Statement by the President on the Senate Passage of the Claims Settlement Act of 2010

from - Big Government by Publius


Statement by the President on the Senate Passage of the Claims Settlement Act of 2010: "

I applaud the Senate for passing the Claims Settlement Act of 2010, which will at long last provide funding for the agreements reached in the Pigford II lawsuit, brought by African American farmers, and the Cobell lawsuit, brought by Native Americans over the management of Indian trust accounts and resources. I particularly want to thank Attorney General Holder and Secretaries Salazar and Vilsack for their continued work to achieve this outcome. I urge the House to move forward with this legislation as they did earlier this year, and I look forward to signing it into law.

This bill also includes settlements for four separate water rights suits made by Native American tribes. I support these settlements and my Administration is committed to addressing the water needs of tribal communities. While these legislative achievements reflect important progress, they also serve to remind us that much work remains to be done. That is why my Administration also continues to work to resolve claims of past discrimination made by women and Hispanic farmers against the USDA.

"

Ireland Bailout Threatens European Monetary Union

from American Power by Donald Douglas


Ireland Bailout Threatens European Monetary Union: "This is the big story from Europe, at WSJ, 'Irish Grasp at EU, IMF Lifeline':

The Irish government all but buckled to pressure to accept a historic international bailout Thursday, capitulating after a week of intense lobbying from officials across Europe and spurring questions about which other European economies will need a helping hand. Ireland's central-bank governor and finance minister acknowledged for the first time Thursday that the country needs help rescuing its banking industry, which has been crippled by losses on sour loans.

The Irish government is in talks with the International Monetary Fund and European officials about a loan package that is likely to amount to 'tens of billions' of euros, the central-bank governor, Patrick Honohan, said. 'It will be a large loan because the purpose...is to show Ireland has sufficient firepower to deal with any concerns of the market.'

Ireland's grudging decision to accept foreign aid, after insisting it didn't need help, is a bitter moment for a country that won its independence from Britain decades ago. Already, some lawmakers and editorial writers are bemoaning what they see as the inevitable loss of sovereignty that will accompany a foreign bailout.

And this is key, in my opinion:

It is an equally pivotal point for the 16 nations that use Europe's common currency. After rescuing Greece in the spring, European leaders are now betting that if they extinguish the financial crisis engulfing Ireland, it won't spread to other euro-zone weak spots. But with bond markets continuing to punish those countries, new bailouts may be needed soon—a prospect that some believe will call into question the durability of the euro as a common currency.

I reported some time back that Germany's economic resurgence was lapping many other EU nations, and the prospect of renew demands for German autonomy outside the political union was said to threaten European integration. (And at NYT, 'German Identity, Long Dormant, Reasserts Itself.')

RELATED: At The Other McCain earlier this week, 'EUROPE IN CRISIS: Sudden Financial Emergency Strikes EU Zone UPDATE: Götterdämmerung?'

"

Obama Policies Force Another 700,000 Seniors to Switch Health Providers

from YID With LID by Jeff Dunetz


Obama Policies Force Another 700,000 Seniors to Switch Health Providers: "

Last year we heard it over and over, I'm talking of course about President Obama's promise that if you like your plan you can keep it. Well forget it. Today it was discovered that another 700,000 Seniors will have to change plans, because health insurers are shutting down certain types of plans because of legislative changes and looming cuts to federal funding.That is on top of the announcement in August that three million seniors would have to get new providers.

Cigna Corp., Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, several Blue Cross Blue Shield plans and others aren't renewing hundreds of Medicare Advantage plans, which are Medicare policies administered by private insurers. The moves will displace some 700,000 beneficiaries who must find new policies, according to Humana Inc., a large seller of Advantage plans.



For 2011, the Kaiser Family Foundation said there will be a 13% decline in the number of Medicare Advantage plans.

The pullback is largely due to a 2008 law that required the plans to have networks of preferred doctors, with the idea that managed care could be less costly and aggressive marketing could be curbed. Some providers of traditional fee-for-service policies decided to close the plans rather than invest in networks. But some insurers say the federal health-care overhaul, which includes $140 billion in cuts to reimbursements for Advantage plans over 10 years, is a factor as well.

Insurers are also saying as the market tightens up more plans will close and prices will go up.

'It is hard to imagine these cuts to Medicare Advantage and nothing is going to change,' said Michael McCallister, chief executive of Humana. The firm closed or merged 31 fee-for-service plans for next year, but sees growth in its remaining business as it picks up seniors displaced when competing plans close.



Medicare Advantage is expected to bring in more than $51 billion in revenue for major health plans this year, according to a Goldman Sachs estimate. That revenue could drop to as low as $37 billion in the next few years as the cuts kick in, Goldman estimates, but insurers likely will find new ways to bring in business, and sales are expected to climb back to $51 billion by 2018.

Back in August we learned that a plan by Medicare to try to make it simpler for consumers to pick drug coverage could force 3 million seniors to switch plans next year whether they like it or not. These seniors see their will see their prescription plan eliminated as part of a new effort by Medicare to eliminate duplicate plans that offer the similar coverage. These seniors would not lose coverage, but they probably will see changes in their premiums and copayments.

Please email me at yidwithlid@aol.com to be put onto my mailing list.
Feel free to reproduce any article but please link back to http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com

"

Pelosi: Gov't Saved $26.8 Billion by Spending $82 Billion

from Pundit Press by Aurelius


Pelosi: Gov't Saved $26.8 Billion by Spending $82 Billion: "

If you gave this headline a double take, you gave it twice the thought as out-going Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi did. According to the House Minority Leader-elect, the United States' government bailout of car companies saved our nation "1.5 million American jobs" and "prevented a $26.8 billion loss to the American taxpayer."



You can read all about it on Pelosi's blog 'The Gavel." With someone like Pelosi, one would expect that she would leave out the fact that the United States spent over three times $26.8 Billion to bailout companies like GM. However, she does not, referencing the $82 Billion just two paragraphs later.



Here is a short excerpt showing the ridiculousness of Pelosi's writings:

'Government action supporting the auto industry prevented a $26.8 billion loss to the American taxpayer and saved nearly 1.5 million American jobs...The loss would have been caused by increased public welfare payments and lost tax receipts from workers had the government not provided $82 billion of assistance to the industry.'

