Please see the original post on www.DeskofBrian.com
http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/obamasstateofunionfullofpanderingcampaignpromises
The sixth longest State of the Union address in our history was 71 minutes of muddled promises, political rhetoric and campaign speak. President Obama attempted to appease his leftist base with more promises to bring the troops home from Iraq and end "Don't Ask Don't Tell" -- haven't we heard that before?
Meanwhile, tax cuts, offshore oil drilling and support for small business were all part of the pandering to the right, or atleast, the moderates. The President is floundering in the middle of one problem after another and appears to not have any solutions, just another speech.
While having filibuster proof majorities in the House and the Senate, the President's lack of leadership couldn't unite the Democrats on health care as some leftists feel abandoned.
The State of the Union address continued the partisan "Blame Bush First" divide that Obama has used time and time again. There is nothing unifying about labelling opposing view points, opinions or proposals as "obstructionist" and part of the problem.
As a climax to a week long build-up, the President proclaims nearly $500 billion in cuts/frozen spending over three years, but of course, he negates to mention the Congressional expansion of spending by $1.9 trillion.
Stop treating Americans like we're stupid: save $200 billion so you can spend $1.9 trillion ?!?!
While many Americans question the direction of our foreign policy and the handling of terrorists, the President focused on gays in the military.
There's a huge divide in this country between the two parties, between the people and their leaders and between the President's words and his actions.
Let's hope that this is what is CHANGED in 2010.
Obama Pic: NY Times
Read full transcript of speech: http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/27/sotu.transcript/index.html?eref=rss_us&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_us+%28RSS%3A+U.S.%29
Showing posts with label NY Times. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NY Times. Show all posts
Friday, January 29, 2010
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
NY Times Saving Jobs by Sending Them to Florida
Jobs, Jobs, Jobs...
The NY Times is cutting more jobs, but also saving a few -- how?
Recent news announced that the NY Times will be moving jobs to The Gainesville Sun.
The struggling paper also announced that they will be stopping pension contributions and take the more inexpensive route of supporting 401K programs. These moves are in addition to the previously announced layoff of 100 employees.
Florida is a non-union state with no state taxes and basically, provides a big cost saving measure for the Times.
States like California, New York and New Jersey are responding to the economic downturn with higher taxes and instrusion into the private sector. The results have been small business and some individuals fleeing to less taxed states.
This cycle is a failure. New York just announced that tax collections are down 21%.
States, like the Federal government, need to understand that it's impossible to tax and spend your way out of difficult economic times.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1004023581
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/business/media/13times.html
http://www.ocala.com/article/20091114/ARTICLES/911141011/1402/NEWS?Title=New-York-Times-to-move-wire-service-jobs-to-Gainesville-
Saturday, October 3, 2009
The "Modest" Cuts of Medicare Advantage - just special interests AGAIN
Since 2007, during his campaign, President Obama has been railing AGAINST Medicare Advantage. This Medicare supplement was created for seniors to have better benefits and more choices through private options. Currently, 20%, 1 in 5, of all Medicare recipients have Med. Adv. will incredible positive results1: patients stay in the hospital 18 days less than Medicare patients, 27% fewer visits to the ER, and a 42% lower re-admission rate to the hospital.
The enhanced benefits focus on reduce out-of-pocket costs, coverages for prescriptions, wellness programs, disease management and care coordination programs. All of the preachings on preventative care, reduction of costs to the individual and quality seem to been missed by the Democrats promoting the current bills.
We don't know what the final bill will entail, but the House Bill (HR 3200) cuts $172 billion and the Max Baucus Senate bill cuts $113 billion from Medicare Advantage.
"If you like your insurance, you can keep it" -- unless you have Medicare Advantage. The NY Times is practicing more irresponsible journalism:
"Although Republican rhetoric has triggered fears that Medicare Advantage enrollees might lose their coverage entirely if private plans drop out of the system, the real effect of the bill would likely be modest on average." while stating the truth elsewhere: "The value of an enrollee's added benefits would shrink by more than half from current levels but would not disappear; they would still be worth about $500 a year in 2019.
Your benefits WILL shrink to half and that's descibed by the NY Times as "MODEST on the average."
Humana launched a major campaign to inform patients and encourage them to speak out against this reform. Medicare responded with an intense investigation2 into the claim "millions of seniors and disabled individuals could lose many of the important benefits and services that make Medicare Advantage health plans so valuable" -- the exact thing that the NY Times has confirmed, but described as modest.
So why is AARP so supportive of this reform? Maybe this is because AARP offers Medigap - a competitor to Medicare Advantage(MA).
When you have MA you don't need Medigap. Preventative care, eye exams and hearing aids are all extra benefits through MA so Medigap (i.e. AARP) is losing revenue. Irony compounds irony as the majority of MA recipients are poor blacks and hispanics - the same folks Democrats and the President claim to protect.
Special interest politics...hmmf, are any of us surprised?
I'm not.
1. http://www.ahipresearch.org/pdfs/CAvsNV.pdf
2. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125349705522626821.html
http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2009/10/03/obamacare_cut_the_elderly_and_give_to_aarp
http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=1524
The enhanced benefits focus on reduce out-of-pocket costs, coverages for prescriptions, wellness programs, disease management and care coordination programs. All of the preachings on preventative care, reduction of costs to the individual and quality seem to been missed by the Democrats promoting the current bills.
We don't know what the final bill will entail, but the House Bill (HR 3200) cuts $172 billion and the Max Baucus Senate bill cuts $113 billion from Medicare Advantage.
"If you like your insurance, you can keep it" -- unless you have Medicare Advantage. The NY Times is practicing more irresponsible journalism:
"Although Republican rhetoric has triggered fears that Medicare Advantage enrollees might lose their coverage entirely if private plans drop out of the system, the real effect of the bill would likely be modest on average." while stating the truth elsewhere: "The value of an enrollee's added benefits would shrink by more than half from current levels but would not disappear; they would still be worth about $500 a year in 2019.
Your benefits WILL shrink to half and that's descibed by the NY Times as "MODEST on the average."
Humana launched a major campaign to inform patients and encourage them to speak out against this reform. Medicare responded with an intense investigation2 into the claim "millions of seniors and disabled individuals could lose many of the important benefits and services that make Medicare Advantage health plans so valuable" -- the exact thing that the NY Times has confirmed, but described as modest.
So why is AARP so supportive of this reform? Maybe this is because AARP offers Medigap - a competitor to Medicare Advantage(MA).
When you have MA you don't need Medigap. Preventative care, eye exams and hearing aids are all extra benefits through MA so Medigap (i.e. AARP) is losing revenue. Irony compounds irony as the majority of MA recipients are poor blacks and hispanics - the same folks Democrats and the President claim to protect.
Special interest politics...hmmf, are any of us surprised?
I'm not.
1. http://www.ahipresearch.org/pdfs/CAvsNV.pdf
2. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125349705522626821.html
http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2009/10/03/obamacare_cut_the_elderly_and_give_to_aarp
http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=1524
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)