Showing posts with label Pelosi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pelosi. Show all posts

Saturday, April 03, 2010

Timeline: Anatomy of a Tea Party Smear by the Democrat-Media Complex

This post updates yesterday's article entitled 'A tale of two time-stamps: Smoking-gun proof that Democrats, the Huffington Post and McClatchy conspired to smear Tea Party activists?'. I want to personally thank McClatchy DC editor Mark Seibel, who has been incredibly helpful in providing transparency into his side of the story.


This article attempts to reconstruct the events of 3/20/2010, in which Congressional Democrats were reportedly harassed by Tea Party activists with racial and sexual slurs during their walks to and from the Capitol building. Reports that black Congressmen had been called the "n-word" spread within minutes into mainstream media reports.

3/20 14:30


At around 2:30pm, members of the House uncharacteristically walked from the Cannon Building to the Capitol in the middle of a massive Tea Party protest. Michelle Bachmann said this journey was unprecedented in her experience. She stated, "In three years I have never seen Nancy Pelosi cross the street, the way that you saw in that picture... They deliberately went through that crowd perhaps to try and incite something."

There were a variety of videotapes of the incident (for example, the walk to the Capitol is covered here and here, the walk from the Capitol here, here and here). Furthermore, as you can see above, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. appears to have videotaped the walk, presumably to catch protesters in the act of hurling racial slurs.


3/20 14:34


Lauren Victoria Burke, a self-described "unbought and unbossed" blogger reporting upon "the 42 members of the Congressional Black Caucus" tweets the first report of the use of the "n-word". @CrewOf42 is Burke's Twitter handle.

Her first tweet reporting the incident came at 2:34pm, just four minutes after -- according to Cashill's timeline -- the CBC departed the Cannon Building for the Capitol. @CrewOf42 tweeted that Rep. Carson said he'd been called the "N-word", the HuffPo DC bureau chief re-tweeted the news. There was no link and no attribution associated with this message.

Her tweet was posted from the web, which means she posted from either a high-powered smart-phone, a full-blown laptop or a desktop.


3/20 15:42


Lauren Burke posts the following on her blog.

Reps Andre Carson and John Lewis had racial epithets hurled at them while walking from the Cannon Building to the US Capitol to vote about 45 minutes ago. Andre Carson reported to me and several other journalists in the Speaker’s Lobby off the House floor that he and Lewis were repeatedly called the N word while on the ir way to vote. About 300 demonstartors were yelling and waving signs outside the Longworth and Cannon House Office Buildings as GOP members made their way from a Caucus meeting in Cannon and Democratic members were leaving a meeting in Longworth.

Put simply, these were flat-out fabrications. If they were "repeatedly" slurred, why don't the tapes capture even one of the epithets? Andrew Breitbart has offered $100,000 to anyone if they can come up with audio proof -- and there have been no takers.


3/20 16:36


According to Twitter's time-stamp, the original McClatchy article hits the web.



3/20 16:51


According to a screen-cap of the content management system provided by online editor Mark Seibel, McClatchy reporter William Douglas' original article was entered into the system.

Bill's first version of the story was posted at 5:01 p.m. (Eastern) Here it is in its entirety: "WASHINGTON — U.S. Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., said Saturday that some demonstrators gathered outside the Capitol to protest the health care overhaul legislation called him "ni--er." [Ed: Redaction mine]

Lewis, a longtime civil rights activist who is head of the Congressional Black Caucus, said some demonstrators also spat on black members of Congress as they left the Capitol after meeting with President Barack Obama.

The claim could not immediately be confirmed."


3/20 16:56


The Huffington Post's Sam Stein breathlessly punches out a story advancing the allegations of rampant racial smears.

In just minutes, Stein cranks out a 400-word piece including interviews with Rep. James Clyburn and a staffer, has it edited and then posted.

First Posted: 03-20-10 04:56 PM

A staffer for Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) told reporters that Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) had been spat on by a protestor. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a hero of the civil rights movement, was called a 'ni--er.' And Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) was called a "faggot," as protestors shouted at him with deliberately lisp-y screams. Frank, approached in the halls after the president's speech, shrugged off the incident... But Clyburn was downright incredulous, saying he had not witnessed...


3-20 17:12


McClatchy updates the article with version 2 of the story, according to Mark Seibel's CMS archive.

WASHINGTON — Demonstrators outside the Capitol, angry over the proposed health care bill, shouted the N-word Saturday at Rep. John Lewis, a civil rights icon who was nearly beaten to death during an Alabama in the 1960s, and shouted obscenities at other members of the Congressional Black Caucus, lawmakers said.

“They were shouting, sort of harassing,” Lewis said. “But, it’s okay, I’ve faced this before. It reminded me of the 60s. It was a lot of downright hate and anger and people being downright mean.”

Lewis said he was leaving the Cannon office building when protesters shouted “Kill the bill, kill the bill,” Lewis said.

“I said ‘I’m for the bill, I support the bill, I’m voting for the bill,” Lewis said.

A colleague who was accompanying Lewis said people in the crowd responded by saying “Kill the bill, then the N-word.”

“It surprised me that people are so mean and we can’t engage in a civil dialog and debate,” Lewis said.

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., said he was a few yards behind Lewis but distinctly heard the N-word shouted out.

“It was a chorus,” Cleaver said. “In a way, I feel sorry for those people who are doing this nasty stuff – they’re being whipped up.. I decided I wouldn’t be angry with any of them.”

CNN reported that protestors inside the Capitol also used a slur to refer to Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., an openly gay member of Congress.


In short, within 16 minutes, McClatchy's writer(s) added three interviews and a CNN report to the original story, whose allegations appear to be entirely false.


3/20 16:15


HuffPo editor Nico Pitney tweets several messages, one to Sam Stein reporting he "personally witnessed Barney Frank being called a "faggot," protesters then continued with lisp-heavy chants"; the other re-tweeting a Huffington Post message with the original allegations.

The latter message read "RT @huffingtonpost: Congressmen called 'ni**er,' 'faggot,' spat on by Tea Party protesters (with protest pics) http://bit.ly/aWAu0V".


03/20 17:19


McClatchy's Mark Seibel describes the posting of the third version of the story:

The second version, posted at 5:12 p.m., corrected when the incident had taken place (it was on the way to the Capitol that the n-word incident happened, not on the way back) and was nine graphs long. The last graph cited a CNN report on the Barney Frank incident. That citation was changed to HuffPost in version 4 at 5:19 p.m. after I was alerted by a Nico Pitney tweet.


As Jim Hoft and Kevin Jackson (author of The Big Black Lie) wrote several days ago:

The state-run media is now pushing their anti-tea party propaganda from sources at the anti-military Jew-hating conservative-hating Huffington Post. And, they’re reporting this propaganda without a single piece of evidence.

