Today is 3 years since Brian Terry was killed
and NO one
has been called to task as of yet. Like Benghazi and
Extortion 17 just another thing swept under the Obama rug.
NEVER forget
and let's fight on for justice for them all.
Saturday, December 14, 2013
Democratic
National Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz says that Obamacare will be a
vote-winner for Democrats in 2014. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
says the same thing.Perhaps they really believe that. But the numbers in polls conducted since Oct. 17, when the end of the government shutdown put the spotlight on the rollout of Obamacare, tell a different story.
Democrats currently hold a 55-45 majority in the Senate. Republicans need a net gain of six seats to win a majority there.
This looks to be within reach. Seven Democratic-held seats are up in states carried by Mitt Romney.
And four Democratic incumbents are seeking re-election in target states in the 2012 presidential election.
In three Romney states -- Montana, West Virginia, South Dakota -- Democratic incumbents are retiring. The likely Republican nominees, two current House members and a former governor, have been leading by wide margins. These are not gimmes yet, but they probably will be.
Of the four incumbent Democrats running in Romney states, only one, Alaska's Mark Begich, has a statistically significant lead in the most recent public poll. But it was conducted in August.
A Republican poll last weekend in Arkansas found challenger Tom Cotton leading Mark Pryor 48-41. That's a significant difference from pre-Oct. 17 polling showing an even race -- and that's bad news for an incumbent.
The latest Louisiana poll has incumbent Mary Landrieu at 41 percent in the state's all-candidate primary. That's well below the 48 percent she got in an August Democratic poll.
The most frequent polling in these races comes from North Carolina, where the Democratic firm PPP has matched incumbent Kay Hagan against several Republicans 12 times in the last year.
In the first 10 polls, Hagan led controversial state House Speaker Thom Tillis by an average of 48 to 38 percent. In two polls conducted since the Obamacare rollout began, Hagan's lead was down to a perilous 44 to 42 percent.
Races have been tightening in 2012 target states too. Colorado Democrat Mark Udall led 2010 Republican nominee Ken Buck 50-35 last June -- post-rollout, his leads were 45-42 and 46-42.
In 2012 Mitt Romney carried Colorado whites 54-44 but lost Hispanics 75-23. Given Barack Obama's big post-rollout slide among Hispanics nationally, Udall may have difficulty matching Obama's Hispanic numbers.
Democratic Rep. Bruce Braley has been the favorite to replace retiring Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin. But a Republican December poll showed Braley with only 40 to 42 percent support and just 3 to 6 points ahead of five Republicans that have limited name recognition.
Pre-rollout polls showed New Hampshire incumbent Jeanne Shaheen with double-digit leads over state Republicans. But she led former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown by only 48-44, and Brown now seems interested in the race.
Obama carried Michigan 54-45 in 2012. But a Democratic poll this month shows Republican Terri Lynn Land leading Democrat Gary Peters 42-40. Neither is well-known. But the Republican label seems surprisingly strong in a state where Republicans have won just one Senate race in the last 40 years.
So Republicans have plausible chances to gain as many as 11 seats. But there are countervailing factors.
Republicans nominated some astonishingly weak candidates in winnable races in 2010 and 2012, and Democrats hope they will do so again in Georgia, where Michelle Nunn, daughter of former Democratic Sen. Sam Nunn, has been running roughly even with -- or a bit ahead of -- various Republicans.
And Democrats have hopes of depicting Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell as a Washington insider and toppling him in Kentucky, despite the state's anti-Obama leanings.
That being said, National Journal's survey of Washington political insiders shows most Republicans and a near-majority of Democrats predicting a Republican Senate majority. That's noteworthy, because these insiders, who spend so much time with incumbents, didn't predict party takeovers in 2006 and 2010 at this point in those election cycles.
The Obamacare rollout has also shifted opinion on the generic vote -- which party's candidate do you support for the House of Representatives? When the shutdown ended, Democrats led 47-41 in Real Clear Politics' average of recent polls.
Now, Republicans lead 44-41 on the question that has often underestimated actual GOP performance.
Analysts Stuart Rothenberg and Larry Sabato see more than 20 Democratic House seats at serious risk.
