Rachel Maddow Joins Blathering Bunch

What big media touches, big media infects. Air America’s Rachel Maddow has been forced to compromise her program with a MSNBC simulcast in her first hour, pushing her into the background and featuring the big media bias of David Gregory. As much as I have cheered Gregory on with his tough questioning, his split personality of political appeasement is infuriating.

Maddow was just one of many who have criticized the media failure, breakdown if you will, to hold this administration accountable. Let’s not forget the media’s mea culpa, admitting it failed to seriously question the reasons for going to war. It wasn't some liberal conspiracy theory either. But Maddow has been put in the position of having to ignore Gregory’s incredible denial.

The MSNBC tie in is an important step for Air America, I understand that, but Maddow’s silence on Gregory’s irresponsible comments are troublesome. Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan admitted the media should have been more unyielding when it came to the outpouring of administration propaganda. But David Gregory thinks otherwise, as Media Matters points out:

NBC's David Gregory, for example, said McClellan "also writes in the book that he think that the so-called liberal media got it wrong and was not hard enough on the administration about the war. You know, I don't know where he gets that idea. I don't know where other people get that idea." Later, Gregory said:

"I think he's wrong. He makes the same kind of argument a lot of people on the
left have made. I tried not to be defensive about it. I thought a lot about this over a number of years, and I disagree with that assessment. I think the questions were asked. I think we pushed. I think we prodded. I think we challenged the president. I think not only those of us in the White House press corps did that, but others in the rest of the landscape of the media did that."

Air America should be guarded against losing it’s independence and critical eye, as it becomes a fully credentialed member of the fourth estate.

Climate, Guns & Church and State

New, Three Year old Climate Change Report Out

After three years and a court order, the Bush administration has released it’s summary of federal and independent research making its case about the harmful impact of human-caused global warming in the United States.

Deniers will not like this because it makes them look wrong, again. You can find the complete report online at climatescience.gov,

The findings: “An increased frequency and severity of heat waves is expected, leading to more illness and death, particularly among the young, elderly, frail and poor. A two thirds chance that Lyme disease and West Nile virus would have expanded ranges because of warming. The same goes for food- and water-borne diseases.

Vatican Reveals History of Church-State Separation, Who saw this Coming?

The Vatican Museum is putting on display the period of struggle between popes and emperors that led to the Western modern concept of the separation of powers. "Matilda of Canossa, the Papacy and the Empire: History, Art and Culture at the Origins of the Romanesque" is the exhibitions title.

The biographical and political events of Matilda's life explain a period of confrontation between popes and emperors that led to boundaries and eventual separation of the two powers -- religious and secular -- and laid the foundations of the modern concept in the West.

Of course, it’s a crazy idea ignored by our founding fathers. Onward Christian soldiers march......

Guns in National Parks, What would Yogi and Boo Boo Say?

The federal government is inching ever so close to allowing visitors to carry loaded, concealed weapons in some national parks, wildlife refuges and monuments.

The National Rifle Association likes the new rule, arguing ( and I’m not kidding) that it would help keep crime down and protect visitors from potentially dangerous wildlife. Here’s the official language of these stark raving lunatics:

“You read stories about people attacked by animals or who stumble upon meth
labs or women who are raped in a national park. We don’t believe
law-abiding citizens should be kept from protecting themselves

National Park Service officials say it could easily ruin the family-friendly atmosphere of the parks and other attractions. Do ya think?

Seven former National Park Service directors say the new rule addresses a nonexistent problem.

McCain’s Corrections as bad as Missteps

The difference is 14,000 troops. That’s too big number to dismiss as “miniscule,” as John McCain’s policy advisor recently did, after McCain wrongly stated the Iraqi troop levels. What I found ludicrous, are the excuses he and his people come up with to explain their mistakes.

Here’s the set up from AP: Republican John McCain's estimate of U.S. troop levels in Iraq touched off squabbling with Democrat Barack Obama. McCain said: "We have drawn down to pre-surge levels. Basra, Mosul and now Sadr City are quiet." In fact, U.S. troop levels are not yet down to levels before President Bush's troop increase last year, a strategy shift McCain had pushed for some four years before the president authorized it.

Here are the punch lines as McCain insisted he didn't misspeak:

"Of course not. I said we've drawn down," the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee said at a news conference. "The rest of them will be home at the end of July."

The Arizona senator added, "It is correct that the levels of troops there are not the same as they were during the surge, and, in fact, all of them will be home by the beginning of July."

