A Controversial and/or Informative Site

[Saundra Hummer]

* * * * * * THE PROGRESS REPORT


August 4, 2009 by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, Nate Carlile, and Pat Garofalo

ECONOMY
Will Cram-Down Make A Comeback?

In April, the banking industry and its allies in Congress successfully defeated a bankruptcy law reform that would have allowed bankruptcy judges to lower -- or "cram down" -- mortgage payments for troubled homeowners. The change was an integral part of the Obama administration's plan for stemming the foreclosure crisis, and while it initially passed in the House of Representatives, it garnered only 45 votes in the Senate. The banking industry spent $42 million on lobbying to defeat cram-down in the first quarter of 2009 alone, leading Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), the bill's sponsor and most outspoken proponent, to conclude that the banks "frankly own the place." Since then, the mortgage modification effort has fallen short, and during the first six months of 2009, "a record 1.53 million properties were in the foreclosure process." One in 84 homes received a foreclosure notice in that period, and thus an interest in cram-down has been renewed. The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the measure last month, and both House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) and Durbin have indicated they will revive the bill.

A SLOW PACE: When the Obama administration initially released its housing plan, titled Making Home Affordable, it set the goal of having mortgage servicers modify 3 to 4 million mortgages. The plan was based upon providing companies with financial incentives for completed modifications, while the threat of a cram-down would give servicers a reason to keep homeowners out of foreclosure, and avoid having a bankruptcy judge alter the mortgage in court. But without cram-down to round out the package, the modification effort has sputtered. Thus far, just 200,000 homeowners nationwide are on track for a modification, with 108,000 of those having mortgages owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, both of which are actively encouraging modifications. Privately-held mortgages constitute less than half of the modification effort, even though they account for 55 percent of delinquencies. The mortgage industry claims that it is attempting to keep up with the demand for modifications, but that it simply doesn't have the capacity. But the New York Times noted that "many mortgage companies are reluctant to give strapped homeowners a break because the companies collect lucrative fees on delinquent loans."

THE SHAME GAME: Last week, the Obama administration brought 25 mortgage company executives, including representatives from Bank of America, Citigroup, and JP Morgan Chase, to the White House for questions regarding the slow modification progress. Today, the administration released a report on the modification effort, including the names of those companies that are lagging behind. As the Associated Press reported, "by publishing the names of companies that are lagging behind in the government's plan to ease the housing crisis, officials are counting on public outrage to get the industry on track." Publishing the names also helps reveal whether the program as a whole is faltering, or whether specific servicers that are behind the curve. "No one wants to be on the bad side of that list just because of the public scrutiny that comes from it," David Sisko, the head of default management services for Deloitte & Touche, told Bloomberg News. But the program's troubles don't end there. As Andrew Jakabovics, the Center for American Progress' Associate Director for Housing and Economics, pointed out, "The lack of transparency in the program makes it difficult to determine where the points of failure lie." He noted a Government Accountability Office report that found "the lack of adequate documentation and specification of the assumptions makes it difficult to assess the reliability of Treasury's estimates and, going forward, may hinder efforts to evaluate how well the program is meeting its objectives."

IF NOT CRAM-DOWN, THEN WHAT?: "People in the servicing industry and in the broader financial industry must understand that if this last effort to produce significant modifications fails, the argument for reviving the bankruptcy option will be extremely strong," said Frank. But Durbin told The Progress Report in an interview that, ultimately, "I think we're going to be forced into alternatives." One alternative option is taking away the tax advantage enjoyed by trusts that hold mortgage-backed securities "if the investors refuse to allow modifications." There is also mandatory mediation, a very successful program requiring that lenders and borrowers meet and try to work out an agreement before a foreclosure can proceed. Congress could also "temporarily change the rules on foreclosure to give people facing foreclosure the right to rent their homes" at the market price, giving banks an incentive to modify mortgages, in order to avoid becoming landlords. Finally, Jakabovics suggested allowing the Treasury Department "to buy out (at a discount) the servicing rights of underperforming servicers or even acquire them outright in exchange for some of the outstanding warrants" that Treasury acquired under the TARP program. "Treasury could then resell those rights to the servicers who have demonstrated capacity to do modifications," he wrote.

UNDER THE RADAR
ECONOMY -- GOP TEAMS UP WITH FINANCIAL SERVICES INDUSTRY TO KILL OBAMA'S PROPOSED CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION AGENCY: As members of Congress return to their districts for the August recess, they should "expect to be bombarded by the guns of August -- K Street-style," with the financial services industry ramping up efforts to kill President Obama's proposal for a Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA). President Obama proposed the idea for the CFPA "to safeguard against mortgage, credit card and other abuses that contributed to the current crisis." The idea has received strong backing from from consumer advocates as well as both House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) and Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT). According to the National Journal, lobbyists for the financial services industry, which views defeating the CFPA as "one of its top two legislative priorities," have been coordinating opposition to the CFPA with Republicans on the House Financial Services Committee in preparation for the August recess. Lobbyists are reportedly holding several meetings with aides to Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee. Bachus has benefited from his support, raising nearly $4 million from the finance, insurance, and real estate sectors over his career. Like the lobbyist-run efforts of manufacturing an image of mass public opposition to kill health care and clean energy reform, the financial services industry is attempting to fund anti-CFPA "grassroots activities" by "hitting up many trade groups for donations of $15,000 apiece for the coordinated lobbying effort."

THINK FAST
Former President Bill Clinton is in North Korea to secure the freedom of Laura Ling and Euna Lee, two U.S. journalists who were recently sentenced to 12 years in jail. He is "the highest-profile American to visit since his secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, went in 2000." White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that the Obama administration would have no public comment to avoid jeopardizing the trip's success.

Last month, the Obama administration filed a "friend of the court brief" in the Supreme Court that defended the state secrets privilege, saying it is "grounded in the Constitution." The filing "raised eyebrows and suspicions among liberals already disappointed that the Obama administration has not rejected a number of legal doctrines associated with the Bush administration."

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander of troops in Afghanistan, has reportedly "suggested a dramatic increase in troops -- 4 to 6 brigades during 2010. That's equivalent to anywhere from 12,000 to 27,000 additional troops deployed to Afghanistan next year." The increase is in addition "to the more than 20,000 troops already approved by President Obama."

The White House has launched a "behind-the-scenes offensive" to save the cash-for-clunkers program. But Democratic leaders are hesitant because "they don't want their carefully planned pre-recess voting schedule to fall victim to procedural delays the Republicans may impose to protest the additional cash." Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) "wouldn't say whether he would potentially delay the start of the August recess."

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said yesterday that Senate Democrats are exploring options to pass a health care reform bill, including budget reconciliation, a parliamentary move that would allow the bill's passage with a simple majority. Reconciliation is "clearly one of the contingencies on the table," Schumer said. "We want to get a bipartisan agreement, but if we don't, it's not going to stop us from moving forward with health care."


Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner "blasted top U.S. financial regulators" -- including Ben Bernanke, Mary Shapiro, and Sheila Bair -- "in an expletive-laced critique" for their uneasiness in implementing the Obama administration's U.S. financial regulation overhaul. U.S. regulators are wary of the plan because of encroachment on the financial service industry's turf. "[E]nough is enough," Geithner charged, saying they had ample time to air their concerns.

Yesterday, President Obama marked the implementation of last year's GI bill -- the most extensive educational assistance program for veterans since the original landmark GI Bill in 1944. "We do this not just to meet our moral obligation to those who've sacrificed greatly on our behalf and on behalf of the country," Obama said. "We do it because these men and women must now be prepared to lead our nation in the peaceful pursuit of economic leadership in the 21st century."

After the New York Times reported of a truce between MSNBC and Fox News, Keith Olbermann did his best last night to prove he's not letting up on the right-wing network. Olbermann used last night's "Worst Person" segment to blast Fox chief Rupert Murdoch, Bill O'Reilly, and NYT reporter Brian Stelter, author of the original article.

MSNBC has admitted to erring by not revealing guest host Richard Wolffe's role as a strategist for a top Washington public affairs firm Public Strategies Inc. The criticism against MSNBC was first leveled by Salon's Glenn Greenwald. Writing on DailyKos, Keith Olbermann stated, "[U]ntil we can clarify what else [Wolffe] is doing, he will not be appearing with us."

And finally: Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL) is looking for "more than the typical exceptional writing, communication and organizational skills" from her staffers. In a new job posting for a legislative assistant, applicants are required to explain, "what you would do to get on [MTV's] 'Real World, D.C.'" Brown-Waite's spokesperson explained that the congresswoman "values a creative staff, and this is a way that we can attract these types of applicants." In the past, applicants have discussed other quirky topics such as "how bocce ball changed your life."


BLOG WATCH
Only Fox News covers the war in Afghanistan.

Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) is confused about twitter, but dedicated to health care reform.

Rachel Maddow ridicules the "orchestrated outrage" at health care town halls.

No truce for Olbermann and O'Reilly.

Republican presidents and air craft carriers.

Should we envy Texas?

The dangers of GE's control of NBC.

There was another town hall ambush in Green Bay, WI last night.


DAILY GRILL
"President Obama acts like there's an urgency to getting this done, but why isn't anybody else acting that way? Where are the people marching in the streets? The streets are empty in this town. If they really want it, where are they? ... There's no public demonstration of support for health care."
-- MSNBC's Chris Matthews, 7/31/09

VERSUS
"[T]housands of people held a rally in a park nearby [Capitol Hill] demanding 'health care reform now.' The crowd included doctors, nurses, labor union leaders and people without insurance. Many urged Congress to create a public health insurance plan, as a possible alternative to private insurance."
-- The New York Times, 6/25/09
This is only a summary, go on site for more. Just click on the following URL:
http://pr.thinkprogress.org * * * * * * * * *

[Saundra Hummer]

.
A
NEWS ALERT

North Korea issues a pardon to two detained US journalists, state media say, during Bill Clinton's visit to Pyongyang

For more details:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news
Bill & his team got it done.

Great! SRH
*

[Saundra Hummer]

.^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Isn't It Ironic Orly Taitz, "Birther" Leader, is Foreign Born and Raised Making Lunatic Claim Obama Wasn't Born in U.S.?
Submitted by mark karlin
on Wed, 08/05/2009 - 6:32am.
EditorBlog
BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG
By
Mark Karlin

The Big Corporate Media is giving the "Birthers" a second wind of publicity, when they should have been confined to the loony bin after their first wave of press coverage.

That is in large part due to two realities: 1) The Big Corporate Media that runs television covers the lunatic fringe right as though they have a legitimate role in news, while ignoring meaningful ideas from progressives that stray from the self-defined "center" (which is any idea that won't upset entrenched wealth and power) and ; 2) the media loves, as Chris Hedges calls it in his brilliant new book on the topic, "spectacle."

In a society that no longer can distinguish between entertainment, fact, celebritydoom, and politics, "spectacle" boosts ratings.

One of the best articles written on the ubiquitous, disputatatious face of the birther movement, Orly Taitz, is in the Orange County Weekly News, where she practices dentistry (when not threatening legal action using a law degree that she received over the Internet).

The article offers a full picture of Taitz's peculiar and factually unfounded crusade, but the most telling quote may be from a blogger who critically keeps track of her largely theatrical activity (no court has upheld any of her legal challenges, or of her rivals for the birther mantle, including attorney Philip Berg -- her nemesis in the movement):

Patrick McKinnion of Yes to Democracy puts it a different way: “There’s a certain amount of fascination with unbridled insanity, and that’s what you’re seeing with the birthers: a level of hatred that borders, if not absolutely pole-vaults, into insanity.”

In a sidebar article in the Orange County Weekly News on Taitz (in which we learn that she claims to have a black belt in Taekwondo), McKinnion comments:

Good article. The sad part is that people like Dr. Orly are so blinded by their hatred that they're not seeing the things around them - or who they're associating with.

The day after I was interviewed for this piece, a gunman who turned out to be a Neo-Nazi shot two guards and killed one at the National Holocaust Museum. Turns out he was posting the same claims and demands that Dr. Orly posts. She's freely associating with people fully willing to hate her simply due to her faith, and that's pretty sad. (One birther in particular, Andy Martin, is a known anti-semite)

The major flaw with the entire birther cause is that there is not a single piece of credible evidence that supports any of their claims. No Pakistan travel ban. No way for a US minor citizen to give up their US citizenship. No credible proof of forgery (just the writings of faceless, nameless internet "experts". A full recording with Sarah Obama that she says clearly "born in Hawaii". Not a single piece of evidence to back up any of their claims. Instead they demand you take it all on faith - and proclaim any evidence to the contrary to be part of the "conspiracy".

And the people involved are just as questionable as the evidence. A dentist [Taitz] with a law degree from an on-line unaccredited law school.

But one of the biggest ironies in this tragic farce of a television media -- particularly cable -- that diverts attention from real issues with coverage of such a psychotic "movement," is that Orly Taitz is herself not born in the U.S. She was raised in Moldavia, during the Soviet Era, was allowed to emigrate to Israel (where she met her husband), and in turn they moved to the U.S. at a time when the government was allowing former Soviet Jews a large quota to immigrate and proceed on a citizenship track.

We saw the MSNBC interview the other night when Shuster and another reporter questioned Taitz, who was in a studio in Tel Aviv, with an aggressive grilling the likes of which I hadn't recalled seeing on corporate media, except on Hannity or Bill O'Reilly when they have a "liberal" rabbit in their sites.

Taitz, who has a heavy accent, kept trying to bully her way out of directly answering questions. (It reminded me of debating an NRA true believer.)

The birther movement is full of malcontents -- anti-Semites, skinheads, political malcontents, white firsters, and a radical right wing Jew -- in the case of Taitz, I speculate (as a Jew who knows the landscape of Israeli politics) -- who fears for Israel (in the Netanyahu paranoid style) under Obama. The birthers are a group of psychos who would be shooting each other if they didn't share a common hatred of Obama and the fear of America becoming a nation where whites are in the minority and our foreign policy is to join as partners in the international community.

Only in America would corporate big media spend such extensive amounts of time covering a foreign-born and raised nutcase challenging the nationality of the president of the United States.

It is, as Christopher Hedges writes in his new book, "Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle," an age when corporate media values spectacle over the truth and a discussion of vital public policy.

It's the circus -- not news -- on a television screen.

BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG http://blog.buzzflash.com/node/9145 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

[Saundra Hummer]

. . . . . . .
THE PROGRESS REPORT
August 5, 2009 by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, Nate Carlile, and Zaid Jilani

HEALTH CARE
Swiftboating Town Halls
With federal lawmakers returning home this week to begin their month-long recess, the far right is welcoming them with large, angry throngs at "town halls gone wild." "Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops [and] congressmen fearful for their safety" have marked the ugly scenes that have become the rule in recent days, as normally respectful meetings between representatives and their constituents have been inundated with right-wing protesters focused on killing health care reform. Over the weekend, Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) became one of the more widely publicized victims, when a mob of protesters chanting "just say no" to health care followed him out of an event. These encounters are being orchestrated by the same lobbyist-run groups -- Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks -- that brought together the tax day tea parties in April. While trying to give the appearance of a "grassroots" uprising, the demonstrations are cover for a corporate-lobbyist engineered harassment strategy that encourages participants to "yell," "stand up and shout," and "rattle" elected officials in favor of reforming health care. Their goal -- recently outlined by an influential lobbyist as "delay" then "kill" -- is apparent: Having successfully delayed a vote until after the August recess, lobbyists are seizing on town halls to ambush lawmakers in an attempt to fool them and the greater public into thinking there is wide opposition to health care reform. Yesterday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs took a "hard line against the Tea-Party organized disruptions," labeling them a "Brooks Brothers Brigade," a reference to GOP staffers staging protests during the 2000 Florida recount.

THE MEMOS: As with the tea parties, these town halls are "lessons in how political interests enlist human and technological resources to build political pressure while those responsible remain safely behind the curtain." Last week, The Progress Report obtained a leaked memo from a volunteer with Tea Party Patriots, a website sponsored by Americans for Prosperity (AFP) (led by a former associate of Jack Abramoff) and FreedomWorks (led by former Republican Majority Leader and current lobbyist Dick Armey). The memo detailed how town hall goers should infiltrate meetings and harass Democratic members of Congress. The memo said activists should "stand up and shout out and sit right back down" so the representative is "made to feel that a majority, and if not, a significant portion of at least the audience, opposes the socialist agenda of Washington." The overall goal, said the memo, is to "rattle" the elected official. Earlier this week, a FreedomWorks volunteer, who doubles as a Tea Party protester, published another memo that outlined a strategy "for his fellow activists -- a playbook of sorts for protesters seeking to disrupt and harass members of Congress during town hall forums in their districts."

A BROAD STRATEGY: Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, has endorsed the strategy of staged protests, telling Politico the days of civil town halls are now "over." In a memo to House Republicans, Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) promised "anger" during the August recess: "Americans' anger will be on full display in the weeks ahead as Members of Congress leave Washington and travel the nation listening to the voices of their constituents." The published memos are similar to talking points being distributed by FreedomWorks that push an anti-health reform assault all summer. Patients United, a front group maintained by AFP, is busing people all over the country to protest health care reform. America's Health Insurance Plans, the trade group and lobbying juggernaut representing the health insurance industry, is also sending staffers to monitor town halls in 30 states. Meanwhile, Conservatives for Patients' Rights (CPR), led by disgraced hospital executive Rick Scott, is running a national campaign against a public health care option. Yesterday, the group took credit for "helping gin up the sometimes-rowdy outbursts targeting House Dems at town hall meetings around the country, raising questions about their spontaneity." Earlier in the week, a representative of CPR "sent an email to a list serve (called the Tea Party Patriots Health Care Reform Committee) containing a spreadsheet that lists over one hundred congressional town halls from late July into September." And last weekend, CPR announced it will send staff to "confront" lawmakers at town halls and then transition to negative ads.

TOWN HALLS GONE WILD: In one incident of right-wing outrage, protesters surrounded Rep. Tim Bishop (D-NY), forcing police to escort him to his car. In another, anti-health care protesters hung up an effigy of Rep. Frank Kratovil (D-MD) outside his district office in Salisbury, MD. The city was the site of a recent symposium on the dangers of "government-run health care," sponsored by a group called "Patients First," a project of AFP. Two nights ago, Reps. Steve Kagen (D-WI) and Steve Driehaus (D-OH) had to face down angry mobs. Kagen, whose town hall was targeted by the Wisconsin chapter of AFP, was "repeatedly disrupted" by "incomprehensible" shrieks and shouts from conservatives. And just last night, Fox's local Houston affiliate reported that at a rowdy town hall hosted by Rep. Gene Green (D-TX), some attendees admitted "they don't live in the district." Still, Democrats are vowing not to let the disruptions stop health care reform. "I hope my colleagues won't fall for a sucker-punch like this," Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) told The Progress Report. "These health insurance companies and people like them are trying to load these town halls for visual impact on television." Doggett agreed. After his town hall was ambushed he declared, "I am more committed than ever to win approval of legislation to offer more individual choice to access affordable health care. An effective public plan is essential to achieve that goal." And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) promised Democrats wouldn't waiver: "In spite of the loud, shrill voices trying to interrupt town hall meetings and just throw a monkey wrench into everything, we're going to continue to be positive and work hard."

UNDER THE RADAR
ECONOMY -- ANTI-EFCA BUSINESS FRONT GROUP HIRES KARL ROVE & CO.: The Economic Freedom Alliance (EFA), a conglomeration of Midwestern business interests, is currently targeting Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) with a billboard campaign and website that implores constituents to "not let Evan Bayh kill jobs" by supporting the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). As a part of its effort to kill EFCA, EFA has hired Anne Layne-Farrar, an economist who works for the corporate consulting firm LECG, to produce a report that claims EFCA would "cost the U.S. economy 600,000 jobs" by the end of 2010. Layne-Farrar's report was funded by the "Alliance to Save Main Street Jobs," which includes anti-labor industry titans such as the American Hotel and Lodging Association, the Associated Builders and Contractors, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. As the Institute for Southern Studies notes, "Even as a piece of business research-for-hire, Layne-Farrar's study is shockingly weak -- based on a thin set of old and irrelevant data that doesn't even bear out her own conclusions." In addition, EFA's newest ally in its war against organized labor is former Bush adviser Karl Rove; this year alone, EFA has paid $100,000 to Karl Rove & Co. Given Rove's long history of engaging in spin, distortion, falsehoods, and lies, it's no surprise that an organization like EFA -- which also has recently teamed up with notorious astroturf group Americans for Prosperity -- would enlist his help in smearing EFCA.

THINK FAST
U.S. journalists Laura Ling and Euna Lee, accompanied by President Clinton and CAP President and CEO John Podesta, arrived back home in California this morning after being held for five months in North Korea while reporting for Current TV. Current co-founder Al Gore released a statement, reading, "Our hearts go out to them -- and to their families -- for persevering through this horrible experience."

Two former employees of Xe -- the private military company formerly known as Blackwater Worldwide -- are alleging that founder Erik Prince is complicit in the murder of individuals who worked with federal authorities investigating the company.

MoveOn.org recently announced it would place ads to pressure centrist Democrats on health care reform, but yesterday, President Obama told Senate Democrats that he wanted "left-wing groups" to back off. "In this context about the less productive tone of the debate in Washington, he said he didn't like to see 'left wing groups attack fellow Democrats,'" a While House official said.

Groups on all sides of the health care reform debate are "pouring tens of millions of dollars into advertising campaigns designed to push the cause of reform forward, slow it down or stop it in its tracks." According to the Campaign Media Analysis Group, more than $52 million has been spent on health care related ads nationwide.

Democrats in Congress are worried that with the intense focus on health care reform, "a major climate change bill may be left on the cutting-room floor this year." Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has asked Senate committees to complete their work on cap-and-trade legislation by Sept. 28.


Prison employees and residents of Standish, MI want to keep the city's maximum corrections facility "open at all costs, even if that means becoming the new home of Guantanamo Bay detainees." While Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D) opposed moving the detainees to Michigan, local residents "are most concerned about keeping some of the 340 jobs and other economic sustenance the prison provides."

The city of New York has accused Lehman Brothers of underpaying its taxes by $627 million since 1996. The city is working to persuade a federal bankruptcy court in Manhattan to move it up the list of Lehman's creditors.

And finally: Washington, DC had fun yesterday celebrating President Obama's 48th birthday. Z-Burger -- where President Clinton recently stopped by and picked up a "double burger (hold the mayo), onion rings, french fries, apple pie milkshake" -- gave out free burgers and cake during lunchtime. The 250-pound cake, which took three days to construct, had "images of Obama throughout his life." Employees at Madame Tussauds also put together "a wax birthday party."

BLOG WATCH
The OMB strikes back.

Meet the Washington Post's new editorial team.

Fox News' Glenn Beck says there's no excuse for violence.

On health care reform, there's a problem with seniors.

Even though jailed journalists were freed, John Bolton thinks Clinton's trip to North Korea was a mistake.

It's time to dump the "Arab rejectionism" talking point.

CNN privately pressured cable operators not to run Media Matters' Lou Dobbs ad.

Would birthers want to see Bobby Jindal's birth certificate too?

DAILY GRILL
"This funding will provide tax relief by savings local tax dollars and, under the stewardship of Chief Livingston, will go a long way to fight crime more effectively through community policing."
-- Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA), 7/28/09, touting funds from the economic recovery act

VERSUS
"Mr. President, where's the stimulus package? Where are the jobs? ... Mr. Speaker, this is not the change the folks in Coffee County, Georgia, can use. They need jobs."
-- Kingston, 7/28/09, attacking the economic recovery act This is only a summary, go on site for the compete reports as well as other articles. Here's the link, just click on it:

http://thinkprogress.org/ . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

* * *
BUZZ FLASH HONORS
WINGS OF JUSTICEVIDEO
WINGS OF JUSTICE
Lloyd Doggett
Go on-site for Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6VOOGzfXGQ&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fblog%2Ebuzzflash%2Ecom%2Fhonors% 2F202&feature=player_embedded
You've likely seen them: the videos of astroturf protests against government-run health care. There are screaming people in the videos, and stunned look on the faces of politicians.

While we know the protests are not legitimate, politicians tend to fear about negative reactions, sincere or otherwise.

But one politician who was subject to attack by these astroturf protestors is standing up, and refuses to be intimidated: Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX).

Rep. Doggett released a statement following the constituent gathering at a local grocery store:

This mob, sent by the local Republican and Libertarian parties, did not come just to be heard, but to deny others the right to be heard. And this appears to be part of a coordinated, nationwide effort. What could be more appropriate for the "party of no" than having its stalwarts drowning out the voices of their neighbors by screaming "just say no!" Their fanatical insistence on repealing Social Security and Medicare is not just about halting health care reform but rolling back 75 years of progress. I am more committed than ever to win approval of legislation to offer more individual choice to access affordable health care. An effective public plan is essential to achieve that goal.

Intimidation only works if you let the other side know you're scared. Rep. Doggett doesn't sound scared.

The mainstream media seems eager to follow along, treating the astroturf protests as legitimate outposts of concern. Having a member of Congress step up, speak up, and call out the truth -- especially these days -- is an act of bravery.

Doggett could have behaved like most politicians and ran meekly away; instead Doggett called out the artificiality of the protestors.

And these protestors weren't just obnoxious in voice. Their signs include a picture of Doggett with a circle around it and a slash through it. Then there was the "dessert": a marble tombstone with Doggett's name on it.

The protestors are tough, but so is Doggett, almost as if Doggett is receiving strength from their cries. As Doggett noted on Monday's "Hardball" on MSNBC:

So "Just say no," a mob scene, is just one way of trying to intimidate members into weakening their position. In my case, it really just reaffirmed my resolve to go back and get a strong public plan, force more competition, provide more choice to people, get the reform I know my constituents want.

Not enough voices are speaking out for why health care reform is so vital. The feeling is that health care reform is so obvious, why speak up too loudly. Except the progressive voices are being drowned out.

Which makes Doggett's words all the more valuable. Again from Monday's "Hardball":

I think these folks are really desperate to stop health reform. They see that for the first time in 60 years, we really have, with President Obama and a Democratic Congress, a chance to enact meaningful reform and deal with these policies of health insurance giants that hurt small business, that deny choice to so many people, and deny them coverage at a time they need it the most.

When Rep. Doggett spoke with Mike Stark of FireDogLake (above) as Stark was asking a number of politicians on their stance on health care, he shared with Stark that people do need to speak up if we are going to get better health care.

If this decision-making process is only a great president like Barack Obama and this Congress, we won't get the right product. We have to have the American people demanding... we've got to have them demanding more.

For fighting for better health care and against astroturf protestors, Rep. Lloyd Doggett earns our Wings of Justice award.
* * *
Nominated by BuzzFlash staff. To see a full list of past Wings of Justice honorees, click here. Go on-site to gain access to all links and functions, there are several.
http://www.buzzflash.com

Technorati Tags: BuzzFlash Honors wings of justice Lloyd Doggett astroturf protestors health care health care reform
COMMENTS
»
Joyful Joy I saw a spokesman
Submitted by Joy Mcclellan on Wed, 08/05/2009 - 12:00pm.
Joyful Joy I saw a spokesman for AARP on Fox News 2 days ago trying to inform Hannity about the health plan but he was talked over, not allowed to answer and when he did answer, he didn't bring out the fact that insurance companies already deny coverage at times and almost always require prior authorization for most procedures. As a nurse, I am well informed about these facts. Those of us who are informed MUST attend those tea parties so that the mob cannot rule. And as for the fact that the WH wants to know about the viral emails so that they can be refuted, that is a very smart action on their part. If the WH does not know about the lies going around, it cannot inform the public. If you don't think there are vicious emails about Obama and his actions, do a search on 'black hurricanes'. I live in Texas and acquaintances who send me this vicious stuff have no idea how offensive I find it. And the sad part is that they call themselves Christians.
»
Rep. Doggett, You Make Me Proud, Once Again, To Be From Texas
Submitted by Carol Burns on Wed, 08/05/2009 - 11:37am.
Thank the Lord for people like you who are willing to do the right thing without regard for the consequences. And, once more, George H. W. Bush, Barbara Bush, George W. Bush, "Jeb" Bush, et al are NOT FROM TEXAS. They are carpetbaggers from Connecticut with a long family history of sympathizing and funding Naziism. They're evil. And I think Rick Perry is an extraterrestrial.
»
Lloyd Doggett
Submitted by Chrisdutch on Wed, 08/05/2009 - 10:04am.
If Texas does decide to bail on the union like Governor Good hair wants to do can he stay behind? Maybe we can send him to Mississippi. That will raise the state IQ significantly.
»
Doggett is the GREATEST
Submitted by Start Loving on Tue, 08/04/2009 - 10:38pm.
Thank you sir!!!!
»
Finally, a Texas politician does something...
Submitted by mckathiki on Tue, 08/04/2009 - 10:37pm.
...we can be proud of! I'm not a constituent of Rep. Doggett so I cannot vote for him but I sure as hell will support him in whatever way I can.
»
Login or register to post comments http://blog.buzzflash.com/honors/202 * * * * *

[Saundra Hummer]

.
A
NEWSLETTER
FROM
RAW STORY

ALSO Bizarre: Sarah Palin calls Politico Tuesday night to reiterate she's not getting divorced
CNN purportedly refuses ad critical of insurance industry
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/08/05/cnn-refuses-ad-critical-of-insurance-industry/
At least they don’t call themselves “Fair and Balanced.”

Days off refusing to run an ad spot criticizing its evening host Lou Dobbs, the cable network has now refused to run an ad criticizing a top health insurance executive who recently retired with a package worth some $70 million and was paid $12.2 million in total compensation last year (More details of Hanway’s salary and compensation package are available at Forbes).

Why?

The ad “unnecessarily” “singles” out an individual company and person by name.

According to Washington Post Company blogger Greg Sargent, CNN wrote the labor-backed group Americans United for Change that, “This ad does not comply with our clearance guidelines because it unnecessarily singles out an individual company and person.”

The ad claims that, on average, Cigna CEO H. Edward Hanway makes $5,883 an hour.

MSNBC, meanwhile, has said they’ll run the ad. The spot follows below.

-John Byrne

Click on the following link for article and video:

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/08/05/cnn-refuses-ad-critical-of-insurance-industry/

[Saundra Hummer]

XXXXXXXX
Blackwater Founder: Murderer?Posted By:
Rebecca Young
22 hours agoBlackwater Founder: Murderer?
Hello,
I saw this article on Care2 and thought you'd like it as well.

Care2 is the largest and most trusted information and action site for people who care to make a difference in their lives and the world.* * *
Two former employees of Blackwater - the notorious military mercenary corporation, now known as XE - have filed sworn statements in federal court making shocking allegations. One of the most explosive allegations is that Erik Prince, founder and former CEO of Blackwater, murdered or facilitated the murder of people who were cooperating in a federal investigation of the company.

I urge everyone to read Jeremy Scahill's report in The Nation that broke the story, and listen to Amy Goodman's interview with Scahill on the August 5th Democracy Now for more details on this critical story.

These allegations are too disturbing to ignore. In addition to murder, these sworn statements allege:

Blackwater executives destroyed incriminating emails, documents and videos;
Blackwater management threatened potential whistleblowers with violence and death; Blackwater smuggled illegal and unlawful weapons into Iraq - sometimes in then CEO Prince's private planes, sometimes in dogfood bags, using Blackwater's canine division as cover for this crime; and CEO Prince "views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe."

The Iraqi government banned Blackwater from Iraq in January of this year, due to its violence toward Iraqis and repeated criminal acts. Yet the U.S. State Department still has other contracts with this company. Why?

Taxpayer money should no longer go to Blackwater. Sign the petition to demand an immediate end to all contracts with Blackwater, a Congressional investigation into these new explosive allegations, and legislation to ban the use of mercenary companies like Blackwater altogether. It's right here.

You can read the sworn statements for yourself, as well. Read the statements from John Doe 1 and John Doe 2 - both men requested anonymity out of fear for their safety in bringing forward these allegations.
Read more: iraq, politics, murder, blackwater, democracy now, erik prince, the nation

Comments
add a comment »

david lee b. says
Aug 6, 2009 10:30 AM
Val L has suggested a great book. The other, painfully bad, books that people need to read are the "left behind" series. Non-believers read them as fantasty - many believers read them as if they're prophecy. If you want to know the true purpose for which Erik Prince formed Blackwater, as well as what is the philosophical force behind the paranoid right-wing we see on display these days, you have to understand the warped fantasy theology of the "End-Times" Dispensationalist Christianity which forms the view of God and the future which drives Tim & Beverly LaHaye, Erik Prince, Sarah Palin, Pat Robertson, George W. Bush, and their ilk - much of what they say is coded to be understood and interpreted by believers in a very specific way, especially all their talk of discrimination against and censure of Christians.

Claire M. says
Aug 6, 2009 10:06 AM
Because the contracts with them are long term and were already in place before the new administration took over. The Bush administration did a lot of questionable things in a hurry during the last year to keep in place after they were gone. It will take a hearing to unload BW because of the way Bush set it up. Its time to stop criticizing Obama for not performing miracles in less than a year in the wake of the Bush disasters and manipulations.

Bernard C. says
Aug 6, 2009 8:50 AM
John Bolton and Eric Prince are insane psychopaths. So, too, are the 'neocon cabal' of the administration of George W. Bush, who cheered on the sidelines.

Is it any wonder we had a series of brutal attacks against people who 'looked strange' right after 9/11?

Is it any wonder the Iraqis ordered BlackWater out of Iraq?

Now, we've got "BlackWater" - gate.

Taz D. says
Aug 6, 2009 8:42 AM
sorry mr. benham, the coup happened about the time george washington declared war on the natives as his first act in office. sending thugs to the southeast to kill as many indians as possible, with pay in gold. full-pay for a man's scalp; half-pay for a woman's and quarter-pay for a child's scalp. millions of murdered natives; millions of murdered blacks; the endless wars of a warmongering, fascist police state that always tried to pose as 'freedom and democracy.' dupont started in 1803 with gunpowder and hasn't had a bad year since...

this 'holy war' mentality is nothing new and is rampant. in 1872, the new york herald tribune did a survey showing that over 70% of americans, listening to their preachers, wanted the complete elimination of all 'indians.' which was virtually accomplished – with the rest put into concentration camps called reservations where they were forced at gunpoint into churches, denied the right to their own beliefs or even the right to pass their traditions along to their children. a 'holy war.' what has changed? technology and spychiatric torture...

Taz D. says
Aug 6, 2009 8:30 AM
terenced... obama also knew and still knows and stil pays them in afghanistan. and on obamabush's 2nd day in office he mandated continuing CIA's rendition program of outsourced torture of far more than are at mere gitmo which despite 'proises' wil now remain open until 2011, if it is ever closed by mr. 'we don't stand for torture.' obama's bush-like war crimes mount daily in afghan and pakistan and leaving 50,000 troops and 100,000 contractors in iraq sounds like eternal war, and colonial occupation. time to start the war crimes trials that stretch from 911 to 2011

Joseph Benham says
Aug 6, 2009 8:29 AM
we have to stop these mercenaries before they stage a coup in our own country. nip them in the bud.

Terrence D. says
Aug 6, 2009 7:59 AM
And Bush knew.

Pat Prest says
Aug 6, 2009 7:53 AM
I have heard horror stories about this group of so called "MEN", and believe me, I wouldnt want to end up in a dark alley with any of them!
And to think, the tax payers moneies are going to fund them, alone with the government good will.....makes you stop and think alot more things were going on with the Bush government that we the public didnt know???

David N. says
Aug 6, 2009 7:42 AM
This is the kind of absurdity we must deal with as a result of our government, & culture's glorifying war. Get used to it. We have thousands of young people who have been taught, "it's ok to kill people." It's taught in the media, in schools, in churches, the playgrounds, in Washington, most anyplace where people congregate.
How do we keep this stuff from happenin? Teach love, & respect.

Juliet D. says
Aug 6, 2009 7:29 AM
As a former Special Agent (97B) I'd just like to say that Blackwater hired people considered unstable by the US Military. Same is true for Homeland Security, although now they seem to be 'cleaning house.' Any mission that we have to hire mercs for probably is not a mission that really needs to be done. I hope this administration will be able to extricate itself from Blackwater, Haliburton, etc. ASAP. Neither war nor health care should be a for-profit endeavor.

view all 27 comments »
Go on-site to access, and to leave your own comments. Just click on the following URL:
http://www.care2.com/causes/politics/blog/blackwater-ceo-murderer/

[Saundra Hummer]

.* * *CAMPAIGN for AMERICA'S FUTURE
OurFuture.org
***HEALTHCARE FOR ALL INFORMATION PROJECT***http://www.ourfuture.org/healthcare
1. Sen. Brown, Hacker, Make Case For Public Health Insurance Option To Compete With Private Insurers, press call with Jacob Hacker and Senator Sherrod Brown, Institute for America's Future, August 6, 2009
2. Health Care Reform: Time to Go All In by Robert Borosage, Huffington Post, August 5, 2009

3. Republicans Propagating Falsehoods in Attacks on Health-Care Reform by Steven Pearlstein, The Washingotn Post, August 7, 2009

4. Progressives Successfully Alter The Town Hall Narrative by Bill Scher, Campaign for America's Future, August 7, 2009

5. Expanded subsidies are essential to health reform by Elise Gould and Alexander Hertel-Fernandez, Economic Policy Institute, August 6, 2009

6. Sick for Profit: Stephen Hemsley's Millions Come From Your Health By Jason Rosenbaum, Fire Dog Lake: The Seminal, August 6, 2009

1. Sen. Brown, Hacker, Make Case For Public Health Insurance Option To Compete With Private Insurers
Press call with Jacob Hacker and Senator Sherrod Brown
Insitute for America's Future
August 6, 2009
Click for source

With lawmakers facing voters during the district work period this month and public passions about health care on the rise, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, joined health care expert Jacob Hacker on a conference call with reporters today to declare their strong support for a public health insurance option to be included in any reforms. They both said the country needs a robust public health insurance plan that competes with private insurers to rein in costs and make health care affordable for all on the call, held by the Campaign for America's Future.

Sen. Brown and Hacker explained that health care reform would ensure that people can keep the health insurance they have if they like it but would provide the guarantee of comprehensive affordable coverage to any lacking employer insurance.
Hacker said the public health insurance plan is crucial as a "benchmark" on cost and quality, a "backup" option that offers financial and health security for people without workplace coverage as well as small employers without access to good group health options, and as a cost-control backstop. He also said that cooperatives cannot do these three crucial things and is "not a serious substitute for a public plan."
Read more here

News Coverage of the press call
Democrats Weigh the Calculus of Public Insurance by Alec MacGillis, The Washington Post, August 7, 2009
White House Won't Rule Out Health Care Co-ops by David Nather, CQ Politics, August 6, 2009

2. Health Care Reform: Time to Go All In
By Robert Borosage
Huffington Post
August 5, 2009
Click for source

It is time to go all in to support comprehensive health care reform. The stakes have gotten prohibitive. Republicans have essentially bet the House on it. Obama, for all intents and purposes, has wagered the White House agenda. The insurance and drug companies are pouring in dough. This month will be telling. The debate in congressional districts across the country in August will go far in determining what kind of reform we get -- or whether we get any reform at all.

The opposition -- well financed by the insurance and drug companies and by the rabid right -- is mobilizing now to stop reform. Republicans believe that they can replay 1994 when the defeat of Clinton's health care plan (and the fight over NAFTA) led to the stunning elections that resulted in the Gingrich congress. The insurance and drug companies have sought to dilute reform on the inside while helping to fund front groups trying to torpedo it on the outside.

Their tactic this August is clear. Run Astroturf campaigns and mobilize the zealots to disrupt congressional town hall meetings, spew anger and invective against the "government takeover" of health care that will "kill your grandmother." Intimidate legislators, cow decent citizens, sow fear and confusion. Legislators learn that if they vote to disembowel reform they'll be amply rewarded with campaign contributions. If they vote to support it, they'll face the fury of the wingnuts and the Astroturf activists. Cynical but effective politics. (For a fact check on the big lies, go to the Campaign for America's Future page here)
Read more here

3. Republicans Propagating Falsehoods in Attacks on Health-Care Reform
By Steven Pearlstein
The Washingotn Post
August 7, 2009
Click for source

As a columnist who regularly dishes out sharp criticism, I try not to question the motives of people with whom I don't agree. Today, I'm going to step over that line.

The recent attacks by Republican leaders and their ideological fellow-travelers on the effort to reform the health-care system have been so misleading, so disingenuous, that they could only spring from a cynical effort to gain partisan political advantage. By poisoning the political well, they've given up any pretense of being the loyal opposition. They've become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems.
Read more here

4. Progressives Successfully Alter The Town Hall Narrative
By Bill Scher
Campaign for America's Future
August 7, 2009
Click for Source

Our own Roger Hickey was featured on MSNBC's The Ed Show yesterday, discussing the broad progressive response to the lobbyist-funded right-wing attempt to seize the congressional town halls. This is just one example of how the modern progressive movement was able to prevent the guerrilla right-wing attack from being easily portrayed as a grassroots response from the political center.
Read more here

5. Expanded subsidies are essential to health reform
By Elise Gould and Alexander Hertel-Fernandez
Economic Policy Institute
August 6, 2009
Click for source

Much of the current debate over health care reform has focused on reaching universal coverage and achieving overall health system cost control. Equally important, however, is providing affordable coverage, or subsidies, to those who cannot currently afford it. Many politicians have suggested trimming the subsidies offered to enrollees in the new national health insurance exchange as way to reduce the total price tag of the reform bill. While legislators should be mindful of the fiscal impact of the final bill, cutting subsidies any more is ill-advised and would ultimately undermine the goals of meaningful reform-to make health insurance and health care more, not less, affordable and accessible.

Current legislation in the House of Representatives would limit the maximum amount families under 400% of the federal poverty line could pay on insurance premiums. This maximum premium amount varies from 1.5% to 12% family income, depending on how much a household is above the poverty line. The fiscally conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats cut these rates, though not as much as they had originally intended. Members of the Senate Finance Committee have proposed reducing support even beyond these levels, limiting subsidies to families making 300% of the poverty line. Nationally, about 42 million individuals (or 14.3% of the population) are between 300-400% of the federal poverty line and thus stand to be affected by a cut in eligibility.
Read more here

6. Sick for Profit: Stephen Hemsley's Millions Come From Your Health
By Jason Rosenbaum
Fire Dog Lake: The Seminal
August 6, 2009
Click for source

Meet Stephen Hemsley. He's the CEO of UnitedHealth. In 2007, he earned $13.2 million dollars. His unexercised stock options total three-quarters of a billion dollars. That's right - billion

Where does he get all that money? He gets it from you. Your health, to be exact. Every time UnitedHealth denies one of their customers a treatment, that's more money in Hemsley's pocket. Every time UnitedHealth skimps on care, or delays treatments, more money for Hemsley. Hemsley is rich because he keeps you sick, that's just the way it works.

It's not just numbers, not just dollars and cents. Real people suffer so Hemsley can own his $6 million house.
Read more here

Additional Resources:
Public Health Insurance Resource Page

. Health Reform Fact Check: Make sure that you are armed with the facts regarding the myths about health insurance reform
. Health Care for America Now: Premiums Soaring in Consolidated Health Insurance Market: Lack of Competition Hurts Rural States, Small Businesses
. Jacob Hacker: "Healthy Competition: How to Structure Public Health Insurance Plan Choice to Ensure Risk-Sharing, Cost Control, and Quality Improvement" (PDF)
. Jacob Hacker: "The Case For Public Plan Choice in National Health Reform: Key to Cost Control and Quality Coverage" (PDF)
. Diane Archer: "Near Universal Coverage, But No Cost Controls or Guarantee of Quality, Affordable Health Care for All" (PDF)
. Frank Clemente: "A Public Health Insurance Plan: Reducing Costs and Improving Quality" (PDF)
. The Commonwealth Fund: The Path to a High Performance U.S. Health System: A 2020 Vision and the Policies to Pave the Way
. Leaders and Experts Agree that a Public Insurance Option is Critical to the Success of Obama's Health Reform Proposals (PDF)

Visit the web address below to tell your friends about this.
Tell-a-friend!
If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for your own updates from Campaign for America's Future.
This message was sent from the Campaign for America's Future.
OurFuture.org | Contact Us
Subscribe to E-Publications * * * * * * *

[Saundra Hummer]

.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Scientists Study Garbage Pile in PacificBy
CHRISTINE RIEDEL
AOL News
posted:
5 HOURS 5 MINUTES AGO
(Aug. 7) -- Researchers shipped out from California this week on a mission to study a man-made problem in the middle of the Pacific: a giant swath of open ocean that has become a floating garbage dump.

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch may cover an area once or twice the size of Texas, or about 262,000 to 524,000 square miles. It's located about 1,000 miles west of California and 1,000 miles north of Hawaii in an area called the North Pacific Gyre, where currents from the equator, North America and Asia swirl together and deposit trash, mostly plastic.

PHOTO
Go on-site to view.
Link at end of article
A 'Stretched-Out Bull's-Eye' of TrashJacob Asher, NOAA8 photos A fishing net entangles a turtle off Hawaii. This week, scientists set out to study the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, an area about 1,000 miles from Hawaii that is swirling with trash deposited by ocean currents. Sea trash is a well-known hazard for large sea animals, but researchers are just beginning to look at how it affects smaller animals and microscopic organisms.(Note: Please disable your pop-up blocker)

http://www.aolcdn.com/ke/media_gallery/v1/ke_media_gallery_wrapper.swf
A 'Stretched-Out Bullseye' of Trash
A fishing net entangles a turtle off Hawaii. This week, scientists set out to study the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, an area about 1,000 miles from Hawaii that is swirling with trash deposited by ocean currents. Sea trash is a well-known hazard for large sea animals, but researchers are just beginning to look at how it affects smaller animals and organisms.
Jacob Asher, NOAA
Jacob Asher, NOAA

Much about the patch is a mystery, including its exact size, how much trash has accumulated there, how deep it extends into the water and how it affects ocean life. And studying the garbage is difficult because it hasn't formed one large, visible mass.

"It's not like this is an island. It's not something you can walk on," said Holly Bamford, director of the Marine Debris Program at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "Sometimes you can cruise along for 10 nautical miles and not see anything and then, bam, you come to a hot spot" of visible trash.

"Small particles -- fingernail-size chips -- make up most of it," said Robert Knox, deputy director of research for the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego. The institution is one of the two main groups involved in the trip to the patch.

Knox described the trash zone as a "stretched-out bull's-eye" that runs from east to west in Pacific.