Pelosi does not explain how exactly the United States saved $26.8 Billion while spending over $50 Billion more just to bailout auto companies.

Pelosi

The Gavel extensively quotes an article that appeared on Bloomberg.com, trying to pretend that she's not saying this. But it is obvious that Pelosi is trying to push this ridiculousness as, one, the truth, and two, is trying to say that she saved the American taxpayer billions of dollars.



This is very similar to the President's and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's claims that the Stimulus saved $282 Billion. According to them, the $787,000,000,000 price tag on the Stimulus saved Americans $282,000,000,000. Once again, they never explain how you can save money by spending three times as much.



This is just another example of Democrats arguing that spending a tremendous amount of money is somehow saving money. Obviously the drubbing they received earlier in the month didn't teach them anything about fiscal responsibility or about not lying to the American people.



She really thinks that she can get away with lying to the American people. Well, I think she is wrong.





Please bookmark!

"

MSNBC's Brewer Promotes Electric Car Charging Stations as Parent Company GE Sells Them

from NewsBusters.org | Exposing Liberal Media Bias by Kyle Drennen


MSNBC's Brewer Promotes Electric Car Charging Stations as Parent Company GE Sells Them: "

Displaying a clear conflict of interest during Friday's 12PM ET hour on MSNBC, anchor Contessa Brewer did a story promoting electric car charging stations but did not disclose to viewers that the channel's parent company, General Electric, was selling the very same product. GE commercials for the charging stations have frequently aired on MSNBC in recent weeks.



Brewer began the segment, a part of NBC-Universal's "Green is Progress" week, by declaring: "Houston, the city known for gas pumps and oil gushers, is getting the nation's largest network of electric car charging stations." The company providing the charging stations was not General Electric, but rather NRG Energy. Brewer interviewed the company's president and CEO, David Crane.

View video below

read more

"

Glenn Beck Tells Audience: They’re Hiding Something From Us

from The Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft

Glenn Beck Tells Audience: They’re Hiding Something From Us: "

Glenn Beck today told his audience that the US government was “hiding something” in regards to the mystery contrail seen off the coast of California last week.

The Right Scoop reported:

Glenn Beck says that he has spoken to military experts about the mystery contrail and he says it’s definitely not a plane, but rather a two stage missile. He just wants to know where it came from, and he has a theory. Beck postulates that this missile was possibly from a Chinese sub off the coast of California, perhaps as a show of force to the world, but even more so to President Obama

Via HotAir:

[wpvideo qboFBCLu]

The missile fired off of the California coast this month appeared on the same day that a Chinese sub surprised US officials when it appeared suddenly in a US carrier group back in 2007. Back in 2007 a Chinese submarine surprised American military chiefs when it popped up close to the massive U.S.S. Kitty Hawk.

"

Dems in Disarray: Harold Ford Hits Out at Obama

from - Big Government by Capitol Confidential

Dems in Disarray: Harold Ford Hits Out at Obama: "

In a new Forbes piece, former Rep. Harold Ford, Jr., Chairman of the moderate Democratic Leadership Council, hits out at President Obama saying he needs to make some “halftime adjustments” including “order[ing] his department heads and agency chiefs to declare a moratorium on new regulations until further notice.”

The critique is timely, given news that Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius Genachowski is engaged in a less-than-stealthy, renewed effort to ram through net neutrality regulations in advance of a Republican takeover of the House that will see one of several opponents of net neutrality assume chairmanship of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), a leading contender for the job, recently wrote in a policy memo that “The FCC’s regulatory compass is broken as it continues in its unrelenting pursuit to impose so-called network neutrality regulations, regardless of whether the agency has the legal authority for such a blind power grab.”

In addition, Ford’s urging of a regulatory moratorium will no doubt hearten Gulf state residents concerned about an ongoing, de facto “permitorium” preventing the resumption of drilling operations in the region in the wake of the BP disaster, and subsequent drilling moratorium, earlier this year.

Ford notes in the piece that “The U.S. needs a strong oil and gas industry to secure our future, and our own companies are leading the world in the development of new technologies to safely recover America’s own resources. These companies are also investing in the fuels of tomorrow. A case in point is Exxon Mobil’s (XOM) work with Synthetic Genomics to develop fuels from algae.”

In the piece, Ford also urges Obama to make permanent the Bush tax cuts for middle-class Americans, and those affecting capital gains and dividend income; he also argues for cutting the corporate tax rate by half.

The advice comes as many conservative and moderate Democrats have been publicly and privately decrying the decision to keep Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic leadership team that led House Democratic candidates to a bloody defeat in November in place. Progressive Democrats, meanwhile, have been arguing that Democrats lost because they did not govern liberally enough, and that Obama needs to veer left in order to improve his chances of re-election.

All indications as yet are that Obama does not intend to pursue a Clinton-esque approach in the wake of November election losses, despite consistent charges from industry and non-profit groups that regulation on his watch has gotten out of hand and threatens to undercut chief administration objectives, ranging from job creation to promotion of green energy. Setting aside net neutrality and drilling permitting issues, the Environmental Protection Agency’s Tailoring Rule has recently been criticized for threatening the biomass industry, traditionally considered a producer of environmentally-friendly energy, and one active in states won by Obama in the Pacific Northwest and New England.

As Ford notes, in order “to jump-start economic growth and business investment, stimulate job creation, and get wages up for ordinary Americans… The most important thing our leader can do is to push the reset button with business.”

"

Fox’s Megyn Kelly Makes Revealing GQ Appearance

from The Blaze - Stories by Jonathon M. Seidl

Fox’s Megyn Kelly Makes Revealing GQ Appearance: "

Megyn Kelly in the most recent edition of GQ Magazine.

Your eyes aren’t fooling you: that really is Fox News’s Megyn Kelly in the most recent edition of GQ Magazine.

The blonde-haired, and pregnant, anchor of “America Live” sat down with GQ’s Greg Veis for the December issue. The article’s title is to be expected: “She Reports, We Decide She’s Hot.”

While the magazine has not yet made a link available for the story, TVNewser does have some excerpts, including the magazine’s description of the conservative host:

Abhorred by the left, adored by the right, frequently pinata’d by The Daily Show, Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly has become the very blonde face—and legs—of the network. And she’s okay with that.

In the magazine interview, she boasts about Fox’s ratings: “You may have heard that we’re number one—we’re pretty good at advertising that.”