McCain's senior foreign policy adviser: "The difference is so minuscule that I'm not sure it rises to the level of nitpicking."

Take a look at the list of other gaffes McCain has dropped in the laps of the media without as much as whimper of skepticism. Thank you Earth Times:

Obama Gives in to McCain’s Dog & Pony Show

In not what I would call an encouraging sign, Barack Obama fell victim to John McCain’s “you haven’t been to Iraq” frame of the issue. How important would it be for the Democratic candidate to make the visit now, in the throws of a presidential campaign, when the results would be less than informative? CNN went right to the source, Michael Ware in Iraq, and soon quickly shelved the revelation that it would be nothing but a “dog and pony show.”

The Washington Post had a few interesting twists to this story:

“Sen. John McCain has attacked Sen. Barack Obama for not traveling to Iraq to see the "facts on the ground." But a recent statement by McCain about troop levels has his opponents raising questions about his own knowledge. In comments to reporters…McCain asserted that ‘I can tell you that it is succeeding. I can look you in the eye and tell you it's succeeding. We have drawn down to pre-surge levels. Basra, Mosul and now Sadr city are quiet and it's long and it's hard and it's tough and there will be setbacks.’ …the troop level in Iraq is at about 155,000 right now,
well above the 130,000 that would mark a return to pre-surge levels. McCain's
comments about Mosul being "quiet" also have raised some eyebrows. On the day
that he said that, three suicide bombings in Mosul and the surrounding areas had
left 30 Iraqis dead.”

Supporters of “Free pass” McCain should be troubled by the high price they’re paying in the polls.

Bush Saved Us, So what are you complaining about?

One of the most successfully “framed” issues, packaged and sold through repetition by the Republican Party, has been its prevention of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil.

It’s actually been just the opposite, since September 11th happened well after the Bush administrations took power, and had numerous warnings of an impending attack inside the U.S. which they ignored.

An incredible feat, when you consider they completely change the public perception of a failed security policy, into an administration and Party people most trust to keep us safe.

But this myth will only last as long as no one calls them on it, and GOP loyalists continually remind us of the “frame,” disregarding the reality. U.S. News was wise to point out this “through the looking glass” opinion from a fiction writer, ironically:

“Novelist and Fordham law professor Thane Rosenbaum writes in the Wall
Street Journal, ‘With President Bush-bashing still a national pastime, it's notable how much international terrorism has been forgotten, and how little credit the president has received for keeping Americans safe. ... Terrorism is now largely off the table in the minds of most Americans,’ and ‘in gearing up to elect a new president, we are left to wonder how, in spite of numerous failed policies and poor judgment, President Bush's greatest achievement was denied to him by people who ungratefully availed themselves of the protection that his administration provided."

Where was Thane Rosenbaum's praise and gratefulness, after President Bill Clinton’s 1993 capture of the World Trade Center terrorists, and subsequent 8 years of “keeping Americans safe?” Both attacks happened in the first 8 months of the Clinton-Bush presidencies.

I’m sure it was an inadvertent omission.

Suicides & Guns Messy Result of Long War

I’m going to make an observation based solely my own early impressions and not factual data regarding news reports of suicides and murders in the 70’s and 80’s by Vietnam vets. Again, I don’t know if the facts would back up my detached recollections of that time period, or it’s a case of selective memory. I personally knew some very messed up vets back then, and because many were forced to go because of the draft, I was sympathetic to their treatment in the press and by war protesters. I feel uncomfortable writing from the gut and not from well documented research.

My main fear is that we might see a repeat of the past, (the past I remember) if we don’t do something to prevent it today. Regardless of whether my impressions are right or wrong, the following stories don’t bode well in dealing with this public safety issue.

Due to lack of money, southwestern Wisconsin’s Boscobel Area Health Care Hospital will close its suicide care unit, while at the same time AP is reporting soldier suicides are hitting its highest rate. This is a big area of Wisconsin, and could be a nightmare for treatment and access.

Law enforcement and mental health agencies have no where else to go locally
to fill the oncoming void. The hospital lost $300,000 over the last year because
reimbursement rates from Medicare, Medicaid and surrounding counties, did not
cover their costs. Where are the five to six patients a day going to
go?

Add to that, the Veterans Administrations attempt to short change returning troops by not testing them for PTSD.

