Video of Rally Via C-Span.
I went with my
Showing posts with label Election 2010. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Election 2010. Show all posts
Saturday, October 23
My First Obama Rally (w/Brown & Boxer at USC)!
Video of Rally Via C-Span.
I went with my
Wednesday, October 20
The Infectious Virus of the O'Donnell Doctrine
As Rachel takes us back to re-examine the tape, it's clear that O'Donnell really does think she's won on this point. That Chris Coons accurate quoting of the beginning of the First Amendment is ALL FAIL.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The Constitution also says this in Article VI.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Taken together these two Constitutional clauses establish that Government will not impose religion on the people, and that religion will not be imposed or required of the agents of the government.
Behind this and the letters of Jefferson and Madison you have the Treaty of Tripoli from 1797.
As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.[
Although this seems self-evident to many of us, and has been affirmed in many court cases including Reynolds and Engle v Vitale (1962) which barred the state from imposing "Official" prayer in public schools. It's not just what's in the literal words of the Constitution, but it's also from multiple judicial interpretations of that phrase.
Further (ht Sam Wise Gingy) O'Donnell doesn't seem to realize that the scenario she suggests - that a local School Board has the "Right" to place Intelligence Design in their curriculum - has already failed before the Courts as it did in the Dover Case - where the Judge overruled the School Board and made this finding.
Teaching intelligent design in public school biology classes violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (and Article I, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania State Constitution) because intelligent design is not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."
Coons was absolutely, 100% correct.
But the Wingnuts see this in a completely different light. Sharron Angle says that Thomas Jefferson was "Misquoted" in his letters to the Danbury Church. Yeah, that's why Dan Burton has been cutting Jefferson out of Texas Textbooks, because he's been "Misquoted". Those are some easy examples and then there's the Big One.
And then there's - Rush Limbaugh.
Limbaugh: Christine O'Donnell was absolutely correct. The First Amendment says nothing about the Separation of Church and State.
And the left has taken this to say that religious people can not be in government. And that you can't teach something like creation in the schools while you can teach evolution because evolution isn't religion but creationism is. Intelligent design can't be taught because that's a religion, evolution is. Yet both require faith because neither can be proved.
Separation of church and state is not in the Constitution, and the fact that people laughed about this is what's really scary.
So Limbaugh feels she won too. What we're seeing here is part of a larger counter-factual dynamic coming from the right. They are deeply invested in things that are clearly not true, they deeply believe in things that can be called little more than a series of self-aggrandizing fantasies.
And Limbaugh isn't alone - here's the American Spectator on the O'Donnell Doctrine.
The political and pundit class is in a tizzy because Delaware Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell had the effrontery to question Supreme Court jurisprudence that has established a "wall of separation between Church and State."
But while O'Donnell may not have been as articulate as she should have been, she's nonetheless right: The phrase "separation of church and state" appears nowhere in the Constitution. It was penned, instead, by President Thomas Jefferson in a letter that Jefferson sent to the Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut.
And, as the Heritage Foundation has observed, far from being a "principled statement on the prudential and constitutional relationship between church and state," Jefferson's missive, in fact, was "a political statement written to reassure pious Baptist constituents that Jefferson was, indeed, a friend of religion."
See, from Jefferson own words "Separation of Church and State" they devise that he was a "friend of religion" - I guess because he agreed to refrain from using the power of government against them, even though they had opposed his Presidency, but then again - "Freedom of Religion and Expression" also stems from the First Amendment doesn't it?
Here's one more example from the "Freedomist.com".
In a debate at Widener University, with a leftist crowd of uneducated college students (who seem to believe the 1st amendment actually contains the phrase “separation of church and state”) Christine O’Donnell stood up to the leftist belief that religion has no place in the public square, that only secular godlessness reigns supreme in the public square. As a result, the leftist blogosphere is atwitter, literally, accusing Christine O’Donnell of not knowing what the 1st amendment means. Oops!
It turns out she does, and they don’t. The 1st amendment in no way shape or form articulates this mythological ‘separation of church and state’ that has been used by secular, godless, leftists to chase any religious value systems out of the public square in favor of so-callled value-neutral secular judgements.
Yeah, we leftists are such godless bullies against the faithful, because we seem to feel that if we were to establish State Sponsorship for religion, exactly which Religion would that be? Protestant? Catholic? Episcopalian? Anglican? Calvinist? Baptist? Mormon? Jewish? Muslim? Baha'i? Hindu? Kabala? Aqua Buddhist?
Which one would rule? Would it be the majority - what if that majority shifts demographically over time? What would happen to the freedom and faith of all the others when that occurs? Do we all have to become Wiccans if they gain electoral dominance and have to write the Pledge to Gaia into our Public School Curriculum?
It's all fun and games to them until someone suggests we have a weekly mass during 5th Period for Thor God of Thunder.
As you can see by how this is written, like O'Donnell, they think they're the smart ones - who have a Special Insight into Truth and we're the ones who are misguided and deluded. They simply don't get it. The only way to protect all faiths, is to ensure to no single faith becomes State sponsored and dominant. There will never be an Official Church of America.
They continue to think that "Intelligent Design" has something to do with Science, and that it should be Taught in Science class, even though it has No Basis in Science. They argue that Evolution is simply a "Theory" - ignoring that you could say the same thing about "Gravity", but I wouldn't recommended stepping off a cliff simply because you don't "Believe in the theory".
E=MC2 was just a theory too, until Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The fact that Sunday Schools and Parochial Schools can already teach any religious doctrine they like, is simply not enough for them - they think Government should be able to mandate Religious Creationism-Lite such as Intelligent Design into our Public Schools. They can't pray enough at their own Church, they also have to Pray in Public and have the School Administration use it to intimidate and coerce everyone else to go along? That's all Fail.
