konane's Blog

"Another billboard mystery in Minnesota?

"Another billboard mystery in Minnesota?

posted at 11:36 am on March 15, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
Source Hot Air Blog

"Somehow, I think people will miss this man more than the one featured in the “Miss Me Yet?” billboard that appeared outside the Twin Cities in Minnesota last month.  Another anonymous advertisement has appeared on the roadside of a major interstate freeway in the outer-ring suburbs of the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolis area, on I-94 just outside of Albertville on the way from St. Cloud to Minneapolis.  This ad recalls a President that never got his due in Minnesota:

 

 

Who paid for this ad?  There are no indications on the sign itself, just as with the previous “Miss Me Yet?” sign with George W. Bush.  Ronald Reagan never won Minnesota in either of his two national elections, but clearly someone recalls him fondly.  It’s not cheap to pay for this kind of advertising, and it would be interesting to discover who’s behind this one.

Update: This is not a photoshop.  I contacted Franklin Outdoor Advertising, who confirmed that they have this sign up at I-94.  It was funded by a private effort, but the person to whom I spoke did not know who specifically that includes.

Update II: Also, just for some background, the “Miss Me Yet?” billboard was purchased through one of Franklin’s competitors.

Update III: Not sure why people are still insisting that this is a photoshop, but maybe King Banaian’s eyewitness account will help:

Ed posts about a sign on I-94. I saw it for the first time on Saturday morning as I drove to the Twin Cities for meetings and eventually the MOB party. …  It gets very good visibility after you come out from under the Albertville overpass on the road traveling east. I did not realize how fresh the sign was, but Saturday was the first time I saw it.

King also recalls Reagan’s speech at Westminster in 1982.  Be sure to read it."

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/15/another-billboard-mystery-in-minnesota/comment-page-1/#comments

Entry #1,689

"Obama Supports DNA Sampling Upon Arrest

You decide.

___________

"Obama Supports DNA Sampling Upon Arrest

By David Kravets   March 10, 2010  |  6:40 pm  | 

Source Wired.com

"Josh Gerstein over at Politico sent Threat Level his piece underscoring once again President Barack Obama is not the civil-liberties knight in shining armor many were expecting.

Gerstein posts a televised interview of Obama and John Walsh of America’s Most Wanted. The nation’s chief executive extols the virtues of mandatory DNA testing of Americans upon arrest, even absent charges or a conviction. Obama said, “It’s the right thing to do” to “tighten the grip around folks” who commit crime.

When it comes to civil liberties, the Obama administration has come under fire for often mirroring his predecessor’s practices surrounding state secrets, the Patriot Act and domestic spying. There’s also Gitmo, Jay Bybee and John Yoo.

Now there’s DNA sampling. Obama told Walsh he supported the federal government, as well as the 18 states that have varying laws requiring compulsory DNA sampling of individuals upon an arrest for crimes ranging from misdemeanors to felonies. The data is lodged in state and federal databases, and has fostered as many as 200 arrests nationwide, Walsh said.

The American Civil Liberties Union claims DNA sampling is different from mandatory, upon-arrest fingerprinting that has been standard practice in the United States for decades.

A fingerprint, the group says, reveals nothing more than a person’s identity. But much can be learned from a DNA sample, which codes a person’s family ties, some health risks, and, according to some, can predict a propensity for violence.

The ACLU is suing California to block its voter-approved measure requiring saliva sampling of people picked up on felony charges. Authorities in the Golden State are allowed to conduct so-called “familial searching” — when a genetic sample does not directly match another, authorities start investigating people with closely matched DNA in hopes of finding leads to the perpetrator.

Do you wonder whether DNA sampling is legal?

The courts have already upheld DNA sampling of convicted felons, based on the theory that the convicted have fewer privacy rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that when conducting intrusions of the body during an investigation, the police need so-called “exigent circumstances” or a warrant. That alcohol evaporates in the blood stream is the exigent circumstance to draw blood from a suspected drunk driver without a warrant."

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/obama-supports-dna-sampling-upon-arrest

Entry #1,688

"IF You Are Going To "Demonstrate"

Every state is in a money grab for revenues because we're all suffering during the Great Depression II. 

Cathy Cox Georgia State Superintendent of Schools has proposed a 50% increase in Georgia Lottery ticket prices.  https://www.lotterypost.com/blogentry/38612

Mrs Cox may want to take a serious look at salaries of university employees before reaching into lottery players' pockets. 

__________

"IF You Are Going To "Demonstrate"....

Tuesday, March 9. 2010
Posted by Karl Denninger in Education at 19:56

Source The Market Ticker

"Then aim your "demonstrating" at the people who are bankrupting your state - and you personally.

I speak specifically of people such as those that The Daily Illini pointed out - all employees for the University of Illinois.

Let's see what we have here....

The head of the football team - the coach - makes $1 million.  For coaching a college football team.

The "intercollegiate (sports) director makes $600,000.

The President of the University is just $50 large shy of a half-million.

A large number of Deans and Professors make $250,000 - or more.

Indeed, I have to get eight pages into this list before I drop below $200,000.

Oh, we also have two Lieutenants in the Police Department that make $192,545 - each - per year.  Handing out tickets to scooter riders without helmets and issuing University Parking Citations (probably more than $200,000 worth of those) I'm sure.

Now maybe you can justify how it is that these fine bastions of American Government Employment earn these bloated salaries. 

I will point out some demographics to readers for Champaign-Urbana, Illinois, where the University happens to be.

The median home price is $159,900, which the top fifteen pages of these employees can afford to pay cash for with one year's salary. 

