Saturday, March 13, 2010

Obama Now Selling Judgeships for Health Care Votes?

Originally post at DeskofBrian.com: http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/obamanowsellingjudgeshipsforhealthcarevotes






It was a dark and stormy night in March as the President hosted the ten House Democrats who voted against healthcare reform. What deals were struck? What agreements were made as President Obama attempts to persuade them to vote yes.



Coincidentally, the White House announced that one of the ten, Jim Matheson, Democrat from Utah, has a brother who will be appointed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.


Press release:


“Scott Matheson is a distinguished candidate for the Tenth Circuit court,” President Obama said. “Both his legal and academic credentials are impressive and his commitment to judicial integrity is unwavering. I am honored to nominate this lifelong Utahn to the federal bench.”


Jim Matheson voted against the healthcare reform in July (as part of the Energy and Commerce Committee) and again in November when the House passed the bill.


The President is determined (from March 3): "..I believe the United States Congress owes the American people a final vote on health care reform. We have debated this issue thoroughly, not just for a year, but for decades." and "I will do everything in my power to make the case for reform."


Obama on Scott Matheson:



“Scott Matheson is a distinguished candidate for the Tenth Circuit court, both his legal and academic credentials are impressive and his commitment to judicial integrity is unwavering. I am honored to nominate this lifelong Utahn to the federal bench.”





In February Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) said that the White House offered him a federal job in an effort to dissuade him from challenging Sen. Arlen Specter in the state's Democratic primary.


So is it above the reproach to believe that the day after meeting with the Utah Representative to garner support for health care that the brother is promoted?


Sestak was bribed.


Sounds like Chicago politics to me.








Sunday, March 7, 2010

Civil Rights Act turned 50 with no fanfare

Originally published at DeskofBrian.com:
http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/civilrightsactturned50withnofanfare

From Wikipedia:

The Civil Rights Act of 1960 was a United State federal law that established federal inspection of local voter registration polls and introduced penalties for anyone who obstructed someone's attempt to register to vote or actually vote.

The Senate's debate over the passage of this bill actually started on February 29, 1960. However, a group of 18 Southern Democrats divided into three teams of six in order to be able to create a continuous filibuster wherein each member would only have to speak for four hours every three days. This system resulted in the longest filibuster in history, lasting over 43 hours from February 29 to March 2. On the morning of March 2nd, only a fifteen-minute break was allowed before the Senate sat for another 82 hours. By the time the 24-hour sessions were called off by majority leader Lyndon Johnson, the Senate had sat for 125 hours and 31 minutes minus a fifteen-minute break.

The act was signed into law by President Eisenhower on May 6, 1960.

We have the first black President and MSNBC, CNN, Newsweek, Times -- I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere.

You people are fired!

Aren't you sensitive to the accomplishments of the Civil Rights Movement.

Those 18 Democrats executed the LONGEST FILIBUSTER in history to stop blacks from voting. This bill was the precursor to the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

By the way, how did that '64 Civil Rights Vote Go:

By party

The original House version:

  • Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
  • Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)

Cloture in the Senate:

  • Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
  • Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

The Senate version:

  • Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
  • Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:

  • Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
  • Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)
That included a 14 hour, 13 minute speech by Robert Byrd to delay the vote. Yes, that's the same Senator from West Virginia.





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1960

Senator Bunning's Heroic Stance Against Spending

Originally published "State of the Nation" at Desk of Brian:

http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/senatorbunningheroicstanceagainstspending


You will surely hear (if you haven't already) how Senator Jim Bunning and Republicans don't care about the uninsured or the unemployed. Even party loyalists are turning on Bunning as Bunning upset the Senate spending "apple cart" by voting NO to bill spending $10 billion.

Susan Collins of Maine was eager to lead the foolish accusations and comparisons to a filibuster and exaggerate the martyrdom of Americans.

Problem is:this is NOT A FILIBUSTER!

A filibuster is a technical procedure to block a unanimous cloture vote in the Senate. The $10 billion spending was on the floor for "Unanimous consent" and Bunning's objection WILL CREATE DEBATE. Instead of flying right through, they have to discuss the bill and find a way to pay for it.