And also manages to discuss fan mail:

Some of them [letters] just say, ‘You’re hot”—which, you know, I don’t find insulting. [laughs] But the ones that go a little over the top get deleted right away.

You can read more from TVNewser and in the December issue of GQ.

"

Obama’s New START Would Have Been Reagan Non-Starter

from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. by Conn Carroll


Obama’s New START Would Have Been Reagan Non-Starter: "

In his last gasp effort to rush his New START agreement with Russia through the Senate, President Barack Obama again invoked the name of President Ronald Reagan from the White House yesterday. Three times President Obama cited Reagan as justification for ratification of New START. But while President Reagan did negotiate and sign the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with the Soviet Union, does that mean he would sign any agreement that reduced U.S. nuclear weapons? No. Heritage Vice President of Foreign and Defense Policy Studies Kim Holmes explains:

Many people, even in the Administration, have argued that what the President wants to do is similar to what Ronald Reagan wanted to do when he talked about making nuclear weapons obsolete. I assure you this is not the case. I was working this issue in the 1980s, and nothing could be further from the truth, because while Reagan, like most people, believed we should reduce our reliance on nuclear weapons, he did not envision their complete elimination coming about through the treaty process.

To prove this point, I ask one question: Why did Ronald Reagan walk away from Mikhail Gorbachev’s offer to eliminate nuclear weapons if only we gave up the Strategic Defense Initiative? Why did Reagan not take him up on that offer? The reason is that Reagan believed strategic defenses were the essential ingredient in disarmament—the exact opposite of what Gorbachev’s vision was then and President Obama’s vision is today.

Whereas Russia wanted to limit our defenses in order to give its nuclear weapons a free shot at us, and since it couldn’t compete with us technologically, Reagan believed that only when our strategic defenses were advanced and successful enough could our offensive forces be safely reduced or even eliminated. In other words, he believed that strategic defenses made nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete, not treaties—which, by the way, he said must be met with a skeptical attitude of “trust but verify.”

President Obama’s New START has at least 12 fatal flaws, including limitations on missile defense that President Reagan would never have agreed to. Specifically, President Obama’s New START limits U.S. missile defense in five ways:

1. Paragraph 9 of the Preamble. As described above, this language in the Preamble established a bias against missile defense in the essential context of New START. It also establishes a logic that will impose ever-greater restrictions on missile defense as the U.S. and Russia pursue additional arms control steps. This logic will also direct that U.S. missile defense capabilities be reduced in accordance with the reduction in the strategic offensive arms of Russia because the defenses will otherwise “undermine the viability and effectiveness” of Russia’s offensive strategic force.

2. Paragraph 3 of Article V. This provision prohibits conversion of offensive strategic missile launchers to launchers of defensive interceptors and vice versa. While the Obama Administration has no plans in its missile defense program to convert launchers of offensive strategic missiles to launchers of defensive interceptors, it is a step that the U.S. has taken in the past. A currently unforeseen circumstance could make it advantageous for the U.S. to take this step in the future.

3. Limits on some kinds of strategic target missiles and their launchers used in missile defense tests. There is an array of provisions in New START that limit and restrict certain types of missiles and missile launchers that are used as targets in missile defense tests. Specifically, these are target missiles that share a first stage with strategic missiles limited by the treaty and their associated launchers.

4. Article XII and Part Six of the Protocol. These provisions of New START create an implementing body, called the Bilateral Consultative Commission (BCC), and gives it a broad mandate to promote the objectives of the treaty. This broad mandate could permit it to impose additional restrictions on the U.S. missile defense program.

5. Article IX, Part Seven of the Protocol and the Annex on Telemetric Information to the Protocol. These provisions could be interpreted in a way that could lead the U.S. to share telemetric information from missile defense tests. While the provisions, even if applied to missile defense tests, do not impose a direct restriction on the conduct of a missile defense tests, they could as a practical matter. It is possible that the sharing of telemetric information from missile defense tests could be used by the recipient to determine what kinds of missiles U.S. defensive systems are able of countering effectively and what kinds of missiles they are less effective in countering.

"

Welfare Reform: British Style

from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. by Rachel Sheffield

Welfare Reform: British Style: "

According to British Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, the United Kingdom will put into place “a radical new welfare state where it always pays to work.” Newly elected British Prime Minister David Cameron has set forth plans that, according to analysts, will result in the nation’s most dramatic welfare reform since World War II.

Wracked with debt, the U.K. is attempting to whittle down their government’s largest expense—welfare—which today stands at approximately $350 billion, or 15 percent of the nation’s GDP. Currently, 5 million British citizens receive welfare, and approximately1.4 million of those have been on welfare for over nine years.

While reining in government spending is certainly a major impetus behind the reform, it’s not the only reason. Similar to the United States’ 1996 reforms, Britain is attempting to promote the philosophy that, as Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg put it, welfare should “not … compensate the poor for their predicament” but instead “act as an engine of mobility.” Britain’s reforms consist of several elements:

• Consolidating dozens of welfare payments into a single tax credit,
• Capping the amount (roughly $40,000) a family can receive in welfare benefits each year,
• Promoting work by gradually phasing out welfare benefits,
• Cutting off benefits to recipients who turn down three job offers, and
• Cutting back on other tax credits available to all citizens regardless of income.

Announcements of the reforms, along with the recent introduction of other government spending cuts, have incited protests among certain crowds across the U.K. Yet the truth of the matter is that the nation is broke, and the only way to return to fiscal solvency is by beginning to eliminate government dependence.

Unfortunately, Britain’s situation is not unique. The 1996 U.S. welfare reforms successfully cut state welfare rolls, but those reforms have been significantly watered down over the years and most recently dealt all but a death blow by the stimulus bill. Today the U.S. spends nearly $1 trillion a year on welfare programs, despite spiraling debt. But there are steps the U.S. can take to get welfare spending under control, including implementing work requirements for able-bodied welfare recipients as a requirement to receive assistance, such as food stamps and housing aid. Another step is to cap federal welfare spending at 2008—pre-stimulus—levels. Also, marriage must be promoted, considering that 80 percent of long-term poverty occurs in single-parent households and the United States out-of-wedlock birth rate continues to climb.

Britain should be applauded for its welfare reform efforts. Policy that promotes personal responsibility is the only policy that will keep citizens free from the burdens of heavy-handed government.