At least one report said that it was “a chorus” of racist hatred. Another report said the Congressional members heard the n-word at least 15 times.  Reporters from ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX News, (including Bill O’Reilly), MSNBC, and so on, repeated this horrible story.

Unfortunately, it was a fake. The media had no evidence... Nothing. As the story was a complete fabrication. It was totally made up.

In fact, several videos were later released that proved that there was no "chorus" of racist hatred and no one screamed the n-word. It was all a lie.


Democrats in Congress wanted to provoke a racial incident. That's why their media drones started tweeting word of the incident just seconds after their walk began.

And a state-run media complex -- as liberal as the day is long -- acted either as ignorant dupes or as active accomplices (take your pick) to market the scam.

From all appearances, this entire incident appears to have been scripted by Democrat representatives to provoke a racially divisive incident. But because the Tea Party movement is freedom-loving, it embraces all races, creeds, religions and colors. Because the freedom tent is the biggest tent of all. And the tyranny tent gets smaller by the day.



Update: Andrew Breitbart writes:

The Democratic Party is trying to signal to the black community and to progressive media types that the way to push back against the Tea Party and Republicans is to use the reliable race card by provoking a racial incident. The ensuing rhetoric about the bill and about the nature of the Tea Party is based upon repeated talking points. Propaganda. Everyone is on message that Republicans and Tea Partiers are racist — a divisive and dangerous argument, so lacking in any shred of evidence save for the fact that the majority in the Tea Party, as in America itself, is white. This is Duke lacrosse politics at its worst.

Those in the movement who are Hispanic or black are given the Clarence Thomas treatment: mocked, ridiculed and marginalized. The Democratic party cannot afford for minority groups to break from the pack, so they show that apostasy is met with high-grade ridicule. Those willing to withstand vile and hateful un-American taunts are some of America’s greatest patriots...

...We’ve called their bluff. And they have tried to back off. They realize that this race warfare can backfire, just as it did with the railroaded Duke lacrosse players, as it did with professor Madonna Constantine and her faked noose incident at Columbia and the Sergeant Crowley boner by Barack Obama who stupidly said the white police officer had behaved “stupidly” in handcuffing Skip Gates.

The first Alinsky president is now using surrogates to split this nation into two hostile parties so he can puppeteer the have-nots against the perceived haves. The non-response to my $100k challenge is a tacit acknowledgement that the Congressional Black Caucus and Barack Obama don’t have the stomach for doubling down.

The other part of the strategy that is built into the N-Word Capitol Hill Walk is the strategy to incite. The media is doing their job for them by speaking of an unhinged white Tea Party mob. Absent any evidence other than creatively selected hand-crafted signs from the fringe of the audience that are presented to represent the whole, the media is simply repeating assumptions that Democrats and media elites have against fly-over types. What we have here is hardcore media elitism mixed with politically correct class warfare.


Linked by: Michelle Malkin, Gateway Pundit and Patterico. Thanks!


Preview of Coming Attractions: EPA Imposes Death Sentences on Thousands of Americans

KMPH in Fresno reports on yesterday's catastrophic accident involving a "smart car":

An accident in Fresno County sent two people to the hospital Friday morning.

Around 7 a.m. California Highway Patrol officers were called to the area of Highway 168, near Sample Road, for reports of a collision between a "Smart Car" and another vehicle.

CHP officials say the two cars crashed head-on, after one of the vehicles cut into the opposite lane while trying to maneuver a turn.

Only two people were involved in the crash; the female driver of the "Smart Car" was taken by helicopter to a nearby hospital, where she was treated for major injuries, while the other driver is said to have suffered minor injuries.

This news comes as the EPA announced its new guidelines for fuel efficiency, which were opposed in Congress by representatives on both sides of the aisle.

The requirements were raised to an average of 35.5 miles per gallon for 2016 model-year cars and light trucks from 27.3 mpg in 2011...

...The final rule issued today will cost automakers $52 billion to comply and add $926 to the cost of buying a car within five years, according to government estimates.

Legacy media has ignored the real impact of CAFE standards: the human toll represented by thousands of deaths on the roads. As cars get smaller and smaller, to meet central planners' guidelines, the mismatches between large and small vehicles become more pronounced -- and far more deadly.

According to a 2006 report by Ryan Bilas of the National Center for Public Policy Research several studies demonstrate the cost in human lives due to CAFE standards:
  • According to a 2001 National Academy of Sciences panel, smaller and lighter vehicle production resulted in an additional 1,300 to 2,600 traffic fatalities in 1993.
  • A 1999 USA Today analysis of crash data found that since CAFE went into effect in 1978, 46,000 people died in crashes they otherwise would have survived. That equates to roughly 7,700 deaths for every mile per gallon gained in fuel economy standards.
  • A 1989 Harvard-Brookings study estimated CAFE to be responsible for 2,200 to 3,900 excess occupant deaths over ten years. It also estimated between 11,000 and 19,500 occupants would suffer serious injury due to these standards.
  • The same study found CAFE has resulted in a 500 pound weight reduction on the average car.
  • Lastly, passengers in smaller, lighter cars die at a rate 12 times that of people driving larger, heavier cars.
To meet increased fuel efficiency standards, automobile manufactures reduced vehicle weight.  There is a direct relationship between vehicle weight and passenger deaths and injuries. 

In short, the EPA has imposed death sentences on thousands of Americans.

Furthermore, its arbitrary, Politburo-style rules will likely "paralyze the recovery" and financially damage auto companies at the worst possible time.

And it's all in support of a charade called global warming climate change, as an eight-part series in Germany's Der Spiegel reports this week. Autos contribute 1% of all human-caused CO2. And CO2 is an infinitesimally tiny portion of all greenhouse gases. Global warming is a scam, through and through, designed to let the government control industrial policy.

It's time to defund the EPA completely and stop their radical progressive agenda. The lives we save in doing so may be our own.


Friday, April 02, 2010

A tale of two time-stamps: Smoking-gun proof that Democrats, the Huffington Post and McClatchy conspired to smear Tea Party activists?

4/2/2010 10:29PM --- Click here for updates, below
4/2/2010 09:54PM --- Click here for updates, below
4/2/2010 06:24PM --- Click here for updates, below

In today's American Thinker, Jack Cashill does an exceptional job describing the timeline related to the events of March 20th, in which members of Congress were reportedly taunted by Tea Party activists with racial and sexual slurs.

[Members of Congress] left the Cannon Building about 2:30 PM on March 20th and returned about 3:15 PM...

I asked because at 4:51 that same day, McClatchy reporter William Douglas posted an article on the McClatchy website with the inflammatory headline, "Tea party protesters scream 'ni--er' at black congressman."

