Blog Loss

Could this be why conservatives are fervent that there not be National Health Care? Over at the think tank Cato, Michael Cannon warns that blocking any such legislation is vital for the GOP's survival Why? Norman Markowitz, a contributing editor at PoliticalAffairs.net (motto: "Marxist Thought Online"), makes an interesting point about how making citizens dependent on the government for their medical care can change the fates of political parties: A "single payer" national health system - known as "socialized medicine" in the rest of the developed world - should be an essential part of the change that the core constituencies which elected Obama desperately need. Britain serves as an important political lesson for strategists. After the Labor Party established the National Health Service after World War II, supposedly conservative workers and low-income people under religious and other influences who tended to support the Conservatives were much more likely to vote for the Labor Party... James Pethokoukis, at U.S. News and World Report, draws the same conclusion as Cannon does from Markowitz's analysis of how universal healthcare changed the political dynamic in Britain: The GOP strategist had been joking about the upcoming presidential election and giving his humorous assessments of the candidates. Then he suddenly cut out the schtick and got scary serious. "Let me tell you something, if Democrats take the White House and pass a big-government healthcare plan, that's it. Game over. Government will dominate the economy like it does in Europe. Conservatives will spend the rest of their lives trying to turn things around and they will fail..." ...Recently, I stumbled across this analysis of how nationalized healthcare in Great Britain affected the political environment there. As Norman Markowitz in Political Affairs, a journal of "Marxist thought," puts it: "After the Labor Party established the National Health Service after World War II, supposedly conservative workers and low-income people under religious and other influences who tended to support the Conservatives were much more likely to vote for the Labor Party when health care, social welfare, education and pro-working class policies were enacted by labor-supported governments." Passing Obamacare would be like performing exactly the opposite function of turning people into investors. Whereas the Investor Class is more conservative than the rest of America, creating the Obamacare Class would pull America to the left. Michael Cannon of the Cato Institute, who first found that wonderful Markowitz quote, puts it succinctly in a recent blog post: "Blocking Obama's health plan is key to the GOP's survival

The lost VA information including social security numbers your thoughts ? Your thoughts on how the information was lost ? How it was handled and how it's propsed we pay for it ? http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?aid=/20060604/breaking/60604004 http://forum.truthout.org/blog/?op=displaystory;sid=2006/6/15/125/71998 "You guys f----- it up," Filner declared. "Stop covering your a-- and figure it out." http://www.spokesmanreview.com/ap/story.asp?AP_ID=D8II13SG0 The money would be taken from programs in the department of Agriculture, Health and Human services, Labor, Transportation, Treasury and Veterns affairs whose money would otherwise go unused or from programs previously set for elimination, according to Scott Milburn, for the office of management and budget. This in The Spokesman Review hard form page A4 Thrusday June 29. I could not find a digital referance to this part of the article. If you find one please post it and thanks again. Let me rephrase the question "The stolen laptop including social security numbers allthough recovered what are the implications ?

Everytime I look, it seems another of THE Dear Leader's incrowd is involved in corruption. What do you think? Obama's Top Aide Gaspard Tied to ACORN Monday, September 28, 2009 2:40 PM By: David A. Patten Patrick Gaspard, considered one of the most powerful figures in the Obama White House, is a "longtime ACORN operative" and former union official, according to a report posted Monday on the American Spectator's online blog. Gaspard's name recently surfaced as the official President Obama dispatched to urge beleaguered New York Gov. David Paterson not to run for another term. Paterson insists he'll continue to run for governor even without Obama's support. Gaspard has extensive ties to organized labor and community-organizing groups. One measure of his influence in the White House: He holds the same "political affairs director" title that belonged to Karl Rove during the Bush administration. The Spectator's Matthew Vadum, a senior editor at the Capital Research Center think tank, reported that Gaspard was the New York political director for top ACORN official Bertha Lewis before 2003. Lewis is the CEO and "chief organizer" for ACORN, which is the subject of more than a dozen investigations for vote-registration fraud nationwide. The House and Senate recently moved to cut off ACORN funding after a series of videos revealed the willingness of its staff to help establish a reputed child-prostitution ring based in San Salvador. Obama refused to support ending federal funding for ACORN, however, telling ABC: "It's not something I'm paying a lot of attention to." Vadum cited the blog maintained by ACORN founder Wade Rathke, ChiefOrganizer.org, as his source for the Gaspard-ACORN link. In May, Rathke described how officials of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) teamed up with HealthCare Reform Czar Nancy-Ann DeParle to pry big price concessions from private health firms. Speaking of the advantage that comes from having powerful friends in high places, Rathke wrote: "Tell me that (Local) 1199’s former political director, Patrick Gaspard (who was ACORN New York’s political director before that) didn’t reach out from the White House and help make that happen, and I’ll tell you to take some remedial classes in 'politics 101.'" The Spectator described Gaspard "ACORN's Man in the White House." It also reported that he was national field director in 2004 for American Coming Together (ACT), a get-out-the-vote organization. The FEC hit ACT with a $775,000 fine for campaign-finance violations — one of the largest FEC fines ever — and it reportedly ceased operations in 2005. Gaspard also worked for eight years for SEIU Local 1199, a hospital workers local, according to the Village Voice. The Spectator report detailed what it calls the "fuzzy" line between the SEIU and ACORN. Vadum reported that SEIU Local 880 and the SEIU Local 100 that Rathke heads are "part of the ACORN network of organizations." He reported that the locals were listed as such on ACORN's Web site, buts the references recently were removed. © 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved. http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_acorn_gaspard/2009/09/28/265678.html?s=al&promo_code=8AAD-1

