BluntPolitics.com

Researched by Ric Joyner

This is a blog post from DailyKos.com which is a VERY leftist blog. They call themselves Kossacks and if you review their logo it appears to mimic the old Soviet Union communist propaganda art. Remember communism seeks to create an egalitarian society by taking wealth from others to give it to people who didn’t work or earn it and basically turning the entire country into slave labor with no opportunity.

Please follow the thread to see the “rock and the hard place” that President Obama is experiencing with several different factions in the democratic party, labor and left wing organizations that are for and against health care reform. President Obama has pandered to the left, unions and has helped to pay them back in the stimulus bill and even bailing out their pension plans in HR3200.

AFL-CIO: No Public Option, No Support

By BarbinMD

Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 03:00:04 PM PDT

This is what it sounds like when someone representing the Democratic wing of the Party speaks:

Democratic lawmakers will not be able to count on the AFL-CIO’s support if they drop the public insurance option from the health care reform legislation, union officials said Tuesday.

The AFL-CIO’s incoming president, Richard Trumka, outlined “three absolute musts” in any overhaul package: a public option, an employer mandate and no tax on employer-provided health benefits.

Asked if the union would work against any bill that did not hit those targets, Trumka told reporters during a *briefing: “That means we won’t support the bill if it doesn’t have the public option.”

Please note I cannot find independent verification of *a briefing: Ric

And as Trumka declared last month during a speech to the Sheet Metal Workers International Association:

We need to send them a special message: it’s that you may have forgotten what the labor movement did to get you elected; but, by God, we never will! And if you stab us in the back on health care this year don’t you dare ask us for our support next year!

And the Max Baucus/Blue Dog wing of the Party needs to remember that — and that 2010 is just around the corner.

Overview of what the “left” believes is the next move for Obama.

Report: President to reveal health care deal-breakers

By Jed Lewison

Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 04:30:04 PM PDT

Marc Ambinder delivers a report that has the feel of a trial balloon:

This time, the President is going to be specific. Next week, President Obama is going to give Democrats a health care plan they can begin to sell.

He plans to list specific goals that any health insurance reform plan that arrives at his desk must achieve, according to Democratic strategists familiar with the plan.

Strikingly, despite the tough “deal-breaker” language, there still seems to be a ton of wiggle room on the public option:

He will insist upon a mechanism to cut costs and increase competition among insurance companies — and perhaps will even specify a percentage rate — and he will say that his preferred mechanism remains a government-subsidized public health insurance option, but he will remain agnostic about whether the plan must include a robust public option. Officials won’t say whether the president intends to endorse a specific “trigger” mechanism if the competition mechanism fails, but they say he will make it clear that the final bill must contain language that increases competition.

Purely in political terms, if the White House’s goal is to generate enthusiasm in the Democratic base, that sort of approach won’t cut it. If they want to excite the base — and as Kos showed earlier, they need to — then they will need to come out more strongly for a public option, because it is the only mechanism that anybody has proposed that will meet his stated objectives.

Update (4:50, by Jed) — Remember that this sounds like a trial balloon, and it’s not coming from named sources. Nothing is written in stone. President Obama hasn’t said anything yet. If you don’t like what you’re hearing, the best thing to do is to let your voice be heard, whether at public events, phone calls to your senators and representatives, or whatever works best for you. Without your active involvement, AHIP could still win this thing.

Make a difference on Friday 9-11 and make the call. Your Representatives need to hear from you. They will be hearing from those who wish to take our freedom of choice, jobs and livelihood.

Technorati Tags: barack obama,spying on americans,whitehouse,collecting americans data on social network sites

(Folks this is an amazing article)

EXCLUSIVE:

Audrey Hudson (Contact)

EXCLUSIVE:

The White House is collecting and storing comments and videos placed on its social-networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube without notifying or asking the consent of the site users, a failure that appears to run counter to President Obama’s promise of a transparent government and his pledge to protect privacy on the Internet.

Marc Rotenberg, president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said the White House signaled that it would insist on open dealings with Internet users and, in fact, should feel obliged to disclose that it is collecting such information.

“The White House has not been adequately transparent, particularly on how it makes use of new social media techniques, such as this example,” he said.

Defenders of the White House actions said the Presidential Records Act requires that the administration gather the information and that it was justified in taking the additional step of asking a private contractor to “crawl and archive” all such material. Nicholas Shapiro, a White House spokesman, declined to say when the practice began or how much the new contract would cost.