In other words, Douglas, with an attributed assist from James Rosen, managed to interview representatives John Lewis, Emanuel Cleaver, and Barney Frank, compose an 800-word article, and have it edited and formatted for posting within a 90-minute window.

During that same 90 minutes, Douglas would have received and incorporated a press release from Emanuel Cleaver, making the easily disproved claim that he had "been spat upon and that Capitol Police had arrested his assailant."

But Douglas also had two other important sources: he referenced two additional journalists in the very same article.

Frank told the Boston Globe that the incident happened as he was walking from the Longworth office building to the Rayburn office building, both a short distance from the Capitol. Frank said the crowd consisted of a couple of hundred of people and that they referred to him as 'homo.' A writer for The Huffington Post said the protesters called Frank a "faggot."

But the Huffington Post's article, by Sam Stein, wasn't published until 4:56pm, five minutes after Douglas' article was posted on the web. This mistake would seem to point to wanton collusion between the two authors as they hastily worked to market the smears.

In about 90 minutes, Stein himself cranked out a 400-word piece in record time after interviewing Rep. James Clyburn and a staffer.

First Posted: 03-20-10 04:56 PM

A staffer for Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) told reporters that Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) had been spat on by a protestor. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a hero of the civil rights movement, was called a 'ni--er.' And Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) was called a "faggot," as protestors shouted at him with deliberately lisp-y screams. Frank, approached in the halls after the president's speech, shrugged off the incident... But Clyburn was downright incredulous, saying he had not witnessed...

What about the Boston Globe?

It appears that the first Boston Globe article to mention the incident didn't actually hit the website until the following day.

Comment at Mediaite by 'val': March 20, 2010 at 7:34 pm

This is a LIE! I was there and no one spat on that congressman. Maxi waters and her crew walked right through the crowd with a look of contempt on their faces. One aid actually called a protester a cracker and a red neck. The Congressional black caucus was looking for troublE and when they didn’t find any they made s--- up.
So how did Douglas reference both pieces, along with engaging in numerous interviews and tying in a rapidly-generated press release, in only 90 minutes?

Simple.

Why did Pelosi, Frank and members of the Congressional Black Caucus take the long walk directly in front of the Tea Party protests, as opposed to using the tunnel as they do 99.9% of the time?

It appears that it was a conspiracy.

In 90 minutes, a press release was crafted by Cleaver's office, McClatchy and HuffPro "reporters" interviewed a half dozen individuals, wrote lengthy articles, referenced each others material (despite it not having been published) while receiving and incorporating said press release.

This appears to be nothing less than a criminal scam -- a mashup effort by Congress and sympathetic media -- designed to promote racial hatred in order to advance a radical Democrat agenda.
 

Update at 6:24pm: Thanks to links from Michelle Malkin and Jim Hoft, this story caught the attention of McClatchy's DC bureau and its online editor, Mark Seibel. Seibel comments:

I edited the Bill Douglas story in question. As anyone who works in media today knows, the Web isn't a newspaper and its stories aren't created like newspaper stories either. Surely, the author of this piece knows that.

Here's the real timeline:

Bill's first version of the story was posted at 5:01 p.m. (Eastern) Here it is in its entirety: "WASHINGTON — U.S. Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., said Saturday that some demonstrators gathered outside the Capitol to protest the health care overhaul legislation called him "ni--er." [Ed: Redaction mine]

Lewis, a longtime civil rights activist who is head of the Congressional Black Caucus, said some demonstrators also spat on black members of Congress as they left the Capitol after meeting with President Barack Obama.

The claim could not immediately be confirmed."

The story then went through 13 additional iterations, each adding detail. The second version, posted at 5:12 p.m., corrected when the incident had taken place (it was on the way to the Capitol that the n-word incident happened, not on the way back) and was nine graphs long. The last graph cited a CNN report on the Barney Frank incident. That citation was changed to HuffPost in version 4 at 5:19 p.m. after I was alerted by a Nico Pitney tweet.

The Boston Globe version of events was added to the story at 6:54 p.m. after Bill heard the audio of the Globe's interview with Frank. At that point the story, in its seventh version, had grown to 16 paragraphs.

James Clyburn's comments were added in Version 9, at 7:35 p.m. The statement from Emanuel Cleaver's office was added in Version 13, at 8:33 p.m. At that point the story was 25 paragraphs long.

The final version, posted three minutes later, made some minor word changes.

That's the timeline from McClatchy's internal audit system.

I sent an email to Seibel asking for some screen-caps from the web site CMS (content management system). I will add updates if I receive responses.

Now there are a couple of additional questions I have for Mark.

1. How is it that an inflammatory word like ni--er wasn't redacted, especially when the story was unconfirmed?
2. Now that more than a dozen videos have emerged of the walks, with none showing the use of a racial epithet, how is that a retraction was never issued for this story?
3. Does it strike you as odd that McClatchy's Nico Pitney re-tweeted an inflammatory HuffPo headline within one minute, apparently without even reading the accusation?
4. Does anyone wonder what's going with HuffPo's CMS when the story says it was "First Posted: 03-20-10 04:56 PM" (see above for screen-shot), yet tweet links started occurring 45 minutes before that timestamp?

Put simply, Mark, this entire story -- from the highly unusual walk through a massive protest, to the instant posting of racially divisive words and inflammatory rhetoric (without a whit of confirmation) -- stinks to high heaven. Are you folks journalists or flacks? Because, from all appearances, it looks like you're the latter.

Andrew Breitbart offered $100,000 to anyone who can provide proof that the slur occurred. No one has taken him up on his offer.


Update at 9:54pm: McClatchy DC online editor Mark Seibel was kind enough to respond twice tonight. His first email reads:

I've seen no video of the event. The americanthinker video displayed is not the event -- the Capitol is clearly in the background and the Congressmen are walking away from it, not to it. The n-word incident, as relayed to Bill, happened when they were headed to the Capitol. I went over this afternoon to see where the videographer was standing when he shot what's on the Web. There's no way it could represent the incident as the incident was relayed to Bill -- or at a time consistent with when Bill interviewed both Lewis and Cleaver in the Visitors Center before they left to go back to their offices. If the videographer had been there when the Congressmen left for the Capitol, that would be useful. But I've yet to see a video of that. As for a screen capture of the story versions, I think I can do it. We'll soon find out.

In response to my request for screen-caps of the McClatchy content management system, Mark did relay the following images a bit later (click to zoom):

Ok. here are two png files. I couldn't get one screen grab that captured the whole thing but i think these two together work. you'll notice a version 15; that's something I did today when I noticed I hadn't clicked the correct box for archiving sales on the first version back on the 20th. there wasn't a change in the story, just how its source (McClatchy, AP etc.) was categorized. I'm sorry they aren't more legible, but i think you can make them out. To the right of the headline you'll see a number in parentheses. this is the word count of that particular version, which would include summaries, links etc.