The expedition is to last three weeks. On Aug. 2, the New Horizon, a Scripps Institution research vessel, took off with a group of graduate students and volunteers who planned to investigate how much trash might be in the gyre, and how it affects sea life, particularly smaller animals.

For example, scientists are interested in finding out whether zooplankton -- microscopic organisms that are a food source for bigger animals -- eat the plastics, and whether it is digestible or poisonous for them, Knox said.

Researchers also want to know whether the trash is helping species move around the globe.

"Do pieces move species and introduce invasive species? What are the implications of the transport of species from Point A to B?" Knox said. "There's quite a web of scientific questions to be put together."
The answers could have major implications for the gyre, one of the Earth's largest ecosystems.

"The question is, how badly are we monkeying with the machinery by using the Pacific as our freebie landfill?" Knox said.

Two days after the Scripps team left, Project Kaisei, a California group whose backers include the recycling industry and other businesses, also headed to the patch. The two teams are cooperating on the research.

While Project Kaisei is also studying the impact of the plastic, it's taking things a step further, looking into ways the trash could be removed and recycled. It could be turned into products like diesel fuel, building materials and clothing, said Mary Crowley, who founded the group.

"We're working on capture technology, all in our effort to figure out the most energy efficient way to collect the debris in the ocean," she said in an interview Thursday from her team's vessel, the sail-powered Kaisei.

The Kaisei was about 300 miles from the garbage patch Thursday afternoon, Crowley said, but people had already begun seeing trash bobbing in the waves. "It surprised us that we're already seeing plastic," she said.

Both groups are blogging about the expedition. You can follow the Scripps team here and the Project Kaisei team here.

In a blog posting Thursday, the chief scientist for the Scripps Institution team said that gathering plastic samples may be tricky.

"Right now, I’m working on the best way to find and sample the plastic," Miriam Goldstein wrote. "Since we don't know what it looks like –- Will we see lots of pieces on the surface? Will it only come up in nets? –- picking the right area to sample will be an interesting challenge."

Bamford, of NOAA, said she is eager to see what the researchers find. NOAA administers the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument and has removed 600 metric tons of trash from the 140,000-square-mile preserve since 1996. Sea garbage is a major threat to the area, smothering coral reefs and harming animals including the endangered Hawaiian monk seal.

"We find debris out there coming from all countries. It's an international problem," she said.

The northern Pacific isn't the only place with circulation vortexes where trash accumulates. There's another one in the South Pacific, two in the Atlantic and one in the southern Indian Ocean. But Bamford said the North Pacific Gyre is the only one known to have a large amount of floating debris.

"If it's the size of Texas, twice the size of Texas or the size of Rhode Island, we need to address it," Bamford said.

But people can start taking steps right now to keep the problem from getting worse.

The Ocean Conservancy reported that on its most recent annual waterway cleanup, in September 2008, volunteers retrieved 6.8 million tons of trash, mostly from inland waterways, in 104 countries. Trash that ends up in the ocean comes from hundreds of miles inland, the group said.

"The easiest thing to do to push back against this problem is for people to dispose of plastic properly," said the Scripps Institution's Knox. "Just don't chuck it out by the roadside, because it's going to go downhill and into the ocean."

2009 AOL LLC. All Rights Reserved.
2009-08-06 10:34:00
http://news.aol.com/article/great-pacific-garbage-patch/606169 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .

[Saundra Hummer]

. * * * * * * * * *Ex-employees claim Blackwater pimped out young Iraqi girls
Share on Facebook
By
David Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: August 7, 2009
Updated 1 day ago

Since the revelation earlier this week of allegations by two former employees of security firm Blackwater that its owner was complicit in murder in order to cover up the deliberate killing of Iraqi civilians, explosive charges have continued to emerge.

Perhaps the most shocking of those charges — quoted by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann on Thursday from the employees’ sworn declarations — is that Blackwater was guilty of using child prostitutes at its compound in Baghdad’s fortified Green Zone and that owner Erik Prince knew of this activity and did nothing to stop it.

The declarations describe Blackwater as “having young girls provide oral sex to Enterprise members in the ‘Blackwater Man Camp’ in exchange for one American dollar.” They add even though Prince frequently visited this camp, he “failed to stop the ongoing use of prostitutes, including child prostitutes, by his men.”

One of the statements also charges that “Prince’s North Carolina operations had an ongoing wife-swapping and sex ring, which was participated in by many of Mr. Prince’s top executives.”

According to the two former employees, Blackwater supervisors in Iraq sometimes sent men back to the United States for wanting to “kill ragheads,” excessive drinking, steroid use, or failure to follow weapon safety procedures, but “Mr. Prince and his executives would send them back” with a reprimand to the supervisor for costing the firm money. Blackwater even fired “those mental health professionals who were not willing to endorse deployments of unfit men.”

The former employees additionally state that Prince was engaged in illegal arms dealing, money laundering, and tax evasion, that he created “a web of companies in order to obscure wrong-doing, fraud, and other crimes,” and that Blackwater’s chief financial officer had “resigned … stating he was not willing to go to jail for Erik Prince.”

Prince has repeatedly insisted his company has done nothing wrong and Blackwater — now renamed Xe — continues to fulfill its contracts with the United States government.

VIDEO
This video is from MSNBC’s Countdown, broadcast Aug. 6, 2009.

Go on-site for photo and to "Download video via RawReplay.com"
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/08/07/blackwater-provided-child-prostitutes/
* * * * * * * .

[Saundra Hummer]

.
. . . . . . .Rights group slams Limbaugh
for
'outrageous' Hitler-Obama analogy
The Jewish Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is hopping mad at hardline Republican radio host Rush Limbaugh for his "outrageous and inappropriate" analogy comparing President Barack Obama to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler.

"Regardless of the political differences and the substantive differences in the debate over health care, the use of Nazi symbolism is outrageous, offensive and inappropriate," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director and a Holocaust survivor, in an media advisory released Friday morning. "Americans should be able to disagree on the issues without coloring it with Nazi imagery and comparisons to Hitler. This is not where the debate should be at all."

Limbaugh's comments came after Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) commented on the Nazi imagery being hoisted by members of the so-called health care "mobs."

Republicans have denied any organizational effort within the party, though a number of current and former GOP officials and high-level donors have been directly linked to advocacy groups promoting the protests.

When Pelosi called out the growing trend of comparing Obama to Hitler, Limbaugh began claiming the artwork used by the White House to promote health reform proposals is somehow "damn close" to the insignia of Hitler's brutal regime. He has also suggested that Obama's style of governance is similar to the Nazi leader because Hitler "ruled by dictate."

The art used by the administration is a modification of the caduceus, a Greek symbol that has become synonymous with the modern medical profession. Hitler's party insignia was an iron eagle, perched upon the Nazi swastika.

The two are decidedly different in appearance and meaning.

ADL's Foxman added: "Comparisons to the Nazis are deeply offensive and only serve to diminish and trivialize the extent of the Nazi regime's crimes against humanity and the murder of six million Jews and millions of others in the Holocaust. I don't see any comparison here. It's off-center, off-issue and completely inappropriate."


More Jewish groups react
The National Jewish Democratic Council, reacting to the Nazi hyperbole, called upon the sole Jewish Republican in the House of Representatives to repudiate Limbaugh's comments. The push was directed at House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA), who said recently that the Republican party needed more "Limbaughs."

"Mr. Cantor, after Rush's Web site antics today and comments yesterday, do you really still think you 'need' Limbaugh?" the NJDC questioned, according to Huffington Post reporter Sam Stein.

"Not all Jewish organizations agree on the issue," Stein noted. "Marc Stern, the acting executive director of the American Jewish Congress, said that it wasn't fair to tag the congressman with Limbaugh's remarks 'because a week ago he said something nice about Rush Limbaugh.'"

Salon columnist Glenn Greenwald on Friday caught an extended reaction from the same group, which said of Limbaugh's remarks:

"The Limbaugh comments comparing Obama (and Pelosi) to Hitler and the Nazis are grossly offensive and intolerable. They reflect a nasty and hyperbolic tendency on our political culture, one which makes reasoned discourse impossible, confuses disagreement with evil, and which makes it impossible to distinguish evil from ordinary politics. . . . It behooves all participants in the political process to unequivocally disavow the comparison and to make it plain that peddlers of such noxious comparison have no place in our politics, no matter how large their audiences. And all Americans should make plain their disgust at the comparisons by talk show hosts by a prompt use of the off button.
Additionally, Rabbi Marvin Hier, who founded the Simon Wiesenthal Center, "made clear that he has some 'serious objections' to some of Obama's policies -- 'especially in the foreign policy context' (read: Israel) -- but was nonetheless scathing in his condemnation of Rush Limbaugh," Greenwald added.

-- Stephen C. Webster

This entry was posted on Friday, August 7th, 2009 at 4:22 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
43 Responses to “Rights group slams Limbaugh for 'outrageous' Hitler-Obama analogy”
Winski:It sounds to me like Rush should audition for a preachers job in the delta of Mississippi and try to motivate the population there with this kind of rhetoric..He and Haley speak the same language so let them try...OR, we can send Limberger to Ironwood...Here's a peek...

http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/visitors/images/aerialShots/ISP_8x10.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SnvtS_kj0I

"Mayor" Rush...have fun !!
There are numerous links within this article and there are over 40 responses, some of which are interesting. Go on-site to gain access to the links as well as comments. SRHhttp://rawstory.com/blog/2009/08/rights-group-slams-limbaugh-for-outrageous-hitler-obama-analogy/ . . . . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

.
:: :: :: :: :: County Judge Head posts some controversial fliers to bulletin board
By
Katie Bauer
Posted: Aug 07, 2009 8:14 PM PDT
Featured Video
County Judge Head posts some controversial fliers to bulletin board

http://www.kcbd.com/global/story.asp?s=10869852


LUBBOCK, TX (KCBD) - Some signs posted at the County Courthouse are causing quite a stir. They depict an anti-Barack Obama sentiment, posted by Judge Tom Head.

On the bulletin board right outside the county commissioner's offices is usually where public notices are posted.

"County Judge Tom Head had that bulletin board installed and where he post different items and in the 4 years I've been I've really just never had paid close attention to it," said County Commissioner Bill McCay.

But on Friday some of the postings were creating quite a scene. McCay says a lot of people were curious about the postings, stopping by and looking at them, and even taking pictures.

One of signs had several mug shots of people wearing Obama T-shirts stating there must be a message here, insinuating that Obama supporters could be criminals.

McCay felt some of the postings were not appropriate for the court house and took them down.

"Some of the items on the board could be controversial. This is not the place for that kind of material. This is the court house for civil and criminal justice and politics should be kept outside the courthouse and so that's why I removed it," said McCay.

We tried to contact Judge Tom Head but he did not return our phone call.

©2009 KCBD NewsChannel 11. All rights reserved.

Go on-site for photos, as well as the video. Our justice system needs to step back and take a critical look at itself and work for change, as this is really not acceptable behavior from those who are to issue fair judgements upon, and for us. SRH
:: :: :: .

[Saundra Hummer]

:: :: :: :: :: :: ::
Even the UK is picking up on this disingenuous, fraught with duplicity, fear campaign, the one Sarah Palin is opining to us all. I don't believe even she thinks that this can possibly hold true, and if she does, she is as wacked as we've thought her to be all along. SRH
:: :: ::
Sarah Palin calls Barack Obama's health reform plans 'evil' Sarah Palin, the former Republican vice-presidential candidate, has accused President Barack Obama of wanting to set up a health care "death panel" that could condemn her Down syndrome baby.
By
Toby Harnden
in
Washington
Published: 9:39PM BST
09 Aug 2009

In her first policy contribution since resigning as Alaska governor, Mrs Palin posted a statement on her Facebook page stating that Mr Obama's health care proposals were "evil" and that a "death panel" would decide who gets treatment.

"And who will suffer the most when they ration care?" the possible 2012 presidential candidate asked. "The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course.

"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care.

She concluded: "Such a system is downright evil."

A spokesman for Mrs Palin said she was referring to a clause on page 425 of the bill drawn up by majority Democrats in the House of Representatives concerning an "advance care planning consultation" that could include discussion of "living wills" and "end-of-life services".

Such sessions, however, would not be mandatory and even conservative thinkers implacably opposed to Democratic health care plans have not interpreted the clause in the way Mrs Palin did.

Related Articles
Sarah Palin: Barack Obama's Special Olympics gaffe on Leno was 'degrading'
Sarah Palin says Barack Obama capable of 'greatness' as she softens image
Barack Obama forced on the defensive over Sarah Palin 'lipstick on a pig' comment
Sarah Palin's hopes for presidency damaged by family feuds
Winslet latest victim of "Fakebooking" craze

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6001372/Sarah-Palin-calls-Barack-Obamas-health-reform-plans-evil.html :: :: :: :: ::

[Saundra Hummer]

.
* * *
OpEdNews
Do You Really Want to Hurt Me?
By
Kathy Malloy
August 10, 2009
Photo of Protestors
Go on-site to view

The Teabaggers, Town Hall protestors, and Birthers, combined, have formed the perfect trifecta of terminal stupidity. Under normal circumstances, this would be good news forthe vast majority of normal Americanswho actually care about this society, as it would guarantee a Democratic majority in Congress and the White House for years to come. However, there's a problem -- they're becoming violent. Their hate-filled moronic screeds are increasingly racist and threatening to President Obama and to, well,just about everyone who does not subscribe to their insane theories and agendas.

Scarier still, the GOP is essentially leaderless, leaving half-wits like Sarah Palin and race-baiting haters like Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Dobbs, et al, to fill the void and pump their followers' vacuous skulls with lies and dangerous rhetoric about the Obama tax plan (which would benefit the very segment of society the tea baggers largely represent), the Obama Health Care plan (which would benefit everyone), and the Obama birth certificate (which is simply ridiculous).

Sarah Palin, my favorite pit bull in lipstick, has taken off the heels and put on the gloves over Obama's health care plan, going viral on her Facebook page (she's so cute . . .) with a warning about "The Obama Death Plan," suggesting that if Obama had his way, her baby Trig would be put to death.

The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's "death panel" so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their "level of productivity in society," whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.
She left out one part -- before executing baby Trig, Obama would abandon the Palin special-needs child to a series of babysitters while running a failed Executive Office political campaign, only trotting him out when he could assist in fundraising or as a walking billboard for said campaign, to capture the woman's vote. Or am I thinking of someone else . . .?

Sadly, there is a segment of the population -- Fox Viewers and Limbot ditto-heads -- who find it reasonable that part of Obama's health care reform plan involves murdering your Nana. Seriously -- they believe the Palin/Beck/Limbaugh mythology. Elderly folk in America right now are on the receiving end of the most organized misinformation plan ever devised by the GOP, Big Pharma, and the insurance lobbyists to make them believe that, along with their new Medicare cards, they'll be given a checklist so they can select the time and method of their executions.

Ironically, it's the current system of delivering medical services that is lethal to Americans.So many cannot afford the health care they so desperately need. But no matter. There's mass-hysteria to foment. Sean "The Baby Jesus" Hannity has charged his listeners and viewers to "become a part of the mob" by attending a health care Town Hall in their area, like Tampa.

This kind of incitement to violence even exceeds the previous record held by the Oxymoron himself, when he suggested that his ditto-heads riot in Denver at the Democratic National Convention.

Fox "News" has long been a fomenter of violent crime, encouraging the tin-foil hat crowd to embark on mercenary missions to take out liberals and other normal, thinking people in waves of violent crimes in churches, woman's health clinics, and pretty much anywhere they find them, and this was true of the so-called witless tea party protests of Obama's tax reform plan. Both Fox News and Fox Business ran back-to-back promotions explicitly encouraging viewers to attend the tea parties. Promising "fair and balanced" coverage, Fox News hosts such as Glenn Beck, Neil Cavuto, and Sean Hannity planned live broadcasts from the events to ensure an uptick in their ratings.

Similarly, right-wing media can be held accountable for encouraging those batty Birthers to question even the legal citizenship of President Obama. While this movement was laughable at its inception, it gained notoriety and an air of legitimacy when CNN's Lou Dobbs gave credence to their fatuous claims, and was followed by nine members of Congress. But once again it was the unbalanced Glenn Beck who really took the ball and ran with it, stating on his Fox "News" TV show that President Obama is a racist who "has a deep-seated hatred for white people." For your typical Beck fanatic it's a short trip from this kind of statement to activating some sleeper cell of the White Supremacist Party of, say,Upper Michigan into actually "doing" something about this racist foreigner who has illegally assumed the Oval Office. A monsterwho not only hates us, but also wants to take our money and kill our grannies. Oh, and confiscate our penises, er, I mean guns, too.

Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck are the masters of brainstem mentality, aiming straight for the primitive "fight or flight" centers of their rabid followers' malleable gray matter. Add a dash of Ann Coulter and a sprinkling of Michael (Weiner) Savage and you have a recipe for true mass murder. They've painted a picture of President Obama as a stereotypical, non-Christian, un-American, dark-skinned, street punk who hates white people and will steal your money -- then kill you. And the reality is there are enough psychopathic, twisted, skinhead types (who identify themselves as "Christian," or Republican or "patriotic") who are ready to believe these lies and reach into their well-stocked ammo cabinets and follow their leaders in an apparentcall to arms.

The imagery on so many conservative websites is disturbing. Like this depiction of Obama as "The Joker" from last year's The Dark Knight, which is making the rounds on right-wing blogs and being plastered on telephone poles and bus stops.

Hey, right-wing radio nuts. Maybe youshould stop. The mini-minds in your audience don't need any violent inspiration from you, they're psychotic enough at face value. Stop provoking them before (more) innocent blood is shed.

Author's Website:
www.mikemalloy.com

Author's Bio: Kathy never expected a career in radio as a talk show producer. Born and raised in Atlanta, Georgia, Kathy was completing her nursing degree when in 2001 - in an emergency - she was asked to fill in as the producer of Mike's program. Within a few weeks she knew she'd found more than a temporary job. Since that beginning, Kathy has steadily grown more comfortable behind the control console, editing, engineering, and assisting in topic selection for the program while also retaining a fairly sizeable chunk of her sanity. Oh, and did we mention the utter (joyful) chaos of raising a daughter who, for some odd reason, only stops talking when she's asleep. Strange, that. A life-long "talk radio junkie," Kathy takes her job with all the seriousness required, and thoroughly enjoys producing a talk show that's intelligent, factual, informative, and most of all entertaining. She takes great pride in -- and has great fun with -- the two biggest joys in her life: Their daughter Molly, and producing one of the most dynamic talk programs in radio.

Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/Do-You-Really-Want-to-Hurt-by-Kathy-Malloy-090810-926.html
There are numerous links within this article go on-site to gain access to them. * * * * * * *

[Saundra Hummer]

.
* * * We are fighting in Portland. Or.
By
Joe Walsh
August 11, 2009

For Immediate Release, please send to all members of the Peace and Justice community.
On March 29th of this year the Lone Vet was arrested along with his oxygen bottle called "little earl" (**Named after Congressman Blumenauer) by the Portland Police because he wanted to continue walking on the sidewalk in front of the Mittleman Jewish Center located on Capital Highway. Joe was on his way home and wanted to cross the driveway to tell his friends he was going home. Thus began the saga of why he was arrested? This was during a protest against fund raising for the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, AIPAC. An order from the Police, security, AIPAC security, the Governor's security, or the police acting for the center as a private security force was delivered to the protesters in the following manner. "You will not cross the driveway from this time on, all of you must stay behind this line that we have decided on, this is not up for discussion." You can hear the man in uniform telling the protesters on video that he will not discuss the decision with them, the problem is that the man in a Portland Police uniform was not acting as a representative of the city, he was being paid by the center or AIPAC.

Video of action before, during and after arrest:
(Video about 4:26 shows cop saying no discussion.)
http://www.individualsforjustice.org/090713JoeWins/
The investigation of who, what and why is just beginning but it sure smells funny. This is the first time in our experience with the police that an officer may have been contracted out to a private organization and remained in his uniform looking like a Portland police officer. Very confusing to say the least.

The first time we were made aware of this was during the trial on the 13TH of July for refusing to obey a lawful order by a policeman. The Judge found Joe Walsh not guilty because of selective prosecution, he was arrested for breaking the order to stay out of the driveway but a man later identified as an operative of AIPAC and/or an Israeli government official was allowed to wander in and out of the driveway without any hindrance from the police. He was taking pictures of the demonstrators and at one point blocked traffic on Capital Highway. Begs the question, who was working for whom?

PHOTO
Veteran arrested in Portland, Or.
Go on-site for photo.

The only way we can find out what the hell was going on here, is to file a civil suit and go through what is called discovery. In a civil action each party can depose, under oath, all of the main players in the arrest. This is a very powerful tool we have and we must use it to discover who was "Calling the Shots," or making the decisions. This action was very different from others because there was almost no notice that an arrest was going to happen. Usually the police will negotiate with protesters before they arrest someone, there was only the order and anyone who violated that order was going to jail. The only exception to this rule were the members of AIPAC and that is what we want to know about.

We believe the sidewalks are almost "Holy ground," when it comes to protests. If the police can order you not to protest on the sidewalk or public property then all protests are in jeopardy. "That cannot stand," as bush #1 would say.

Jason Kafoury and his father have been wonderful, they are working very hard to win this case. It is important because to lose it or just ignore it would allow a police state and that is not going to happen in our time without one hell of a fight.

Joe's favorite founding father was Thomas Paine. In his wonderful pamphlet, "Common Sense" he writes:

"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of Custom."

Police--any police, deciding where you can protest is wrong, and anytime the authorities take sides we must fight it on every level we can.

A copy of the civil lawsuit is attached and was filed on Monday, August 10th, 2009.

We are sending you a wonderful article by Steve Duin which will appear in the Oregonian tomorrow Tuesday morning, August 11, 2009. You can read the article here:
http://www.oregonlive.com/duin

WE ARE ASKING YOU TO SEND THIS OUT TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW, EVERY LIST YOU HAVE. THIS ACTION BY THE POLICE/SECURITY/OR WHOEVER MADE THE DECISION TO ARREST JOE MUST NOT STAND.
** It is full of gas!

For further contact information e-mail

Patricia E. Walsh
Lonevet2008@comcast.netAuthor's Bio:Short Bio I was born in Brooklyn, New York in May of 1942. My first memory was the wonderful block parties that celebrated the end of WW2. I don’t remember much but it was exciting and I could see how joyous people could be during a major event. My cousin Danny and I lived near or actually in the same house for most of our childhood and shared great adventures together. We went from playing marbles to dating girls; it was a magical time in Brooklyn. I attended Our Lady of Good Counsel grammar school, my early teachers were women and in the fourth grade we were taught by the Franciscan Brothers. High School was the beginning of a journey that continues to this day. I wondered where I was going and why I was making the trip. I entered the Capuchin Seminary after the eighth grade to study for the priesthood. After 15 months I left the seminary and returned home. My studies allowed me to pick which Catholic high school I was going to attend. I lasted less than a year at Trinity High. One of the teachers excommunicated me from the Catholic Church because I thought birth control was a good idea. After leaving Trinity, I started full time work, and completed high school at night; I was only sixteen and already lost in the world. I worked at Dictaphone for about four years and played on their softball team. I loved sports and was a good center fielder. In 1962 I entered the Navy and spent nine years traveling around the world, including two tours in Vietnam. In 1970 I openly opposed the war and asked to be released. In 1971, I was given an honorable discharged and once again I was looking at a whole new way of thinking. I was married, entered college and in 1979 finally received my Bachelor of Arts from the College of New Rochelle. I went to work at Long Beach Naval Shipyard and retired from civil service in 1995. I was a Union Official most of my time at the yard but did take a supervisory position for the last three years of service. Since retirement I have been a substitute teacher in Nevada and teacher’s aide in Oregon. My two great loves are my four grandchildren and my wife Pat. Since arriving in Portland in 1999, I have been part of the protest against the Bush Wars, torture and what I see as a loss of our liberties. I am the co-founder of Individuals for Justice, Veterans Against Torture, member of Vietnam Veterans Against War, (VVAW.) I support the Veterans for Peace, Coed Pink and the fight for Single Payer Healthcare. I have been arrested three times, once in Gordon Smith’s office, again outside of Congressman’s Blumenauer’s office, and the last time protesting AIPAC. My favorite books are: Life of Pi by Yann Martel, The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz, How To Know God by Deepak Chopra, almost anything written by Stephen King. My favorite movies are: The Shawshank Redemption, Wolfen, Lawrence of Arabia, The Quiet American. My preferred hobbies are: Enjoying time with family and friends, listening to music and creating things with my hands. I love to write, and completed a play called, “The Trial of George W. Bush.” http://www.opednews.com/articles/We-are-fighting-in-Portlan-by-Joe-Walsh-090811-748.html

http://www.opednews.com/flyer/news_20090811_1.html
* * * * *
.

[Saundra Hummer]

.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ SPIEGEL ONLINE08/10/2009 01:40 PM
SPIEGEL INTERVIEW WITH AUTHOR DAVID GROSSMAN
'Foreigners Cannot Understand the Israelis' Vulnerability'
In a SPIEGEL interview, novelist David Grossman discusses the vicious cycle of fear and violence in Israel, the inability of foreigners to understand the Israelis' sense of vulnerability and lack of confidence in the country's future. He also expresses skepticism about Benjamin Netanyahu's belief in peace.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Grossman, you're a very political person, but you have avoided the Israeli-Arab conflict in your most recent books. Why?

Grossman: I felt that there was no way to write anything about this conflict without falling into the trap of clichés. There was no real argument anymore. Everything had been said, by the left and by the right. I didn't want these clichés in my literature. More than that I felt that because so much of our energy goes into the conflict we don't have energy to deal with the real existential things of life: being a father, being a mother, being a partner. For 10 years I preferred to write about these topics in my novels, because for me they are more important.


SPIEGEL: Is it at all possible to escape the depressing reality of the Israeli-Arab conflict?

Grossman: It is possible for so many Israelis. In a strange way you can live in this place and yet be totally detached from what happens. You can live a very comfortable life here. You do not feel the occupation, you do not see the Palestinians -- even if you live in the occupied territories like the settlers. We have paved, in reality and in our hearts, so many ways in order to detour and not confront ourselves with this reality.

SPIEGEL: Why then did you return to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in your new novel?

Grossman: For me it was impossible to fade out the reality of the conflict forever. I wanted to find a way to integrate politics and my inner life. When I started, I felt I must try to find a way to integrate the outer sphere of reality with the private world -- to show how the brutal reality penetrates the most intimate spaces.

SPIEGEL: The book is a very pessimistic one. At one point Ora, the main character, says of Israel: "I know that this country doesn't have a chance at all." Is that also your feeling?

Grossman: For me it is not a book about despair. It's a book about life with all its facets, about the relationship between people and the founding of a family. One of the strongest movements for me in the book is how Ora rediscovers her youth love Ofer and how she gets him out of a decades-old depression just by the power of her love.

SPIEGEL: At the same time, Ora's son Ofer appears to fall in the war.

Grossman: I don't write this explicitly, I leave the ending open. But it's a very realistic fear, for every parent here in Israel.

SPIEGEL: Your second son Uri was killed during the Lebanon war in 2006. Is this book a kind of autobiography?

Grossman: Everything I write is autobiographical, even if I don't know it when I start writing. However, I started writing it three years and three months before my son Uri died in the war. Uri knew about the book and when he came home from the army for the weekends, we used to discuss what I was writing about. Every time, he asked me what new things I had done to my characters in the meantime.

SPIEGEL: Did you change the manuscript after his death?

Grossman: No, the main thing is not what happened to me. The main theme is the acuteness of life here in Israel. And even if a catastrophe like the death of a son does not befall you, one feels this immediate effect of political events on one's own personality. Many deny this reality, they simply ignore it. But at some point you are caught up by reality -- at the latest when your boys reach puberty, and the shadow of the army starts to fall on them. An international TV program once interviewed a young Israeli couple und asked how many children they wanted to have. The beautiful bride said immediately: "Three." And the interviewer asked: "Why three?" And she said with a smile: "So that if one of them is killed in a war or in terror we shall still have two left."

SPIEGEL: You, too, were a father of three, before your son Uri died.

Grossman: We did not have three children out of this calculation, but I must admit that this thought had crossed my mind when we started having children. The option of personal catastrophe is connected to the special fate of this country. As I fear for my children, all my life I lived with this fear of what happens if a catastrophe occurs in Israel. The question of whether we shall exist here in the future, whether we will still live here within a few decades time, prevails subconsciously in the mind of most Israelis. We are living with difficult and partly violent neighbors, most of whom don't want us here. Some of them even threaten to eradicate us. I take them very seriously.

SPIEGEL: You describe a feeling which people in Europe and the United States don't usually know.

Grossman: From the outside Israel looks like a bully-militant fist. Foreigners cannot really understand the vulnerability of people here and their lack of confidence in the fact that Israel will still exist in a few decades. I read that Germany plans the construction of its roads several decades in advance, and that sounds perfectly normal. But no sane Israeli would make such long-term plans. If I do it, I feel a kind of pain in my heart as if I violated a taboo by allowing myself quantities of future that are too great.

SPIEGEL: In your book, there is a generation gap: While Ora, the mother, dreams of peace, Ofer wants to be a soldier and go to war.

Grossman: Yes, but as a young woman Ora was also part of this military machine. From my experience, many young people going out of the army suddenly start to see the reality as so much more complicated. Being in the army at this age has very little to do with political affiliation. This is why armies are built of young people: You can easily manipulate them.

SPIEGEL: So the enthusiasm Ofer and his comrades feel is not a new phenomenon?

Grossman: It existed from the very beginning. This ceremony of taking your son to the army is part of the Israeli identity: Because of our situation here, we are programmed from birth to be warriors. However, after Ora brings her son to his army unit, she asks herself: How come I am more loyal to the army and to the state than to my child? She starts to rebel, flees to the north of Israel, in order not to be at home when they want to deliver the news of her son's death. She simply refuses to collaborate with this machinery of death.

SPIEGEL: In the Gaza war against the Islamistic Hamas at the beginning of the year, the Israeli side only suffered very few victims. Was that because of the Israeli army's brutal conduct?

Grossman: The whole situation of the occupation legitimizes brutality. I remember the testimony of a soldier who was in Gaza in the first intifada who said, "The moment I crossed the borderline I started to feel like God. There was nothing that could have stopped me." It is an irresistable temptation.

SPIEGEL: Especially when a war like this is religiously legitimized by the chief military rabbi.

Grossman: Young people, especially, are susceptible to this. On the other hand you must remember that for four years there was rocket shooting from the Gaza Strip. There was ongoing provocation. Israel had withdrawn its soldiers and settlers from Gaza. The Palestinians could have used this partial sovereignty in order to build up their land. Instead Hamas decided to bombard Israel.

SPIEGEL: You are known as a leftist peace activist, but you are starting to sound like the average mainstream Israeli politician.

Grossman: Not at all. I thought it was a mistake of Ariel Sharon to withdraw from Gaza unilaterally instead of coordinating it with the moderate Palestinians. The unilateral withdrawal empowered the narrative of Hamas, which says that Israel understands only power. On the other hand already on the third day of the war, I wrote an article for the front page of Haaretz calling for an immediate stop to the Israeli attacks. I wrote that we Israelis must, for once, try to act against the lethal logic of violence.


'The World Denies our Right to Retaliate in Principle'


SPIEGEL: But you were not against a military operation in general?

Grossman: All my life I have tried to prevent the use of military power, but I also insist on Israel's right as a sovereign state to defend itself when attacked. It is strange that Israel is the only country that is immediately criticized when it retaliates after years of rocket terror.

SPIEGEL: Perhaps because the scope and strength of this reaction were disproportionate?

Grossman: The world denies our right to retaliate in principle. At the same time, the government in Jerusalem conducts a war which leads to many civilian victims. It is a tragedy that we believe we have to constantly decide between total pacifism and monstrous violence. My hope is that we shall find an adequate language for the complex situation between us and the Palestinians.

SPIEGEL: The liberal-left Meretz party you support only received three seats in Knesset during the last election. Do you sometimes feel a bit lonely as a member of the Israeli peace movement?

Grossman: It is right that we currently don't have too many people (in parliament). Our ideas are not very popular at the moment. It is very hard to talk to Israelis about chances of peaceful co-existence.

SPIEGEL: Why?

Grossman: From the perspective of most Israelis our government tried to make peace in 2000 at Camp David, but the Palestinians betrayed us. Israelis failed to see their part in this mistake. I think both sides were not mature enough for peace. They came to this peace as they come to war.

SPIEGEL: Many Israelis consider President Barack Obama to be as naïve as Bill Clinton was back then at Camp David.

Grossman: We need a mediator from the outside. I think Obama is much better equipped than his predecessor, George W. Bush, because of his multi-focal look at reality. I wish Obama would stand up for his vision. I wish he would impose on us the solution that we all know it is inevitable.

SPIEGEL: Two states for two people -- even a right-wing prime minister like Benjamin Netanyahu seems to be accepting this model now.

Grossman: Basically the left has succeeded. The majority of Israelis now accepts the two-state solution, a concept people like Amos Oz, me and others have advocated for almost 40 years. But I am skeptical about Netanyahu. Before his speech at the Bar-Ilan-University ...

SPIEGEL: ... where he for the first time accepted the idea of a Palestinian state ...

Grossman: ... he invited me for a talk. My impression is that he does not really believe in the option of peace between us and the Palestinians. He will do everything in order to create an illusion of a peace process but will not fulfill it. His speech was merely paying lip service to the Americans.

SPIEGEL: Many Israelis have become very cynical over the years. But you haven't?

Grossman: If you become cynical, you later become apathic and then you will not really do anything to change the situation. It may sound terribly old-fashioned, but I believe in the good powers in people. We Israelis have lived for more than 60 years in a reality of fear and violence, of animosity and hatred. If there is a leader who will enable us to explore these good parts within us, Israel could be a much better place to live.

SPIEGEL: In the book, Ofer whispers into his mother's ear when he leaves for the war: "If something happens to me, you have to leave this country. You will having nothing left to lose." Have you ever considered emigrating?

Grossman: After what happened to us, of course my wife and I asked ourselves how different it could have been if had we left 25 years ago. I have received many offers to work abroad. Israel is the only place on earth where I am not a stranger. I regard it as a privilege to take part in the creating of this country. In the Mishna ...

SPIEGEL: ... a commentary of the Hebrew Bible ...

Grossman: ... there is a phrase saying the one who has experienced a miracle does not necessarily recognize it as a miracle. I recognize the miracle: We Jews do have a state.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Grossman, we thank you for this interview.

Interview conducted by Martin Doerry and Christoph Schult.
URL: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,641437,00.html
© SPIEGEL ONLINE 2009
^ ^ ^ ^ ^

[Saundra Hummer]

.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
White House emails,
Bush aide implicate Rove in firing of US Attorneys
The House Judiciary Committee released thousands of pages of new documents concerning the firing of nine US Attorneys under the Bush Administration — and they heavily implicate the office of onetime Bush advisor Karl Rove.

Moreover, former Bush Supreme Court pick and legal advisor Harriet Miers fingered Rove during her testimony to Congressional investigators.

In an effort to provide an earliest glance at the documents’ contents, RAW STORY has reprinted highlights from a release issued by the Committee Tuesday afternoon. The Committee released, in total, 5,400 pages of White House and RNC e-mails.

Go on-site for photo's
Emails obtained by the Democrat-led committee reveal that Rove and his office were involved in the firing of New Mexico US Attorney David Iglesias, who Republicans had criticized as not aggressively prosecuting voter fraud cases — which would have benefited Republicans. According to the committee, Rove and his staff were involved “months earlier than previously known.”

“For example,” the release notes, “in May and June 2005, Rove aide Scott Jennings sent emails to Tim Griffin (also in Rove’s office) asking ‘what else I can do to move this process forward’ and stressing that ‘I would really like to move forward with getting rid of NM US ATTY.’ In June 2005, Harriet Miers emailed that a ‘decision’ had been made to replace Iglesias. At this time, DOJ gave Iglesias top rankings, so this decision was clearly not just the result of the White House following the Department’s lead as Rove and Miers have maintained.”

“I have provided a copy of the materials released today to special U.S. Attorney Nora Dannehy to assist in her effort to determine whether federal criminal charges are appropriate and to pursue any such charges,” House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers said in a statement emailed to RAW STORY. “In the meantime, the Committee has honored its pledge to get on-the-record statements from Karl Rove and Harriet Miers, as well as the relevant White House documents, and is pleased to make this unprecedented collection of Bush Administration materials directly available to the American people by posting it online.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• 2005 White House “Decision” to fire David Iglesias – It has previously been known that New Mexico Republicans pressed for Iglesias to be removed because they did not like his decisions on vote fraud cases. New White House documents show that Rove and his office were involved in this effort no later than May 2005 (months earlier than previously known) - for example, in May and June 2005, Rove aide Scott Jennings sent emails to Tim Griffin (also in Rove’s office) asking “what else I can do to move this process forward” and stressing that “I would really like to move forward with getting rid of NM US ATTY.” In June 2005, Harriet Miers emailed that a “decision” had been made to replace Iglesias. At this time, DOJ gave Iglesias top rankings, so this decision was clearly not just the result of the White House following the Department’s lead as Rove and Miers have maintained.

• Iglesias criticized by Rove aide for not “doing his job on” Democratic Congressional Candidate Patricia Madrid – An October 2006 email chain begun by Representative Heather Wilson criticized David Iglesias for not bringing politically useful public corruption prosecutions in the run up to the 2006 elections. Scott Jennings forwarded Wilson’s email to Karl Rove and complained that Iglesias had been “shy about doing his job on Madrid,” Wilson’s opponent in the 2006 Congressional race. Just weeks after this email, Iglesias’ name was placed on the final firing list.

• An “agitated” Rove pressed Harriet Miers to do something about Iglesias just weeks before Iglesias was placed on the removal list – Karl Rove phoned Harriet Miers during a visit to New Mexico in September 2006 – according to Miers’ testimony, Rove was “agitated” and told her that Iglesias was “a serious problem and he wanted something done about it.”

• Senator Domenici personally asked Bush’s Chief of Staff Josh Bolten to have Iglesias replaced – In October 2006, Senator Domenici stepped up his campaign to have Iglesias replaced. According to White House phone logs and emails, as well as Rove’s own testimony, Domenici spoke with President Bush’s Chief of Staff Josh Bolten about Iglesias on October 5, 2006, and during October 2006, Domenici or his staff spoke with Karl Rove at least 4 times.

• Todd Graves removed in Rove-approved deal with Republican Senator – Kansas City US Attorney Todd Graves was removed as part of a White House-brokered deal with US Senator Kit Bond. In exchange for the Administration firing Graves, Senator Bond agreed to lift his hold on an Arkansas judge nominated to the Eighth Circuit federal appeals court. A White House email stated that “Karl is fine” with the proposal.

• Miers obtained favorable statement on Rick Renzi in violation of DOJ policy – When rumors of the FBI investigation of Rep. Rick Renzi surfaced in October, 2006, one of Rove’s subordinates contacted Harriet Miers, who called Deputy Attorney General McNulty seeking a possible statement that would have “vindicated” Renzi. Even though this was contrary to standard DOJ policy, such a statement was issued several days later.

The full interview transcripts and documents can be found here.
http://judiciary.house.gov/issues/issues_WHInterviews.html
DEVELOPING…

-John Byrne

Raw Story | P.O. Box 21050 | Washington | DC | 20009

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/08/11/white-house-emails-implicate-rove/ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

[Saundra Hummer]

:: :: :: :: :: Euthanasia Scare Shows a Tough Sell on Health Care
By
Heidi Przybyla
(Update2)
Aug. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Representative Tom Perriello said he was approached by two senior citizens who were trembling with fear. The source of their terror, he said, was their belief that President Barack Obama supports euthanasia for the elderly.

The Virginia Democrat said the two constituents were clutching a leaflet from a religious group that purported to be a copy of Obama’s health-care plan. It claimed the overhaul “would pull the plug and decide a 24-year-old’s life was important and that an 85-year-old’s wasn’t,” Perriello said.

Lawmakers across the U.S. are confronting such false claims as they return to their districts for the August recess. The assertion about euthanasia stems from a proposal to allow Medicare to reimburse patients for voluntary consultations with a doctor on end-of-life treatment or the preparation of living wills.

The leaflet is part of a campaign in Perriello’s district -- which stretches from Charlottesville to the North Carolina border -- by foes of the Democratic push to remake health care, an industry that accounts for about 18 percent of the U.S. economy. It includes mailings, radio and television ads and several protests scheduled over the next few weeks.


‘Off the Rails’
For Perriello, 34, who is serving his first term, the incident with the senior citizens “gives the indication of how off the rails some of this is going.” The couple, he said, “were physically shivering with fear.”

Republicans say they can’t be responsible for every piece of literature created by an outside group, and that most of those fears are based on legitimate concerns about a policy that is increasingly unpopular.

“Concerned middle-class Americans hear a strong tinge of elitism when politicians like Tom Perriello dismiss genuine frustration with Washington as either misinformed or manufactured,” said Andy Sere, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee.

On July 23, House Minority Leader John Boehner issued a statement with his colleague, Thaddeus McCotter, a Michigan Republican, warning that the provision to pay for the voluntary consultations “may start us down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia.”


Republican District
Democrats such as Perriello, who describes himself as fiscally conservative, are critical to their party’s chances of getting a majority in the House on health care when a measure comes up for a vote in September. Many are among the 49 Democrats serving in districts that voted for Republican presidential candidate John McCain last year, and about half were elected in 2006 or 2008.

Democrats, who have a 256-178 edge in the House, will need the support of these members to get health-care legislation passed because Republicans are likely to oppose it unanimously.

Lawmakers are debating whether to create a government-run health-care plan to compete with private insurers, require employers to offer health insurance to their workers, and how to pay for a plan that may cost $1 trillion over 10 years. The proposal would affect insurance companies such as Minnetonka, Minnesota-based UnitedHealth Group Inc., Indianapolis-based WellPoint Inc. and Hartford, Connecticut-based Aetna Inc.


Walking a Line
The Democratic lawmakers from Republican-leaning areas are trying to walk a fine line between supporting the president’s top domestic priority and protecting their own political futures. Perriello, who will listen to his constituents before committing to a position, said any health-care measure must provide savings and can’t be funded by taxing the rich.

“If health care is being set up basically as a new welfare program, it will fail,” he said at an Aug. 4 meeting at the Danville Rotary Club.

It may take more to win over opponents who have disrupted appearances by House members in recent days. White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have said the protests are being orchestrated.

“The antis are playing on people’s fears,” Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, a former governor, said in an interview. “It’ll make it hard for Perriello.”

Virginia Republicans said Perriello’s seat is up for grabs in next year’s election, and unseating him would have an added benefit.


Staking His Prestige
“Barack Obama has staked a fair amount of his prestige and capability on keeping Virginia in Democratic hands,” said Tim Murtaugh, a spokesman for the Virginia Republican Party.

Perriello won his district by less than 1,000 votes and the National Journal recently ranked him as the most-vulnerable House Democrat. He has been under fire as one of just three freshman Democrats from districts won by McCain to vote for Obama’s June 26 climate-change bill, which all except eight House Republicans opposed. At the same time, Perriello has shown he is willing to part with his party. In April, he voted against Obama’s budget plan; in January, he supported a bill aimed at blocking the release of $350 billion in funds for the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

During the July 4 recess, Perriello was one of 14 Democrats targeted by Republicans with radio ads and phone calls and the only one to be subjected to a television ad. The National Republican Congressional Committee plans a health-care drive this month.


‘Insidious Efforts’
Bill Wilson, the president of Americans for Limited Government, a Fairfax, Virginia-based group, issued a call Aug. 3 for protests against Perriello “in opposition to Barack Obama’s insidious efforts to take over the health system.”

Craig Brians, a political science professor at Virginia Tech University in Blacksburg, said Perriello is an attractive target.

“This is about a lot more than Perriello,” he said. “This is the Republicans saying, ‘here’s somebody we can take out.’”

At the Rotary Club, Perriello refuted opponents of the health-care plan, including their claim that Obama wants a single-payer system that would be the equivalent of a government takeover.

“None of the bills on the table have single-payer,” Perriello said.

Instead, he said the latest House plan goes in the right direction because “everybody is paying in.” That, he said, is the difference between being liberal and being progressive.

“A liberal might say, ‘well, the poor people are having a bad time, let’s tax the rich,’” he said. “A progressive in my mind is about being in this together.”

Last Updated: August 6, 2009 12:48 EDT Go on-site to gain access to the photo as well as the NUMEROUS links within this article. Just click on the following URL:http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601170&sid=aHq7dX65mBCU# :: :: :: :: ::

[Saundra Hummer]

.A
POLITICAL
NEWSLETTER

Democratic Congressional
Campaign Committee
DCCC
Saundra--

The Republican strategy to defeat health insurance reform is simple: poison the debate with lies and then drown us out by yelling and screaming as loud as they can.

Now, Sarah Palin is outrageously claiming that Americans "would have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' " to receive care. While Palin's attack is a complete fabrication, the GOP is closing ranks to defend these outright lies. Over the weekend, former Speaker Newt Gingrich stood by Palin's bizarre "death panel" accusation on national TV.

But this is how we'll beat Palin and Gingrich's shameless fear-mongering - by every one of us spending every day aggressively fighting back with the facts. That's why the DCCC has put together Health Care Fact Check Cards debunking GOP myths on health insurance reform with the real facts.

Help us fight fear tactics with the facts: Download your Health Care Fact Check Card >>
http://www.dccc.org/page/-/pdfs/Health_Care_Fact_Check.pdf

The truth is we need each and every one of you to help us spread these fact check cards far and wide.

More and more, we're hearing disturbing reports from grassroots supporters who say that they hear ordinary Americans at birthday parties, picnics, and summer barbecues starting to believe the lies they are being fed by Republicans and their right-wing lobbyists.

President Obama is counting on grassroots Democrats to help him get the real facts out.

Help us fight fear tactics with the facts: Download your Health Care Fact Check Card >>
https://dccc.org/page/contribute/factcard0?source=081209_jv
We've seen the lengths that Republicans and their powerful special interests will go to stop reform. Busing in violent mobs to disrupt town hall meetings; Flooding the airwaves with outrageous lies and misleading ads; and now even using swastikas to compare Democrats to Nazis courtesy of Rush Limbaugh.

More than ever, President Obama needs grassroots Democrats like you to get the real truth out before the Republican lies get accepted as fact.