According to AP, “The US Army says 115 soldiers on active duty committed
suicide in 2007, the most in one year since the service began keeping records in
1980. Nearly 1,000 soldiers attempted suicide. Colonel Elspeth Ritchie said,
"Mainly it is the long time and multiple deployments away from
home, the exposure to really terrifying and horrifying things, the easy availability of loaded weapons."

On the issue of “the easy availability of loaded weapons,” many Republican state houses across the country actually want to allow soldiers to legally carry firearms because of their service and weapons training.

Call me crazy, but I sense a dangerous outcome for returning vets, their families and local communities. The above short sighted actions, withdrawing treatment and accessible weaponry, will result in many unintended deaths and social instability and tragedy.

As for Republican tax cutters and vet short changers, maybe Scrooges was right after all: "Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?"

The Real Rove-Lawless

Wikipedia defines Karl Rove this way: "the former Deputy Chief of Staff to President George W. Bush until his resignation on 31 August 2007. He has headed the Office of Political Affairs, the Office of Public Liaison, and the White House Office of Strategic Initiatives. Now he’s working as a political analyst and contributor for Fox News, Newsweek, and the Wall Street Journal."

My definition would be less kind and sure to include Joseph Georbells, a German politician and Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda in Nazi Germany from 1933 to 1945. Georbells inclusion is intentional for the purpose of asking this question; Would you hire him after the fall of Nazi Germany as a political analyst for any media outlet? Then why has the U.S. media been so reckless calling on his services at a time when their own credibility is being called into question. Perhaps author James Moore of "Bush's Brain" put it best when he said this;


As the Democurmudgeon, I have been attempting to point out the elements of marketing; positioning and framing. Over the two Bush terms, Karl Rove has ruthlessly defined his enemies and crushed them, mastering the art of propaganda in politics as a blood sport. Too continue to allow his voice to subvert and poison the important role the media has as a checks and balance over the three branches of government is a mistake we can't afford to make.

CNN’s Kyra Phillips Connected the Dots

Remember Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, open letter to all in uniform to refrain from getting involved in politics? After all, it only makes sense so close to a presidential election, that “Keeping our politics private is a good first step. The only things we should be wearing on our sleeves are our military insignia. It is and must always be a neutral instrument of the state, no matter which party holds sway."

My earlier post on this military “open letter” suggested perhaps the administration didn’t want the troops vote to count like they did in previous elections because of the popular sentiment of American troops in Iraq. Mullen got the clue when he visited with U.S. military personnel around the world, and got a series of right wing questions from those who sensed a change of mood in the military: “What if a Democrat wins?” and, “What will that do to the mission in Iraq?”

CNN’s Kyra Phillips spoke to Iraqi soldiers and got an enthusiastic thumbs up for the prospects of a Democratic president.

“Within that whole group, not one wanted a republican in the US presidential
seat. They were all for a democrat. They were all for that type of change
because they said they were living a republican war.”

McClellan Speaks While White House in state of Denial

AP) - Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan between May 2003 to April 2006, defended his bombshell book about the Bush administration (and that) he didn't speak up against the overselling of war in Iraq at the time because he, like other Americans, gave the president the benefit of the doubt. He hoped his book would help change the culture that has turned governing into a never-ending campaign.

A Main Turning Point: The president was leaving an event in North Carolina, McClellan recalled, and as they walked to Air Force One a reporter yelled out a question: Had the president, who had repeatedly condemned the selective release of secret intelligence information, enabled Scooter Libby to leak classified information to The New York Times to bolster the administration's arguments for war? McClellan took the question to the president, telling Bush: "He's saying you yourself were the one that authorized the leaking of this information." "And he said, 'Yeah, I did.' And I was kind of taken aback," McClellan said. "For me I came to the decision that at that point I needed to look for a way to move on, because it had undermined, I think, a lot of what we had said." "Republican critics dismissed him as a turncoat, a sellout and a disgruntled former employee. The White House called the book puzzling and sad." What is sad is their cruel disrespect to McClellan, the dozen or so former officials who have written similar expose's. The vaulted to No. 1 on Amazon.com's best-seller list.

Yellin at the top of Her voice, Media is to Blame

It's noteworthing to point out that in Scott McClellan’s new book "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception," McClellan passed some of the blame off onto the well deserving media. Remember the numerous mea culpa? Congressional correspondent MSNBC Jessica Yellin, while on Anderson Cooper 360, admitted there had been network pressure to put a positive spin on the Bush administration on the run up to war.