The median income for a family is $52,628, while per-capita income according to the BEA is $31,354.  Fewer than FIFTEEN PERCENT of the persons on the University Payroll make equal to or less than the median per-capita income for the city.

Oh, and let's not discuss retirement benefits.  Legacy pensions anyone?  How about medical care once one retires.  And speaking of which, what's the retirement age?

There has been much written about overblown pensions, double and even triple-dipping and similar games.  But this table, nicely sortable by salary, makes quite clear exactly who the system employs and how much they pay - and that the pay is, shall we say, ridiculous compared to the average private-sector prevailing wage.

This much should be clear: If you're curious about why you're being bankrupted with parabolic tuition and fee increases along with demands to take on outrageous amounts of debt to get a so-called "college education", you might discern from the above that the only "educating" you're getting in the UofI system is how to hold still while you're bent < snip>.

What you, Dear Student, who is being given the whaaaaambulance treatment by the Administration (the folks making those six-figure salaries that are all radical multiples of the average living wage in your town) do about that "education" is, of course, up to you."

http://market-ticker.org/archives/2062-IF-You-Are-Going-To-Demonstrate.....html

Entry #1,687

"Is Cox taking a gamble in suggesting raising price of lottery tickets to fund schools?

Note this is a corrected post.  I referenced the wrong person named Cathy Cox, Democrat, former Secretary of State who ran for Governor, in my previous deleted post which featured the same article below.

______

Kathy Cox, Superintendent of Schools State of Georgia and a Republican has proposed raising Georgia Lottery ticket prices from $1.00 to $1.50.

I personally want ticket prices to remain at current levels because Georgia has always captured lottery money from bordering states, from travelers on our extensive interstate system and from people flying through Hartsfield Jackson airport.  

A 50% increase in ticket prices in our current Depression is shortsighted,  money grabbing, and will not increase overall lottery revenues.  Kathy Cox might want to consider trimming salaries of university employees, or simply raising sales tax.  Would suggest contacting your respective state legislator if you're opposed to a ticke price increase.

Or you might want to email Mrs. Cox with a short polite message.

__________

Kathy Cox
State Superintendent
of Schools
 (Georgia)

 (404) 656-2800
 (404) 651-8737
state.superintendent@
doe.k12.ga.us

http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/sup.aspx

________

"Is Cox taking a gamble in suggesting raising price of lottery tickets to fund schools?

2:06 pm March 12, 2010, by Maureen Downey
Source BogsAJC.com

The suggestion today by state school Superintendent Kathy Cox that lottery ticket prices could be raised by 50 cents to help support k-12 education in Georgia is bound to be controversial because it would shift a larger share of school funding on low-income Georgians.

My former colleague Jim Wooten contended that the lottery took “poor people’s butter-and-egg money.” I argued that all of us are entitled to waste our own money. (I come from a family where my aunts and parents were weekly lottery ticket buyers. I don’t buy them.)

When the AJC looked at lottery sales by zip codes in 2003, we found the areas where people tend to play the lottery most and benefit least from HOPE are substantially poorer than areas that receive the most HOPE scholarships. At the time, Zell Miller, the father of the lottery and the HOPE Scholarship, had a retort to that, saying that the lottery was a diversion.

Players “buy that lottery ticket instead of buying People magazine or the National Enquirer, ” Miller said. “They buy that lottery ticket instead of a six-pack sometimes. They buy that lottery ticket instead going to a baseball game.”

According to the AJC:

Cox said during an appearance Friday on CNN that hiking the price by just 50 cents per ticket could raise $350 million to help fill a massive hole left by state budget cuts in the last two years. Cox said raising prices would ensure K-12 got money while also preserving funding for the HOPE college scholarship and state’s prekindergarten program.

The state constitution already allows lottery revenue to go to technology and buildings for elementary and high schools, but lawmakers stopped allotting that money to K-12 in 2003. Cox said the state’s education budget has been slashed by nearly $3 billion in the last 19 months.

http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/03/12/is-cox-taking-a-gamble-in-suggesting-raising-price-of-lottery-tickets-to-fund-schools/?cxntfid=blogs_get_schooled_blog

Entry #1,686

"Squeezing the Last Drop of Productivity from the American Working Class – 18 Percent National Under

Article has charts to illustrate points, click link at bottom to access.

_____________

"Squeezing the Last Drop of Productivity from the American Working Class – 18 Percent National Underemployment and why Wall Street and the Government are Cheering Your Financial Failure.

Posted by mybudget360   

Source My Budget 360

"The American financial press cheered on Friday when “only” 36,000 jobs were lost in February.  This if you haven’t noticed now passes for good economic news.  The unemployment rate remained unchanged because the actual workforce continued to show a decline yet Wall Street somehow viewed this as positive developments.  And why not?  The middle class is under assault from every angle.  Things are so twisted with propaganda that many Americans now believe that the banking elite are actually looking out for the well being of American workers.  As news of the job losses somehow echoed as positive developments, more and more Americans are continually being kicked out of their homes from banks they helped to bail out.  Irony has no meaning to Wall Street.

And if we look at the details of the jobs report, it turns out that 17.9 percent of Americans are either unemployed or underemployed or flat out have stopped looking for work:

Source:  BLS

This wasn’t the only spin going on in the media.  Before the jobs report came out there was a preemptive flow of information trying to justify the job cuts by blaming it on the weather.  Yes, now instead of blaming the financial catastrophe on the actual perpetrators in Wall Street who systematically looted the American system and turned our economy into a giant casino that they leeched onto, we are now to believe people are losing their jobs because of the weather:

“(CNSnews) Ahead of Friday’s announcement, Goldman Sachs predicted that the storm might skew the job loss number by as much as 100,000 – a prediction that was embraced by officials in the Obama administration.