Note the 4:51pm "release date" at the top of the screen. This corresponds to Jack Cashill's time-stamp for the publication of the original story.

I very much appreciate Mr. Seibel's forthright approach and help. That said, answers to the questions I posed, above, would be very helpful. I will update this post as events warrant.


Update at 10:29pm: I've been reconstructing the chain of events on Twitter. Recall that Seibel said he altered Douglas' article to refer "to HuffPost in version 4 at 5:19 p.m. after I was alerted by a Nico Pitney tweet."

Let's ignore the fact that a mainstream media outlet instantly modified a major news article based upon a re-tweet by a Huffington Post associate. Nico's tweets are screen-capped above. About ten minutes after @CrewOf42 tweeted that Rep. Carson said he'd been called the "N-word", the HuffPo DC bureau chief re-tweeted the news. There was no link and no attribution associated with this message.

@CrewOf42 is the Twitter handle for Lauren Victoria Burke, a self-described "unbought and unbossed" blogger reporting upon "the 42 members of the Congressional Black Caucus."

Her first tweet reporting the incident came at 2:34pm, just four minutes after -- according to Cashill's timeline -- the CBC departed the Cannon Building for the Capitol.

Now that's service! Four minutes after setting off on his walk, Carson verbally informed a reporter that he'd been called the N-word? Give me a freaking break.




So it begins: 'If you voted for Obama... seek urologic care elsewhere'

An Orlando urologist is expressing his delight over socialized medicine with the following sign.

"I'm not turning anybody away — that would be unethical," Dr. Jack Cassell, 56, a Mount Dora urologist and a registered Republican opposed to the health plan, told the Orlando Sentinel on Thursday. "But if they read the sign and turn the other way, so be it."

The sign reads: "If you voted for Obama … seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."

Estella Chatman, 67, of Eustis, whose daughter snapped a photo of the typewritten sign, sent the picture to U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson, the Orlando Democrat who riled Republicans last year when he characterized the GOP's idea of health care as, "If you get sick, America … Die quickly."

Chatman said she heard about the sign from a friend referred to Cassell after his physician recently died. She said her friend did not want to speak to a reporter but was dismayed by Cassell's sign.

"He's going to find another doctor," she said.

Oh, honey, this is only the beginning. Democrats are slashing care of every kind to seniors: diagnostic tests, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, inpatient care, etc.

Just how unpopular is the Democrat health care cramdown? Mark Knoller's tweet says it all.

Even the latest CBS poll -- with its tradition of oversampling Democrat voters -- can't hide the decline.

Americans despise this criminal health care bill and everything it stands for. And those counting on people forgetting by November will get a rude reminder why the symbol of the Republican Party is the elephant.

We don't forget. And we will trample you, politically speaking, of course.


Hat tip: C&S.

Thursday, April 01, 2010

Tyler Durden: I know this comes as a surprise, but it looks like the White House is fixing the unemployment numbers

A selection of headlines at The Drudge Report highlights the problem with our economy.

The Cloward-Piven tactics of the administration appear to be in full effect. So how is it that the media portrays things as "getting better"?

Writing at Zero Hedge, Tyler Durden describes the implications of this week's unemployment numbers. In a nutshell: they appear to be an outright scam.

Even as the BLS [Bureau of Labor Statistics] and DOL [Department of Labor] would like us to believe that the unemployment picture is getting better, we present a chart comparing the initial and continued claims as presented by the Dept. of Labor and compare these to actual government outlays. Even as the two combined series have been declining (offset by increasing much discussed EUCs), the most recent Unemployment Insurance Benefit outlay reported by the Treasury (as of March 30 - there is still one more day of data for March), just hit an all time record high of $15.4 billion. What this means is that in March the average paycheck from Uncle Sam for sitting doing nothing, surged to an all time high of $1,447/month.

...It appears that in March either the government decided to payout an additional roughly 20% per unemployment paycheck, or once again, there is a shadow population of beneficiaries, which are not caught in any of the standard cohorts. Keep in mind that the average monthly paycheck has traditionally been indicated as being about $1,000.

If anyone has an explanation other than that presented by Tyler Durden, I'd welcome it.

Because it's quite disturbing to believe the administration is lying about ev-ery-thing.


Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Mark Levin: your health care bill is a fraud, Mr. President, and you lied

Mark Levin:

I have a message for the President. Mr. President, I have a message for you. Your health care bill stinks, just as we said it did. As a matter of fact, your health care bill is a fraud.

Your health care bill does not cover pre-existing needs for children as you said it did.

Your health care bill does, in fact, slash life-saving diagnostic tests for senior citizens, as we said it did, including MRIs, CAT scans, diagnostic labs, home health, medical devices, nursing homes, in-patient rehab facilities, in-patient psych hospitals, etc. Did you know that, Mr. President?

Your health care bill does change coverage for retirees, who now receive prescription drug coverage from businesses -- and forces them onto Medicare Part D.

You lied again, Mr. President. That's a change in coverage.

At the same time, your health care bill is not $940 billion over ten years, is it, Mr. President?

You lied, didn't you?

You fixed the books like Al Capone's accountant. When you add $320 billion to cover payments to doctors under Medicare. And when you double-counted $550 billion in Medicare "cuts". You increased spending by over $2 trillion when we add in the rest. Don't you, Mr. President?

You lied, didn't you?

And if you were in the private sector, you'd be indicted and facing sure imprisonment, wouldn't you, Mr. President?

And, in fact, your health care bill does drive up costs for small businesses. If they offers a private plan to employees that exceeds some government-imposed limit, over time it's taxed at 40%. Why?

And if these business don't offer health care to their employees, they're fined $2,000 per employee. Isn't that an expense?

If they offer a health plan that's not approved by the government, they're fined as well. Isn't that an expense?

Doesn't that change coverage?

And if these businesses don't offer coverage to part-time workers, they're find $2,000 a pop, again.

And your health care bill punishes young people and middle-class citizens as well even though you said it wouldn't.

You lied.

As the great Bill McGurn reports in the Wall Street Journal today:

Almost by definition, those hit by the mandate will be either young people starting out, or those working for smaller businesses that do not provide employees with health coverage. Back in November, a report by the Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that nearly half (46%) of the mandate penalties will be paid by Americans under 300% of the poverty line.

That's lower-middle class citizens, Mr. President. You lied.

In today's dollars, that works out to $32,500 for an individual. For a family of four, it's $66,150. Generally speaking, these are not the folks who have to worry about paying taxes on, say, a villa in the Dominican Republic or income from the International Monetary Fund.

So we are left with one of two possibilities. The first is that the penalty for not having "minimal essential coverage" is fully enforced, in which case Americans of relatively modest means will get a lesson in how the government deals with people who don't pay up.

