rates — not negotiated rates — is unacceptable." Some of them told House Speaker Nancy Porklosi, d-Calif., in a conference call Tuesday that discussions with RepublicRATs are pointless. White House spokeswoman Linda Douglass played down the intraparty fuss, noting that it's far from clear how the final legislation will turn out. She said negotiations involving obama have led drug manufacturers to agree to reduce costs for the nation's health care system by $80 billion over 10 years, while hospitals have agreed to an additional $155 billion. Those concessions will carry weight with lawmakers as they "look at enacting reform that will lower costs and increase stability and security," Douglass said in an interview. But such concessions cut several ways. Pharmaceutical industry leaders say the $80 billion agreement should end efforts to allow the government to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs used in Medicare and other programs. Liberals say such price reductions are precisely the type of change obama called for in his presidential campaign. And now, they say, is the time to turn those promises into reality.

• Why ARE the democRATs holding out for a bipartisan fluffycare bill? If the bill is passed, Americans will finally realize all the undesireable points of the bill. The negativity [not negative-press; the media are Fluffy's bed-partners!!] will sweep the nation. With bipartisanship, Fluffy can claim that republicRATs were behind the bill as well as democRATs; It's not HIS FAILURE-It's Congress' failure!!
• Grassley was very correct in attacking the democRATs after winning concessions!! He will not support a bill that allows the government to decide when to "pull the plug on Grandma!!" This is in direct contridiction to Eric Massa, a freshman from New York's southern tier who said that he would not vote his constituents' desires if he didn't agree with their point of view!! [This guy should be a "One Term Wonder!!!] His job should be seen as doing all in his power to shut down the entire fluffycare bill completely and forevermore!!!
• If ANY PORTION of fluffycare is passed, Der Fluffmeister will proclaim victory-regardless of the number of items or the impact on society!!
• How can this truly be called "healthcare reform" when Fluffy obama is proposing reducing Medicaid and Medicare's dollars in the next budget?
• This bill has very little to do with healthcare improvement; everything to do with control of all aspects of American life!!!
• America DOES NOT NEED THIS REFORM!!! If we did..... Why are patients flying in from all over the world for medical procedures?? We have the BEST HEALTHCARE ON THE PLANET!!!
• What America really needs is healthcare INSURANCE reform!! Why not a system based on the success of the auto insurance industry?

• Start with a base amount.

  Subtract percentages for positive lifestyles, actions.

  ADD percentages for negative lifestyles, actions.

• Americans would be far more fairly if they were paying their fair share-either higher or lower than the base rate. America must return to a nation that relies on personal responsibility and away from this "sucking-from-the-government-teat" mentality!!! The Constitution does not guarantee us healthcare, welfare, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, a minimum wage, etc. These programs were only put in place to guarantee the authors a supportive voting block!!!
• The Constitution DOES guarantee, among other things, the freedom to do the best one can; to borrow a phrase from the US Army-to "be all you can be!!"

Til Nex'Time....

This'n'That; August 17th[Boxer;Fluffy-EU;Credibility;VictorDavisHanson]

One Guy "Gets It!" [Remember a while back, when senator babs boxer admonished Brigadier General Michael Walsh for calling her "ma'am" instead of "senator"-a title "she worked hard to get"....MY ACHIN' ASS!! The General was testifying about the Army Corps of Engineers' progress in the post-Katrina Louisana coastal restoration. ms boxer is a member of the legion-545 strong, who believe they are royalty, thus entitled to their position, title and power...... ANOTHER ONE WHO MUST GO!!! Mister Jim Hill, a National Guard aviator and a Captain with Alaska Airlines wrote an answer that right on the money!! This email is circulating-maybe you received it??] Dear Senator Boxer: You were so right on when you scolded the general on TV for using the term, "ma'am," instead of "Senator". After all, in the military, "ma'am" is a term of respect when addressing a female of superior rank or position. The general was totally wrong. You are not a person of superior rank or position. You are a member of one of the world's most corrupt organizations, the U.S. Senate, equalled only by the U.S. House of Representatives. Congress is a cesspool of liars, thieves, inside traders, traitors, drunks (one who killed a staffer, yet is still revered), criminals, and other low level swine who, as individuals (not all, but many), will do anything to enhance their lives, fortunes and power, all at the expense of the People of the United States and its Constitution, in order to be continually re-elected. Many democrats even want American troops killed by releasing photographs. How many of you could honestly say, "We pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor"? None? One? Two? Your reaction to the general shows several things. First is your abysmal ignorance of all things military. Your treatment of the general shows you to be an elitist of the worst kind. When the general entered the military (as most of us who served) he wrote the government a blank check, offering his life to protect your derriere, now safely and comfortably ensconced in a 20 thousand dollar leather chair, paid for by the general's taxes. You repaid him for this by humiliating him in front of millions. Second is your puerile character, lack of sophistication, and arrogance which borders on the hubristic. This display of brattish behavior shows you to be a virago, termagant, harridan, nag, scold or shrew, unfit for your position, regardless of the support of the unwashed, uneducated masses who have made California into the laughing stock of the nation. What I am writing, Senator, are the same thoughts countless millions of Americans have toward Congress, but who lack the energy, ability or time to convey them. Under the democrats, some don't even have the 44 cents to buy the stamp. Regardless of their thoughts, most realize that politicians are pretty much the same, and will vote for the one who will bring home the most bacon, even if they do consider how corrupt that person is. Lord Acton (1834 - 1902) so aptly charged, "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Unbeknownst to you and your colleagues, "Mr. Power" has had his way with all of you, and we are all the worse for it. Finally Senator, I, too, have a title. It is "Right Wing Extremist Potential Terrorist Threat." It is not of my choosing, but was given to me by your Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano. And you were offended by "ma'am"? Have a fine day. Cheers! Jim Hill 16808 - 103rd Avenue Court East South Hill, WA 98374 Fluffy "In Bed" With The EU As Well?? [Since when..... does an American corporation such as Gubmint Motors have to have the European Union's approval to acquire another American corporation?!?! Has that stupid shit-obama completely sold out America???] The European Union has approved the acquisition of Delphi Corp.'s steering business -- which includes Delphi's plant in Rochester[,NY] -- by General Motors Co. The EU said the deal, which includes three other Delphi plants, will cause no antitrust problems in Europe. The European Union said “that for all automotive components, the merged entity will have very small market shares and will continue to face several strong, effective competitors” in the EU. Speaking of "Stupid Shits;" What Happened To Fluffy's Credibility?? Remember when Fluffy obama intially proposed reforming America's healthcare? His teleprompter had all the buzzwords programmed in; "If you like your plan, you can keep it. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. " Remember that?? Last Friday, during the "Belgrade Experience".... that photo-op/news conference in Montana, Fluff' made the following statement: "Everybody here who still has -- who has currently private insurance, you know, you would more than likely still be on your private insurance plan." Are both he and ACORN so ignorant as to believe that even the KoolAid drinkers still believe his massive piles of BULLSHIT?!?! A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that most voters (54%) say no health care reform passed by Congress this year would be the better option. As the public has become more engaged in the debate over health care reform, support for the Congressional reform plans has fallen to new lows. Just 42% of U.S. voters now favor the plan while 53% are opposed. Those who oppose the effort feel more strongly about it. The "FluffyCare" Mess [I found this article by Victor Davis Hanson in the National Review. As a sidebar: Mr Hanson is a supporter of Hillsdale College { www.hillsdale.edu } and has spoken at events on several occasions. If you're a conservative or better yet, a patriot-you should sign-up for the free, monthly "Imprimis" at the above URL.] Obama’s Health-Care Mess [Victor Davis Hanson] Ironies abound in the health-care debate. Bush was pilloried by the Obamanians for (1) not planning for the postwar occupation of Iraq; and (2) not being able to articulate the ends and means of the administration’s war. Yet in the hubris of high ratings, Obama apparently felt that he neither had to present a comprehensive finished blueprint of health-care reform, nor that he or his associates should have to sum it up succinctly and clearly. The result is that most Americans not only do not know what the administration plan is, but sense that their president does not either. Health care is stalled and insidiously undermining the presidency of Obama precisely because the public senses he has not leveled with the American people. Of the uninsured, how many millions are young people who feel no need right now to buy insurance, how many million are illegal aliens, how many millions chose to use their optional income for things other than a low-cost catastrophic health plan, how many millions still find care outside the insurance system? Nor do most Americans feel their system is broken. They worry about redundant care, frivolous procedures, and lawsuits, but sense that all in all it can be improved rather than scrapped. They know that Americans with cancer and heart disease survive longer than anywhere else due to superior American care. And they know that longevity is influenced by factors well beyond medical care. The president just as easily could tackle the epidemic of homicides and youth violence, as well as automobile accidents, if his concern really were to ensure that Americans on average lived longer than any others. Bottom line: Too many Americans, whether rightly or wrongly, believe that Obama has other agendas that transcend simply ensuring American live longer, healthier, and better — such as growing government, enforcing an equality of result, and creating permanent constituencies that administer and receive expanding federal entitlements. And what looms over the entire debate? Debt, debt, debt — both the recognition that one cannot expand those covered and save money at the same time without rationing or higher taxes; and the notion that all Obama’s new entitlements essentially involve borrowing money, much of it from Asia, as our indebtedness soars. Til Nex'Time....