Thanks,

Jon Vogel
DCCC Executive Director

Of course there are the usual funding requests, however, this is something that the American public has been misled about, and there is such real confusion as to the real story, that even overt political pleas should be listened to, if for any reason, just so you can glean what is true, tossing out the more radical viewpoints that so many are into regarding providing healthcare for everyone.

Lets go for healthcare, and if it doesn't work, it will be tossed aside, we all know this. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, and this time our very lives could depend on it.

We know who's funding this battle against us having the health care so many of us need, we know who is planting this overblown fear which has so so many of us cringing and becoming fighting mad over. It's the very insurance company's who dictate to doctors and hospitals how many IV drips a patient is allowed, etc., etc., etc. Doing this when doctors know best, but aren't listened to. Then too, too many doctors know where their bread is buttered, and so they march in lockstep to the insurance company's drums. I know, as we were denied treatment and funds over the years. I'm talking about our family, mother, father, children, and ourselves. It was, and is criminal to my way of thinking. SRH
http://www.dccc.org/page/-/pdfs/Health_Care_Fact_Check.pdf. . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

A
VIDEO
Issues › Domestic › Health Care
Ask the Expert: The Broken Individual Health Insurance Market
By
Peter Harbage
August 12, 2009

How are individual market health plans different from employer-sponsored insurance? What affect does the broken individual market have on health care in general? And would health reform help mend problems with the individual insurance market?

CARTOON:
Go on-site to view
VIDEO
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/08/harbage_video.html

For more information, see:

Too Sick for Health Care: How Insurers Limit and Deny Care in the Individual Health Insurance Market

The State of the Individual Market: Fact Sheets for the 50 States and DC
To speak with our experts on this topic, please contact:

Print: Suzi Emmerling (foreign policy and security, energy, education, immigration)
202.481.8224 or semmerling@americanprogress.org

Print: Jason Rahlan (health care, economy, civil rights)
202.481.8132 or jrahlan@americanprogress.org

Radio: John Neurohr
202.481.8182 or jneurohr@americanprogress.org

TV: Andrea Purse
202.741.6250 or apurse@americanprogress.org

Web: Erin Lindsay
202.741.6397 or elindsay@americanprogress.org

Go on-site to gain access to any and all functions, issues, etc. Just click on the following URL:
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/08/harbage_video.html . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

. A
NEWLETTER

FROM
MORRIS DEES
FOUNDER
SPLC-Southern Poverty Law Center . . . . .
A MODERN DAY HERO
SRHAugust 12, 2009

Dear Friend,
As you may have seen in the news today, we've just released a new report about the resurgence of the right-wing militia movement — a movement steeped in paranoia and infused with a boiling rage against President Obama.

Back in 1994, we detected similar stirrings among those in the radical right, and we warned the federal government that the "mixture of armed groups and those who hate is a recipe for disaster." Six months later, 168 people were murdered in the Oklahoma City bombing.

Today, we're facing a similar situation. One federal agent told us that "all it's lacking is a spark."

Anti-government militias are just one part of an explosion of extremist rage in America — a backlash to Obama's election and to the progress we're making toward social justice and tolerance. These groups and their allies traffic in bizarre conspiracy theories — like the claim that Obama is not really a U.S. citizen and that he wants to euthanize senior citizens.

The Department of Homeland Security has recently warned that right-wing extremists such as these militias currently pose the No. 1 threat of domestic terrorism.

The fact is, we're already seeing acts of terror. Six law enforcement officers have been murdered by extremists in recent months, and Obama has received more threats than any other president.

We're working hard to keep law enforcement agencies at every level up to date with the latest and most accurate intelligence about these extremists and their activities.

Please read our new report and pass it along to your friends and family. We all need to stay informed so that we can fight back against this rising tide of extremism.

Thank you for supporting our work — and remember to speak out against hate and intolerance in your community.

Sincerely,

Morris Dees
Founder

We welcome your feedback.
Contact us online.
http://www.splcenter.org/center/contact.jsp?splcnewsletter=newsgen-081209

Or by mail:
Southern Poverty Law Center
400 Washington Ave.
Montgomery, AL 36104
Go on-site to read SPIC"s new report, and to access links. Just click on the following URL: http://www.splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?aid=392&splcnewsletter=newsgen-081209 . . . . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Guitar legend-inventor Les Paul dies at age 94
By
LUKE SHERIDAN
Associated Press Writer

FILE - AP Photo/Richard Drew, fileIn this Oct. 4, 2004 file photo, guitar legend Les Paul gets ready to rehearse at the Iridium Jazz Club in New York. Paul, 94, the guitarist and inventor who changed the course of music with the electric guitar and multitrack recording and had a string of hits, died, Thursday, Aug. 13, 2009 in White Plains, N.Y., according to Gibson Guitar.
There are numerous photo's. Go on-site to view.
You know, Les Paul was a household name for years and years. He and his wife Mary Ford were much loved and admired. SRH

WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. -- Les Paul, who invented the solid-body electric guitar later wielded by a legion of rock 'n' roll greats, died Thursday of complications from pneumonia. He was 94.

According to Gibson Guitar, Paul died at White Plains Hospital. His family and friends were by his side.

As an inventor, Paul also helped bring about the rise of rock 'n' roll with multitrack recording, which enables artists to record different instruments at different times, sing harmony with themselves, and then carefully balance the tracks in the finished recording.

The use of electric guitar gained popularity in the mid-to-late 1940s, and then exploded with the advent of rock in the mid-'50s.

"Suddenly, it was recognized that power was a very important part of music," Paul once said. "To have the dynamics, to have the way of expressing yourself beyond the normal limits of an unamplified instrument, was incredible. Today a guy wouldn't think of singing a song on a stage without a microphone and a sound system."

A tinkerer and musician since childhood, he experimented with guitar amplification for years before coming up in 1941 with what he called "The Log," a four-by-four piece of wood strung with steel strings.

"I went into a nightclub and played it. Of course, everybody had me labeled as a nut." He later put the wooden wings onto the body to give it a tradition guitar shape.

In 1952, Gibson Guitars began production on the Les Paul guitar.

Pete Townsend of the Who, Steve Howe of Yes, jazz great Al DiMeola and Led Zeppelin's Jimmy Page all made the Gibson Les Paul their trademark six-string.

Over the years, the Les Paul series has become one of the most widely used guitars in the music industry. In 2005, Christie's auction house sold a 1955 Gibson Les Paul for $45,600.

In the late 1960s, Paul retired from music to concentrate on his inventions. His interest in country music was rekindled in the mid-'70s and he teamed up with Chet Atkins for two albums. The duo were awarded a Grammy for best country instrumental performance of 1976 for their "Chester and Lester" album.

With Mary Ford, his wife from 1949 to 1962, he earned 36 gold records for hits including "Vaya Con Dios" and "How High the Moon," which both hit No. 1. Many of their songs used overdubbing techniques that Paul had helped develop.

"I could take my Mary and make her three, six, nine, 12, as many voices as I wished," he recalled. "This is quite an asset." The overdubbing technique was highly influential on later recording artists such as the Carpenters.

Released in 2005, "Les Paul & Friends: American Made, World Played" was his first album of new material since those 1970s recordings. Among those playing with him: Peter Frampton, Jeff Beck, Eric Clapton and Richie Sambora.

"They're not only my friends, but they're great players," Paul told The Associated Press. "I never stop being amazed by all the different ways of playing the guitar and making it deliver a message."

Two cuts from the album won Grammys, "Caravan" for best pop instrumental performance and "69 Freedom Special" for best rock instrumental performance. (He had also been awarded a technical Grammy in 2001.)

Paul was inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame in 2005.

Paul was born Lester William Polfus, in Waukseha, Wis., on June 9, 1915. He began his career as a musician, billing himself as Red Hot Red or Rhubarb Red. He toured with the popular Chicago band Rube Tronson and His Texas Cowboys and led the house band on WJJD radio in Chicago.

In the mid-1930s he joined Fred Waring's Pennsylvanians and soon moved to New York to form the Les Paul Trio, with Jim Atkins and bassist Ernie Newton.

Meanwhile, he had made his first attempt at audio amplification at age 13. Unhappy with the amount of volume produced by his acoustic guitar, Paul tried placing a telephone receiver under the strings. Although this worked to some extent, only two strings were amplified and the volume level was still too low.

By placing a phonograph needle in the guitar, all six strings were amplified, which proved to be much louder. Paul was playing a working prototype of the electric guitar in 1929.

His work on taping techniques began in the years after World War II, when Bing Crosby gave him a tape recorder. Drawing on his earlier experimentation with his homemade record-cutting machines, Paul added an additional playback head to the recorder. The result was a delayed effect that became known as tape echo.

Tape echo gave the recording a more "live" feel and enabled the user to simulate different playing environments.

Paul's next "crazy idea" was to stack together eight mono tape machines and send their outputs to one piece of tape, stacking the recording heads on top of each other. The resulting machine served as the forerunner to today's multitrack recorders.

In 1954, Paul commissioned Ampex to build the first eight-track tape recorder, later known as "Sel-Sync," in which a recording head could simultaneously record a new track and play back previous ones.

He had met Ford, then known as Colleen Summers, in the 1940s while working as a studio musician in Los Angeles. For seven years in the 1950s, Paul and Ford broadcast a TV show from their home in Mahwah, N.J. Ford died in 1977, 15 years after they divorced.

In recent years, even after his illness in early 2006, Paul played Monday nights at New York night spots. Such stars as Led Zeppelin's Jimmy Page, Dire Straits' Mark Knopfler, Bruce Springsteen and Eddie Van Halen came to pay tribute and sit in with him.

"It's where we were the happiest, in a 'joint,'" he said in a 2000 interview with the AP. "It was not being on top. The fun was getting there, not staying there - that's hard work."
http://www.star-telegram.com/454/story/1536275.html ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

[Saundra Hummer]

IIIIIIIIIII
Cheney 'Spills the Beans' About Bush Administration August 13, 2009 1:07 PM

ABC's Stu Schutzman reports from New York: Dick Cheney appears to be at it again. In the run-up to his new book, author Cheney purportedly “spill’s the beans” about the inside stories surrounding the controversies which swirled around the Bush administration for most of its 8 years in power. According to Bart Gellman’s account in today’s Washington Post, some of those close to Cheney say he believes Bush “was moving away from him” and “went soft” during his second term.

Late last year (as noted here) in an apparent rift, then Vice President Cheney vocally criticized the President for failing to pardon his long time colleague and friend, Scooter Libby. Libby, Cheney’s Chief Of Staff, was the only White House official convicted in the Valerie Plame affair. Cheney said Bush “abandoned an innocent man.” Strong language from someone who seem tied at the hip to George W. Bush.

PHOTO
Go on-site to view

In today’s Post, Gellman describes a series of recent conversations Cheney has had with former colleagues among others. “In the second term, he felt Bush was moving away from him,” said one, “…shackled by the public reaction and criticism he took……the implication was that Bush had gone soft on him.” “It was clear,” said the participant, “that Cheney’s doctrine was cast-iron strength at all times -- never apologize, never explain -- and Bush moved toward the conciliatory.”

It seems fair to say that President Bush, not unlike any President, was acutely aware of his legacy. Bush spoke often and at times sounded a bit defensive about the way history would judge him. As some see it, Bush “crossed the Rubicon” when he finally fired Donald Rumsfeld shortly before election day 2004. As the war in Iraq got bloodier whit no end in sight, this was something critics and even some friends thought he should have done much earlier. Cheney immediately pushed back against the boss calling Rumsfeld the “finest Secretary of Defense” in history. But the dyke was breached. The President went on to undo many of the Cheney inspired policies of the post 911 era: he ended torture of detainees by water boarding; ended the CIA secret prison program; ended unsanctioned domestic surveillance and called for the closing of the prison at Guantanamo Bay.

According to those who spoke to the Post, Cheney has not softened on those policies one iota. “He hadn’t stepped back a bit from the positions he took in office…” said one. “He’s not going to soften anything or accommodate shifts in conscience.”

The former President is right to believe that history will render his ultimate job approval rating. But until then, I for one, can’t wait to read Dick Cheney’s book.

August 13, 2009http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnewser/2009/08/cheney-v-bush-round-2.html?nwltr=WN_dailyfeature_hed
IIIIIIIIIII

[Saundra Hummer]

^ ^ ^ ^ ^
Indian Island Tribes Linked Directly to African 'Eve'
Posted on: Thursday, 19 May 2005, 19:52 CDT
PHOTO
Go on-site to:
Download full size image
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/150845/indian_island_tribes_linked_directly_to_african_ev e/index.html

HYDERABAD, India (AFP) -- Two primitive tribes in India's Andaman and Nicobar islands are believed to be direct descendants of the first humans who migrated from Africa at least 50,000 years ago, according to a study by Indian biologists.

A team of biologists at the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology in the southern Indian city of Hyderabad studied the DNA of 10 Onge and Great Andamanese people in the Indian Ocean archipelago who lived for tens of thousands of years in "genetic isolation" from other human contact.

The findings suggest the tribes are descended from the "oldest population of the world and were among the first batch of modern humans to migrate from Africa," said professor Lalji Singh, director of the centre.

The tribals have similar physical features to Africans and their DNA suggests that they have close links with Africa.

Mitochondrial DNA, which is passed maternally and found in every human cell, can be traced to a single female ancestor who lived about 150,000 to 200,000 years ago.

It is believed the descendants of this "Eve" that all humans claim as their ancestor began migrating out of Africa in batches some 70,000 years ago.

The tribals' DNA is extremely close to the so-called African root gene of the single female ancestor, Singh said this week.

This made it likely that they migrated from Africa via a sea route 50,000 to 70,000 years ago and have lived "in genetic isolation" since in the Andaman Islands, said Singh.

"These islanders could hold the key to the mystery of our origins. They are windows to look into the past and hence need to be preserved," Singh said.

The two other "Stone Age" tribes living in the islands -- the Jarawas and the Sentinelese -- were not studied because they are resistant to contact with outsiders, the scientists said.

The Indian government has discouraged outside contact with the tribals in an effort to preserve their traditions and protect them from falling victim to illnesses to which they might have no resistance.

The Nicabarese, another tribal group in the islands who were tested, showed they had a closer DNA affinity with people from Asia, suggesting a more recent arrival from the east in the past 18,000 years, Singh said.

There were fears some of the tribes living in the chain of islands might have been wiped out in the devastating tsunamis of December 26 that were triggered by a powerful underground earthquake nearby off the coast of Indonesia.

But the four Stone Age tribes -- the 99-member Onge, 250 Sentinelese, the 39 almost extinct Andamanese and 350 Jarawas --- have been accounted for in a post-tsunami headcount, tribal and government officials say.

There were many casualties, however, among the far more numerous Nicobarese tribals who are farmers and live along the coast.

Some 1,899 people died in the tsunamis that hit the islands and some 5,554 people are listed as missing, according to government figures. ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

[Saundra Hummer]

.
* * * * * Sweet Relief: Chocolate Cuts Heart Attack Risk
Posted on:
Thursday, 13 August 2009,
12:36 CDT
There’s good news for chocoholics: a new study has found that eating chocolate two or more times during the week can reduce a person’s risk of heart attack.
Writing in the September edition of the Journal of Internal Medicine, Imre Janszky of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm and colleagues were the first to show how chocolate can cut the risk of death among patients who have previously suffered a heart attack.

"It was specific to chocolate -- we found no benefit to sweets in general," said Kenneth Mukamal, a researcher at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston told AFP.

"It seems that antioxidants in cocoa are a likely candidate."

Researchers noted that while smaller servings of chocolate provided less protection, it is still better than no chocolate at all in protecting against a heart attack.

Their study combined 1,169 non-diabetic men and women, 45-to-70 years old. Each participant was monitored shortly after suffering his or her first heart attack. Researchers questioned volunteers about their diets—specifically how much chocolate they ate on a regular basis.

"Our findings support increasing evidence that chocolate is a rich source of beneficial bioactive compounds," researchers wrote.

"To be frank, I'm pretty cautious about chocolate because we're working on weight problems with so many individuals," said Mukamal.

"However, I do encourage those who are looking for healthier desserts to consider chocolate in small quantities," he said.

* * *
On the Net:
Journal of Internal Medicine
Karolinska Institute
Source: redOrbit Staff & Wire Reports

More News in this Category

Related Articles
Molecule Prompts Damaged Cells To Repair After Heart Attack
AIDS Drug Increases Heart Attack Risk, Study Finds
Scientists find genes linked to heart attack risk
Anti-clotting drugs beat heparin for heart attack
Scientist Urges Rethink After Secondarthritis Drug Found to Be Linked to Heart Attacks
Anti-clotting drug cuts heart attack deaths-study
Takeda diabetes drug cuts heart attacks
Rapid drop in air pressure may trigger heart attack
Heart Attack Findings Raise New Fears Over Popular Painkiller
Discovery of 'Heart Attack Gene' Offers Treatment Options
Go on-site to see other articles of interest as well as this one, it's links, etc. http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1737183/sweet_relief_chocolate_cuts_heart_attack_risk/index.html * * * * * * *

[Saundra Hummer]

:: :: :: :: :: SARAH PALINShe has quit. Sarah Palin has abandonded her elected post as governor of the state of Alaska. She is after all, a quitter, which she has denied. What else can one be called when one just up and quits?

She has found a calling more appealing, one that fits in well with her own perception of herself. This new calling of hers, and her handlers, regardless of how they might think of it, is catering to the "Fringe", and so here we go again, her appealing to all that is wacky.

She sees things to be gained, so, even when she knows what she is saying to be untruthful, she is like Rush Linbaugh, in that she knows how to butter her own bread. Like Rush, she knows who it is who will fill up her coffers and give her the power she seeks, even if it is only a modicum of power, (God forbid it it will come to more), she'll pump these untruths out to her followers over, and over, with 'Aw Shucks', seeming conviction. She must have realized somewhere along the way, having become all puffed up, out of proportion, after the GOP Convention, that it wasn't the voters of Alaska who will fuel her needs, not for the schemes she entertains in her head. She, it seems to me, realized that to live up to her own grandiose ideas, her schemes, a national stage is "where it's at". (Excuse my grammar, but it fits.) SRH

Palin Renews False 'Death Panel' ChargeAugust 13, 2009 12:03 PM ABC News' Teddy Davis reports:
Sarah Palin is standing by her discredited charge that House Democrats are proposing to create "death panels". The former Alaska governor's statement, which she posted to Facebook on Wednesday evening, came one day after President Obama implicitly took issue with her stance during a Tuesday town-hall meeting in New Hampshire.

Referring to Section 1233 of the House Democratic health care bill, Palin writes: "With all due respect, it’s misleading for the president to describe this section as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients."

The truth, however, is that the end of life counseling contained in the House Democratic bill would be voluntary.

As the Associated Press has reported, the House bill would permit Medicare to pay doctors for voluntary counseling sessions that address end-of-life issues. The doctor-patient discussions would cover living wills, making a close relative or a trusted friend your health care proxy, learning about hospice as an option for the terminally ill, and information about pain medications for people suffering chronic discomfort.

Palin first leveled her "death panel" charge in a Friday message on Facebook.

“The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil,” Palin wrote last week.

Palin's "death panel" claim has been debunked not only by ABC's Jake Tapper but also by FactCheck.org and Politifact.com.

A Palin spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.

--Teddy Davis

August 13, 2009
in
Gov. Sarah Palin, Health Care
User Comments (203)
User Comments
Of course, Palin has lost what little mind she ever had.

As a Holier-than-Thou, lunatic fringe, Christian Extremist........someone should ask Sarah the ol' WWJD question. Would Jesus lie as Palin does? Geez, Sarah..........you don't think God ain't gonna git ya' for all this nonsense?
Posted by: Sammy | Aug 13, 2009 12:07:06 PM

Why does anyone give her the time of day? You reporters give her more credit than she has earned. You all are making her the celebrity. I guess the old adage that a pretty face gets further than a homley intelligent person. This is true...I have seen it work.
Posted by: talmag | Aug 13, 2009 12:32:35 PM

Okay everyone, settle down, and don't be so jealous of Sarah......she's gonna be around for a long time! LOL
Posted by: lyineyes1956 | Aug 13, 2009 12:37:34 PM

Why are we Democrats so afraid of her. If your not afraid of her, then ignore her and she'll go away.
Posted by: Gunnerv1 | Aug 13, 2009 12:40:34 PM

"Okay everyone, settle down, and don't be so jealous of Sarah....."
LOL, who in the world would be jealous of a loser? You may have fantasies about this woman, but normal people think she's a fruitcake.
Posted by: Trent | Aug 13, 2009 12:43:13 PM

Rick Klein shows his bias in not only the title of his blog but also his omission of the cash incentive for doctors to hold such end of life counseling. Why should the government intrude into a family issue.
Posted by: Explorer65 | Aug 13, 2009 12:46:53 PM

her politcal career is over after her bizzare behavior over the pas t few months....she is clearly angling for a "Glenn Beck" type show...where she does not have to have any real education or depth on issues.

if so, god help our country...she'll get the nutjobs all riled up, and tragedy is sure to follow.

She will be nearly as dangerous, as if she had became VP.
Posted by: indithinker | Aug 13, 2009 12:48:21 PM

This woman is certifiable, lock her up and throw away the key.
Posted by: Ron | Aug 13, 2009 12:48:30 PM

One can only hope Palin will go far, far away. She was annoying on the campaign trail with her whiney, maverick-y tone......and she's only gotten more so. Seriously, she needs to go into hiding. She's an embarrassment and a moron.
Posted by: Joanne Brown | Aug 13, 2009 12:49:17 PM

The Republican ammo is and always has been to repeat a lie over and over until it becomes accepted as the truth by their faithful yet uneducated followers.
Posted by: Eric | Aug 13, 2009 12:51:38 PM

Only her uneducated beloved followers in the GOP will continue to believe the crap she says.
Posted by: GWP | Aug 13, 2009 12:55:30 PM

The woman needs to have some of those demons exorcised by her witch doctor.
Posted by: libertyrulz | Aug 13, 2009 12:56:14 PM

yikes
Posted by: jimt | Aug 13, 2009 12:57:21 PM

You are assuming that she can read and cmprehend above the third grade level. Even her own party is running away from her. Too bad someone does not sue her for liable/slander. She is making false statements which can easily be refuted. You are free to offer opinions, but when you say balck is white you are mistating fact. Even after the truth was pointed out, she continues to spread the equivalent of political gossip. Why doesn't she spend some quality time with her child who is in desperate need of maternal care and leave the comments to the grownups who can deal with complex situations.
Posted by: Chidem | Aug 13, 2009 12:58:33 PM

Sarah Palin is nothing more than a pot stirrer.
Posted by: juneorzoey | Aug 13, 2009 1:01:05 PM

Sara Palin's outragious rants make for good editotial fluff. Her nonsens always makes waves and waves sell advertising. Sarah Palin is a joke that we all enjoy. Other than that, she has no real validity.
Posted by: KsDevil | Aug 13, 2009 1:02:37 PM

Only teh uneducated beloved follwers of the dems can still stand up for lies and false that comes out of their mouths. The change we can believe in is ruining our country and you still believe them. Palin is the most honest politian in decades, that is your problem with her. The bill has not been finalized and there are many versions out there. How the hell are you going to give healthcare to everyone without raising taxes? Easy, you don't call it a tax. You are falling for it hook line and sinker, just like unemployment will not go over 8.5%. It is still rising. where is the outrage in that! Read the bills, understand the bills beofr they are passed. don't forget, politians are supposed to represent the people that elected them. If we complain, we do so because we are being stabbed in the back, and they want to hide.
Posted by: mike | Aug 13, 2009 1:03:12 PM

This woman is DANGEROUS Look at her Hate rallies during the Campaign she belongs to the Right Wing Extremist you know the likes of Timothy Mcveigh SHE DOES NOT BELONG TO MAIN STREAM AMERICA!Shame on her for ralling up the Nutcases.
Posted by: ANGIE IN PA | Aug 13, 2009 1:04:08 PM

The inmates are running the Republican asylum right now. And the press treats their insane, paranoid and deluded rantings as if it's dealing with sane, well adjusted people.
Posted by: Will | Aug 13, 2009 1:04:41 PM

why does the media keep her around? She's nothing? She no longer holds public office. She has no brains and no credibility. Oh wait, She can see russia from her house which makes her an expert on socialism.
Posted by: Brendan | Aug 13, 2009 1:06:18 PM
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/08/palin-renews-false-death-panel-charge.html?nwltr=politics_thenote_hed :: :: ::

[Saundra Hummer]

.
* * * White House Makes 'Viral E-Mail' of Its Own
August 13, 2009 7:00 AM
Feeling victimized by misinformation spread virally through the Internet, the White House Thursday is launching its own "viral e-mail" for supporters to spread.

With the subject line: "Something worth forwarding," the e-mail -- from senior White House adviser David Axelrod -- seeks to combat "the viral e-mails that fly unchecked and under the radar, spreading all sorts of lies and distortions" and invites Americans to "start a chain e-mail of our own."

The e-mail outlines 24 points -- eight ways the Democrats' health care reform measures will, in Axelrod's view, "provide security and stability to those with or without coverage," eight "common myths" about reform, and eight reasons why reform is an urgent matter.

The e-mail also features a Web video from White House health care reform czar Nancy-Ann DeParle in which she refutes an opposition viral e-mail sent to one of her White House colleagues from his father, a physician.

VIDEO
Click on this link to gain accsss to site:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/08/white-house-makes-viral-email-of-its-own.html?nwltr=politics_featureHed
DeParle then proceeds to refute points in the email (which, it appears, has made its way into Pat Boone's in-box), claims such as "the government will have direct real-time access to bank accounts," that all doctors will be paid the same regardless of speciality, and the notion that employers must enroll employees into the government run plan.

"This is probably one of the longest e-mails I’ve ever sent," Axelrod acknowledges at the beginning of the message. He explains that "it could be the most important."

This is just the latest attempt by the White House to combat opposition to health care reform, some of which is rooted in false information such as the "Obama 'death panel,'" that former Gov. Sarah Palin wrote about last week, painting a picture of a bureaucratic care-rationing board that would withhold medical treatment from seniors and the disabled.

This week, for instance, the White House set up a webpage "RealityCheck" "to knock down the rumors and lies that are floating around the Internet," Axelrod said.

The eight "common myths" are: that reform will lead to rationing and will mean a "government takeover" of health care; that reform is unaffordable; that it will encourage "euthanasia"; that it will limit veterans' access to the health care; that it will hurt small businesses; that it will be paid for by cutting Medicare benefits; that health reform will force Americans out of their current insurance plans or force them to change doctors; that it will mean the government will be in charge of Americans' bank accounts.

Some of the "myths" are clearly false -- that euthanasia is part of reform, for instance.

Others are matters of some dispute. Will health care reform really not lead to any American being switched from one insurance company to another, or one doctor to another? No, as President Obama has acknowledged, he cannot stop a private company from doing so -- though, he emphasizes, private companies are dropping coverage altogether for millions of Americans. But wouldn't the creation of this less expensive government-run plan lead to some employers opting for that coverages? Estimates of how many Americans would go from private to public plans range from two million Americans by the Congressional Budget Office to an estimate of tens of millions by analysts at the Lewin Group, a group that asserts editorial independence but is owned by UnitedHealthcare.

Axelrod goes on to argue the eight reasons for reform, among them that "36 percent of those who tried to purchase health insurance directly from an insurance company in the individual insurance market" were either unable to do so because of a pre-existing condition in the previous three years or they were dropped from coverage when they became seriously ill.

Other reasons for reform, Axelrod says, are that employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have nearly doubled since 2000, that those in rural areas have less access to health care, that nearly one-third of the uninsured are employees of small businesses, and that projections suggest that the number of uninsured Americans will rise to about 72 million.

The eight ways health reform will provide security to those with or without coverage include provisions in the health care reform bills working their way through Congress that would prohibit insurance companies from discriminating against those with pre-existing conditions; yearly caps on how much companies can charge for out-of-pocket expenses; and prohibitions against charging women more than men.

"Right now, someone you know probably has a question about reform that could be answered" by the viral e-mail, Axelrod writes. "So what are you waiting for? Forward this e-mail." He signs it: "Thanks, David."

- jpt

August 13, 2009
User Comments (156)
Go on-site to view or add to comments, they're numerous * * * * *

[Saundra Hummer]

+++++++++Fear for Obama's Safety Grows as Hate Groups Thrive on Racial BacklashViolent Signs, Gun, Standoff Latest in Emerging Anger Towards the President
By
BRIAN ROSS,
ANNA SCHECTER and MEGAN CHUCHMACH
August 14, 2009—
Experts who track hate groups across the U.S. are growing increasingly concerned over violent rhetoric targeted at President Obama, especially as the debate over health care intensifies and a pattern of threats emerges.

The Secret Service is investigating a Maryland man who held a sign reading "Death to Obama" and "Death to Michelle and her two stupid kids" outside a town hall meeting this week. And in New Hampshire, another man stood across the street from a Presidential town hall with his gun on full display.

Los Angeles police officers apprehended a man Thursday after a standoff with him inside a red Volkswagen Bug car in Westwood, CA the latest disturbing case even though officials said the man had mental problems.

"I don't think these are simply people who are mentally ill or off their rocker," Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center, told ABC News of those behind the threats. "In a very real sense they represent a genuine reaction, a genuine backlash against Obama."

Experts say a sharp growth in so-called militia groups that helped spawn a wave of domestic terrorism in the 1990s and are now using YouTube, rock music and the Internet to recruit members and spread hate and fear - shouldn't be ignored.

"It's certainly a scary time," said former FBI agent Brad Garrett, now an ABC News consultant. Garrett said the Secret Service "cannot afford to pass on anyone," and he believes "they really do fear that something could happen to [Obama]."

Garrett said statements like one recently made by controversial radio host Rush Limbaugh comparing a logo for the White House plan to a Nazi symbol "legitimizes people who are on the edge to go do something or say something."

"And if you go and take a look at this, you will find that the Obama health care logo is damn close to a Nazi swastika logo," Limbaugh said.

Later, someone painted a swastika outside the office of Congressman David Scott of Georgia, one of Obama's supporters.


Secret Service Security Around Obama
While officials told ABC News that the President's daily threat matrix has yet to reflect a sharp increase in threats, White House officials privately admit deep concern and have told the Secret Service to keep security tight, even if Obama objects.

"I think the president has, in effect, triggered fears amongst fairly large numbers of white people in this country that they are somehow losing their country, that the battle is lost," Potok told ABC News. "The nation that their Christian white forefathers created has somehow been taken from them."

Asa Eslocker contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2009 ABC News Internet Ventures
Go on-site to gain access to the links within this disturbing article. Click on the following URL/Link. SRH
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=8324481&page=1+++++++++++++

[Saundra Hummer]

IIIIIIIIIIIII Deadly Scum
Killer blue-green algae blooms have returned to our rivers
By Ryan Burns
The first sign that something was wrong with Joey, the Johnston family's beloved, hyperactive Blue Heeler cross, came as they were walking back up to their campsite from the edge of the Van Duzen River. He was moving slowly, which actually wasn't all that strange considering the manic, splash-crazy swimming he'd been doing for the past two hours. But a few minutes later, when everyone had made their way back down to the water and Joey didn't jump in but just sat there, listless -- that was unusual. Joey flat-out loved the water, and at just 3 years old he usually had boundless energy. When Pete Johnston called out to his wife Jennifer to say the dog was now vomiting all over their friends' river gear, they knew Joey was in trouble.

"By the time I got there he was almost comatose," Jennifer Johnston told the Journal last week. "His tongue was hanging out in the sand. His eyes were rolled back."

They carried Joey up into the shade and set him down. He wagged his tail weakly, and they thought maybe he'd be OK. But then he went completely limp. With no cell phone reception in the Pamplin Grove campground, they quickly shoved Joey into his portable kennel in the back of their car, and Jennifer started driving northwest along curvy Highway 36. Pete stayed behind with their son, 7, and daughter, 6. Near Hydesville, Jennifer was finally able to reach the Animal Emergency Center in Eureka, and as she struggled to talk and drive at the same time, she could hear Joey's kennel rustling and shaking in the back of the car. He was having convulsive seizures.

"At Fernbridge I pulled over because I couldn't hear anything," Jennifer said. "He was already dead."

Joey, she later learned, had likely died from swallowing cyanobacteria, also known as blue-green algae. The photosynthetic bacteria can form almost anywhere, though usually in harmless single cells. In summer months, however, it can multiply rapidly in warm, shallow water, forming blooms that can produce some of the most powerful natural poisons in the world -- poisons with no known antidote. "It's a ubiquitous, very common bacteria," says Harriet Hill with Humboldt County Division of Environmental Health. "It's always there. The question is, will it bloom and produce toxins?"

Since 2001, 11 dogs have died in Humboldt and Mendocino counties after coming into contact with water containing cyanobacteria. That includes Joey, plus another dog who died just last Sunday after swimming in the South Fork Eel River near Phillipsville. Tests are underway to confirm the cause of death. Hill suggests that anyone whose dog shows signs of illness after contact with algal blooms freeze some of the dog's body fluids for analysis. (Gross but helpful, she said.)

The Johnstons had heard about blue-green algae and made a point of staying out of local rivers after Aug. 1. But they didn't realize just how dangerous cyanobacteria can be, and on this particular late-July day the slimy stuff hardly looked like a potential killer.

"You could see a little in the bottom of the river but nothing that would make you think twice," Jennifer Johnston said.

Blue-green algal blooms can form as scum, foam or floating mats -- usually in the hue advertised, though they can also look white or brown. Freshwater blooms can contain neurotoxins, which affect the nervous system (this is likely what killed Joey), hepatotoxins, which attack the liver, and other dangerous chemicals. With people, it can cause eye irritation, skin rash, vomiting, diarrhea and cold- and flu-like symptoms -- especially among children. Lake County officials this summer have received reports of skin rashes apparently caused by cyanobacteria in Clear Lake.

Local health officials have posted warnings along affected rivers and issued press releases urging people and their pets to avoid water with visible blooms. Fish, they warn, should be gutted, then rinsed in tap water before consumption. They also suggest ways to prevent the algal blooms from forming in the first place, like reducing our use of fertilizers and pesticides, making sure our septic systems don't leak and encouraging native plant growth around riverbanks and shorelines -- all of which can reduce the nutrients that help the toxic slime spawn.

Cyanobacteria aren't entirely evil. In fact, we wouldn't exist without them, and neither would dogs or plants or any of the things we tend to recognize as living. They're called the "architects of Earth's atmosphere" by the Berkeley Natural History Museum because, over billions of years, they produced the oxygen that allowed life on our planet to evolve into so many different forms. And it's not always poisonous. The Aztecs regularly ate one variety of the stuff (cyanobacterium Spirulina), and another healthful type, Aphanizomenon Flos-Aquae (AFA), grows abundantly in the Klamath River. (But so does the toxic stuff, so avoid it in its natural state.) When processed into powder or pills, AFA, which is high in protein, vitamins and essential fatty acids, is consumed as a health supplement.

But the toxic species are indeed bad news, and Jennifer Johnston wants to help other pets avoid Joey's fate. She'd read local media reports saying the blooms are a threat, but she feels the warnings should be stronger. "It's not a threat; it's a death sentence if they get it," she said.

For more information on cyanobacteria, call the county Public Health office at (707) 442-6215 or (800) 963-9241.

We saw this quite often down by a creek we used to fish in, it was where the creek had overflowed it's banks and pools of water would form, sometimes, after it had been there a while it would bubble out gases or whatever it was doing, I just thought it was caused by stagnant water, thinking it might be bad for you, that it would hurt ones health if you were in it too much, so we avoided it. I never realized it could be so deadly. Luckily we never took our dogs there. SRH
http://www.northcoastjournal.com/issues/2009/08/13/deadly-scum/IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

[Saundra Hummer]

~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Mayan Calendar & Vatican Secret behind years 2012-2090 - 2 - August 15th, 2009
Time Masters of the New World Order: Messiah, 666 and MAYA calendar system. Maya were destroyed by Christian Church only because of the Vatican calendar system secret. Let us have a look at the secret plans behind what is known as the different Jewish (Hebrew) and Christian calendars of our times. Both are embedded into the same keen system based on the number of verses of the Torah: (please read @ otaku.onlinehome.de The current Jewish calendar was founded by Rabbi Hillel II circa 360 AD …

Mayan Calendar & Vatican Secret behind years 2012-2090 - 225
Tags: 2012, 2090, 666, beast, Calendar, Gregorian, Hebrew, Homorrah, Jewish, Julian, Jupiter, knowledge, Lunar, maya, Meshiah, Messiah, occult, Saturn, Sodom, system, Torah, Vatican, Venus

There are numerous links within the article, and they don't all pertain to the Mayan Calendar, but they are of the same type of beliefs from ancient times.

End of the World ~ Polar Shift ~ Mayan Calendar ~ Doomsday ~ Large Hadron Collider ~ 21 December 2012 2012-Mayan calendar & Velikovsky’s predictions? - 3 - August 13th, 2009


It is all about calendar systems and chronology - Mayan calendar, Hebrew Torah, Christian Bible and Khemetic Kolbrin. The Kolbrin is a collection of ancient Egyptian (including EXODUS as in TORAH) manuscripts. From combined research, the origins of The Kolbrin can be traced back to a large collection of manuscripts salvaged from Glastonbury Abbey during an arson attack in 1184 that was intended to destroy them. It was the time of history when there was a great suppression of monasteries. As …

2012-Mayan calendar & Velikovsky’s predictions? - 313
Tags: 2012, aztec, Bible, Calendar, catastrophism, collapse, earth, ice, Khemet, Kolbrin, Mayan, probe, prophecy, system, Torah

Posted under 2012 Predictions
Nostradamus 2012 Part 7 of 10 - August 12th, 2009


www.December212012.com

Nostradamus 2012 Part 7 of 1011
Tags: 2012, December 21 2012, end of the world, Nostradamus

Posted under Nostradamus 2012
CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC) - August 12th, 2009


The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is a gigantic scientific instrument near Geneva, where it spans the border between Switzerland and France about 100 m underground. It is a particle accelerator used by physicists to study the smallest known particles — the fundamental building blocks of all things. It will revolutionise our understanding, from the minuscule world deep within atoms to the vastness of the Universe. Two beams of subatomic particles called ‘hadrons’ — either protons or lead ions …

CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC)25
Tags: cern, collider, hadron, large, lhc

Posted under Large Hadron Collider
2012-Mayan calendar & Velikovsky’s predictions? - 2 - August 11th, 2009


It is all about calendar systems and chronology - Mayan calendar, Hebrew Torah, Christian Bible and Khemetic Kolbrin. The Kolbrin is a collection of ancient Egyptian (including EXODUS as in TORAH) manuscripts. From combined research, the origins of The Kolbrin can be traced back to a large collection of manuscripts salvaged from Glastonbury Abbey during an arson attack in 1184 that was intended to destroy them. It was the time of history when there was a great suppression of monasteries. As …

2012-Mayan calendar & Velikovsky’s predictions? - 216
Tags: 2012, aztec, Bible, Calendar, catastrophism, collapse, earth, ice, Khemet, Kolbrin, Mayan, probe, prophecy, system, Torah

Posted under 2012 Predictions
Mayan 2012 Prophecy - August 11th, 2009


A Mayan elder gives a message of hope for 2012. Join our community at www.esotericonline.net

Mayan 2012 Prophecy25
Tags: 2012, alignment, ancestors, baktun, galactic, maya, Mayan, prophecy

Posted under 2012 Prophecy
Coming Polar Shift 1/12 - August 11th, 2009


I DO NOT OWN THIS! Copyright Premiere Radio Networks. Air date 1/11/09 George Knapp welcomed researcher Brent Miller, of The Horizon Project, who warned of mounting evidence that Earth is due for a polar shift which will end civilization as we know it. “It could happen tomorrow, it could happen 50 years from now, but all the evidence that we’ve been able to collect indicates that the next one is about to happen,” Miller cautioned of the global catastrophe that he sees as imminent. Describing …

Coming Polar Shift 1/121
Tags: 1, coming, polar, shift

Posted under Polar Shift
Mayan Calendar predicts Dollar Collapse and Revolution - August 10th, 2009


MAYAN CALENDAR VIDEO Prepare now for the dollar crisis as the times are changing as we enter the halfway point of this eight cycle of the mayan calendar. This change brings a new consciousness where ETHICS and right/wrong will over ride the consolidation of power. The next cycle following is that of CONSCIOUS CO-CREATING. This will help humanity with this project of the new change that this world is going through

Mayan Calendar predicts Dollar Collapse and Revolution25
Tags: (R)evolution, 2012, AGE, Aquarius, assets, coming, dollar, dollar collapse, economic collapse, economy, fake, fiat, food, george ure, gerald celente, gold, Golden, instead, love, mayan calendar, money, of, Peace, Real, revolt, silver, usa, webbot

Posted under Mayan Calendar 2012

Go on-site to access any links within this article, just click below:

http://isomp.com/
~ ~ ~

[Saundra Hummer]

. . . . . . . . . FACTCHECK.ORG
A PROJECT OF THE ANNENBERG PUBLIC POLICY CENTER
? Ask FactCheck posted these new items
during the week ending Aug. 14, 2009
(Follow the links to read complete answers)

Q: Does Ezekiel Emanuel advocate sacrificing medical care for senior citizens and disabled youths for the good of society?
A: No. Critics of health care legislation are distorting the meaning of Emanuel’s academic writings on medical ethics. And Emanuel tells us, "I am not advocating this."

Q: Will the House’s proposed health care plan outlaw private insurance?
A: No. Those who are claiming that the plan would get rid of private insurance or make it illegal are misinterpreting the bill.

Q: Fox News’ Glenn Beck said that the government will get complete access to your computer and all of your files when you log on to Cars.gov for the Cash for Clunkers program. Is there any truth to this?
A: This claim is false. Beck quoted from a security message on the site for dealers, not the site for the general public.


Mobile and dial-up users go here
http://m.factcheck.org/
The FactCheck Wire posted these new items during the week ending Aug. 14, 2009
(Follow the links to read complete posts)

Palin vs. Obama: Death Panels
We sort out the Facebook-fueled debate.
When Philosophy Meets Politics
Ezekiel Emanuel and the difficulty in interpreting ethics texts.

Obama Wrong on AARP Endorsement
The group hasn't endorsed a bill, contrary to the president's remarks.

Health Care Meets Shark Week!
MoveOn.org likens insurance companies to predatory sharks.

There He Goes Again: Obama’s False $6,000 Claim
The president repeats an incorrect comparison between health care spending in the U.S. and other countries.
How to Not Prove a Point
Investor's Business Daily says British scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't get medical care in England.

Broken Record on Record-Breaking Profits
The DCCC repeats the false claim that insurance companies are reaping record profits.

Nazi Symbols at Town Halls: The Real Story
Pelosi was correct to say that protesters had carried swastikas.

Read some of the letters we receive in our new feature: FactCheck Mailbag.

And you can follow us on Twitter. And we're on Facebook, too.

This message was sent by FactCheck.org, a project of the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center . It was sent from: FactCheck.org, 320 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045.
Forward to a Friend

About FactCheck.orgOur Mission We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit "consumer advocate" for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases. Our goal is to apply the [...]more →
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.factcheck.org . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

* * * * * POLITICO
Playbook Daily Update
An Excerpt
'... SPORTS IS BAD FOR BUSINESS ...'
TOP TALKER -- N.Y. Times Sports front, 'Money Walks: In Hard Times, Sports Is Bad for Business,' by Ken Belson: 'Baseball's deliberate pace and the increasingly lavish suites and box seats have made major league games an ideal setting for doing business. But for bankers, brokers and others in the financial industry, accepting an invitation to a game has fast become taboo. Not only are companies cutting their entertainment budgets, but they are also facing increased scrutiny from regulators, shareholders and politicians - pressures that have forced workers even at healthy firms to avoid being seen at sporting events. This is particularly true in New York, the capital of the financial industry, where the most expensive seats at the new Yankee Stadium and Citi Field, or at the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center in Queens, home of the United States Open, far exceed what many firms allow employees to accept from clients.

'In better times, many companies casually enforced entertainment guidelines, which typically prohibit employees from accepting tickets worth more than $100. In the past year, however, as the government has spent hundreds of billions of dollars rescuing financial firms like Bank of America and Citi, companies have begun to enforce policies more strictly through ethics seminars, e-mail reminders and dismissals. Corporate compliance departments and the Internal Revenue Service are also doing more to ensure that the business entertainment taking place at games is tangible, not tangential. 'The seats behind home plate, no one wants to be seen there,' said John Lieberman, the former chairman of the entertainment and sports committee of the New York State Society of Certified Public Accountants. ... asketball and hockey teams are trying to find takers for suites that were not renewed by financial firms. ... Ticket brokers are also scrambling. ... Some season-ticket holders who have found it hard to use their seats to entertain clients, and who have had trouble reselling their tickets online, are considering canceling their plans next year. ... In an internal memo sent in July, JPMorgan Asset Management told employees in its Institutional Americas division that 'in light of the current regulatory environment,' they would not be allowed to entertain clients at the United States Open tennis tournament this month.'
From
Mark Allen's
POLITICO PLAYBOOK
http://www.politico.com/playbook
[B]* * * * * * *

[Saundra Hummer]

+++++
PETA
Help animals on Chinese fur farms
Help us drastically reduce the number of dogs, cats, and other animals slaughtered for their skin on Chinese fur farms and around the world. Donate now
Dear Saundra,

Every year, millions of individual animals, including more than 2 million cats and hundreds of thousands of dogs, are killed for their fur in China. Some are strays, and countless others are companions who once shared homes with people who loved and cared for them before the animals were rounded up—often with metal tongs around their necks—and tossed, screaming, into a crate.

PHOTO A timid young rabbit waits, terrified, in a cramped, filthy wire cage. Suddenly, a hand reaches in and roughly grabs her. Her neck is broken. She is then tossed, still convulsing, into a barrel. When it's filled, the barrel is wheeled into another room, where she is skinned. PHOTO: Go on site to view and to see the yellow tiger striped tabby awaiting it's fate in a cage.
We were in a chidrens store, looking about, when I walked over to the stuffed animal cage, and there were little stuffed animals covered with real cat fur, yellow tabby cat fur. and then there was black dog hair that looked to be from a Labrador. I was just sickened by what I was seeing. We complained to the girl waiting on us, she was as upset about it as we were. I was really surprised at what I was seeing, that Carter Childrens Clothing (the brand name of the clothing) and it's outlet,would be selling such items. I don't always agree with Peta, just the opposite, but, this is something I would like to see ended. However, other than a boycot, how does one stop China from doing anything?