Susan Cooper, a spokeswoman for National Archives and Records Administration, said the presidential records law applies to “social media” and to public comments “received by the president or immediate staff.”

Mr. Obama signed a memo in January stating that his efforts to maintain an open government would be “unprecedented” and “ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation and collaboration.”

An Obama campaign document on technology pledged that, as president, Mr. Obama “will strengthen privacy protections for the digital age and will harness the power of technology to hold government and business accountable for violations of personal privacy.”

In a June 5, 2008, article in PC Magazine, Mr. Obama said, “The open information platforms of the 21st century can also tempt institutions to violate the privacy of citizens. We need sensible safeguards that protect privacy in this dynamic new world.”

The National Legal and Policy Center, a government ethics watchdog, said archiving the sites would have a “chilling effect” on Web site users who might wish to leave comments critical of the administration.

Ken Boehm, a lawyer and chairman of the center, also disputed that the presidential records law applies, because the comments are pasted onto a third-party Web page and not official correspondence with the president.

“If the White House has nothing to hide, why is this cloaked in secrecy? Why won’t they make the dollar amount this is going to cost public?” Mr. Boehm asked. “I don’t think there is an expectation that this is being captured by the government and saved.”

But Patrice McDermott, director of OpenTheGovernment.org, called the proposal “a positive development because it demonstrates a commitment from the Obama administration to meet its obligations under the Presidential Records Act.”

“Additionally, I am encouraged to see the administration recognizing that it must find a way to handle the ever-expanding amount of data generated electronically. I hope the rest of the executive branch will learn from the president’s leadership on this issue,” Ms. McDermott said.

Shahid Buttar, executive director of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, called for congressional oversight of the practice of collecting data.

“Given the administration’s disappointing secrecy in other contexts, the Bill of Rights Defense Committee encourages Congress to conduct oversight to ensure compliance with the law, maximize transparency and protect individual privacy,” Mr. Buttar said.

According to the law, the term “presidential records” means documentary materials “created or received by the president, his immediate staff or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise and assist the president, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.”

“It includes any documentary materials relating to the political activities of the president or members of his staff, but only if such activities relate to or have a direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President,” the law says.

David Almacy, who served as President George W. Bush’s Internet director, said the Bush administration did not use the then-fledgling social-networking sites in the same manner as the Obama White House, except to upload presidential speeches onto iTunes. The White House, however, did archive comments posted to its official Web site.

The proposal issued Aug. 21 calls for a contractor to “crawl and archive” social-networking Web sites where the White House maintains an official presence on seven networks: Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, Flickr, YouTube, Vimeo and Slideshare.

The collection will include the comments, tags, graphics, audio and video posted by users who don’t work for the White House.

The White House has more than 333,000 fans on Facebook, and posts updates several times a day that draw hundreds of thousands of comments, both positive and negative. The White House has more than 1 million followers on Twitter and more than 87,000 subscribers on YouTube, where more than 400 videos of the president and White House briefings are posted.

Politico (Politico)
- Clipping Loc. 20-55 | Added on Tuesday, August 04, 2009, 11:14 PM