"

IPCC Official: “Climate Policy Is Redistributing The World's Wealth, ...nothing to do with environmental policy”

from theblogprof by The blogprof


IPCC Official: “Climate Policy Is Redistributing The World's Wealth, ...nothing to do with environmental policy”: "The only thing shocking here is that it is being admitted. From theqwpf via memeorandum: IPCC Official: “Climate Policy Is Redistributing The World's Wealth”. Note that this is no climate skeptic. This is one of their own admitting the scam is just a way to redistribute wealth from those that have it (us), to those that do not. In other words it's an affirmative action program to reward non-productive countries. Read - Africa:

The new thing about your proposal for a Global Deal is the stress on the importance of development policy for climate policy. Until now, many think of aid when they hear development policies.

That will change immediately if global emission rights are distributed. If this happens, on a per capita basis, then Africa will be the big winner, and huge amounts of money will flow there. This will have enormous implications for development policy. And it will raise the question if these countries can deal responsibly with so much money at all.

They are unable to deal with what they have now (Zimbabwe anyone?). It's not a question of if they can deal with the money, it's a question of why our money would be shoveled over there in the first place. And check this out:

De facto, this means an expropriation of the countries with natural resources. This leads to a very different development from that which has been triggered by development policy.

First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

Good grief. EXACTLY what we have been saying all along. Ex-act-ly! This comes on the heels of this a few weeks ago: American Physical Society Prefessor resigns, calls global warming a scam. You know - maybe it won't be necessary to murder a billion people via poison vaccination after all as Bill Gates said:

"

Ron Paul Introduces Legislation to Protect Americans From TSA Groping: “The American People Are Being Treated Like Cattle” (Video)

from Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft


Ron Paul Introduces Legislation to Protect Americans From TSA Groping: “The American People Are Being Treated Like Cattle” (Video): "

Rep. Ron Palul (R-TX) introduced the “American Traveler Dignity Act” (HR 6416) today against the invasive TSA screenings.

The Washington Examiner reported:

Rep. Ron Paul took to the house floor to introduce legislation against the invasive screenings of the TSA.

During his speech, Paul denounced former Homeland Security chairman Michael Chertoff and big companies making money off of airport scanners and said that the American people were being treated like cattle.

“The argument from the executive branch is that, when you buy a ticket you have sacrificed your rights and that the duty of the government is to make us safe.” said Paul, “That isn’t the case, you never have to sacrifice your rights. The duty of the government is to protect our rights, not to use them and do what they have been doing to us.”

Here is Congressman’s Paul’s speech today on the House floor:



Dallas Blog posted the bill today:

A BILL – HR 6416

To ensure that certain Federal employees cannot hide behind immunity.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. NO IMMUNITY FOR CERTAIN AIRPORT SCREENING METHODS.

No law of the United States shall be construed to confer any immunity for a Federal employee or agency or any individual or entity that receives Federal funds, who subjects an individual to any physical contact (including contact with any clothing the individual is wearing), x-rays, or millimeter waves, or aids in the creation of or views a representation of any part of a individual’s body covered by clothing as a condition for such individual to be in an airport or to fly in an aircraft. The preceding sentence shall apply even if the individual or the individual’s parent, guardian, or any other individual gives consent.

Paul added this on the bill:

It’s very simple, it’s one paragraph long. It removes the immunity from anybody in the federal government that does anything that you or I can’t do. If you can’t grope another person and if you can’t x-ray people and endanger them with possible x-rays, you can’t take nude photographs of individuals, why do we allow the government to do it? We would go to jail. He’d be immediately arrested if an individual citizen went out and did these things, and yet we just sit there calmly and say, “Oh, they’re making us safe”.

"

President’s Statement about GM IPO Reveals a Defensive Politician

from Cato @ Liberty by Daniel Ikenson



President’s Statement about GM IPO Reveals a Defensive Politician: "

By Daniel Ikenson

I don’t particularly relish picking on a president who, on virtually every policy front, is showing all the markings of a man in way over his head. But the president’s actions and statements are becoming excruciating to watch—like a highly-touted Olympic figure skater who can’t complete a maneuver without falling to the ice.

President Obama’s salutary statement about GM’s IPO yesterday reveals a man so focused on defending his policies that he can no longer conceal the incongruity between his political objectives and the country’s imperatives.

American taxpayers are now positioned to recover more than my administration invested in GM, and that’s a good thing. (My emphasis)

Besides revealing the president’s preference for LIFO accounting procedures, the statement strikes me as sub-presidential. Shouldn’t the POTUS be concerned about American taxpayers getting back all of the money invested in GM? Even though former President Bush is complicit, shouldn’t the sitting president of a country that owes its wealth, freedom, and future to the endurance of the rule of law and the other long-standing, bedrock institutions that were defiled and abused to bail out two automakers issue a statement of regret and reassurance that such extreme measures will never be undertaken again?

I think President Obama missed an opportunity to make amends, build a bridge, and reassure businesses and investors that the White House will do its part to reduce the economy-stifling problem of regime uncertainty going forward. But, then again, that might have been too presidential for a politician who appears motivated more by avoiding blame than by advancing the country’s best interests.

President’s Statement about GM IPO Reveals a Defensive Politician is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog

"

Republicans prepare to fight possible FCC net-neutrality push by year's end

from TheHill.com by sjerome@thehill.com (Sara Jerome)


Republicans prepare to fight possible FCC net-neutrality push by year's end: "

“Ramming through Internet regulations would ignore the will of a
bipartisan majority of Congress' and the public, Rep. Stearns said.

"

Climate Talks or Wealth Redistribution Talks?

from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. by Nicolas Loris


Climate Talks or Wealth Redistribution Talks?: "

Typically the largest wealth distribution program that occurs in Cancun, Mexico, is college students spending their parents’ money. That could change at the upcoming United Nations climate summit if developing countries clamoring for money to cope with global warming get their wish. With each passing year, it’s clear that international climate change talks are less about climate and more about wealth redistribution.

The latest case in point comes from United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) official Ottmar Edenhofer. In a recent interview with Germany’s NZZ Online, Edenhofer lays out just what the climate talks are all about:

NZZ: The new thing about your proposal for a Global Deal is the stress on the importance of development policy for climate policy. Until now, many think of aid when they hear development policies.