$10 billion to extend unemployment benefits, COBRA, perpetuating doctor fees for Medicare patients, flood insurance, highway spending -- Bunning supports all of this: if we can find a way to pay for it.



"When 100 senators are for a bill and we can't
find $10 billion to pay for it, there's something the matter, seriously
the matter with this body.
" Bunning proclaims as he reminds us that the Democratic controlled Senate of the last three years has escalated the debt $5 trillion dollars."



It takes a moment like this to stop the bleeding, stop the endless freight train of abusive spending and that hero is in Kentucky.

Jim DeMint (R-SC) has come to the aid of Bunning: "When we borrow the money to do it we threaten the futures of our
children and grandchildren, diminish their quality of life and likely
cause their unemployment in the future."


Better late than never.

Todd Schnitt, a Conservative talk show host here in Tampa, objective to the decision because it's "political suicide" and bad timing.

Isn't that the core of the problem: being Conservative, following the Constitution ONLY when it's convenient and politically expedient to do so.

So let's throw some gasoline on the fire and mention that the PAYGO BILL - requiring Congress to offset spending to keep a zero balance, was just passed. A year - A YEAR after the $2 trillion deficit of the first year in office, President Obama can pound his chest in victory.

Of course, within a month, Congress wants $10 billion in "emergency spending" -- not from the stimulus, extra spending.

How are we going to pay for it?




"This is a temporary extension. It's over $10 billion. And all Senator
Bunning was saying, quite correctly, is it ought to be paid for.
Congress just passed the so-called pay-go legislation which is supposed
to require that we find offsets or other savings if we're going to spend
money. We exempt this bill from it. ... The question for
the longer term extension is a different issue, because that's well over
$100 billion." - John Kyl (R-AZ)




So let's check the other side of the aisle:

"As American families
are struggling in tough economic times, I am keenly disappointed that
political games are putting a stop to important construction projects
around the country," said
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.
"This means that construction workers will be sent home from job sites
because federal inspectors must be furloughed."


Is he kidding? Political games...the bill isn't passed and workers are sent home. I've told you how stupid they think we are.

Harry Reid responded by attacking Bunning for raising "no objections to passing the Bush tax cuts and authorizing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq without paying for the provisions" -- Reid's point is well taken, but isn't that the whole point to PayGo.


Partisan politics on both sides, spineless wimps for leaders and we're left with the tab. Bunning's move didn't earn any Republicans public opinion points, but if they were more concerned about that DEBT instead of getting re-elected, then they'd see how they could continue the theme to stop the Healthcare Reform freight train.



Jim DeMint defending Bunning:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/84547-demint-comes-to-bunnings-aid-in-unemployment-fight

John Kyl finally joins in the fight: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/01/reid-neutralize-bunnings-objection-unemployment-aid/

Pic: USA Today http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2010/03/sen-bunnings-one-man-filibuster-is-over/1

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Healthcare Update from Left, the Summitt & Mother Jones

Originally Published "State of the Nation" by Brandon Jones at Desk of Brian.com: http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/healthcareupdatefromleftthesummittmotherjones




"Still, my take is that the summit was basically a draw, but with a slight edge to the Republicans. They didn't have to win, after all. They just had to seem non-insane, and for the most part they did. What's more, Obama missed a chance to provide a punchy, 60-second sales pitch for the Democratic plan." - Kevin Drum, liberal website "Mother Jones"1

 

To the leftist supporters of Obamacare and the Democrats aligned for the government takeover of one-sixth of our economy, Republicans are just simple obstructionists.

 

Right-wing talking heads will tout the successes of Paul Ryan while the left heard: "The Republicans simply don’t want to pass comprehensive health-care reform." (EJ Dionne at the Washington Post)

 

Let me credit "Mother Jones" for providing such a great synopsis of the left-wing healthcare reformers.

 

Paul Krugman:

 



"So what did we learn from the summit? What I took away was the arrogance that the success of things like the death-panel smear has obviously engendered in Republican politicians. At this point they obviously believe that they can blandly make utterly misleading assertions, saying things that can be easily refuted, and pay no price. And they may well be right."