Evolution is the core basis of our understanding of Biology, to deny and doubt it would undermine much of our Medicine and Biotech. For example we develop vaccines on the biological basis that living organisms adapt to their environment and can develop anti-bodies to fight off infection. In contrast to this "Intelligent Design" leads us to what Scientifically Valid Conclusions? That we can Pray our Cancer Away? If we fail to understand our own biology accurately, our ability to address disease, infection and injury can be dangerously diminished. That's not just a difference of opinion, that's foolhardy and dangerous.
This type of anti-thinking among the right is also why you find large numbers of Climate Change Deniers among GOP Gubernatorial Candidates.
An exclusive Wonk Room analysis finds that 22 of the 37 Republican candidates for governor this November are deniers of the scientific consensus on global warming pollution. These science deniers are part of an anti-reality wave of Tea Party candidates, who comprise the Republican slate for the U.S. House and Senate. “The GOP is stampeding toward an absolutist rejection of climate science that appears unmatched among major political parties around the globe, even conservative ones,” writes the National Journal’s Ron Brownstein.
Although 97 percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is manmade, only two Republican gubernatorial candidates in Democratic strongholds — Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie (R-VT) and Lt. Gov. Duke Aiona (R-HI) — want to address the threat. Two more candidates — Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ) and Meg Whitman (R-CA) — accept that global warming is a manmade problem, but oppose enacting policy to reduce fossil fuel pollution. The other eleven candidates have “artfully avoided” any discussion of the threat global warming poses to their states, from flood-ravaged Iowa and Tennessee to drought-parched Nevada.
It's not just Climate Science they deny, it's Science they deny. They are in denial of Fact. This is where we get the "Stimulus Failed" when it's clear that it saved us from going into a new Great Depression. This is where we get claims such as Obamacare leading to "Death Panels" which Rep Paul Broun just Resurrected by linking it to the Stimulus.
BROUN: We see so many unintended consequences, or intended consequences, that are gonna force people off medicare advantage. Obamacare if it stays in as the law of the land is going to hurt the elderly more than anyone else [...] In the stimulus bill Nancy Pelosi set up a panel or something called comparativeness effectiveness research, what they’re doing there with that is they’re not comparing effectiveness as well as I and all the physicians will do, they’re comparing effectiveness of spending a dollar on one person versus another, which means the elderly are gonna be denied the care to keep them living and keep their health in good shape so they can have a useful, fruitful productive life. So see marked rationing of care for the elderly and those who have disabilites and those who have illnesses that will be terminal over a fairly short period of time, that may be who knows, ten years, those people are gonna be denied coverage of care of their health problems under Obamacare. [...] It’s gonna kill people by denying care.
Just like their misinterpretation of the First Amendment, this view is completely upside down - the Comparative Effectiveness Research is intended to find more efficient and cost effective ways to expand coverage to more people, not deny it.
Under the legislation, researchers will receive $1.1 billion to compare drugs, medical devices, surgery and other ways of treating specific conditions. The bill creates a council of up to 15 federal employees to coordinate the research and to advise President Obama and Congress on how to spend the money.
The program responds to a growing concern that doctors have little or no solid evidence of the value of many treatments. Supporters of the research hope it will eventually save money by discouraging the use of costly, ineffective treatments.
Shouldn't we know what treatments work and which don't? Shouldn't we put a higher priority of effective treatments that don't break our bank?
The fact Broun is himself a Medical Doctor, makes this even more insidious. But that's what happens when someone has become infected by the Anti-Fact Virus of the Right. And sadly, whether they take back either chamber of congress - there is all likelyhood that this virus will only intensify after the election. It's not the separation of Church and State that these people should be worried about, it's their own separation of Fact and Thought.
Vyan
Tuesday, October 19
Aqua Buddha Victim says Conway ad "Over the Top", but Accurate
Dem Jack Conway's new ad hammering Rand Paul over his college excesses is accurate on the facts, and it's legit to raise questions about his past views as a way of probing whether his current posture as a conservative Christian is genuine, the victim of Paul's Aqua Buddha prank just told me in an interview.
She confirmed the ad's accuracy, and wondered aloud why Paul doesn't just admit what occured and move on.
"Yes, he was in a secret society, yes, he mocked religion, yes, the whole Aqua Buddha thing happened," she said. "There was a different side to him at one time and he's pretending that it never existed. If he would just acknowledge it, it would all go away and it wouldn't matter anymore."
There'e nothing wrong with changing your mind, or your point of view - so why can't Paul just say that he's changed and put this to rest?
Of all the things that Rand Paul has said in recent months, from his questioning the legitimacy of the Public Accommodations Act, his opposition to the Americans with Disabilities Act, his weird support and defense for BP when they were responsible for the largest environmental disaster in U.S. History, and all the kooky things he's said it's weird to me that Jack Conway decided to plant his flag with the Aqua Buddha - but that's seems to be exactly what he's done, and it appears to be working.
The TPM Polltracker now has Conway within 5 points, up from an 11 point deficit that had been holding for weeks.
All of this isn't to say that Paul's accuser in this case is entirely happy with the Conway ad.
"The tone of voice sounds more ominous than it actually was," she said, referring to the ad's narrator. "The way the person is talking, it sounds like [Paul] is some kind of evil-worshipping person who's a little bit more threatening than perhaps he really is. The ad is over the top. I'm disappointed that someone is making this into a central issue."
It seems to me that this was really not much more than a silly college prank involving the swim team. This is Animal House, minus most of the funny - but not really anything more than that. It should only be a two minute discussion: Did this happen? Yes, but don't most of us do silly things when we're young, I'm an adult now and shouldn't we be discussing adult issues?
End of problem, right? But no, instead of responding reasonably to the issue - even if it has been blown out of proportion - Paul is now hurting himself by grossly overreacting to it as he did here.
However anyone feels about Conway bringing this up and hammering on it, the question now is why hasn't Paul responded?
Paul could have argued that the source is mistaken or untrustworthy, that this event never happened and therefore there is no answer to the question of "why mocked people of faith" because it didn't happen.
He didn't do that.
He could have argued that it were merely a joke, and not intended to be taken literally or seriously.
He didn't do that.
He could have argued it didn't happen this way, it happened that way!
He didn't do that.
He could have argued, as does the whistleblower, that his views from when he was a youth 30 years ago have greatly changed - that he's essentially not that person anymore.
He didn't do that.
Instead he attacked Conway for daring to ask the question "Have you no decency, Sir?" Rather than address the issue he basically jumped up and down and stamped his feet - practically saying "Stop Lying about my Record!"
Well, maybe Conway isn't perfectly "decent" - maybe he's willing to throw a haymaker in order to win - Lord knows Republicans do it all the time. From Saxby Chambliss who made a decorated War Veteran into an aider and abettor for al Qaeda, the Willie Horton ad, to David Vitter accusing Melancon of providing Welfare for Illegals, Sharron Angle accusing Harry Reid of providing Viagra to Sex Offenders, of Congressional Candidate Renee Elmers who attacked for Rep. Bob Etheridge for Not Speaking Out against the Ground Zero Victory Mosque, it's not like those guys are pulling their punches.
So why should Democrats play nice, exactly?
If Rand Paul can't stand up to Jack Conway, or for that matter Rachel Maddow or Chris Matthews, how's he going to stand up to al Qeada and the Taliban? (Not that I think Maddow/Conway/Matthews are equivalent to the Taliban - but didn't we repeatedly hear this very argument whenever someone couldn't stand up the "tough questioning" of Fox News?) I'm just saying this guy has repeatedly shown he can't take the heat once it's turned up to broil anymore than Tea Bagger Joe Miller can take a tough question without retaliating against journalists - who were just trying to interview another journalist that he'd had illegally handcuffed by Off duty U.S. Army personnel who were illegally moonlighting for a fly-by-night security firm and bait shop, or Christine O'Donnnell can show she's ever actually read the 1st Amendment, or Sharron Angle who can't tell a Latino from an Asian, or Carl Paladino who hasn't had a foot he couldn't insert all the way to his own back molar!)
These guys are absolutely not ready for prime time, and if it takes unflinching hard knocks to make the American people see it - so be it. Better Democrats leave everything on the field, than let these tea bagging wingnuts take over Congress and the country.
Vyan
Friday, October 8
Rachel Maddow v Art (Crazy Bag) Robinson: Cage Match
Wow... just WOW!
Before I break down this lunar loon, let me first cleanse your palatte with a previous piece that Maddow did with Congressman Pete Defazio, where the question of whose funding this guy was first openly asked.
Ok, back to crazytown.
Most of Rachel's interview with Robinson is obviously a complete cluster-frack, but in the midst of all this we do get one half-way cogent position, or comment from this nutbag.
The only thing he was willing to admit to is being a global warming denier. Check.
Maddow: You're well known for your belief that Global Warming is made up. That that is not true, that's sort of a source of your national reputation, to the extent that you have one. You're opponent Mr. Defazio...
Robinson: That's not a belief, that's a conclusion I reached as a Physical Scientist. I have a degree from CalTech. Many others who have degrees from CalTech have agreed with me on this. Thousands of Physical Scientist in this country who on the basis of scientific evidence alone reject the cause of global warming. I'll tell you madam, there are thousands and thousands of them - far more than there are at the UN pushing this bogus claim about global warming.
Did anyone mention to this officious Caltech blowhard that Rachel Maddow has a Bachelors degree from Stanford and is a Rhodes Scholar with a PHd in Philosophy from Oxford University based on a thesis titled HIV/AIDS and Health Care Reform in British and American Prisons?
Everything, EVERYTHING, after this was dodge, deflect, and blame or accuse Peter Defazio of something or the other, and Rachel Maddow of being up to some nefarious evil Liberal Plot to defame and smear Mr. Robinson.
I'm not going to get into his own quotes which paint him as a denier of HIV's link to AIDs and his argument that the entire thing was a government political plot. He rejected that anyway. All he wanted to say was...
Robinson: Pete Defazio voted for higher taxes. Pete Defazio voted for more government regulation. Pete Defazio has cut off Oregonians from access to use their forests and their fisheries. Pete Defazio voted for the Medical Care after he promised that he wouldn't
Pete Defazio's Voting Record is Here via Project Vote Smart.
He voted for the Stimulus which included Tax Cuts for 95% of Americans. He Voted for Energy Efficiency Loans, he voted against Cap and Trade, he voted for Vouchers for Fuel Efficient Cars, He voted to add the Taunton River to part of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Program, he voted in favor of Tax Credits for Offshore Drilling and in favor of Oil Production Leases, he voted against forcibly removing our forces from Afghanistan, he voted in favor of the New GI Bill, he voted to improve House Ethics and he voted for the final Health Care Act, even though it didn't have a Public Option.
Generally speaking Defazio is your average middle-of-road Democrat. Not a fire-breathing Liberal, but not a Conserva-Crat either. Here he is with Rachel again explaining way back in the day how Obama's Stimulus was too weak on infrastructure. Oh, for the days when Obama used to tell the Repubs - "I Won"!
Here's a tip Art, when you're being interviewed - the interview is about YOU and what you believe - not all the problems with your opponent.
But Robinson, in this interview refused to explain his support for the concept of hor-mesis, which is the idea that exposure to low-level radiation could actually be beneficial for humans, and hence we should simply dilute the waste of Nuclear Powerplants with sea water and allow it to spread through the population.