Edenhofer: That will change immediately if global emission rights are distributed. If this happens, on a per capita basis, then Africa will be the big winner, and huge amounts of money will flow there. This will have enormous implications for development policy. And it will raise the question if these countries can deal responsibly with so much money at all.

NZZ: That does not sound anymore like the climate policy that we know.

Edenhofer: Basically it’s a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War. Why? Because we have 11,000 gigatons of carbon in the coal reserves in the soil under our feet—and we must emit only 400 gigatons in the atmosphere if we want to keep the 2-degree target. 11 000 to 400—there is no getting around the fact that most of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil.

NZZ: De facto, this means an expropriation of the countries with natural resources. This leads to a very different development from that which has been triggered by development policy.

Edenhofer: First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

This shouldn’t be all too surprising. The Copenhagen conference last year quickly devolved from a discussion on how to cost-effectively curtail greenhouse gas emissions—the primary culprit behind global warming, according to the U.N.—into a browbeating session designed to get developed countries to accept massive economic costs arising from carbon dioxide cuts and to provide billions of dollars in wealth transfers (up to $100 billion annually was discussed in Copenhagen last year) to help developing nations cope with the projected consequences of a changing climate. Meanwhile, developing countries (even the large developing country emitters like India and China) were being exempted from emissions restrictions even though that would undermine any possibility of meeting emissions targets.

Last year in Copenhagen, Janos Pasztor, the director of U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s Climate Change Support Team, admitted: “This is not a climate-change negotiation. … It’s about something much more fundamental. It’s about economic strength.” The nations at the negotiation, he added, “just have to slug it out.”

It goes to show how ill-suited the United Nations is at handling a climate treaty. The competing interests of U.N. member states make it extremely difficult to for the negotiations not to get sidetracked.

In the end, there is a reason why these conferences are often held in exotic locales. But instead of college kids spending their parents’ money on spring break, it’s international diplomats spending our taxpayer dollars on conferences focused on how to they can spend even more down the road.

"

TSA Forces 12 Year-Old Girl Traveling Without Parents Through Naked Scanner

from Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft


TSA Forces 12 Year-Old Girl Traveling Without Parents Through Naked Scanner: "

(AFP)

Recently a 12 year-old girl traveling with friends of the family was separated from her group and forced to go through the naked scanner at the Tampa airport. The girl’s parents say that TSA, “In essence conducted a strip search on a 12-year-old girl without her parents present to advocate for her.”

TampaBay.com reported on the July incident:

A Baltimore family is raising the issue after their 12-year-old daughter was pulled out of line in Tampa and subjected to what they say was an embarrassing and unhealthy scan. The girl was traveling with an adult friend of the family, not her parents.

“Our daughter was scared and didn’t understand what was happening,” said Michelle Nemphos, the mother of the girl. She declined to give her daughter’s name. “In essence they conducted a strip search on a 12-year-old girl without her parents present to advocate for her.”

• • •

The girl told her story in a phone interview:

Okay, I was coming home to Baltimore, Md., from Siesta Key, Fla., and I was with my friend and her parents and I was going to this airport security check.

I put my bag through, and they pulled me aside and told me to go over here. I thought it was some high-tech scan and I walked right through it and this lady said ‘”Hold on, you can’t just walk through this thing. Put your feet on the yellow footsteps and make a triangle above your head.” I guess it was so they could see my whole body.

I heard a beep and she said, “Okay you can leave.”

I heard one of the guards say “affirmative on the female,” and I knew they were talking about me. And that made me worried.

I couldn’t see my friend and her dad, and I was really worried that I was separated from them. I was trying to look happy when I saw them but inside I was really scared.

• • •

When the girl first got home to Baltimore, she didn’t mention the beaches she’d visited or her trip to the aquarium. All she wanted to talk about was what happened at the airport.

“Why did they pick me?” the girl asked her mother.

Nemphos wasn’t sure. She couldn’t imagine the Transportation Security Administration needing to scan a 12-year-old girl for weapons.

Paul Susie, the parent who was with his daughter and Nemphos’ in Tampa, said it all happened so fast.

“I didn’t know it was optional,” he said. “But I thought it was ridiculous that a 12-year-old girl got picked for that.”

He said he was not notified she would be taken to the other line.

"

Video: Three year old met his mother’s miscarried child in Heaven

from theblogprof by The blogprof


Video: Three year old met his mother’s miscarried child in Heaven: "This is simply an incredible story. A 3-year old boy goes into surgery for a burst appendix, and has an experience that absolutely disproves the musings of secular progressives and atheists. He describes exactly what his parents were doing while he was in the operating room. He meets his great grandfather that he never met in Heaven (he later recognizes pictures of him when 'pop' was a young man) and to boot has a conversation with his dead sister that he wasn't aware of as she lost her life through miscarriage. The 3-year old's mother never told him about the miscarriage. There is no way this young boy, now 4, could have known the facts he did in any other way. Via The Right Scoop:

I have had a small handful of people tell me about their visions, not quite as dramatic as the above. There is no reason to doubt these accounts. Jesus Christ is real.

"

Detroit News blames GOP for not extending unemployment benefits, but US House dominated by Democrats 255-177

from theblogprof by The blogprof


Detroit News blames GOP for not extending unemployment benefits, but US House dominated by Democrats 255-177: "The establishment suck-up MSM is at it again, blaming the GOP for a Democrat problem. The US House is dominated until January by Democrats. In January, the GOP takes over after winning in a landslide midterm election November 2. Apparently, the Detroit News doesn't understand that the changing of the guard occurs in January, not November, because they are blaming Republicans for a failed vote in the House on extending unemployment benefits. The establishment MSM is being spoon-fed, of course, by a Democrat ploy in the House where Pelosi for no reason other than political cover is requiring a 2/3 supermajority to pass the extension. It takes a simple majority to pass anything in the House. Detroit News Washington Bureau writer Nathan Hurst is apparently a 9 month old journalist toddler being spoon-fed his info. Here's his sub-headline in the News: Dems don't get required House votes to pass extension after GOP decries its cost. The vote tally was 258-154 to extend benefits, far more than the 50% necessary under House rules but short of the 2/3 artificial barrier that Pelosi erected.

The U.S. House rejected an extension of benefits for unemployed workers Thursday, with Republicans bristling over the proposal's $12 billion cost.

