Justified Right

What's Wrong With The Health Care Debate? The Press, As Usual

Today I'm going to use the Town Hall meeting of Health Bill sponsor Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) as typical of all Town Halls, and his local newspaper, the Gannett owned Asbury Park Press, as representative of all mainstream media.

Because they're all the same.

I blogged about my experience at Pallone's Town Hall meeting here.  I went with a question about an analysis of the bill that found the promise to get rid of all "pre-existing medical condition exclusions" in insurance policies, as promised by the President, isn't actually in the bill.

I purposely asked my question respectfully and in a non-accusatory, non-partisan manner.  I even gave the Congressman a break and conceded that the issue is so complicated I didn't expect an answer from him that night.

There were many well presented and rational questions - like the accountant who brought with him a report drafted by him and other accountants about financial shortcomings of the bill.

What did the media think of my question and the accountant's question?  BOOORRRRRIIIIIINNNNNGGGG!  Neither of us were mentioned in any of the news coverage the following day.

Oh but the screamers - boy did they get press coverage!

I was the first speaker.  The speaker right after me, without referencing any portion of the bill or even letting on whether he read it, did what we've seen in news clips and YouTube videos at every Town Hall Meeting - he began breathing fire into the microphone - complete with untoward insinuations against the Congressman.

The media rushed to interview that man for his biographical information.  When I inquired of  New Jersey Network (public television) reporter Adrienne Supino why she hurried to interview that angry man, she dropped an "F" bomb on me!  I guess she was looking to interview like minded people as herself.

The day following the Town Hall, the Asbury Park Press, corporate media with a daily monopoly covering more than a million residents in central New Jersey, made certain they covered only the screamers, including the firebreather who spoke after me.  They showed photographs of a man holding a sign saying, "Obamacare May Kill My Daughter." The Asbury Park Press column described the crowd as "booing and hissing."

Yet there was no mention of those of us who read the bill and posed real questions about its problems. We were there too, but the crowd was only portrayed as angry, not inquisitive.

I guess that Jerry Springer stuff sells newspapers, and questions about the bill don't. 

Hey but look - the Asbury Park Press is a private company.  They can edit their stories to sell papers any way they wish.  If I don't like it, I can go start a competing paper.

Then, as usual, the Asbury Park Press went too far.  A couple of days later, they "editorialized" the Pallone Town Hall.

You can read the sanctimonious blather here.

Let's do a descriptive word round-up used by the Asbury Park Press about the crowd at Pallone's Town Hall:
 
Incivility, rancor, disgraceful, unsettling, disinterested, unreasoned, rude, heckling, booing, echo chamber, misinformation, misconception, ignorant, not factual, disturbing, shouting, cheap talk, lynch mob, lies, hijackers, rabble, incendiary.

Wow.  Makes you wonder if the crowd, so described, should ever buy the Asbury Park Press again.

My two favorite descriptions of the crowd used by the Asbury Park Press editorial board were these: "Rugby Scrum" and "Reign of Terror during the French Revolution."  The writer, on  metaphor steroids, managed to put those two concepts in the very same sentence!

Reign of Torror?  Really?  I suppose if I had brought my guillotine and killed 30,000 people rather  than pose a question about whether pre-existing health conditions will be covered under the plan, I would  have been taken more seriously by the Press.
 
The editorial's final analysis was this:

"Those who wouldn't let others voice their opinion did nothing to advance the cause of a badly needed nuanced, intelligent debate."

There were people who brought "intelligent debate" to Pallone's Town Hall, but the Asbury Park Press refuses to acknowledge or cover us.  Instead, by showing nothing but the screamers in print, they, like the rest of media, invite and perhaps even create the screaming.  Nothing enables like the media.

Here's a challenge to the Asbury Park Press:  Why not have  us opponents of the bill and Congressman Pallone up to your editorial board offices for a discussion on real questions about the bill?  You can cover that in your paper to advance "nuanced, intelligent debate."

If you're worried that it won't attract readers, I promise to throw at least one Jerry Springer chair at the Congressman.

For a similar blog post about the misleading Asbury Park Press coverage of Pallone's Town Hall, go see the Dean of New Jersey's blogging contingent, Art Gallagher, whose post is here, complete with video of the audience being respectful to Pallone.

Texting While Driving PSA

I showed this to my teenage daughter today.  Show it to everyone you care about.