This is something I actually bothered to look up. Dodgy though it can be Wikipedia has something on the subject of Hormesis.
Hormesis (from Greek hórmēsis "rapid motion, eagerness," from ancient Greek hormáein "to set in motion, impel, urge on") is the term for generally-favorable biological responses to low exposures to toxins and other stressors. A pollutant or toxin showing hormesis thus has the opposite effect in small doses as in large doses. A related concept is Mithridatism, which refers to the willful exposure to toxins in an attempt to develop immunity against them.
In toxicology, hormesis is a dose response phenomenon characterized by a low dose stimulation, high dose inhibition, resulting in either a J-shaped or an inverted U-shaped dose response. Such environmental factors that would seem to produce positive responses have also been termed “eustress”.
As a layman, I find that pretty clear. It's sounds like the same principle behind vaccinations and immunity. A small or low level dose or exposition to a potential toxin, virus or poison can lead to the development of resistance and which can render something immune to the effects of this toxin. If we're talking about Small Pox, or some other virus this seems to have been clearly borne out in science. However, when you're talking about radiation it's an entirely different story. Viruses interact with our bodies in a specific way that can allow us to develop anti-bodies which can specifically target and eradicate that virus from out systems. Radiation isn't a virus, it's a form of energy entering our bodies and destroying cells as it's passes through. It's like arguing you could became immune to a Light if you just had enough anti-bodies for it, or that you could develop a resistance to a knife blade entering your sternum.
Still apparently the idea has not gone unaddressed in Scientific Circles.
One percent (195 out of 20,285) of the published articles contained 668 dose-response relationships that met the entry criteria.[1]
Indeed, the idea that low dose effects may be (sometimes strikingly) different is accepted, but that the low dose effect is positive is questionable. In one of the better studied areas of hormesis, radiation hormesis the United States National Research Council (part of the National Academy of Sciences),[2] the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (a body commissioned by the United States Congress)[3] and the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Ionizing Radiation (UNSCEAR) all agree that radiation hormesis is not clearly shown, nor clearly the rule for radiation doses.
So it seems that Mr. Robinson is not entirely a fool, still he seems to be a half a bag short of a nut. Just remember that Ted Kasczinky, aka the Unibomber, also had a prestigious degree from Harvard, a Phd in Mathematics from the University of Michigan and was an instructer at UC Berkeley by the time he was just 25. Since then things have gone less well for Ted, and after multiple bombings and murders, his address is now the Colorado Supermax Detention Facility.
Smart is apparently no antidote for crazy.
Pete Defazio is currently running 2 points ahead of this guy -- why don't we SEND HIM SOME MONEY via Act Blue? (Update: Nate Silver has this race as a 100% chance for Defazio's reelection, holding a 27 point lead - which is a massive relief, Robinson did receive $178,000 independently, but Defazio currently has over $600,000 more than Robinson in reserve)
Vyan
Thursday, September 30
Are Dems Doomed in November?
For example Health Care has begun to kick in, but Dems won't take credit for it because they feel they'll get hit upside the head with stuff like this...
But all they have to do - is FIGHT BACK.
Right now ElectionProjection.com says the Democrats are likely to retain control of the Senate by 1 Seat, but lose the House by 3 giving Republicans a 220 to 215 majority.
This despite the fact that the so-called "Pledge To America" that the GOP House just released contains seven items that are already included in the Health Care Bill and are now part of the law. Via Thinkprogress
| Affordable Care Act | GOP’s ‘Pledge To America’ | |
| Insurance Across State Lines | Allows for the creation of State Health Insurance Compacts – permits states to enter into agreements to allow for the sale of insurance across state lines. (SEC. 1333; p. 100-101) | “We will allow individuals to buy health care coverage outside of the state in which they live. ” (p. 15) |
| High-Risk Insurance Pools | The states and the federal government have already established high-risk insurance pools to provide temporary coverage to individuals with pre-existing conditions until 2014. (SEC. 1101; p. 30-33) | “We will expand state high-‐risk pools, reinsurance programs and reduce the cost of coverage” (p. 15) |
| Pre-Existing Conditions | Children cannot be denied coverage starting today, but beginning in 204, insurers must accept everyone who applies. (SEC. 2702-2705; p. 46-51) | “We will make it illegal for an insurance company to deny coverage to someone with prior coverage on the basis of a pre-‐existing condition.” (p. 15) |
| Lifetime and Annual Caps | A health insurer cannot impose lifetime limits and will be prohibited from placing annual limits on plans beginning in 2014. (SEC. 2711; p. 14) | “[E]liminate annual and lifetime spending caps” (p.15) |
| Recissions | A health insurance issuer cannot rescind a policy except for in cases of fraud. (SEC. 2712; p. 14) | “[P]revent insurers from dropping your coverage just because you get sick.” (p.15) |
| State Innovation | States can receive waives from certain requirements if they can cover the uninsured and lower health costs in a more innovative manner. (SEC. 1332; p. 98-100) | “We will incentivize states to develop innovative programs that lower premiums and reduce the number of uninsured Americans.” (p.15) |
| Conscience Protections | The law does not affect existing conscience protections or discriminate “on the basis of the willingness or refusal to provide, pay for, cover, or refer for abortion or to provide or participate in training to provide abortion.” (SEC. 1303; p. 67) | “We will also enact into law conscience protections for health care providers, including doctors, nurses, and hospitals.” (p.15) |
So not only are the Dems for Covering Children with Pre-existing Conditions - the Republicans are For it Too - or at least they say they are on paper. Yet in the clip Amy Holmes argues that...
Holmes: Some Insurers are already dropping their coverage of sick kids because of Obamacare...
And on this she is correct, some Insurers now refuse to offer "Child-Only" policies. It's not that they dropped coverage just for sick kids, they're dropping it for ALL KIDS so they don't have to cover the ones who are sick. Still, few people who report on this seems to also report that parents with group and family plans now have to accept children at least until those children are 26 years-old, no matter whether their already sick or not. Although you can't get children individual coverage - you can add them to your coverage.
Also this coverage gap created by greedy, heartless health insurance companies would now make nearly all of those children eligible for SCHIP which has been greatly expanded, and State-based High-Risk Poll Insurance which are already coming online at fairly affordable rates. So far enrollment rates for these pools has been low, but then that might be because NO ONE TALKS ABOUT THEM!
Certainly not Democrats.
Breitbart argues that ..
Obamacare was done at a tremendous cost...
He spouts this lie, another in his long string of them, even when the CBO says that Repealing the PPACA would increase the Deficit by $455 Billion.
On balance, the two laws’ health care and revenue provisions are estimated to reduce the projected deficit in 2020 by $28 billion, and the education provisions of the Reconciliation Act are estimated to reduce the projected deficit in 2020 by $2 billion. [...]
Finally, you asked what the net deficit impact would be if certain provisions of PPACA and the Reconciliation Act that were estimated to generate net savings were eliminated—specifically, those which were originally estimated to generate a net reduction in mandatory outlays of $455 billion over the 2010–2019 period. The estimate of $455 billion mentioned in your letter represents the net effects of many provisions. Some of those provisions generated savings for Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and some generated costs. If those provisions were repealed, CBO estimates that there would be an increase in deficits similar to its original estimate of $455 billion in net savings over that period.
Repealing Obamacare would cost Tax Payers almost a Half $Billion, But Democrats don't say it.
Amy comes back again with this gem...
Holmes: What is the morality of passing legislation that is now keeping business from hiring new employees?
First of all, Obama always said "If you like your current insurance - you can keep it and it won't change". He never intended to drastically change the existing Employee-based system, only to add minor fixes - such as the pre-existing condition ban - and to gradually create some alternatives to it for those who can't even get or afford insurance. Plus the ridiculous rate increases the insurance companies have been piling on the backs of business aren't anything new. Remember just last year when Anthem Blue Cross tried to raise their rates by 39 percent in California? Ultimately a rate hike was approved by State Regulators, but for less than half that amount.
Insurance companies have been blaming their rate increases on "Obamacare" requirements but that is simply bogus, and HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has begun to call them out for it.
It has come to my attention that several insurance carriers have sent out letters to their enrollees falsely blaming premium increases for 2011 on the (Health Care Bill)
...
According to our analysis and some academic and industry experts, any potential premium impact from consumer protections and increased quality improvements should be minimal. We estimate that the effect will be no more than one or two percent.
...
Already my department has provided 46 states with information to strengthen the review and transparency of proposed premiums. Later this fall we will issue a regulation requiring state or federal review of all unreasonable rate increases.
State regulators already have the power to restrict and reduce these rate hikes by requiring that insurers justify them, HHS is moving to help strengthen their hand in this area to continue to prevent consumer gouging. Also even prior to the Exchanges coming online in 2014, insurers that gouge customers NOW, can be barred from participating in the exchanges and lose access to 32 Million additional customers and $Billions in government subsidies.
But Democrats Don't Talk About it.
Also millions of small businesses (those with less that 50 employees) already have access to a 35% tax credit for their health insurance which can directly offset even the highest proposed cost increase.
Small businesses will receive $40 billion in new tax credits to help cover the cost of health coverage for their employees. The tax credit is designed to both support those small businesses that provide coverage today as well as new businesses who decide to provide coverage. Effective immediately, the tax credit is worth up to 35 percent of the premiums a business pays to cover its workers and in 2014, the value of the credit will increase to 50 percent. An estimated 4 million small businesses will be eligible to receive these tax credits.
But Democrats don't talk about it.
Instead they swallow the line that this is all somehow "Obama's Fault".
Notice how quiet Seth McFarland is during this entire exchange, and finally when he does speak he only mentions one thing - The Public Option.
Once we lost the Public Option - Obama essentially lost his Democratic Base, those who frankly really wanted either Single-Payer, or at least making all health insurers into Non-Profits in order to limit the kind of price gouging and coverage restrictions, all done to increase profits, that we've seen for over a decade.
No, we didn't get the Public Option - however, what we did get is just as good. As a replacement for the PO, a Non-Profit Option will be offered by the Office of Personnel Management. The only real difference between the Public Option and this one, is that instead of being run by Federal employees directly, it's run by a Federal Contractor - but the Director of OPM would have broad control and oversight of that contractor. This is the Directors Authority over that Non-Profit Agency.
SEC 1332 (3) NON-PROFIT ENTITIES.—In entering into contracts under paragraph (1), the Director shall ensure that at least one contract is entered into with a non-profit entity.
(4) ADMINISTRATION.—The Director shall implement this subsection in a manner similar to the manner in which the Director implements the contracting provisions with respect to carriers under the Federal employees health benefit program under chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code, including
(through negotiating with each multi-state plan)—
(A) a medical loss ratio;
(B) a profit margin;
(C) the premiums to be charged; and
(D) such other terms and conditions of coverage as are
in the interests of enrollees in such plans.
(5) AUTHORITY TO PROTECT CONSUMERS.—The Director may prohibit the offering of any multi-State health plan that does not meet the terms and conditions defined by the Director with respect to the elements described in subparagraphs (A)
through (D) of paragraph (4).
(b) ELIGIBILITY.—A health insurance issuer shall be eligible to enter into a contract under subsection (a)(1) if such issuer—
(1) agrees to offer a multi-State qualified health plan that meets the requirements of subsection (c) in each Exchange in each State;
Over and above the new 85% medical loss ration which allows only 15% overhead and profit for any insurer who wishes to participate in the exchange, this option can be negotiated by the OPM Director to an even higher MLR. The Director can set their premium rates and their profit margin, which being by definition "Non-Profit" could essentially be Zero. Current Pseudo Non-Profits like Anthem/Blue Shield are not likely to qualify.