All this could change if public opinion on Obamacare -- or Obama -- shifts once again. But it looks like recent obituaries of the Republican Party were premature.
The website problems were too numerous to count, and they are just the
tip of the Obamacare iceberg. The substantive problems with Obamacare
are enormous. Oh, and the website problems continue, as well.
Obama is not about to abandon this law, because he cares more about fundamentally transforming the nation than he even does about his approval ratings, which have reached an all-time low. Besides, if he's lost the public's trust, it's not his fault but ours, because, to paraphrase Valerie Jarrett, we are just not quite capable of fathoming his surpassing greatness, and we'll eventually recover our senses.
As a returning cloistered astronaut who has just emerged from his propaganda session with the Obamabot, you should hear some highlights about Obamacare from just the past few days' news.
The Obamacare website has reportedly violated the Federal Information Security Management Act by failing to perform a series of security control assessment tests.
The Department of Health and Human Services reports that just 365,000 people have signed up for private health insurance under the new law, which is abysmally far from its already meager goal of signing 1.2 million by the end of November. Most of these came from the 14 state exchanges, and only 137,000 came from the federal website, HealthCare.gov. As some 5 million have already lost coverage because of Obamacare, it's hard to imagine how the law won't result in millions more people losing their coverage than new people acquiring it, even counting the 800,000 new Medicaid enrollees. All the while, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius falsely assures Congress that everything's fine, saying, "We are seeing very, very positive trends" now that HealthCare.gov is supposedly working better.
Some who have signed up for coverage on the website are receiving email notices informing them they shouldn't assume they are covered unless they "have seen the Confirmation Letter from the Disbursing Office!"
Indeed, according to insurance industry consultants, those who have signed up for coverage may find that their coverage has lapsed because to secure coverage, a customer's premiums first must be paid.
Reportedly, only 5 percent of Obamacare enrollees have paid at this point.
The Washington Post reports that patients with high medical bills are having difficulties determining which plans on the exchange fit their particular needs. In the website chaos, this information is far from readily obtainable.
Reuters cites a Cornell University study showing that just half of the country's psychiatrists are likely to accept Obamacare.
Only 7,000 people in Illinois have signed up for Obamacare. In Missouri, the scorched-earth law may cause major cuts in hours for substitute teachers and a potential fine of $150,000 for public schools.
A little-known regulation from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services may cause as many as 3.5 million poor and elderly people to lose home health care coverage beginning Jan. 1.
It's now common knowledge that Obamacare exchanges are excluding many physicians, hospitals and drugs, and a panel of doctors will testify before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that they are being dropped from patient provider networks because of Obamacare.
Sebelius refuses to provide straight answers to questions about whether and how often she met with President Obama about Obamacare and the website prior to the rollout.
Adding insult to injury, HHS is obstructing a congressional investigation by instructing contractors working on the website not to release documents to the investigators.
While we are treating Obama's fraudulent promises on Obamacare as past-tense deceit, we may be overlooking his ongoing duplicity. As The Wall Street Journal's editors also observe, "the reason for all this obstruction and statistical juking is so the White House can get the press corps and Democrats to believe that the worst is over and that ObamaCare is now rolling toward success. ... But it's impossible for an outsider to know what the truth really is because HHS and the White House continue to manipulate and bury the real statistics."
There's one other thing I want you space travelers to understand before we end this session. Our indignation over Obama's lies about our ability to keep our plans and doctors is wholly justified, but let's not overlook another consequence of this betrayal beyond the government's outrageous severance of our freedoms and personal relationships with our health care providers. Obamacare's exclusion of doctors and hospitals from the exchanges necessarily means a reduction in the quality of health care overall, thus negating one of the main ostensible purposes of this abominable law in the first place.
Next time you decide to go on a space mission, demand Web access and give me your email address.
Obama is not about to abandon this law, because he cares more about fundamentally transforming the nation than he even does about his approval ratings, which have reached an all-time low. Besides, if he's lost the public's trust, it's not his fault but ours, because, to paraphrase Valerie Jarrett, we are just not quite capable of fathoming his surpassing greatness, and we'll eventually recover our senses.