The belief that government controlling healthcare is a viable option cannot be refuted to Krugman, Dionne, Drum, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid or Barack Obama.




25% -- yes, only 25% of Americans wants this reform to be passed. Compared to 75% that supported President Obama's effort one year ago, 50% of the population have come to the same conclusion -- no.

 

Don't reform healthcare like this.

 

Many surveyed agree to scrap the bill, start over, incorporate the "small bill" conservative reformation suggestions, but DO NOT pass the Senate or the House bills.

 

If there was truth and validity to the claims of lies and falsehoods by the Republicans, then the Obama administration wouldn't be pressing Congress to add portability, state line and TORT language to the bills.

 

But hey, those are facts and they don't taste good.

 

Paul Ryan leads the Republicans to victory with the answered fact: the real cost is $2.3 trillion.

 

Paying for it appears to be a problem the Democrats will ignore for now.

 

 

1. http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/02/healthcare-summit-wrapup-iii



Cartoon from Biggovernment.com: http://biggovernment.com/sgor/2009/11/24/tuesday-funnies-no-support-edition/

Mike Evans Interview: Bomb Iran to help your ratings

Originally Published "State of the Nation" by Brandon Jones at Desk of Brian.com: http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/mikeevansinterviewbombirantohelpyourratings


Early February, on "Insights" Robert Herriman directed our attention to Daniel Pipes advice to President Obama: invade Iran.1

Now on Conservative Talk Show Host, Michael Medved's show, Mike Evans offers similar advice: invade Iran to help your ratings.

 



Medved is a Conservative host based in Seattle and mixes in Pop Culture with political diatribe. Mike Evans is touring the various shows to promote his new book "Atomic Iran: Countdown to Armageddon"

 

Evans discussed the following:

 


  • Sanctions for Iran to directly cutoff the Revolutionary Guard

  • 100% certainty Israel will act

  • America can assist Israel with "plausible deniability"

  • Since Obama's ratings are low, he should consider bombing Iran

Got that: Plausible Deniability and help your ratings, Mr. President - the right will line up to support you bomb Iran.

 



Even Evans sputtered after suggesting that Obama can recover from his plummetting ratings by bombing Iran directly or aiding the Israeli effort.

 

Whether or not you support Israel, which I do, don't you find it disturbing that the motivations to intercede with the Iranian nuclear program would be approval ratings?

 

Truly disturbing.

 

I'm even more disturbed at the Biblical insinuations without scriptual context. Evans is a practicing fearmonger irresponsibly justifying violence against Iran.

 

 

 

 

 

1. Let's hope that Mr. Obama doesn't listen to the advice of this neocon

Homeschooling Illegal in Germany

Originally Published "State of the Nation" by Brandon Jones at Desk of Brian.com: http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/homeschoolingillegalingermany?pli=1



What started with a casual comment about homeschooling in Europe turned to shock as I've quickly found that this is public knowledge.

This is from the introduction on Wikipedia:

"Parents violating the law have primarily or most prominently been Christians seeking a more religious education than that offered by the schools. Sanctions against these parents have included fines of thousands of euros, successful legal actions to remove children from the parents' custody, and prison sentences."

Also from Wiki:

"In September 2006 the European Court of Human Rights upheld the German ban on homeschooling, stating "parents may not refuse... [compulsory schooling] on the basis of their convictions", and adding that the right to education "calls for regulation by the State". The European Court took the position that the plaintiffs were the children, not their parents, and declared "children are unable to foresee the consequences of their parents' decision for home education because of their young age...."

Prison sentances for homeschooling you child in Germany, not some radical Muslim country or remote third world nation -- Germany. Note that the "State" knows what is best for the children of Germany NOT their parents.
In 2007, a German family with six children paid the fines and still

faced potential jail time. From the 2007 story:

"Joerg Grosseleumern, a spokesman for the German advocacy group, said a prosecutor, unsatisfied with fines the family already has paid, is demanding the 90-day terms in custody for Juergen and Rosemarie Dudek. He said that's possible because in the state of Hesse, a family's failure to follow the mandatory school attendance laws violates not only administrative regulations, but the criminal code."