Or the penalty for violating the individual mandate will become like the fines for not filling out your Census form. In other words, unenforced. In that case, the costs of this legislation will be even higher and more hidden than we have been led to believe.

You lied, Mr. President.

And you lied about the cost of premiums, too, Mr. President. You said that premiums would on average go down two thousand, five hundred dollars a year. The Associated Depress is reporting that:

Americans under the age of 35 can expect their individual health insurance premiums to rise by about 17 percent.

That's not a $2,500 cut, is it, Mr. President?

You lied.

You also lied about the costs to the states, Mr. President.

The Council of State Governments, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, estimates that your expansio of Medicaid alone:

...will cost states $25 billion over the next 10 years, not including other significant administrative costs to initially implement the new law.

And you lied when you said your health care plan would increase efficiency, didn't you, Mr. President?

In fact, it will cause doctor shortages and long waiting periods. The Associated Depress reports the obvious:

Primary care physicians already are in short supply in parts of the country, and the landmark health overhaul that will bring them millions more newly insured patients in the next few years promises extra strain.

And what of those medical records -- our medical records, which will become part of the federal medical database, Mr. President? How do you plan to secure those? With the IRS?

Who will have access and how will we prevent misuse of our records, Mr. President?

Oh, you were all proud and celebratory, excited about this historic moment. The more we learn about this bill, the more disastrous it becomes. You got a very slight pop in the polls -- did you notice, Mr. President? And now you're down again. The generic party polls for Congress? Pelosi Democrats -- you got a very slight tick up -- and now you're down again. The people are wise to you.

As a matter of fact, you know your bill is deeply flawed, don't you, Mr. President? You were on the Today Show this morning, which is where you go when you want to put out your talking points, because you're never really challenged there. And now you're talking about this being just a first step. This is just a first step, ladies and gentlemen! Gee, I can't wait for the next one, can you? All these little steps, right over the cliff.

I think it is a critical first step in making a healthcare system that works for all Americans. It is not going to be the only thing. We are still going to have adjustments that have to be made to further reduce costs.

What does he mean, "further reduce costs"? Have costs been reduced anywhere?

Now, let me ask you a question: does it occur to anybody at the Today Show or on any of these other programs... has it occurred to a real, live journalist with a degree in Journalism... to confront this President as a serious person and ask him, "Mr. President, all these issues, all these points, you've been campaigning on -- as recently as last week. As recently as this weekend... and yet they were false! And you do this, you massively expand entitlements in this country despite the fact that we now have a report that the Social Security system is broke! Where is your proposal, Mr. President, for fixing the Social Security system? What are you going to do about it?"

Oh, it's one thing to create new programs, to create new promises. But, as President of the United States, you're still responsible for these programs. Nancy Pelosi was as proud as could be! Ol' Stretch was down there on the House floor saying that you all had invented Social Security, you all had invented Medicare and Medicaid. Okay, I'll give you that. But you've also destroyed them! You invented them -- and you destroyed them.

So the question, Mr. President, is: on your watch, what are you going to do about Social Security?

The editors of Investors Business Daily -- a real newspaper -- write:

Social Security's chief actuary reports that the social safety net will run a deficit for 2010, nine years earlier than predicted. Put down that big gavel, Madam Speaker, we're about to hit the iceberg.

Wow. Social Security is now offically broke.

They're expanding Medicaid. There are states that are soon to be officially broke. And yet they're required to pay a huge amount of this Medicaid.

They're going to be slashing Medicare, while pushing more citizens onto it, because the bill punishes businesses that are generous with prescription drug programs for retirees.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, this is what happens when radical, left-wing ideologues sit around and talk with each other about coming up with a Utopian proposal. Because there's no Utopia. This is misery, and it's only just begun, because it hasn't really kicked in yet.

But people are planning. Small and large businesses, senior citizens, young people, they're going to have to plan, going to have to hustle, have to figure out how to protect themselves. While the president bounces all over the place from one issue to the next, one entitlement to the next, one tax and spending increase to the next, patting himself on the back over how wonderful he's made this country.

You know what bothers me most about this? We have a man in the Oval Office who has no respect for what's come before him. He has no respect for what's been tried and tested throughout American history or -- for that matter -- throughout world history. We know that these Stalinist-like programs are failures. We know that, rather than create food, they create starvation. Rather than clothe people, people freeze in the winter. Rather than provide medical treatment for people, people suffer.

Oh, Mark, you say, that's extreme rhetoric: 'these Stalinist-like programs'. Really? Soviet-style? Where does come from? It doesn't come from the Founding Fathers. It doesn't come from the great philosophers on whom they relied. Where does it come from?

It comes, mostly, from the same mindset. Oh, they have different degrees and levels of suffering and implementation and aggressiveness. But it's a soft tyranny as I've said before and have written. This is the soft tyranny that others have warned about. This is the soft tyranny that we witness in other societies -- being imposed upon us.

Obama has done nothing to cut costs in health care. He's done nothing to increase efficiencies in health care. He's done nothing to create competition in health care. He'd done nothing to address those who suffer -- and those who will suffer. Except to make it worse.

Except to make it worse.

...So welcome to ObamaCare, welcome to the Obama recovery, as jobs continue to not be saved or created, welcome to the Obama housing boom, welcome to the Obama business boom, isn't it great?

Isn't Utopia hell?

This bloated, out-of-control, top-heavy federal government couldn't run a damn weather-stripping program or "cash-for-clunkers" without billions in misery, waste, fraud and abuse. Now picture what that means for your health care.


Obamanomics! Greenspan warns "huge overhang of federal debt, which we have never seen before," will soon make it hard for U.S. to borrow

The Cloward-Piven tactics of the Obama administration have borne fruit. Even the usually subdued Alan Greenspan is sounding the alarm.

Greenspan Calls Treasury Yields ‘Canary in the Mine’


Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said the recent rise in Treasury yields represents a “canary in the mine” that may signal further gains in interest rates... Higher yields reflect investor concerns over "this huge overhang of federal debt which we have never seen before," Greenspan said... "I’m very much concerned about the fiscal situation... [An increase in interest rates would] make the housing recovery very difficult to implement and put a dampening on capital investment as well."

...The U.S. budget deficit reached a record $1.4 trillion for the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30 amid falling tax revenue from the recession, a bailout of the banking and auto industries, and the $787 billion economic stimulus package.

"I don’t like American politics and what’s happening," Greenspan said... Historically, there has been "a large buffer between the level of our federal debt and our capacity to borrow... That’s narrowing. And I’m finding it very difficult to look into the future and not worry about that."

Democrats have proposed adding a value-added (VAT) tax to further extract money from the economy, presumably to emulate the petrified economies of Europe. Greenspan suggested that even a VAT tax wouldn't suffice.

Put simply, the problem is that the government isn't controlling its spending.

Everything Obama's doing is obvious: implementing a value-added tax, throwing sludge into the economy, transforming the society, rejecting the limits in the Constitution, cramming liberal activists throughout the judiciary, massively expanding the federal bureaucracy, and moving rule-making power to unelected bureaucrats.

It's not change, it's not hope, it's a disaster.


Hat tips: Mark Levin and AGAHB.

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Out of control: salaries inside the paper-bushing bureaucracies of D.C.

Ever wonder why the federal government continually adds agencies, departments, bureaus, regulations, offices and employees -- but never sheds them? Or why government grows whether the economy is booming or flat on its back?

To illustrate the problem, consider this graph of salaries for all federal employees.

In DC, however, the salaries are considerably richer.

In the real world, of course, the distribution of salaries is considerably -- uhmmm -- flatter.

The federal government under the Social Democrat Party is out of control. In November, it's time to take the federal government back. And downsize the hell out of it. I can think of oh, about five different
departments to defund immediately.


Hat tip: Taxing Tennessee.

Monday, March 29, 2010

I Blame Fillmore

Consumer Indexes has the play-by-play on the Obamaconomy.


[Growth] had been dropping precipitously in part because of a sudden and significant weakening of our [composite index], which reached a level reflecting a 4.8% year-over-year contraction on February 27th. This was the lowest level recorded for the index since the middle of November, 2008. Although every one of our ten sector indexes weakened over the prior 10 days, our Housing Index retreated the most, again reaching readings representing a 9.5% year-over-year decline in consumer demand.

I blame Bush. Or Millard Fillmore. Or... anyone but the current tenant in the White House, who couldn't possibly be to blame, since he's not Bush.


Sunday, March 28, 2010

DemCare: a tidal wave of regulations, taxes, fees, bureaucracies, waiting lines, bankruptcies and seniors denied medical care are on the way

Courtesy of the House Committee on Ways and Means comes this timeline of DemCare socialized medicine. And this is only a taste of the hell to come. One thing is absolutely certain: if you like your existing plan, you most definitely will not be able to keep it.

  2009  

Medicare cuts to hospitals begin (long‐term care (7/1/09) and inpatient and rehabilitation facilities (FY10))

  2010  

• Provide income exclusion for specified Indian tribe health benefits provided after 3/23/10
• Temporary high‐risk pool and high‐cost union retiree reinsurance ($5 B each for 3.5 years) (6/23/10)
• Impose 10% tax on indoor UV tanning (7/1/10)
Medicare cuts to inpatient psych hospitals (7/1/10)
• Prohibits lifetime and annual benefit for private insurers spending limits (plan years beginning 9/23/10)
• Prohibits non‐group private insurance plans from canceling coverage (rescissions) (plan years beginning 9/23/10)
• Requires private insurance plans to cover, at no charge, most preventive care (plan years beginning 9/23/10)
• Requires private insurance plans to allow dependents to stay on parents’ policies through age 26 (plan years
beginning 9/23/10)
• Hospitals in "Frontier States" (ND, MT, WY, SD, UT ) receive higher Medicare payments (FY11)

  2011  

• Hospitals in “low‐cost” areas receive higher Medicare payments for 2 yrs ($400 million, FY11)
Medicare Advantage cuts begin
• No longer allowed to use FSA, HSA, HRA, Archer MSA distributions for over‐the-counter medicines
Medicare cuts to home health begin
Medicare cuts for wealthier seniors ($85k/$170k), who are forced to pay higher Part D premiums (not indexed for inflation in Parts B/D)
Medicare reimbursement cuts when seniors use diagnostic imaging like MRIs, CT scans, etc.
• Medicare cuts begin to ambulance services, ASCs, diagnostic labs, and durable
medical equipment
• Impose new annual tax on brand name pharmaceutical companies
• Americans begin paying premiums for federal long‐term care insurance (the CLASS Act, which analysis indicates is a ticking fiscal time-bomb)
Private insurance plans required to spend a minimum of 80% of premiums on medical claims (where 65% is considered the maximum "safe" amount to cover claims). Prior experience at the state level will indisputably harm private health insurance business.
• Physicians in "Frontier States" (ND, MT, WY, SD, UT ) receive higher Medicare payments
Prohibition on Medicare payments to new physician‐owned hospitals (which will dramatically reduce access to senior care)
• Penalties for non‐qualified HSA and Archer MSA distributions double (to 20%)
Seniors prohibited from purchasing power wheelchairs unless they first rent for 13 months
• New Medicare cuts to long‐term care hospitals begin (7/1/11)
• Additional Medicare cuts to hospitals and cuts to nursing homes and inpatient rehab facilities begin (FY12)
New taxes on all private health insurance policies to pay for comparative effectivness research (plan
years beginning FY12)

  2012  

Medicare cuts to dialysis treatment begins
Medicare to cut spending by using an HMO‐like coordinated care model (Accountable Care Organizations)
New Medicare cuts to inpatient psych hospitals (7/1/12)
Medicare cuts to hospitals with high readmission rates begin (FY13)
Medicare cuts to hospice begin (FY13)

  2013  

• Impose $2,500 annual cap on FSA contributions (indexed to CPI)
• Increase Medicare wage tax by 0.9% and impose a new 3.8% tax on unearned , nonactive
business income
for those earning over $200k/$250k (not indexed to inflation)
• Generally increases (7.5% to 10%) threshold at which medical expenses, as a % of income, can be deductible
Eliminate deduction for Part D retiree drug subsidy employers receive
Impose 2.3% excise tax on medical devices
Medicare cuts to hospitals who treat low‐income seniors begin
• $500,000 deduction cap on compensation paid to insurance company employees and officers

  2014  

Unconstitutional personal mandate begins: Individuals without government‐approved coverage are subject to a tax of the greater of $695 or 2.5% of income
• Employers who fail to offer "affordable" coverage would pay a $3,000 penalty for every employee that receives a subsidy through the Exchange
• Employers who do not offer insurance must pay a tax penalty of $2,000 for every fulltime employee
• More Medicare cuts to home health begin
• All non‐grandfathered and Exchange health plans required to meet federally mandated levels of coverage
States must cover parents /childless adults up to 138% of poverty on Medicaid, receive increased FMAP
• Tax credits available for Exchange‐based coverage, amount varies by income up to 400% of poverty
Private insurers cannot impose any coverage restrictions on pre‐existing conditions (guaranteed issue/renewability, which will bankrupt insurance providers)
Private insurers must offer coverage to anyone wanting a policy and every policy has to be renewed (which will bankrupt insurance providers)
• Insurance plans must include government‐defined "essential benefits " and coverage levels
• Government board (IPAB) begins submitting proposals to cut Medicare
Impose tax on nearly all private health insurance plans
Medicare payment cuts for hospital‐acquired infections begin (FY15)

  2015  

• More Medicare cuts to home health begin

  2016  

Impose "Cadillac tax on “high cost” plans, 40% tax on the benefit value above a certain threshold: ($10,200 individual coverage, $27,500 family or self‐only union multiemployer coverage)

There should be little doubt that this extravaganza of central planning will be devastating for insurers, pharmaceutical companies, medical device manufacturers, doctors, nurses, hospitals, and their business partners. It will crush an economy that is already flat on its back.