As a returning cloistered astronaut who has just emerged from his propaganda session with the Obamabot, you should hear some highlights about Obamacare from just the past few days' news.
The Obamacare website has reportedly violated the Federal Information Security Management Act by failing to perform a series of security control assessment tests.
The Department of Health and Human Services reports that just 365,000 people have signed up for private health insurance under the new law, which is abysmally far from its already meager goal of signing 1.2 million by the end of November. Most of these came from the 14 state exchanges, and only 137,000 came from the federal website, HealthCare.gov. As some 5 million have already lost coverage because of Obamacare, it's hard to imagine how the law won't result in millions more people losing their coverage than new people acquiring it, even counting the 800,000 new Medicaid enrollees. All the while, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius falsely assures Congress that everything's fine, saying, "We are seeing very, very positive trends" now that HealthCare.gov is supposedly working better.
Some who have signed up for coverage on the website are receiving email notices informing them they shouldn't assume they are covered unless they "have seen the Confirmation Letter from the Disbursing Office!"
Indeed, according to insurance industry consultants, those who have signed up for coverage may find that their coverage has lapsed because to secure coverage, a customer's premiums first must be paid.
Reportedly, only 5 percent of Obamacare enrollees have paid at this point.
The Washington Post reports that patients with high medical bills are having difficulties determining which plans on the exchange fit their particular needs. In the website chaos, this information is far from readily obtainable.
Reuters cites a Cornell University study showing that just half of the country's psychiatrists are likely to accept Obamacare.
Only 7,000 people in Illinois have signed up for Obamacare. In Missouri, the scorched-earth law may cause major cuts in hours for substitute teachers and a potential fine of $150,000 for public schools.
A little-known regulation from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services may cause as many as 3.5 million poor and elderly people to lose home health care coverage beginning Jan. 1.
It's now common knowledge that Obamacare exchanges are excluding many physicians, hospitals and drugs, and a panel of doctors will testify before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that they are being dropped from patient provider networks because of Obamacare.
Sebelius refuses to provide straight answers to questions about whether and how often she met with President Obama about Obamacare and the website prior to the rollout.
Adding insult to injury, HHS is obstructing a congressional investigation by instructing contractors working on the website not to release documents to the investigators.
While we are treating Obama's fraudulent promises on Obamacare as past-tense deceit, we may be overlooking his ongoing duplicity. As The Wall Street Journal's editors also observe, "the reason for all this obstruction and statistical juking is so the White House can get the press corps and Democrats to believe that the worst is over and that ObamaCare is now rolling toward success. ... But it's impossible for an outsider to know what the truth really is because HHS and the White House continue to manipulate and bury the real statistics."
There's one other thing I want you space travelers to understand before we end this session. Our indignation over Obama's lies about our ability to keep our plans and doctors is wholly justified, but let's not overlook another consequence of this betrayal beyond the government's outrageous severance of our freedoms and personal relationships with our health care providers. Obamacare's exclusion of doctors and hospitals from the exchanges necessarily means a reduction in the quality of health care overall, thus negating one of the main ostensible purposes of this abominable law in the first place.
Next time you decide to go on a space mission, demand Web access and give me your email address.
Boehner Eats His Young
By DICK MORRIS
Published on DickMorris.com
House Speaker John Boehner would not be House Speaker John Boehner if it were not for the tea party and the other conservative groups he now criticizes. He says that they "lack all credibility" and accuses them of "using our members [Congressmen] and the American people for their own goals."
Asked about the criticism leveled at the budget deal by conservative groups, the said "Are you kidding me? I don't care what they do."
By DICK MORRIS
Published on DickMorris.com
House Speaker John Boehner would not be House Speaker John Boehner if it were not for the tea party and the other conservative groups he now criticizes. He says that they "lack all credibility" and accuses them of "using our members [Congressmen] and the American people for their own goals."
Asked about the criticism leveled at the budget deal by conservative groups, the said "Are you kidding me? I don't care what they do."
His comments immediately drew admiring praise from
Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who said his comments were
"a breath of fresh air."