Criminal code!?!

The same article quotes Hitler:

"The Youth of today is ever the people of tomorrow. For this reason we have set before ourselves the task of inoculating our youth with the spirit of this community of the people at a very early age, at an age when human beings are still unperverted and therefore unspoiled. This Reich stands, and it is building itself up for the future, upon its youth. And this new Reich will give its youth to no one, but will itself take youth and give to youth its own education and its own upbringing." - Hitler, 1937

I'm going to venture down the road toward another Nazi Germany; however, it does illustrate that the European Union and the countries like Germany has frightening unAmerican policies and laws. Many, many liberals in Washington and across the country promote these nations as role models and focus on directing American policy to emulate the EU.

1. Wikipedia: Homeschooling in Germany

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Organizing for America encourage Liberals to call Radio Shows

Originally Published "State of the Nation" by Brandon Jones at Desk of Brian.com: http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/organizingforamericaencourageliberalstocallradioshows




The latest greatest effort to stir support for Obamacare. The powerhouse activist group Organizing for America launched their new website: http://radio.barackobama.com/



GOAL: "The fate of health reform has been a focus of debate in living rooms
and offices, on TV and online -- and on talk radio. And since millions
of folks turn to talk radio as a trusted source of news and opinions,
we need to make sure OFA supporters are calling in with a pro-reform
message."



It's apparently time give Liberal supporters some Cliff Notes and talking points and send them out to face Conservative Talk Shows. Rush Limbaugh has always identified these individuals as "Seminar Callers" having frequented his show for years.



More from the site:




CALLING TIPS




  • Be polite, respectful, and clear. Remember, you represent Organizing for America.

  • How radio stations will connect you will depend on the
    show. Some radio shows may connect you right away, but most will take
    your name and basic info and put you on hold. You may or may not be
    able to hear the broadcast on the show while you're waiting. You may
    hear the radio host say something like, "Hello, we have your name on the line with us."

  • Some hosts may challenge your views. Stay calm and firm. Sharing a
    personal story about how health reform affects you and your family is a
    great way to show the importance and urgency of health reform.

  • If you can't get through, don't worry! If the show you call is busy
    or not accepting calls at the moment you call in, simply click "Give me
    another show" to find another.




DISCUSSION POINTS




These points are only to provide extra information and suggestions. Your personal story will make the most compelling message.



  • For
    most Americans, their health care plan covers too little and costs too
    much. Far too many people delay or even skip the care they need because
    they simply can’t afford it.

  • The plan the President
    laid out includes the largest health care tax cut for middle class
    families in history and makes coverage more affordable for tens of
    millions of families and small business owners and expands coverage to
    over 31 million Americans who are currently uninsured.


  • This plan will give millions of Americans new choices in health
    insurance by making coverage more affordable, ending the denial of
    coverage for pre-existing conditions, putting power in the hands of
    consumers instead of insurance companies and providing one of the
    largest tax cuts in history while also reducing our national deficit.

  • Reform
    couldn’t be more urgent – just this month consumers in California were
    told their premiums could go up as much as 39 percent.

  • Too
    many in Washington are now saying that we should delay or give up on
    reform entirely, but Americans understand the stakes for our economy
    and our lives, and we want action.












I personally have always welcomed opposing discussion, but find most people are aligned with the party, believe what they believe and can't or won't back it up.



To the Discussion Poinsts:



More than half of the 31 million people that are uninsured (according to these claims) choose NOT to purchase insurance (earning $50,000 per year or more) or simply don't apply for programs like Medicaid.



Obama solution: force them.



Next, there is no decrease in deficit because of the fuzzy math. This ten year plan yields only six years of benefits. Taxation begins immediately with the coverages starting four years from now -- not real, real urgent after all.



Moreover, if we look at full ten years of coverage, the Congressional Budget Office estimates the cost at $2.5 trillion.





I'd love to have open debates with supporters, but they are few and far between. If you are up for the challenge, let me know.



















http://radio.barackobama.com/