House Democrats hoped to avoid a long debate over the extension, bypassing the normal motion to recommit by suspending the lower chamber's normal voting rules.

The House was able to ram cap-and-trade through in the blink of an eye without anyone even seeing the bill. Same with the stimulus that didn't get a single GO vote. Same with ObamaCare. But with unemployment all of a sudden they require a 2/3 supermajority. This is just political cover to force a handful of GOP votes to call the extension 'bipartisan.' And the Detroit News swallowed the baby food. Exit question: is the establishment MSM staffed by mostly mindless drones that just report what they're told by the ruling class?

"

Detroit News blames GOP for not extending unemployment benefits, but US House dominated by Democrats 255-177

from theblogprof by The blogprof


Detroit News blames GOP for not extending unemployment benefits, but US House dominated by Democrats 255-177: "The establishment suck-up MSM is at it again, blaming the GOP for a Democrat problem. The US House is dominated until January by Democrats. In January, the GOP takes over after winning in a landslide midterm election November 2. Apparently, the Detroit News doesn't understand that the changing of the guard occurs in January, not November, because they are blaming Republicans for a failed vote in the House on extending unemployment benefits. The establishment MSM is being spoon-fed, of course, by a Democrat ploy in the House where Pelosi for no reason other than political cover is requiring a 2/3 supermajority to pass the extension. It takes a simple majority to pass anything in the House. Detroit News Washington Bureau writer Nathan Hurst is apparently a 9 month old journalist toddler being spoon-fed his info. Here's his sub-headline in the News: Dems don't get required House votes to pass extension after GOP decries its cost. The vote tally was 258-154 to extend benefits, far more than the 50% necessary under House rules but short of the 2/3 artificial barrier that Pelosi erected.

The U.S. House rejected an extension of benefits for unemployed workers Thursday, with Republicans bristling over the proposal's $12 billion cost.

House Democrats hoped to avoid a long debate over the extension, bypassing the normal motion to recommit by suspending the lower chamber's normal voting rules.

The House was able to ram cap-and-trade through in the blink of an eye without anyone even seeing the bill. Same with the stimulus that didn't get a single GO vote. Same with ObamaCare. But with unemployment all of a sudden they require a 2/3 supermajority. This is just political cover to force a handful of GOP votes to call the extension 'bipartisan.' And the Detroit News swallowed the baby food. Exit question: is the establishment MSM staffed by mostly mindless drones that just report what they're told by the ruling class?

"

This Week in Government Failure

This Week in Government Failure

theblogprof: Video: Conan O'Brien Makes Sarah Palin Joke Out of Grizzlies Mating

theblogprof: Video: Conan O'Brien Makes Sarah Palin Joke Out of Grizzlies Mating

Convenient untruths about corporate welfare by Cap-and-Traders

Convenient untruths about corporate welfare by Cap-and-Traders

Morning Bell: Our Economy Can’t Afford More GM “Success” Stories

Celebrating the company's Wednesday initial public offering, President Barack Obama last night called his government takeover of General Motors a "success story." "American taxpayers are now positioned to recover more than my administration invested in GM," he said. Left unsaid is the fact that if the Obama Administration keeps selling their GM stock at the IPO price, the U.S. taxpayer will lose $10 billion on the deal, and that does not include the loans GM still owes, cash for clunkers, the Chevy Volt subsidies, or the millions of unseen costs the unprecedented intervention has inflicted on our economy.

No matter what you hear from the President's defenders, always remember that it did not have to be this way. As late as April 30, GM's bondholders were willing to take a 58 percent equity stake in the company in exchange for canceling their $27 billion in unsecured GM bonds. But under their deal, the federal government would have had no control over this new company, while the United Auto Workers union would have received a minority share of the company and the taxpayers would have been protected as a secured creditor. An even better outcome would have been for the federal government not to have supplied taxpayer cash at all and let all creditors take their lumps from an unbiased bankruptcy judge. But President Obama just couldn't keep his government out of it.

So he publicly bullied the GM bondholders into accepting a much worse deal. Under the White House plan, the federal government was awarded a 60 percent stake of GM, the Canadian government got 12.5 percent, and GM's unions got 17.5 percent while the bondholders walked away with just 10 percent. Defenders of the bailout say all this was worthwhile because the effects of a failure of GM would have been catastrophic. But that ignores both the deal the bondholders first offered the unions and the possibility of an expedited—but non-political—bankruptcy proceeding.

Before this week, taxpayers put $49.5 billion into GM and held a majority stake in the company. The IPO allowed the Treasury to sell about a quarter of this at $33 per share, raising $13.6 billion. That leaves taxpayers, post-IPO, with $35.9 billion "invested" and about a 37 percent stake in the company. At $33 per share, that leaves taxpayers still almost $10 billion in the hole. The shares would have to jump to $51 for taxpayers to break even, a price level considered by most analysts to be unlikely.

But perhaps the biggest danger of all is the prospect of the GM "success" being used to justify future bailouts of other firms. That would be the true catastrophe. As George Mason University economist Don Boudreaux wrote:

The chief economic case against the bailout was not that huge infusions of taxpayer funds and special exemptions from bankruptcy rules could not make G.M. and Chrysler profitable. Of course they could. Instead, the heart of the case against the bailout is that it saps the life-blood of entrepreneurial capitalism. The bailout reinforces the debilitating precedent of protecting firms deemed "too big to fail." Capital and other resources are thus kept glued by politics to familiar lines of production, thus impeding entrepreneurial initiative that would have otherwise redeployed these resources into newer, more-dynamic, and more productive industries. The "success" of the bailout is all too easy to engineer and to see. The cost of the bailout—the industries, the jobs, and the outputs that are never created—is impossible to see, but nevertheless real.

The legal and political chicanery used by the White House to produce the GM "success" story is also exactly why the United States fell from the ranks of the economically "free," as measured by The Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom this year. From Fannie Mae to Freddie Mac, from GM to Chrysler, from AIG to Citibank, our government continues to subvert the established rule of law. This lawlessness creates uncertainty in the business environment, and it is a huge reason why our economy is not recovering as it should be.

Quick Hits:

• New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo filed two suits against President Obama car czar Steven Rattner yesterday alleging that Rattner used special favors to win a $150 million investment from the New York pension fund.
• California was forced to boost interest rates on $10 billion in short-term debt it sold Thursday.
• The Kaiser Family Foundation said there will be a 13 percent decline in the number of Medicare Advantage plans thanks to Obamacare.
• According to the Labor Department, the number of start-up companies fell by 2 percent last year.
• Soaking the rich would not solve the long-term deficit crisis.