Let me ask you Democrats something. When -- in all of recorded human history -- has this kind of central planning, with price controls, arbitrary dictates, wage-fixing, giveaways, bribes, payoffs, cutout deals, and social engineering experiments, ever worked?

It's a rhetorical question, you anti-American moonbats. This bill sentences our seniors to premature disease and death while assuring our children of poverty, misery and economic dislocation. Of this, there can be no doubt.


Related: "This will close our business."

Saturday, March 27, 2010

A Government Within a Government

By Victor the Contractor

This Administration and the Congress who cloy before President Oabama are a stain upon the soul of the nation. Indelicately put, but inescapably true.

I am moved to nausea as I consider the policies this Government is pursuing. The demeaning gloating makes it all the more distasteful to me. If we're lucky there will be a Great Depression to 'wipe the slate clean' and we can start over. I just don't see how winning a few seats in November will change things substantially.

We need a sweep of both Houses of Congress and subsequent impeachment proceedings. It is that simple. The President has failed miserably to uphold the Constitution. He has, in fact, labored to subvert and defame it in his speeches, actions, and legislative agenda. President Obama is part of a fifth column, if you will: an organization of traitors who are trying to dismantle our economy one industry at a time.

Their ideals are not those of patriots: they are the ideals of narcissists who believe that everyone will dance to their tune based on a collective cult of personality. The ability of President Obama to give a scripted speech does not give him the right to unlawfully alter our form of government.

Similarly, the allure of a society where all are provided for equally discounts the reality of competition ingrained in mankind. The immutable fact of nature is that some will rise and many will fall, even when given a 'level' playing field. Most see the truth that hiring incentives and minority quotas in the workplace have resulted in a jaded workforce that often sees the promotion of the unqualified to a level that renders them incompetent. The dream of Shangri-La evaporates when exposed to the piercing sunlight of human ambition and personal industry.

Such extensive delusion is, unfortunately, contagious to a populace who thirsts to be provided for and comforted in their want of largess. We have a citizenry who have no living memory of totalitarianism in its harshest forms and has been lulled into a false sense of obligation to the rest of the world.

But the better part of the world tolerates unjust tyrannies that openly rob the people of their productivity to support those who do not produce a thing. And so we are taught to feel guilty about being members of a successful country and are then coerced to feed, clothe and shelter a world of failing economies. And by failing economies I mean a debt-sodden European Union, perennially war-torn Africa and an Asia still trying, in varying degrees, to emerge from a Colonial stupor and enter the fray of economic modernism.

The 1.5% growth that the EU 'enjoys' can not be called success on any level given its debt obligations. Most countries in Africa possess non-existent economies, dominated by clans who reinforce their military juntas from the back of pickup trucks. Most of Asia and South America seem to be barely concealed dictatorships running roughshod over duly elected representatives who either rubber stamp or passively tolerate overt socialist agendas.

But growth of 2.5% or more is required to replace infrastructure and provide jobs for a growing pool of the educated -- and most countries never achieve that mark.

But our President, his advisers, and a cloyingly obnoxious Congress are spreading and marketing a hatred for American exceptionalism and the free market. They call capitalism a failed paradigm that can logically be succeeded by a socialist model which suppresses individuality and unction while it encourages sloth and conformism.

President Obama is attacking our way of life, our moral tenets and our raison d'être! Pardon the French. But our reason for being -- America's core! -- is to maintain and advance freedom and defy the same forms of tyranny that socialists espouse and which they try to teach our children in our schools.

I believe this administration and this Congress are attempting nothing less than an end-run on the Constitution; what else could you call the federal government swallowing up as many industries as possible before the midterm elections?

With more than 50% of the economy under its control or outright owned by illegal buyouts in the financial, automotive and now the health care sectors, the administration has formed a government within a government. President Obama is putting on a show, with the trappings of a democracy but the substance of a dictatorship with a capitol 'D'.

One fine example of this twisted ideology is the 'decision' by GM to start importing the Renault 500 model while rebadging them for sale in the United States. Thus, take a car that could not possibly survive the NHTSA crash tests and market it as a new 'Green Machine." This Parmesan grater is so small that you have to drive with your arms out the windows (one does need the tiniest bit of humor to avoid tearing up from time to time, but I digress).

We have a government so out of control that it has become a danger to its citizens. President Obama has already overstepped the lawful boundaries clearly delineated by the United States Constitution and should be impeached. His close ties to Acorn and other obviously subversive political organs require investigation at the very least.

Additionally, Congress, especially Nancy Pelosi and her Senate counterpart, Harry Reid, have so abrogated their responsibilities that there is a pressing need to investigate their bizarre activities. Consider the financial and political circumstances that led to the climate of secrecy, special exemptions, political favors and promised jobs they used to get their horrible piece of legislation passed.

For if we still have a representative Government, then we have the right, no, the obligation, to call for an accounting when our elected officials act in such an immoral and arrogant fashion. When leaders in our midst become senile, morally compromised or otherwise unable to perform their functions it is incumbent upon us, the citizenry, to recall them and install saner, wiser persons who are able to perform as promised.

As November nears we are called upon to prepare. To prepare to field candidates who can meet the responsibilities of leadership and follow their oaths to uphold the Constitution. To prepare to debate and expose those who denigrate our way of life, our belief in hard work and our faith in American exceptionalism. And to prepare to resurrect the country from the malaise that the relativists have levied upon our society, our collective outlook and even our children.

For my America is a land not or of promises but of promise. My America is a country that prevails, not is prevailed against. My America is a reprieve for all who seek opportunity and flee tyranny. The ideals we hold dear are the values that built this nation and made it a welcoming light in a dark world, the model to be emulated, the haven for the tired and for the poor to rebuild their lives. Not to disable ambition, but to enable the spirit, through hard work and vigor, to achieve and attain all of the blessings that this wonderful nation offers. For it is through honest endeavor and forthrightness that we shine as a beacon that none can dim and none can extinguish.

Now let us go to work. Let us share the concerns we have with an open heart and discerning spirit. Let us meet and decide that which is dear to us and that which is beneath us. Let us choose new leaders from among us who will resist temptation and shine a light on the dark actions of the ignoble in Congress. Leaders who share our vision, our ideals and vigilance so that our generation will never again have to go to Washington to clean out the moral refuse who have squatted there, in our house.