Have you seen the video of the St. Bernard crosses they are raising for food? The scientist who headed the project resigned, as his subjects, this great dog breed, became attached to him and he to them. He was amazed at their friendliness and devotion, their sweet nature. He couldn't bear to see his friends sent to slaughter for food and for fur.

Greed is astounding isn't it? SRH
This horrific abuse is happening right now to countless rabbits … and cats and dogs … on Chinese fur farms and in Chinese markets. Won't you please help us stop this massive cruelty?

China is one of the world's largest fur suppliers, and more than 95 percent of the country's finished garments are exported—with many ending up in North America. And as we now know, Chinese companies have been known to deliberately mislabel cat and dog fur as "Asian jackal," "rabbit," or "raccoon" to fool consumers. Every fur-trimmed collar or other fur item from China, regardless of the kind of animal slaughtered to manufacture it, is the product of cruelty on a truly massive scale. And we must combat it!

We need your help right now. Please make an urgently needed donation to PETA today and help us stop the horrific slaughter of cats, dogs, and other animals for their skin.

The suffering on Chinese fur farms involves all sorts of animals, all of whom are deeply frightened. Powerful video footage taken during a PETA Asia-Pacific undercover investigation documents the misery of rabbits condemned to a short, miserable life and painful death at the hands of grubby fur-farm operators. The investigator saw rabbits who were crammed into filthy cages covered with urine and feces, where they could only wait, petrified, as workers made their way along the tiers of cages.

The rabbits were yanked out of their cages by their ears or legs. The workers aimed at their heads with handheld electrical devices—often multiple times—as the animals kicked and screamed. The rabbits were then hung upside down and were crudely decapitated. The farm that the investigator visited has 11,000 cages and will be responsible for the slaughter of more than 600,000 animals this year alone in the quest to satisfy the demand for their skins.

Through difficult investigations similar to this one and through decades of relentless campaigning, PETA has saved many thousands of rabbits, dogs, cats, and other animals by convincing consumers and corporations to reject all fur. We've successfully persuaded some of the world's leading designers and retailers—including Ann Taylor, Calvin Klein, Polo Ralph Lauren, and Tommy Hilfiger—to adopt permanent no-fur policies, and we've made fur so synonymous with suffering that furs are no longer considered "luxury goods," and fur prices have seen record lows.

While we've accomplished much, the wholesale slaughter of so many animals for their fur in China is an urgent matter. To help these animals, we must educate consumers, corporations, and even governments about the pain that goes into every piece of fur trim and every fur cat toy produced in China. That is only part of our work, but it is a vital part.

Please contribute to our work for dogs, cats, and all animals by making a special gift today.

On behalf of all animals, especially those confined and killed for their skins in all parts of the world, thank you.

Kind regards,

Ingrid E. Newkirk
President

P.S. With the fall fashion season just around the corner, we need to do everything we can to make sure designers, retailers, and consumers know the horrific extent of the animal suffering that takes place on fur farms in China and around the world. Please rush your online donation to PETA today. Together, let's save more animals from being cruelly mistreated and killed for their skin.

This e-mail was sent by PETA, 501 Front St., Norfolk, VA 23510 USA
http://www.peta.org/+++++++

[internet]

i don't even know what the fuck is going on in this thread

[Saundra Hummer]

i don't even know what the fuck is going on in this thread


What's going on? Need an explanation?

Anything at all is what's going on.

No hijacking here.

It's like this, this is how it is, it's about whatever it is you want to go on.

:wohoo:

[RonF]

i don't even know what the fuck is going on in this thread

No one expects you to understand. :rolleyes:

[RonF]

For those of us who knew the Bush/Cheney regime was lying, this comes as no surprise. Amazing that Ridge decided to finally tell the truth. A little late, Tom.

Tom Ridge: I Was Pressured To Raise Terror Alert To Help Bush Win
First Posted: 08-20-09 11:20 AM

In a new book, former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge reveals new details on politicization under President Bush, reports US News & World Report's Paul Bedard. Among other things, Ridge admits that he was pressured to raise the terror alert to help Bush win re-election in 2004.

Ridge was never invited to sit in on National Security Council meetings; was "blindsided" by the FBI in morning Oval Office meetings because the agency withheld critical information from him; found his urgings to block Michael Brown from being named head of the emergency agency blamed for the Hurricane Katrina disaster ignored; and was pushed to raise the security alert on the eve of President Bush's re-election, something he saw as politically motivated and worth resigning over.
Dave Weigel, writing for the Washington Independent, notes that in the past, Ridge has denied manipulating security information for political reasons. In 2004, for example, he said, "We don't do politics in the Department of Homeland Security."

The Bush administration was forced to admit in the days after the 2004 alert that it was based on intelligence three or four years old. Officials then claimed there was a previously unmentioned "separate stream of intelligence" that justified the warning -- but offered little tangible information to support their new story..

ThinkProgress recalls, the AP reported that "even 'some senior Republicans' privately questioned Ridge's timing of a terror alert that came just three days after the Democratic National Convention."

[Saundra Hummer]

For those of us who knew the Bush/Cheney regime was lying, this comes as no surprise. Amazing that Ridge decided to finally tell the truth. A little late, Tom.

Tom Ridge: I Was Pressured To Raise Terror Alert To Help Bush Win
First Posted: 08-20-09 11:20 AM

In a new book, former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge reveals new details on politicization under President Bush, reports US News & World Report's Paul Bedard. Among other things, Ridge admits that he was pressured to raise the terror alert to help Bush win re-election in 2004.

Ridge was never invited to sit in on National Security Council meetings; was "blindsided" by the FBI in morning Oval Office meetings because the agency withheld critical information from him; found his urgings to block Michael Brown from being named head of the emergency agency blamed for the Hurricane Katrina disaster ignored; and was pushed to raise the security alert on the eve of President Bush's re-election, something he saw as politically motivated and worth resigning over.
Dave Weigel, writing for the Washington Independent, notes that in the past, Ridge has denied manipulating security information for political reasons. In 2004, for example, he said, "We don't do politics in the Department of Homeland Security."

The Bush administration was forced to admit in the days after the 2004 alert that it was based on intelligence three or four years old. Officials then claimed there was a previously unmentioned "separate stream of intelligence" that justified the warning -- but offered little tangible information to support their new story..

ThinkProgress recalls, the AP reported that "even 'some senior Republicans' privately questioned Ridge's timing of a terror alert that came just three days after the Democratic National Convention."

It was all out there in front of us if we took the time to see the forest for the trees.

Not everyone was being fooled. Those of us who did speak up were thought to be worthy of tar and feathering, remember Ron? It's all laughable now, but for the mess it all caused. We're living in it, and it isn't pretty.

[Saundra Hummer]

+++++++HEALTH CARE
KNOW THIS:
INSURANCE COMPANIES
POCKET 1/3 OF MONEY
CHARGED FOR HEALTH CARE
SRHThe Health Care Mess: Who’s To Blame?By
Bernie Horn
August 20, 2009
7:05am ET

August has been a frustrating month for progressives who seek quality, affordable health care for every American. Why does the Administration vacillate? Why does the media legitimize the opinions of right-wing liars and kooks? Why can’t congressional leaders get their act together? Most of all, who’s to blame?

Not President Obama. Sure, the White House has made its share of mistakes, but they have been minor. The Obama strategy has been consistent and firmly based on political realities. One reality is that Obama cannot dictate the details of legislation to members of Congress, even to loyal Democrats. The Administration’s job is to help, guide, and cajole lawmakers to craft the most effective plan that can possibly be enacted into law—and the measure that has taken shape in the U.S. House fits that description. As a former Senator, Barack Obama knows that no one, not even the President, can order around U.S. Senators. Each Senator has his or her own political kingdom, and insists on being treated as royalty. It is not Obama’s fault that a handful of Democratic Senators are not, and never were, progressives. More about that in a moment.

Not “the Democrats.” Let’s be reasonable. No one controls the whole Democratic Party. But Speaker Pelosi and her leadership team have done a pretty impressive job of getting House Democrats to support the stimulus, the FY2010 budget, and a strong health care bill. The “Blue Dog” caucus of Democrats remains a stumbling block. But Pelosi and her whips have already shown their power and determination—when push comes to shove they will succeed in passing a pretty strong health care plan. Sadly, the Senate is a different matter. Senator Reid has perhaps been too patient while Senator Baucus fiddles around with phony bipartisanship. In any case, the majority of Senate Democrats have, so far, worked faithfully for a real health care solution.

Not the progressives. You never thought we progressives were to blame, of course. But the media have recently suggested that the proponents of a public health care option are holding up legislative progress. The Washington Post even found some unnamed source in the White House to say:

I don't understand why the left of the left has decided that this is their Waterloo… We’ve gotten to this point where health care on the left is determined by the breadth of the public option. I don’t understand how that has become the measure of whether what we achieve is health-care reform. It’s a mystifying thing…

Okay, maybe some blame is appropriate here. During the past year, what planet was this spokesperson on? Progressives have made it entirely clear why the public health care option is essential—and Barack Obama agreed during the campaign! The President is now going around the country arguing for the public option. In poll after poll, Americans overwhelmingly support a public option—we are fighting for the will of the people. What’s so mysterious about that?

Not the Republicans. Well yes, of course they're at fault for opposing health care reform. But really, who’s surprised? If there was any hope of Republicans working in a bipartisan fashion this year, that hope was shattered by their irresponsible obstructionism during the stimulus debate. As Campaign for America’s Future co-director Robert Borosage made very clear, the vision of bipartisan health care legislation has been proven a fantasy:

The effort to gain bipartisan support was torpedoed by the leading Republican negotiator, Senator Charles Grassley, when he revealed his true colors by embracing the vicious inanity about “death panels.” He aligned himself with the wingnuts, and there is simply no reason or way to negotiate with lunacy…. More to the point, the Republican National Committee scorns [any reform] as a “government take over of health care.”

The point is, except for a very few reasonable GOP Senators like Olympia Snowe, we never were going to get Republican cooperation. The Republicans never were the solution.

Not the right-wing crazies. A frantic fringe of militants are being mobilized and used by the likes of Dick Armey and Newt Gingrich—who themselves are acting on behalf of wealthy GOP interests—to shout down Democrats, progressives, moderates, and even well-intentioned conservatives. We know that these people do not represent the silent majority. They are merely the same old John Birch Society-types who continually shriek absurdities (e.g. “Get us out of the U.N.!), but who are—for good reason—almost always ignored. Except to the extent that any wavering Democrats take them seriously, the tea-baggers are irrelevant. We need to answer their lies and de-legitimize their hate speech. But they are not our focus.

A very small group of so-called moderate Democrats are to blame.

This legislation, or at least much of it, requires a 60 vote majority to pass the Senate. At best, we might hope to persuade two or three Senate Republicans to support it. Sadly, we cannot count on our long-time health care leader, Senator Edward Kennedy, to be available for the vote (and an unusual provision in Massachusetts law makes it impossible for him to be quickly replaced).

So we need the vote of nearly every Senate Democrat and a handful currently stand in the way, including the likes of Max Baucus (MT), Evan Bayh (IN), Ben Nelson (NE), Mary Landrieu (LA), and Blanche Lincoln (AR). None of these Democrats ever professed to be a liberal or progressive. Their voters elected them as moderates or conservatives. We think the right thing to do is obvious. But it’s not obvious to them.

We progressives need to persuade them (and a few House Blue Dogs as well) that real health care reform is not liberal or conservative, it is neither too expensive nor too radical, and it is no danger to the market system—rather, it will help businesses both large and small. The President, congressional leaders, and grassroots activists need to focus on these few target Democrats and make them understand that the progressive vision for health care reform is essential—it is the only way—to provide for the security of all Americans, our children and their children.

The challenge is clear. Go get ‘em.

The writer is a Senior Fellow at Campaign for America’s Future and author of the book, “Framing the Future: How Progressive Values Can Win Elections and Influence People”. + + + A band of doctors from the Pacific Northwest are taking to the roads in a motorhome to educate the public as to what is going on in the health care debacle, as they are hoping to change our health care for the better, getting insurance companies out of medical decisions and other health care intrusions on their part.

Be watching for them in your neighborhoods, in your state.

They believe it is the insurance companies who have ruined medical benefits, getting proper treatments, and inflated health care costs beyond most of us having the capacity to pay for it. SRH http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2009083420/health-care-mess-who-s-blame
+++++++++++++

[Saundra Hummer]

. . . . . Progressive Breakfast:
"By Any Legislative Means Necessary"
By
Bill Scher
August 20, 2009
The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day.

WH Re-Engages Grassroots On Health Care Today more »

More »»
LA Times previews today's presidential outreach on health care: [1] "Obama will hold a strategy session today with many of his supporters from the presidential campaign, a massive army that has yet to make its weight felt on healthcare. He is also scheduled to sit down with one of the country's more conservative radio talk-show hosts for a broadcast from the White House."

Politico story on problems with pro-reform grassroots efforts buries fact that tide is changing: [2] "Organizing for America still reigns as the biggest grassroots movement in the nation -- and its supporters are now beginning to outnumber opponents at more town hall meetings. Obama's call to arms today could accelerate that trend."

President calls out liars during conference call with pro-reform faith leaders. NYT: [3] "I know there's been a lot of misinformation in this debate, and there are some folks out there who are frankly bearing false witness ... These struggles always boil down to a contest between hope and fear ... That was true in the debate over Social Security, when F.D.R. was accused of being a socialist. That was true when J.F.K. and Lyndon Johnson tried to pass Medicare. And it's true in this debate today."

Baucus caucus to meet today via conference call. NYT: [3] "Plans for them to meet in person over the break have evidently been shelved."

President Senator Chuck Grassley decrees we should pass a stripped-down bill. W. Post: [4] "[Grassley] said Wednesday that the outpouring of anger at town hall meetings this month has fundamentally altered the nature of the debate and convinced him that lawmakers should consider drastically scaling back the scope of the effort."

Strategy to demand simple majority vote demanded by PCCC's Adam Green in Politico [5] "The next step should be putting the pressure on Harry Reid, telling him to forget about reconciliation and instead to demand that Senate Democrats unite behind cloture and give this President an up-or-down vote on his proposals."

Reid spokesman hints to CNN they may just do that: [6] ""The White House still prefers a bipartisan bill, and neither the White House nor the Democratic leadership has made a decision to pursue reconciliation. We will not make a decision to pursue reconciliation until we have exhausted efforts to produce a bipartisan bill. However, patience is not unlimited and we are determined to get something done this year by any legislative means necessary."

WSJ says Dems are considering passing part of the bill using budget reconciliation: [7] "In recent days, Democratic leaders have concluded they can pack more of their health overhaul plans under this procedure, congressional aides said. They might even be able to include a public insurance plan to compete with private insurers, a key demand of the party's liberal wing, but that remains uncertain. Other parts of the Democratic plan would be put to a separate vote in the Senate, including most of the insurance regulations that have been central to Mr. Obama's health-care message. That bill would likely set new rules for insurers, such as requiring they accept anyone, regardless of pre-existing medical conditions. This portion of the health-care overhaul has already drawn some Republican support and wouldn't involve new spending, leading Democratic leaders to believe they could clear the 60-vote hurdle."

[B]Howard Dean responds to criticism from W. Post's Steve Pearlstein on Wonk Room: [8] "Real health care reform that includes a new public health insurance option would give Americans a real choice and not reward for-profit health insurers with 47 milllion new customers. Real health care reform that includes a new public health insurance option would cut out the administrative waste of private insurers and begin changing the way health care is delivered. Real health care reform that includes a new public health insurance option could adopt the kind of payment reforms that would start to 'hold down long-term growth in health spending' and encourage providers to deliver care more efficiently. We know that premiums in the public option would be about 10 percent lower and that a real robust plan that piggy backs off of Medicare's infrastructure could save us somewhere between $75 billion and $150 billion over 10 years."

HuffPost notes WH still won't draw line on public option: [9] "White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said on Wednesday that President Obama is unalterably opposed to a health care bill that raises taxes on those making less than $250,000. But Gibbs would not draw a similar line in the sand when it came a bill that lacks a public insurance option."

Obama faces a incendiary right-wing of historic intensity. LA Times notes: [10] "President George W. Bush was routinely portrayed by critics as a warmonger, a dunce and even Hitler. President Clinton was accused, among other things, of orchestrating the murder of his friend and Commerce secretary, Ron Brown; covering up a drug-running ring in rural Arkansas, and complicity in the Oklahoma City courthouse bombing. What is different this time, [SPLC's Mark] Potok said, is the involvement of 'mainstream aiders and abettors' like former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and ex-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who promoted the false charge that Obama's health plan would euthanize senior citizens, as well as widely watched TV personalities who question Obama's citizenship and, thus, his legitimacy as president. Back in the Clinton days, those kinds of fabrications played mostly on the fringes of political debate and dark corners of the Internet."

TPMDC uncovers memo showing major health insurer pushing employees to join right-wing Tea Party rallies: [11] "Last week, UnitedHealth Group--the second largest health insurance company in the country--sent out a letter to its employees urging them to call UHG's United for Health Reform Advocacy Hotline to speak with an advocacy specialist about health care reform. The advocacy specialist, according to the letter, is there to help UHG employees write personalized messages to elected officials, and to arm them with talking points to use at local events in order to better oppose the public health insurance option." EARLIER: BusinessWeek details UnitedHealth ties to Blue Dog Dems. [12]

While obstructionists delay, more Americans face loss of insurance. Bloomberg: [13] "Unemployed workers facing the end of a U.S. subsidy that pays 65 percent of their group health insurance premiums may be forced to find individual policies. Those who need it most might not qualify. Diane Nelson, 48, of Riverview, Florida, has terminal lung cancer and worries she'll have to stop medical treatments once her Cobra subsidy ends. 'I have no idea what I'm going to do come December,' said Nelson, whose husband lost his job in February. 'We've been paying $377 a month. It will go up to $1,100.' ... The economic stimulus plan passed in February included a $24.7 billion subsidy to reduce health-care costs for the growing number of fired workers. It covers 65 percent of a monthly Cobra premium for up to nine months. Cobra enrollments have doubled since the subsidy began ... The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates about 7 million people will use it for some part of 2009."

Links:
[1] http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-obama-outreach20-2009aug20,0,2954896.story?track=rss
[2] http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26277_Page2.html#ixzz0OjAhieTn
[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/20/us/politics/20obama.html
[4] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/19/AR2009081904125.html?wprss=rss_politics
[5] http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=3508434E-18FE-70B2-A81AB0F906049A03
[6] http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/19/reid-spox-patience-is-not-unlimited/
[7] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125072573848144647.html
[8] http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/08/19/howards-post/
[9] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/19/white-house-draws-line-in_n_263323.html
[10] http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-demonize20-2009aug20,0,2722723.story?track=rss
[11] http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/major-health-insurance-company-urges-employees-to-attend-tea-parties.php
[12] http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_33/b4143034820260.htm
[13] http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aJrjiHkpr7lk

more progressive breakfast »
http://www.ourfuture.org/category/hidden-grouping/progressive-breakfast . . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

.
freepress*

HELP US EXPOSE ASTROTURF
Dear Richard R.,

Net Neutrality is under attack from "astroturf" groups -- phony grassroots organizations funded by powerful phone and cable companies to spread lies and misinformation.

These hired guns are painting Net Neutrality and the Internet Freedom Preservation Act (HR 3458) as an attempt to "socialize the Internet." They call people like you and me "extremists" for supporting a free-flowing Web.

Their rhetoric is frozen in the Cold War era. All Net Neutrality really does is protect market innovation, consumer choice and free speech online.

Now we're fighting back. Today, Free Press launched Astroturf: Exposing the Fake Grassroots -- an interactive online tool that reveals the money behind front groups like Americans for Prosperity, the Heartland Institute and Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks:

[Mighty phone and cable companies have controlled Internet policy in Washington for years. They set up astroturf groups and launch deceptive "consumer" Web sites to fool politicians and the media into thinking that everyday people support their harmful policy positions.

It's time to set the record straight. Free Press has pulled together the SavetheInternet.com Coalition, which now represents more than 800 groups, from the Christian Coalition to MoveOn.org and the SEIU to the American Library Association. More than 1.5 million activists -- from all walks of life and across the political spectrum -- have signed our petition in support of Net Neutrality.

Help us pull back the curtain on astroturf and tell people the truth about Net Neutrality.

Expose the Shills and Front Groups
Go on-site to gain access to this report
We need everyone -- including the media and members of Congress -- to learn about these phony front groups. You can forward the widget to your friends, and we've made it easy to post it on your own Web site or blog.

Thanks for your help!

Timothy Karr
Campaign Director
Free Press

www.freepress.net
www.savetheinternet.com
Check out 'Astroturf: Exposing the Fake Grassroots'
http://www.freepress.net/astroturf
Use the Internet to Expose the Shills
Go on-site to access this function
http://www.freepress.net/astroturf
This interactive tool pulls back the curtain on phony "astroturf" groups and exposes the people paid to spin and misinform the public.

It’s time to expose the astroturf groups. Spread the word. Copy the code below to post the widget on your blog or Web site.
iframe src="http://tools.freepress.net/telco/Main.html" width="450" height="375" style="border:0;background:transparent;" frameborder="0" border="0"><!-- The logos depicted in this widget are the property of the respective corporations listed. --></iframe>
Fight Astroturf on Facebook and Twitter
Go on-site to gain access to all functions
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

[Saundra Hummer]

.
.^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^I started writing a note to you and it turned into an article, one of the most important I think of written, out of the close to 1500 articles and diaries I've posted since starting OpEdNews.com

American Justice is At Risk. What Are You Doing About it?

Please read it and send it to your lists, to Rachel Maddow and Olbermann, Schultz, Ratigan, and every other media outlet you can think of. If this issue were in front of the media, the right wingers blocking health care reform would slink back into their holes.

please read it and take action.

thanks,

rob kall
American Justice is At Risk.
What Are You Doing About it?
by
Rob Kall
www.opednews.com

The health reform debate is roaring, as it should be, and we are engaged in pressing the spineless Dems – including Obama – to stand up to the insurance companies and rescue American health care. While we are enaged in this one noble battle, we are in danger of distracting ourselves from another urgent situation-- the toxic US Attorneys appointed by Bush are still in place and their victims are in jail.

These attorneys have engaged in horrific abuses of justice, engaging in serial prosecutory misconduct that abused the legal system. They jailed innocent people, bullied elected officials into quitting their elected positions or withdrew from political races. They threatened the children and parents and families of their targets, forcing them to chose between letting their family members become victims or pleading guilty. The judges in the cases-- Bush appointees-- often allowed evidence and processes that, ultimately, other Republican judges reversed and rejected. We are talking about heinous, criminal misconduct that has turned good citizens into cowering victims of tyranny.

These appointments were the brainchild of Karl Rove, and their express purpose was to pursue political prosecutions of mid level Democratic office holders or activists and contributors-- people who would fly under the radar. The prosecutions took place in less than 20 "swing states" where elections had been close. The plan appears to have been to solidify the states as Republican through abusive prosecutions that took out through resignation, imprisonment or attacks on integrity some elected officials, and intimidated others. We don't know how many were threatened who were never prosecuted. We do know that over 700 were victims who were identified.

It is beyond outrageous. It is obscene that Obama and Holder have not already removed these sociopathic criminals from the judicial system. I have some ideas why: Why Holder and Obama have not fired the Bush Appointed, Rove-Vetted DOJ Attorneys (LINK: Go on-site to access)

American justice is not at risk, it is being abused and corrupted as you read this because Holder has not removed these vile criminals from their positions in the DOJ.

If you are not already familiar with this situation, the background is in this 50-minute video by John McTiernan, director of Die Hard 1 and 3, Hunt for Red October and Predator: The Political Prosecutions of Karl Rove. (LINK: Go on-site to gain access to this Video)
OpEdNews.com will be on a mission to set this wrong right-- and we hope you will help. (I never recommend videos, but this one is sooo important. You will not regret watching it.)
When Thomas Jefferson faced similar prospects, he fired the attorneys, freed the wrongly- prosecuted and imprisoned and began impeachment hearings. We expect nothing less of President Obama. Not only US Attorneys but judges have abused their office for politically-motivated witch hunts. The most famous case is Don Siegelman (LINK-Go on-site to access), former Governor of Alabama, who became a target of Rove's machine after he had the audacity to ask for a recount in the suspicious 2002 election in which he ‘lost' to Bob Riley. This must not stand. As John McTiernan says, Americans must not reach a point where they fear the judicial system and that has happened to over 700 victims of judicial and prosecutorial misconduct.

Obama has invited us to push him. Let's take him at his word! Lives and families have been destroyed by the monsters still in their jobs as prosecutors and judges. Obama, through Holder, must insist on investigations and prosecutions.

Dana Jill Simpson was an Alabama Republican who worked for the Riley campaign, until she became aware that Rove was concocting charges of ‘corruption' against Siegelman in order to influence the election. She bravely came forward with this story, but her house has since burned down, and she has repeatedly been threatened. When Karl Rove lied about his role in the Siegelman case, she wrote this article; My Response to the article "Closing in on Rove". (LINK-Go on-site to gain access)
There are over 700 victims, like her, who deserve justice.

Ironically, if these shameful bush initiated, GOP backed practices were brought to the public's attention, the right wingers who are now afflicting the Obama Health Reform efforts like swarms of gnats would be in retreat, doing all they could to clean up their image and distance themselves from these horrendous perpetrations.

Meanwhile, Governor Don Siegelman still awaits sentencing and incarceration. How can Holder allow this to stand when he has released Alaska's senator Stevens who was clearly a red herring meant to distract from the otherwise massively partisan witch hunt Rove directed in his corruption of the DOJ?

The fact that the attorneys who perpetrated such injustices are still at their jobs, still threatening people is insupportable. We must create a huge uproar, a massive demand from all corners of the media, from the blogosphere, that he fire the remaining attorneys immediately.

Some argue that the Republicans, like Jeff Sessions, are holding back appointments of replacements. That is a pathetic argument. You don't leave a fox guarding the henhouse just because you haven't found a solid guard dog yet. First, you get rid of the fox.

Judges, too, appointed by Bush, engaged in totally inappropriate, illegal, judicial misconduct, playeing a key role in partisan prosecutions. They must be investigated, impeached and prosecuted. Those who are found guilty should be imprisoned.

Rob Kall is executive editor, publisher and site architect of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, more...) Go on-site to gain access to this article and several other topical issues of the day. Just click on the following URL/LINKS:http://www.opednews.com/articles/American-Justice-is-At-Ris-by-Rob-Kall-090821-897.html
MORE:http://www.opednews.com/flyer/news_20090821_1.html Pass this along to anyone and everyone. SRH ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

[Saundra Hummer]

.^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Republicans, Religion
and the
Triumph of Unreason
By:
Johann Hari
Visit article original
@ The Independent UK
Wednesday 19 August 2009

PHOTO
Barack Obama's presidency has spurred an onslaught of bizarre reactions from the right wing. (Photo: Reuters)
http://www.truthout.org/082209A?n How do they train themselves to be so impervious to reality?

Something strange has happened in America in the nine months since Barack Obama was elected. It has best been summarised by the comedian Bill Maher: "The Democrats have moved to the right, and the Republicans have moved to a mental hospital."

The election of Obama - a black man with an anti-conservative message - as a successor to George W. Bush has scrambled the core American right's view of their country. In their gut, they saw the US as a white-skinned, right-wing nation forever shaped like Sarah Palin.

When this image was repudiated by a majority of Americans in a massive landslide, it simply didn't compute. How could this have happened? How could the cry of "Drill, baby, drill" have been beaten by a supposedly big government black guy? So a streak that has always been there in the American right's world-view - to deny reality, and argue against a demonic phantasm of their own creation - has swollen. Now it is all they can see.

Since Obama's rise, the US right has been skipping frantically from one fantasy to another, like a person in the throes of a mental breakdown. It started when they claimed he was a secret Muslim, and - at the same time - that he was a member of a black nationalist church that hated white people. Then, once these arguments were rejected and Obama won, they began to argue that he was born in Kenya and secretly smuggled into the United States as a baby, and the Hawaiian authorities conspired to fake his US birth certificate. So he is ineligible to rule and the office of President should pass to... the Republican runner-up, John McCain.

These aren't fringe phenomena: a Research 200 poll found that a majority of Republicans and Southerners say Obama wasn't born in the US, or aren't sure. A steady steam of Republican congressmen have been jabbering that Obama has "questions to answer". No amount of hard evidence - here's his birth certificate, here's a picture of his mother heavily pregnant in Hawaii, here's the announcement of his birth in the local Hawaiian paper - can pierce this conviction.

This trend has reached its apotheosis this summer with the Republican Party now claiming en masse that Obama wants to set up "death panels" to euthanise the old and disabled. Yes: Sarah Palin really has claimed - with a straight face - that Barack Obama wants to kill her baby.

You have to admire the audacity of the right. Here's what's actually happening. The US is the only major industrialised country that does not provide regular healthcare to all its citizens. Instead, they are required to provide for themselves - and 50 million people can't afford the insurance. As a result, 18,000 US citizens die every year needlessly, because they can't access the care they require. That's equivalent to six 9/11s, every year, year on year. Yet the Republicans have accused the Democrats who are trying to stop all this death by extending healthcare of being "killers" - and they have successfully managed to put them on the defensive.

The Republicans want to defend the existing system, not least because they are given massive sums of money by the private medical firms who benefit from the deadly status quo. But they can't do so honestly: some 70 per cent of Americans say it is "immoral" to retain a medical system that doesn't cover all citizens. So they have to invent lies to make any life-saving extension of healthcare sound depraved.

A few months ago, a recent board member for several private health corporations called Betsy McCaughey reportedly noticed a clause in the proposed healthcare legislation that would pay for old people to see a doctor and write a living will. They could stipulate when (if at all) they would like care to be withdrawn. It's totally voluntary. Many people want it: I know I wouldn't want to be kept alive for a few extra months if I was only going to be in agony and unable to speak. But McCaughey started the rumour that this was a form of euthanasia, where old people would be forced to agree to death. This was then stretched to include the disabled, like Palin's youngest child, who she claimed would have to "justify" his existence. It was flatly untrue - but the right had their talking-point, Palin declared the non-existent proposals "downright evil", and they were off.

It's been amazingly successful. Now, every conversation about healthcare has to begin with a Democrat explaining at great length that, no, they are not in favour of killing the elderly - while Republicans get away with defending a status quo that kills 18,000 people a year. The hypocrisy was startling: when Sarah Palin was Governor of Alaska, she encouraged citizens there to take out living wills. Almost all the Republicans leading the charge against "death panels" have voted for living wills in the past. But the lie has done its work: a confetti of distractions has been thrown up, and support is leaking away from the plan that would save lives.

These increasingly frenzied claims have become so detached from reality that they often seem like black comedy. The right-wing magazine US Investors' Daily claimed that if Stephen Hawking had been British, he would have been allowed to die at birth by its "socialist" healthcare system. Hawking responded with a polite cough that he is British, and "I wouldn't be here without the NHS".

This tendency to simply deny inconvenient facts and invent a fantasy world isn't new; it's only becoming more heightened. It ran through the Bush years like a dash of bourbon in water. When it became clear that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, the US right simply claimed they had been shipped to Syria. When the scientific evidence for man-made global warming became unanswerable, they claimed - as one Republican congressman put it - that it was "the greatest hoax in human history", and that all the world's climatologists were "liars". The American media then presents itself as an umpire between "the rival sides", as if they both had evidence behind them.

It's a shame, because there are some areas in which a conservative philosophy - reminding us of the limits of grand human schemes, and advising caution - could be a useful corrective. But that's not what these so-called "conservatives" are providing: instead, they are pumping up a hysterical fantasy that serves as a thin skin covering some raw economic interests and base prejudices.

For many of the people at the top of the party, this is merely cynical manipulation. One of Bush's former advisers, David Kuo, has said the President and Karl Rove would mock evangelicals as "nuts" as soon as they left the Oval Office. But the ordinary Republican base believe this stuff. They are being tricked into opposing their own interests through false fears and invented demons. Last week, one of the Republicans sent to disrupt a healthcare town hall started a fight and was injured - and then complained he had no health insurance. I didn't laugh; I wanted to weep.

How do they train themselves to be so impervious to reality? It begins, I suspect, with religion. They are taught from a young age that it is good to have "faith" - which is, by definition, a belief without any evidence to back it up. You don't have "faith" that Australia exists, or that fire burns: you have evidence. You only need "faith" to believe the untrue or unprovable. Indeed, they are taught that faith is the highest aspiration and most noble cause. Is it any surprise this then percolates into their political views? Faith-based thinking spreads and contaminates the rational.

Up to now, Obama has not responded well to this onslaught of unreason. He has had a two-pronged strategy: conciliate the elite economic interests, and joke about the fanatical fringe they are stirring up. He has (shamefully) assured the pharmaceutical companies that an expanded healthcare system will not use the power of government as a purchaser to bargain down drug prices, while wryly saying in public that he "doesn't want to kill Grandma". Rather than challenging these hard interests and bizarre fantasies aggressively, he has tried to flatter and soothe them.

This kind of mania can't be co-opted: it can only be overruled. Sometimes in politics you will have enemies, and they must be democratically defeated. The political system cannot be gummed up by a need to reach out to the maddest people or the greediest constituencies. There is no way to expand healthcare without angering Big Pharma and the Republicaloons. So be it. As Arianna Huffington put it, "It is as though, at the height of the civil rights movement, you thought you had to bring together Martin Luther King and George Wallace and make them agree. It's not how change happens."

However strange it seems, the Republican Party really is spinning off into a bizarre cult who believe Barack Obama is a baby-killer plotting to build death panels for the grannies of America. Their new slogan could be - shrill, baby, shrill.

MORE»
Go on-site to gain access http://www.truthout.org/082209A?n ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

[Saundra Hummer]

$ $ $ $ $ $ $
Why the Gang of Six
Is Deciding Health Care
for
Three Hundred Million of Us

$ $ $
By:
Robert Reich
Visit article original
@ Robert Reich's Blog
Friday 21 August 2009
PHOTO
Sen. Charles Grassley, a member of the "gang of six."
(Photo: AP) Go on-site to view

Last night, the so-called "gang of six" -- three Republican and three Democratic senators on the Senate Finance Committee -- met by conference call and, according to Senator Max Baucus, the committee's chair, reaffirmed their commitment "toward a bipartisan health-care reform bill" (read: less coverage and no public insurance option). The Washington Post reports that the senators shared tales from their home states, where some have been besieged by protesters angry about a potential government takeover of the nation's health care system.
It's come down to these six senators. The House has reported a bill as has another Senate committee, but all eyes are fixed on Senate Finance -- and on these three Dems and three Republicans, in particular. But who, exactly, anointed these six to decide the fate of the nation's health care?

I don't get it. Of the three Republicans in the gang, the senior senator is Charles Grassley. In recent weeks Grassley has refused to debunk the rumor that the House's health-care bill will spawn "death panels," empowered to decide whether the sick and old get to live or die. At an Iowa town meeting last Tuesday Grassley called the President and Speaker Nancy Pelosi "intellectually dishonest" for claiming the opposite. On Thursday Grassley told the Washington Post that Congress should scale back its efforts to overhaul health care in the wake of intense anger at town hall meetings. But -- wait -- the anger is largely about distortions such as the "death panels" that Grassley refuses to debunk.

This week on Fox News Grassley termed the House bill "the Pelosi Bill," and called it "a government takeover of heath care, exploding the deficit because it's not paid for and it's got high taxes in it."

I really don't get it. We have a Democratic president in the White House. Democrats control sixty votes in the Senate, enough to overcome a filibuster. It is possible to pass health care legislation through the Senate with 51 votes (that's what George W. Bush did with his tax cut plan). Democrats control the House. The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, is a tough lady. She has said there will be no health care reform bill without a public option.

So why does the fate of health care rest in Grassley's hands?

It's not even as if the gang represents America. The three Dems on the gang are from Montana, New Mexico, and North Dakota -- states that together account for just over 1 percent of Americans. The three Republicans are from Maine, Wyoming, and Iowa, which together account for 1.6 percent of the American population.

So, I repeat: Why has it come down to these six? Who anointed them? Apparently, the White House. At least that's what I'm repeatedly being told by sources both on the Hill and in the Administration. "The Finance Committee is where the action is. They'll tee-up the final bill," says someone who should know.

More by this author »
http://www.truthout.org/articles/by-author/external/Robert+Reich
http://www.truthout.org/082209D?n
It just couldn't be huge corporate interests driving their humane caring, and fiscal responsibility, now could it? SRH, ... and by the way, one doesn't have to be a cynic to clearly recognize their position for what it is. It isn't about the people, it's what we've all become so accustomed to, ...corporate & our own politician's greed. The well being of the American people be damned.
$ $ $ $ $ $ $

[Saundra Hummer]

+++++++++
Social Security Payments to ShrinkBy STEPHEN OHLEMACHER
AP
posted: 4 HOURS 29 MINUTES AGO WASHINGTON (Aug. 23)- Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise. The trustees who oversee Social Security are projecting there won't be a cost of living adjustment (COLA) for the next two years. That hasn't happened since automatic increases were adopted in 1975.

By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly.

"I will promise you, they count on that COLA," said Barbara Kennelly, a former Democratic congresswoman from Connecticut who now heads the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. "To some people, it might not be a big deal. But to seniors, especially with their health care costs, it is a big deal."

Cost of living adjustments are pegged to inflation, which has been negative this year, largely because energy prices are below 2008 levels.
Advocates say older people still face higher prices because they spend a disproportionate amount of their income on health care, where costs rise faster than inflation. Many also have suffered from declining home values and shrinking stock portfolios just as they are relying on those assets for income.

"For many elderly, they don't feel that inflation is low because their expenses are still going up," said David Certner, legislative policy director for AARP. "Anyone who has savings and investments has seen some serious losses."

About 50 million retired and disabled Americans receive Social Security benefits. The average monthly benefit for retirees is $1,153 this year. All beneficiaries received a 5.8 percent increase in January, the largest since 1982.

More than 32 million people are in the Medicare prescription drug program. Average monthly premiums are set to go from $28 this year to $30 next year, though they vary by plan. About 6 million people in the program have premiums deducted from their monthly Social Security payments, according to the Social Security Administration.

Millions of people with Medicare Part B coverage for doctors' visits also have their premiums deducted from Social Security payments. Part B premiums are expected to rise as well. But under the law, the increase cannot be larger than the increase in Social Security benefits for most recipients.

There is no such hold-harmless provision for drug premiums.

Kennelly's group wants Congress to increase Social Security benefits next year, even though the formula doesn't call for it. She would like to see either a 1 percent increase in monthly payments or a one-time payment of $150.

The cost of a one-time payment, a little less than $8 billion, could be covered by increasing the amount of income subjected to Social Security taxes, Kennelly said. Workers only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,800 of income, a limit that rises each year with the average national wage.

But the limit only increases if monthly benefits increase.

Critics argue that Social Security recipients shouldn't get an increase when inflation is negative. They note that recipients got a big increase in January — after energy prices had started to fall. They also note that Social Security recipients received one-time $250 payments in the spring as part of the government's economic stimulus package.

Consumer prices are down from 2008 levels, giving Social Security recipients more purchasing power, even if their benefits stay the same, said Andrew G. Biggs, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank.

"Seniors may perceive that they are being hurt because there is no COLA, but they are in fact not getting hurt," Biggs said. "Congress has to be able to tell people they are not getting everything they want."

Social Security is also facing long-term financial problems. The retirement program is projected to start paying out more money than it receives in 2016. Without changes, the retirement fund will be depleted in 2037, according to the Social Security trustees' annual report this year.

President Barack Obama has said he would like tackle Social Security next year, after Congress finishes work on health care, climate change and new financial regulations.

Lawmakers are preoccupied by health care, making it difficult to address other tough issues. Advocates for older people hope their efforts will get a boost in October, when the Social Security Administration officially announces that there will not be an increase in benefits next year.

"I think a lot of seniors do not know what's coming down the pike, and I believe that when they hear that, they're going to be upset," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who is working on a proposal for one-time payments for Social Security recipients.

"It is my view that seniors are going to need help this year, and it would not be acceptable for Congress to simply turn its back," he said.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press
http://money.aol.com/article/social-security-payments-to-shrink-in/635285?icid=main|htmlws-main|dl1|link4|http%3A%2F%2Fmoney.aol.com%2Farticl e%2Fsocial-security-payments-to-shrink-in%2F635285 +++++++++++++

[Saundra Hummer]

.
+++++++++++ Appendix May Be Useful Organ After AllBy
CHARLES Q. CHOI
LiveScience Posted:
14 HOURS 7 MINUTES AGO(Aug. 24) -- The body's appendix has long been thought of as nothing more than a worthless evolutionary artifact, good for nothing save a potentially lethal case of inflammation.

Now researchers suggest the appendix is a lot more than a useless remnant. Not only was it recently proposed to actually possess a critical function, but scientists now find it appears in nature a lot more often than before thought. And it's possible some of this organ's ancient uses could be recruited by physicians to help the human body fight disease more effectively.
Skip over this content
APGo on-site to view exampleThe appendix is a slimy dead-end sac that hangs between the small and large intestines. Scientists long believed it to be a useless remnant, but new research suggests it could have a critical function.
Skip over this content In a way, the idea that the appendix is an organ whose time has passed has itself become a concept whose time is over.
"Maybe it's time to correct the textbooks," said researcher William Parker, an immunologist at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, N.C. "Many biology texts today still refer to the appendix as a 'vestigial organ.'"
Slimy Sac
The vermiform appendix is a slimy dead-end sac that hangs between the small and large intestines. No less than Charles Darwin first suggested that the appendix was a vestigial organ from an ancestor that ate leaves, theorizing that it was the evolutionary remains of a larger structure, called a cecum, which once was used by now-extinct predecessors for digesting food.

"Everybody likely knows at least one person who had to get their appendix taken out — slightly more than 1 in 20 people do — and they see there are no ill effects, and this suggests that you don't need it," Parker said.

However, Parker and his colleagues recently suggested that the appendix still served as a vital safehouse where good bacteria could lie in wait until they were needed to repopulate the gut after a nasty case of diarrhea. Past studies had also found the appendix can help make, direct and train white blood cells.

Now, in the first investigation of the appendix over the ages, Parker explained they discovered that it has been around much longer than anyone had suspected, hinting that it plays a critical function.

"The appendix has been around for at least 80 million years, much longer than we would estimate if Darwin's ideas about the appendix were correct," Parker said.
Moreover, the appendix appears in nature much more often than previously acknowledged. It has evolved at least twice, once among Australian marsupials such as the wombat and another time among rats, lemmings, meadow voles, Cape dune mole-rats and other rodents, as well as humans and certain primates.

"When species are divided into groups called 'families,' we find that more than 70 percent of all primate and rodent groups contain species with an appendix," Parker said.

Several living species, including several lemurs, certain rodents and the scaly-tailed flying squirrel, still have an appendix attached to a large cecum, which is used in digestion. Darwin had thought appendices appeared in only a small handful of animals.

"We're not saying that Darwin's idea of evolution is wrong — that would be absurd, as we're using his ideas on evolution to do this work," Parker told LiveScience. "It's just that Darwin simply didn't have the information we have now."

He added, "If Darwin had been aware of the species that have an appendix attached to a large cecum, and if he had known about the widespread nature of the appendix, he probably would not have thought of the appendix as a vestige of evolution."

What Causes Appendicitis?
Darwin was also not aware that appendicitis, or a potentially deadly inflammation of the appendix, is not due to a faulty appendix, but rather to cultural changes associated with industrialized society and improved sanitation, Parker said.

"Those changes left our immune systems with too little work and too much time their hands — a recipe for trouble," he said. "Darwin had no way of knowing that the function of the appendix could be rendered obsolete by cultural changes that included widespread use of sewer systems and clean drinking water."

Now that scientists are uncovering the normal function of the appendix, Parker notes a critical question to ask is whether anything can be done to prevent appendicitis. He suggests it might be possible to devise ways to incite our immune systems today in much the same manner that they were challenged back in the Stone Age.

"If modern medicine could figure out a way to do that, we would see far fewer cases of allergies, autoimmune disease, and appendicitis," Parker said.

The scientists detailed their findings online Aug. 12 in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology.

More from LiveScience
Eyeless Creature Discovered in Undersea Tunnel
New Theory Questions Why We Sleep
Powerful Ideas: Spray-On Solar Cells
Freak Hurricane Wave Strikes Maine
Gigantic Lightning Jets Shoot from Clouds to Space More Stories© Imaginova Corp. All rights reserved.

http://news.aol.com/science

http://news.aol.com/health

http://www.livescience.com2009-08-24 16:41:24 +++++++++

[Saundra Hummer]

***********Expert Fired Who Warned Levees Would Burst
Hurricane George, Four Years Later

By
Greg Palast
Wednesday, August 25, 2009

For Crooks and Liars
Tonight on Air America: Greg Palast joins Crooks and Liars' John Amato, guest host of "Clout!" on your local progressive station or streaming live on AirAmericaRadio.com at 9pm Eastern.
There's another floater. Four years on, there's another victim face down in the waters of Hurricane Katrina, Dr. Ivor van Heerden.
Go on-site for photo's
I don't get to use the word "heroic" very often. Van Heerden is heroic. The Deputy Director of the Louisiana State University Hurricane Center, it was van Heerden who told me, on camera, something so horrible, so frightening, that, if it weren't for his international stature, it would have been hard to believe:

"By midnight on Monday the White House knew. Monday night I was at the state Emergency Operations Center and nobody was aware that the levees had breeched. Nobody."

On the night of August 29, 2005, van Heerden was shut in at the state emergency center in Baton Rouge, providing technical advice to the rescue effort. As Hurricane Katrina came ashore, van Heerden and the State Police there were high-fiving it: Katrina missed the city of New Orleans, turning east.

What they did not know was that the levees had cracked. For crucial hours, the White House knew, but withheld the information that the levees of New Orleans had broken and that the city was about to drown. Bush's boys did not notify the State of the flood to come which would have allowed police to launch an emergency hunt for the thousands that remained stranded.

"Fifteen hundred people drowned. That's the bottom line," said von Heerden. He shouldn't have told me that. The professor was already in trouble for saying, publicly, that the levees around New Orleans were no good, too short, by 18". They couldn't stand up to a storm like Katrina. He said it months before Katrina hit - in a call to the White House, and later in the press.