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/11/19/morning-bell-our-economy-cant-afford-more-gm-success-stories/

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

Obama’s school salad-bar idea: Ignores regulations; districts opting out before it begins

This is so much feel-good crap.  A salad bar in public school?  You actually think kids won't plant bodily fluids in the greens?  That aside, check this out:

But schools also are deterred by USDA regulations that require students to pass by a cash register or "point of sale" station after they have been to the salad bar to ensure that they have served themselves the correct portions of fruits and vegetables required under the federal lunch program. In October, the USDA's Food and Services division, which oversees the subsidized meal program, circulated a memo saying that while it encourages the use of salad bars in schools, school menu planners must tell students the minimum amounts they must take from salad bars, cashiers "must be trained to judge accurately the quantities of self-service items," and point-of-sale registers "must be stationed after the salad bar."

Gotta love it.  "Um, you have to go back.  You have too much three-bean salad and not enough of the useless iceberg lettuce."

Oh, how I long for the days when irrationality amounted to no more than classifying ketchup as a vegetable.

Already opting out – Philly, Austin, MontCo MD.  Smart.

Related Posts

1. The Most Awesomely Awesome School Ever
2. Kids R Smart: Healthy-food rules at school 'send pupils sprinting to fast food joints'
3. More school districts taking harder line on Obama's speech
4. Pacifist & ACLU Want Access To Students
5. Paying tuition vs paying school taxes

http://libertypundits.net/

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

Another dem volley: Shutting down P2P sites passes their Senate committee – legal standard is suspec

The Senate dems – and a few too many pubs – wish to empower the Attorney General to shut down websites that are suspected of violating copyright laws.  Suspected. Not proven.  Suspected:

On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously approved a bill that would give the Attorney General the right to shut down websites with a court order if copyright infringement is deemed "central to the activity" of the site — regardless if the website has actually committed a crime. The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) is among the most draconian laws ever considered to combat digital piracy, and contains what some have called the "nuclear option," which would essentially allow the Attorney General to turn suspected websites "off."

When did the First Amendment get modified?  The 4th, 5th, and 6th?

More:

Many people opposed to the bill agree in principle with its aims: Illegal music piracy is, well, illegal, and should be stopped. Musicians, artists and content creators should be compensated for their work. But the law's critics do not believe that giving the federal government the right to shut down websites at will based upon a vague and arbitrary standard of evidence, even if no law-breaking has been proved, is a particularly good idea. COICA must still be approved by the full House and Senate before becoming law. A vote is unlikely before the new year.

Among the sites that could go dark if the law passes: Dropbox, RapidShare, SoundCloud, Hype Machine and any other site for which the Attorney General deems copyright infringement to be "central to the activity" of the site, according to Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group that opposes the bill. There need not even be illegal content on a site — links alone will qualify a site for digital death. Websites at risk could also theoretically include p2pnet and pirate-party.us or any other website that advocates for peer-to-peer file sharing or rejects copyright law, according to the group.

Copyright law is one of the very laws set forth in the US Constitution (v2.0).  Our country has enforced the ownership rights to intellectual property for centuries.  We do so in the same manner in which we enforce all of our other laws:  Innocent until proven guilty, due process.

Why the US Senate thinks it can now through all of that out, and shift the judicial function to the Executive Branch, is stunning.

Related Posts

1. Will the House accept any health care bill the Senate passes?
2. Irish gambling sites bet Republicans will both House and Senate
3. Senate Passes Flagrantly Unconstitutional Bill Giving D.C. a House Vote
4. Government Web sites attacked; NKorea suspected
5. Beau Biden out in Delaware Senate race, effectively handing seat to pubs

http://libertypundits.net/

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

Secretary of State Clinton Lashes Out at Europe; Demands That They Appease Muslims

Muslim women in Sweden advocate for their right to wear headscarves in schools throughout France. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized Wednesday the state of religious freedom in Europe, as Washington highlighted policies and attitudes toward Muslim veils and Islam as a whole.… Read more »
(AFP/Bertil Ericson)

Does this really surprise you?
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lashed out at Europe yesterday demanding that EU countries be more appeasing to Muslims.
AFP reported:

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized Wednesday the state of religious freedom in Europe, as Washington highlighted policies and attitudes toward Muslim veils and Islam as a whole.

"Several European countries have placed harsh restrictions on religious expression," Clinton said, without elaborating as she unveiled the State Department's report on international religious freedom for the last year.

Her assistant secretary for human rights, Michael Posner, cited France's ban on wearing the niqab and other face coverings in public places and a Swiss motion passed last year that bans building new minarets.

Both measures have been criticized as intolerant moves stigmatizing Europe's growing Muslim population.

Posner acknowledged "growing sensitivity and tension in Europe" over Islam.

"What we are urging our European friends to do is to take every measure to try to alleviate that tension," he added.

The different attitudes toward Muslims in Europe and the United States are the source of frequent tensions and misunderstandings between both sides of the Atlantic.

This foolish administration has become a complete embarrassment.

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2010/11/secretary-of-state-clinton-lashes-out-at-europe-demands-that-they-appease-muslims/

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

Global Warming Moonbats On Suicide Watch? ANTARCTIC ICE JUST WON'T MELT

http://thegwpf.org/ipcc-news/1877-ipcc-official-climate-policy-is-redistributing-the-worlds-wealth.htmlIts time to put the Global Warming Moonbats on a suicide watch.  The elaborate hoax they are perpetuating on the world for the express purpose of worldwide redistribution crumbles just a little more every day. The latest news comes from the National Snow and Ice Center (appropriately located in Colorado). It seems that the ice in Antarctica cannot read, because it is not melting the way it is supposed to. Worse yet, this year it reached its second highest level ever since satellite measurement began over 30 years ago.

On average, the Antarctic sea ice peaks at about 18.3 million sq km around September 20, but this year it achieved that level five weeks early, around August 9th. Even more tragic for the Al Gore globalists is the fact that the damned ice is acting like political commercials the week before an election, it just won't go away. This years Antarctic sea ice stayed at or above that 18.3 million sq km until late October a month later than the usual decline.