“The blizzards that affected much of the country during the last month are likely to distort the statistics,” Larry Summers, director of the White House’s National Economic Council, said in an interview with CNBC. “So it’s going to be very important … to look past whatever the next figures are to gauge the underlying trends.”

If the storm caused a skewing of job loss numbers I wonder how many job losses can be linked to Goldman Sachs and their casino style gambling in the derivatives markets and mortgage backed securities?  Then again, people should be happy that the unemployment rate remained steady at 9.7 percent even though more Americans are working part-time with no benefits and many others have simply fallen off the payrolls.  This is supposedly the new American dream for the middle class through the eyes of Wall Street who are selling capitalism but living in a world of corporate handout socialism.

There is a new show called Undercover Boss where a CEO goes undercover to work in the trenches with the proletariat.  As it turns out, the middle class is being worked to death and as we all know, the CEO can’t even do the job most workers do on a daily basis.  Even Henry Ford understood the interworking of the cars he was putting out.  In the end the CEO reveals his identity and gives a nice little handout to the worker and all is well in TV land.  The check is a token of what CEOs actually make.  This is the ultimate reflection of our trickle down economy where those at the top act like sociopaths and rulers of the universe but when it comes to doing the daily tasks of their company, they have no clue.  This is the de facto rule running on Wall Street.  In fact, CEO pay has grown outrageously over the past few decades as the middle class has gotten poorer:

Source:  American Progress

In reality, part-time employment has spread even to poor CEOs making 300 to 400 times the average American worker salary.  Poor CEOs and Wall Street executives need time off to enjoy their tax payer funded yachts and all expense hedonism trips to the Caribbean.  They would like to convince each other that the money they have is all through their will power and market prowess but in reality it is nothing more than being part of a corporatocracy and buying out the government with an army of lobbyist and insiders.  You have to be a self indulgent narcissist to take the economy to the brink of financial destruction in the case of many Wall Street firms and still reward yourself with outrageous bailouts.  The fact that average Americans are still not protesting in mass about this tells me that many actually believe what Wall Street is saying.  You see this when many would rather blame the working class for the ills of today than focus their energy where it really needs to go.

Wall Street loves this economic crisis.  They receive trillions in bailouts yet convince the public that what is occurring today is merely the “market” correcting itself.  So as most Americans have more and more troubles keeping up with their daily bills, companies are squeezing every little excess from those currently working.  Those that have jobs out of fear will work harder and probably demand less merit increases in the current economy.  After all, the head guy is only making 300 times what you make even though he can’t even understand the main function of the organization.  So what if the low level guy is selling toxic crap to some homeless person with no income and giving him access to a $500,000 loan.  These Wall Street tycoons are big picture thinkers and can’t be worried with the day to day operations of the proletariat unless it means turning it into a caricature for mass viewing and quick TIVO access.

You don’t think productivity actually increased?  Take a look at this:

Source:  BLS

This recession has been fantastic for productivity.  Just look at the above chart.  American workers have been doing their part during this recession.  After all, now you can hire a cadre of “contract” workers and not have to pay them one cent in healthcare support or even contribute to their pension.  Once the job is done you can kick them to the curb.  After all, this is capitalism so long as those at the top have managed to setup sweetheart deals and golden parachutes.  This is how the top 1 percent makes sure their hold on 40 percent of the nation’s wealth isn’t damaged.  And if you think financial institutions deserve this bailout money and their outrageous bonuses then companies like Circuit City or Mervyns would still be around today if that model applied across the board.  But this doesn’t apply to the general economy.  This applies to Wall Street and somehow the absurdity of it all still goes on.  The worst financial crisis since the Great Depression and not one solid reform has been enacted.  26 months of job losses and nothing.  Who is running the show?

The rise of the part-time work force is nothing new as we become more and more like Japan.  Japan bailed out their financial institutions after their failed stock market and real estate bubbles popped and today, their working class is made up of one-third part-time workers:

“(LA Times) In the world’s second-largest economy, the global financial crisis has forced part-time workers such as Kudo to face a harsh new reality.

Over the last few years, temporary employees have gone from being a rarity in Japan to accounting for one-third of the workforce of 67 million. They enjoy far fewer protections than full-time workers — placing their necks squarely on the layoff chopping block.

By March, the government predicts, 85,000 part-timers will fall prey to haken-giri, or temporary-worker cutbacks — a relatively small number compared with U.S. layoffs but high for a nation where job security has long been a staple.

On Wednesday, embattled Prime Minister Taro Aso made the plight of part-timers a major piece of a proposed stimulus package. Aso pledged to create 1.6 million jobs, partly by turning part-time jobs into full-time ones.”

Japan’s headline unemployment rate is 4.9 percent.  Just like our headline unemployment rate, the devil is really in the details.  If we continue on this path part-time work may be all that is left."

http://www.mybudget360.com/squeezing-the-last-drop-of-productivity-from-the-american-working-class-%e2%80%93-18-percent-national-underemployment-and-why-wall-street-and-the-government-are-cheering-your-financial-failure/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+mybudget360%2FQePx+%28My+Budget+360%29

Entry #1,685

"Here's Why You Should Take The Intrade Healthcare Betting Very Seriously

Wonder if how much tax payer money is being used to spike the numbers?