Has the world turned upside down? If it were not for these groups -- the Tea Party Patriots, Heritage Action for America or others -- the Republicans would have lost the elections of 2010 and he never would have been Speaker.
The grass- and cyber-roots enthusiasm of these conservative groups animate the Republican Party in the same way that groups like Occupy Wall Street and Moveon.org provide a shot in the arm for their party.
Without their hard work, outreach, enthusiasm and donations, the Republican Party would never have won in 2010 and won't win in the future. And House Speaker John Boehner better realize it. If he doesn't, perhaps his members will and will reacquaint him with reality.
Without the tea party, the Republican Party would be an inarticulate, me-too party without ideas or energy.
The Republican Party has always represented a fusion of two broad groups: those who are driven by ideology and those who grew up in geographic areas that are traditionally Republican and joined the party because it was the obvious way to enter politics.
Call them the Nixon Republicans, these folks live in suburbs or small towns and represent the equivalent of the urban big city machines that spawn and nurture Democrats.
But this party could not get elected. It would not have defeated Jimmy Carter in 1980 or elected Ronald Reagan. It would not have been the vehicle for the Gingrich Revolution of 1994, nor would it have taken the House in 2010.
It required a Reagan, a Newt Gingrich, a Ted Cruz, a Paul Ryan, a Mike Huckabee, or the like to animate it, fill it with ideas and carry it to victory.
For Boehner to cast aside these party enthusiasts and conservative workhorses is shortsighted and ungrateful in the extreme.
The tea party types are amateurs. They are small businesspeople, retired military, doctors and so forth that are professionals in their occupations but amateurs in politics. We need to be patient with their learning curve. They learned a lesson in October when the government shutdown backfired. And they won't make that mistake again. Indeed, their basic acceptance of the Ryan-Murray deal indicates precisely that growth of perspective and maturity.
In this light, the Speaker's comments are outrageous and cast real doubt on his ability to lead the House in the future.
Has the world turned upside down? If it were not for these groups -- the Tea Party Patriots, Heritage Action for America or others -- the Republicans would have lost the elections of 2010 and he never would have been Speaker.
The grass- and cyber-roots enthusiasm of these conservative groups animate the Republican Party in the same way that groups like Occupy Wall Street and Moveon.org provide a shot in the arm for their party.
Without their hard work, outreach, enthusiasm and donations, the Republican Party would never have won in 2010 and won't win in the future. And House Speaker John Boehner better realize it. If he doesn't, perhaps his members will and will reacquaint him with reality.
Without the tea party, the Republican Party would be an inarticulate, me-too party without ideas or energy.
The Republican Party has always represented a fusion of two broad groups: those who are driven by ideology and those who grew up in geographic areas that are traditionally Republican and joined the party because it was the obvious way to enter politics.
Call them the Nixon Republicans, these folks live in suburbs or small towns and represent the equivalent of the urban big city machines that spawn and nurture Democrats.
But this party could not get elected. It would not have defeated Jimmy Carter in 1980 or elected Ronald Reagan. It would not have been the vehicle for the Gingrich Revolution of 1994, nor would it have taken the House in 2010.
It required a Reagan, a Newt Gingrich, a Ted Cruz, a Paul Ryan, a Mike Huckabee, or the like to animate it, fill it with ideas and carry it to victory.
For Boehner to cast aside these party enthusiasts and conservative workhorses is shortsighted and ungrateful in the extreme.
The tea party types are amateurs. They are small businesspeople, retired military, doctors and so forth that are professionals in their occupations but amateurs in politics. We need to be patient with their learning curve. They learned a lesson in October when the government shutdown backfired. And they won't make that mistake again. Indeed, their basic acceptance of the Ryan-Murray deal indicates precisely that growth of perspective and maturity.
In this light, the Speaker's comments are outrageous and cast real doubt on his ability to lead the House in the future.
Newsmax Wis. Gov. Walker Pushing Plan to Sidestep Obamacare
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has a plan to sidestep Obamacare – and his novel idea is gaining traction, according to reports.
Walker reportedly wants to let the uninsured use tax credits to buy plans offered on the federal online exchanges directly from the insurance companies.