Using Ted Kennedy; Democrats Are Awful

I blogged about it yesterday - Rush Limbaugh predicted back in March that the Democrats would eventually call the Health Insurance proposal the "Ted Kennedy Memorial Health Care Law."  Democrats pretended to be outraged.

Within hours of Kennedy's death yesterday, Senator Robert Byrd, the former KKK recruiter who the Democrats call the "conscience of the Senate," proposed changing the name of the law exactly as Rush predicted.

Instead of being outraged like they were at Rush, Democrats are lining up behind Byrd to exploit the death of Ted Kennedy to raise the pity factor and pass their government Health Insurance plan.  See the NY Times article on it here.

Disgusting.  The man isn't even buried yet and the Democrats are using him as a tool.

What was it that Rahm Emmnuel said?  Never let a crisis go to waste?

Stay classy, Democrats.

Limbaugh Was Right, and Robert Byrd Is Still An Idiot

Back in March, Rush Limbaugh said that before the Health Insurance debate was over, the Dummycrats would rename it the "Ted Kennedy Memorial Health Care Bill."

The Dummycrats went apoplectic with rage.  See this piece on Huffpoo, complete with calls for the Republican Party to denounce Limbaugh.

Ted Kennedy died today.

Here is what the former recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan, the man the Dummycrats call the "Conscience of the Senate," Robert Byrd had to say about Kennedy:

In his honor and as a tribute to his commitment to his ideals, let us stop the shouting and name calling and have a civilized debate on health care reform which I hope, when legislation has been signed into law, will bear his name for his commitment to insuring the health of every American.

Ted Kennedy has been dead only a few hours and Byrd wants to hang him up (as Byrd only understands hangings) as a prop in the health care debate.

I wonder if the Dummycrats will formally denounce Robert Byrd?

Rush was right.  And Byrd is still an idiot.

My Town Hall With Health Bill Sponsor Rep. Frank Pallone

Since Congressman Frank Pallone (D, NJ) is a sponsor of HR3200, the bill to create a government insurance company, I thought his Town Hall meeting would be interesting.  It was fascinating.  The public square for debate is now a public sausage grinder in which to feed your congressman.

I went to address Pallone about President Obama’s promise to outlaw insurance policies that exclude “pre-existing conditions” from coverage. I did an analysis of that section of the bill, and what I found was a lengthy mess of legalese. In the end, it turns out the bill WILL ALLOW insurance companies to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions - even the government insurance.  Read my analysis here.

I don’t impugn the intention of either President Obama or Congressman Pallone to prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions.  The bill is so complicated I believe neither of them realizes what it actually says, because the offending language is buried in a 1500 page law from the 1940’s, which the pending bill refers to.

Note this well:  I understand that requiring all pre-existing conditions to be covered will jack up the price of insurance policies. At least you will know the price before you buy it. My concern is this: If President Obama is claiming there will be coverage for pre-existing conditions, that better be true when sick people buy the insurance.  Pallone should either insist the President stop saying all policies will cover pre-existing conditions, or amend the bill to ensure that they will.

When I arrived at the Red Bank, NJ middle school, which holds about 500, I saw more than 2000 people waiting in line.  I feared not getting in, but being a third-generation local to the area has its advantages – I know how to sneak into every public building in the district, and if I get caught, I probably know the guard anyway.

My apologies to the people of the 6^th Congressional District I cut in front of.  No apologies to the Obama supporters with the professionally made, expensive looking signs who were brought in by activist groups to clog up the line.  You shouldn’t have been there in the first place.

I got to the microphone first and started to explain my analysis to Congressman Pallone, when his aid quickly signaled me to finish.  I’m not mad at him.  He has a rough job – telling people who hope their Congressman is listening to “hurry up.”  That guy got more boos than Bernie Madoff at a Florida retirement community.

Congressman Pallone accepted a copy of my analysis and promised to look into it and conference with me later.  That’s exactly what I asked of him, so I thank him for that.

Since mine is really a non-partisan issue, I was hoping my presentation to Congressman Pallone came off that way.  As I walked to the rear, a man stopped me.  I would later learn that this man’s two favorite curse words start with “F” and “P.”  His shouts to the Congressman were filled with them.  He looked at me puzzled and asked, “Are you for this thing or against it?”  “Mission accomplished,” I thought to myself.  I came off non-partisan.

I also must have come off boring to the media.  Even though I analyzed the bill and found a flaw in a major initiative being touted by the President of the United States, the reporters looked at me like college students in the third hour of a calculus lecture.