_______

Amazing what exposure does to an issue.  Check out the buy amount now down from 60% to 49% as of posting this link.  Today, 11:51 am

http://data.intrade.com/graphing/jsp/closingPricesForm.jsp?tradeURL=https://www.intrade.com&contractId=709242

_________

"Here's Why You Should Take The Intrade Healthcare Betting Very Seriously

Joe Weisenthal | Mar. 9, 2010, 12:06 PM | 10,064

Source Business Insider 

"Everyone today is talking about the fact that on Intrade the odds of Obamacare passing have spiked up above 60%.

But this doesn't just reflect conventional wisdom. No, this is Washington DC insiders speaking here.

We reached out to InTrade CEO John Delaney, who confirmed that a lot of the trade volume on this particular contract is coming out of DC.

Specifically he said:

...it is a reasonably active market but atypically a lot of the trade is coming from the DC area when normally we might see trade coming from all the major urban areas.

Think of this as political insider trading.

When the insiders are talking, you should listen.

Update: We discuss the possibility that this is manipulation, here.

Don't miss: How the Obama administration plans to raise $1.9 trillion in taxes >

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-why-you-should-take-the-intrade-healthcare-betting-very-seriously-2010-3

______________

"Here's How Obama Is Going To Raise Your Taxes By $1.9 Trillion

  1/17
 

$9.154 Billion: Disclosing all payments over $600 to anybody

 What Is The Tax: By re-establishing reporting rules of deals over $600 between individuals or businesses, compliance in terms of paying proper taxes on such deals would increase making for fewer losses in the tax system.

Tax Revenue 2011-2020: $9.154 Billion

Source: Green Book 2011

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-the-heck-do-you-raise-taxes-11-trillion-2010-2#9154-billion-disclosing-all-payments-over-600-to-anybody-1

Entry #1,684

"Obama-Care Meets Obama-Ed *Important Info*

Found this via Powerlineblog.com.

_____

"Obama-Care Meets Obama-Ed

March 10, 2010 By Peter Wood

Source NAS - The National Association of Scholars

"Of President Obama’s three big takeovers—cap ‘n trade, health care, and higher ed—higher ed has garnered the least public attention. That may change now that the administration is attempting to impose its wishes by legislative trickery.

The health care bill that the Democrats hope to pass by “reconciliation” to avoid the normal Senatorial voting procedure is now being amended to include the administration’s Big Grab on federal student loans.  If this works, we will have one bill in which the federal government not only takes primary control of American health care but also simultaneously takes practical control of American higher education. 

Some background:  last September, The Wall Street Journal (“The Quietest Trillion”) gave an early heads-up to the administration’s then-plan to move the Department of Education from a 20 percent to an 80 percent share of the student loan market.  A bill passed the House that month that would have eliminated private lenders from the federally guaranteed student loan market by July 1, 2010.  It came with a promise that taxpayers would save some $87 billion from substituting a government-run service for the rough-and-tumble of private lenders.  In October, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan sent a letter to colleges and universities across the country advising them to get their institutions ready for a 2010 implementation of the new rules, dubbed “Direct Lending.”  College officials, some House Democrats, and a few Republicans expressed their uneasiness at the new plan.

Duncandidn’t yield an inch.  Here he is in a February op-ed in the Washington Postarguing his case that “direct student loans” will save taxpayers billions and make life easier for “educators, engineers and computer scientists—the backbone of the new economy.” 

Not everyone is convinced.  A few days ago, another Secretary of Education—Lamar Alexander—inveighed in WaPoon what the folks at Department of Education “haven’t told us.”  Senator Alexander notes that DOE plans to borrow from the Fed at a 2.8 percent interest rate, lend to students at 6.8, and splurge with the difference with a massive new spending program.  He reports that the Congressional Budget Office has lowered the estimated savings from kicking out the private lenders from $87 billion to something like $47 billion.  Some 2,000 private lenders will be forced out of this business.  Services to students driven by industry competition will be eliminated in favor of typical federal bureaucratic “efficiency.”  And those “educators, engineers and computer scientists—the backbone of the new economy”?  They will be spending years longer and paying lots more to pay back loans that are actually being used to fund Congressmen’s favorite edu-pork programs. 

The effort to shoehorn the direct lending program into the health care reconciliation bill seems odd on its face.  CBS News suggests that the maneuver is prompted partly by Democrats trying to get on top of the wave of student protest over college costs that surfaced during the March 4campus demonstrations.  But CBS also thinks that the Democrats are just grabbing an opportunity that might not come again.  “Reconciliation,” if it works, is a way of short-circuiting all the inconvenience of having to line up sixty votes for a controversial measure.  Why not slide as much unpopular legislation as possible into one giant, unpopular, economy-ruining, budget-busting, anti-democratic bill?

Student loan “reform” slipped into the national agendarather quietly in January 2007 when New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo began to investigate reports that Sallie Mae, the nation’s largest lender to students, had been engaged in some questionable practices.  As it turned out, many private lenders had bribed college officials, and numerous colleges had abused their students by channeling them into disadvantageous loans.  The scandal snowballed.  It grew worse as then Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings appeared to stonewall inquiries and cover for the Republican-friendly Nelnet Corporation, a student loan re-financer that had gamed a DOE program to extract hundreds of millions of unwarranted payments.  The mischief culminated in an ill-considered lawsigned by president Bush in September 2007, the College Cost Reduction and Access Act, CCRAA, that cut the payments to private lenders in the federally guaranteed student lending business so drastically that many of the lenders—some sixty of them—simply quit.

That added more snow to the snowball by creating the prospect that students would have a much harder time finding loans the following year.  Congress recognized its mistake and in May 2008 rushed through a billthat authorized the Department of Education to buy up “debt” from the private lenders.  In many ways this was a rehearsal for the great economic collapse and bank bailouts that came later in 2008. 