"Basically, our number one concern right now should be getting folks health insurance. Given the website problems, that suggests the value of a pilot of the type proposed here," Jonathan Gruber, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told The Journal Sentinel in Milwaukee.
Gruber was involved in both the Massachusetts universal coverage plan, and the Affordable Care Act.
The plan will need the approval of Health and Human Services.
“If they don't approve this, this is ultimately exposing that this isn't really about access and this isn't about affordability,” Walker told Fox News Thursday. “It's about government playing a heavier hand in these kinds of decisions.”
Wisconsin's insurance commissioner, Ted Nickel, is asking HHS to include the state in a pilot program to let consumers go right to insurance carriers for coverage available through online exchanges; the newspaper reported the direct enrollment option is already included in Obamacare as it was originally written.
"Given that it's not working and [consumers] were promised subsidies, there's got to be a better way," Nickel’s spokesman, J.P. Wieske, told the newspaper.
Gruber supports a short-term plan to let buyers get insurance on the exchanges directly from the carriers, but warns against allowing consumers use their tax credit in search of a plan outside the exchange market.
"If the young and healthy can use the tax credit to stay out of the reformed insurance market, then it will worsen the price increase in that market,” he told the newspaper.
Fox News noted the Walker plan – and other GOP alternatives – fly in the face of Obama’s Dec. 3 assertion Republicans want only to “go back to the way things used to be.”
GOP plans are generally consumer driven, Ed Haislmaier of The Heritage Group told Fox News.
“The patient makes choices,” he said.
Still, Gruber told Fox News other plans can’t go as far as the Affordable Care Act.
“I’ve yet to hear a Republican alternative which covers nearly as many uninsured or even half as many uninsured or offers evidence-based solutions to the health care cost crisis,” he told Fox News.
Obama And Mandela: A Lot More Than Little White Lies
UPI FILE
Nelson Mandela, the former terrorist-turned-compromiser and the so-called “father of democracy” who served as president of South Africa, hated America. But progressive liberals loved him — none more so than President Barack Obama, who ordered that flags at the White House and all Federal buildings fly at half-staff through Monday, following Mandela’s death last Thursday at age 95. But that was only the start.
Obama, like so many black celebrities and members of the white media, has personalized his relationship with Mandela beyond all reason: “He no longer belongs to us; he belongs to the ages,” Obama said upon learning of Mandela’s death. The President added, “We will not likely see the likes of Nelson Mandela again.”
I have no doubt about that last statement. Can you think of another terrorist bent on killing and overthrowing a government with bombs and armed insurrection who went on to be considered the greatest statesman ever? And just in case you think that Mandela was never a terrorist but a misunderstood man walking in the steps of Mahatma Gandhi, then you are at odds with Washington.
He was on the terrorist list until 2008.
No doubt, South Africans were upset when Mandela tried to blow up a hospital in the early 1960s. The difference between Mandela then and Timothy McVeigh, who blew up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, is that McVeigh was a deadlier terrorist. Later in life, Mandela did say that he was glad he was caught and did not kill all those innocent sick people. Millions of people find it heartwarming that Mandela had a change of heart.
Check one for sainthood!
In the 1980s, when the Government of South Africa said that Mandela could walk out of jail a free man if he would simply renounce violence as a means to black majority rule, the great leader said no. Apparently, his wife Winnie Mandela was too happy necklacing her black opponents with tires filled with gasoline for her husband to make a false promise.
Check two for sainthood!
Then there is the fact that Mandela is now celebrated as the greatest human being of the modern era, perhaps any era. Larry King said on CNN that he knows of no greater person who lived in the 20th century than Mandela. Apparently, King has forgotten a lot of people.
But my favorite shout-out comes from Peter Oborne, who wrote last Friday for The Telegraph:
There are very few human beings who can be compared to Jesus Christ. Nelson Mandela is one. This is because he was a spiritual leader as much as a statesman. His colossal moral strength enabled him to embark on new and unimaginable forms of action. He could lead through the strength of example alone.Check three for sainthood!
That makes two human beings who I have heard compared to Christ: Mandela and Obama. (After all, Oprah Winfrey called Obama the “chosen one.”)