The next guy to the microphone – now HE is what they were looking for!  He screamed at the Congressman at the top of his lungs, made untoward insinuations and generally provided the raw meat the media loves to cover as we head into next month’s sweeps.

After he left the microphone, two reporters ran past me to get his biographical information, which they scribbled with such importance, as if they were interviewing Buzz Aldrin during a moonwalk.

On her way back I stopped one of the reporters.  “Why did you run to get that guy’s information?”  I asked.  She seemed to sense where I was going with this.  She bluntly said, “Why?”  “Just curious,” I said.  “Why him?”   She responded with this non-believable line:  “I couldn’t hear him.”  “Ha!” I exclaimed.  “The guy was yelling at the top of his lungs into a microphone!  What’s the real reason you wanted to interview him?”   

To that question, this lovely-looking reporter offered me this reasoned response:  “Don’t f—king start with me!”  Welcome to New Jersey.

This confirmed for me that a debate about the language of the health insurance reform bill is the last thing the media wants to show on TV (boring!!!!) but they do want people (on both sides) spitting heat and no light into a microphone.

By the way, the cursing reporter was Adrienne Supino of New Jersey Network.  NJN is a public TV station supported by tax dollars, which kind of makes me Adrienne’s boss, much the same as I’m Congressman Pallone’s boss.  She shouldn’t curse at me, or anyone else.  Frank Pallone didn’t, no matter what anyone said to him.

The rest of the night was what you see of Town Halls on YouTube videos and the news:  Lots of anger toward congress. 

As a conservative, I understand the anger – this bill is a sea change away from capitalism.  However, we conservatives used to laugh at and even scold liberals who acted the way many of us are acting now by shouting at meetings.  Conservatives aren’t the ones who throw pies at Ann Coulter, eggs at Arnold Schwarzenegger and destroy property at World Trade Organization meetings.  That’s how liberals act.  All we need to do to win this debate is to calmly raise the actual language of the bill – the flaws will show.

On my way out, two people holding pro-Obama signs called me a racist.  What the...?

As for Congressman Pallone – I anxiously await his response to my analysis about pre-existing condition exclusions.  I’m hoping he tells me, “You’re right, and I’m offering an amendment on the floor to clarify the section.” 

Even if he does, I don’t think Congressman Pallone and I will get much media coverage for fixing the section, unless we appear on Jerry Springer and hit each other with chairs first.

Bob Novak, Who Never Illegally Outed A CIA Agent, Dead At 78

Rest In Peace.

A great American journalist died today.  Bob Novak was more honest than most of his contemporaries.  He let on his own political point of view, instead of feigning the myth of complete personal objectivity, as if there really could be a human being in the world that doesn't have an opinion.

Opinion journalism has become the better of news sources today, thanks in part to men like Novak.

Journalism by those with opinions more closely resembles the search for truth practiced in American courtrooms, where advocates relay their messages to the public and the public decides the truth.  That's a great deal more reliable than having a supposed "viewless" news anchor read to the public what some editor decides is truth.

Thanks Bob.    You left the world better than you found it.

"Yes We Can" Sounds Like "Thank You Satan" Backwards

File this under funny.

When one of my sons told me Barack Obama's slogan "Yes We Can"  sounds like "Thank you Satan" backwards, I didn't believe him, mostly because the letters in "Yes" and "Satan" are so different.

So he grabbed his DSi and recorded "Yes We Can."  Then he played it backwards, and sure enough it sounded like, "Thank You Satan."  Then he recorded "Thank You Satan" and played it backwards, and it sounded like, "Yes We Can."

I chalk this up to the same phenomenon that makes people see the Virgin Mary in grilled cheese, like this one which the Golden Palace Online Casino paid $28,000.00 for on ebay:

Quite honestly, I've never seen the resemblance myself.

It's called Pareidolia.  The mind automatically looks for familiar shapes in randomness or chaos.  I imagine the same phenomenon applies to hearing, which is probably why people get so many music lyrics wrong.  Like when Phoebe on the show "Friends" sang the song "Tiny Dancer" from Elton John, and thought it was about Tony Danza:

Even though the "Yes We Can" - "Thank You Satan" sounds are just a bit of Pareidolia, that doesn't mean it isn't fun!!!  And as an added bonus, I'm sure posting a YouTube Video about it will aggravate some Obamabots somewhere, so here it is.  Have fun:

Obama Makes The Case Against His Own Health Plan

Wow Obama really is a great communicator!  Americans have been trying to find exactly the right words to show that government run health insurance is going to be fraught with problems, and Obama gets the job done in under 30 seconds!  Bravo, Obama!