The CBO analysis of costs of operating this option when contrasted with the Public Option were essentially nil, and with other changes includes actually saved about $2 Billion more than it had previously.
This estimate incorporates the effects of the manager’s amendment, which would make a number of changes to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as originally proposed. The changes with the largest budgetary effects include: expanding eligibility for a small business tax credit; increasing penalties on certain uninsured people; replacing a "public plan" that would be run by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) with "multi-state" plans that would be offered under contract with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM); deleting provisions that would increase payment rates for physicians under Medicare; and increasing the payroll tax on higher-income individuals and families. Of the total deficit reduction of $132 billion projected to result from the legislation, the manager’s amendment accounts for about $2 billion, and the act as originally proposed accounts for the remaining $130 billion.
The Public Option wasn't simply deleted, it was Replaced by something that from a deficit and premium controlling standpoint - is just as effective!
But Democrats don't say it.
Lastly as of now... Preventive Care is Free. Insurers are prohibited from charging co-pays or deductibles for mammograms or other cancer screenings.
Effective for health plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010
All new plans must cover certain preventive services such as mammograms and colonoscopies without charging a deductible, co-pay or coinsurance.
But Democrats don't say it.
Maher: I don't know how Democrats can keep losing the argument about sick kids, they lost that one this week. They can't even mention health care because it "doesn't poll well". Well maybe if you'd mention it - IT WOULD POLL WELL! Maybe if you brag about what you did for people, it wouldn't poll badly...
This admittedly received the biggest applause of the segment, and it should have - because he's dead right.
It's not guaranteed, but maybe if Democrats DID mention that much of "The Pledge" is simply trying to steal their thunder by laying claim to things the Democrats already did without any Republican support, and maybe if they mentioned that ridiculous rate hikes of 32% can be blocked, and that even if insurers refuse to offer child-only policies - they still have to let now kids on their parents policies, and maybe if they mentioned that there are now state run low-cost high-risk insurance pools for people with pre-existing conditions or who have simply been without coverage for six months, that repealing "Obamacare" would add almost half a $billion to the deficit, that millions of small businesses now have a 35% tax credit for health insurance that will increase to 50% in 2014, that HHS is cracking down on price gouging by insurers and can block them from the Exchanges in 2014 if they gouge now, that Preventive Care is now FREE, and that although we didn't get the "Public Option" we got something that does the same exact thing just as well, if we simply bothered to mention some of this - at least once in a while - we might keep control of both the Senate and the House.
I understand we didn't get everything we might have hoped for, and that there are still loopholes in the law that these private insurers are trying to squirm and slither through. That's always going to be the case.
Yeah, but maybe if Democrats - not just those in Washington - but all of us talked about this stuff more, while admitting things aren't perfect, we might start seeing better polling numbers, and possibly electoral prospects in November.
Maybe... but one thing is certain, if we don't start pushing back on all these memes, distortions and out-and-out lies - and I mean agressively - we can pretty much guarantee what's going to happen in less than 40 days.
Right now all we need to do is keep two or three seats in the House. That could be Alan Grayson's seat (since he's currently trailing). That's all we need to keep Grayson and one or two more... his seat is worth a bit of laryngitis isn't it?
Vyan
Thursday, September 16
Time to Get Motivated - Get Active - Get Angry or Else
The latest Census Numbers are the 43.6 Million Americans are Living in Poverty, and that over 50 Million now do not have Health Care.
Ed: If we want to keep the progressive agenda alive, we have to maintain our Majorities in the House and the Senate!
He also talks to Ben Jealous about the continue signs of Bigotry and Racism in the Party.
Ben: What I can't understand is why they can't be more outspoken about the racists in their ranks. Why they won't push them out. Look, you can have a party that's based on small government and tax policy, that's great. Let's have that debate, but if you want to let people to stir up the pot and pour gasoline on the flame, that's a problem. I rarely say good things about Glenn Beck, but it was a good move for him to say "Leave your signs at home"
That's true, but then again Glenn is overall a negative influence, particularly on issues of inciting violence - while at the same time claiming the violence will come "From the left".
Ben: We have friends at the ACLU and Tides Foundation who are shaken up as we speak because a man was on his way to shoot up both those locations. He ended up getting caught by the CHP, wearing body armor after a shootout, and they talked to him and asked what he was doing. "Why did you target the Tides Foundation" - Because he'd heard about it on Glenn Beck
Well, I'm not sure he actually said that - he said he wanted to start a "Revolution".
Williams, an anti-government zealot on parole for bank robbery, had hoped to "start a revolution" with the bloodshed at the ACLU and the Tides Foundation in San Francisco, authorities said.
But the fingerprints of his planned attack only lead to one place... Glenn Beck.
According to our searches, since Beck’s show premiered on January 19, 2009, Tides has been mentioned on 31 editions of Fox News programs, 29 of which were editions of Beck’s show (the other two were on Sean Hannity’s program). In most of those references, Beck attacked Tides, often weaving the organization into his conspiracy theories. Two of those Beck mentions occurred during the week before Williams’ shootout.
…
By contrast, since January 19, 2009, according to our Nexis search, Tides was not mentioned on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, or PBS. Not once. This search is not perfect — Nexis does not include, for example, MSNBC’s daytime coverage. But the contrast with Beck’s coverage is stark.
And just what was it former Florida GOP Chair said again?
