There Are Not 46 Million Americans Without Healthcare
The president has been repeating over and over that 46 million Americans do not have healthcare for so long that it has been accepted by the American people, and the media, as truth. But it is not true, it is a lie.
It is a clever little lie designed to drum up support for the president’s healthcare reform bill. The truth is that there are 46 million people in America who lack health insurance. That is not the same as 46 million Americans without healthcare.
The number of uninsured “Americans” that the president keeps throwing out there includes about 10 million legal and illegal aliens. Over 20% of the people who do not have healthcare in America are not citizens of America, and if the president has his way you and I are going to pay for their health insurance. The 46 million number that the president keeps touting is probably an accurate number of the people the president plans to help insure.
The taxpayer will be paying healthcare benefits for 10 million illegal aliens and foreign nationals. The president knows that the American people will not support paying healthcare benefits to those who are not citizens and so he has intentionally blurred the line and included non-citizens when speaking about uninsured Americans. It is a fine line when speaking of Americans and people living in America.
A clever deception indeed.
Sen. Chuck Grassley is so far the lone Republican asking for more information on the president’s firing of Gerald Walpin, an inspector general who found a misappropriation of funds within AmeriCorps, one of the president’s favorite organizations. He wants to know if the first lady had anything to do with the firing considering the fact that Michelle’s former chief of staff is going to be handed a plum job for the organization that runs AmeriCorps.
My question is, why is Grassey standing alone? Why are there no other Republicans standing by him and demanding an investigation? This firing seems politically motivated and yet the Republicans for the most part are sitting quietly on this issue.
You have to give the Democrats credit for their tenacity when it comes to Republicans who pull off similar moves to Obama’s firing of Gerald Walpin. When President Bush fired the attorneys the left jumped all over the issue and did not back down until Alberto Gonzalez was forced to resign. To this day there are people still calling for investigations.
But now that a Democrat president has made the same basic move that George Bush did the Republicans remain quiet. Why is that? Is it because of the beatings that Republicans have taken at the polls in the last two election cycles? That could be it.
The bottom line as I see it on this issue is that this firing was politically motivated and the president has not supplied congress with the information on the firing that is required by law. That last fact alone should be enough to open up an investigation. Yet Republicans are giving the president a free ride. It is time for an investigation into the firing of Gerald Walpin, hopefully the Republicans will stand together with Senator Grassley. However, it looks like Republicans are just going to let this happen without a fight.
ABC Becomes the Official Government News Outlet; Will Anchor News From the White House
It is no big secret that the mainstream media is in bed with the president but this news takes the cake. ABC has worked out a deal where they will be broadcasting their news from inside the White House.
As part of the deal ABC will be touting the president’s troubled healthcare reform bill; including a prime-time special that will not voice an opposing position. If this were talk radio the cry for the fairness doctrine would be re-established.
This deal is taking the media bias to a whole new level. How can ABC even pretend to report objectively on the president when there will be the threat from the president that they will have their premium position in the White House rescinded and replaced with another network? At least before ABC pretended that they were an impartial news organization. Now we know that they are nothing more than a mouthpiece for the president.
Is there really anyone out there besides the administration that doesn’t see a major problem here? The president has made ABC the official news network of the presidency. This strikes very closely the same note that Hugo Chavez is ringing in his country.
The president now has an official government news station. He will be able to dictate the news and the angles that ABC pursues under the threat of removing them from their unprecedented position. ABC will fall in line with the president on all issues. They have sold their souls to the president and as such they will cater to his every whim.
How can anybody consider ABC a legitimate news organization any more? They have now become the propaganda arm of the government. At least now they are out in the open, there is no longer any debate that they will carry the president’s water.
In what certainly has to be considered good news to taxpayers it appears as if the president is lacking the votes to pass healthcare reform legislation. This great news is coming from the Health Secretary, who claims that there is enough opposition in the Democrat party to stall this disastrous $1 trillion proposal.
At the center of the debate seems to be the “public option” otherwise known as government run healthcare that the president is in favor of. This idea seems to lack support all across the political spectrum other than in far left circles.