The teleprompter-less, stutterer-in-chief admitted that government run stuff is lacking by comparing Fed Ex and UPS favorably to the United States Postal Service. 

He was trying to make the point that private insurers will stay in business with a government run insurer, just as Fed Ex and UPS stay in business with the USPS.

It was a bad analogy anyway, as the taxpayer subsidized post office HAS kept Fed Ex and UPS out of certain markets, like mailing a simple letter.

Enjoy our gaffe-tastic  President at work, as he disses government run business:

Hillary Clinton On Disagreeing With The Administration

The dummycrats sure have been hard on average folks showing up at congressional town hall meetings to tell their congresspersons that they disagree with President Obama's health insurance reform.

Nancy Pelosi has called them everything from un-American to insinuations they are Nazis.

Hillary Clinton thinks differently about folks who disagree with their President.  Check it out:

Of course, that was her sentiment back when George Bush was President. I haven't heard her so ardently defend the rights of free speech for those who disagree with Obama.

Eunice Kennedy And The Gift Of Happiness

Often times when I'm at an event of whatever nature - sports, concerts, plays, parties - I see faces of people enjoying themselves and wonder about the people who organized the day.

There's something special about people who work hard and spend their efforts so that others can show up and have a great time.  I imagine a particularly wonderful place in heaven reserved just for them.

There is so much we would miss without people who organize happy times.  There would be no parades, no fireworks, no festivals or even back yard barbecues if God didn't make certain personalities who, lucky for the rest of us, work to make us happy.

Eunice Kennedy, who died early today, probably brought more smiles to people who genuinely needed a day to smile than any other person who graced the world.

Eunice Kennedy was co-founder of the Special Olympics.  There are over one million athletes who take part in the Special Olympics around the world each year, and if you take their smiles and times that by the number of smiles of their families, then Eunice Kennedy just might by the greatest creator of happy smiles the world has ever known.

Making other people happy.  That's quite a legacy.  Few will achieve it to the point that Eunice did, but everyone should follow her lead and try.

Will you put out some effort to make someone smile today?  Do it to honor Eunice.

Obama Health Plan Won’t Cover All Pre-Existing Conditions

You may have heard President Obama trumpet in many recent speeches his plan to have government run health insurance cover everyone’s pre-existing medical conditions.  As an example, he said to the American Medical Association on June 15, 2009: 

“That is why we need to end the practice of denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing conditions. The days of cherry-picking who to cover and who to deny--those days are over.”

That certainly sounds like signing up for one of the government insurance plans, no matter what ails you, will get you covered, doesn’t it?

I was curious to see if the President is right about his plan putting an end to "cherry-picking”  which illnesses to cover, so I decided to wade through the 1,018 page proposed health care law to find out if that’s true.

Come with me on this fantastic voyage through a mess of cross-referenced and confusing legalese.  As your tour guide, I have nearly 20 years experience in practicing insurance law, but reading this was not easy for me.  We can get through it together though.

If the President wanted his health insurances to cover all pre-existing conditions, you’d expect some pretty simple language that says, “All pre-existing conditions will be covered.”  Take a look at what is written into the law instead:

Section 111 has this paragraph about pre-existing conditions:

A qualified health benefits plan may not impose any pre-existing condition exclusion…

Great!  Looks like the President is telling the truth.  Oh but wait, the paragraph doesn’t end there. It continues…

…(as defined in section 2701(b)(1)(A) of the Public Health Service Act)…

Ok, that means we have to look up a whole other law – the Public Health Service Act (PHSA) - to find out what the definition of “pre-exiting condition exclusion” is.  But before we do that, the paragraph we are reading continues:

…or otherwise impose any limit or condition on the coverage under the plan with respect to an individual or dependent based on any health status-related factors (as defined in section 2791(d)(9) of the Public Health Service Act) in relation to the individual or dependent.

Ok, the paragraph we are reading has ended, but we now have two tasks:  Go to the PHSA and look up the definition of “pre-existing condition” in section 2701(b)(1)(A) and the definition of “health status related factors” in section 2791(d)(9).