“In the year since I issued a prepared statement regarding President Obama speaking to the nation’s school children, I have learned a great deal about the party I so deeply loved and served,” Greer’s Monday statement said. “Unfortunately, I found that many within the GOP have racist views and I apologize to the President for my opposition to his speech last year and my efforts to placate the extremists who dominate our Party today. My children and I look forward to the President’s speech.”
Greer declined to name names, but said, “I had to discipline state members who promoted racists [sic] comments.” “It is not my belief that the Republican Party as a whole or even a majority of Republicans have racist views,” Greer elaborated on Tuesday. “I just believe there are some in the party that don’t think minority outreach should be a priority, that moving in that direction doesn’t help the party because it encourages more minorities to vote,” he explained. Greer added that as chairman, he had “to keep certain segments of the party happy,” and that he worries “there is no place for moderates in the Republican Party” today.
A year ago this guy was sounding just like the rest of them, claiming that Obama was trying to indoctrinate our children into his socialist agenda, but now - that's he's under indictment - he has a different tune.
The problem is that what he's saying ring completely true. The extremist are running the table in the GOP. All the hard-core Birchers and 700 Clubsters have had the fear of God put into them by the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama and their having one great big freak out session over it. These people aren't new, they've been around forever, they're just getting LOUDER and much more intolerant.
If we sit on our hands in frustration, these wack-o-doddles from Beck to Palin, Sharron (We don't want to Worship our Government) Angle, Rand (I can balance the budget on the head of a pin, later...) Paul, Joe (Shut down the Government) Miller, Christine (Mice with Human Brains) O'Donnell, Carl (Horse Porno) Paladino, Jan (I see Dead-Headless-Torsos) Brewer and Marco (Flip, Flop and Fly) Rubio - either by the ballot or the bullet will have their "Revolution" and begin to systematically destroy the middle-class of this nation.
The way it looks right now most of these nutbags are going to WIN.
As I've said before, That. Can't. Happen.
We need to Act Blue and Contribute.
Key Senate Races.
. Chris Coons DE
. Russ Fiengold WI
. Scott McAdams AK
. Barbara Boxer CA
. Kendrick Meek FL
. Jack Conway KS
Key House Races on the Bubble.
. Ann Kirkpatric AZ
. Alan Grayson FL
. Harry Mitchel AR
. Joyce Elliot AR
. Trent VanHaaften IN
. Tom Perriello VA
. John Bocceri OH
. Harry Teague NM
If we can move the needles enough to win just one of the above races in the House, and one in the Senate (not counting Boxer since she's leading, for the moment) - we keep control of BOTH!
We also need Support and Attend the NAACP Rally on 10/02/10
Oh yeah, and VOTE!
Vyan
Vyan
Wednesday, September 8
The News of the Impending Dem Bloodbath may be premature
House Results
Democrats 217 -39
Republicans 218 +39
And in the Senate by 2 Seats
Seenate Results:
Democrats 48 -9
Republicans 50 +9
Although this would be a horrible thing for the Democrats, it appears that it's actually a much more fragile prospect than much of the Punditocracy would like us to believe.
Now Election Projection is simply looking at the most recent set of polls without the benefit of analysis or context, but I think it's shocking to really consider the possibility that we could lose both Houses. That means Speaker John Boehner with Darryl Issa running his own Inquisition with Subpoena power, and Paul Ryan and his Reverse-Robin Hood Plan running the budget committee, not to mention Majority Leader Mitch McConnell with Senators Rand Paul and Sharon Angle?
I mean seriously.
So what does it take to avoid this fate? Looking at this worst case scenario who are the seats and races that we have the strongest chance of preserving and ensuring that Republicans have to take to gain control of either the House or Senate?
The Senate according to Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight.com (which has an excellent track record and is now sponsored by the New York Times) there are just 9 seats currently listed as "Tossup".
FiveThirtyEight Gives us 46 Safe Democratic Seats, 4 Leaning Democratic and these 9 - (Current most likely Winners in Bold)
| State | Democrat | Republican | Ind/Other | Chance of Win |
| Colorado | Michael Bennet | Ken Buck | 77% Rep | |
| Florida | Kendrick Meek | Marco Rubio | Charlie Christ | 52% Rep |
| Illinois | Alex Giannoulias | Mark Steven Kirk | 53% Dem | |
| Missouri | Robin Carnahan | Roy Blunt | 91% Rep | |
| New Hampshire | Paul Hodes | 5 Candidates | 77% Rep | |
| Nevada | Harry Reid | Sharon Angle | 59% Rep | |
| Ohio | Lee Fisher | Rob Portman | 82% Rep | |
| Pennsylvania | Joe Sestak | Pat Toomey | 88% Rep | |
| Wisconsin | Russ Feingold | 3 Candidates | 69% Dem |
So the more sophisticated projection shows us probably keeping the Senate as long as we keep at least one of the above, even if we do lose Harry Reid (but don't count him out yet!). All we need to do is KEEP THOSE TWO SEATS ON THE BUBBLE. I mean, I won't be satisfied by that considering the filibuster abuse we've been going through already, but even looking at it this far out it doesn't yet seem like a total bloodbath.