So, even before Katrina, even before our interview, the professor was in hot water. Van Heerden was told by University officials that his complaints jeopardized funding from the Bush Administration. They tried to gag him. He didn't care: he ripped off the gag and spoke out.

It didn't matter to Bush, to the State, to the University, that van Heerden was right- devastatingly right. Exactly as van Heerden predicted, the levees could not stand up to the storm surge.

In 2006, I met van Heerden in his office at the University's hurricane center; a cubby filled with charts of the city under water. He's a soft-spoken, even-tempered man, given to understatement and academic reserve. But his words were hand grenades: the Bush White House did nothing about the levees, despite warning after warning.

Why? A hurricane is an Act of God. But a levee failure is an Act of Bush - of the federal government. Under the Flood Control Act of 1928, once the levees break, it's Washington's responsibility to save lives -- and to compensate the victims for lost homes and lost loved ones.

By telling me this, the professor had to know he was putting his job on the line. This week marks the fourth anniversary of the drowning of New Orleans.

Shakoor Aljuwani of the Rebuilding Lives Coalition reminds me it is also the fourth year of exile for more than half of the low-income Black residents who once lived in the Crescent City. In the Lower Ninth Ward, 81% have yet to return.

And it marks the end of Dr. van Heerden's career at LSU. They got him. Once the network cameras were turned away from New Orleans, as America and Anderson Cooper shifted attention to Brad and Angelina and other news, the University put an end to Dr. van Heerden. "In 2006 they started the nonsense - they stopped me from teaching. They tried last year to get faculty to vote me out."

His contract was not renewed; he was forced out too, dumped along with the chief of the Hurricane Center who led the academics who supported van Heerden's research. The Man Who Was Right was fired.

Cronies and Contracts I did not seek out professor van Heerden about Bush's deadly silence. Rather, I'd come to LSU to ask him about a strange little company, "Innovative Emergency Management," a politically well-connected firm that, a year before the hurricane, had finagled a contract to plan the evacuation of New Orleans.

Innovative Emergency Management knew a lot about political contributions, but seemed to have zero experience in hurricane response planning. In fact, their "plan" for New Orleans called for evacuating the city by automobile. When Katrina hit, 127,000 wheel-less New Orleans folk were left to float out.

And van Heerden knew all about it. Well before the hurricane, I discovered, he'd pointed out flaws in the "Innovative" plan - and was threatened for the revelation by a state official. The same official later joined the payroll of Innovative Emergency Management.

When I asked the company, at their office, for a copy of the plan, they body-blocked our Democracy Now! camerawoman and called the cops.

Not everyone shared the harsh fate of van Heerden. Just this month, Innovative Emergency Management, the firm with the drive-for-your-life plan, was handed a fat contract by the State of Alabama to draft - you guessed it - a hurricane evacuation plan for Mobile.

The City That Care Forgot After the flood, I filmed the uplifting story of Common Ground, the commune of Katrina survivors who, under the leadership of the community organizer Malik Rahim, rebuilt a shattered hulk of a building with their own sweat and donated materials. They housed 350 displaced families.

Since I broadcast that film in 2006, Rahim and the tenants were evicted by speculators who bought the building. Just before Christmas, elderly residents were carried out and dumped in the street, literally, by marshals. The speculators paid the families who build their new edifice not one dime.

We also filmed the story of Patricia Thomas, a woman fighting to return to her home in the beautiful Lafitte public housing project. Speculators have long lusted for this property on the edge of the French Quarter.

And now the speculators have it. Patricia's home, unscathed by Katrina, was nevertheless bulldozed. As Rahim puts it, "They wanted them poor niggers out of there and they ain't had no intention to allow it to be reopened to no poor niggers." Their plan succeeded. Patricia, homeless, died last year.


This Friday, take a moment to remember a courageous professor, an indefatigable activist and the refugee families who once lived in what was once called, "The City That Care Forgot."

Now, in 2009, you could call it the city that everyone forgot.

Part 2 tomorrow. A new warning; the next Katrina and Big Oil


For one week only, the International Humanities Center is offering, free of charge, a download of Greg Palast's investigative report for Democracy Now!, "Big Easy to Big Empty - the untold story of how the White House drowned New Orleans" at www.GregPalast.com.

Download the film or make a donation to support these investigations and get a copy signed by Palast at:

http://www.gregpalast.com/bigeasy
*********************
Greg Palast is the author of the New York Times bestsellers The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Armed Madhouse.

Subscribe to Palast's podcast and follow Palast on Twitter. * * * * *

[Saundra Hummer]

.
^^^^^^^
Tranny Fired From Job For Making Headlines In Jealous Attack Against A Woman
"Taty" the transvestite who denies attacking a woman and her child for the love of his man, found himself out of work, when the banana packer company in Limón where he worked to can his ass.
This just struck me funny. It's from a Costa Rica newspaper, Inside Costa Rica, I get their newletter. Go on-site for the article. Sounds like someone is ticked, what with the wording and all. A Costa Rican Bill Maher?

Go on-site to read the rest of the article and see other issues involving Costa Rica, such as how Nicaragua's Ortega is going to change the couse of a river that has been in dispute for a long time now. He always makes for hardships, or so it seems to me. Seemingly, he relishes these types of issues, these conflicts.
http://www.insidecostarica.com/ ^^^^^^^^^

[Saundra Hummer]

.
XXXXXXX
OpEdNews They're Coming to Take Me Away,
hee-hee, ho-ho . . .
By
Kathy Malloy
August 26, 2009

It's getting squirrely out there, Truthseekers. Break out the straitjackets and extra-large nets, because Michelle “Batty” Bachmann, Deadeye Dick Cheney, and Rush “Deaf by Temptation” Limbaugh have released their inner lunatics in their respective anti-Obama ravings this week.

Squeezing in behind his golden EIB microphone yesterday, the Oxymoron explained to his (mostly white male) audience that Obama was coming after their . . . penises. With sharp things. If he is not stopped, Obama will force circumcisions on the helpless, unwilling, white male victims of his Communist Health Care Plan.

Limbaugh explained". . . it is President Obama who wants mandated circumcision. We had that yesterday. That means if we need to save our penises from anybody, it's Obama.”

This is even loonier -- and more racially inciting -- than The Drug Addict's concocted vision of President Obama hovering over your slumbering, lilly-white grandma with a pillow, ready to snuff her out, cuz he's decided she's lived long enough. Doesn't get much more Freudian than that, does it, Truthseekers? What a fabulous metaphor for (mostly white male) powerlessness in the age of Obama, the Black Avenger and Insane Granny-Killa.

(Keep hitting their little midbrains, Rush. Keep repeating the warning that The Other wants to kill your family and cut off your penis. Good boy. Well Done! Here's another Krispy Kreme glazed doughnut. And an “oxy” chaser.)

On the other hand, this wacky warning might actually have some benefit if, for example, it thins the ranks of those gun-totin' (mostly white male) protestors who keep popping up armed and outraged outside Obama's Town Hall meetings. I have a message for these would-be protestors: Take heed! President Obama's in town, and he's wielding forceps and an exacto knife! Grab your crotch and RUN! Save yourself! Distract him! Toss an old person into his path!

Meanwhile, a man whose lust for, and appreciation of, death, destruction, and mayhem exceeds even The Pigman's -- Deadeye Dick Cheney -- has warped reality to such a mind-bending, time-twisting degree that he actually believes the recently released CIA documents that prove detainees were criminally tortured to the point of death vindicates his claim that he did the right thing, the necessary thing, the patriotic thing. Cheney's backward, battery-operated bizarro world operates exactlyas Orwell's 1984: Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength; Torture is Compassion.

If you will.

“The documents released Monday clearly demonstrate that the individuals subjected to Enhanced Interrogation Techniques provided the bulk of intelligence we gained about al Qaeda. This intelligence saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks” The Dark Lord hissed.

Deadeye Dick is particularly displeased that Attorney General Eric Holder is opening an investigation into the war crimes he commanded the CIA to carry out over the past eight years. In response to the dedication of those seriously warped CIA-lings, he recently bestowed his sinister praise and Black Sabbath-y blessings on the minions he sent forth to carry out his evil deeds and dark biddings: “The people involved deserve our gratitude,” Cheney growled. “They do not deserve to be the targets of political investigations or prosecutions.” Then he collapsed into a column of bats and scattered into the night.

Speaking of bats, Michelle Bachmann has truly escaped her crawl-space once and for all. Holding what she called a “tele-town-hall” online meeting to discuss health care reform, titled “Keeping Faith with the Unborn,” (love that title) she warned of the forced, government-mandated abortions that were to come if God didn't stop Obama from killing babies.

Is the thought of universal health care for all Americans so terrifying that the mere possibility has brought Bachmann to her knees, praying to her Savior that we be denied affordable health insurance? Reaching out to her faithful followers (from a safe tele-town-halled distance, mind you) and pleading with them to fast and pray so that no American anywhere will suffer the eternal damnation of reasonably priced medical insurance premiums and prescription drugs! EVER!

“Everything that all of us have worked together and labored for over the years, all of it could be undermined with this one bill. President Obama realizes that. The radicals that are on the pro-abortion left, they realize that. They could win it all. And the unborn, and the vulnerable, the disabled and those at the end of life could lose it all . . . Remember, faith without works is dead. So we're asking you to do all of it: pray, fast, believe, trust the Lord, but also act,” she dreamily sang into the video camera.

I half expected the aging and weirdly coiffed televangelist Earnest Angley to pop out from behind a pillar of fire, stick a finger in his ear and direct Americans to just “say BABY JESUS! That will heal you! You don't need Obamination Care! Just pray to the Tiny Baby Jesus! He'll lay a healing on ye!" while Bachmann, eyes fluttering and lips quivering, raises her hands skyward and speaks in tongues. To the TelEPromptR.

Besides, Obama just wants to cut off your penis, so how's that gonna help you, right?

To recap the current crop-o-crazy: Limbaugh warns that Obama wants your penis, Darth Cheney claims that evidence of criminal torture -- to the point of death -- proves he did a good thing, and Crazy Eyez Bachmann prays that God stops the Obama baby-killing juggernaut and urges us to fast so that the Good Lord will be pleased with the offering of our suffering and will save us from affordable health care.

Couldn't we just kill a ram or something? Then throw it to Limbaugh and Cheney and let ‘em fight for the carcass?

Uh-oh, it's starting to get to me now. . . . Must. Turn. Off. TV. . .


Author's Website:
www.mikemalloy.com
Author's Bio: Kathy never expected a career in radio as a talk show producer. Born and raised in Atlanta, Georgia, Kathy was completing her nursing degree when in 2001 - in an emergency - she was asked to fill in as the producer of Mike's program. Within a few weeks she knew she'd found more than a temporary job. Since that beginning, Kathy has steadily grown more comfortable behind the control console, editing, engineering, and assisting in topic selection for the program while also retaining a fairly sizeable chunk of her sanity. Oh, and did we mention the utter (joyful) chaos of raising a daughter who, for some odd reason, only stops talking when she's asleep. Strange, that. A life-long "talk radio junkie," Kathy takes her job with all the seriousness required, and thoroughly enjoys producing a talk show that's intelligent, factual, informative, and most of all entertaining. She takes great pride in -- and has great fun with -- the two biggest joys in her life: Their daughter Molly, and producing one of the most dynamic talk programs in radio.

Original Content at:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/They-re-Coming-to-Take-Me-by-Kathy-Malloy-090826-607.html XXXXXXXXX

[Saundra Hummer]

~ ~ ~ ~ ~
MEDIAMATTERS
FOR AMERICA
August 28, 2009

Media Matters: Storming Camelot:
Sen. Kennedy's death brings out worst from the right
Following Wednesday's early-morning news that Sen. Edward M. Kennedy had lost his battle with brain cancer, Media Matters posted the following statement from president Eric Burns at 3:51 a.m. ET on the County Fair blog:

"Ted Kennedy was a true American statesman. The values that he so eloquently and tirelessly championed represent the best of our American ideals. He reached across the aisle to get hard work done but never sacrificed principle. Though he is gone, the dream will forever live on. Our thoughts and prayers go out to Vicki Kennedy, the Senator's family, his loyal staff and the millions of lives he touched throughout his historic life and career."
Far from letting Kennedy rest in peace, many media conservatives savagely attacked the Senate's last liberal lion. Leading the charge was radio host Rush Limbaugh, who began his broadcast Wednesday morning eulogizing Kennedy by calling him "the lion of the Senate" before noting that "we were his prey." Hardly finished, El Rushbo would go on to say that "Kennedy screwed up everything he touched." He said Kennedy's opposition to Robert Bork's Supreme Court nomination was "the beginning of the dawn of the age of the current hate." He claimed Kennedy "used the government to take money from people that work to give it to people that don't work" and that "most of Senator Kennedy's plans ended up damaging the people he seeks to help." Finally, Limbaugh marveled at the fact that "the Constitution is still there, even after Ted Kennedy in the Senate for 52 [sic] years." All that and more led MSNBC's Joe Scarborough and Politico's Patrick Gavin to agree that "Limbaugh showed great restraint" in discussing Kennedy's death. Can you imagine what Rush would have said had it not been for such "restraint?"

Limbaugh was hardly alone in his disgusting attacks on Kennedy. Radio host and Fox News political analyst Tammy Bruce kept it classy, claiming on Twitter that Fox News Sunday's Chris "Wallace noted the last great act of Kennedy's career was to endorse [President] Obama. I agree: he left a woman to drown and now he's left us to drown."

Eric Sanger, a director at Premiere Radio Networks, ABC Radio/Citadel Media and The Sean Hannity Show, said on Facebook (emphasis added), "The irony is that the media is already positioning Ted as a champion for the little man against wealth and privilege. This piece of garbage was the poster child for wealth and privilege. Hopefully, this event will mark the end of this repugnant family and all the endless crap, entitlement, personal indulgences and collateral damage (Kopechne, Bessette, Bowman, Moxely, etc.)."

Wesley Pruden, a Washington Times columnist, wrote that Kennedy's death was "a good career move" and that Democrats "are smiling through their tears," while Andrew Breitbart, a fellow Times columnist, called Kennedy a "villain," a "duplicitous bastard," and a "prick" on Twitter, as noted by Politico. Riehl World View, a right-wing blog, came to Breitbart's defense, claiming that liberals criticizing him were "hypocrites" because when Dick Cheney dies, they're going to do the exact same thing. That's right, liberals today are hypocrites because of what they might do in the future. Now that's some crazy fortune-telling.

Fox News host Sean Hannity told his audience that "out of respect for his family," he had decided not to "bring up Mary Jo Kopechne" or Kennedy's "radical socialism." Seriously.

When they weren't busy attacking Kennedy's legacy, media conservatives -- like Fox News' Laura Ingraham -- were attacking Democrats for purportedly attempting to use his passing to stifle debate and enact health care reform legislation, repeatedly calling this supposed tactic the "death card." In a true episode of pot meets kettle, conservative media figures -- like health care serial misinformer Betsy McCaughey -- have used Kennedy's death to attack health care reform, some even baselessly suggesting that if reform passes, elderly cancer patients -- as Kennedy was -- will be "denied" treatments or that their treatments will be "rationed." Limbaugh said that "Ted Kennedy didn't have to read a death book," while Tom Marr, guest-hosting Lou Dobbs' radio show, said under a public option, a "bureaucrat" would have told Kennedy, "77, brain tumor, bye-bye."

On top of the relentless smears from media conservatives, several mainstream press outlets repeated without question the GOP claim that Kennedy's absence from the health care debate prevented lawmakers from reaching a bipartisan compromise and that had Kennedy been present, agreement on health care reform would have been more likely. Several progressive commentators have identified this talking point as GOP spin intended to disguise Republicans' obstructionism, with Salon.com's Joan Walsh, for example, stating that "absolutely no evidence supports that point of view" and washingtonpost.com blogger Ezra Klein noting that Kennedy's committee has already reported out a bill -- a progressive one, at that.

In another example of, shall we say, interesting reporting, ABC's Jonathan Karl claimed on August 27 that if "last night's town hall meeting in Phoenix is any indication" of whether Kennedy's death will "inspire newfound unity on health care reform," "the answer seems to be no." But the video Karl aired to support his claim was from an August 25 event that occurred before Kennedy's death, not from "last night."

Perhaps worst of all, conservative media figures -- like Fox News' Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity, Limbaugh, and National Review Online's Kathryn Jean Lopez, to name a few -- have returned to the tired smear that the memorial service for the late Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-MN) became "a political rally" to suggest that progressives will excessively politicize Kennedy's death. But as now-Sen. Al Franken documented at length, the claim that Wellstone's memorial was politicized is a myth based on distortions propagated by the conservative media.

Which leads me to think this is becoming a case of déjà vu all over again.

Other major stories this week

Death becomes them
An increasingly morbid culture is dominating conservative attacks against health care reform. Not content to accuse Democrats of merely seeking the deaths of seniors and the disabled with supposed "death panels," conservatives have now accused them of seeking to turn the Veterans Affairs Department into a euthanasia organization -- for veterans. Yes, it was the week of the "death book." The book in question was "Your Life, Your Choices," or YLYC, originally published in 1997 and designed to help vets consider end-of-life issues. According to the right, though not according to fact, the Bush administration had temporarily put the book out of use, but Obama's VA has brought it back, among other similar works.

As an aside, it's worth noting that in 2005, the Republican-controlled Senate proposed calling on Medicare to cover voluntary advanced planning consultations -- end-of-life counseling, as it were. Fox News, of course, ignored the story. But consistency isn't their bag -- hypocrisy is.

And so, after an August 18 Wall Street Journal op-ed argued that YLYC contained an unmistakable "hurry-up-and-die message," Fox News' Chris Wallace repeatedly cropped quotes from the new Veterans Health Administration (VHA) document mentioning the book in order to falsely suggest the Obama administration was requiring veterans to read it. When his guest, assistant secretary of Veterans Affairs Tammy Duckworth rebutted his accusation, he said she was lying.

The conservative noise machine swung into action. The baseless assault was soon repeated by multiple Fox News guests. A Washington Times editorial raised rationing fears and claimed that "the book fosters dark thoughts about a difficult life somehow being less of a life." Sean Hannity said the administration was doing something "unimaginable." Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin posted on her Facebook page that the book "encourages veterans to forego care as they make end-of-life decisions." National Review's Jonah Goldberg said that the VA was telling "veterans that maybe they should be euthanized." Fox News' Karl Rove said that vets were being pushed toward "assisted suicide." Even Sen. John McCain agreed that the book was like a "death panel." (Sadly, CNN entertained the smear, too.)

When The New York Times reported on the story, it neglected to note a fact that just might get to the heart of the story. The author of the original Journal op-ed, H. James Towey, runs a nonprofit group that has published its own booklet on end-of-life issues, a book by Towey himself. It shouldn't surprise us, then, that Towey has been trying, unsuccessfully, to get the VA to adopt his literature instead of YLYC.

How do veterans feel? The Vietnam Veterans of America weighed in on Wednesday, saying that "it is outrageous for some partisans to politicize the debate by targeting veterans with blatant scare tactics." But don't look for them to get much airtime on Fox. That's not what the conservative media mean when they talk about "supporting the troops." VoteVets.org blogger Richard Smith criticized Towey's assertion that YLYC presents "end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions," noting "if the document was really trying to get veterans to pull the plug on themselves, then first suggesting to them that their life should be prolonged at all costs is a pretty stupid way to do it" [emphasis in original].

As was the case last week, there were good examples of media coverage to be celebrated. MSNBC's Contessa Brewer noted that Betsey McCaughey, who is normally treated by the media with a sort of reverence, was forced to resign from a medical company's board over "conflict of interest" concerns. NBC News' David Gregory corrected Sen. Orrin Hatch's false claim that "tens of millions" of Americans will switch to a public option if it is offered. MSNBC's David Shuster debunked claims about the "death book" and rebutted the idea that Democrats will provide health care to undocumented immigrants, while his colleague Keith Olbermann also took the "death book" smear to task, as did Alison Stewart, guest-hosting for Rachel Maddow. While interviewing McCain, ABC's George Stephanopoulos pushed back repeatedly against the baseless conservative spin. CNN's Howard Kurtz discussed a poll finding that 75 percent of Fox News viewers believe the false "death panel" claims -- which turned Fox News' Shepard Smith into an outlier when he forced Carl Cameron to note that there are no "death panels" in Democratic health care legislation. Look for him to face renewed criticism from conservatives for daring to set things straight.


Conspiracy theorist Beck loses 46th advertiser

Did Glenn Beck forget that he called Obama a "racist"? And does the fact that nearly 50 advertisers to date have abandoned his program in response to a grassroots campaign have anything to do with Beck's sudden bout of monumental amnesia?

Why do we ask? Because when Beck visited Bill O'Reilly's show this week to bemoan attempts by nasty liberal "loons" to shut Beck up, to snatch away his freedom of speech, there wasn't a single mention of what exactly Beck had done to attract such scorn from progressives. At Fox News, that smear seems to have been flushed down the memory hole, and all that's left is playing the victim.

We're used to Beck being "out there," but Thursday's show was special. Beck's hour (the second day in a row in which he didn't say a thing about Kennedy's death) was all about the supposed secret army being built by Obama. In fact, Obama's comments about the necessity of a "civilian national security force" came from a July 2, 2008, speech on service, and they referred to expanding the foreign service, AmeriCorps, and the Peace Corps.

This secret army idea -- not supported by any facts, though possibly written in invisible ink that Beck can interpret -- is a pet cause of fringe radio host Alex Jones, who is something of a leader in the underground 9-11 "truth" movement, which believes that the attacks were an inside job and that all the governments of the world are controlled by a cabal of the uber-rich who want to kill two-thirds of the world's population. Jones has repeatedly alluded to the existence of a secret army being built by Obama, a charge similar to the one leveled by Beck on his show. The difference, of course, is that Jones mostly transmits over the Internet and shortwave radio. Beck has a show on a cable "news" network. Beck's previous flirtation with the idea that FEMA was building detention camps for conservatives is also an article of faith with Jones and his followers.

When Beck wasn't occupied with scrawling wild conspiracy theories on a chalk board (by the way, it became apparent this week that Beck could use some spelling lessons), he was begging his audience to "call a friend and tell them to watch the show this week." Surely, this had nothing to do with the legions of advertisers fleeing his show. By the way, Palin was happy to oblige, inviting her Facebook fans to tune in.


Sean Hannity for president, Hahahaha ...

Here's a good laugh to close out the week. On Monday, the right-wing Fox News website TheFoxNation.com linked under the headline "President Hannity?" to a WorldNetDaily article that claimed the Fox host "would make a formidable candidate, with the likability of Reagan, good looks and strong convictions." Adding more fuel to the hilarious fire in an "exclusive commentary," Joseph Farah, a birther and founder/editor/CEO of WorldNetDaily, weighed in: "I could get excited about a Sean Hannity candidacy. I could get excited about a Sean Hannity presidency. I even hear he has a birth certificate." For his part, Hannity said Thursday: "I would run for office at some point in my life." Could America be so lucky? Try not to swoon.


This week's media columns

This week's media columns from the Media Matters senior fellows: Eric Boehlert looks at how to media, angry right-wingers are important, while angry libs are annoying, and Jamison Foser discusses the media's health care filibuster.

Greg Lewis brings us "'Rush Limbaugh showed great restraint'? Please ..." in The Friday Rush, a review of Limbaugh's radio shows over the past week.

This weekly wrap-up was compiled by Karl Frisch, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube or sign up to receive his columns by email.


Forward This E-mail To A Friend
Share your concern about conservative misinformation
Sign up
Did a friend forward you this email? Click here to sign up to receive Media Matters for America email alerts:

https://mediamatters.org/u/login?source=email
© 2008 Media Matters for America
1625 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Suite 300, Washington, D.C. 20036
There are numerous links within this newsletter, go on-site to gain access to them. Just click on the following link:

http://mediamatters.org/ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

[Saundra Hummer]

.^^^^^^^^^^^
POLITICAL CORTEX
Ted Kennedy's Ideal:
Health Care Linked to Cost Containment
By
Bill Hare
2009-08-28 13:51:07
Section: Left Brain

Since national health care is so inextricably linked to the public policy beliefs of Senator Edward Kennedy it is essential to recognize the linchpin on which its foundation rested. When his brother President John Kennedy championed a Medicare proposal that would ultimately become law under his successor President Lyndon; its foundation rested on public policy.

Such had been the case earlier extending back to the Bull Moose Party platform of Theodore Roosevelt and comparable subsequent proposals by Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry Truman. Cost containment is the engine driving the historic proposal.

Its four presidential proponents along with Senator Kennedy recognized the need to hold down costs in the private sector in order for such a proposal to succeed.

For instance, I read just this week a figure that, since 2002, the profits of health insurers burgeoned more than 400 percent. It is with this reality in mind that it was disconcerting to learn about an agreement that President Obama allegedly reached with the same pharmaceutical giants that have driven prescription drug costs up to record levels.
http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2009/8/28/13517/0991 ^^^^^^^^^

[Saundra Hummer]

:: :: :: :: ::
Cheney Blasts Interrogation ProbeBy
LARA JAKES
AP
Posted:
11 MINUTES AGO
WASHINGTON (Aug. 30) -- Former Vice President Dick Cheney says politics are driving the Justice Department's decision to investigate whether CIA interrogators abused terror suspects detained after the Sept. 11 attacks.

"It's clearly a political move," Cheney said in an interview aired on "Fox News Sunday." "I mean, there's no other rationale for why they're doing this."

He added: "I just think it's an outrageous political act that will do great damage, long term, to our capacity to be able to have people take on difficult jobs, make difficult decisions, without having to worry about what the next administration is going to say."

At issue is Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to look into abuse allegations after the release of an internal CIA inspector general's report. President Barack Obama has said interrogators would not face charges if they followed legal guidelines.

However, the report concluded that some CIA interrogators went beyond Bush administration rules that gave them wide latitude to use severe tactics against detainees such as waterboarding, a simulated drowning technique that critics call torture. Three high-level suspects underwent waterboarding scores of times.

Cheney called the techniques "good policy," saying he was comfortable in cases where interrogators went beyond what they were specifically authorized to do. The CIA report found they included cases of interrogators threatening a detainee with a handgun and an electric drill.

Cheney said those techniques were "directly responsible for the fact that for eight years, we had no further mass casualty attacks against the United States."

He noted that the Justice Department, during the Bush administration, approved the harsh tactics in legal memos to the White House.

"Now you get a new administration and they say, well, we didn't like those opinions, we're going to go investigate those lawyers and perhaps have them disbarred," Cheney said. "I just think it's an outrageous precedent to set, to have this kind of, I think, intensely partisan, politicized look back at the prior administration."

Cheney was striking out at a Justice Department that has reeled from accusations of bending to White House politics for years, most recently under the Bush administration.

Asked for comment Sunday, Justice Department spokesman Matt Miller pointed to Holder's earlier comments about the probe in which the attorney general said he would not target anyone who was acting within the Bush-approved interrogation guidelines.

"I fully realize that my decision to commence this preliminary review will be controversial," Holder said in comments last week. "In this case, given all of the information currently available, it is clear to me that this review is the only responsible course of action for me to take."

Cheney said he has serious doubts about Obama's policies — especially whether the new Democratic administration understands the threat to Americans.

"I was not a fan of his when he got elected, and my views have not changed any," Cheney said of Obama.

In a related issue, Cheney said he was aware of a Bush administration order prohibiting the CIA from advising Congress about a program to kill or capture top al-Qaida leaders. But he stopped short of saying he personally issued that order, as has been reported.

"My recollection of it is, in the reporting I've seen, is that the direction was for them not to tell Congress until certain lines were passed, until the program became operational, and that it was handled appropriately," Cheney said.

The House Intelligence Committee last month launched an investigation to determine whether the CIA broke the law by not informing Congress about the secret program as soon as it was begun.

In the interview taped last week at his home in Wyoming, Cheney also touched on policies for two reclusive regimes — Iran and North Korea. He said he supported taking military action against Iran's nuclear program but was overruled by President George W. Bush.

"I thought that negotiations could not possibly succeed unless the Iranians really believed we were prepared to use military force," Cheney said.

He also said he thought it was a mistake for former President Bill Clinton to secure the release for two U.S. journalists from North Korea, given the regime's nuclear weapons proliferation.

"Obviously, you are concerned for the reporters and their circumstances, but I think if we look at it from a policy standpoint, it is a big reward for bad behavior on the part of the North Korean leadership," Cheney said.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press.
2009-08-30 10:48:17
Dick Cheney lives in another world.
He doesn't grasp what the rest of us have, and do... It being that it was his, and Bush's, directives that put the CIA's collective behinds on the line. That it was the CIA's having blindly followed these directives, which has once again put the CIA in a bad light. They all, Cheney, Bush & others, were part and parcel of what is known by us as them breaking our laws, and, not just here at home, but around the world.

We have the protections of our Constitution and they saw fit to think of it as antiquated and something to ignore. This grand document has held us in good stead since our inception. Granted, it has been ignored in the past, but as far as I know, never to such an extent as we have seen with the Cheney/Bush administration, and our courts.

I would hope we can get back to what we're supposed to be all about.

How can Cheney's viewpoints be allowed to influence anyone? We'll never get over the harm his ideas have caused, especially when they became policy. Can we ever fix everything he's left as his/their legacy? Remember the closed door meetings with the criminals of the energy world? Remember how they almost shut our country down?

Can our country ever be repaired (on several fronts) completely. It's a monumental task in front of us, as numerous boondoggles were being acted on by the Cheney/Bush administration, fosited upon us at will, and now we're paying the price. We'll continue to pay and pay. Most of us realize it. We know it for what it is.

They failed, and they did it up big, and due to it, look at where we are today. We who're not into politics or constitutional law even realize it, so how can he truly believe what it is he's saying? Dick Cheney must live in another world, this career politician, a behind closed doors type of guy. His thought processes aren't anything we can join in on and know we are doing the best we can do; join in on & know we are doing right, doing good. The mans a joke; a dangerous one in my opinion.

Laws on the books were ignored. We are still in a bad light due to how they ran things. They saw fit to ignore our laws, and too many of us let them, and look where we are now due to their wacked policies.

Conveniently he leaves out how he, GW Bush, Rumsfeld, and Ms. Rice chose to ignore the reams of intelligence on terrorism which was handed to them in their very first days in office, instead they believed "Missile Defense was more important". They let it all come down, and they have never lived up to that fact, never admitted to their colossal mistake.

Could they have stopped the destruction and loss of lives in New York on 9/11, and at the two other locations? We'll never know for certain, but we do know this fact, they didn't even try. This in itself tells us a whole lot. SRHhttp://news.aol.com/article/dick-cheney-says-politics-behind/474997?icid=main|htmlws-main|dl1|link5|http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.com%2Farticle %2Fdick-cheney-says-politics-behind%2F474997 :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

[yZeGuy]

Sandi, I've seen alot of your posts as copy/pastes, but I was wondering if I could ask you a few questions, because i am wondering what YOU really think.

Is that Ok?

[Saundra Hummer]

Sandi, I've seen alot of your posts as copy/pastes, but I was wondering if I could ask you a few questions, because i am wondering what YOU really think.

Is that Ok?

Sure, not sure it will go anywhere.

I've just done all I can to let people see what is happening by posting the views, and OP Eds of those who are more in the loop than I ever have been, or ever will be, having gathered what I do know from ordinary sources, the usual sources. There are others here who have made it their lifes work studying current events, where as I have been pretty much isolated from world events due to lots of circumstances, that is until I started going on line.

I'm amazed at the depth of knowledge a lot of our own members have stored up. I'm not in that category. Much of the time, there were things going on which prevented it.

I click and drag info which I think interesting; as important to pass on, because I felt our country was on a dangerous trajectory, and I hoped to make a tiny difference in how things were being thought of and done. I was hoping that people would pass on either with emails or word of mouth these thoughts and facts, as that sometimes can become a powerful surge.

I felt that the pro's could state the obvious, if not the hidden, much better, and, in more depth than I could ever hope to, and know the reasons for all that was coming down. I didn't feel qualified to just state what I felt was needed to be known.

I have a lot of free time on my hands, more than I've ever been used to, and my posts occupy a bit of the would be boring times for me.

By the way, has the site been down? I couldn't get on-line yesterday or earlier today. Wrote to Tenorman, but he didn't get back to me. Oh well. Mike asked me one time before to contact him, but I didn't need to, everything came up fairly quickly, but this time I did write, so figure he's off hiking about Scotland.

[yZeGuy]

Thanks for your most articulate reply, Sandi. Have you ever heard of or studied the concept of the "Hegelian Dialectic" ?

There are alot of explanations, but I find this one to really hit
http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/intro2.html#hegel

[Saundra Hummer]

Thanks for your most articulate reply, Sandi. Have you ever heard of or studied the concept of the "Hegelian Dialectic" ?

There are alot of explanations, but I find this one to really hit
http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/intro2.html#hegel

Wow, that's a bit of info.

I'll read it when I can get into it and, no, I hadn't heard of it, at least not in any depth. Think I've seen the name somewhere, but ... ???

Thank you for posting the link.

EDIT: An addition.

I see where they are applying this "Hegelian Dialectic" concept to "The New World Order", being part and parcel of the PNAC's plans for the country and global economy. Tearing it down so they can build it up. Building it up the way they want it to be, but, first breaking all that exists globally, not just here in the United States, is necessary for them to achieve their end goal, world dominance by a few. Keeping power here in the U.S.A., or where ever they choose to sit on their thrones. Dominance financially and militarily. Dreams of empire as we've been saying here on this board for years now.

Is the PNAC alive and well, or is this thing with them just a crazy scheme gone awry? One thing for certain, we are in a fix financially here at home and globally. I believe the PNAC's members were a large part of it being able to come about. If I'm wrong; hey, I'm no expert. I can duck behind this fact. Ha.

Here's another link that I found since you posted your info, and a quote from the article:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Levant/nancy137.htm
In order to achieve one-world governance, existing systems all over the globe had to be dismantled and eliminated. For instance, national sovereignty, national loyalty, national patriotism, personally selected lifestyles, individual beliefs and preferences, and naturally occurring communities versus socially engineered....

[Saundra Hummer]

. . . . . . .SPLC

SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER
Sept. 2, 2009

Dear Friend,
Last November, Marcelo Lucero, an Ecuadorian immigrant, was brutally murdered in the town of Patchogue, N.Y., by a group of teens who were prowling the streets looking for Latinos to attack. They called it "beaner jumping."

Today, as you may have seen in the news, we released a report, Climate of Fear: Latino Immigrants in Suffolk County, N.Y., showing that Lucero's murder was not an isolated hate crime.

Instead, it was part of a shocking pattern of violence and intimidation against Latinos in that community. Things are so bad there that Latino parents often won't let their children play outside.

The truly frightening thing about the Lucero case is that it could have happened anywhere. The high school students who killed him weren't members of hate groups. Instead, they were average kids who had been inundated with dehumanizing, poisonous messages about "illegal" immigrants from pundits and politicians.

You know the kind of rhetoric I'm talking about. You hear it on the radio and television all the time.

When I look at the pictures of Lucero's killers, I actually feel sorry for them. I just wish that some caring adult had gotten hold of them before it was too late — before Marcelo Lucero, a legal immigrant in our country, lay dying in the street.

That's why we started our Teaching Tolerance program — to give teachers across the nation the tools they need to combat the poisonous rhetoric that we all too often hear, to help young people understand that we are all human beings, worthy of respect.

It's a message that can't be repeated too often in this day and time.

Thank you for making our work possible and for all that you do to promote the cause of justice in your community.

Sincerely,

Richard Cohen
President, Southern Poverty Law Center

ONLINE REPORT:
Climate of Fear
Latino Immigrants in Suffolk County, N.Y.
By
Mark Potok
Editor
Less than one year ago, on Nov. 8, 2008, Marcelo Lucero, an Ecuadorian immigrant, was murdered in the town of Patchogue, N.Y. The killing, police say, was carried out by a gang of teenagers who called themselves the Caucasian Crew and targeted Latino residents as part of a sport they termed "beaner-hopping." It highlighted a growing national problem — violent hatred directed at all suspected undocumented immigrants, Latinos in particular. Officials in Suffolk County, N.Y., where Patchogue is located, minimized the tragedy, with the county executive even suggesting that it would have been a mere "one-day story" if not for earlier publicity about his and other residents' anti-immigrant activism over the prior decade.
But the reality was that nativist intolerance and hate violence had been festering for years in Suffolk County, fostered by some of the very same officials who were now wishing the story away. The situation in Suffolk County, in fact, is a microcosm of a problem facing the entire United States, where FBI statistics suggest a 40% rise in anti-Latino hate crimes between 2003 and 2007, the latest numbers available. The number of hate groups in America has been rising, too, climbing more than 50% since 2000, mainly by exploiting the issue of undocumented non-white immigration.

In the aftermath of the Lucero murder, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) sent a Spanish-speaking researcher to Suffolk County to interview Latino residents, both documented and undocumented, over a period of months. What SPLC found was frightening. The Lucero murder, while the worst of the violence so far, was hardly an isolated incident. Latino immigrants in Suffolk County are regularly harassed, taunted, and pelted with objects hurled from cars. They are frequently run off the road while riding bicycles, and many report being beaten with baseball bats and other objects. Others have been shot with BB guns or pepper-sprayed. Most will not walk alone after dark; parents often refuse to let their children play outside. A few have been the targets of arson attacks and worse. Adding to immigrants' fears is the furious rhetoric of groups like the now-defunct Sachem Quality of Life, whose long-time spokesman regularly referred to immigrants as "terrorists." The leader of another nativist group, this one based in California, was one of many adding their vitriol, describing a "frightening" visit to an area where Latinos are concentrated in Suffolk: "They urinate, they defecate, [they] make sexual overtures to women."

Fueling the fire are many of the very people who are charged with protecting the residents of Suffolk County — local politicians and law enforcement officials. At one point, one county legislator said that if he saw an influx of Latino day laborers in his town, "we'll be out with baseball bats." Another said that if Latino workers were to gather in a local neighborhood, "I would load my gun and start shooting, period." A third publicly warned undocumented residents that they "better beware." County Executive Steve Levy, the highest-ranking official in Suffolk, is no friend of immigrants, either. When criticized by a group of immigrant advocates, for example, Levy called the organization a den of "Communists" and "anarchists." At the same time, immigrants told the SPLC that the police were, at best, indifferent to their reports of harassment, and, at worst, contributors to it. Many said police did not take their reports of attacks seriously, often blaming the victim instead. They said they are regularly subjected to racial profiling while driving and often to illegal searches and seizures. They said there's little point in going to the police, who are often not interested in their plight and instead demand to know their immigration status.

Although Suffolk County is not unique — many communities across the United States are undergoing similar racial conflicts and rapid demographic changes — there are several concrete measures county officials could take to remedy what has been a worsening problem there for a decade:

. First, local politicians should halt their angry demagoguery on the issue of immigration. There is abundant evidence that Suffolk County officials have contributed substantially to an atmosphere conducive to racial violence.
. Second, the county and state legislatures should mandate that crime victims and witnesses not be asked their immigration status during criminal investigations. As long as they are, immigrants will be unwilling to come out of the shadows to report crimes against themselves and others.
. Third, law enforcement officials should train officers to ensure that they take seriously cases of hate-motivated crime. Until they do, Latino residents will continue to distrust law enforcement officials and avoid cooperation.
. Fourth, the county should maintain accurate hate crime statistics that are readily available to the public. Doing so will help guide county leaders and residents in confronting the problem of hate-motivated violence.
. Fifth, the county should promote educational programs in the public schools to encourage respect for diversity and opposition to hatred. In the end, educating the next generation is the only permanent antidote to hate.

If these measures are taken to combat an increasingly volatile situation, it's likely that angry passions in Suffolk can be cooled and a rational debate on immigration and its consequences begun. The alternative is that the county continues to foster a dangerous growth of violent racial intolerance and nativism — a climate of fear.


Mark Potok is the director of the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which produced this report.

Sarah Reynolds was the lead researcher for this report, conducting interviews and research in Suffolk County, N.Y. David Holthouse was the principal author. Other staffers of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) who contributed include project manager Heidi Beirich, design director Russell Estes, designer Valerie Downes, copy editor Melissa Henninger and researcher Janet Smith. Photographs were taken by Lowell Handler, Carlos Morales and Sarah Reynolds. The report was edited by Mark Potok and Rob Waters of the SPLC, along with contributing editor Henry Fernandez, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.
Latinos in Suffolk County
Climate of Fear
Law enforcement officials and politicians contribute to atmosphere of hate
Fueling the FireSachem Quality of Life helped poison local attitudes toward immigrantsVoices from the ShadowsLatino immigrants speak out about their lives
The EnablerSuffolk County Executive Steve Levy is no friend of immigrants
TimelineA decade of race violence in Suffolk County
Download the report (PDF)

Special thanks to the Hagedorn Foundation for its generous support of this project. Thanks also to the Center for American Progress. Go on-site to gain access to the following number of pages:Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6http://www.SPLCenter.org . . . . . . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

Sandi, I've seen alot of your posts as copy/pastes, but I was wondering if I could ask you a few questions, because i am wondering what YOU really think.

Is that Ok?

By the way, when I do add my own thoughts and beliefs to a post, which isn't all that often, I try to remember to sign it with SRH. I don't always remember, but try to do this.
SRH

[Saundra Hummer]

:: :: :: :: ::
WE DON'T NEED INSURANCE,
WE NEED
GUARANTEEED HEALTHCARE

CALIFORNIA NURSES ASSOCIATION STORIES . FACTS . NEWS . ACTIONhttp://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/
RN Rx for healthcare reform!

The rhetoric is flying, but what about the patients? Nurses and activists need to ground the debate in the reality of patient care. And the foundation for providing care based on patient needs, for providing complete choice of provider, and saving costs by eliminating the insurance company profits, care denials and unnecessary overhead, is HR 676 – Medicare for All.

And we if we do not win real reform at the federal level, states need the tools to innovate to establish their own Medicare-type single-payer systems.

Fax a message to your congressmember urging support for HR 676 when it is voted on in the House of Representatives, and urging their support for the Kucinich amendment to enable states to establish their own single-payer systems.
. Watch Rep. Anthony Weiner promote Medicare for All
. Get info here on Kucinich amendment (PDF)
. Look-up your elected officials using your zip code!
Thank you,

www.CalNurses.org
www.NNOC.net
2000 Franklin Street
Oakland, CA 94612

Visit the web address below to tell your friends about this.
Tell-a-friend!

Go on-site for underlined links and more. Link is up above^ ^ ^
If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for California Nurses Association. :: :: ::

[Saundra Hummer]

Fear for Obama's Safety Grows
as
Hate Groups Thrive on Racial Backlash
Violent Signs, Gun, Standoff Latest in Emerging Anger Towards the President
By
BRIAN ROSS, ANNA SCHECTER and MEGAN CHUCHMACH
August 14, 2009—

Experts who track hate groups across the U.S. are growing increasingly concerned over violent rhetoric targeted at President Obama, especially as the debate over health care intensifies and a pattern of threats emerges.

The Secret Service is investigating a Maryland man who held a sign reading "Death to Obama" and "Death to Michelle and her two stupid kids" outside a town hall meeting this week. And in New Hampshire, another man stood across the street from a Presidential town hall with his gun on full display.

Los Angeles police officers apprehended a man Thursday after a standoff with him inside a red Volkswagen Bug car in Westwood, CA the latest disturbing case even though officials said the man had mental problems.

"I don't think these are simply people who are mentally ill or off their rocker," Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center, told ABC News of those behind the threats. "In a very real sense they represent a genuine reaction, a genuine backlash against Obama."

Experts say a sharp growth in so-called militia groups that helped spawn a wave of domestic terrorism in the 1990s and are now using YouTube, rock music and the Internet to recruit members and spread hate and fear - shouldn't be ignored.

"It's certainly a scary time," said former FBI agent Brad Garrett, now an ABC News consultant. Garrett said the Secret Service "cannot afford to pass on anyone," and he believes "they really do fear that something could happen to [Obama]."

Garrett said statements like one recently made by controversial radio host Rush Limbaugh comparing a logo for the White House plan to a Nazi symbol "legitimizes people who are on the edge to go do something or say something."

"And if you go and take a look at this, you will find that the Obama health care logo is damn close to a Nazi swastika logo," Limbaugh said.

Later, someone painted a swastika outside the office of Congressman David Scott of Georgia, one of Obama's supporters.


Secret Service Security Around Obama
While officials told ABC News that the President's daily threat matrix has yet to reflect a sharp increase in threats, White House officials privately admit deep concern and have told the Secret Service to keep security tight, even if Obama objects.

"I think the president has, in effect, triggered fears amongst fairly large numbers of white people in this country that they are somehow losing their country, that the battle is lost," Potok told ABC News. "The nation that their Christian white forefathers created has somehow been taken from them."

Asa Eslocker contributed to this report.
Click Here for the Blotter Homepage.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=8324481&page=2

Copyright © 2009 ABC News Internet Ventures

Go on-site to gain access to links and photo's. There are a couple of them.

What a disgusting display of unfounded off the wall fear, bigotry and hatred. We are regressing as a nation in how we relate to differences. This is shameful and it make's one feel ill. Truly ill.

Are exhibitionists considered dangerous? When too many people take notice, perhaps they are, as much so as those with the worst criminal mindset, as it seems they get their jollies off being noticed and thought of.

Empty lives; empty; with little comprehension about what it is they're all up in arms and shouting about. Kill someone because he is trying to help us all? Get with it. How very dumb.

I would hope that they would use the brains and a clearer thought process which they seem to not be in control of, as this isn't what we should be all about.

Why would this be a dangerous thing: Give the health program a try, and if it isn't viable, fix it, or dump it, but wanting to kill and threaten? How is it that they came to this? Them believing the propaganda and vitriol being pumped out faster than the price of gas and the cost of living goes up and up just floors me. Where were the gun toting and shouting naysayers with their loud red faced nonsensical hate filled protests when Dick Cheney, and to a small extent, GW Bush, were calling the shots? Not a peep from the radicals then was there?
,
They seem to be rushing head long at breakneck speed into disasterous actions.

And the Blue Dogs? How much is the health of the nation worth to them?, as we feel it's the insurance lobby pulling their strings, not that they're concerned about our overall health issues.