Recess strategies center on health Carrie Budoff Brown | 800 words They call this a recess? The five-week House break — the Senate is meeting another week — could go a long way in determining the direction of health care reform when lawmakers return next month. Aware of the stakes, House Democratic and Republican leaders have armed their members with enough talking points and tips to keep them from taking much of a vacation. Here’s the CliffsNotes version of what you need to know about the summer strategy on health care, according to House Democratic and Republican memos: Strangely absent. Many Democrats consider the government-run insurance plan their top priority, but there’s not one mention of it in the House Democratic strategy memo. It’s a noteworthy omission, given that Democratic leaders have said repeatedly and unequivocally that the House bill will include a public plan. Members are instead encouraged to talk about insurance market reforms, which are far less controversial than the public plan. They are following a slight shift in messaging that started last month with the White House calling the bill ‘health insurance reform" rather than ‘health care reform." So what will you hear? ‘No discrimination for pre-existing conditions," according to the House Democratic memo. ‘No dropping your coverage because you get sick. No more job or life decisions made based on loss of coverage. No need to change doctors or plans. No co-pays for preventive care. No excessive out-of-pocket expenses, deductibles or co-pays. No yearly or lifetime cost caps on what insurance companies cover." Weapon of choice. Despite a few recent town halls gone bad, the traditional recess sit-down with constituents is still a preferred method of spreading the message. But both Democrats and Republicans suggest a slightly more controlled option: the telephone town hall, which can make it much harder for critics of either side to hijack the event — and media headlines. An unruly event Saturday with Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) suggests it may be a long recess month. After saying he would support the Democratic health care plan even if his constituents opposed it, the congressman faced chants of ‘Just say no." The shouting protesters followed him to the parking lot with signs and appeared to cheer when his car pulled away, according to a video posted on YouTube. Message of choice. Voters could be in for a confusing month. Republicans plan to argue that the Democrats want a government takeover of health care. Get used to hearing Republicans draw comparisons between the health care effort and the bailout of the auto and financial industries.’Democrats are leaving Washington on the defensive, and as a Republican challenger candidate, you must do everything you can to own the issues and frame the debate," the Republican memo states. ‘It is up to you to reaffirm what the voters already know, which is that government is NOT the answer to an ailing economy." Democrats have built a messaging strategy aimed at explicitly refuting the government takeover argument. The Democratic boogeyman is the not the government but, rather, insurers, which disrupt the doctor-patient relationship. By all means necessary. Democratic House leaders seem intent on leaving no media untouched. If you go on Facebook, they want you to visit their health care reform page. Ditto for Twitter. They also want members to create their own health care Web pages and are sending a template to member offices in case they didn’t get the hint the first time. And lawmakers should record YouTube videos, reach out to Hispanic media, hold online video chats with reporters and create flash quizzes on health reform for their websites, the leaders urge in their strategy memo. Best gimmick. You know that clock in Times Square that displays an ever-spiraling uptick in the federal debt? The ‘hidden tax" clock is next. Look for one on a member website near you, tallying the money insured families pay to subsidize the care of the uninsured. The strategy is to convince people who worry about paying more money to cover the uninsured under a reform bill that they are already footing the bill. The idea of a hidden health tax was introduced in a May report from the liberal consumer group Families USA. Its bottom line: In 2008, families paid a ‘hidden health tax" of $1,017, and individuals paid $368. Shameless coordination. Democrats will roll out all their assets. The House Democratic memo details coordination not only with the White House and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius but also with advocacy groups, including Health Care for America Now, AARP and the Service Employees International Union. Spoiler alert. Republican House leaders are urging members to submit op-eds to local newspapers for Aug. 17 to mark ‘the six-month anniversary of the signing of the failed ’stimulus’ bill’" — which will no doubt be tied back to the health care debate.

Folks,

The left wing of the democrat party is on the attack. Obama certainly falls into this category even though he ran in the middle. Last week in his several conferences, President Obama mentioned that doctors were theives by just giving people tests to protect their backsides! Next he spoke about the insurance carriers and how they “ration” care by getting in the way of you and the doctor etc. When I was in Canada on the drive last week with some agent friends I said that you will see the democrats now attempting to demonize the insurance carriers and then agents. Today Nancy Pelosi attacked the carriers outright saying the carrier control of health care was almost immoral. Well guess you are next since you deliver insurance policies thus are you immoral? I hope you are offended and call your Representative and complain about this treatment.

They are desperate folks and the new tobacco is the rich (defined as those who create jobs), insurance carriers and then the agent!

We called our Representatives and asked them to stop by our office and “meet the folks they are going to put out of business” and they did! You can do the same. If you don’t call, write, get involved and let others carry the fight you deserve to lose your job, career and retirement if the “left wing” gets their way of having a government run program.

This fight goes deeper than control of health care. The left wing believes in fairness for all. The problem is that in America where we have individual choices over our destiny (Judge Sotomayer proves this) fairness is impossible unless you force everyone into a government run program. Then fairness can be achieved however, the loss is our freedoms. Freedom of choice, freedom to choose the doctor, freedom to go to the doctor without rationing and others telling me what they will pay for! If you read the book 1776 you will clearly see that this country rebelled from government control in the lives of people because it translates into limiting choices. This fight is about freedom and individual choice versus fairness. Fairness is like persuing the elusive happiness because happiness is usually defined by those who are in control and so is fairness.