This great country of ours requires upkeep from time to time, and a cleaning of the machinery of Democracy is needed when it is gummed up by the muck of greedy men and covetous women.

Let us start now!


Victor The Contractor


Poetic Justice: DemCare Will Erase Health Care Benefits for Million of Union Members Starting in Just Nine Months

Remember how the President endlessly bragged that health care reform would never -- never! -- impact your existing health plans? You know, the "if you like your plan, you can keep it" shtick? Well, I know this comes as a shock, but he lied.

What no one appears to be pointing out is that DemCare specifically targets private sector union members first. Because of the dizzying new regulations imposed by the new law, "industrial concerns [and/or] those with unionized employees, say the end of the deduction could force them to ... curtail or even cancel them [health benefits]," according to The Los Angeles Times. That's right: most union retirees will have their cushy plans slammed by DemCare through changes in the tax code.

Which unions will be hardest hit?

• The Communication Workers of America, whose website doesn't bother to mention the impending disaster. Telecom companies such as Verizon and AT&T will be forced to slash upwards of two billion in health benefits to retirees.

• The United Auto Workers, specifically at manufacturers like Deere and Caterpillar.

• The United Steelworkers, through diversified manufacturers like 3M.

• The Sheet Metal Workers International Union.

• The Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers (OCAW) union.

And many, many more.

I won't get into the accounting details associated with these companies' benefits programs (mainly, because I don't understand them), but informant "CPA Ray" tells me that only three general scenarios are possible -- and all of them are devastating for union members and retirees.

Put simply, their promised benefits will be slashed and they'll be forced onto the government-run program. Oh -- and the government-run program will have 30 million more people on the books and spend $500 billion less on seniors, even as the need dramatically increases for the elderly.

Union members, it's time you started kicking the crap out of your union bigwigs -- politically speaking -- because:

They. Sold. You. Out.


Hat tip: Legal Insurrection.

Thursday, March 25, 2010

So, Social Democrat Dimwits: if Health Care's a Right, What's Your Service-Level Agreement (SLA)?

Leftists and their beanie-brained supporters like to proclaim that health care is a right.

Never mind that health care is just a set of economic services and products, controlled by a complex web of voluntary human interactions. Just ignore the fact that the founders would have dismissed the idea that any such interaction could be a "right". And don't even consider that -- to grant someone a right like health care -- you will have to force someone else to provide that service, whether they want to or not.

Those bullet points are far too complicated for your average Social Democrat to contemplate (note to liberals: "contemplate" means "think about").

So the question you've got to ask these mental midgets is a follow-up: if health care's a right, what's the service level agreement (or "SLA") offered by ObamaCare?

A service level agreement... is a part of a service contract where the level of service is formally defined. In practice, the term SLA is sometimes used to refer to the contracted delivery time (of the service) or performance... The SLA records a common understanding about services, priorities, responsibilities, guarantees, and warranties. Each area of service scope should have the "level of service" defined. The SLA may specify the levels of availability, serviceability, performance, operation, or other attributes of the service.

If I want my guaranteed health care, how quickly will I receive it? What good is it if I don't know what my SLA is?

What services are covered? Face-lifts? Gastric bypasses? Tummy tucks?

What drugs are provided? What quality of care am I guaranteed? What kind of specialists will I get to see -- and how long will it take to get a referral?

The thousands of pages of DemCare create a hundred new offices, agencies and bureaucracies, but omit any mention of SLAs. Democrats don't want you to think about waiting in lines, the poor quality of care, or the disastrous policy decisions by bureaucrats in Washington, even though those will be the inevitable results of their doomed central planning efforts.

So I encourage you to call your Democrat representative and demand to know why you can't get immediate, free health care. It's your right, dammit! Your Constitutional right!


The cold, hard proof that Congressional Democrats despise Obamacare

1. THEY EXEMPTED THEMSELVES    You read that right. ObamaCare is so wonderful, so Utopian, so amazing, that Democrats in Congress exempted themselves, their families, their staff members and the President's clan from having to wait in line under socialized medicine.

2. THE 'BENEFITS' OF DEMCARE DON'T START UNTIL 2014    To postpone the wonderfulness until after the 2012 presidential election, Democrats purposefully delayed health care spending until 2013 and 2014. Every day, Democrats told us, 35,000 people lost their health insurance (primarily because they lost their jobs under the Obamaconomy, but I digress). So these people remain screwed.

And you know those sickly child props the Democrats rolled onstage like a Jerry Lewis telethon to pitch DemCare?

Sorry, kids. You've got as much of a chance of getting covered under DemCare as Michael Moore has of getting his own Jenny Craig commercial.

But, Melvin, it's so historic.


Hat tip: Mark Simone, 3/24/2010

Funny, I don't drive a DeLorean, but suddenly it's 2016

Thanks to their outstanding stewardship of the economy, the Democrat-controlled Congressional Budget Office announced that Social Security is running in the red this year, six years earlier than expected.

This year, the system will pay out more in benefits than it receives in payroll taxes, an important threshold it was not expected to cross until at least 2016, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

...Analysts have long tried to predict the year when Social Security would pay out more than it took in because they view it as a tipping point — the first step of a long, slow march to insolvency, unless Congress strengthens the program’s finances...

The Social Security "Trust Fund" contains nothing but trillions in worthless IOUs. In other words, Congress stole all of the money out of the "lock box" and replaced the cash with paper. It's similar to the approach Argentina used before hyperinflation exploded.

All of the trillions of dollars that baby boomers paid in to the "trust fund" was stolen. If the U.S. government was a private enterprise, Congress would be serving time with Bernie Madoff.

And the big wave of baby boomers hasn't even hit yet.

So what do Democrats do? How do these brilliant architects of Social Security and Medicare react? Do they try to fix the system that's already $100 trillion under water and threatens to bankrupt future generations?

No. They create a brand new entitlement program -- nationalizing the health care system -- using every accounting gimmick and sleazy payoff ever invented.

That, my friends, is beyond reprehensible. It is child abuse -- breaking the backs of subsequent American generations with deficits they never asked for and never approved.


Linked by: Michelle Malkin. Thanks!

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Introducing Another Startling Innovation from Ross Industries: the 'Fire Nancy Pelosi' Word Widget™

You've got to admit this idea's gold, Jerry -- gold. I just created a Word Widget™, which provides a graphic link to the popular FireNancyPelosi website.

If you have a blog, just post the HTML (below) into your article whenever you use the term . You can use it multiple times in a row, like this: . Thus, with minimal effort, you'll provide needed link-love to a worthy site and maybe help generate some cash for the cause.

Here's the HTML:


You can thank me later.