This dramatic admission will get little play, and frankly, fade quickly from the discussion. The media framing and positioning in the run up to a war of choice, was handled like any other public event, an opportunity to shape public opinion based on the social mood at the time. The ultimate ad campaign, with deadly consequences.

Cathartic McClellan Betrays Bushies With Truth

Former press secretary Scott McClellan produced “What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception," a memoir bashing his old boss from a deceptive selling the Iraq war, secrecy at all levels. And when it comes to mistakes, what mistakes?

According to AP, Scott McClellan calls:

the operation "insular, secretive and combative"

“pushed to leave earlier than he had planned…kept out of the loop on key decision-making sessions.”

"I fell far short of living up to the kind of public servant I wanted to be.”

The news media were "complicit enablers" for focusing more on "covering the march to war instead of the necessity of war."

Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq, a determination McClellan says the president had made by early 2002 - at least a full year before the invasion - if not even earlier.

"He signed off on a strategy for selling the war that was less than candid and
honest…

During the "political propaganda campaign to sell the war to the American people," Something else was downplayed as well, McClellan says: any discussion of "the possible unpleasant consequences of war - casualties, economic effects, geopolitical risks, diplomatic repercussions."

In Bush's second term, as news from Iraq grew worse, McClellan says the president was "insulated from the reality of events on the ground and consequently began falling into the trap of believing his own spin."

"The Iraq war was not necessary," McClellan concludes.

Bush's weaknesses:

“someone with a penchant for self-deception if it ‘suits his needs at the
moment,"


"an instinctive leader more than an intellectual leader’ who has a lack of interest in delving deeply into policy options”


“a man with a lack of self-confidence that makes him unable to acknowledge when he's been wrong.”

“lacked real accountability in large part because Bush himself did not embrace openness or government in the sunshine.”

McClellan calls Vice President Dick Cheney "the magic man" who "always seemed to get his way" and sometimes "simply could not contain his deep-seated certitude, even arrogance, to the detriment of the president."

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who was national security adviser earlier in Bush's presidency, "was more interested in figuring out where the president stood and just carrying out his wishes while expending only cursory effort on helping him understand all the considerations and potential consequences" of war. Rice "was somehow able to keep her hands clean, even when the problems related to matters under her direct purview," McClellan says, but he predicts that "history will likely judge her harshly."

Karl Rove "always struck me as the kind of person who would be willing, in the heat of battle, to push the envelope to the limit of what is permissible ethically or legally."

When Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast in August 2005…the administration went on autopilot "rather than seizing the initiative and getting in front of what was happening on the ground."

The White House responded angrily "Scott, we now know, is disgruntled about
his experience at the White House," said White House press secretary Dana
Perino. "We are puzzled. It is sad. This is not the Scott we knew."

McClellan says Bush loyalists will no doubt continue to think the administration's decisions have been correct and its unpopularity undeserved. "I've become genuinely convinced otherwise," he says.

Overrated Genius Rove Sputters Under Questioning

Bush’s brain Karl Rove made a strategic error thinking he could easily dismiss the media’s questions about his involvement in the prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman on corruption charges. This over confident buffoon is not sitting with the usual gullible audience he had gotten used to in the White House. Near the end of the video, you’ll see this sick cornered nerd turn to goo with this exchange:

ABC's "This Week":

Rove: "I read about -- I'm going to simply say what I've said before, which is I found out about Don Siegelman's investigation and indictment by reading it in the newspaper."

George Stephanopoulos: "But that's not a denial."

Rove: "I've -- you know, I read - I heard about it, read about it, learned about it for the first time by reading about it in the newspaper," Rove replied.



What has struck me about this supposedly brilliant man is that he speaks in simple clichéd terms, not like some conservative intellectual. And anytime you think in such clichéd terms, I would expect a more instinctive sense of hate for the opposition, as opposite to a well argue conceptual disagreement.

The mere fact that he is still respected, and allowed to spew spin and propaganda in the media, is reason enough for anyone to lose faith in the fourth estate.

U.S. Weapons Supplier to the America’s

The Gun Guys recent article “U.S. Should Focus On Stemming Gun Trafficking, Mexican Officials Say” should be a wake up call all gun owners. We don’t like the idea that Iran supplies weapons to other countries in the middle east, but it’s ok if we do the same to our neighboring countries. I’ll let the Gun Guys tell you the rest of the story:

The first paragraph of this May 24th Reuters article speaks for itself:

“The chief of Mexico's war on drug gangs said Washington should concentrate
on halting the flow of arms to Mexican drug cartels rather than haggle over how
much aid to give Mexico's anti-smuggling operation.”