You’ve got to attract some Republicans as well as holding virtually all of the Democrats together. And that, I don’t believe, is possible with the pure ‘public option.’ I don’t think the votes are there,
Another issue that seems to have congress worried is the apparent flip-flop the president has made regarding taxing the healthcare benefits that most Americans already receive tax free. This idea of taxing healthcare benefits is a proposal that was made by John McCain during the election and railed against by the current president. Now the president seems to be in favor of John McCain’s proposal. Even our moron of a vice president is firmly against this idea, it seems at least Joe Biden hasn’t flip-flopped on this idea.
We need to hope that conservative Republicans, Blue Dog Democrats, and the newly formed New Democrat Coalition can remain true to their stated beliefs and stop the healthcare reform bill from ever becoming law. I am concerned that in order to secure the votes this bill will become even more bloated with earmarks and pork barrel spending as a means to buy the votes necessary.
The day after Treasury Secretary Harry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke met with congress behind closed doors and urged congress to bail out the troubled banks Dick Durbin just happened to sell off over $155,000 in stocks. On the same day shortly after the meeting Dick Durbin bought almost $43,000 of stocks in a Warren Buffett company.
We are being told that there was no insider information being traded here and that this was just a coincidence. Dick Durbin didn’t use information that was given out at this closed door meeting for personal gain is what he would have us believe. But something sure seems fishy here, doesn’t it?
Does Dick Durbin really expect us to believe that he attended a meeting with the Treasury Secretary and the Federal Reserve chairman in which a plan to save the banks was discussed and that he did not gain inside information on which stocks he should buy and which stocks he should sell?
I am willing to admit for the sake of argument that Paulson and Bernanke might not have intentionally given Dick Durbin the information knowing that he would use it for his own personal benefit but I believe that Dick Durbin was able to use whatever was discussed in that meeting to serve his own agenda.
I will even go a step further and say that perhaps no information was exchanged that could have given Dick Durbin warning about his portfolio, but if this is the case what does it tell us about the plan to bail out the banks if upon hearing the news that the banks needed to be bailed out that Dick Durbin thought that this was an appropriate time to sell certain stocks? Perhaps it tell us that he knew right away that this bailout was a bad idea and he was moving all of his money that could be affected far away from any chance that he would lose this money because of the bailout.
There are only two conclusions that I can come to after hearing this news; either Dick Durbin was in fact given inside information, or he knew that the bailout was a bad idea and moved his stocks accordingly. Neither scenario is rather attractive.
Either way a full investigation should be demanded. It is not the nature of the evidence, it is the seriousness of the charges that needs to be considered. It seems I have heard that argument before.
We need to find out one way or the other if there was insider trading happening behind closed doors with the Treasury Secretary, the Federal Reserve chairman, and Dick Durbin.
This is too much of a coincidence to be a coincidence. If he is found guikty he should be sent to one of the gulags that he claims American soldiers are running.
Obama’s Justice Department Dismisses Case Against the Defense of Marriage Act; Gay Activists are not Happy
During the campaign the president tried to play both sides of the gay marriage issue. He claimed that he believes a marriage is between one man and one woman while at the same time promising to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that was signed into law by President Clinton.
But now he is finding it hard to defend both positions at the same time and last week the administration filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit that was filed against the Defense of Marriage Act. This has infuriated some gay rights groups who consider this a flip-flop on one of his campaign promises.
The president made very explicit and emphatic campaign promises that he opposes DOMA and would provide leadership calling on Congress to repeal it,” said Jennifer Pizer, marriage project director for Lambda Legal. “This brief is not consistent with that promise.”
The United States Justice Department has said that DOMA is constitutional based on state’s rights issues and as such the administration would not allow challenges to DOMA in the justice system.
Until Congress passes legislation repealing the law, the administration will continue to defend the statute when it is challenged in the justice system
The president is using stare decisis. You remember the huge deal that was made about stare decisis in regards to abortion during the confirmation hearing of Chief Justice Roberts don’t you? The left was petrified that if Roberts was confirmed as Chief Justice he would ignore stare decisis and that he would reverse Roe vs Wade. Suddenly the left is no longer interested in stare decisis any more.