Who agrees that Obama doesn't denounce Castro's endorsement because Obama is a communist himself? http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=304124899839152 Among Obama's biggest admirers, for example, is one Pepe Lozano. Unknown at the national level, Lozano is more of a small-time agitator, just as Obama was in his community organizing days in Chicago. Maybe that explains part of the attraction. But it's more likely that Lozano, a leader in the Chicago Young Communist League and an editorial board member of the People's Weekly World, newspaper of the Communist Party USA, finds that Obama is the communist party's best hope because of the junior senator's far-left positions. "This is a history-making process," Lozano told a Chicago gathering of about 250 in June, "and we will be missing it if we don't do all we can to elect Barack Obama president." The next month, the People's Weekly World editorialized in favor of Obama, calling his a "transformative candidacy that would advance progressive politics for the long term." The communist support is nothing new, however. Joel Wendland, managing editor of Political Affairs: Marxist Thought Online, another CPUSA magazine, suggested in February that Obama could be "the people's president." Also in February, Political Affairs editor Terri Albano talked about how the "kind of upsurge" surrounding Obama "comes around just once in a lifetime. I hope for all progressives — each of us — (to) get involved. Don't stand on the sidelines. Be active. Don't let history pass you by." While communists are endorsing Obama, the Communist Party USA isn't. But that's not because it doesn't like Obama. The CPUSA simply does not endorse candidates. Yet it issued what could be called a non-endorsement endorsement of Obama in March, saying "his campaign has the clearest message of unity and progressive change." "This election can begin to turn the tide: It can help bring universal health care, save the environment and start the restoration of our democratic rights," the group said. "This election can strengthen democracy for all." If Obama is smarting because he didn't get an official Communist Party USA endorsement, maybe he will be mollified by the approval of an old communist to the south. Fidel Castro in the spring wrote in the state newspaper Granma that Obama is "the most progressive candidate for the U.S. presidency." That's an endorsement that anyone who doesn't have a socialist agenda should be ashamed of, especially given Castro's murder and intimidation of his foes and his repeated, egregious human rights violations of average Cuban citizens. But from what we can tell, Obama has not rejected Castro's support. What we can tell, though, is that when Obama says he stands for change, he could be talking about erasing facts that he considers to be politically damaging. Last month he scrubbed clean from his Web site evidence that he opposed the successful Iraq surge, and last winter he deleted the endorsement of the extremist Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who had become a political liability. But despite his campaign's penchant for cyberhygiene, the community blog on his own Web site still has an entry that's rather incriminating: "This group is for self-proclaimed Marxists/Communists/Socialists for the election of Barack Obama to the presidency. . . . We support Barack Obama because he knows what is best for the people!" The fact that it can still be found on Obama's official site would indicate that the campaign has no problem with it — and that it might even appreciate the endorsement. The current campaign is not Obama's first association with groups that promote socialism or its more stringent ideological cousin, communism. In 1995, he sought the endorsement of the New Party for his 1996 state Senate candidacy. The party — a collection of anti-capitalist ex-communists and socialists that disbanded in 1998 after six years of trying to push the Democratic Party even further left — gladly gave Obama its support. Obama also was endorsed in that election by the Democratic Socialists of America, the largest socialist group in the U.S. While the name might sound benign, the DSA has a poisonous agenda. Its goal is to establish "an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics" and is committed to "restructuring society." Members "are socialists because we reject an international economic order sustained by private profit, alienated labor, race and gender discrimination, environmental destruction, and brutality and violence in defense of the status quo." Just as it should be no surprise that a Che Guevara poster was found hanging in an Obama campaign office, it would not be a shock to see an Obama poster on a wall in the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism's headquarters. Mark Solomon, the group's national co-chair, wrote in a virtual endorsement in February that Obama "is an attractive, articulate and talented politician" whose "campaign has sparked a powerful surge." But that would be