Speak up

By Ric Joyner

eflex employees were told in meetings of the Senate Finance Committees plans to eliminate or cap employer tax breaks on employee benefits. After sharing this information with employees, and the impact that the cuts would have on them, they immediately asked what they could do to let help. Then we let them know that flex plans (FSAs) could lose its tax savings and eliminate our industry! Of course they were upset and began to let their voices be known to their Congressional Representatives.  www.house.gov and www.senate.gov

Here is the video the staff put together. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFOrHR637Qo&feature=channel_page

Please consider writing your representative. Here is a step by step guide.

http://napba.org/Flexplan.html

For a survey that you can send to your clients and they can pass on to their employees: http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/?p=WEB229BAUR6MBC We are including this survey on each of our emails to customers and to clients. We will collect the data and send along to Congress.

Thanks again and pass this information along to clients, friends, and colleagues!

Surprise! People will lose their insurance and gain insurance with a net increase that moves us backwards! And sacrificing Flexible Spending Accounts hurts employees and employers by eliminating the ability to afford out of pocket medical expenses, childcare and insurance premiums to pay for the health care bill which will put millions on the uninsured list not to mention unemployment. And we will lose our freedom and choice of doctor regardless of what Obama promises.

Preliminary Analysis of Major Provisions Related to Health Insurance Coverage Under the Affordable Health Choices Act

CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation staff worked together to produce a preliminary  analysis of the major provisions related to health insurance coverage contained in the “Affordable Health Choices Act,” drafted by the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP).  The estimates are based on provisions from title 1 of the draft legislation released by HELP on June 9th. Among other things, the draft legislation would establish insurance exchanges (called “gateways”) through which individuals and families could purchase health insurance coverage. The proposed bill also would provide federal subsidies to substantially lower the cost of that coverage for some enrollees.

According to our preliminary assessment, enacting the proposal would result in a net increase in federal budget deficits of about $1.0 trillion over the 2010-2019 period. When fully implemented, about 39 million individuals would obtain coverage through the new insurance exchanges. At the same time, the number of people who had coverage through an employer would decline by about 15 million (or roughly 10 percent), and coverage from other sources would fall by about 8 million, so the net decrease in the number of people uninsured would be about 16 million or 17 million.

These new figures do not represent a formal or complete cost estimate for the draft legislation, for several reasons. The estimates provided do not address the entire bill—only the major provisions related to health insurance coverage. Some details have not been estimated yet, and the draft legislation has not been fully reviewed. Also, because expanded eligibility for the Medicaid program may be added at a later date, those figures are not likely to represent the impact that more comprehensive proposals—which might include a significant expansion of Medicaid or other options for subsidizing coverage for those with income below 150 percent of the federal poverty level—would have both on the federal budget and on the extent of insurance coverage.

CBO will continue to work on an ongoing basis with the HELP Committee and the other Senate and House committees involved in health care reform to provide estimates and analyses as legislation is developed.

First, what did Barack say regarding “state-ism” and second what is state-ism? Barack said (paraphrase) “that rich people did very well and could afford to be taxed more on their giving because they gained from the economy”.The problem with this thinking is that these people gained in a good economy because of right choices and their individual circumstance. Not because the “state” gave this to them. These people don’t owe the government anything more than a small obligation. This leads into statism. State-ism is where liberal left wing progressives (backwards) want everyone to get their “sustenance” from the state. Healthcare, money, jobs everything. This type of thinking destroys invidual achievement and dignity. Yes dignity. When people are faced with hardship they change and have two choices. Either they make right choices or make wrong choices. State-ism wants to stop people from making wrong choices thus crippling their growth.

This thinking is leads directly to socialism (state welfare society) and then to communism. God help us.

I was watching Fox last night and the embedded reporter for the McCain campaign said he was finally given permission to discuss the problems with Pahlin being a “diva”. http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/story?id=6196407&page=1

I was really struck by how poorly she did in the interviews with Gibson and the Couric interview was a disaster. McCain’s poll numbers dropped after these interviews and then the economic crisis hit. But I didn’t know why. Anyway, Pahlin refused help and coaching on both interviews which staff warned her would be a disaster. (rumor though) And it was.

Apparently, she also didn’t know that Africa was a continent and thought South Africa was like a “county” (yes a county) in the country of Africa.

And then last week of the election cycle she “cracked” under the pressure due to the bad press and was ranting and raving reducing staff to tears (somewhat like I do around the office). The poor woman was thrown into the lime light and was rolling a giant rock up a hill against the country’s visceral reaction toward Bush.

More will come out about both campaigns  I am sure, but the perception that people had of Pahlin was real (discounting her) and I am sure it was her small town view of the world of politics in Alaska that she felt she could handle the likes of Katie Couric without help.