This does not mean that the president does not want to see DOMA repealed, he claims that he will support a bill to repeal the law if it is passed in congress but that isn’t good enough for the far left. They want the court to impose their beliefs upon the rest of America. The dismissal of this case does not go against his campaign promise to repeal DOMA. A lawsuit is not the way to go about repealing a law.
The president will continue to try and please both sides on this issue. He has always said that he opposes gay marriage yet he will support the repeal of DOMA. These two positions are at odds with each other, we will not be able to hold these dueling positions for much longer. He will have to take one position eventually and I think we know which side he will ultimately come down in favor of. But do we?
U.S. Department of Justice lawyers argued that the act — known informally as DOMA — is constitutional and contended that awarding federal marriage benefits to gays would infringe on the rights of taxpayers in the 30 states that specifically prohibit same-sex marriages.
If the administration truly believes the position stated above than wouldn’t a bill that repeals DOMA also “infringe on the rights of the taxpayers?” How could he then find a repeal of DOMA acceptable using the guideline stated above?
The gay rights groups are not to blame for their anger at the president, nobody really knows where he stands on the issue of gay marriage because of his dueling positions during the campaign. He was able to convince the right that he opposed gay marriage while at the same time convincing the left that he would repeal DOMA. Both sides assumed that he was lying about the opposite position from which they held.
One side will be right, we just don’t know which one yet. If the president does sign a repeal of DOMA we know that he has been lying about his position on gay marriage all along. If he refuses to sign a repeal of DOMA (highly unlikely) we will know that he lied about his position on that issue. Either way there are going to be quite a few people upset with the president, this is a no win situation for him. He should have just given us a clear position during the campaign and he wouldn’t be in this predicament, the American people would have voted him into office KNOWING his position, instead of seeing in him the position they wanted him to hold.
This is what happens when you try to be all things to all people. But for now at least we have to give him just a little bit of credit for following stare decisis and for now bowing down to the extreme pressure of the far left by allowing the court create law. (A position that seems at odds with his supreme court nominee who claims that the courts are where policy is created.)
On “Meet The Press” this is what Joe Biden had to say about the stimulus package:
everyone guessed wrong
Joe Biden
He made that statement referring to the lack of impact that the stimulus bill has had on the ever worsening economy. Whoops, sorry, we guessed wrong. Three trillion dollars down the drain. Thank you all for playing. Come again.
Here is my problem with that moronic statement. The economic advisers in the president’s cabinet should not be guessing in the first place.
The president has a team of advisers to work on the economy, these people are supposed to be experts, they should form an economic plan based on experience. If they were going to force this disastrous stimulus package down our throats the least that they could have done was not to have guessed what to do.
Now that Joe Biden has admitted that the president’s economic team is grasping at straws it is time to hold someone accountable. I would start with Timothy Giethner and go from there.
The whole “solution” of throwing money at the problem obviously did not work and considering that is all that this administration has tried to do on every problem where do we go from here? Are we just going to throw more money at the problem?
This was a damning statement by the vice president, as well as an admission of failure, and it highlights the president’s lack of business experience. He has never run anything before and now he is in charge of the entire economy.
Last week the president fired Gerald Walpin, an inspector general, who the president claimed he lost faith in. There was no other reason given although according to law the president must inform the senate of the specific reasons for the firing to ensure that the firing was not politically motivated.
But the president has refused to offer any specific reasons for the firing other than a loss of confidence. That leaves us to speculate to the possible reason for the firing and it sounds like it was politically motivated.
Gerald Walpin had been investigating Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who just happens to be a supporter of the president, and AmeriCorps for misuse of funds. AmeriCorps is an organization that the president believes strongly in having already signed legislation tripling the size of the organization.
Walpin found that Kevin Johnson had been paying VOLUNTEERS, (I guess the term “volunteer” just doesn’t mean what it used to.), to run his errands for him.
The inspector general found that Johnson, a former all-star point guard for the Phoenix Suns, had used AmeriCorps grants to pay volunteers to engage in school-board political activities, run personal errands for Johnson and even wash his car.
AmeriCorps in now in the process of paying back $350,000 in misspent money, a fraction of the millions that Walpin found they abused, and the man who brought the scandal to light is looking for a new job. Without a proper explanation given it certainly looks on the surface as if this was nothing but a politically motivated firing. Instead of being congratulated for finding and putting a stop to corruption he was fired for his efforts.
Walpin had the nerve to investigate a program that the president believes strongly in, and the fact that he found wrongdoing within the organization is secondary to the actual crime that was committed in the president’s eyes– investigating AmeriCorps in the first place.
The president is required by law to inform Congress of the reasons for this firing, if he does not do so than it is time to open up a full investigation into this matter. Alberto Gonzalez ended up resigning over much the same issue. I am not asking for anything other than full and equal treatment in this case. Somebody needs to be held accountable.
Moderate Democrats May Stall Healthcare Reform Bill
The president may be finding a little opposition to his “public option” on health-care reform from an unexpected place– moderate Democrats. Over 100 moderate Democrats, who have dubbed themselves the New Democrat Coalition, have called a meeting with the Blue Dog Democrats to show that there is major opposition to this bill in the president’s own party.
It seems that some members of congress may still actually believe in the free market system over government sponsored programs after all.
The discussion will focus on the so-called public option in health care. Moderates want to ensure that that government-backed health care plan doesn’t undermine the private market.
The president is moving too fast on this issue and he may be over-reaching. It is one thing for conservative Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats to oppose the health-care reform bill but if the president is truly losing the support of centrists Democrats he should be concerned.
This news coupled with the news that the American Medical Association is opposed to government run health-care are two big setbacks for this bill. Hopefully the moderate Democrats and the Blue Dog Democrats will not succumb to party pressure on this issue and will stand with conservative Republicans to bring this bill to a swift demise.
I don’t think that is going to happen, but any time the government proposes a new program that will cost $1 trillion and will also need to raise an additional $600 billion in new taxes everyone should be leery. Besides, as well as Medicare and Medicaid are being run, do we really want to put all of our health-care needs in the deciding hands of the government?
I don’t think so.
Second Amendment Victory in California
As hard as this is to believe, second amendment advocates won a victory recently in of all places California’s ninth circuit court of appeals. The notoriously liberal court ruled that INDIVIDUALS have the right to challenge state and local gun laws.
Relying on the landmark decision of the Supreme Court last year in the Heller vs Washington D.C., the ninth circuit court of appeals had the following majority opinion:
…the right to keep and bear arms is ‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.’ Colonial revolutionaries, the Founders, and a host of commentators and lawmakers living during the first one hundred years of the Republic all insisted on the fundamental nature of the right. It has long been regarded as the ‘true palladium of liberty.’ Colonists relied on it to assert and to win their independence, and the victorious Union sought to prevent a recalcitrant South from abridging it less than a century later. The crucial role this deeply rooted right has played in our birth and history compels us to recognize that it is indeed fundamental, that it is necessary to the Anglo-American conception of ordered liberty that we have inherited.
This ruling came down in a case that involved Alameda County’s ban on gun shows being held on county property. While the decision was not a victory for the gun show promoters themselves, this is the second time in the last year where a court has ruled that the second amendment applies to individuals. A direct contrast to the argument that the gun control advocates have promoted.
Second amendment advocates are beginning to gain momentum, we seem to be turning a corner but we must not let down our guard. The fact that this decision came down from a far left leaning court is extremely encouraging but now is not the time to lie back. Those who would so willingly assault the constitution will not be quick to take this defeat in stride, they will continue to fight and we must meet them on the front and not back down.
This is not only a fight that we can win, and are winning, it is a fight that we must win. If we let them take away this right that is guaranteed in the constitution what right will be next?
You may not have strong feelings one way or the other about gun rights but you should have strong feeling about the constitution and that is what this fight is all about.