What do both men have in common? Their roots are African. And, beneath all that gloss, polish and hype, Mandela was what Obama remains: a die-hard Marxist.
Op-ed:
Iran and ‘Fast & Furious’…tied together in lies and deceit by our ever-loving media
By: Diane Sori
You know things are bad…real bad…when even Iran calls Barack HUSSEIN Obama out as the liar that we all know him to be.Late Thursday night Iran quit and walked out of the ongoing nuclear disarmament talks on enforcement mechanisms currently ongoing with the P5+1 in Geneva. Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, Abbas Araqchi, claimed Washington agreed that NO further or new sanctions would be placed against Iran for six months, and that Obama is now “going against the spirit of the landmark agreement reached last month by expanding its sanctions blacklist…and Tehran was weighing the 'appropriate response.’”
And Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said that any new sanctions would most assuredly kill the agreed to comprehensive deal.
Washington countered this by saying the black listings were carried out within the "framework of the existing sanctions"…the very same sanctions that brought Tehran to the negotiating table and thus did NOT constitute new measures. Continuing with their bloviations, Washington tried justifying their blacklisting of a dozen additional foreign firms and individuals (for helping Tehran evade the international oil sanctions currently in place) by saying it was done to “head off Congress” from imposing additional sanctions that would be in clear breach of the Geneva agreement.
And true to form our spineless, gutless wonders in Congress agreed late Thursday night NOT to vote on any new sanctions this year…and I bet they won’t vote on any come the New Year either.
So here we have Obama continuing to lie to ‘We the People’ about any and every thing…we have Obama now lying to the enemy…and we have Obama getting Congress to back down on doing what they know must be done…ain’t Obamaland such a happy place (sarcastically said with a deep sigh).
And
coming right on the heels of this Iran nonsense is the fact that today
marks three years since the murder of Brian Terry, the Border Patrol
agent who was killed in a firefight on the Arizona-Mexico border in
December 2010...killed in what has become forever known as the ‘Fast and Furious’ gun running scandal yet NOT a word about that from Obama, AG Eric Holder, or the
rest of his merry band of miscreants.To date NOT one single person has been fired over ‘Fast and Furious’ let alone even been called to task…shades of Benghazi isn’t it. In fact, last month a federal court threw out a case brought by Brian Terry’s family against the government saying that money already awarded to the family precludes this sort of case from proceeding.
Saying the rule of law is that if the victim's surviving family members received compensation from another government statute…in this case money Congress gives to families of federal law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty…they cannot sue the government for more. The ruling also stated that federal worker’s comp law prohibits an award in this case.
Translation…as per this administration’s warped vindictive logic, because the Terry family have been awarded the death benefits they were legally and rightfully entitled to receive, they cannot now or ever sue the government for Brian’s wrongful death. Basically saying your son’s life was worth what we oh so generously give you and NOTHING more reeks of the now normal practice of NEVER dare go up against the Obama administration…period. NEVER mind that the Obama administration was ILLEGALLY running guns to Mexican drugs cartels…NEVER mind that Obama and Holder orchestrated the operation, armed the drug runners, and then orchestrated its subsequent cover-up with lie upon lie (including Holder’s lying under oath to Congress) when the operation went sour…NEVER mind any of that for Barack HUSSEIN Obama and those who orbit around him believe they are indeed untouchable.
And the 'in-the-pocket-of-Obama’ main stream media helps them along every step
of the way…helps Obama and his minions cover-up all the scandals that
shadow this administration for the media has forgotten how to factually
and without bias report the news. Instead they have chosen to decide
what is and what isn’t news…what should be and what shouldn’t be
reported…and if they deem something newsworthy for how long it should or
shouldn’t be reported on.Today's media is as much a cause of the problems in this country today as it is the problem in this country today. The media created the myth that is Barack HUSSEIN Obama choosing to ignore the facts about the man behind their created myth, and this directly resulted in rogue nations like Iran telling the US what they will or will NOT do...resulted in the cover-ups and lies spewed in the cases of Benghazi and 'Fast and Furious'...and God only knows what else they're covering-up for the worst president in US history.
Sorry Jimmy Carter but you've now been bumped down to number two.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)