Wow! So American politicians are worried about crime increasing along with illegal immigration from Mexico, and the Mexican government is concerned that loose U.S. gun laws are fueling violence and gun trafficking in their nation! That is some irony, a tragic one to be sure.

“Reacting to a vote by U.S. lawmakers to trim an aid package for the drug
war, Mexico's deputy attorney general, Jose Luis Santiago Vasconcelos, said an
alternative would be to keep the cash in the United States and use it to curb
illegal arms trafficking across the border. Indeed, Vasconcelos claims that 97
percent of the guns used by the drug gangs come from the U.S."

That’s 97%!” the gun industry in the U.S. is "looking the other way" and making money off of the drug cartel battles in Mexico which also spill across the border into our nation.

Profit based on the shedding of blood is a profit worth living without. The Mexican government understands that – and our elected officials should too.

The full story is here:

GOP Assassination Agenda continued

You may have heard or read about the theory that liberals have a strange form of brain damage, processing information in a way that may result in advocating a dangerous social agenda, like health care or something. Really, I’m not kidding. Well I can be just as nutty (or am I?). Is the conservative desire to have opponents assassinate for their ideological differences a psychopathic behavior?

Here we go again: CBS/AP)

“Pittsburgh-area sports radio host Mark Madden has been permanently taken
off the air by ESPN. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has quoted Madden as saying he had hoped Sen. Edward Kennedy ‘would live long enough to be assassinated.’ The Massachusetts Democrat has a brain tumor.”

Are we seeing a trend here? I’ve included a few comments from a few brain damaged readers?

“He meant it in good clean fun.” -johndevinejr

“What is the world coming to when you can''t poke fun at someone''s brain tumor or wish for them to be assassinated on the air? Just another example of the liberal media.” -http://blancadebree.blogspot.com

“Cannot blame Madden... he is just another of the damned liberal media... like Rush” - Nancy_Naive

J Street Takes on Hagee and Lieberman

I have only recently discovered the orginazation JStreet.org, and found them to be a refreshing alternative to the Joe Liebermans of the world, so I've included their recent email as a way to introduce them, get their message out and get your imput.

Dear J Street Supporter,
When John McCain renounced Pastor John Hagee's endorsement last week, you thought Hagee would be banished from mainstream American politics, right? Wrong!

Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut is still standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Pastor Hagee, the same man who preaches Hitler was only doing God's bidding.

This July, thousands of Hagee followers will head to Washington for an "Israel Summit" where they will demonstrate the strength of their alliances across Capitol Hill -- and Lieberman is scheduled to deliver the keynote address at their banquet dinner.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Senator Lieberman has:

• Compared Hagee to Moses, calling him "A man of God....Like Moses," in his address to Hagee's "Israel Summit" last year.
• Spoken regularly with donors and supporters of CUFI on conference calls.
• Regularly defended Rev. Hagee's extremism in the media, citing his so-called "pro-Israel" credentials.

Max Blumenthal writes today in the Huffington Post, reminding us of the depth of Lieberman's ties to Hagee. How can Joe Lieberman continue to stand with a man who preaches that Hitler was only doing God's bidding in the Holocaust? Sign our petition to Joe Lieberman telling him not to speak at Hagee's Israel summit in July.

This is the same John Hagee who has said:
• On Muslims: "All Muslims have a mandate to kill Christians and Jews."
• On Hurricane Katrina: "I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God and they were recipients of the judgment of God for that."
• On women: "Do you know the difference between a terrorist and a woman with PMS? You can negotiate with a terrorist."

Lieberman's excuse for Hagee's outrages? He's "pro-Israel." To us, Senator Lieberman, an alliance with John Hagee is not what it means to be pro-Israel. Hagee opposes Israel giving up a single inch of land to achieve peace and he supports military action against Iran. Why? Well, according to Hagee, Armageddon will begin in Israel any day now. Following a great war, where Israel will be covered in a "sea of blood," Jews will be offered "the opportunity to receive Messiah, who is a rabbi known to the world as Jesus of Nazareth." Hagee's group also funds Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories, a major obstacle to a two-state solution peace process.