Is there a lesson to be learned? Nah but the darn 2 year super bowl is over so I had to find something to write about regarding politics!

Yes. He hopes that by taxing the rich, and corporations that the job loss will trickle down to the rest of the country putting thousands out of work. Then he can put those people to work building bridges and roads thus keeping them enslaved to the government. Sound sarcastic? It is not meant to be because fear of Obama’s taxes and capitol gains increases is driving away investors to the market. These fears are only making a bad economy worse.

Read the article by Investors Business Daily today:

VIEWPOINT

Stocks Pay Price Of Coming Tax Increases

GROVER G. NORQUIST

   Some Americans are concerned that if Sen. Barack Obama is elected president, his plans for higher taxes on personal income, capital gains, dividends and corporations will damage the economy.
   It is a little late to be worrying about this. We are already in the midst of the Obama recession. But to be fair, we should give House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at least equal billing.
   Why has the stock market collapsed? Why wouldn’t it?
   In 2003, the Dow stood at about 8000. The then-Republican Congress and President Bush reduced the capital gains tax to 15% from 20% and the tax on dividends to 15% from 35%. In the next three years, the Dow rose 50% to 12,000, and household net worth rose to $56 trillion from $40 trillion.
   This is the “wealth effect” of taxation. If you own stock in a company and the tax on earnings by that company is reduced, the value of the stock increases. If taxation on the company is increased, you would pay less for the same stock.
   Microsoft stock is worth less if you attach the boat anchor of higher capital gains taxes, higher corporate income taxes and higher dividend taxes. But this is not what will happen if Obama is elected. It’s what already happened on Nov. 7, 2006, when Democrats won the majorities in the House and Senate.
   The tax cuts of 2003 that sparked the increase in national wealth are scheduled to end on Jan. 1, 2011. It does not require a President Obama to make those taxes increase. All it requires is for the Democrats to control either the House or the Senate with enough votes to stop legislation to extend the tax cuts.
   And the top individual tax rate, now at 35% but also paid by many small businesses, will snap back up to Bill Clinton’s 39.6% on Jan. 1, 2011.
   Pelosi and Reid both voted against the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. We know where they stand. Every Democrat in the House and Senate has voted repeatedly for higher taxes since that party became the majority in January 2007, and House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel has unveiled his “mother of all tax hikes” to increase taxes by $38 billion over 10 years.
   Presidents don’t cut taxes or raise taxes. They sign the bills sent to them by Congress.
   Obama originally campaigned for raising the dividend tax to 39.6% from 15%. Then, when his contributors from Wall Street pointed out how devastating that would be to the stock market, he changed his rhetoric to calling for an increase to “only” 20%. But if Congress does nothing, the dividend tax increases to 39.6% on Jan. 1, 2011.
   Americans for Tax Reform worked with John Rutledge to calculate how Obama’s and McCain’s tax policies would affect the stock market. The calculator appears at ATR’s Web site, www.atr.org.
   You can enter the size of your 401(k), and it will calculate its value under four different scenarios: if Obama’s tax increases pass; if McCain’s tax cuts are enacted; if Congress’ plans are enacted; and if Americans for Tax Reform’s fantasy tax cuts, including abolishing the capital gains tax, were made law.
   The Obama tax plan will reduce the value of the stock market and your 401(k) by 6%. The House Democrat plan will drop the market by 16%. Remember, Obama cannot impose his tax plan — he has to sign what Congress sends him, so Congress’ tax plans are more important than Obama’s campaign speeches.
   If Republicans won the House and Senate and McCain’s tax plans were enacted, the market and your 401(k) would increase by 46%. And if you pass the McCain plan and add ATR’s abolition of the capital gains and dividends tax, the market and your 401(k) would increase by 58%.
   But the market can read the newspapers and is aware that the Democrats control the House and Senate now and likely will for the next two years. This means the market gains since 2003 due to lower capital gains and dividend taxes will disappear.
   The market has already begun to drop in anticipation of the coming tax increases. The Pelosi-Reid-Obama recession has already started.
   Of course, if Obama and the Democrat leaders in Congress have tax hikes and regulatory burdens planned that they haven’t shared publicly, the market will drop even further. It can get worse.
   
Norquist

is president of Americans for Tax Reform and author of “Leave Us Alone: Getting the Government’s Hands Off Our Money, