In 2007 the NAACP opposed the same type of Medicare cuts it supports under Obamacare
According to this article back in 2007 the House and the Senate passed a bill which would have cut Medicare by roughly $150-160 billion, the measure was eventually vetoed by then president George W Bush. The NAACP vehemently opposed these cuts, claiming they would have adversely affected minorities:
“[Medicare Advantage] MA plans – private health plan options that provide coverage to 8.3 million Medicare beneficiaries – disproportionately provide coverage to low-income and racial and ethnic minority beneficiaries,” according to a letter the NAACP sent to Congress.
“Specifically, 40 percent of African Americans without Medicaid or employer coverage rely on comprehensive health insurance coverage provided by MA plans. By providing more comprehensive benefits and lower cost-sharing than traditional Medicare, MA plans help racial and ethnic minority populations gain access to health care services that are critical to their long-term health and well-being,” the NAACP letter read.
“Reduced funding for the MA program would have a negative impact on the health and health care of millions of Medicare beneficiaries – particularly for low-income and minority beneficiaries,” the letter continued.
“We urge you not to backtrack on these priorities by cutting funding for the MA program. This program is vitally important to the health and well-being of racial and ethnic minorities who rely on MA to provide them with the comprehensive, affordable, and coordinated care they need,” the NAACP letter added.
As anyone who has been paying attention already knows, Obamacare cut $300 billion from Medicare, more than twice the estimate from the 2007 bill, and yet the NAACP supports Obamacare, calling it one of the most pressing civil rights issues for this generation.”
Chris Christie signs New Jersey DREAM Act into law
In an attempt to pick the Republican nominee for president in 2016 the mainstream media has already anointed Chris Christie as the only Republican candidate who can defeat Hillary Clinton.
Much like when the mainstream media anointed John McCain and Mitt Romney as the Republicans to have the best chance at winning the White House in 2008 and 2012 respectively this is nothing but an attempt by the media to chose the most liberal Republican as a fall back in case the Democrat actually loses the election. I believe this is called hedging your bets.
There are many reasons why Republicans should not support a Chris Christie presidential run, not the least of which is his stance on illegal immigration. Today he reaffirmed my concerns when he signed the DREAM Act into law in the state of New Jersey.
Democratic Senator Carl Levin retracts his support for restoring veteran pensions by closing a tax loophole for illegal aliens
Just a couple of hours ago I published an article entitled ‘Democratic Senator Carl Levin says he supports restoring veteran pensions by closing a tax loophole used by illegal aliens.’ In that post I warned my readers to take that statement for what it was worth considering the fact that Democrats had the chance to restore pensions for military veterans by closing a tax loophole for illegal aliens but refused to bring the amendment to the floor for a vote.
I hope that my warning was heeded to for it did not take long for Carl Levin to retract his support for this legislation. If you follow the link I provided in my original post you will see it has been updated with the following statement:
Democratic Senator Carl Levin says he supports restoring veteran pensions by closing a tax loophole used by illegal aliens
As we all know, the budget compromise reached by Paul Ryan and Patty Murray, which was eventually signed into law by Barack Obama, included a cut to military pensions.
Today Democratic Senator Carl Levin said he would support restoring the veteran cuts by cutting a tax loophole which is used by illegal aliens:
“I’ll vote for it when it’s offered,” Levin said on Tuesday, according to The Hill. “I would vote for it unless it in some ways messes up a bill that I favor.”
My Senator, Kelly Ayotte, (whom I still despise) is sponsoring a bill which would restore the military pensions by closing a tax loophole used by illegal aliens, and that is what Carl Levin is referring to here.
Earlier today the Senate cleared a procedural hurdle on extending unemployment benefits and will now begin to debate the issue. The Democrats want to extend the benefits with no strings attached while the Republicans are willing to extend the benefits only if there are offsetting spending cuts made elsewhere.
That seems like a reasonable enough request but should the Republicans hold firm on this when dealing with unreasonable Democrats? There is no doubt in my mind that the Democrats will be more than willing to let those who have lost their benefits suffer if in the end they believe it will hurt the Republicans. In fact I actually believe the Democrats want the benefits to remain expired so people will suffer because they feel the Republicans will also suffer at the ballot box at the end of the year.
The Federal and State governments are in the business of identifying things which are not good for an individual and implementing taxes as a means, so they say, to dissuade people from engaging in the activities it deems unsafe.
Smoking is easily the best example of this mindset, as is the recent push by many in the government to tax sugary drinks, limit sodium in products, regulate trans fats, and of course taxing gasoline and coercing people into driving more fuel efficient vehicles.
This post is not meant to diminish the negative effects of any of these products because we all know that smoking and consuming too much sugar or salt is not good for you, but rather to highlight the real goal of the government when it decides to tax us for our own good.
Earlier today U.S. District Court Judge Edmond Chang, a Barack Obama appointee nonetheless, ruled that Chicago’s handgun sales ban is unconstitutional:
U.S. District Court Judge Edmond E. Chang wrote in a 35-page opinion that “Chicago’s ordinance goes too far in outright banning legal buyers and legal dealers from engaging in lawful acquisitions and lawful sales of firearms . . .”
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit — a combination of Chicago residents and an association of Illinois firearms retailers — argued that if they have the right to have a handgun within city limits — as courts have ruled — then they have a right to buy one within the city.
That argument carried the day with the judge.
Chalk one up for the law adding gun owners in Chicago but the decision was not a complete victory for the judge stayed his opinion pending appeal and left the door open for other gun control laws in the city.
The ruling, though, does not ban the city from imposing regulations on the sales of handguns within the city.
“Indeed, nothing in this opinion prevents the City from considering other regulations — short of the complete ban — on sales and transfers of firearms to minimize the access of criminals to firearms and to track the ownership of firearms,” Chang wrote.
We must not let this small victory make us complacent for we must stay ever vigilant in this assault on our second amendment rights.
As America’s Watchtower reported earlier today Allen West has sent a letter to John Boehner questioning whether he and Eric Cantor are part of the Benghazi cover-up because they know more about what happened than they are letting on.
If this story is accurate it appears as if the GOP leadership has responded to Allen West:
The unidentified aide would work for either Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, or Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, per the Examiner’s identification.
Pat Smith, the mother of murdered Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith, and Charles Woods, the father of murdered security officer Tyrone Woods, along with Smith’s uncle Michael Ingmire, joined scores of conservative movement leaders in demanding Boehner install a select committee.
A bill that would do so is sitting in the House with 179 cosponsors including lead sponsor Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), more than a substantial majority of the House GOP conference. Boehner, Cantor, and McCarthy will not schedule a vote on the matter, despite overwhelming support from the conservative movement, victims’ families, the American people, and the GOP conference.
Instead, an anonymous House GOP leadership aide responded to Monday’s letter, which was exclusively reported by Breitbart News, to the Washington Examiner’s Paul Bedardby accusing the coalition writing the letter of making false statements in the letter regarding the GOP leadership’s incapacity to lead an investigation into Benghazi.
“These complaints are absurd and factually inaccurate,” the anonymous GOP leadership aide said. “The committees’ efforts are coordinated by a full-time leadership staffer, administration witnesses have testified publicly and privately, and the committees have both professional investigators and subpoena authority.”
I guess we now know which side the Republican leadership is on. We have to take this for what it is worth considering the fact that this is an unnamed source, but I for one believe the only thing absurd with the story is the fact that the GOP leadership seems unwilling to turn this case over to a select committee. What are they hiding…..
Allen West has sent a letter to John Boehner questioning whether he and Eric Cantor are possibly assisting in the cover-up of what happened in Benghazi.
Here is part of what he wrote:
“There is widespread support for a select committee to get to the bottom of disturbing questions surrounding the attack, as H.Res. 36 has 178 cosponsors,” West said in an email to Breitbart News. “Yet Speaker of the House John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor refuse to bring it to the House floor for a vote. You have to wonder, is there something they know that they prefer not come to light?”
The letter delivered to Boehner on Monday similarly questioned whether Boehner is helping President Barack Obama’s administration cover up the Benghazi scandal. Specifically, because Boehner is a member of the “Super 8”—congressional leaders who are briefed on national security matters—the coalition wondered if he knew something that a full investigation into Benghazi would reveal.
“Some analysts believe your inaction and passivity towards getting to the truth concerning Benghazi is because you were briefed on the intelligence and special operations activities in Libya as a member of the ‘Super 8,’” the group wrote. “You may possess ‘guilty knowledge.’ We recall how then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi developed a form of ‘amnesia’ concerning a documented briefing she received on so-called ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ – later termed ‘torture’ for political purposes.”
This is something that I have believed for quite awhile now, in fact I wrote about that very possibility back on August 6th of last year in this post. Here are two paragraphs from that article:
America's Watchtower 