In a certain sense, the private lenders who participated in the federally guaranteed student loan programs brought the house down on their own heads.  Corrupt practices combined with wildly imprudent financial dealings opened the way for the “reform” that President Obama, Secretary Duncan, and the Congressional leadership now intend to push through. 

I don’t have much sympathy with those lenders, though surely only a minority was corrupt and imprudent.  The real question is whether concentrating federal student loans in the U.S. Department of Education is really going to be an improvement.  If the legislation passes, we may well be trading a flawed system for a disastrous one.  With direct federal control of student loans will come, as surely as a hangover follows a binge, federal control over the content of higher education." 

http://www.nas.org/polArticles.cfm?Doc_Id=1201

Entry #1,683

"If Democrats ignore health-care polls, midterms will be costly

     Stooges   Agree with stupid 

____________

"If Democrats ignore health-care polls, midterms will be costly

By Patrick H. Caddell and Douglas E. Schoen
Friday, March 12, 2010 
Source The Washington Post 

"In "The March of Folly," Barbara Tuchman asked, "Why do holders of high office so often act contrary to the way reason points and enlightened self-interest suggests?" Her assessment of self-deception -- "acting according to wish while not allowing oneself to be deflected by the facts" -- captures the conditions that are gripping President Obama and the Democratic Party leadership as they renew their efforts to enact health-care reform.

Their blind persistence in the face of reality threatens to turn this political march of folly into an electoral rout in November. In the wake of the stinging loss in Massachusetts, there was a moment when the president and the Democratic leadership seemed to realize the reality of the health-care situation. Yet like some seductive siren of Greek mythology, the lure of health-care reform has arisen again.

As pollsters to the past two Democratic presidents, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, respectively, we feel compelled to challenge the myths that seem to be prevailing in the political discourse and to once again urge a change in course before it is too late. At stake is the kind of mainstream, common-sense Democratic Party that we believe is crucial to the success of the American enterprise.

Bluntly put, this is the political reality:

First, the battle for public opinion has been lost. Comprehensive health care has been lost. If it fails, as appears possible, Democrats will face the brunt of the electorate's reaction. If it passes, however, Democrats will face a far greater calamitous reaction at the polls. Wishing, praying or pretending will not change these outcomes.

Nothing has been more disconcerting than to watch Democratic politicians and their media supporters deceive themselves into believing that the public favors the Democrats' current health-care plan. Yes, most Americans believe, as we do, that real health-care reform is needed. And yes, certain proposals in the plan are supported by the public.

However, a solid majority of Americans opposes the massive health-reform plan. Four-fifths of those who oppose the plan strongly oppose it, according to Rasmussen polling this week, while only half of those who support the plan do so strongly. Many more Americans believe the legislation will worsen their health care, cost them more personally and add significantly to the national deficit. Never in our experience as pollsters can we recall such self-deluding misconstruction of survey data.

The White House document released Thursday arguing that reform is becoming more popular is in large part fighting the last war. This isn't 1994; it's 2010. And the bottom line is that the American public is overwhelmingly against this bill in its totality even if they like some of its parts.

The notion that once enactment is forced, the public will suddenly embrace health-care reform could not be further from the truth -- and is likely to become a rallying cry for disaffected Republicans, independents and, yes, Democrats.

Second, the country is moving away from big government, with distrust growing more generally toward the role of government in our lives. Scott Rasmussen asked last month whose decisions people feared more in health care: that of the federal government or of insurance companies. By 51 percent to 39 percent, respondents feared the decisions of federal government more. This is astounding given the generally negative perception of insurance companies.

CNN found last month that 56 percent of Americans believe that the government has become so powerful it constitutes an immediate threat to the freedom and rights of citizens. When only 21 percent of Americans say that Washington operates with the consent of the governed, as was also reported last month, we face an alarming crisis.

Health care is no longer a debate about the merits of specific initiatives. Since the spectacle of Christmas dealmaking to ensure passage of the Senate bill, the issue, in voters' minds, has become less about health care than about the government and a political majority that will neither hear nor heed the will of the people.

Voters are hardly enthralled with the GOP, but the Democrats are pursuing policies that are out of step with the way ordinary Americans think and feel about politics and government. Barring some change of approach, they will be punished severely at the polls.

Now, we vigorously opposed Republican efforts in the Bush administration to employ the "nuclear option" in judicial confirmations. We are similarly concerned by Democrats' efforts to manipulate passage of a health-care bill. Doing so in the face of constant majority opposition invites a backlash against the party at every level -- and at a time when it already faces the prospect of losing 30 or more House seats and eight or more Senate seats.

For Democrats to begin turning around their political fortunes there has to be a frank acknowledgement that the comprehensive health-care initiative is a failure, regardless of whether it passes. There are enough Republican and Democratic proposals -- such as purchasing insurance across state lines, malpractice reform, incrementally increasing coverage, initiatives to hold down costs, covering preexisting conditions and ensuring portability -- that can win bipartisan support. It is not a question of starting over but of taking the best of both parties and presenting that as representative of what we need to do to achieve meaningful reform. Such a proposal could even become a template for the central agenda items for the American people: jobs and economic development.

Unless the Democrats fundamentally change their approach, they will produce not just a march of folly but also run the risk of unmitigated disaster in November."

Patrick H. Caddell is a political commentator and former pollster. Douglas E. Schoen, a pollster, is the author of "The Political Fix."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/11/AR2010031102904.html

Entry #1,682

"IMF suggests how to raise climate change funds

I can't seem to reconcile how collecting global funds will diminish climate change which has been and always will be cyclical.

Excerpt

____________

"IMF suggests how to raise climate change funds

By TOM MALITI, Associated Press Writer Tom Maliti, Associated Press Writer – Mon Mar 8, 3:43 pm ET

"....... Strauss-Kahn proposed that countries adopt a quota system similar to the one the Fund uses to raise its own money, which could bring in money faster than proposals to increase carbon taxes or other fundraising methods. He only provided a broad outline of the plan, as the organization will release a paper within 10 days with full details. It is unclear how the proposal will be received.

The IMF raises funds from its 185 members mainly through a quota system that is based broadly on each country's economic size. The United States is currently the largest shareholder.  ......."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100308/ap_on_bi_ge/af_imf_climate_change

Entry #1,681

Bookies Take on Obamacare

I have permission to post this link.

I am not trying to advertise this site but it is often used to test the pulse of an issue ... how well or badly it's faring with public opinion.  Hope this link opens to the chart showing bets on healthcare passage.  Price has climbed some lately but doesn't seem a done deal yet.

http://data.intrade.com/graphing/jsp/closingPricesForm.jsp?tradeURL=https://www.intrade.com&contractId=709242

Entry #1,679

"Dead Legislation Walking

Commerntary from Powerlineblog.com which seems to be the heart of this administration's government takeover of health care.

______

"Cause and Effect

Powerlineblog.com

"...........The answer is competition. Any company will--and should--raise the prices of its goods or services until they reach the point where they are constrained by competition. Our government has followed a perverse policy with regard to health care, by limiting the extent to which health insurers can compete against each other and thereby constrain each others' prices. The obvious solution, if we want to rein in health insurance costs, is to 1) broaden competition in the industry to the maximum amount possible, and 2) repeal all mandates that require insurance companies to charge for coverages that many people don't want.

If the Democrats took those two basic steps, they would significantly reduce the cost of health care. But they wouldn't dream of doing anything so effective to reduce costs, because they want health care costs to remain high. They need high costs to justify government medicine, which means, at its core, a radical restructuring of the relationship between the citizen and the state."

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/03/025774.php

___________

"Morning Bell: Dead Legislation Walking

Posted March 9th, 2010 at 9:33am
Source The Foundry: Conservative Policy News The Heritage Foundation

"Another day, another stream of health care fantasy from the White House. A quick look at two health care events from yesterday, one in Glenside, Pennsylvania, and the other in Tawas City, Michigan, clearly exposes the yawing gap between the Obama administration’s health care rhetoric and cold hard legislative reality. First in Glenside, President Barack Obama turned up the volume on his already tired “final push” for health care reform. In addition to the usual litany of false claims about the legislation in Congress (in fact, you don’t get to keep your doctor, it isn’t paid for, it doesn’t reduce costs) President Obama also repeated his new line from his doctors-in-lab-coats address last week:

We have now incorporated almost every single serious idea from across the political spectrum about how to contain the rising cost of health care … Our cost-cutting measures mirror most of the proposals in the current Senate bill…

But, as we pointed out last week, there is one not-so-minor difference between the Senate bill and the President’s new proposal: the Senate bill actually exists. Now, Democrats may be telling their conservative counterparts that they will have reconciliation legislative text in front of the Budget Committee by tomorrow, but don’t hold your breath. The “fixes” that the White House is promising wavering House Democrats they will make all sound easy at first glance: 1) scaling back the tax on high-end health insurance policies; 2) closing the Medicare D loophole; 3) boosting insurance subsidies; 4) increasing Medicaid payments; and 5) fixing the Cornhusker Kickback. But when you take a second look, you see that all of these “fixes” will cost more money. Just look at the Cornhusker Kickback which the President chose to address, not by taking away Nebraska’s special Medicaid payments, but by extending those extra Medicaid payments to every state! Every single item in the President’s proposal either increases spending or reduces new revenues. And he didn’t put forward any way to pay for them. If passing health reform were as easy as giving away free candy, Obamacare would be law already. Finding a way to pay for all these fixes is going to be just as difficult as every earlier effort to pay for this bill. So don’t expect any solutions anytime soon. 

And we haven’t even mentioned “abortion” yet, which brings us to Tawas City where Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) hosted his own health care townhall. Now the Associated Press headline may read “Stupak: Health bill abortion fight can be resolved” but then the AP actually reports “Rep. Bart Stupak said he expects to resume talks with House leaders this week…” In other words, there is no agreement yet. And what kind of timeline is Stupak looking at for such an agreement? WJRT reports: “[Stupak]’s confident a bill will pass sometime this year.” “Sometime this year” is a bit longer of a timeframe than the White House deadline of next Thursday. But even more importantly, look at the process Stupak suggests for final passage: “According Stupak, until the House and the Senate bills and the president’s proposals become one piece of legislation, health care will remain in limbo.” Considering that everyone agrees that abortion cannot be fixed in reconciliation, Stupak’s position is a total rejection of the White House’s current plan to have the House pass the Senate bill now on the promise that the Senate might come back and try and fix it sometime in the future. Stupak clearly wants “one piece of legislation,” and the only way to accomplish that is to scrap the current Senate bill and start over.

In the meantime, legislative “limbo” has not been kind to the Senate bill. Every day seems to bring news of yet another yes vote switching to undecided or no vote. Just yesterday, former-yes votes Reps. Michael Arcuri (D-NY), Dan Maffei (D-NY), Bill Owens (D-NY) and Dan Lipinski (D-IL) all confirmed they were either now undecided or would vote no. And Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL), who voted no the first time, said he would suspend his campaign for Governor just so he could come back to Washington to vote against Obamacare again. The President can travel the country talking about an up-or-down vote for “our proposal” all he wants, but the reality is he simply doesn’t have the votes in the House for the only piece of health care legislation that actually exists."

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/09/morning-bell-dead-legislation-walking/

Entry #1,678

"Poll shows Obama, Dems losing ground

Ya think?????  For anyone fretting about how we looked to the world with GW as President ........ this resembles a redneck bar fight midnight, full moon.

Please note polls cited have not been conducted by conservative pollsters.

_______

"EMBATTLED DEM CONGRESSMAN: I WAS PUSHED OUT FOR HEALTHCARE!

 
DEM REP. CHARGES: NAKED RAHM THUGS AROUND GYM SHOWERS

http://www.drudgereport.com/

___________


"Poll shows Obama, Dems losing ground
By Joseph Curl

Source Washington Times

"A majority of Americans say the United States is less respected in the world than it was two years ago and think President Obama and other Democrats fall short of Republicans on the issue of national security, a new poll finds.

The Democracy Corps-Third Way survey released Monday finds that by a 10-point margin -- 51 percent to 41 percent -- Americans think the standing of the U.S. dropped during the first 13 months of Mr. Obama's presidency.

"This is surprising, given the global acclaim and Nobel peace prize that flowed to the new president after he took office," said pollsters for the liberal-leaning organizations.

On the national security front, a massive gap has emerged, with 50 percent of likely voters saying Republicans would likely do a better job than Democrats, a 14-point swing since May. Thirty-three percent favored Democrats.

"The erosion since May is especially strong among women, and among independents, who now favor Republicans on this question by a 56 to 20 percent margin," the pollsters said in their findings.

A May 2009 survey by the pollsters found the public saw the Democratic and Republican parties as equally able to handle national security (41 percent trusted Democrats more, and 43 percent trusted Republicans more.) On conducting the war on terrorism, the two parties were tied at 41 percent.

The Democrats' gap on national security has widened on several other fronts:

• "Keeping America safe": Democrats now trail by 13 points (34 percent to 47 percent.) The gap was just 5 points in July 2008.

• "Ensuring a strong military": Democrats trail by 31 points (27 percent to 58 percent.)

• "Making America safer from nuclear threats": Democrats trail by 11 points (34 percent to 45 percent,) "despite the president's strong actions and speeches on steps to reduce nuclear dangers," the pollsters said.

The poll, conducted late last month, found "the administration's response to the Christmas Day terrorist attempt has contributed to the erosion."

"While public polling showed that initial approval of Obama's response was above 50 percent, two months of Republican criticism have taken a toll. Now a narrow 46 to 42 percent plurality of likely voters say they feel less confident about the administration's handling of national security because of how it responded to the incident," the pollsters said.

In addition, the detention of terrorist suspects and the Obama proposal to prosecute suspects in civil trials in New York City, which was later abandoned, also have taken a toll on the president's approval ratings.

"Whereas a majority of the public approves of the job President Obama is doing in most aspects of national security, a 51 to 44 percent majority of likely voters disapproves of his efforts on the prosecution and interrogation of terrorism suspects," the pollsters found.

Democracy Corps calls itself an independent, non-profit organization dedicated to making the government of the United States more responsive to the American people." It was founded in 1999 by former Clinton adviser James Carville and Stanley Greenberg, a leading Democratic pollster.

Third Way calls itself "the leading moderate think-tank of the progressive movement."

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/08/poll-obama-dems-losing-ground/

Entry #1,677

"Morning Bell: Obamacare's Kabuki End Game

"Morning Bell: Obamacare’s Kabuki End Game

Posted March 4th, 2010 at 9:42am
Author: Conn Carroll
Source blog.heritage.org

"The doctors in lab coats surrounding President Barack Obama as he gave his latest health care speech yesterday were not there to give the President a physical; that happened Sunday. No, these doctors were props, dressed to impress for what the White House claims is their “final push” for the President’s government take-over of the health care industry. The President again repeated the same old tired claims he has been making for months: “The proposal I’ve put forward gives Americans more control over their health care,” “our proposal is paid for,” and “my proposal would bring down the cost of health care for millions.” We, and plenty of others, have refuted all these claims before, but this time they are particularly easy to expose as patently false. President Obama gave away the game when he said:

Our cost-cutting measures mirror most of the proposals in the current Senate bill, which reduces most people’s premiums and brings down our deficit by up to $1 trillion over the next two decades. And those aren’t my numbers – they are the savings determined by the CBO, which is the Washington acronym for the nonpartisan, independent referee of Congress.

But there is one huge difference between the Senate bill and what the President kept referring to as my/our proposal: the Senate bill actually exists. For all the talk in Washington about Democrats in the Senate using reconciliation to pass a final version of Obamacare, one key fact has been overlooked: no reconciliation bill exists. Not in the House. Not in the Senate. Nowhere. It simply has not yet been written, and there are plenty of reasons to believe it never will. 

The White House is telling the public they expect the House to pass the Senate bill, and then both the House and Senate would pass the yet-to-be-drafted reconciliation, all before Easter recess. But Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) simply does not have the votes to pass the Senate bill. If she did, it would already be law. To convince her fellow wayward Democrats to vote for the Senate bill, the yet-to-be-drafted reconciliation bill is expected to: 1) scale back the tax on high-end health insurance policies (decreases revenue); 2) close the Medicare D loophole (costs money); 3) boost insurance subsidies (costs money); and 4) increase Medicaid payments (costs a ton of money). Where exactly do House and Senate aides writing this new bill expect to come up with the money to pay for all these new goodies? And they have to find that cash because all reconciliation bills must be certified by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to reduce the deficit by $1 billion over five years. And that CBO score will take at least a week, or possibly two to complete.

So when will the public get to see this reconciliation bill? The Wall Street Journal reports that “Democrats have started writing the formal reconciliation bill” and “intend to send it to the Congressional Budget Office for evaluation by the end of the week.” But The Los Angeles Times reports that: “Senior Democrats on Capitol Hill will not finish writing the reconciliation package until next week at the earliest.” Our advice: don’t hold your breath.

In the meantime Speaker Pelosi is bleeding the votes she needs to first pass the Senate bill, by an up or down vote, in the House. Just 220 members of the House voted for their version of Obamacare in November. Since that time, Reps. Robert Wexler (D-FL) and Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) have left the House; Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) has passed away; and Joseph Cao (R-LA) has said he will vote against the bill. That leaves Pelosi 216 votes, which would be exactly enough to pass the Senate bill. But then there is Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) who will not vote for the Senate bill since it uses taxpayer money to fund abortion. And Stupak says he has a dozen other members that will switch from yes to no with him. And Rep. Michael Acuri (D-NY) now says he is likely to switch his vote from yes to no. And Rep. Shelly Berkley (D-NV), who voted yes the first time, says she is “not inclined to support the Senate” bill. And Rep. Gerry Connolly says he could “absolutely” switch his vote from yes to no. And now Congressional Progressive Caucus Rep. Raúl Grijalva, (D-AZ) says he’s less likely to vote for the final health care reform bill if the reconciliation bill contains the ideas President Obama outlined yesterday.

One House Democrat tells the LA Times why the White House is facing such a tough sell: “It’s a no-win situation for those of us in moderate districts. If you vote no, your base is upset. If you vote yes, everyone else is upset. You almost couldn’t design a legislative vise more damaging to moderate Democrats — or that puts our majority more at risk.” But don’t worry House Democrats, the Senate is going to do everything it can to convince you that you aren’t going to walk the plank alone again. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) tells Politico that Senate Democrats are planning a gesture some time next week that will guarantee to House Democrats the Senate will act: “I don’t know what the gesture will be but it will be a convincing gesture.” Kabuki theater indeed.

Quick Hits:

  • According to Rasmussen Reports, (42%) of American adults now expect the U.S. economy to be weaker in one year’s time, the highest number at any time since President Obama took office.A group of four Democrats (Sens. Chuck Schumer (NY), Sherrod Brown (OH), Jon Tester (MT) and Robert Casey (PA)) called Wednesday for the Obama administration to halt a federal stimulus program aimed at building wind farms and other clean-energy projects.
  • A FOIA request from the Competitive Enterprise Institute has revealed that the Department of Energy – specifically the office headed by Al Gore’s company’s former CEO, Cathy Zoi – recruited wind industry lobbyists to help push Obama’s wind energy proposals.

  • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson told a Senate Appropriations panel yesterday that any effort to restrict EPA’s authority to regulate carbon emissions pursuant to the Clean Air Act would be an “enormous step backward for science”.

    Guest Blogger: Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) on Free Trade

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/04/morning-bell-obamacares-kabuki-end-game/

Entry #1,676

"Teen Paralyzed After Getting H1N1 Vaccine


"Teen Paralyzed After Getting H1N1 Vaccine

Doctors Say Boy Developed Rare Condition

POSTED: 6:34 pm CST March 5, 2010
UPDATED: 8:00 pm CST March 5, 2010
CECIL COUNTY, Md. --
Source WDSU.com

"A 16-year-old boy in Maryland was paralyzed from the chest down after getting the H1N1 flu vaccine at school, a doctor said.

In December, Robert Beckham lost feeling in both his legs and was rushed to Baltimore's Sinai Hospital, Baltimore station WBAL reported.

"Under very heavy treatment, not only did he not improve, he even got slightly worse," said Sinai pediatric neurologist Dr. Yuval Shafrir.

Shafrir said Robert is being treated for a rare condition called transverse mylitis in which a segment of Robert's spinal cord was destroyed by his own immune system.

Transverse mylitis is a disease that can occur after infection, but in this case, Shafrir said it was a medically unpredictable reaction to a vaccination that's being given in schools all over the country.

"The only obvious cause was the H1N1 vaccination," Shafrir said.

"I kept pestering my parents to get me this shot. I got it, and a month later, it went bad," Robert said.

"I'm still in shock from it. I can't believe that this happened to him," his mother, Belinda Beckham said.

Robert's parents are disabled and financially unable to bring him home from the hospital.

"If he had received the regular flu vaccine, the family would be able to file a claim with the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program," said attorney Clifford Shoemaker. "But because it was the swine flu program, which falls under the same bill as terrorism … the family will get very little in compensation for what's happened to this child."

The family needs help making their home handicapped-accessible for Robert. There's a fundraiser this weekend at the Porters Grover Baptist Church. All donations can be made at Cecil Bank in care of Robert Beckham.

Meanwhile, Maryland Health Department officials are aware of Robert's case.

"Certainly, there are instances of adverse events -- they're very rare -- and it's something we want to monitor closely," said DHMH Deputy Secretary Fran Phillips.

While Robert Beckham's paralysis is heartbreaking, Shafrir said it shouldn't deter anyone from getting the vaccination."

http://www.wdsu.com/mostpopular/22758511/detail.html

Entry #1,675