FiveThirtyEight doesn't yet have a similar analysis in place for the House, so using the less sophisticated ElectionProjection we basically have this when we look at the threatened Democratic Incumbents and Seats.
| Seat | Democrat | Republican | Rep Lead |
| Arizona-1 | Ann Kirkpatric-Inc | Paul Gosar | +0.3 |
| Arkansas-1 | Chad Causey | Rick Crawford | +7 |
| Arkansas-2 | Joyce Elliot | Tim Griffin | +13.8 |
| Colorado-4 | Betsy Markey-Inc | Corey Gardner | +4 |
| Florida-2 | Alan Boyd-Inc | Steve Southerland | +1.3 |
| Florida-8 | Alan Grayson-Inc | Dan Webster | +3.6 |
| Florida-24 | Susan Kosmas-Inc | Sandy Adams | +1.8 |
| Illinois-11 | Deborah Halvorson-Inc | Adam Kinizinger | +8 |
| Illinois-14 | Bill Foster-Inc | Randy Hultgren | +2.6 |
| Indiana-8 | Trent VanHaaften-Inc | Larry Bucshon | +3.8 |
| Indiana-9 | Baron Hill-Inc | Todd Young | +1.3 |
| Iowa-3 | Leonard Boswell-Inc | Brad Zaun | +3.5 |
| Kansas-3 | Stephene Moore | Ken Yoder | +5.3 |
| Louisiana-3 | Ravi Sangisetty-Inc | undetermined | +10.3 |
| Maryland-1 | Frank Kratovi-Inc | undetermined | +2.5 |
| Michigan-1 | Gary McDowell-Inc | Dan Benishek | +5.6 |
| Michigan-7 | Mark Shauer-Inc | Tim Walberg | +4.3 |
| Mississippi-1 | Travis Childers-Inc | Alan Nunnelee | +3.4 |
| Nevada-3 | Dina Titus-Inc | Joseph Heck | +1 |
| New Hampshire-1 | Carol Shea-Porter-Inc | undetermined | +2.8 |
| New Hampshire-2 | undetermined | undetermined | +2.8 |
| New Mexico-2 | Harry Teague-Inc | Steve Pearce | +2 |
| New York-24 | Michael Arcuri-Inc | undetermined | +1.8 |
| New York-29 | undetermined | undetermined | +10.3 |
| North Dakota-AL | Earl Pomeroy-Inc | Rick Berg | +4.6 |
| Ohio-1 | Steve Driehaus-Inc | Steve Chabot | +3.3 |
| Ohio-15 | Mary Jo Kilroy-Inc | Steve Stivers | +3 |
| Ohio-16 | John Bocceri-Inc | Jim Renacci | +3.8 |
| Penn-3 | Kathy Dalkhemper-Inc | Mike Kelly | +1.3 |
| Penn-7 | Bryan Lentz | Patrick Meehan | +0.2 |
| Pann-10 | Chris Carney-Inc | Thomas Marino | +1.3 |
| Penn-11 | Paul Kanjorski-Inc | Louis Barletta | +7 |
| S. Carolina-5 | John Spratt-Inc | Mike Mulvaney | +1.3 |
| S. Dakota-AL | S. Herseth-Sandlin-Inc | Kristi Noem | +3.1 |
| Tennesee-6 | Brett Carter | Diane Black | +10.3 |
| Tennesee-8 | Roy Herron | Stephen Fincher | +3.5 |
| Texas-17 | Chet Edwards-Inc | Bill Flores | +1.8 |
| Virginia-2 | Glenn Nye-Inc | Scott Rigell | +2.1 |
| Virginia-5 | Tom Periello-Inc | Robert Hurt | +8.5 |
| Washington-3 | Denny Heck-Inc | Jaime Herrero | +5.6 |
| Wisconsin-7 | undetermined | undetermined | +0.8 |
Although there are a lot of Democratic seats with a huge Republican lead in double digits, what's most notable about this is how many of these races (26) are at just 1% to 3% down - which is within the margin of error. A lot of these races could go either way, and in order to take congress, Republicans Have to RUN THE TABLE.
Beyond the safe Republican and Democratic seats, these Battleground Districts need to be vigorously defended.
We can't afford to lose Alan Grayson, but certainly can't let former Rove Lackey Tim (Vote Cager) Griffin become a member of Congress. Someone who while a member of the RNC violated a Federal Court Order to block the counting of absentee ballots submitted by African American Troops while they were serving in Iraq, then as a reward he was granted a spot as U.S. Attorney - replacing Attorneys like Robert Iglesias who wouldn't setup bogus prosecutions of ACORN and bypassing Senate Confirmation thanks to loopholes in the Patriot act - this Bushie leftover CAN NOT become a member the Controlling Majority in Congress. No way. No how!
We need to show who these people are...
Accurately.
Sharon Angle -"We might have to resort to Second Amendment Remedies", "The People have become Spoiled", "Phase out Social Security" yet she lives off her Husbands Federal Pension.
Rand Paul - "I would have a discussion about Public Accomodations and business right to discriminate", Holding BP accountable is "Un-American"
Joe Miller - "Dismantle Medicare"
Rubio - 'Repeal Health Care", "Make Bush Tax Cuts Permanent" but "Employee Benefit extension must be paid for"
Mitch McConnel - "I take Obama at his word that he's a Christian"
Joe Wilson - "You Lie"
Mike Pence - "I don't think Rush Limbaugh has a Racist Bone in his body"
Joe Barton - "I apologize to BP" for the White House "Shakedown"
Michele Bachmann - "Obama Stands with Achmedinejad", "We have to stop this Gangster Government", "I want people armed and dangers on cap and trade", "We need an investigation of Congress for their Anti-American views..."
John Boehner - "The Stimulus hasn't created a Single Job","We'll Defund Health Care"
To avoid this Democrats need to get out and Campaign Hard as the President did yesterday, they need to stand on their record - be willing to push back on all the GOP Talking points about "Government Takeover" and "Death Panels", note as was mentioned this weekend on Meet the Press that even though this recovery has been tough, it's still been one of strongest recoveries in history (after one of the largest crashes in history) - they need be willing to point to wavering Liberals and Progressives that the final Health Care Bill actually came out a little bit better with the Non-Profit Option than it would have been with the Public Option.
They need to FIGHT, and we need to help them.
We will probably lose some seats this November, but really there's no reason for us to lose All OF THEM - not if we ActBlue and move to protect our Democratic Majorities right now, and keep doing so right until November.
Vyan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)