Led like sheep once again, here we go. Another a comedy of errors, as the dark cloud of hate hovers over all of us due to their actions and words, and those who work at such things within their propaganda machine, have become more than proficient over the past several years; they have it down pat. Goebbles might seem a rank amature up against these new guys on the block, of those in the back rooms of the politicians.

Oogle and count that money, stuff your mouths, and your wallets, get those promises of board appointments, a scholarship for your kid. Cater to the worst of us. You know the routine, as the story is as old as our "Shining City on The Hill", and we've learned all about how it speaks to you in a convincing, winsome voice. SRH

[Saundra Hummer]

.~ ~ ~ ~ ~
OpEdNewsDiebold sold for $5 million?
This is crazy
ES&S Acquires Premier Election Solutions.
This is just wrong on so many levels.
By
Lani Massey Brown
September 4, 2009

When Voting News reported on on ES&S acquiring Premier Election Solutions, they commented, “Monopoly anyone?” But this acquisition is just wrong on so many levels.

Yes, the monopoly. ES&S's website boasts that ES&S voting systems counted approximately 50% of the votes in the last four major elections. 67 million registered voters vote on ES&S machines. 97K iVotronic touch screens are installed in 20 states and approximately 30K scanner tabulators are installed in 43 states and worldwide. While Premier Election Solutions (Diebold) Global Election Management System (GEMS) is used in more than 1,000 election environments throughout North America.

While the acquisition of Premier indeed adds munitions to ES&S's arsenal. The monopoly is but a part of the troubling equation.

Consider the Government Accountability Office's (GOA) stunted investigation of Sarasota's 2006 District 13 with its 18,000 missing votes. While the investigation fizzled with inconclusive results and investigative paths not taken, the initial findings of the investigation revealed an end-to-end ES&S election process lacking good business practices and void of independent checks and balances. ES&S virtually owns the election process. ES&S manufactures the machines, produces test data, defines the testing process, counts the votes, determines the winner, and declares the election valid. While Florida's Secretary of State and Sarasota's Supervisor of Elections simply follow the ES&S directions. (1)

Consider the absence of election laws and comprehensive processes that recognize bogus election results and mandate clear and immediate corrective action. This void has actually enabled election blunders since 2000.
Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/ES-S-Acquires-Premier-Elec-by-Lani-Massey-Brown-090903-993.html

More importantly, the lapse in business standards in tandem with the absence of such laws make it all the more possible for a lone techie, a company insider to slip some crafty little program code into the election program mix. As long as this techie stays smart and keeps the win within the margin of error he or she can effectively alter and even spot control election results.

Consider the technical challenges experienced by these two companies. Nine states reported voting problems with their Diebold equipment, including: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Maryland, Ohio, Utah, Virginia. Eight states reported problems with their ES&S voting equipment: Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Wisconsin, and West Virginia. And five states reported voting problems with both ES&S and Diebold voting equipment: Florida, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Texas. (2)

Consider the ES&S technical problems the GAO did not find and why. GOA's Sarasota investigation fizzled when they wrapped up the investigation by testing only two working machines to assess whether touch screen miscalibration failures caused Sarasota's improbable results. Ironically, the GAO didn't investigate the statewide Attorney General race in which the evidence was abundant and convincing. As in Sarasota race, the ES&S touch screens in Attorney General race incurred a statistically improbable undervote of 137K or 8.65%. All other voting machines including ES&S scanners registered undervotes within normal ranges (2.72 to 3.04%). (3)

Throughout it all, ES&S failed to disclose, failed to accept responsibility, and consistently failed to produce a product that accurately counts our votes. All this and we keep buying their machines and now ES&S is rewarded with a bigger market share.

“Monopoly anyone?”

(1) A closer look at the GAO's Florida District 13. No smoking gun...Not if but when and how often. Could Red be next?

(2) Please note, this is only a partial list of voting errors retrieved from information provided by http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp and does not include any errors occurring prior to October 2008. If your state or voting machine isn't listed here, check the complete report at Voters Unite.)

(3) 1.5 million total ballots were cast on ES&S iVotronic touchscreens in 11 Florida counties. 137K of these electronic ballots, resulted in no votes being counted for Attorney General. An undervote rate of 8.65%. (2)

730K paper ballots were counted on ES&S optical scanners in 21 Florida counties. Of these 730K paper ballots, there were only 22K undervotes for Attorney General. An undervote rate of 3.04%. (Note: Sequoia's touchscreen undervote rate was 3.0%. Diebold's optical ballot scanner undervote rate was 2.72%.) (2).

We are indebted to Florida Fair Elections Coalition for the extensive research and data collected as presented their comprehensive, “Florida's Vanished Votes Reports.” The reports can be found on www.floridafairelections.org.

Author's Bio:
Author of A MARGIN OF ERROR: BALLOTS OF STRAW. Lovely brainy Cady Palmer is trapped in a web of terror and treachery. The governor wants her dead. Her stalker wants revenge. The governor's spy... he simply wants her. Lani Brown draws on personal experience as an election official for this suspense novel. Original Content at: Go on-site to gain access to the numerous links within this article, one's not in this post. Just click on the following URL/LINK: http://www.opednews.com/articles/ES-S-Acquires-Premier-Elec-by-Lani-Massey-Brown-090903-993.html ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.

[Saundra Hummer]

.
— — — — — Jack Kemp, when in office and running on the "National Ticket" in the primaries, visited the local high school, and there wasn't a peep out of anyone in the media, print or electronic, nothing was said about him like is being said about President Obama, and he made a physical appearance, not a media one. Politicians visiting schools is commonplace. Usually when running for office or re-election to one, trying to use the input our kids have with we parents. Not sure it works, however, I do have to say our daughter was imrpessed with him.

This is just the most outrageous thing yet. Getting upset when President Obama trys to encourage children to stay in school, study hard, and plan for their future?

So what if, and when, his talk to the children grabs attention out and away from the someone elses agenda? So what if it pumps up President Obama's popularity? Where's the harm? Where's the actual harm? They must realize not all of us are as capable as these professed conservatives are of hating him as they do. Some of us might not like him, but to dislike and hate him so strongly is a dangerous thing.

Perhaps you, the conservatives/Republicans need to send out a rebuttle? No, you need to send out a backup to this idea. Who can talk the talk and grab attention for the good on the GOP side of the isle? Whomever it is, send them out to do more convincing of our children that staying in school and planing for their future is a great thing. Where's the harm for either side? What a flimsy excuse for coming down on President Obama. This is how many of us see it.

Get real people, this is a good thing. Granted it comes from a half African/American, which I know upsets too many of us, but hey, take this type of encouragment as a blessing, not a detriment to the well being of our school children, thus our country's welfare.

If you're a racist and/or a Republican, tell it like it is, quit this grasping at straws to rid yourselves of any influence for the good this man of vision has.

I agree with Robert Gibbs. Just how silly can you get? SRH
An
ARTICLE

Gibbs: Furor over school speech is 'silly season' By
BEN FELLER
AP
posted: 8 MINUTES AGO

WASHINGTON - The White House on Friday dismissed as pointless the furor over President Barack Obama's plan to deliver a televised back-to-school speech to the nation's students.

"I think we've reached a little bit of the silly season when the president of the United States can't tell kids in school to study hard and stay in school," presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters. "I think both political parties agree that the dropout rate is something that threatens our long-term economic success."

Obama's planned address to students has prompted a surprising push-back from some quarters over what the White House sees as an important but innocuous topic.

Some conservative critics say Obama is trying to promote a political agenda and overstepping his bounds, taking the federal government too far into public school business.

Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, a potential presidential contender in 2012, said Obama's speech is "uninvited" and that the president's move raises questions of content and motive.

Many school districts have decided not to show Obama's speech, to be delivered at noon EDT Tuesday, partly in response to concerns from parents.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, on Friday defended Obama's plan to address students.

"The bottom line is we need the president of the United States of America to use his bully pulpit to talk to kids about the importance of education and to help inspire kids," she said on "The John Gambling Show" on radio station WOR NewsTalk Radio 710 in New York.

Gibbs said former Republican presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush delivered similar speeches to students. He said Obama's speech will not be partisan but rather a chance for children to get "a little encouragement as they start the school year."

The White House spokesman said he couldn't speak to the motivations of some school districts.

"Look, there are some school districts that won't let you read 'Huckleberry Finn,' " Gibbs said.

He said the administration understands that some districts have logistical concerns with the timing of Obama's speech.

The White House plans to release the speech online Monday so parents can read it. Obama will deliver the speech at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Va.
—Associated Press writer Marcus Franklin in New York contributed to this report.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reservedhttp://news.aol.com/article/gibbs-furor-over-school-speech-is-silly/656357?cid=12— — — .

[Saundra Hummer]

.
* * *
TRUE MAJORITY a project of USACTION
A
NEWSLETTER
WITH A PETITION TO SIGN

Dear Saundra R.,

This is a joint message from TrueMajority and Health Care for America Now, a massive nationwide coalition of citizens' groups co-founded by our parent organization, USAction. All across this gigantic movement we agree that there is one crucial thing to do right now. Read on.


-- Matt Holland, TrueMajority.org


President Obama will give a major speech on health reform this coming Wednesday. In it, he'll lay out his vision for health reform.1

Two weeks ago, on a webcast with hundreds of thousands of supporters, the President reiterated his strong support for a public health insurance option. Now, he is under enormous pressure from conservatives in both parties - and some advisers - to drop it.2

Press reports indicate President Obama has not decided what his upcoming speech will say.3 It is at this crucial moment that he needs to hear from you most.

Barack Obama ran for President on the promise of real change. He promised to break the stranglehold private insurers have on our health and our wallets, and break the stranglehold corporate money and lobbyists have on Washington.

It's not going to be easy to change all that. That's why the President needs to hear from you.

Can you sign this petition and let President Obama know that you'll fight with him for a public health insurance option? Can you let him know that you're counting on him for bold leadership to bring us quality, affordable health care including a public health insurance option?

Click here to sign the petition.

The petition says: President Obama, we're counting on you to fight for bold change on health care. We need quality, affordable health care we all can count on, including a strong public health insurance option. It's the key to breaking the stranglehold that private insurers have over our health care system.

Health reform is at a crossroads.

The forces arrayed against the President are numerous. Insurance companies are spending millions every day to defeat the public health insurance option.4 Republicans are opposing anything he supports.5 Lobbyists are stoking hatred and fear at town halls around the country.6 And the media is feeding the controversy and refusing the cover the fact that pro-reform people outnumber those who are against at events.7

In this climate, President Obama needs to know you stand behind him for bold, real change.

Click here to sign the petition to the President, telling him you stand with him for the change we all believe in - quality, affordable health care with a public health insurance option to break the insurance industry stranglehold.

As the President himself often says, change comes from the bottom up. We need to show the President and everyone in Washington that we voted for real change and we're willing to fight for real change.

With bold leadership and the people behind him, President Obama can win the change we need - real health care reform for all, affordable coverage, and a public health insurance option.

Please click here to sign the petition.
https://secure.healthcareforamericanow.org/page/s/change

-Matt

Matt Holland
Online Director
TrueMajority / USAction



1. Obama to give health-care speech to joint session of Congress - Associated Press
2. Obama Aides Aim to Simplify and Scale Back Health Bills - New York Times
3. The Divisions in the White House Over Health-Care Reform - Ezra Klein
4. Lobbyists Spend Millions to Influence Health Care - Washington Post
5. Health reform foes plan Obama's 'Waterloo' - Politico
6. Right-Wing Harassment Strategy Against Dems Detailed In Memo: 'Yell,' 'Stand Up And Shout Out,' 'Rattle Him' - Think Progress
7. The Real Town Hall Story - E.J. Dionne Jr.

If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for TrueMajority.

TrueMajority.org is a grassroots group of citizens who believe in America's true values of openness, fairness and compassion. We believe participating in an effective government is the best way to be mutually responsible for our community. TrueMajority is a project of USAction, a 501(c)(4) organization under the IRS tax code.
Send on to friends. SRH* * * * * * *

[Saundra Hummer]

.
*************Health Care "Reform"
that Will
Enrich For-Profit Insurance Companies
and
Big Pharma is What the WH is Fighting For Now
By
mark karlin
Created 09/05/2009 - 6:54am
BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG
By
Mark Karlin

Okay, we've heard enough.

Just yesterday, the White House reluctantly released a partial log of who has visited with Obama's staff on so-called "healthcare reform" and it reads like a who's who of Big Pharma and health insurance lobbyists.

Let's stop the pretense of Obama making some bold move here.

Remember Medicare Part "D"? That was when Bush stuffed money in the pockets of Big Pharma by getting more prescription coverage for seniors, but only because the government was prohibited from negotiating or setting prices for the medications. In short, Big Pharma dictated the bill and has made billions of dollars and contributed to the Medicare shortfall at an an exorbitant rate. Medicare Part "D" helped seniors, but its real purpose was to loot the public treasury in order to fatten the profits of Big Pharma.

Now in that bill was a so-called "trigger" that if Big Pharma charged "too much" then a public option would trigger in on pharmaceuticals. But Big Pharma wrote the target for the trigger so high in the bill, which the Republicans championed, that the trigger has never been reached.

So a few weeks back Rahm "I don't give a shit about anything but winning -- don't f**king talk to me about principle and doing the right thing" Emanuel suggested to the Wall Street Journal that the public option for "Healthcare Reform" was no big deal anyway and the WH would be satisfied with a "trigger" for "healthcare reform," meaning that the for-profit insurance companies would police themselves. The WH had already negotiated a "self-policing" deal with Big Pharma, while keeping true healthcare reform advocates -- including public opiton and single payer advocates -- at bay, not even including them in negotiations.

Now, a New York Times article on Friday indicated that Emanuel was negotiating with Olympia Snowe on a "trigger" instead of a public option. This is Bush style "reform," not the change Obama promised. It's a sad joke that will allow Emanuel to end up with an outhouse and call it a victory, because that's all he is concerned with; i.e., to say he won, but what he won doesn't matter a whole lot to him.

This has all the makings of a travesty.

During the primary campaign BuzzFlash lost many readers because we were highly critical of certain racial coding in the Clinton campaign. Now, we will probably lose some readers because we are critical of the White House having been changed by D.C. into corporate appeasers rather than changing D.C. (Pissing people off is what comes of BuzzFlash being completely independent of any corporation or co-opting political relationships.)

Sure, we'd still vote for just about any Democrat over just about any Republican, particularly since the GOP has turned into a colony for lunatics and racists. But when it comes to corporate control over Congress, the healthcare "reform" that's on the table is only going to enrich the for-profit insurance companies and Big Pharma.

Yes, it will (after a multi-year phase in) eliminate pre-existing condition disqualification and recissions, but the insurance companies will just jack up their rates to accomodate the new requirements. It won't cost them a thing -- and the increased costs that for-profit healthcare brings to the system will stay in place.

What will happen is that the taxpayers will end up subsidizing for-profit insurance and Big Pharma through government subsidies to cover the premium increases.

This isn't "reform"; it's looting of the public treasury when Medicare has shown that a government option that negotiates and sets healthcare costs -- and doesn't need to make a profit -- dramatically reduces the costs of medical care.

Right now, the WH is leaking that it wants a deal, just about any deal. Obama can't afford to walk away without the appearance of a "win."

But the real winners will, it appears, once again be the corporations who pull the strings in D.C., with the cooperation of the White House.

Axelrod and Emanuel are also "anonymously" telling the press that it will be good for Obama to slap down progressives to show that he's a centrist.

But when given accurate information, more than 3/4 of Americans support a government option -- before FOX and Limbaugh get to them with lies.

Obama is buying the "centrist" mythology created out of a GOP disinformation campaign, as have his Democratic predecessors.

We need a Democratic President for Supreme Court appointments, but as far as anything related to Wall Street or business, it's business as usual.

BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG
Source URL: http://blog.buzzflash.com/node/9361

Links:
[1] http://technorati.com/tag/EditorBlog
[2] http://technorati.com/tag/For-profit looting
[3] http://technorati.com/tag/White House
[4] http://technorati.com/tag/Healthcare Reform
Published on BuzzFlash.org
Go on-site to gain access to numerous comments and other articles on this subject, or those related to it. Just click on the above, and, following links
http://blog.buzzflash.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * *

[Saundra Hummer]

.. . . . . . . .Gang Documentarian Killed in El SalvadorPosted Friday
September 07:54 AM
By: 04PopEater / Wire Services
65 Comments

The film world is in shock after a French documentary maker who spent years filming a brutally violent Salvadoran street gang was found shot to death in a gang-riddled El Salvador neighborhood. El Salvador's top prosecutor said Thursday the involvement of gangs was under consideration in the killing of Christian Poveda, a former war photographer whose latest film takes an intimate look at the violent lives of gang members deported back to the Central American country after serving time in U.S. prisons.

Salvadoran Attorney General Astor Escalante declined to provide more details of the ongoing investigation.

"It is our duty to do everything we can to find those responsible," he said.

Poveda, 53, was found Wednesday inside a car in the rural Tonacatepeque region north of the capital of San Salvador. He was shot in the head.

The day of his death, the filmmaker had set out to visit the gang-dominated area of Soyapango, just outside the capital, to arrange an interview with female gang members for journalists from a French fashion magazine. He told an Associated Press photographer about the outing before leaving.

Gang violence in impoverished El Salvador fuels one of the highest homicide rates in Latin America.

Poveda practically lived among members of one gang, the Mara 18, to create "La Vida Loca," filming gang initiations, drug use, tattoo session and funerals. Pirated copies of the film are sold on the streets of the capital, and even Salvadorans consider the documentary to be a shocking glimpse into gang life.

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner praised Poveda's intrepid work, calling him "a respected journalist, a professional who never hesitated to take great risks in the name of freedom of information."

In April, Poveda told the Los Angeles Times that despite the drugs, shootings, beatings and cruelty he captured on the film, he had sympathy for many of the gang members, whom he described as "victims of society."

"As savage as they can be, they're people of their word. The gangs are very well-structured organizations and the decision made by a gang is the final one. From the moment I understood that, I had no problems," he said.

Poveda, who lived and worked as a filmmaker and photojournalist in El Salvador during the civil war that began in 1980, had recently begun touring with "La Vida Loca."

Salvadoran Public Safety Minister Manuel Melgar called Poveda's slaying a "repugnant and reproachable criminal act" and said police would work "tirelessly" to find the killers.

The French ambassador in San Salvador said France would support the Salvadoran investigation.

Reporters Without Borders board member Alain Mingham, a friend of Poveda's, said the filmmaker was able to be committed to and involved with his subjects without taking sides.

The son of Spanish Republicans who sought refuge in France, Poveda reported from Chile under the Pinochet dictatorship, and also covered the civil war in Nicaragua in the 1980s, Mingham said.

During his 30-year career, Poveda wrote for a variety of publications including Time and Newsweek magazines, Paris Match and Figaro, from posts in Latin America, Iran and Iraq, Sierra Leone and the Philippines.

"His humanistic convictions went hand-in-hand with a great deal of professional rigor," Mingham said.

2009 AOL LLC. All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2009Go on-site for photo of Christian Poveda http://www.popeater.com/2009/09/04/gang-documentarian-killed-in-el-salvador/?icid=main|htmlws-main|dl7|link5|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.popeater.com%2F200 9%2F09%2F04%2Fgang-documentarian-killed-in-el-salvador%2F I am of the opinion due to all I've observed over a long period of time, corruption and gangs don't exist when there is honesty in government, local especially, as it takes the police and the justice system turning a blind eye to violence and dishonesty, if not them actually joining in on the events that cause us so much grief. This goes for drugs, and to illustrate a point, just remember prohibition. All of the articles in the media, and in the overwhelming magazine articles and, books written about it, now expose just how corrupt everyone was during that time in our history, and how, due to their corruption, it, the business of supplying alcohol to everyone, flourished. Fortunes were made, just like we're seeing with drugs today, especially marijuana.

These are dangerous people who killed this enlightened man, and oftentimes, they hone their craft right here in the United States.

I feel badly for the honest hard working Latino's who, because of a few, suffer terrible discrimination, as they are all too often, lumped in with the worst offenders. I've been exposed to, and have known both types, and it's a tragedy in my view. . . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

.
XXXXXXX
Hide the Kids,
the
President Wants to Urge Them to Stay in SchoolBy
Jesse L. Jackson

Bizarre headline of the year: “Obama’s Plan for School Talk Ignites a Revolt.” President Obama will speak today to public students across the country, urging them to work hard and to stay in school – and somehow this has become a front page controversy. Some things make you fear for this country’s future.

America has a real education crisis. As a high wage country, we have a massive investment in developing the best educated workers in the world. As a democracy, we depend on educated citizens informing themselves about the world around them so they can make informed choices about candidates and issues. As a nation of immigrants, we have a clear stake in a public school system that teaches the common language, history and learning that helps to unite us and make our diversity strength.

Yet, many of our schools aren’t working well. Our dropout rates, particularly those among low income students, exceed those of other industrial countries. Too many students graduate without the skills they need to be productive in an economy ever more linked to high technology. Too many come out of high school without the resources to get the higher education or training that they merit.

In many of our urban schools, what Jonathan Kozol called “savage inequalities” still sap the spirit. Many poor children go to schools that are overcrowded, in need of repair, with too few textbooks and dated equipment. Often these schools get the worst teachers, as the good teachers flock to schools in more affluent neighborhoods. The kids can’t miss the message: that the society doesn’t have much hope for their potential.

That’s why Barak Obama’s own story is so important. He personifies possibility, the notion that you can overcome great obstacles if you dedicate yourself. His election showed African Americans and other minorities that there need be no ceiling on their dreams.

So for him to speak to students, to tell them to stay in school, to apply themselves, to work hard, to dream big is important. It is exactly what we would want a president to do, particularly this president. One speech won’t change the world. But it may spark some hope – and it helps show that we as a society care about their education.

So why is this controversial? The uproar has been particularly severe in Texas, where several school districts, under pressure from parents, have decided to let children opt out of listening to the speech. Why? Because some parents are apparently worried that the president will indoctrinate their children with “socialist ideas.” The speech, they argue, should be screened for political content and reviewed by local school boards. A Texas engineer was quoted as saying, “I don’t want our schools turned over to some socialist movement.” The Republican Party Chair in Florida announced he was “appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama’s socialist ideology.”

This is ugly stuff. They are talking about the democratically elected president of the United States. They are suggesting that the president, chosen by a vast majority of voters to lead this country, is so un-American that one speech might lead their children astray – and we have Republican Party officials echoing this slander.

I only wish President Obama’s speech had the power they attribute to it, for it might then lead millions of children to stay in school and work harder. But it isn’t the silly exaggeration of the president’s influence that is so shocking, it is the notion that the kids have to be locked away when the president of the United States speaks.

We’ve now witnessed the Republican Governor of Texas fanning talk about seceding from the union. We’ve seen Republican leaders repeating the contemptible lie about “death panels” in the health care bill. We’ve seen zealots packing guns outside of presidential town meetings.

This is taking partisan or ideological disagreement to an ugly and dangerous extreme. It is the equivalent of the old days when the John Birch Society charged that Dwight Eisenhower was a communist. And just as Eisenhower and sensible people in both parties finally stepped up to discredit Joe McCarthy (as he had begun to go after the Army), it is time for sensible people to stand clearly against this nonsense.

Whether you agree with his policies or not, President Obama is the democratically elected president of this nation. His own life story makes his message about staying in school compelling. His speech today should be celebrated, not castigated.
http://mediachannel.org/blog/2009/09/hide-the-kids-the-president-wants-to-urge-them-to-stay-in-school/ XXXXXXXXXXXX .

[Opus131]

Modern schools have become nothing but a vessel for forceful liberal propaganda or social engineering, no wonder people are slowly flocking away from those institutions. The only reason people still go to school is to earn that degree in order to get a job, but even that is becoming a dubious necessity with all the outsourcing that is going on.


As a nation of immigrants, we have a clear stake in a public school system that teaches the common language, history and learning that helps to unite us and make our diversity strength.

What garbage, pure liberal fiction.

[Dave Martin]

Modern schools have become nothing but a vessel for forceful liberal propaganda or social engineering, no wonder people are slowly flocking away from those institutions. The only reason people still go to school is to earn that degree in order to get a job, but even that is becoming a dubious necessity with all the outsourcing that is going on.

What garbage, pure liberal fiction.
Oh, my.

Other than a drop-out rate that's far too high, I don't really see people flocking away from middle and high schools; do you have a source to back up your statement, with percentages of students 'flocking away'?

Oh - one other thing: You shouldn't refer to, "As a nation of immigrants, we have a clear stake in a public school system that teaches the common language, history and learning that helps to unite us and make our diversity strength." 'liberal fiction'; I believe that's part of the creeping facism that the President is pushing, not his communist agenda.
http://home.comcast.net/~fxgpic/obama_nazi_communist_muslim_peace.jpg

[Saundra Hummer]

:: :: ::
CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS
Public Opinion Snapshot: Conservatives’ Greatest Enemy
on
Health Care Is Clarity
By
Ruy Teixeira
September 8, 2009
Conservatives have held nothing back in their efforts to discredit the efforts of the majority of Congress and President Barack Obama to reform the health care system. Their strategy is simple: by spreading lies about the health care plans before Congress, among them government “death panels,” coverage for illegal immigrants, and government tax dollars for abortions, conservatives hope the public can remain confused about what is actually in these plans.

This strategy, as appalling as it is, makes sense from their avowed goal of stopping health care reform. As poll after poll has documented, the public strongly supports the basic reforms that the health care bills would deliver. The latest example of this comes from an end of August CBS News poll. In that poll, 79 percent support “requiring health insurance companies to cover anyone who applies,” 72 percent support “the government setting limits on the amount that health insurance companies can charge people for insurance premiums, co-pays, and out-of-pocket expenses” and 71 percent support “the government providing subsidies to help low-income people buy their own health insurance from private insurance companies.”

The following has accompaning grahps, the percent of people who agree, disagree or are unsure of these questions:Some lawmakers have proposed requiring health insurance companies to cover anyone who applies for health insurance regardless of whether or not they have an existing medical condition or a prior illness. Do you aprove of disapprove of requiring health insurance companies to cover anyone who applies

Would you approve or disapprove of the government setting limits on the amount that health insurance companies can charge people for insurance premiums, co-pays, and out-of-pocket expenses?

Would you apporve od disapprive of the government providing subsidies to hlep low-income people buy their own health insurance from private insurance companies? Go on-site to gain access to their numbers.http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/09/opinion_090809.html
Source:
August 27-31, 2009 CBS News poll
Nm 1,027 adults nationwide.MoE+(for all adults).
Go on-site to view the graph with the numbers, These are items that are sure to be in any health care reform bill that Obama signs. But does the public know that? Very doubtful. In the same poll, respondents were asked “Do you think you understand the health care reforms under consideration in Congress, or are they confusing to you?” By an overwhelming 67 percent to 31 percent, the public confessed they are confused by the health care reforms before Congress. This is the confusion the conservatives are so assiduously trying to cultivate.

GRAPH/CHARTDo you think you understand the health care reforms under
consideration in Congress, or are they confusing to you?Go on-site to gain access
President Obama can use the bully pulpit to try to dispel some of this confusion. Right now, the public does not feel he has done that. By a 60 percent- to 31-percent margin, they say he has not clearly explained his plans for health care reform. Tomorrow evening the president will have his chance to put that right. If he does, the worst possible thing for conservatives’ political strategy may happen: The public will have some clarity on what is at stake in health care reform. That’s the conservatives’ great nightmare. Let’s hope it happens.
GRAPH/CHART
with Percentages
Go on site to view.Ruy Teixeira is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress. To learn more about his public opinion analysis go to the Media and Culture page and the Progressive Studies program page of our website.
To speak with our experts on this topic, please contact:Print: Suzi Emmerling (foreign policy and security, energy, education, immigration)
202.481.8224 or semmerling@americanprogress.org
Print: Jason Rahlan (health care, economy, civil rights)
202.481.8132 or jrahlan@americanprogress.org

Radio: John Neurohr
202.481.8182 or jneurohr@americanprogress.org

TV: Andrea Purse
202.741.6250 or apurse@americanprogress.org
Web: Erin Lindsay
202.741.6397 or elindsay@americanprogress.org
© Center for American ProgressPass these links on to family and friends, it might mean a lot in their lives. http://www.atamericanprogress.org :: :: :: :: ::

[Saundra Hummer]

. . . . . . .Senior Scare, Yet AgainA DNC ad falsely accuses Republicans of voting "to abolish Medicare." September 8, 2009
SummaryThe Democratic National Committee says in a TV ad that "Republicans voted to abolish Medicare." Not true.

The ad refers to a proposal endorsed by most House Republicans as part of the alternative budget they presented earlier this year. In fact, the GOP plan actually called for:
. Preserving the current Medicare program for anyone now receiving it, or within 10 years of qualifying for it.

. For those now under age 55, converting Medicare to a system of private, government-approved health insurance plans purchased mostly with government payments.

The proposal is similar to one endorsed a decade ago by the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare. It is controversial, to be sure: Most Democrats don’t like it, and not all Republicans do either. It’s a plan to change Medicare significantly but not to "abolish" it.

AnalysisThe DNC released the ad at the start of the Labor Day weekend. Besides claiming that Republicans "voted to abolish" Medicare, it also claims that "Republicans want to end Medicare" and that its leaders are now calling "for killing it."

The DNC also unveiled similar ads aimed at GOP House members, including Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio and GOP Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia and eight others: Reps. Erik Paulsen of Minnesota, Jean Schmidt of Ohio, Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, Don Young of Alaska, Mary Bono Mack of California, Patrick Tiberi of Ohio, Lee Terry of Nebraska and Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, claiming in turn that each of them "voted to abolish Medicare" and is "no friend of seniors."
VIDEODNC Ad:
"Republicans Want To End Medicare"
Click on the following link to gain access to site and the video, plus links within this article. http://factcheck.org/2009/09/senior-scare-yet-again/
Announcer: Republicans want to end Medicare. You heard right: Republicans actually voted to abolish Medicare for future generations.

One of the most important programs for seniors. America’s seniors have relied on Medicare for over 40 years, and Democrats are working to strengthen Medicare. But the plain truth is Republicans have opposed Medicare from the start. Their leaders have called for cutting Medicare, and now for killing it. The Republican party: No friend of seniors.

The Democratic National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising. http://factcheck.org/2009/09/senior-scare-yet-again/

The ad is aimed at countering Republican claims that Democratic health care proposals would be paid for by reductions in Medicare benefits to seniors. (That claim made our list of "Seven Falsehoods About Health Care.") The DNC’s Communications Director Brad Woodhouse said: "You know that Republican attempts to lie and mislead the public have reached the height of absurdity when the GOP … tries to portray itself as an ally to this country’s senior citizens."

We’ve criticized Republicans and we’ve criticized Democrats for making scary, false accusations about Medicare. This latest round of ads just continues a pattern of partisan warfare by both sides that relies on false claims and appeals to fear.

"Voted to abolish?"The DNC offered no factual back-up for its claims on its Web site. The TV ad itself cites House vote number 191 from March 20, 2009, as justification for the claim that Republicans "actually voted to abolish Medicare." But that was not a straight up-or-down vote on the existence of Medicare. Rather, it was a vote on a Republican alternative to the annual budget resolution that Congress passes to set targets for federal spending and revenues, to guide the appropriations and tax-writing committees. The GOP alternative budget contained a "policy statement on Medicare" calling for gradual conversion of Medicare from government insurance to government-subsidized and government-approved private insurance.

The statement set down a policy of enacting legislation "to ensure the Medicare benefit continues to provide health care coverage for seniors" through a new method "to make the program solvent and fiscally sustainable." It specifically called for legislation that "preserves the current Medicare program for individuals 55 and older." For younger persons, it called for the government to provide subsidies, equivalent to "100 percent of the cost of the Medicare benefit," for the purchase of private insurance "from a menu of Medicare-approved plans, similar to options available to Members of Congress."

The full debate on the GOP budget alternative, formally known as "amendment number 4" to House Concurrent Resolution number 85, may be read in the Congressional Record of April 2, 2009, starting on page H4469 and continuing through page H4487. The "Policy Statement on Medicare" appears on page H4474, and we have excerpted the full text of that statement here:

SEC. 301. POLICY STATEMENT ON MEDICARE.
(a) MEDICARE POLICY.—It is the policy of this concurrent resolution that Congress will enact legislation to ensure the Medicare benefit continues to provide health care coverage for seniors by establishing a new methodology to make the program solvent and fiscally sustainable. Legislation shall be enacted that:
(1) Expands protections for seniors against catastrophic medical costs, simplifies beneficiary contributions, updates Medicare payments, increases flexibility for hospitals serving unusually high numbers of low-income patients, and reduces the prescription drug benefit subsidy for high-income seniors (household incomes over $170,000). To ensure that the cost of frivolous litigation is not passed on to beneficiaries, the medical malpractice system is reformed.
(2) Preserves the current Medicare program for individuals 55 and older. For those under 55, the resolution gradually converts the current Medicare program into one in which Medicare beneficiaries receive a premium support payment—equivalent to 100 percent of the cost of the Medicare benefit—to purchase health coverage from a menu of Medicare-approved plans, similar to options available to Members of Congress. The premium support payment is risk-adjusted to increase with age and health status, and income-related so low-income seniors receive extra support. Premiums continue to be based on an all-beneficiary average, so the phasing of the younger population into the new program will not increase premiums for the population continuing in the existing program.

During House debate, Republican Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the author of the GOP proposal, said of the Medicare portion:

Rep. Ryan, April 2: [A]ll we’re saying on Medicare for younger people, so we can save the program, why don’t we let them have a program like the one we have in Congress. We have a good health care program. I think it’s worthy of theirs.
In short, there was no vote to "abolish," "kill" or "end" Medicare. There was a vote on a GOP budget proposal that, among many other things, called for legislation that would gradually replace the current form of Medicare with a different model – and only for those now under age 55.

Pictures Speak LouderTo give the DNC credit, the ad’s announcer does make a gesture in the direction of factual accuracy by saying that the vote to "abolish" Medicare applies to "future generations." But the announcer also said "Republicans want to end Medicare" and that their leaders now favor "killing it," without any qualification. Meanwhile, the ad shows many images – not of persons under age 55 who actually might be affected – but of persons who all appear to be over age 65 and now enrolled in Medicare, the very ones for whom the GOP plan "preserves" the current form of the program. And nothing in the ad’s images or graphics reinforces the brief qualification voiced by the announcer. Overall, we judge the ad to contain a false message aimed at today’s Medicare recipients, not those of the year 2019 and beyond.

We of course neither endorse nor reject the GOP Medicare proposal. It certainly stirs strong objections, mainly among Democrats. During debate, Democratic Rep. Robert E. Andrews of New Jersey criticized the GOP proposal, saying it would leave younger workers to "fend for themselves":

Rep. Andrews, April 2: Madam Chairman, if you ever wonder what a third Bush term would look like, this is it. This is a budget plan that maintains the tax breaks for the wealthiest people in America, pays for it by giving people 55 and under a voucher to go fend for themselves in the insurance market instead of Medicare, which I think would pay maybe 80 percent of what it costs. Actually, the GOP Medicare plan would have brought about little if any reduction in the cost of the program over the next decade, since anyone 55 or older would go onto the current system upon reaching age 65. (The GOP policy statement was silent on how or when disabled persons, who made up 16 percent of the Medicare population last year, might be affected by the plan.)

In fact, the GOP budget projected that Medicare spending would rise 88.5 percent during the 10 years covered by the GOP budget proposal – with outlays going from just under $427 billion in the current fiscal year (which ends Sept. 30) to more than $804 billion in fiscal 2019. Remember, this is the budget plan that the DNC’s ad says amounted to a vote to "abolish" Medicare.

The ad also claims that Republicans "have opposed Medicare from the start." It’s true that Democrats were chiefly responsible for enacting Medicare legislation, which was signed in 1965 by Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson. And many Republicans did oppose it, but by no means all of them. When the House voted on final passage, 70 Republicans voted for it, and 68 voted against it. In the Senate, 13 Republicans voted in favor, and 17 against.

The ad also pictures former president George W. Bush as the first example of a Republican who "opposed Medicare." In fact, Bush pushed through and signed the largest expansion of Medicare since its inception – the prescription drug benefit.

A Good Idea?We’ll leave it to our readers to judge which party has the better plan for Medicare. It’s worth noting, however, that something very similar to the GOP idea was endorsed by a majority of the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare in 1999.

The proposal was authored by then-Sen. John Breaux of Louisiana, a Democrat, and supported by then-House member Bill Thomas of California, a Republican. Breaux and Thomas were co-chairmen of the commission. Just as with the GOP proposal, the Breaux plan envisioned giving Medicare recipients access to a variety of private, government-approved health plans with premiums heavily subsidized (at about 88 percent, initially) by the government. The proposal stated: "We believe modeling a system on the one Members of Congress use to obtain health care coverage for themselves and their families is appropriate," a sentiment later echoed by Rep. Ryan when explaining the GOP budget proposal.

Under the Breaux proposal, Medicare beneficiaries would have chosen from a menu of private managed care plans, but (unlike Ryan’s plan) also could have opted for the traditional, government-run, fee-for-service plan. Beneficiaries willing to pay extra could purchase an expanded benefit package. The plan ultimately was supported by 10 of the commission’s 17 members. Two Democrats supported it, Breaux and Sen. Robert Kerrey of Nebraska. All seven who opposed it were Democrats. But the 10-vote majority fell short of the 11-vote super-majority that was required to refer any recommendation to Congress and the president, so the proposal was not formally adopted.

Such ideas remain controversial and even Republicans aren’t unanimously in favor. Indeed, 38 House Republicans voted against the budget plan containing the Medicare policy statement. Republican Rep. J. Randy Forbes of Virginia, though he ultimately was among the 137 Republicans who supported the budget proposal, nevertheless said he had "strong reservations" about endorsing the Medicare proposal without more thorough study: "Before embarking on any change to Medicare to ensure that this program exists for my children’s generation and my grandchildren’s generation, I expect the House to engage in a thorough, earnest debate that we have not yet had."

Those seeking thorough, earnest debate won’t find it in the DNC’s 30-second TV ad, however. It mischaracterizes what Republicans actually voted for.

– by Brooks Jackson
SourcesCongressional Record: 2 Apr 2009; H4469-H4467.

U.S. Congress. "House Concurrent Resolution 85" 111th Congress, 1st Session.

"Building a Better Medicare for Today and Tomorrow," final Breaux-Thomas Medicare Reform Proposal, National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare. 16 Mar 1999.

"Record of the final vote.Meeting Agenda for Tuesday, March 16, to Consider the Final Breaux-Thomas Medicare Reform Proposal, National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare. 16 Mar 1999.

"After the Bipartisan Commission: What Next for Medicare?" Commonwealth Fund. Oct 1999.

Posted by Brooks Jackson on Tuesday, September 8, 2009 at 1:33 pm
The FactCheck WireObama and Kenya. Again.
We've burned through rather a lot of pixels combating the claims of those who deny...Click to read the full post »

Hitting Grassley With Inflated NumbersTwo liberal groups, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and Democracy for America are airing an ad...Click to read the full post »

View the full Wire archivesAsk FactCheckQ: Will the "Cash for Clunkers" credits be taxed as income for consumers who participated in the program?
A: The act establishing the program prohibits the credit from being treated as income for federal income tax purposes. The credits, however, may be subject to a state or local income tax depending on the laws of the state or locality where the consumer resides.
Read the full question and answer
View the Ask FactCheck archives Fact of the DaySeptember 8, 2009
A total of 76 million people were enrolled in school — from nursery school to college — in the U.S. in October 2007. That’s 27 percent of the population age 3 and older.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau
See more facts of the dayFactCheck MailbagFactCheck Mailbag, Week of Aug. 25-Aug. 31"You will provide more useful analyses if you lose your childlike faith in the honesty of politicians, and look at the long-term agenda."
See letters from previous weeks" http://www.factcheck.org :: :: :: :: ::

[Saundra Hummer]

Modern schools have become nothing but a vessel for forceful liberal propaganda or social engineering, no wonder people are slowly flocking away from those institutions. The only reason people still go to school is to earn that degree in order to get a job, but even that is becoming a dubious necessity with all the outsourcing that is going on.



What garbage, pure liberal fiction.

I think it's an important thing to do, go to school, as it teaches one to interact on a positive basis with ones peers, and others who aren't part of your immediate family and circle of friends. All important wouldn't you say?

Pity the young child who never gets that opportunity in life. It can be terribly hard for them socially, and don't think that social acceptance isn't important in this life, we all know it is. That's just the way it is.

I remember learning that many schools and teachers only give us enough knowledge to become factory workers. That we have to seek out higher learning on our own in many cases, but in a lot of ways, that is easy to do if you live near centers of learning and libraries, & also have the funds to have elecronic media and such.

Funny, but in kindergarten, and 1st grade, I had the best little time with a little saw, pieces of wood, hammer and nails + empty thread spools of wood, with which, I made a little tug boat and then I painted it red, blue and yellow with tempura paints.

Was that training to become a grunt? To learn to do the hard work that needs to be done? I just know I loved it, that, and my Austrian elderly music teacher, Mrs. Gertselle or however she spelled her name. she made learning so much fun. She lived a couple of blocks from me and I used to go over to her house and help she and Geno Harrison with her dahlia's and other flowers. I don't think I was any help, but she let me believe I was. Geno was a lot older, so he was helping her for real.

We even had sheep and a steer in a little pen at Fries Avenue school, that is until they became concerned about dogs attacking them, then too, there was the danger of tetanus. Before that, for years we saw the older kids taking care of them, for 4H I believe.

This was only a mile or two from Los Angeles Harbor where my dad worked in the ship yards during WWII.

It's a rough area, however, we had the best schools there, I learned more there than I did in a wealthier part of Los Angeles County. Even more than at a private school, which come to find out wasn't accredited.

There were great teachers as well as wonderful programs. The food at one school was even good. Picture fresh halibut, two+ inches thiick and cooked perfectly, and all the trimmings that were better than most top notch restaurants. I kept telling my mother how good the food was there and she kept saying that wasn't possible, so I had her come to school one lunch time and eat with me and she was amazed. She comes from a family of fabulous cooks and she was good herself, and it just floored her that we had the best tasting food with expensive and tasty ingredients. When I see the slop being fed in most schools these days, it just about gags me to look at it. Good food can be made if they want to go to the effort and a bit more expense.

Wilmington Junior High was an experimental school, and it was one of the best schools around. They had pulled in the best teachers from all over the county and elsewhere as well. It was brand new in the mid 50's. Our group of 7th graders were the first students in it, we moved from bungalows to the nice buildings. It has now been torn down as it was on leased land belonging to an oil company, and it had asbestos everywhere, so I think that must be the reason for it's demise.

I liked living in Hermosa Beach the best, but I just can't fault the teachers and schools in Wilmington, which is where I went to school up until the 9th grade. Lots of life's lessons learned there, among them, acceptance and friendships with other races. We all had good times together and so I grew up not understanding or accepting the biases, the bigotry and hatred which afflict so many people. Thank goodness for that.

Off on a nostalgic trip here, but school is very important in the learning process, bookwise and perhaps it's just as important, if not more so, is the life experience you're gaining. You're learning how to relate to those around you in a positive manner. Enjoying friends and life experiences with those around you, even if you are as different as night and day. Possessing that experience is all important. This is how I see things.

[Saundra Hummer]

.
+++++++++++++
BUZZ FLASH
A
NEWLETTER
Indoctrinate or Inspire? Reagan Told Students to Embrace Guns & Tax Cuts, While GOP Tells Kids They Can't Think for ThemselvesSubmitted by
meg
on
Tue, 09/08/2009 - 12:39pm. Analysis
BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by
Meg White

President Barack Obama spoke before what I'd posit was one of his toughest audiences in his presidency so far: American high school students. President Obama's speech Tuesday at Wakefield High School in Arlington, VA was met with a screaming, standing ovation and copious handshakes and thank-yous in the rope line on his way out.

Listening to the reaction from listeners who called into C-SPAN, not one person had a negative comment about the speech, except to criticize the prejudgment of some conservative parents who threatened to keep their kids home from school so as not to allow their indoctrination by the president's words.

You can always count on first ladies to stand up for education and children. In an interview on CNN this weekend, former First Lady Laura Bush came to the defense of President Obama's plan to speak to schoolchildren on this first day back to school for many students across the country.

Bush also noted that it was the socialist lesson plan, not the potential words of encouragement our president planned to give to America's schoolchildren, that had everyone all riled up. Of course, when a person can easily read the speech online beforehand and see that there's absolutely nothing indoctrinating or political about it, it's pretty tough to describe it as propaganda.

However, even the charges of a politicized lesson plan ring hollow after watching the speech. Every person who called in within the first few minutes of the discussion on C-SPAN immediately following the speech used some iteration of the word "inspiration" to describe the speech. After over a half-dozen people in a row used this word, one wonders about the widespread negative reaction to the lesson plan question, "What is President Obama inspiring you to do?"

Let's consider these questions instead: Would President Obama ever venture to think he could get away with saying anything that could in any way be construed as political or -- gasp -- socialist? Would he hawk his economic theories or push his religion on innocent students?

Now that the speech is over and safely squirreled away in the C-SPAN archives, we can safely say that Obama will have to leave that kind of craven politicking to his rivals, opponents and previous occupants of the White House.

The ringleader of the anti-Obama school speech crowd could be considered to be Florida's Jim Greer. I'll let Mona Gable, a journalist specializing in parenting, introduce you:

Greer, the chairman of Florida's Republican Party, has been the most vocal, if not the most literate, opponent of Obama's speech. (An aside here: Notice how it is always Florida and Texas that cause such a political ruckus?)

If you didn't have the pleasure of seeing the Senate hopeful on the news, here's what Greer said in a press release:

As the father of four children, I am absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology. President Obama has turned to the American's [sic] children to spread his liberal lies, indoctrinating American's [sic] youngest children before they have a chance to decide for themselves.

Asked repeatedly where he got the notion that Obama was going to talk about health care and other policy matters when he hadn't actually read the text, Greer strangely couldn't answer.

This is just my take, but it appears that Greer is comfortable using his children as a political football by depriving them of their education for a day to perpetuate a myth about the president and to get some free press ahead of his Senate run.

Oh, wait; after he saw the text of the speech, Greer said he'd let his kids watch it. I wonder if he would have been OK with another U.S. president's speech containing propaganda over what the tax code should be, the role of government and the idea that students should study moral precepts alongside science and English.

He probably would, but only because that president was Ronald Reagan. In November 1988, just after the election that determined his successor, Reagan trucked in kids from a handful of different high schools to the White House and held a kind of press conference in which he gave a speech and answered a few questions from the students.

At the establishment of American Education Week, he told them to study the religious foundations upon which our great country was founded.

"We will also need to reaffirm our traditional moral values, because these values are the foundation on which everything we do is built," Reagan said in his prepared remarks. "It's also a moral vision, grounded in the reverence and faith of those who believe that with God's help, they could create a free and democratic nation."

Talk about indoctrination! Reagan also redefined American freedom in economic terms (emphasis mine):

But America's world leadership goes well beyond the tide toward democracy. We also find that more countries than ever before are following America's revolutionary economic message of free enterprise, low taxes and open world trade. These days whenever I see foreign leaders they tell me about their plans for reducing taxes and other economic reforms that they're using, copying what we've done in this country. I wonder if they realize that this vision of economic freedom, the freedom to work, to create, to produce, to own, and use property without the interference of the state, was central to the American revolution.

(Hmm, I wonder! Let's ask the Contras, shall we?)

Here Reagan expertly uses the founding fathers myth Republicans love so well to justify his current economic policies. Can you imagine if President Obama's prepared remarks to schoolchildren contained, say, a justification of the stimulus package using the New Deal as an example of the Americans' historical commitment to investing in their country's future?

But instead, Obama's vision of how the past relates to the future of this country was quite different that the self-serving city-on-a-hill rhetoric often employed by Reagan. From Obama's prepared remarks today:

The story of America isn’t about people who quit when things got tough. It’s about people who kept going, who tried harder, who loved their country too much to do anything less than their best.

It’s the story of students who sat where you sit 250 years ago, and went on to wage a revolution and found this nation. Students who sat where you sit 75 years ago who overcame a Depression and won a world war; who fought for civil rights and put a man on the moon. Students who sat where you sit 20 years ago who founded Google, Twitter and Facebook and changed the way we communicate with each other.

In contrast, Reagan took the time to "inspire" students to support the ability of presidents to have line-item veto power and to be required by the Constitution to balance the budget each year.

But, just as I'm sure today's students won't buy every word of President Obama's speech, a few challenged Reagan in the Q&A after his speech. One asked if future generations wouldn't be saddled by the debt created by tax cuts. Another asked Reagan what he thought about the gun ban, to which the president replied with a complaint that he'd have to wait a whole five days to get a gun, even though he's the president of the United States. How unfair!

But ultimately what Greer and other conservatives fail to do here is give American students credit. Kids have opinions and are truly free-thinkers in the sense that do not come preset ideologically. Though the teaching of critical thinking skills has fallen off from what it once was, kids can see when an argument doesn't make sense, and they're excellent at detecting and decrying inequality and injustice.

Thing is, you have to actually be interested in what they think to know that. If you tell kids they're going to be brainwashed by listening to the president speak, you're only going to succeed in insulting their intelligence or making them feel powerless.

If you tell kids it doesn't matter what they think or whether they go to school or not, they're probably not going to chime in with their thoughts, nor are they going to care much what you think. But more than anything else, they're not going to be motivated to work hard in school or think for themselves.

The difference between Reagan's speech more than 20 years ago and Obama's speech today is that Reagan told kids what he believed about American government and Obama galvanized them to work harder. In all likelihood, neither of them were written with the purpose of indoctrination. But only one of them truly inspired.

BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
Comments:thou shalt not indoctrinate the little brats
Submitted by PorkLoin on Tue, 09/08/2009 - 3:44pm.
Thou shalt not permit thy precious little school aged brats to behold the President of the United States for he shall surely indoctrinate them in things not of Bibleism
http://www.buzzflash.com
+++++++++++++

[Saundra Hummer]

. . . . . . . . Center for American Progress

Center for American Progress and the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies

Please join the Center for American Progress and the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University for a special presentation:

Undue Influence
Improving the Regulation of Special Interest Efforts to Affect Public Policy
September 14, 2009, 9:00am – 3:00pm
Admission is free.

RSVP to attend this event
In September 2007, President George W. Bush signed legislation significantly expanding reporting requirements for those who registered as lobbyists. During last year's presidential campaign, Barack Obama refused to accept campaign contributions from lobbyists and, following his election, precluded lobbyists from working on his transition team in the fields of policy on which they had lobbied. Upon becoming president he banned people accepting positions in the new administration from taking positions as lobbyists for two years following their departure from government and severely limited the number of appointments available to those who had in previous years worked as lobbyists.

Join the Center for American Progress and American University's Center for Congressional & Presidential Studies for a symposium on the impact of special interests, featuring expert panels and a keynote speech by Norm Eisen, Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform.

8:30 - 9:00 a.m. Registration and light breakfast

9:00 - 9:15 a.m. Opening Remarks
John Podesta, President and Chief Executive Officer, Center for American Progress
Cornelius M. Kerwin, President, American University
Charles E.M. Kolb, President, Committee for Economic Development (CED)
William LeoGrande, Dean, School of Public Affairs, American University

9:15 - 10:30 a.m. What is Lobbying and How Does it Affect Our Daily Lives?
Chair: Scott Lilly, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress
Robert Kaiser, Associate Editor and Senior Correspondent, Washington Post; author, So Damn Much Money: The Triumph of Lobbying and the Corrosion of American Government
Wendell Potter, Senior Fellow, Center for Media and Democracy; former Director of Communications, Cigna

10:30 - 10:40 a.m. Break

10:40 - 12:00 p.m. The Intended and Unintended Consequences of Lobby Reform
Chair: James A. Thurber, Distinguished Professor of Government, American University; Director, Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies
Patrick J. Griffin, Scholar-in-Residence, Department of Government; Academic Director, Public Affairs and Advocacy Institute
Melanie Sloan, Executive Director, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
Barbara Sinclair, Professor, University of California at Los Angeles

12:00 - 12:30 p.m. Buffet lunch

12:30 - 1:30 p.m. Lobbying, Ethics and The Obama Administration
Norm Eisen, Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform

1:30 - 1:45 p.m. Break

1:45 - 3:00 p.m. Legal Issues in Lobby Reform
Chair: Thomas Susman, Director, Government Affairs Office, American Bar Association; co-author, The Lobbying Manual, a Complete Guide to Federal Law Governing Lawyers and Lobbyists
Joseph J. Minarik, Senior Vice President and Director of Research Committee for Economic Development
William Luneburg, Professor, University of Pittsburgh School of Law; co-author, The Lobbying Manual, a Complete Guide to Federal Law Governing Lawyers and Lobbyists

3:00 p.m. Closing Remarks

September 14, 2009, 9:00am – 3:00pm

Space is extremely limited. RSVP required.
Seating is on a first-come, first-served basis and not guaranteed.

Breakfast and lunch will be served

Center for American Progress
1333 H St. NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
Map & Directions

Nearest Metro: Blue/Orange Line to McPherson Square or Red Line to Metro Center

For more information, call 202-682-1611.
Marlene Cooper Vasilicevents@
americanprogress.org
Director of Outreach
and Special Events

1333 H Street, NW
10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005

Tel: 202.741.6246
Fax: 202.682.1867
http://www.americanprogress.org

Center for American Progress
1333 H Street NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005 . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

.
((())) ROLLING STONEBack to Sick and Wrong
URL:http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29988909/sick_and_wrong
Sick and WrongHow Washington is screwing up health care reform – and why it may take a revolt to fix itMATT TAIBBIPosted Sep 03, 2009 11:33 AM
VIDEOWatch Matt Taibbi break down his report on the sad state of health care reform in his blog, Taibbloghttp://taibbi.rssoundingboard.com/health-care-reform-sick-and-wrong
Health Care Reform: Sick and WrongAmerica’s disastrous health care system is responsible for incalculable amounts of illness, death, lost productivity and federal deficit — not to mention anxiety, anger and disgrace. And it’s not going to get fixed, writes Matt Taibbi in the new issue of Rolling Stone, because it’s encased in another failed system: the U.S. government. Rather than attempt to remedy the problem this summer, our government sat down and demonstrated its dizzying ineptitude. “We might look back on this summer someday and think of it as the moment when our government lost us for good,” writes Taibbi. “It was that bad.”

Taibbi breaks down the five steps Congress took to be sure no bill would pass — aiming low, gutting the public option, packing it with loopholes, providing no leadership and blowing the math — in his story, which is available on stands now. In a series of video interviews for RollingStone.com, Taibbi explores one of our system’s most severe flaws, explains how the government wedged itself into an awkwardly damning position, and looks at how the proposed bill would change the ordinary American’s life.

Perhaps the biggest flaw in the American health care system is that 31 percent of costs are associated with administration and paperwork. Here Taibbi examines the easiest way to eliminate the red tape:
~ ~ ~ ~ ~SICK and WRONGLet's start with the obvious: America has not only the worst but the dumbest health care system in the developed world. It's become a black leprosy eating away at the American experiment — a bureaucracy so insipid and mean and illogical that even our darkest criminal minds wouldn't be equal to dreaming it up on purpose.

The system doesn't work for anyone. It cheats patients and leaves them to die, denies insurance to 47 million Americans, forces hospitals to spend billions haggling over claims, and systematically bleeds and harasses doctors with the specter of catastrophic litigation. Even as a mechanism for delivering bonuses to insurance-company fat cats, it's a miserable failure: Greedy insurance bosses who spent a generation denying preventive care to patients now see their profits sapped by millions of customers who enter the system only when they're sick with incurably expensive illnesses.

The cost of all of this to society, in illness and death and lost productivity and a soaring federal deficit and plain old anxiety and anger, is incalculable — and that's the good news. The bad news is our failed health care system won't get fixed, because it exists entirely within the confines of yet another failed system: the political entity known as the United States of America.

Just as we have a medical system that is not really designed to care for the sick, we have a government that is not equipped to fix actual crises. What our government is good at is something else entirely: effecting the appearance of action, while leaving the actual reform behind in a diabolical labyrinth of ingenious legislative maneuvers.

Over the course of this summer, those two failed systems have collided in a spectacular crossroads moment in American history. We have an urgent national emergency on the one hand, and on the other, a comfortable majority of ostensibly simpatico Democrats who were elected by an angry population, in large part, specifically to reform health care. When they all sat down in Washington to tackle the problem, it amounted to a referendum on whether or not we actually have a functioning government.

It's a situation that one would have thought would be sobering enough to snap Congress into real action for once. Instead, they did the exact opposite, doubling down on the same-old, same-old and laboring day and night in the halls of the Capitol to deliver us a tour de force of old thinking and legislative trickery, as if that's what we really wanted. Almost every single one of the main players — from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Blue Dog turncoat Max Baucus — found some unforeseeable, unique-to-them way to fuck this thing up. Even Ted Kennedy, for whom successful health care reform was to be the great vindicating achievement of his career, and Barack Obama, whose entire presidency will likely be judged by this bill, managed to come up small when the lights came on.

We might look back on this summer someday and think of it as the moment when our government lost us for good. It was that bad.

Here's where we are right now: Before Congress recessed in August, four of the five committees working to reform health care had produced draft bills. On the House side, bills were developed by the commerce, ways and means, and labor committees. On the Senate side, a bill was completed by the HELP committee (Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, chaired by Ted Kennedy). The only committee that didn't finish a bill is the one that's likely to matter most: the Senate Finance Committee, chaired by the infamous obfuscating dick Max Baucus, a right-leaning Democrat from Montana who has received $2,880,631 in campaign contributions from the health care industry.

The game in health care reform has mostly come down to whether or not the final bill that is hammered out from the work of these five committees will contain a public option — i.e., an option for citizens to buy in to a government-run health care plan. Because the plan wouldn't have any profit motive — and wouldn't have to waste money on executive bonuses and corporate marketing — it would automatically cost less than private insurance. Once such a public plan is on the market, it would also drive down prices offered by for-profit insurers — a move essential to offset the added cost of covering millions of uninsured Americans. Without a public option, any effort at health care reform will be as meaningful as a manicure for a gunshot victim. "The public option is the main thing on the table," says Michael Behan, an aide to Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. "It's really coming down to that."

The House versions all contain a public option, as does the HELP committee's version in the Senate. So whether or not there will be a public option in the end will likely come down to Baucus, one of the biggest whores for insurance-company money in the history of the United States. The early indications are that there is no public option in the Baucus version; the chairman hinted he favors the creation of nonprofit insurance cooperatives, a lame-ass alternative that even a total hack like Sen. Chuck Schumer has called a "fig leaf."

Even worse, Baucus has set things up so that the final Senate bill will be drawn up by six senators from his committee: a gang of three Republicans (Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Olympia Snowe of Maine, Mike Enzi of Wyoming) and three Democrats (Baucus, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico) known by the weirdly Maoist sobriquet "Group of Six." The setup senselessly submarines the committee's Democratic majority, effectively preventing members who advocate a public option, like Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia and Robert Menendez of New Jersey, from seriously influencing the bill. Getting movement on a public option — or any other meaningful reform — will now require the support of one of the three Republicans in the group: Grassley (who has received $2,034,000 from the health sector), Snowe ($756,000) or Enzi ($627,000).

This is what the prospects for real health care reform come down to — whether one of three Republicans from tiny states with no major urban populations decides, out of the goodness of his or her cash-fattened heart, to forsake forever any contributions from the health-insurance industry (and, probably, aid for their re-election efforts from the Republican National Committee).

This, of course, is the hugest of long shots. But just to hedge its bets even further and ensure that no real reforms pass, Congress has made sure to cover itself, sabotaging the bill long before it even got to Baucus' committee. To do this, they used a five-step system of subtle feints and legislative tricks to gut the measure until there was nothing left.

STEP ONE: AIM LOW
Heading into the health care debate, there was only ever one genuinely dangerous idea out there, and that was a single-payer system. Used by every single developed country outside the United States (with the partial exceptions of Holland and Switzerland, which offer limited and highly regulated private-insurance options), single-payer allows doctors and hospitals to bill and be reimbursed by a single government entity. In America, the system would eliminate private insurance, while allowing doctors to continue operating privately.

In the real world, nothing except a single-payer system makes any sense. There are currently more than 1,300 private insurers in this country, forcing doctors to fill out different forms and follow different reimbursement procedures for each and every one. This drowns medical facilities in idiotic paperwork and jacks up prices: Nearly a third of all health care costs in America are associated with wasteful administration. Fully $350 billion a year could be saved on paperwork alone if the U.S. went to a single-payer system — more than enough to pay for the whole goddamned thing, if anyone had the balls to stand up and say so.

Everyone knows this, including the president. Last spring, when he met with Rep. Lynn Woolsey, the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Obama openly said so. "He said if he were starting from scratch, he would have a single-payer system," says Woolsey. "But he thought it wasn't possible, because it would disrupt the health care industry."

Huh? This isn't a small point: The president and the Democrats decided not to press for the only plan that makes sense for everyone, in order to preserve an industry that is not only cruel and stupid and dysfunctional, but through its rank inefficiency has necessitated the very reforms now being debated. Even though the Democrats enjoy a political monopoly and could have started from a very strong bargaining position, they chose instead to concede at least half the battle before it even began.

Obama wasn't the only big Democrat to mysteriously abandon his position on single-payer. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Henry Waxman, the influential chair of the House commerce committee, have both backed away from their longtime support of single-payer. Hell, even Max-freaking-Baucus once conceded the logic of single-payer, saying only that it isn't feasible politically. "There may come a time when we can push for single-payer," he said in February. "At this time, it's not going to get to first base in Congress."

And helping it not get to first base was … Max Baucus. It was Baucus' own committee that held the first round-table discussions on reform. In three days of hearings last May, he invited no fewer than 41 people to speak. The list featured all the usual industry hacks, including big insurers like America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), Blue Cross and Aetna. It's worth noting that several of the organizations invited — including AHIP and Amgen — employ several former Baucus staffers as lobbyists, including two of his ex-chiefs of staff.

Not one of the 41 witnesses, however, was in favor of single-payer — even though eliminating the insurance companies enjoys broad public support. Leading advocates of single-payer, including doctors from the Physicians for a National Health Program, implored Baucus to allow them to testify. When he refused, a group of eight single-payer activists, including three doctors, stood up during the hearings and asked to be included in the discussion. One of the all-time classic moments in the health care reform movement came when the second protester to stand up, Katie Robbins of Health Care Now, declared, "We need single-payer health care!"

To which Baucus, who looked genuinely frightened, replied, "We need more police!"

The eight protesters were led away in handcuffs and spent about seven hours in jail. "It's funny, the policemen were all telling us their horror stories about health care," recalls Dr. Margaret Flowers, one of the physicians who was jailed. "One was telling us about his mother who was 62 and lost her job and was uninsured, waiting to get Medicare when she was 65." The protesters were sentenced to six months' probation. Baucus later met with them and conceded that not including single-payer advocates in the discussion had been a mistake, although it was "too late" to change that.

Single-payer advocates have had an equally tough time getting a hearing with the president. In March, the White House refused to allow Rep. John Conyers to invite two physicians who support single-payer to the health care summit that Obama was holding to kick off the reform effort. Three months later, a single-payer advocate named David Scheiner, who served as Obama's physician for 22 years, was mysteriously bumped from a prime-time forum on health care, where he had been invited to ask the president a question.

Many of the health care advisers in Obama's inner circle, meanwhile, are industry hacks — people like Nancy-Ann DeParle, the president's health care czar, who has served on the boards of for-profit companies like Medco Health Solutions and Triad Hospitals. DeParle is so unthreatening to the status quo that Karen Ignagni, the insurance industry's leading lobbyist-gorgon, praised her "extensive experience" and "strong track record."

Behind closed doors, Obama also moved to cut a deal with the drug industry. "It's a dirty deal," says Russell Mokhiber, one of the protesters whom Baucus had arrested. "The administration told them, 'Single-payer is off the table. In exchange, we want you on board.'" In August, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America announced that the industry would contribute an estimated $150 million to campaign for Obamacare.

Even the Congressional Progressive Caucus, whose 80-plus members have overwhelmingly supported single-payer legislation in the past, decided not to draw a line in the sand. They agreed to back down on single-payer, seemingly with the understanding that Pelosi would push for a strong public option — a sort of miniversion of single-payer, a modest, government-run insurance plan that would serve as a test model for the real thing. But one of the immutable laws of politics in the U.S. Congress is that progressives will always be screwed by their own leaders, as soon as the opportunity presents itself. And with a bill the size and scope of health care, there was plenty of opportunity.

STEP TWO: GUT THE PUBLIC OPTION
Once single-payer was off the table, the Democrats lost their best bargaining chip. Rather than being in a position to use the fear of radical legislation to extract concessions from the right — a position Obama seemingly gave away at the outset, by punting on single-payer — Republicans and conservative Blue Dog Democrats suddenly realized that they had the upper hand. Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid would now give away just about anything to avoid having to walk away without a real health care bill.

The situation was made worse as the flagging economy ate away at Obama's political capital. Polls showed the percentage of "highly engaged" Democrats plummeting, while the percentage of "highly engaged" Republicans — inspired by idiotic scare stories from Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin about socialized medicine and euthanasia — rose rapidly. By late summer, "the depth of Republican support was starting to rival the breadth of Democratic support," said noted statistician Nate Silver. The more the Republicans and Blue Dogs fidgeted and fucked around, the easier it would be for them to kill the public option. Democrats, who on the morning after Election Day could have passed a single-payer system without opposition, were now in a desperate hurry to make a deal.

The public option is hardly a cure-all: Among other things, it does nothing to reduce the $350 billion a year in unnecessary paperwork and administrative overhead that makes the current system so expensive and maddening. "That's one of the big issues," says an aide to a member of the progressive caucus. "None of this addresses the paperwork issue. It might even make it worse." But the basic idea of the public option is sound enough: create a government health plan that citizens could buy through regulated marketplaces called insurance "exchanges" run at the state level. Simply by removing the profit motive, the government plan would be cheaper than private insurance. "The goal here was to offer the rock-bottom price, the Walmart price, so that people could buy insurance practically at cost," says one Senate aide.

The logic behind the idea was so unassailable that its opponents often inadvertently found themselves arguing for it. "Assurances that the government plan would play by the rules that private insurers play by are implausible," groused right-wing douchebag George Will. "Competition from the public option must be unfair, because government does not need to make a profit and has enormous pricing and negotiating powers." In other words, if you offer a public plan that doesn't systematically fuck every single person in the country by selling health care at inflated prices and raking in monster profits, private insurers just won't be able to compete.

Will wasn't the only prominent opponent of reform openly arguing in favor of the insurance industry's right to continue doing business inefficiently. Sen. Ben Nelson, who together with Baucus are the Laverne and Shirley of turncoat Democrats, complained that the public option "would win the game." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell admitted that "private insurance will not be able to compete with a government option." This is a little like complaining that Keanu Reeves was robbed of an Oscar just because he can't act.

For a while, the public option looked like it might have a real chance at passing. In the House, both the ways and means committee and the labor committee passed draft bills that contained a genuine public option. But then conservative opponents of the plan, the so-called Blue Dog Democrats, mounted their counterattack. A powerful bloc composed primarily of drawling Southerners in ill-fitting suits, the Blue Dogs — a gang of puffed-up political mulattos hired by the DNC to pass as almost-Republicans in red-state battlegrounds — present themselves as a quasi-religious order, worshipping at the sacred altar of "fiscal responsibility" and "deficit reduction." On July 9th, in a harmless-sounding letter to Pelosi, 40 Blue Dogs expressed concern that doctors in the public option "must be fairly reimbursed at negotiated rates, and their participation must be voluntary." Paying doctors "using Medicare's below-market rates," they added, "would seriously weaken the financial stability of our local hospitals."

The letter was an amazing end run around the political problem posed by the public option — i.e., its unassailable status as a more efficient and cheaper health care alternative. The Blue Dogs were demanding that the very thing that makes the public option work — curbing costs to taxpayers by reimbursing doctors at Medicare rates plus five percent — be scrapped. Instead, the Blue Dogs wanted compensation rates for doctors to be jacked up, on the government's tab. The very Democrats who make a point of boasting about their unwavering commitment to fiscal conservatism were lobbying, in essence, for a big fat piece of government pork for doctors. "Cost should be the number-one concern to the Blue Dogs," grouses Rep. Woolsey. "That's why they're Blue Dogs."

In the end, the Blue Dogs won. When the House commerce committee passed its bill, the public option no longer paid Medicare-plus-five-percent. Instead, it required the government to negotiate rates with providers, ensuring that costs would be dramatically higher. According to one Democratic aide, the concession would bump the price of the public option by $1,800 a year for the average family of four.

In one fell swoop, the public plan went from being significantly cheaper than private insurance to costing, well, "about the same as what we have now," as one Senate aide puts it. This was the worst of both worlds, the kind of take-the-fork-in-the-road nonsolution that has been the peculiar specialty of Democrats ever since Bill Clinton invented a new way to smoke weed. The party could now sell voters on the idea that it was offering a "public option" without technically lying, while at the same time reassuring health care providers that the public option it was passing would not imperil the industry's market share.

Even more revolting, when Pelosi was asked on July 31st if she worried that progressives in the House would yank their support of the bill because of the sellout to conservatives, she literally laughed out loud. "Are the progressives going to take down universal, quality, affordable health care for all Americans?" she said, chuckling heartily to reporters. "I don't think so."

The laugh said everything about what the mainstream Democratic Party is all about. It finds the notion that it has to pay anything more than lip service to its professed values funny. "It's a joke," complains one Democratic aide. "This is all a game to these people — and they're good at it."

The concession to the Blue Dogs comes at a potentially disastrous price: Without a public option that drives down prices, the cost of other health care reforms being considered by Congress will almost certainly skyrocket. The trade-off with conservatives might be understandable, if those other reforms were actually useful. But this is Congress we're talking about.Go on-site to read the other steps. There are illustrations and such. There is much more to this article, much more, go on site to gain access to it as well as other topical issues of the day and an article on the Beatles and the cause of their break up, an article on Stephen Colbert, "A SHORT HISTORY" on him, etc. This magazine has a lot more latitude than many others, like Vanity Fair, they are allowed more space to inform.http://taibbi.rssoundingboard.com/health-care-reform-sick-and-wrong

http://www.rollingstone.com/((()()))()())(()()))

[Saundra Hummer]

Why was there the need for over 130 pages of rules and stipulations when the clunkers for cash program was put in place?

Can't governement even figure out how to cut costs by keeping it simple and direct? Were so many pages of rules and directions needed? Where these rules and directives only complicating the issue?

We're hearing that it is a problem for car dealers, a big one, as D.C. double talk is crowding out what needs to be done with how they always manage to take a simple issue and work it around so that only attorney's can understand what it is they're saying.

[Saundra Hummer]

. . . . . . . . .
THE PROGRESS REPORT
by
Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel,
Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster,
Nate Carlile, Pat Garofalo, and Zaid Jilani
September 8, 2009

Education
Indoctrinating Hard Work
Today, President Obama addressed elementary and high school students across the nation -- the first time a president has spoken directly to America's students since 1991 -- in a back-to-school speech emphasizing the importance of personal responsibility in education. Some conservatives spent last week heavily criticizing the President's plan to speak, saying it was "an attempt at 'indoctrination' of kids," and encouraging parents to keep their children home for the day. But as Education Secretary Arne Duncan said, "[T]he whole message [of the speech] is about personal responsibility and challenging students to take their education very, very seriously." Indeed, as the Washington Post pointed out, the speech did not mention any political agenda but drew on "Obama's own education experience -- from the predawn tutoring by his mother when his family lived in Indonesia to his acceptance to law school" to make its point about the importance of educational attainment. "At the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world -- and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities," Obama said to the students. "Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed."


'STAVED OFF AN EDUCATION CATASTROPHE':
As part of the conservative uproar prior to the speech, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins claimed that the President "hasn't pushed any educational reform issues." However, the administration has made an "unprecedented investment" in education -- including $100 billion in new money -- to implement a strong reform agenda, driven in large part by the economic stimulus package passed in February. But the stimulus also, as Duncan explained, "staved off an education catastrophe," filling budget gaps that would have forced states to significantly cut their education funding. "We would have had hundreds of thousands of teachers who were going to be teaching, starting last week and this week, who would have been out of jobs, teachers, social workers, counselors," Duncan said. Gov. Haley Barbour (R-MS) said that he expects the effect of education budget cuts in his state to be "very, very minimal" due to the stimulus. The stimulus is also helping to combat other effects of the economic downturn, including providing transportation help to the more than one million students without stable housing, a number that "has tested budget-battered school districts as they try to carry out their responsibilities -- and the federal mandate -- to salvage education for children whose lives are filled with insecurity and turmoil."


RACE TO THE TOP:
A main thrust of the administration's reform effort included in the stimulus package is Race to the Top, a $4.35 billion fund that "provides competitive grants to encourage and reward States that are creating the conditions for education innovation and reform." In order to qualify for the funding, states and districts must address four reform areas: adopting internationally benchmarked assessments and standards, rewarding effective teachers and principals, building new data systems and turning around low-performing schools. States are also ineligible for the money "if they have laws on the books prohibiting student performance from affecting teacher assessment." States should adopt these reforms because, as the Center for American Progress pointed out in its report Stimulating Excellence, "the current and potential new entrepreneurs are stifled by several unnecessary and outdated state and district policies, and an education system that remains as a whole insensitive to performance and quality." Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA) has called a special session of the California legislature in order to take up reforms that would make the state eligible for the funding.


TEACHER ACCOUNTABILITY:
The administration's reform agenda also focuses on teacher accountability and the possibility of implementing pay-for-performance for teachers. As Center for American Progress Associate Director for Teacher Quality Robin Chait explained, "there are a number of examples throughout the country that show that this strategy can work. For example, in Chicago, preliminary research findings show that the pay-for-performance program there has increased teacher retention and provided more support for new teachers. In Denver and in Guilford County, the programs there are having a positive impact on student achievement." Plus, the Teacher Advancement Program -- under which trained evaluators visit a teacher's classroom four to six times a year -- "has had a positive impact on student achievement in a number of schools throughout the country." But not only do some states bar student performance from being used in teacher assessments, but most teacher evaluations provide very little in terms of real information. Currently, in school districts that use binary evaluation ratings (satisfactory or unsatisfactory), "more than 99 percent of teachers receive the satisfactory rating." In districts that have a wider array of rating options, "94 percent of teachers receive one of the top two ratings and less than 1 percent are rated unsatisfactory." As Andrew Rotherham at Eduwonk put it, "[D]espite all the rhetoric about how important teachers are and despite the importance of people in a labor-intensive field like education, the lack of systematic attention to teacher effectiveness in education is shocking."


UNDER THE RADAR
HEALTH CARE -- KINGSTON CLAIMS HEALTH SYSTEM WORKED 'VERY WELL' FOR BANKRUPT CANCER SURVIVOR WITHOUT INSURANCE: At a recent town hall held by Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA), an elderly gentleman named Jim Parker stood up and told the congressman that he was recently treated for colon cancer. "I did not have insurance," he said, adding that "things didn't quite work out" after he started his own business. Parker informed Kingston that "a friend of mine was in the same position, and we buried him last January." Kingston responded by telling the man that "you did do very well" because he was able to get treated when he arrived at the hospital. Parker responded, "I am functionally bankrupt!" Kingston cut him off and reiterated his point, saying "but you did get coverage. You didn't get the insurance, but they won't turn you down at the door." Kingston's argument is a familiar conservative trope. In July 2007, President Bush claimed that "people have access to health care in America. After all, you just go to an emergency room." But just going "to an emergency room" is what drives up health care costs for all Americans. "Access to emergency room care is not the same as access to comprehensive, coordinated, and timely health care services -- the kind of care that coverage facilitates." And as the town hall attendee noted, without insurance, a hospital visit commonly leaves Americans bankrupt.


THINK FAST

The Washington Post documents the health insurance industry's use of rescission -- "the technical term for canceling coverage on grounds that the company was misled." Insurers defend the practice, claiming that they "need to be able to cancel policies to control fraud." If health reform legislation bars companies from screening for preexisting conditions, rescissions should no longer be an issue.

Several House liberals tell Roll Call that "they could support" a health care reform bill that would only include a public option as a fallback plan "depending on how it was structured." "This is a way to get a bill," Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-NJ) said. "I believe it’s worth listening to because I want legislation that is going to, in some shape or form, expand coverage and bring down the cost of health care."

Although Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) was an ardent opponent of the stimulus, he has made federal "crime grants to local law enforcement agencies" an "integral part" of his "political machine." Perry has made it sound like the money was his idea, saying Texas "remains dedicated to equipping our law enforcement with the resources necessary to protect our citizens."

Military observers, soldiers on the ground, "and some top Pentagon officials are warning that dispatching even tens of thousands more soldiers and Marines" to Afghanistan "might not ensure success." The skeptics say that “the heart of the problem" is that "neither Barack Obama's White House nor the Pentagon has clearly defined America's mission in Afghanistan."

The Swedish Committee for Afghanistan, a charity organization that provides health services to Afghans, on Monday accused American soldiers of illegally raiding one of their hospitals, damaging property and tying up patients and staff in the process. Anders Fange, the Committee's country director, told the press, "This is a clear violation of internationally recognized rules and principles."

Afghanistan's U.N.-backed Election Complaints Commission "has ordered a number of recounts and audits of votes from last month's presidential election," concluding that there was "clear and convincing evidence of fraud." The Aug. 20 election has been plagued by "claims of mass fraud and ballot-box stuffing against all the main candidates."

President Obama's global warming agenda stands in limbo as the administration makes an all-out push to pass health care legislation. "Senate Democrats originally intended to roll out their version of a cap-and-trade climate bill this week, but they have since delayed that schedule until later this month in part because of the brewing battle over health care."

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is launching a $2 million ad campaign aimed at defeating the creation of the Obama administration's proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency, which would "tightly regulate consumer products including mortgages and credit cards." Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA)'s office called the campaign nothing more than "scare tactics from the likes of big business."

And finally: Sarah and Todd Palin are up for auction. Dinner with the Palins is one of the items in the 10-day charity auction on eBay for Ride2Recovery, with the opening bid set at $25,000. However, "dinner will be in Palin's home town, Wasilla, deepest Alaska, and the successful bidder will have to get themselves there at their own expense."


BLOG WATCH
John Podesta: Van Jones has higher standards than Glenn Beck.

Only 51 percent of Kentucky residents believe Obama was born in the United States.

Michael Moore's film taking aim at capitalism premieres in Venice.

Is GQ censoring on behalf of the Russian government?

Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) claims health reform will benefit undocumented immigrants because "it always does."

Will Obama give the health care reform effort "a much-needed kick in the pants"?

What would John Kerry's Supreme Court have looked like?

Parents protesting Obama's education speech plan to take their children to...a pizza parlor.


DAILY GRILL

Q: State Rep. Workman mentioned his [tenther] bill that uses the U.S. Constitution that prevents a government plan from taking over health care in Florida. Do you support that proposal?
POSEY: I really do.
-- Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL), 9/2/09

VERSUS

"I don't have a problem with Medicare."
-- Posey, 9/2/09

This is only a summary, go on-site to gain access to complete reports as well as the numerous links within them. Amazing stuff, like, how about Kentucky? Whew! SRH
http://www.thinkprogress.org. . . . . . . . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

.
. . . . . . .
FACTCHECK.ORG
Obama’s Health Care Speech
We fact-check the president's address to Congress and the nation.
September 10, 2009

Summary
President Obama’s prime-time address to Congress and the nation on health care prompted a Republican congressman to shout “you lie!” Did he? Here’s what we’ve found:

. Obama was correct when he said his plan wouldn’t insure illegal immigrants; the House bill expressly forbids giving subsidies to those who are in the country illegally. Conservative critics complain that the bill lacks an enforcement mechanism, but that hardly makes the president a liar.
. The president said “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions.” But the House bill would permit a “public option” to cover all abortions, and would also permit federal subsidies to be used to purchase private insurance that covers all abortions, a point that raises objections from anti-abortion groups. That’s true despite a technical ban on use of taxpayer dollars to pay for abortion coverage.

. The president repeated his promise that his plan won’t add “one dime” to the federal deficit. But legislation offered so far would add hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficit over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
. The president overstated the degree of concentration in the insurance industry. He said that in 34 states the “insurance market” is controlled by five or fewer companies, but that’s true only of insurance bought by small groups, not the entire “insurance market.”
. Obama said his plan won’t “require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have.” It’s true that there’s no requirement, but experts say the legislation could induce employers to switch coverage for millions of workers.

FactCheck Wire
Boustany’s Response

Barack Obama wasn't the only person misstating health care facts during prime time on Sept. 9....Click to read the full post » Go on-site with following URL at end of post.
Cantor’s Gender Problem
At a press stakeout on Capitol Hill today, House GOP Whip Eric Cantor sounded bullish...Click to read the full post »

View the full Wire archives

Ask FactCheck
Q: Did Obama change his back-to-school speech in response to pressure from conservatives?

A: One exercise in the accompanying lesson plan was reworded.

Read the full question and answer

View the Ask FactCheck archives
Fact of the Day
September 10, 2009

More than half - 55 percent - of 3- and 4-year-olds in the U.S. were enrolled in school, as of October 2007.

Source: Census Bureau

See more facts of the day
FactCheck Mailbag
FactCheck Mailbag, Week of Sept. 1-Sept. 8

If there is one thing the health care reform debate has shed light on, it is that the American public is starving for the truth.
See letters from previous weeks
FactCheck Connections
Get the Feed FactCheck
Mobile Get the E-mail subscribe | unsubscribe | change address

Note: This is a summary only. The full article with analysis, images and citations may be viewed on our Web site:
Desktop Users
Mobile Users
http://www.FactCheck.org
This message was sent by FactCheck.org, a project of the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center . It was sent from: FactCheck.org, 320 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045. You can modify/update your subscription via the link below.
Forward to a Friend http://factcheck.org/2009/09/obamas-health-care-speech/ . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: OpEdNewsHeckled Woman in Wheelchair has a Message:
An Exclusive InterviewBy
Chaz Valenza
Ocean Grove, NJ
September 10, 2009

You may have seen this event on MSNBC or You Tube: At one of the many notorious August town hall meetings, a woman in a wheelchair ignores a barrage of heckling and stoically reads a brief statement in favor of health care reform.

Marianne Hoynes of Ocean Grove, NJ read on as Congressman Frank Pallone strained to hear her. A man booed incessantly, eyes closed rocking in his seat. Others repeatedly shouted the demand that she, “Ask a question!”

PHOTO
Marianne Hoynes: Shouted Down - Speaking Out
Go on-site to view:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Heckled-Woman-in-Wheelchai-by-Chaz-Valenza-090908-546.html
In the end, the left wing pundits picked up on the opposition's blatant incivility and the terror of this ugly vignette.

Marianne got through her statement, but her message was lost. She told me that during the entire two hours of the town hall session there was no real discussion of health care issues, no exchange of ideas, no questions intelligent enough to be answered with a rational response.

I wanted Ms. Hoynes to have a real chance to speak her mind. She has a lot to say and her story is timely. Please take a few moments to hear her out.

At 43 years old in 2005, Marianne was generally healthy. She did weight training two hours a day, five times a week at a local gym. But, a skin rash caused by Granuloma Anulare, a chronic viral disease that is usually asymptomatic, was spreading over her body, joint by joint.

In 2006, she moved to South Carolina for a year during which she curtailed her work-out regiment and her health took a sudden tumble. Apparently, her strenuous exercise routine was masking an underlying illness. Now, the pain and stiffness was impossible to ignore.

Today, at age 47, she has been diagnosed with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Sjogren's Syndrome, both associated with autoimmune dysfunction confirmed by high levels of antinuclear antibody (ANA). Chronic back problems now limit her ability to walk. She is being diagnosed for treatment of herniated disks. She hopes this problem is not associated with her autoimmune condition as then it would be acute and untreatable.

Youthful health to critical illness in a matter of three years, it could happen to any of us and it does happen to many of us.

“This country is a completely different place to live in when you get sick,” she stated at the Congressman Frank Pallone's town hall. “Please protect me from the extortion of the pharmaceutical giants.”

In our conversation she elaborated. “The minute I was diagnosis it was like the medical system strapped on the feed bag.” She described how, even though she has Medicare, her medical costs are nearly $10,000 per year.

“I made a big mistake when I became eligible for Medicare,” she explains. “I had six months to purchase a supplemental plan and didn't know it, and now that I'm sick no private insurer will cover me.” The next chance she will have to purchase private supplemental Medicare insurance will be her sixty-fifth birthday.

She told me how the new biological drug Enbrel worked wonders after being bedridden for two summer months last year. But when the free samples ran out she was unable to afford the $600 per month co-pay for the drug that was priced at $1,600 per month. “I've chatted with people in other countries and these drugs are available and affordable. The world is watching us have this debate and they find it appalling.”

One of the drugs Marianne now takes costs $389 every two weeks. Marianne believes medical care is a human right and she doesn't buy the argument that a government sponsored insurance program is socialist. “We all pay in. It's much more a fee for service.” Medicare's out-of-pocket payments are similar to private insurance plans: a premium, a deductible, co-pays and don't forget that Medicare Part D, the prescription drug program, is purchased from private insurance companies and has that huge “donut hole” in its coverage.

“In other countries, people don't spend two months sick in bed,” says Marianne. “Their medical care is accessible and affordable enough that they can get the care they need when they need it.”

When we talk about health care reform being watered down, Marianne worries. “What scares me most about any compromise that doesn't have a public option is the idea that everyone is forced to buy private health insurance, giving the insurance companies tens of millions of new customers to prey on.”

It was an ordeal for Marianne to make her public statement. She waited two hours to participate in the second of three sessions held by Congressman Pallone of New Jersey. While she waited, protesters chanted, “Hands off health care,” and “Don't kill Grandma.”

“It would have been one thing to speak in a situation where the audience was respectful. But to speak about something painful and personal in front of a crowd of screaming maniacs was quite another.”

“I was exhausted from the two hour wait and I considered not speaking, but I was just tired of taking it silently. I shut them out. I forced myself not to cry while I was reading my statement.”

Though Congressman Pallone stated clearly at the start of the session that anyone could ask a question or make a statement, Marianne was peppered by people yelling “Ask a question!” during her less than three minutes at the microphone.

“You don't cry in front of bullies, right?” she says with a dose of pride.

Marianne told me that about two-thirds of the crowd was opposed to health care reform. “People were told to state their names and where they were from. A lot of the people were from out-of-state. They were bused to the event.”

According to Marianne, there was no discussion of the pending House legislation. “People would take the microphone and ask Congressman Pallone if he read the bill, even though he had stated several times he helped write the bill,” she recalled. “Others told the Congressman he was a domestic terrorist.”

“If you were there to learn about what was in the health care reform bill,” she laments, “you learned nothing.”

What would she tell President Obama? “We elected him with a lot of hope. I want to know, where is the audacity? Sometimes compromise is not the answer. Dr. King would never have settled for upgraded seats in the back of the bus.”

Author's Bio: Chaz Valenza is writer and small business owner in New Jersey. He earned his MBA from New York University's Stern School of Business. His current feature film project is "Single Point Failure" an insider's account of how the Reagan Administration caused the greatest tragedy of the space age based on Richard C. Cook's book "Challenger Revealed." He is a former Director of Public Information for Planned Parenthood of NYC. His website is: www.WordsWillNever.com Original Content at:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Heckled-Woman-in-Wheelchai-by-Chaz-Valenza-090908-546.html :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

[Saundra Hummer]

.
Center for American Progress Think Again: Why Can’t the Media Explain Our Woes?
(and Why Other Countries Don’t Have Them)By
Eric Alterman
September 10, 2009
SOURCE:AP/Jason ReedPresident Barack Obama speaks to a joint session of Congress on health care at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on September 9, 2009. Obama is right: We do have a health care system that is unsustainable in the long term, and it comes up short compared to European systems.* * *
The most moving part of President Barack Obama’s powerful speech Wednesday night was undoubtedly the letter from which he read, sent to him from “our beloved friend and colleague” Ted Kennedy. Kennedy had asked, back in May when he wrote it, that the letter should not be opened until after his death. As Obama reported, Kennedy “expressed confidence that this would be the year that health care reform—‘that great unfinished business of our society,’ he called it—would finally pass,” and in doing so, define “the character of our country.” Indeed, it is amazing that while Kennedy served for more than four decades in the Senate and dedicated much of his energy and superb legislative skills to the passage of just such a program, the problem has only gotten worse over time.

Given the degree of the problem, it can difficult to understand, writes Serge Halimi, editor of France’s prestigious Le Monde Diplomatique, why Barack Obama, who has established himself as one of America’s most effective diagnosticians of what ails our health care system, is proposing so modest a reform to address its failures. As the president told a Montana town hall meeting this past August, “We are held hostage by health insurance companies that deny coverage, or drop coverage, or charge fees that people can’t afford for care they desperately need … We have a health care system that too often works better for the insurance industry than it does for the American people.”

Halimi answers his own question: “American politics is so poisoned by money flowing from industrial and financial lobbies that the only proposals ensured a smooth ride through Congress are those that cut taxes.” Indeed, according to BusinessWeek, in 15 states more than half of the “market” is held by one private health care company, and this kind of monopoly profit is not going to go off quietly into the night. And yet this essential fact is often missing from a media debate that focuses on nonexistent, often crazy issues like imaginary “death panels” and whether or not Sarah Palin would be forced to murder her own child.

Late in the dog days of August, The Washington Post published a piece by T.R. Reid, a reporter who has left the paper and written a book called The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care, delineating what he called “five myths about health care around the world.” It’s worth reading the piece, not only for the information it offers, but for the picture of just how far our debate has drifted from reality. Barack Obama is right. We do have a health care system that is not only unsustainable in the long term, but a great shame on the heads of those of us who can afford to buy the health care we need whenever we need it. Not only are the alleged horror stories about “socialized medicine” untrue, but its superiority to our own system is largely absent from our debate.

In addition to the issues Reid raises—I have not yet read his book—I did some research on this question while writing Why We’re Liberals, and I found the following:

The United States and South Africa are the only two developed countries in the world that do not provide health care for all of their citizens.
Nationally, 29 percent of children had no health insurance at some point in the last 12 months, and many get neither checkups nor vaccinations.
The United States ranks 84th in the world for measles immunizations and 89th for polio. These figures are particularly shocking given that Americans spend almost two and a half times the industrialized world’s median on health care, nearly a third of which is wasted on bureaucracy and administration.
Americans have fewer doctors per capita than most Western countries. We go to the doctor less than people in other Western countries. We get admitted to the hospital less frequently than people in other Western countries. We are less satisfied with our health care than our counterparts in other countries. American life expectancy is lower than the Western average. Childhood-immunization rates in the United States are lower than average. Infant-mortality rates are in the 19th percentile of industrialized nations. Doctors here perform more high-end medical procedures, such as coronary angioplasties, than in other countries, but most of the wealthier Western countries have more CT scanners than the United States does, and Switzerland, Japan, Austria, and Finland all have more MRI machines per capita. Nor is our system more efficient. The United States spends more than $1000 per capita per year—or close to $400 billion—on health care-related paperwork and administration, whereas Canada, for example, spends only about $300 per capita. And, of course, every other country in the industrialized world insures all its citizens; despite those extra hundreds of billions of dollars we spend each year, we leave 45 million people without any insurance.

Meanwhile, the Finns, for instance, devote less than half of what we do to medical care, as a percentage of GDP, and yet their infant mortality rate is half that of the United States—and one-sixth that of African-American babies—while their life expectancy rate is greater. The United States ranked 42 in life expectancy behind not only Japan and most of Europe but also Jordan, Guam, and the Cayman Islands, according to the most recent census figures.

Conservatives, members of the American medical industrial complex, and other defenders of the U.S. status quo frequently berate the European health care alternative because they say the care that patients receive there is both less responsive and less advanced than that available to Americans, however much more we may have to pay for ours. But American patients wait longer, on average, for routine treatments than those in France and Germany. Moreover, hospitals in those two nations also provide new mothers more than four days to recover, while insurance companies insist that doctors send American mothers home after only two.

Swedes enjoy better success rates treating cervical and ovarian cancers. The French best the American system when it comes to stomach cancer, Hodgkin’s disease, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The French also benefit from more cancer radiation equipment than Americans. And despite so many American boasts on exactly this topic, Germans get the most hip replacements. In the area where one hears the loudest cheers for the American system—making new cancer treatments available to patients as quickly (however expensively) as possible, the United States is merely tied with Austria, France, and Switzerland.

I could go on—almost indefinitely. And perhaps there are good reasons why we cannot match the performances of all of these countries when it comes to providing decent health care to our citizens despite being the wealthiest nation in the world. But the arguments related to economic efficiency are demonstrably false. Conservatives so consistently denigrate the amazing achievements of 21st-century Europeans that one can’t help but wonder what has them so worried. “If you want a lower standard of living,” conservative policy experts Grace-Marie Turner and Robert Moffit argued in a December 2006 op-ed, “the Europeans have the right prescription.” Their argument echoes views, as The New Republic’s Jonathan Cohn noted, that are popular across the conservative spectrum, from Newsweek’s Robert Samuelson (“Europe is history’s has-been”) to The National Review’s Jonah Goldberg (“Europe has an asthmatic economy”) to The New York Times pundit David Brooks (“The European model is flat-out unsustainable”).

Conservatives have been making exactly these arguments for roughly five decades now, yet these same European nations have by almost every measurement—individual rights and community, capitalist enterprise and social solidarity, and even personal mobility—demonstrated results that Americans can only envy. (You can find the details supporting these claims in chapter one of Why We’re Liberals.)

In the meantime, shouldn't we be able to at least discuss these issues, instead of largely ignoring them and focusing on the shouts and screams of hysterical crazy people who accuse our president of being a racist, a Communist, and a Nazi, only to be rewarded with guest appearances (and even their own shows) on Fox? Can America have fallen so far that this is our answer to Ted Kennedy regarding the content of our character? Barack Obama gave one answer last night but, let’s face it, it rested on “hope.” Congress and the American people will give a more final answer in the coming months; let’s hope it demonstrates a different form of “character” than that on display on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox, alas.

Eric Alterman is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress and a Distinguished Professor of English at Brooklyn College. He is also a Nation columnist and a professor of journalism at the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism. His seventh book, Why We're Liberals: A Handbook for Restoring America's Most Important Ideals, was recently published in paperback. He occasionally blogs at http://www.thenation.com/blogs/altercation and is a regular contributor to The Daily Beast.
To speak with our experts on this topic, please contact:
Print: Suzi Emmerling (foreign policy and security, energy, education, immigration)
202.481.8224 or semmerling@americanprogress.org

Print: Jason Rahlan (health care, economy, civil rights)
202.481.8132 or jrahlan@americanprogress.org

Radio: John Neurohr
202.481.8182 or jneurohr@americanprogress.org

TV: Andrea Purse
202.741.6250 or apurse@americanprogress.org

Web: Erin Lindsay
202.741.6397 or elindsay@americanprogress

. . . . . . .
As President Obama told a Montana town hall meeting this past August, “We have a health care system that too often works better for the insurance industry than it does for the American people.”

Serge Halimi, editor of Le Monde Diplomatique, writes that “American politics is so poisoned by money flowing from industrial and financial lobbies that the only proposals ensured a smooth ride through Congress are those that cut taxes.”

Indeed, according to BusinessWeek, in 15 states more than half of the “market” is held by one private health care company, and this kind of monopoly profit is not going to go off quietly into the night. And yet this essential fact is often missing from a media debate that focuses on nonexistent, often crazy issues like imaginary “death panels” and whether or not Sarah Palin would be forced to murder her own child. Public Opinion Snapshot: Conservatives’ Greatest Enemy on Health Care Is Clarity In a CBS News poll from the end of August, 79 percent support “requiring health insurance companies to cover anyone who applies,” 72 percent support “the government setting limits on the amount that health insurance companies can charge people for insurance premiums, co-pays, and out-of-pocket expenses” and 71 percent support “the government providing subsidies to help low-income people buy their own health insurance from private insurancr companies.” Read more:
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/09/opinion_090809.html
Support the Center for American Progress
Center for American Progress | 1333 H Street NW, 10th Floor | Washington, DC 20005 http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/09/ta091009.html . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

.

. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
He is a wise man who seeks by every legitimate means to make all the money he can honestly, for money can do so many worthwhile things in this world, not merely for one’s self but for others. But he is an unmitigated fool who imagines for a moment that it is more important to make the money than to make it honestly. One of the advantages of possessing money is that it facilitates one’s independence and mental attitude. The man head over heels in debt is more slave than independent.

B.C. Forbes
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.

[Saundra Hummer]

.
^^^^^^^^^ A
NEWSLETTER

Some may have thought us overly alarmist when we warned you last week that UNLESS you speak out now, the IRS would soon be pounding on your door demanding thousands of dollars for overpriced corporate health insurance.

Well it sure didn't take them long to propose just exactly that. Today Max Baucus, the original made man of the medical mafia, suggested a $3,800 FINE against anyone who refuses to buy whatever "for the corporations only" medical plan they finally come up.

If you are not outraged yet, if you don't feel totally betrayed by our so-called representatives, one has to wonder what it would take. So we ask you again, speak out now, before they ram through the most hideous caricature of medical care reform bill imaginable. Here is the new email action page.

Stop Baucus Action Page: http://www.peaceteam.net/action/pnum1002.php
And here again is the new blog resource where you can make notes for others to read about your phone calls to Congress in support of the real health care reform bill, HR 676, Medicare for all.

HR676 Phone Lobby Page: http://www.peaceteam.net/lobby.php
Some of you have written us and told us you don't make phone calls. Well maybe, just maybe, it's time you made ONE at least. And on the new phone lobby page are all the latest tested good toll free numbers for you to use, plus an "Easy policy points" link right there at your finger tips if you need the best arguments on what to say. It even looks up all your members of Congress for you.

Can't do that even? OK, how about Facebook, are you on Facebook? Here is the same action page over there.

Facebook Action Page: http://apps.facebook.com/fb_voices/action.php?qnum=pnum1002
Still not easy enough for you?? Do you have a Twitter account? Just send the following as a Twitter reply, and Congress will get the same message, "No punitive fines in health care bill."

@cxs #p1002
That's only about 10 characters. Can't type 10 characters to even save your own life?? How much easier can we make this, folks?

Guess we can all see the right wing and blue dog Democratic (no difference really) health care "reform" plan coming by now. Here it is, they put us all in prison, and if we can't pay the corporate ransom we stay there for the rest of our shortened lives. Because what else is a sick body with inadequate medical care BUT a prison.

In the ongoing mad dash of Congress to go in absolutely the wrong direction on health care, at the same time Steny Hoyer continues to maintain they may pass something with not even a weak shred of a so-called "public option" in it. If these are negotiating positions they are truly sick ones.

So what would that leave us with? Nothing by a punitive system of forcing us to cough up whatever the medical insurance corporations demand. And that is exactly what could happen UNLESS YOU SPEAK OUT NOW!! Not even the lame "public options" they have floated would make a real difference. We must demand and get nothing less that true single payer, Medicare for all, the only economical and efficient solution to the health care crisis. That's OUR negotiating position and we are sticking to it.

People inside the beltway like to talk about "political realities". Well the bottom line political reality is this, when people speak out in sufficient numbers they are forced to listen whether they want to or not, whether they are pretending that they aren't listening or not. The only way the bad guys can win is if they can get us to persuade OURSELVES that our voices do not count.

We'll give you just one recent example from just last week. Another group organized an action to call Obama's scheduling office to demand a meeting on single payer. They did not have to generate that many emails before Obama's people were totally freaking out, DEMANDING that they stop. Did you hear that, folks? Obama's people were demanding that they stop their activism, and why would they do that if it was NOT working?

C'mon folks, this is pour it on time, all hands on deck. Commit to us right now that you will submit one email action page this week, or make one phone call from the phone lobby page, or send one Twitter reply to our message to Congress gateway. And to thank you, we will send you one of the new "Single Payer Health Care" caps for even the SMALLEST donation. There is no set price. On many we will lose money. But some of you will be able to donate more and that will keep us afloat to fight another day.

Single Payer Health Care Caps: http://www.peaceteam.net/all_gifts.php
We just want you to win, folks. That's why we talk to you the way we do. It isn't always pretty but it is always the truth, as these latest developments demonstrate. Please take action now.

Please take action NOW, so we can win all victories that are supposed
to be ours, and forward this alert as widely as possible.

If you would like to get alerts like these, you can do so at
http://www.peaceteam.net/in.htm ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

[Saundra Hummer]

.
:: :: :: :: :: :: ::
Jordan’s night to remember turns petty
By
Adrian Wojnarowski
Yahoo! Sports
12 hours, 24 minutes ago

SPRINGFIELD, Mass. – The tears tumbled, flooding his face and Michael Jordan had yet to march to the microphone at Symphony Hall. He had listened to the genuine stories and speeches of a remarkable class. He had watched a “This is Your Life” video compilation of his basketball genius. Everything flashed before him, a legacy that he’s fought with body and soul to never, ever let go into yesterday.

Yes, Michael Jordan was still fighting it on Friday night, and maybe he always will. Mostly, he was crying over the passing of that old Jordan, and it wouldn’t be long until he climbed out of his suit and back into his uniform and shorts, back into an adolescent act that’s turned so tedious.

This wasn’t a Hall of Fame induction speech, but a bully tripping nerds with lunch trays in the school cafeteria. He had a responsibility to his standing in history, to players past and present, and he let everyone down. This was a night to leave behind the petty grievances and past slights – real and imagined. This was a night to be gracious, to be generous with praise and credit.

VIDEORelated Video
Jordan speaks on honor

More NBA Videos More From Adrian WojnarowskiAgainst Jordan, defense never rested Sep 11, 2009 Trail of Crumbs leads Jordan to Hall's doorstep Sep 9, 2009 “M.J. was introduced as the greatest player ever and he’s still standing there trying to settle scores,” one Hall of Famer said privately later.

Jordan didn’t hurt his image with the NBA community, as much as he reminded them of it. “That’s who Michael is,” one high-ranking team executive said. “It wasn’t like he was out of character. There’s no one else who could’ve gotten away with what he did tonight. But it was Michael, and everyone just goes along.”

Jordan wandered through an unfocused and uninspired speech at Symphony Hall, disparaging people who had little to do with his career, like Jeff Van Gundy and Bryon Russell. He ignored people who had so much to do with it, like his personal trainer, Tim Grover. This had been a moving and inspirational night for the NBA – one of its best ceremonies ever – and five minutes into Jordan’s speech it began to spiral into something else. Something unworthy of Jordan’s stature, something beneath him.

Jordan spent more time pointlessly admonishing Van Gundy and Russell for crossing him with taunts a dozen years ago than he did singling out his three children. When he finally acknowledged his family, Jordan blurted, in part, to them, “I wouldn’t want to be you guys.”

Well, um, thanks Dad. He meant it, too. If not the NBA, he should’ve thought of his children before he started spraying fire at everyone.

No one ever feels sorry for Isiah Thomas, but Jordan tsk-tsked him and George Gervin and Magic Johnson for the 1985 All-Star game “freeze-out.” Jordan was a rookie, and the older stars decided to isolate him. It was a long time ago, and he obliterated them all for six NBA championships and five MVP trophies. Isiah and the Ice Man looked stunned, as intimidated 50 feet from the stage, as they might have been on the basketball court.

The cheering and laughter egged Jordan on, but this was no public service for him. Just because he was smiling didn’t mean this speech hadn’t dissolved into a downright vicious volley.

Worst of all, he flew his old high school teammate, Leroy Smith, to Springfield for the induction. Remember, Smith was the upperclassman his coach, Pop Herring, kept on varsity over him as a high school sophomore. He waggled to the old coach, “I wanted to make sure you understood: You made a mistake, dude.”

Whatever, Michael. Everyone gets it. Truth be told, everyone got it years ago, but somehow he thinks this is a cleansing exercise. When basketball wanted to celebrate Jordan as the greatest player ever, wanted to honor him for changing basketball everywhere, he was petty and punitive. Yes, there was some wink-wink teasing with his beloved Dean Smith, but make no mistake: Jordan revealed himself to be strangely bitter. You won, Michael. You won it all. Yet, he keeps chasing something that he’ll never catch, and sometimes, well, it all seems so hollow for him.

This is why he’s a terrible basketball executive because he still hasn’t learned to channel his aggressions into hard work on that job. For the Charlotte Bobcats, Jordan remains an absentee boss who keeps searching for basketball players on fairways and greens.

From the speeches of David Robinson to John Stockton, Jerry Sloan to Vivian Stringer, there was an unmistakable thread of peace of mind and purpose. At times, they were self-deprecating and deflective of praise. Jordan hasn’t mastered that art, and it reveals him to be oddly insecure. When Jordan should’ve thanked the Bulls ex-GM, Jerry Krause, for surrounding him with championship coaches and talent, he ridiculed him. It was me, Jordan was saying. Not him. “The organization didn’t play with the flu in Utah,” Jordan grumbled.

For Jordan to let someone else share in the Bulls’ dynasty will never diminish his greatness. Just enhance it. Only, he’s 46 years old and he still doesn’t get it. Yes, Jordan did gush over Scottie Pippen, but he failed to confess that he had wanted Krause to draft North Carolina’s Joe Wolf. Sometimes, no one is better with a half a story, half a truth, than Jordan. All his life, no one’s ever called him on it.

Whatever Jordan wants to believe, understand this: The reason that Van Gundy’s declaration of him as a “con man” so angered him is because it was true on so many levels.

It was part of his competitiveness edge, part of his marketability, and yes, part of his human frailty.

Jordan wasn’t crying over sentimentality on Friday night, as much as he was the loss of a life that he returned from two retirements to have again. The finality of his basketball genius hit him at the induction ceremony, hit him hard. Jordan showed little poise and less grace.


Once again, he turned the evening into something bordering between vicious and vapid, an empty exercise for a night that should’ve had staying power, that should’ve been transformative for basketball and its greatest player. What fueled his fury as a thirtysomething now fuels his bitterness as a lost, wandering fortysomething who threatened a comeback at 50.


“Don’t laugh,” Michael Jordan warned.


No one’s laughing anymore.


Once and for all, Michael: It’s over.

You won.

Adrian Wojnarowski is the NBA columnist for Yahoo! Sports. Send Adrian a question or comment for potential use in a future column or webcast.
Can't deny his ability, but personality wise he's "hurtin". Being a sports legend, a giant in the game, doesn't make for perfection in social skills now does it? SRH
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-jordanhall091209&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

[Saundra Hummer]

.
<<>>><<<>>CATHOLICS
UNITED
Dear Saundra R.,

Over the past month, Catholics United has joined other faith-based organizations for a 40 Days for Health Reform campaign. More than 300,000 people of faith participated in advocacy events over the August recess. Together we sent a clear message that reforming a broken health care system is an urgent moral imperative.

We can't stop now.

On Tuesday, September 15, please join the National Call-in Day for Health Care Reform. People of faith around the country will be calling their memebers of Congress to express their support for health care reform.

To do your part, call 866-279-5474 anytime between 9am and 5pm ET tomorrow.
This is a toll free patch through phone line for people of faith that will direct you to your representatives office.

Let Congress know that affordable and quality health care for all is about serving the common good and human dignity, not partisan politics.

Our representatives are hearing from those shouting down health care reform. It's critical they hear from Catholics and other people of faith like you who know that health care is a human right, not a luxury for the privileged few.

Faith-based movements have always inspired our nation to live up to its highest ideals. We know that victories for social justice never come easily. Together we can make quality and affordable health care a reality for all Americans.

Thanks for putting your faith into action.

The Catholics United Team,

Chris, James and Nick

You are receiving this email because you signed up at our website, or signed one of our petitions.http://www.catholics-united.org/ Brought to you by Catholics United - P.O. Box 33524
Washington, DC 20033
United States <<<>>>o<<<>>>

[Saundra Hummer]

. . . . . . . The RAW STORYEx-Powell chief on Cheney: 'The man is now just crazy'
http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/09/ex-powell-chief-on-cheney-the-man-is-now-just-crazy/

Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, the former chief of staff to Bush Secretary of State Colin Powell, said in response to an interviewer's question Thursday that he believes Cheney has gone a bit farther than too far.

"I’ve come to the conclusion that the man truly is — whether he was that way when I knew him before, when he was Secretary of Defense, I don’t know, that’s not at issue with me any more — the man now is just crazy," Wilkerson said.

Wilkerson was speaking in an interview with Andy Worthington at The Public Record, the author of a book on Guantanamo detainees.

Andy Worthington: That’s another thing, really, is that at no point did [the Bush Administration] ever seem to have any concept of how something might end. They started things and had no idea what their ultimate plan was. What, you really intend to hold people forever without charging them with anything? You really want to kidnap people on an industrial scale and have secret prisons and — you don’t know what you’re going to do at the end of this, do you? Everything was started with no thought for how it might possibly be concluded.

Lawrence Wilkerson: I think the principal figure in this — Vice President Cheney — would say, in response to what you’ve just said, “So what?” I mean, I really do. I wouldn’t have said that a couple of years ago, but now I’ve come to the conclusion that the man truly is — whether he was that way when I knew him before, when he was Secretary of Defense, I don’t know, that’s not at issue with me any more — the man now is just crazy.

Andy Worthington: Yes, well, I’m glad you said that. In March you called him evil. Crazy is — you know, he just seems to be a deranged man, I’m surprised he’s been getting so much air time.

Lawrence Wilkerson: It’s our media. Our media loves to keep it going. They love to throw him out there and, you know, stoke the fires. I asked a couple of people fairly high up in our media world, “Why in the world do you continue to give him and Limbaugh an audience? Why? Why do you even put them on the same plane as the President of the United States? Why do you have these dueling speeches? You guys made them dueling speeches, not the two principals.” Well, you know, they’re running out of business. People are canceling their newspaper subscriptions every day. They want news.
-John Byrne
This entry was posted on Friday, September 11th, 2009 at 10:14 am
90 Responses to “Ex-Powell chief on Cheney:
'The man is now just crazy'"

74misses the constitution
The problem here is contempt for the laws governing the vast majority of this (once) great nation, but not practiced by our governing body. Of, for and by the people. Not these modern day bullshit spouting Republican'ts who admonish only law-breakers they happen to disagree with. There is apparently a different set of rules for those they agree with and those they presume as inferior to their belief systems. The same elitist, self righteous superiority-complex suffering idiots that tell you how to fuck in your bedroom, yet claim to believe in non-intrusive governments when they want to buy cheap guns and ammo at Walmarts. They are the same "religious" fucktards that watch as their nazi-pope blesses not only soldiers going off to the kill, but also a fleet of ferraris while wearing $400 gucci loafers soaked in the blood of thousands of molested children. The same hypocrites that proclaim freedom of speech while trampling upon your right to be left alone in the privacy of your home. The same fools who want to make the military some sort of sacred class of people who should do whatever they want to dark-skinned enemies to sustain peace on our shores while yelling foul when newspapers want to show the true horrors of war here and abroad. The same bible-thumping divorce-having, spouse-beating closet -faggots calling "them" animals when they torture our boys while calling our boys heroes while doing the same thing to "them". Shut the fuck up and go pray to your false gods and go fuck your cousins already. And for you liberals out there, be prepared to actually fight because the day is coming when you too will have to put up or shut the fuck up about your own contradictory ways. Fuck all of you swamp dwelling mongrels.
75Vultwulf
The trouble with Dick Cheney is that he believes in an all powerful executive -- something the framers of the Constitution rejected. The US fought the War for Independence to be rid of an executive who could unilaterally declare war, suspend habeas corpus, and many other oppressive acts. He swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, multiple times, when he in fact subverted it.
He abused the office to enrich himself -- he was still receiving "deferred executive compensation" from Halliburton while he was Vice President. He hid in the interstices between the Executive branch and Legislative branch with his secretive role, running intelligence operations amongst other things. Remember this, the Vice President only has two, trivial Constitutional duties: to preside over the sessions of the US Senate and to cast the tie breaking vote in the Senate. There are no other official duties to the office, except to become President upon death, incapacity, or removal of the President. Whatever else the Vice President is allowed to do is entirely at the discretion of the President. As to the use of torture, the Constitution, treaties ratified by the United States, and laws enacted by Congress prohibit the practice. It is amazing that "conservatives" refuse to understand this. George Washington would be appalled. The founders would not have hesitated for one minute to impeach or indict former Vice President Richard Bruce Cheney for what he did. Most countries that have a presidential system eliminated their vice presidency because it is not really needed. I did a little survey of historical data on this matter. How many readers are aware that for approximately one sixth of the time since the Constitution became operational the US Office of the Vice President has been vacant. There had never been a rush to fill the office, until the 25th Amendment was ratified in 1967. Only after that did this trivial office assume any real significance. So why, after the experience of the last 8 years, do we keep this unaccountable office?
76LewScannon
Do you clowns think prisoners of war have a set release date? Indefinite detention in wartime is the norm. Better make that Indefinite detention in indefinite wartime. Some people may believe that extreme rendition was necessary, none more than Cheney himself, who needed scapegoats to cover his inputs into 9/11. In 1997, Cheney, as part of the Project For A New American Century, called for a "New Pearl Harbor" to get the American citizens behind their agenda. In Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta's testimony before the 9/11 commission he stated:"During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President...the plane is 50 miles out...the plane is 30 miles out....and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president "do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said "Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!??" The orders were, of course, a stand down order. Standard operational procedure is when a plane, which has filed it's flight plan before take off, veers from that path, efforts to raise the cockpit are made from the ground. If they are unable to raise the pilot, fighter jets are immediately scrambled to intercept and force the plane to land if need be. This did not happen on 9/11. Why? I refer you back to Mr. Mineta's testimony. In March of 2001, after the Taliban refused overtures to allow a pipeline to be built through it's country, the US, under the Bush administration, began to tell our allies overseas that we would be invading Afghanistan. That summer, Dick Cheney's Secret Energy Task Force met, and when forced to reveal documents following a suit by Judicial watch, revealed that some documents included Iraq's oilfields. So, here you have the spoils of war being divvied up by Cheney and cronies before there was even an excuse, a "New Pearl Harbor", to go to war. Before Cheney could become VP, he had to give up all his Halliburton stock. They had to pry it from his hands. Why? Because he knew that with the upcoming war, Halliburton, which already had no-bid contracts in place, would be reaping a fortune. Dick Cheney's not crazy, but those people here defending him are totally around the bend.
77cheneyisforlosers
To all you cheney lovers: I'm impressed with how y'all can type while choking yer chickens to a poster of Cheney grinning at god-knows-what (him sucking you off?) Pull yer pants back up -- you ass-hats need a "come to jesus" meeting with reality. Obama is the adult in the house, and you need to show some respect.
78marinessuck
Even the devil doesn't want this motherfucker.
79liberallosers
Typical pompous elitist ass - think you are defined by where you went to school. I'm an electrical engineer, but didn't go to Harvard. Did you go to Harvard? Because if you did, that would clearly make you more capable of speaking intelligently on this topic.
80Elmer Fudd
Like the former Governor of Minnesota said, let him waterboard Cheney for ten minutes and he'll get him to profess to being Obama's illegitimate father. This Governor was a Navy Seal. Remember losers, 09/11 happened on YOUR watch!!Attacking Iraq was exactly what Bin Laden wanted us to do. It gave him credibility in the Muslim world. Should have eliminated Bin Laden the first time we struckin Afganistan, thats when we knew where he was and had the world behind us.
81Jerry
I think the actions of Cheney in the last nine months represent his deeply held resentment over the belief he has that HE, not George W. Bush, was the President, as so many of us used to note. Cheney was deeply bitter over the recommendations Gen. Colin Powell made during the Gulf War, to limit our engagement with Saddam Hussein to 100 hours of war. I'm fairly clear that Cheney may have wanted to stonk Saddam and Iraq, but the prevailing winds of G. H. W. Bush, through Gen. Schwartzkopf, Gen. Powell, and the Vice President reined in any attempt to widen the war at that time. Cheney, therefore, entered the Bush Administration with a view that Bubba Bush was dumber than a box of rocks, and, that he would actually be the one who sat behind the King On The Throne, and pull strings, and make things happen. Once Colin Powell signed on as Secretary of State, and Condi Rice, as NSC Chief Adviser, Cheney made every attempt to destroy Powell. Powell was the voice or reason. Cheney and Rumsfeld both hated Powell. Cheney, essentially, prevailed enough times over Powell, but Powell fought him back, trying to bring a sense of responsibility to the Bush Administration. Cheney convinced Bubba to do all the things he did with Guantanamo, Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, invading Iraq, etc. The shift from nailing bin Laden in Afghanistan, and fighting that war to win, to invading Iraq, we know, was led by Cheney. There are any number of areas where Cheney drove the truck the first term of Bush, and then, slowly, Condi prevailed, and Bush began to cool on Dick. Dick was more and more the guy who lost the arguments, and as such, he lost influence and also, was marginalized, in some ways, by Bush. The pay back, now, is that Cheney calls the shots and makes all the claims and assertions, not to balance the focus on Bush's part of the Bush-Cheney Administration, but on Cheney's importance in same. We should feel lucky that Cheney was NOT the Pres. Had he been, there would have been many Americans on the Left arrested, sent to some kind of Gulag, and a successor to Bush-Cheney would have been, Cheney ... who? Dick Army? Some maniac from the Right, for sure. There is no doubt that Cheney is a racist. He always managed to get either Powell or Rice to parade before the U.N. or some other agencies, and defend some egregious policy shift ... the whole point was to get the Black Man and the Black woman to tote some water, move that bale. Cheney is clearly clever and skilled enough to not overtly cast aspersions on Obama in a racial way, but he certainly feeds the fire of doing his best to minimalize Obama's wisdom, world view, sense of how dangerous these times are (i.e., Obama just doesn't understand), etc. If Obama loses a run for President for a second term, which does seem as likely now as I've seen it ... the racists and right wing fringe types will come out of the woodwork, and there will be a purge of Leftists, for sure. Because, if Obama fails, it will be because the uglier and more radicalized GOP portrays him and his government goals as Socialist. A great "war" will be set up, at the minimum, in any second term for Obama, as a movement towards a Socialist regime v. something more "American," i.e, good old capitalist political and economic system. The fact is, with all the very many things falling apart for the American Empire, a form of Democratic Socialism would actually be a sensible move. If the next four years show a lean towards "socialism" in the minds and eyes of people like Cheney, Cantor, Army, Wilson, Limbaugh, O'Reiley, Beck, et al, we'll see some kind of open revolt, I fear. When Hitler came to power, he may have made plenty of threats against the Jews, but the first groups he went after were Communists and Socialists. Communism is dead, and rightly so. Modern Democratic Socialism can be said to work better, in some ways, than priviledged and stacked Capitalism, as we have here. Cheney will remain a hero to the Right, and he will continue to spout off garbage until his ticker finally gives up.
82an84u
Folks, like I keep saying, it's obvious ole Cheengangy's driven to cover his own criminal butt; and in so doing has driven himself crazy....of course shitheads such as he stay mostly on insanity's cusp anyway. I say indict him, try him, convict him, set his sorry ass in jail and throw away the key...and SOON!!
83Conservative is Just Another Word For Layered Nut Cake « The Long Goodbye[...] Ex-Powell chief on Cheney: ‘The man is now just crazy’ Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, the former chief of staff to Bush Secretary of State Colin Powell, said in response to an interviewer’s question Thursday that he believes Cheney has gone a bit farther than too far. [...]
84Jeanne
Dick Cheney is doing what he needs to do to continue to keep himself legitimate. People who make very wrong decisions for their own self interest will continue to stand up for those decisions long after the reality of problems and hurt they created is apparent. You pull the plug on the guy. You pull the plug on Karl Rove. It's simple. There should be no public discourse involving these people who didn't serve their country but essentially raped it of all they could. They are criminals. They're selfish, mean hearted and cruel. Pull the plug. Nothing good will come from them.
85ploome
Wilkerson, was since 1989 Colin Powell's butt boy, his 'special' assistant his secretary ".....in early 1989 to a successful interview to become the assistant to Colin Powell, who was then finishing his stint as National Security Advisor in the Reagan administration and moving to a position in the United States Army Forces Command at Fort McPherson. He continued this supporting role as Powell became Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff through the Gulf War, following Powell into civilian life and then back into public service when President George W. Bush appointed Powell Secretary of State. Wilkerson was responsible for a review of information from the Central Intelligence Agency that was used to prepare Powell for his February 2003 presentation to the United Nations Security Council. His failure to realize that the evidence was faulty has been attributed on the limited time (only one week) that he had to review the data. The subsequent developments led Wilkerson to become disillusioned: "Combine the detainee abuse issue with the ineptitude of post-invasion planning for Iraq, wrap both in this blanket of secretive decision-making...and you get the overall reason for my speaking out."[1]" Wilkerson never made the decisions....he was a secretary President BUsh and VP Cheney kept us safe this economic problem is the result of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and the Demo Congress let's see what Barry Soweto will do-besides alienating all our allies
86 An Interview With Col. Lawrence Wilkerson (Part Two) | Andy Worthington
[...] were cross-posted as a single article on The Public Record. The interview was also picked up on by The Raw Story, and for a couple of interesting follow-up articles on Firedoglake, see the following on Empty [...]
87J. B.
I am a USA trained professional and a Registered Architect with a Bachelor of Architecture Degree and an Associates Degree in Structural Engineering. These are the basic facts about fires in steel framed high rise buildings with the structural frame protected by fire resistive materials and sprinkler systems, as the WTC towers were. In the history of high rise fires (and planes crashing into high rises, NYC Empire State Building, B-25, 1945) only three buildings have ever fallen down, let alone turned to powder on the way down and fallen mostly into the building basements, WTC 1, 2 & 7. And please note, WTC 7 was not hit by a plane. No protected steel framed high rise building in the world has EVER fallen or was even determined to be in danger of falling down because of a fire or a plane crash. No matter how long the fire burned. Never happened before, check it out. And, since 9/11, two high rise have sustained fires that burned out of control for hours and tens of hours, but the building's protected steel frame and floors stood firm and did not fall down. These buildings were built and burned in Spain and China. Check it out.
88McRocken
He's CRAZY and EVIL... a bad combo
90Qsip
It seems to me one person is posting under different monikers and saying the same basic things over and over.Sad.
Just a few of the comments posted, as there were too many too include all of them, but this gives you an idea of what some of some viewers are thinking, just click below to view more: SRH http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/09/ex-powell-chief-on-cheney-the-man-is-now-just-crazy/ . . . . .

[Saundra Hummer]

Truthout OriginalTHURSDAY 17 SEPTEMBER 2009

Beating Up Thurgood Marshall
Monday 14 September 2009
By:
Sam Ferguson
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
(Illustration:
Jared Rodriguez / t r u t h o u t)
Go on-site to view
Chief Justice Roberts has gone for the rope-a-dope, and it appears that he just dealt the knock out blow.

Based on the tenor of the argument yesterday at the Supreme Court in Citizens United v. FEC, the Supreme Court is poised to overrule the 1990 decision in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce. If they do, corporations will be allowed to use general treasury funds to run advertisements and campaign on behalf of federal candidates. Corporate cash will flood our elections and special interests will be enshrined in the Constitution.

But the blow will not just be to the proponents of campaign finance reform. It will be a stinging uppercut to the legacy of Justice Thurgood Marshall.

Austin was one of Marshall's final decisions, written just a year before he retired from an illustrious career. Before becoming the first African-American to sit on the Supreme Court, Marshall lead the NAACP's fight against segregation and argued the historic case of Brown v. Board of Education. In Austin, Justice Marshall upheld a Michigan law that prohibited corporations from spending general treasury funds to support or oppose candidates for office. He reasoned that â?oCorporate wealth can unfairly influence elections when it is deployed in the form of independent expenditures, just as it can when it assumes the guise of political contributions.â?ˇ

Austin was emblematic of Marhsall's judicial philosophy: He sided with the powerless and the voiceless, and he navigated through legal problems by steering towards equality.

Marshall was the conscience of liberal legal thinkers. He stood strong for everything that Chief Justice Roberts and the conservative wing of the Supreme Court are now fighting. The bout has been grueling, and Marshall is now on the ropes.

The rope-a-dope began at Chief Justice John Robert's confirmation hearings. Like Muhammad Ali against George Foreman in the Rumble in the Jungle, Roberts allowed his opponents to slip into a false sense of security. During the hearings, he promised to bring â?ono agendaâ?ˇ and to remain faithful to the law.

If that promise meant anything, it should have meant fidelity to the rules and values for which Justice Marshall fought for nearly 60 years as a lawyer and a judge. Marshall did more than perhaps any other person to change the legal landscape of the 20th century, and his contributions to the law - once radical - now seem like common sense. As a lawyer, he argued against Jim Crow in all its incarnations: in voting rights, in segregated housing, in schooling and in public accommodations. He gave content to the reconstruction amendments that promised an America steeped in equality. As a judge and justice, he wrote and joined dozens of opinions that expanded this legacy to make the law more fair, just and decent.

But, as soon as Chief Justice John Roberts took his seat on the bench, he came out swinging. In 2007, Roberts landed a heavy blow to Brown v. Board of Education, Marhsall's biggest accomplishment. In a school integration case, Parents Involved, the Roberts court held that the Seattle and Louisville, Kentucky, School Districts could not consider the race of pupils in making school assignments, even though the assignments were used to integrate the schools, rather than segregate. The case turned Brown on its head, and was a mid-round punch right in Marshall's face.

Roberts has landed other punches, mostly to the body. Marshall always stood for an expansive right to privacy, but in 2007, in Gonzalez v. Carhart, the Roberts court chipped away at a woman's right to choose. Marshall also joined a revolutionary opinion in 1969, granting school children important First Amendment rights. Though the decision still stands, it is all but irrelevant after an expansive 2007 decision by the Roberts court in Morse v. Frederick.

No doubt, Roberts now sees the chance for a KO. At least four other Justices - Kennedy, Scalia, Alito and Thomas - seem ready to overturn Austin.

If Marshall's legacy can muster the strength to stand back up, it has a fighting chance. Indeed, last term, the court took a swing against the Voting Rights Act, but missed. For now, the Act stands as a tired fighter of Marshall's legacy.

There was also another glimmer of Marshall's strength yesterday. The case was the first argument heard by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court. She is the first Latino and the third woman to ever sit on our nation's highest court. Neither the election of president Obama nor the nomination of Sotomayor would have been possible without Marshall, and it would be tragic if Marshall's legacy were dismantled as soon as it was coming to fruition. Under their watch, let's hope the ref does not count to ten.

Sam Ferguson is a Yale Law School Robina international human rights fellow.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~CommentsWe can save a lot of time
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 04:20 — CurtisWe can save a lot of time and money, if our elections are run the way corporations hold their elections. The number of votes is based on how much money (stocks) are controlled by an individual. Elections could be easily completed by just adding up how much money each corporation has and how the corporation wants to use it's votes. We can then go back to our football games.Great concept, Curtis. We
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 07:52 — Peter EdlerGreat concept, Curtis. We already have the Selectoral system backed by the Supremacy Court, all of it solidly grounded in the Constillusion. Add to this Obama's newthink on Afghanistan - more troops in advance of pioneer settlers from impoverished US states - and we're getting closer to the Brave New World envisioned by Zbigniev, Rove, Cheney, Bush et al. Tally-ho, folks. Pete Edler, StockholmNext Roe vs Wade...
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 08:40 — GenklagNext Roe vs Wade... A single person can never
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 11:24 — Stefan AlbrechtA single person can never compete against any corporation. Therefore equality is impossible. Corporations are supernatural persons! If a corporation can directly influence elections then this will be the end of democracy. Combined with an ignorant population this will be the end of civil society. Corporations should never be allowed to be persons. Fascism here we go!!!As a bicycle messenger, I
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 11:34 — AnonymousAs a bicycle messenger, I made deliveries directly to his office. Seems trite, but there was a laid back feeling to his office staff - particulary during the Reagan era when the wheels were coming off. Sotomayer should come out swinging - enough is enough.Somebody tell Cheney that
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 12:34 — AnonymousSomebody tell Cheney that Roberts is an avid hunter and they should hook up soon for an outing.... please. I hate to think of the cases
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 13:10 — kannaI hate to think of the cases corporations will now bring to the courts. which one will Roberts Court decide to use next. I note the Republican party is supposed to be for less Government with exceptions, and States, Individual rights with exceptions. I always ask authoritarians; who will get to decide. What can Justice Sotomayer do? We have a right-leaning court. She sure isn't going to change Scalia's mind on anything, nor Roberts, nor Thomas. So now we are stuck for years to come Roberts' age? 54.This will be the death of
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 13:30 — AnonymousThis will be the death of any balance we have had between corporations and their wealth and the tax payer and his/her single vote. If this passes we will see more one sided adds, with little factual basis and nothing from our bought and paid for corporate news media to help give us a balanced, rational concept of the ideas that are being voted, much like the current debate over the public option but more out front. Lets keep corporations from getting more power than they have. I can only imagine the difficulty we will have getting environmental bills through the legislators when corporations are spending money to stop it. I believe the same will happen with unions and workers rights.We need a new Constitutional
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 13:33 — AnonymousWe need a new Constitutional amendment saying simply that a corporation is not a person under the Constitution. It is just a legal arrangement for commercial purposes.Two events coming soon will
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 13:41 — BillyDocTwo events coming soon will signal the end of the United States experiment as a free society. There will be no recovery from these events this side of complete collapse.

The first event will be the affirmation of the "personhood" of corporations, and their "right" to "spend their money any way they want to." Once this principle is established, our corporations will spend their money to insure their control of every aspect of society, and especially to bring profits to themselves. Profits collected from the rest of us.

The second event will be the resolution of the health care issue in favor of the insurance industry. This will probably take the form of a "Public Option" that is no such thing; where we are all forced into the loving hands of the insurance companies because congress will make sure that any public entity cannot function. Remember that they did exactly this when they prevented Medicare from negotiating lower prices from the pharmaceutical industry.

These two events are now inevitable, and they will clearly mark the beginning of the end. A few of our fellow citizens will watch in horror from their armchairs, but most will not even recognize the transition.True to form, holy righteous
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 13:42 — grannyTrue to form, holy righteous religious and pretty John Roberts and his gang of thug "Justices" are selling the country to the highest bidders. George and the big Dick knew exactly how to cement in their evil long after they were gone. God HELP the United States of America, because the Supremes won't do it.American citizens should pay
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 14:26 — AnonymousAmerican citizens should pay more attention to the corporations they support and what/who those corporations support. If you invest or purchase from a corporation which contributes to or supports persons or political policies that tear at the fabric of true democracy, you are equally complicit in its degradation.American citizens should pay
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 14:31 — AnonymousAmerican citizens should pay more attention to the corporations they support and what/who those corporations support. If you invest or purchase from a corporation which contributes to or supports persons or political policies that tear at the fabric of true democracy, you are equally complicit in its degradation.It was Mussolini who
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 14:50 — AnonymousIt was Mussolini who commented, "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
I couldn't agree more
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 14:54 — EliotI couldn't agree more w/Curtis and Peter Edler. W/corporate control (pure capatalism) there is no room for education, the sick, the environment. Those w/the power to revolt have been reduced to apathetic sports-nuts or well-meaning bloggers incapable of change. History repeats itself, the similarity to Rome is frightening. Sometimes I wonder... are we now living one of the final chapters in some future "Rise and Fall of the USA" DVD set?If Roberts, et al, have
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 15:11 — DouglasIf Roberts, et al, have their way, then this really is the creation of corporate fascism taking over the American political system, and the exit of democracy as we knew it. How can ordinary people fight back? One of the problems will be that ordinary people won't even know what's happening, except what the corporations want them to know. Corporate money is not unlimited, but it could easily swamp small donors, or non-profit groups, or public interest groups. I don't understand why the ACLU is arguing for Citizens United, against the FEC. Sure, Aclu is a nonprofit corporation, but its resources are miniscule compared to those of a GE, or AIG, or B of A. Anyway, the ACLU role is not made clear in the above commentary. I wish it were.A constitutional amendment
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 15:13 — Jim RA constitutional amendment banning all contributions, providing public financing and free air time is the only answer to our corporate run elections and corporate owned politicians; even more so now that the corporatists own five justices. No reforms on behalf of "The People" will be possible until this is done, IMHO.What about Strict
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 15:41 — Gregory WetzelWhat about Strict Constitutionalists??? Our founding fathers never wanted corporations to have the power of people, and they were worried about money having a negative impact on our democracy. Once the court gives corporations the power of persons to spend money freely on elections we will be a Fascist nation. We will be ruled by corporations if we are not already ruled by corporations. Congress could amend the Constitution to redefine the rights of persons to be given only to natural people but there is little chance this will ever happen.Can you spell Oligarchy? In
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 15:42 — AnonymousCan you spell Oligarchy? In case you don't think that unlimited advertising will not sway your liberal mind to hold virtually any opinion, think again. If that were that not true, there would be no money spent on advertising! At last, the business of America will finally be just BUSINESS! Thanks Calvin.A you can be sure that it
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 15:56 — HadashitoA you can be sure that it will be 5 -4 decision. The corporations (and unions ?) already run U S A, so it won't be much different, no matter how you re- define the situation. Roberts and his 'conservative 'cohorts are simply Republican Party/corporate shills - - and the one African-American is Scalia's lap dog. So the SCOTUS votes nearly always go the same way, especially if they affect who rules the roost in Washington. Expect to see more re-decisions and decisions favorable to the Republicans, no matter how moribund the Republican Partty becomes. Let's at least hope the SCOTUS Republican cabal won't be able to get their hands on another election as they did to put C heney and G W Bush into office.What none of our elected
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 16:15 — AnonymousWhat none of our elected reps (that I'm aware of) focused on at Roberts' confirmation hearings is that he is and was very very pro business. What other kind of judge did anyone expect Bush to nominate? Regardless of his christian schtick and his bully boy "use a big stick rather than talk" foreign policy, he & Cheney were as pro corporations as it's possible to be. But no one was paying any attention and probably our elected reps just don't care, since who pays them and provides their health care coverage seems to be much less important to most of them than who puts money into their campaign funds and, some of the time, offers jobs to their spouses & children. So we've ended up with at least 20 years of incredibly probusiness anti all civil rights for humans except the right to "carry" weapons of death. People were mostly too busy spending money to care assuming they'd pay attention anyway. Thank the MSM for steadfastly refusing to draw attention to every justice's position on these "business" issues.The worst things about our
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 17:52 — AnonymousThe worst things about our country can all be traced to the overwhelming influence of corporations over our elected officials. If this decision goes Robert's way, Democracy will be completely dead. Worst of all, the small chance we still have of preventing global warming from going out of control will be reduced to nothing. The corporations only care about short term profit and are perfectly willing to sacrifice the future of life on earth for it. If we allow this to happen, we are all accomplices in the ultimate crime. It is imperative that we stop it, so how can we stop it?Corporate capitalism, which
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 17:53 — Crispin B. HollinsheadCorporate capitalism, which is not to be confused with the honest capitalism defined by Adam Smith, has risen to unprecedented power in the last few decades. Defined by law as an individual, corporations are not alive, yet never die, like zombies. This Zombie Capitalism has created a few billionaires, impoverished the rest of us, and given us toxic assets, toxic air food and water, toxic health care, and toxic politics. Now the Republican activist judges on the Supreme Court want to turn these zombies loose to buy the political system wholesale. In the movies, the citizens eventually wake up and kill off the zombies before it's too late. Corporations are not Persons
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 20:47 — Christopher MarloweCorporations are not Persons and should not have constitutional rights. Santa Clara v So. Pacific RR is a fraud. Read: Unequal Protection by Thom Hartmann. Corporate Personhood was not part of the holding, but rather the statement was inserted into the headnotes by a clerk. Justice Black gives a brilliant lecture on the foolishness of Corporate Personhood in his dissent in Connecticut General Life v Johnson. The 14th Amendment was not intended to give such rights to Corporations, nor did the voters approve that amendment with such an intention. This is fascist law, written and upheld by fascists.It's an outrage. People
Wed, 09/16/2009 - 00:46 — Anonymous It's an outrage. People would take tot he streets if they weren't camped-out in front of their TVs watching corporate videodrome.Well here we go again with
Wed, 09/16/2009 - 18:42 — Michael ShawWell here we go again with another blow to what little is left of democracy in this country. At this point they might as well abolish the three branches of government and crown Wall Street king. In every attempt for the common good, the usual 1% of the power wealth in this nation who own most politicians on both sides of the aisle, can't stand for one moment to not own and control everything and crush what little is left of the already reeling corpse of what was once a strong and vibrant middle class. It seems to me the illusion is over! There will never be meaningful regulation of Wall Street, nor viable health care for all Americans. All that exists now is class war, the same old rich and the ever growing poor along with the usual plan of pitting the working class against itself with the usual phony socialist argument. Democracy in the USA is dead! Long live the crooks on Wall Street!I would add the idea that a
Wed, 09/16/2009 - 18:56 — Michael ShawI would add the idea that a corporation is a person, thus guaranteed the same rights under the constitution as a living person is probably the longest living lie in US history. It began with Santa Clara verses the Southern Pacific railroad where in fact the Supreme Court didn't rule at all but rather reverted to the lower court that said corporations are artificial entities and thus are not entitled constitutionally to have the same rights because they already had more then enough political power and influence. Thomas Jefferson actually proposed an 11th amendment for the bill of rights that would in fact have banned corporations entirely. John Adams and others said we don't need that since all of the states already had similar laws on the books. Since that lie, which began in the days of the robber barons, got a rebirth under Reagan who continued to once again perpetuate it, we the people have been going downhill ever since to the point where the corporations now make the laws favorable only to them. They have the Supreme Court stacked with all their boys and the consequences over the last thirty odd years are apparent!A position such as Roberts
Wed, 09/16/2009 - 22:58 — AnonymousA position such as Roberts has FOR LIFE seems to me a little bit like being king. I don't understand why the newest and youngest Justice can be appointed Chief Justice instead of the most experienced in the court. Roberts being 54 will be able to do a lot of damage, I just hope that President Obama will be able to replace a couple of the conservative ones during his time in office. The next glass ceiling we need to break is a woman, being Chief Justice.When corporations porked and
Wed, 09/16/2009 - 23:10 — John MajeskiWhen corporations porked and purchased the mainstream media during the eighties and nineties we were already done for, and the fork has been in us ever since. I've never ever comprehended how Congress legislated and bestowed 'personhood' upon private business entities, as there is absolutely no biological rationale for such a determination. That's akin to saying money is blood....hmm. © 2009 truthouthttp://www.truthout.org/091409R?print ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

[Saundra Hummer]

.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Quote to Ponder
'A bundle of sticks
can not be broken.'

African Proverbfrom
BLACK COMMENTATOR
http://www.blackcommentator.com
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.