Those positions serve Hagee's particular brand of apocalyptic theology, but not the best interests of Israel or the region. At J Street, we believe that Israel's security and survival depend on resolving its conflicts with its neighbors through diplomacy and by making the compromises necessary to establish a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Joe Lieberman should know better. Tell him yourself -- sign our "Don't go, Joe" petition right now.
Isaac Luria
Online Campaigns Director, J Street

P.S. As a Jewish American, it has been very upsetting for me on a personal level to watch Senator Lieberman draw so close to some of the worst people and ideologies in the so-called pro-Israel community. Much too often lately, some of the Jewish community's most prominent leaders are willing to trade away what the Jewish community has traditionally stood for in American politics - justice and equal rights for all - for support on Israel. Joe Lieberman's recent drift toward Hagee embodies this disappointment for me.

The McCain Gramm Wrecking Ball

MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olberman exposed an outrageous influence advising Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain.

His “national campaign general co-chair, former Texas Sen. Phil Gramm, was being paid by a Swiss bank to lobby Congress about the U.S. mortgage crisis at the same time he was advising McCain about his economic policy. McCain himself has often cited Gramm’s influence as a way to establish his bona fides with economic conservatives.”

In a shockingly irresponsible moment, McCain has hinted that he might make Phil Gramm Treasury Secretary. A quick run down by Keith himself will give you a painful insight into a party bent on destruction.



A few tidbits more from MSNBC, read it and weep:

“When Gramm chaired the Senate Banking Committee, he wrote and passed
deregulatory legislation…establishing himself as a pre-eminent foe of government
regulation. McCain’s March 26 2008 speech recommended further deregulation of
the banking industry as his response to the mortgage crisis.”

“After Gramm passed a law easing regulation of energy-commodity trading,
California experienced a sharp run-up in energy costs. The energy-trading
company Enron was blamed and soon collapsed.”

“In 1999, Gramm successfully undid the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act, removing the decades-old wall between commercial banking (put in place to prevent another depression). Some economists fault Gramm’s deregulatory successes, as well as lax enforcement of remaining oversight powers, not just for the subprime mortgage crisis, but for its spread to other sectors of
finance.

Gramm was lobbying the Senate in the second half of 2007 (against) the Helping Families Save Their Homes in Bankruptcy Act. The bill failed.”

S.E.C. Backs Health Care, DID HELL FREEZE OVER?

I’m still not sure I’m awake or have somehow fallen through the looking glass. According to the NY Times- “The Securities and Exchange Commission, shifting its position, has told companies they must allow shareholders to vote on a proposal for universal health insurance coverage…religious groups and labor unions (say it’s) an effort to draw the nation’s largest corporations deeper into a debate over the future of health care. The commission said it had reversed its position on certain issues to reflect ‘changing societal views,’ and that now appears to be the case with respect to health care.”

It comes across like a set up article in the Onion. The initiative basically says health insurance should be universal, continuous, “affordable to individuals and families,” and “affordable and sustainable for society.

Those are fighting words for some, especially the health insurance industry. And you thought they cared about you…!

Lawyers representing UnitedHealth, told the S.E.C., “The proposal provides that ‘health care should be universal,’ dictating to whom the company should provide coverage.” Moreover, by asserting that “health care coverage should be affordable,” the proposal usurps the company’s right to decide what prices to charge for its policies. The proposal does not relate to a ‘significant social policy issue,’ as that term has been defined” by the commission.”

UnitedHealth’s breathtaking position is this:

1. When it comes to treating sick people, THEY want to decide who gets healthy and who doesn’t.

2. Affordable access to health care GETS IN THE WAY of what prices they want to charge.

3. Health care is NOT related to a SIGNIFICANT SOCIAL POLICY ISSUE.

Remember, these are the money grubbing ghouls deciding what treatments are covered and which ones you’ll go broke pay for yourself. They are not alone.

The business geniuses at General Motors, the same ones who destroyed the
auto industry in this country and handed the car keys to Toyota and Honda, said
that “adoption of these health care principles will not advance the legislative
debate or facilitate the enactment of federal legislation that would benefit the
corporation, its stockholders or the country.” In that order too. The
country is last, an after thought.

And the company that has put more people into our costly health care system,

“Reynolds American, the cigarette maker, expressed concern that universal
coverage would be financed by more tobacco taxes.”

Bottom line: The actual S.E.C. is pushing universal health care. Sounding like Norway, they even framed the issue like some kind of socialist European country: “The shareholder proposal asks top corporate executives to view the issue in a broader context, as a question of social policy.”