These charts were created by Notrickszone to illustrate what is going on.

Now they Moonbats haven't been totally wrong.  Total global sea ice was steady until six years ago, when it saw a three year decline, but since 2007 the amount of ice has been growing.

 

 

But wait a second, if the ice isn't shrinking why are we going through this Climate Change hoax?  

The Answer for that comes from United Nations' IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer:

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

The Global Warming hoax has very little to do with protecting the world from an environmental apocalypse, its all about globalization and redistribution of income (except for Al Gore who is getting rich from the hoax)

Please email me at yidwithlid@aol.com to be put onto my mailing list. Feel free to reproduce any article but please link back to http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/NWlS/~3/71TZcqXt6nI/global-warming-moonbats-on-suicide.html

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

Teachers union boss takes in $428K, demands shared sacrifice

Teachers union boss takes in $428K, demands shared sacrifice

Mike Pence on why government is causing economic weakness

Mike Pence on why government is causing economic weakness

UN climate official admits climate hoax is about redistributing wealth globally

UN climate official admits climate hoax is about redistributing wealth globally

‘Apalling’ comment from White House on terror trial – Bolton

‘Apalling’ comment from White House on terror trial – Bolton

Obama’s Last-Ditch Push for Immigration Amnesty

Obama’s Last-Ditch Push for Immigration Amnesty

Sen. Barbara Boxer Likens U.S. to Iran, North Korea and Pakistan Because US Bans Homosexual Activity In the Military

Sen. Barbara Boxer Likens U.S. to Iran, North Korea and Pakistan Because US Bans Homosexual Activity In the Military

Anti piracy bill could be used to limit free political speech

Anti piracy bill could be used to limit free political speech

http://biggovernment.com/smotley/2010/11/19/fcc-chairman-planning-an-internet-power-grab-next-month/

http://biggovernment.com/smotley/2010/11/19/fcc-chairman-planning-an-internet-power-grab-next-month/

UN climate change panel chairman: Yup, global warming policies are really about redistributing wealth.

UN climate change panel chairman: Yup, global warming policies are really about redistributing wealth.

Obama’s legacy: A salad bar in every school?

Obama’s legacy: A salad bar in every school?

» European Rescue, Just a Mouse Click Away For The Fed - Big Government

» European Rescue, Just a Mouse Click Away For The Fed - Big Government

theblogprof: Good news: CA to raise $14 billion in bond sale so liberals can continue to overspend

theblogprof: Good news: CA to raise $14 billion in bond sale so liberals can continue to overspend

Morning Examiner: Five ways to waste money and hurt the economy

Morning Examiner: Five ways to waste money and hurt the economy

The Verdict on Holder

via: from USACTION NEWS by Editor


The Verdict on Holder: "

Unlawful enemy combatants captured on the battlefield deserve to be held in Guantanamo and tried in military commissions. And if Mr. Holder can’t tell the difference, he should find a new job.-WSJ

Wall Street Journal Editorial

EXCERPTS:

“Terrorist Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani was acquitted Wednesday on 284 of 285 counts associated with murdering 212 innocents, but the verdict on Attorney General Eric Holder was guilty as charged. His strategy of force-feeding terrorists into the civilian court system has turned into a legal and security fiasco.

The blunder was Mr. Holder’s decision to dump Ghailani into the civilian system when a perfectly adequate military tribunal was available. Despite interminable legal challenges from white-shoe law firms and the political left, the Supreme Court has ruled that military commissions are lawful and part of a long U.S. tradition from revolutionary days through FDR. Their advantage is that military tribunals have somewhat more liberal rules of evidence and are designed to handle classified material in a way that protects national security without disqualifying pertinent facts.”

FULL STORY

"

Governors push back on Obamacare

via: from USACTION NEWS by Editor


Governors push back on Obamacare: "

Citing additional costs of $100 million to a billion dollars in their states newly elected governors speak out against Obamacare and what they plan to do about it.

If you can see this, then you might need a Flash Player upgrade or you need to install Flash Player if it's missing. Get Flash Player from Adobe.

Who Should Control Your Health Care, You Or The Government?

Paul Krugman Recommends ‘Death Panels’ to Help Balance Budget

‘He has erected a multitude of New Offices’

150 new agencies with thousands of new rules in Obamacare alone.

"

Democrats prioritize radical feminists over low taxes

via: from USACTION NEWS by Editor


Democrats prioritize radical feminists over low taxes: "

Rather than trying to fix the tax hike that will hit Americans on Jan. 1, Reid wanted to give the government unprecedented power over employers’ compensation decisions and cause endless litigation, discouraging hiring.

By: Diana Furchtgott-Roth at Washington Examiner

EXCERPTS:

If signed into law, the bill would have required all employers with more than two employees to submit data on sex, race, national origin, and earnings of employees to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, even if no complaint has been filed.

Women would have been included in class-action suits against employers unless they specifically opted out, a windfall for trial lawyers.

Even though the Paycheck Fairness Act won’t yet become law, the task force plans to implement selected provisions through regulations. It’s planning to “institute a strategy to collect pay data from federal contractors” to identify contractors out of compliance, even if no workers have complained.

FULL ARTICLE

"

O Canada: The Epitaph for Single Payer Health Care

via: from USACTION NEWS by Editor


O Canada: The Epitaph for Single Payer Health Care: "

“[H]ealth care system is coming apart at the seams….On the ground, there is too often a glaring lack of execution: long waits, bed shortages, unequal access to medication. Those failures are compounded by the fact that the ever-rising medicare bill is squeezing out education and other social priorities.”

By STANLEY GOLDFARB at The Weekly Standard

EXCERPTS:

No, that’s not from an item in the New York Times; rather, that’s from a piece in the Toronto Globe and Mail on Nov 7, 2010 about Canada’s health care system. Its problems provide a glimpse of what a fee-for-service medical care produces in a single payer system

As the Canadian system shows, central control leads to, for example, a one-year wait to have a colonoscopy in Quebec. It might make sense from an economist’s perspective, but the populace is not that happy about it and demanding better government care.

So think again about a single payer plan. It is struggling in a nation with about 1/10 the U.S. population. Plan B is needed. Ideological arguments about how we need to eliminate insurance companies and do away with a competition-based system simply do not square with the results of the Canadian experience.

FULL STORY

"