Poll: Where do you come down on Global Warming - Chamber of Commerce (who knows it's a scam) or the "greens"? Climate Bill Backers Quit Chamber of Commerce By Amanda DeBard The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's largest business trade association, has suffered the defection of five of its members, including Apple Inc. and Nike Inc., over its hard-line opposition to pending climate change legislation. The resignations, submitted in just the past two weeks, have shined a spotlight on the deep divisions in industry over how to deal with the issue of climate change. The chamber is leading the charge against President Obama's effort to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere. But three utilities, along with business powerhouses Nike and Apple, support the climate legislation that passed the House in June. Disagreements are common in large trade associations. But resignations over policy are rare, an indication of how high the stakes are in opposing a top-agenda item of a sitting president. Apple is the latest company to publicly split with the chamber over climate policy. The maker of Macintosh computers and iPhones said Monday that it wishes the chamber would "play a constructive role in addressing the climate crisis" and finds it frustrating to be at odds with the chamber over regulating greenhouse gas emissions, according to a letter to the chamber from Catherine A. Novelli, Apple's vice president of worldwide government affairs. As a result of the chamber's position, Apple said, it would resign its membership effective immediately. In response, the chamber said its position on climate change is misunderstood, explaining that it opposes the pending legislation rather than comprehensive climate policy. "The chamber is a consensus-driven organization and welcomes input from any company that wants to work on a comprehensive approach to reduce greenhouse gases," said Eric Wohlschlegel, a chamber spokesman. "While well continue to represent the broad majority of our membership on this goal, we recognize that there are some companies who stand to gain more than others with the current options on the table." Three major utilities - PG&E Corp. of California, Exelon Corp. of Chicago and PNM Resources of New Mexico - said they also disagree with the chamber's position on its call for a public hearing on the Obama administration's assertion that there is a link between carbon dioxide and public health and welfare. The link, if it exists, would allow the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate all carbon dioxide emitters. The hearing would be the equivalent of a "Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century," Peter Darbee, PG&E's chief executive, said in a blog post last month announcing the split. "The carbon-based free lunch is over," John Rowe, Exelon's chief executive, said last month. Mr. Rowe said the world's climate problem cant be fixed free of charge, but his company supports the legislation because it "will drive low-carbon investments in the most inexpensive and efficient way possible." Exelon, the nation's largest nuclear power generator, could earn more than $1 billion a year in profit if the pending legislation becomes law, Mr. Rowe said. PNM Resources said it objected to calls to put "the science of climate change on trial" and would withdraw from the chamber. The utility had previously informed the chamber that it would allow its members on the chamber's board to lapse. The three utilities are members of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP), a group of businesses and environmentalists that supports the pending legislation. The House-passed climate bill was based in part on proposals advocated by USCAP. Nike also quit the chamber's board late last month, but will retain its membership in the group. The global athletic company said it "does not believe that on the issue of climate change the chamber represents the diversity of views held by board members." Separately, Johnson & Johnson, General Electric Co. and the San Jose Chamber of Commerce have said the chamber's position on climate change does not reflect their corporate views, but they have not severed ties with the business group. Pete Altman, climate campaign director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the actions of the companies show their frustration with what he called the chamber's "retrograde" position on climate change regulation. "Companies keep proving me wrong, because I think it's hard for them to leave the chamber. It's a big hurdle, because this is just not normally what companies do in order to express opinions," Mr. Altman said. "I have been surprised at how many companies are leaving or publicly criticizing the chamber." He added that the departures were based on a mix of reasons. He noted that some utility companies see the chance to profit from the legislation, while manufacturers desire a climate bill that gives them certainty about the future. In the cases of Nike and Apple, he said, they have made corpor

Doesn't this list of czars look suspicious? There are many duplicates within and of Secretary positions? 1. Afghanistan Czar – Richard Holbrooke 2. AIDS Czar * – Jeffrey Crowley 3. Auto Recovery Czar – Ed Montgomery 4. Border Czar * – Alan Bersin 5. California Water Czar – David J. Hayes 6. Car Czar – Ron Bloom 7. Central Region Czar – Dennis Ross(middle east including Afghanistan) 8. Climate Czar – Todd Stern 9. Domestic Violence Czar – Lynn Rosenthal 10. Drug Czar * – Gil Kerlikowske 11. Economic Czar * – Paul Volcker 12. Energy and Environment Czar – Carol Browner 13. Faith-Based Czar * – Joshua DuBois 14. Government Performance Czar – Jeffrey Zients 15. Great Lakes Czar – Cameron Davis 16. Green Jobs Czar – Van Jones 17. Guantanamo Closure Czar – Daniel Fried 18. Health Czar * – Nancy-Ann DeParle 19. Information Czar – Vivek Kundra 20. Intelligence Czar * – Dennis Blair 21. Mideast Peace Czar – George Mitchell 22. Pay Czar – Kenneth R. Feinberg 23. Regulatory Czar – Cass R. Sunstein * 24. Science Czar – John Holdren 25. Stimulus Accountability Czar – Earl Devaney 26. Sudan Czar – J. Scott Gration 27. TARP Czar – Herb Allison 28. Technology Czar – Aneesh Chopra 29. Terrorism Czar – John Brennan 30. Urban Affairs Czar – Adolfo Carrion Jr. 31. Weapons Czar – Ashton Carter 32. WMD Policy Czar – Gary Samore http://me.jeremybuff.com/blog/list-of-obama-czars/?wpmp_tp=1