GOP Assassination Agenda Exposed

Not a lot of people walk around wanting to "knock off" their opponents. It was shocking to hear Pat Robertson take up the banner of assassination because that's an area where God's the decider. But really, what is it about conservatives...




So casual, so witty and so illegal. And for sick minds teetering on the edge, the power of suggestion.

Comparing Health Care Cost Help Patients And Competitors

I admit, I don’t know everything, so I’m going to pose a “what if” scenario to highlight a possible future problem in health care cost shopping.

An Australian article in the Kennebec Journal pointed out a how health care information might drive down costs.

“Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Maine unveiled…Anthem Care Comparison,
an online program that allows members to find the typical costs for 40 different medical procedures (breaking out costs for hospital, physician, anesthesia and post-procedure care) at hospitals all over the state. You can sort the tables for geography, procedure, minimum and maximum typical price and the annual number of times that procedure is performed at the hospital.”

“Want to know how much a knee replacement might cost? You'd pay a low of $13,822 at St. Mary's in Lewiston to a high of $46,992 at Miles Memorial Hospital in Damariscotta.”

You can also comparison shop at the governments web site www.hospitalcompare.hhs.gov. The problem is this.

If consumer can compare prices, hospitals and doctors can do the same. As with all other major services, prices average out over time. Health care services will see a rise in prices knowing that people have been willing to pay more at other hospitals and with other doctors. Sure higher prices my come down a little, but the wide differences will eventually narrow, settling in at one average escalating price.

Think about it, needing a cataract removed, hip replacement, a cancerous mole removed or treatment for a viral borne illness is not something you can put off for very long without being a danger to society, incapacitated or dead. Plasma television, video game or lawn ornaments are all items you can live without (kinda). We’re all kind of over a barrel when it comes to ending the pain.

Again, it’s a doom and gloom “what if scenario” I think we should all consider possible, in this mean old ugly world.

Is this what our top notch health care system has come to?

Hunger often goes hand-in-hand with poor health. That is why the Houston Food Bank is teaming up with Baylor College of Medicine and St. Luke's Episcopal Health Charities to deliver medical care along with nutritional foods to low-income neighborhoods in and around Houston.-Houston Chronicle

Medical missionaries in U.S. cities, just like those in developing countries, should make us all feel so God fearing proud.

Bush, Appeasement and “I know you are but what am I?”

Weak and hypocritical are the end results of the Bush administrations tough impossible stances with America’s perceived and real enemies. While the rest of the world looks on in disbelief, the administrations reversals and contradictions are viewed by the White House as having been part of the plan, or a misunderstood position.

The Washington Posts story, “Despite stance on negotiating with tyrants, U.S. lends Bashir an ear” highlights their “aw shucks, did we say that” attitude toward foreign policy.

Hypocrisy 101:

“It has at least provoked charges of hypocrisy, because Bush recently accused those advocating talks with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other radical figures of "appeasement…underscoring how White House policy has departed from his pointed public call to shun talks with radical tyrants and
dictators."

Appeasement #1:

“A special envoy of President Bush plans to meet with Sudanese President
Omar Hassan al-Bashir, whose government sheltered Osama bin Laden and pursued a scorched-earth policy in southern Sudan that resulted in more than 2 million deaths… spoken to or exchanged letters with Bashir on numerous occasions…reportedly offered the regime major concessions in exchange
for minor steps and rolled out the red carpet for some of its most reprehensible officials," said Susan Rice, who handled Africa policy in the Clinton administration and is a top adviser to the presidential campaign of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).”

So Bush has offered letters, personal meetings and major concessions with a tyrant and mass murderer. That is the true definition of appeasement; giving something away in order to get something back. It’s interesting to note just who might have been tougher pursuing and punishing state sponsors of terrorism. “The Clinton administration…tried to isolate Sudan because of its ties to Osama bin Laden, imposed stiff sanctions against the government and placed it on the official list of state sponsors of terrorism.”

Appeasement #2, #3, #4, #5, #6:

His appointees have also pursued aggressive diplomacy with North Korea and
Libya and have even conducted limited business with Cuba, Syria and Iran.

I personally think the White House is really trying to desensitize us so we generally accept a certain level of “minor” corruption and incompetence. The more egregious misconduct in office charges have been successfully thwarted by simply not cooperating.

There are advantages to being in the highest office and hovering confidently above the law.