When we Google those sections of the PHSA to read it, we run into a problem:  The section numbers referenced in Obama’s bill for the PHSA are the old numbers.  The PHSA has been amended with new numbers, so our Googling has failed us.

Undeterred, we print out the full text of the PHSA so we can read the whole thing and find the correct section numbers.  Much to our chagrin, it is 1,476 pages long. There goes our Saturday.  But we are committed to this project, so we bear down and find the right sections.

Here is how the PHSA defines “pre-existing condition exclusion” in section 2701(b)(1)(A):

IN GENERAL.—The term ‘‘preexisting condition exclusion’’ means, with respect to coverage, a limitation or exclusion of benefits relating to a condition based on the fact that the condition was present before the date of enrollment for such coverage, whether or not any medical advice, diagnosis, care, or treatment was recommended or received before such date.

That’s great!  I have to tell you, President Obama seems a man of his word…oh wait.  We had two things to look up here in the PHSA, didn’t we? Section 2701(d)(9) defines “Health Status-Related Factor” like this:

The term ‘‘health status-related factor’’ means any of the factors described in section 2702(a)(1).

Ok, what kind of dirty trick to waste our time was that?  President Obama sends us to section 2701 for a definition, and the definition is “see section 2702.”  Why not send us right to section 2702?  Sigh.  Fine.  Let’s keep reading.

Section 2702 (a)(1) of the PHSA says:

(a) INELIGIBILITY TO ENROLL.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2),…

Ok, stop right there.  Just know that as we continue reading paragraph 1, we have to withhold any conclusion, because everything we are about to read is subject to paragraph 2.  Ok?  So let’s continue with paragraph 1:

…a group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan, may not establish rules for eligibility (including continued eligibility) of any individual to enroll under the terms of the plan based on any of the following health status-related factors in relation to the individual or a dependent of the individual:

(A) Health status.

(B) Medical condition (including both physical and

mental illnesses).

(C) Claims experience.

(D) Receipt of health care.

(E) Medical history.

(F) Genetic information.

(G) Evidence of insurability (including conditions arising

out of acts of domestic violence).

(H) Disability.

Well I have to tell you up to this point President Obama is still looking good.  Paragraph 1 seems to say the Government can’t deny you coverage based upon any of the above pre-existing conditions.  Oh but I forgot – the whole thing is “subject to paragraph 2.”  Let’s see what that says:

(2) NO APPLICATION TO BENEFITS OR EXCLUSIONS.—To the extent consistent with section 701,…

OK, stop right there.  They are making us work again.  We are going to continue reading paragraph 2, but we have to withhold conclusions because we have to make sure it is “consistent with section 701.”  All right, here is paragraph 2:

paragraph (1) shall not be construed—

(A) to require a group health plan, or group health insurance coverage, to provide particular benefits other than those provided under the terms of such plan or coverage, or

(B) to prevent such a plan or coverage from establishing limitations or restrictions on the amount, level, extent, or nature of the benefits or overage for similarly situated individuals enrolled in the plan or coverage.

The bottom just fell out, and Obama is looking pale.  The above language in paragraph 2 just put a whole bunch of power in the hands of the folks writing the policies when it comes to pre-existing conditions.

But before we analyze that, remember paragraph 2 has to be “consistent with section 701.”  So let’s look at that.  It says:

The purpose of this subpart is to enable the Secretary to provide a Federal program of student loan insurance for students in (and certain former students of) eligible institutions (as defined in section 719).

Wait…what?  What’s that got to do with the price of tea in China?  We are talking about pre-existing medical conditions and suddenly we get sent to a section about - I don’t know - giving loans to foreign exchange students from Kenya?

I think I know what happened there.  The Public Health Service Act was originally written in the 1940’s and has been amended many times.  Somewhere along the way Congress just got sloppy, and now there is a cross-reference that either makes no sense or the connection is so obscure even comedian Dennis Miller thinks it’s a little far-fetched.

I think it’s just a huge typographical error, so the only thing we can do is ignore section 701 and get back to paragraph 2 of Section 2702, which we were discussing above.

I know all of this is confusing, but let your trusty tour guide tell you where you stand:

Paragraph two in Part A does several things. 

First, Paragrph two in Part A says that the prohibition against pre-existing condition exclusions DOES NOT APPLY to benefits offered in the policy in the "coverages" section, which means when the policy is written, pre-existing condition exclusions will be allowed to be written into the the sections defining coverage.  In short, insurers will still be allowed to exclude pre-existing conditions from coverage.

Second, paragraph two also says in Part A that policy writers for the government will be allowed to make the insurance you buy cover certain ailments, and not cover others (one of which may be a condition you happen to have, which is pre-existing).

What paragraph two says in Part B is that policy writers for the government will be allowed to limit the amount, level, extent, or nature of the treatment you get for certain ailments (one of which may be your pre-existing condition). 

So who will be writing your insurance policy?  According to the President’s plan, a new bureaucracy known as the “Health Benefits Advisory Committee.”  It will be made up of 27 people, and guess how many have to be a treating doctor:  One. 

So if you believe President Obama’s quote to the AMA means that if you sign up for government insurance your pre-existing condition will automatically be covered, - you’re wrong, and so is the President.  You’d better read the fine print on whether the gang of 26 bureaucrats plus one doctor is going to cover your pre-existing condition or not.  President Obama is giving them the power to not cover you.

Health Reform Protests: Obama Say, Media Do!

Barack Obama is more than just denouncing those who disagree with him on health insurance reform.  He has the White House website targeting individuals.  He has asked that fellow Americans turn on fellow Americans and report to a White House email address the names of those who disagree with him. He has not made clear what repercussions await those who get reported.

 

The rhetoric by the White House and Democrats on the Hill has become visceral, not just with the usual hollow claims of hate, fear and greed, etc., but also Senator Barbara Boxer’s weird insult that the protestors aren’t sincere because Americans don’t wear nice clothes.

 

Politics is rough and tumble, but a President collecting the names of people who disagree with him is downright scary.

 

The main objection posited by the President and Congressional Democrats is that people showing up to protest at town hall congressional meetings are not “real people” but shills for lobbyists and other organizations. They coined the cutesy term “astroturf,” meaning not real grass-roots, but fake.  That claim is denied by protestors who attend the town hall meetings.

 

Mainstream media is supposed to journal events, not shape them.  They shouldn’t pick a side.  Is that what the media is doing on the issue of Obama v. the protestors?  Far from it.  Mainstream media has sided with Obama’s against the American people who disagree with him.

 

Let’s take a look at a roundup of mainstream media lingo about those who are protesting President Obama’s changes to health insurance.

 

NBC holds back nothing in their support for Obama’s position.  In an article under the header “News/Politics” they ran this column, which calls the folks speaking at town hall meetings “fake” “angry” and “comical.” That was just the first paragraph.  The column later calls them “infamous” “yokels” and “astro-turfing wing-nuts.”  Again, this is under the heading “news.”

 

MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell has in interesting way of supporting Obama. While not directly questioning the sincerity of protesting Americans as does the President, Mitchell claims they “just don’t know what’s good for them.”  Not that Andrea’s an elitist or anything.

 

Here is ABC’s Charlie Gibson’s lead-in to a storyabout the protests at town hall meetings: Members of the House of Representatives are already back in their districts on summer recess, most holding town hall meetings to find out what's on the voters' minds, and what they're hearing is criticism over health care reform. And some of that criticism appears to be orchestrated, causing the White House to push back.

 

Note Gibson does not report that the White House thinks the protests are orchestrated.  He takes the White House position himself and says it appears so.

 

CBS news ran an investigative pieceseeking to prove that the website “Operation Embarrass Your Congressman” is secretly a lobbyist website.  After receiving 2 emails from the editor confirming he is one lone citizen, CBS reporter Montopoli concluded – that he can’t conclude anything.  Had the email come from a lobbyist, would he hold back his conclusion?

 

CBS slipped in a little “organized protest” argument in a columnabout the town hall protests: “The protests have echoes not just of the Tea Parties held around tax day this year, but also of protests during the Florida election recount in 2000…” Echoes of Florida ? Funny, that’s the same talking point used by Barbara Boxer in the clip linked above. 

CNN’s Anderson Cooper is a bit sneakier.  Here are 1,000 words from himon the topic.  It contains interviews with Democrat congressman and party officials and also a Democrat video, combining to call the Protestors “desperate” “hostile” “mob-type” “orchestrated” “manufactured” “angry”   and “disruptive.”  How many interviews does Cooper present with people who actually attended a town hall meeting?  Zero.  Sure, Anderson - that seems fair.  “This…is CNN.”

The only linked column on the home page of the New York Times was Paul Krugman calling the protestors racists.  Number of racist quotes from protestors Krugman used to support that claim? Zero.

 

The Washington Post took the CNN route:  1200 words, lots of statements from Democrats about how awful the “organized” protestors are, but not one single interview with a protestor who was there to deny the “organized” allegation. 

 

Obama v The People is a fair fight.  Double-teaming The People by Obama and the media isn’t.

Now Tina Fey Can See Russians From HER House

I don’t make jokes.  I just watch the government and report the facts.  Will Rogers

U.S. Northern Command spokesman Michael Kucharek has issued a statement confirming that two Russian nuclear submarines have been spotted along the east coast of the United States.

 According to the American school of liberal thought espoused by Obama during his campaign and popularized by SNL nymph Tina Fey, having Russians close to America is no cause for concern.  It’s funny, even.

However, if you are a rational person, the proximity of Russian weapons to America is cause for concern.  Liberals at one time understood that.  See as an example President Kennedy’s response to the Cuban Missile Crisis.  Of course, the tax-cutting JFK was no liberal by today’s standards.

Sarah Palin, who ran for Vice President with exactly the same amount of foreign policy experience as Presidents Reagan and Clinton had when they ran for President, never actually said, “I can see Russia from my house.”  Tina Fey’s funny line overshadowed Palin’s point:  That Russia is still a military threat, and Alaska’s governor, no matter who he or she may be, has a burden of diligence toward Russia that no other state Governor shares.

Palin was right about that.  If there were ever a slow military buildup by Russians near Alaska, there would be a response by the national military under the command of the President.  However, were there ever a sneak attack, America’s first line of defense would be the National Guard under the command of the Alaskan Governor.  That’s a foreign policy burden the other 49 Governors don’t share.

It’s also no laughing matter.  The shortest distance between Russia and Alaska across the Bering Strait is 2.4 miles.  That means Russia is closer to Alaska than Manhattan is to Staten Island. 

The lower 48 (49?) have never really given our Alaskan brethren their due for their position near Russia and their diligence for keeping an eye on the Russians while the rest of us sleep.  That indifference was on full display as Obama did nothing to defend our Guardsman and our fellow Americans against the onslaught of Fey and the liberal media’s schoolboy teasing.

What is really funny though is this: Since becoming President, Obama has not asked for a disbanding of the Alaska Air National Guard.  In fact, he hasn’t even supported ordering them to stand down from their constant 24-hour alert status.  Seems a terrible waste of money since the Russian threat is just a liberal punch line.

This reminds me of President Bush protecting America as a pilot with the Texas Air National Guard for 51/2 years. That too was related as a joke by the left. I haven’t seen President Obama disband that group either, since, you know, according to liberals flying for the TANG has nothing to do with protecting America.

East Coast liberals are finally getting a taste of what Alaskans live with daily – Russian weaponry in their backyard.  I guess its no longer funny when it happens to liberals.

So – Tina Fey – whatcha want to do about those Russian subs?  (wink).

"Read My Lips: No New Taxes"

"Read my lips: no new taxes" may have been the line that elected President George H.W. Bush in 1988.  It also may have sunk this reelection chances in 1992 after he broke that pledge and raised taxes anyway.

It was also the line that may have helped Barack Obama win in 2008.  Just 6 months in, and Obama suddenly seems willing to break the pledge too.

This Sunday Obama's top money guys, Geithner and Summers, each wouldn't rule out raising taxes on those making less than $250,000, which is exactly what Obama swore he'd never do.

Read all about it here.

Question:  Did Obama lie when he told the American people he could triple the deficit and create trillions of dollars in new spending without raising taxes, or his he so stupid that he really believe he could do that?

Upon hearing the news that Obama may raise taxes on the middle class, members of the Republican Party were heard to say "Duh" while members of the media were heard to say "Everyone pretend this isn't happening"  and Saturday Night Live was heard to say,"Let's write more skits talking about how smart Obama is."

Classy Move By Henry Louis Gates

Henry Louis Gates is reported to have sent flowers and a note of gratitude to Lucia Whalen, the woman who called 911 when she and another woman saw two men breaking into Gates' house.

It was first alleged that the call was racially based.  Al Sharpton's radical-activist niece called for "repercussions" against Whalen, whatever that means.

The 911 tapes were released and revealed Whalen told police she didn't know what color the man who broke into the house was, ending claims the call was made from racial bias.

With this gesture, the matter ended as it should have begun.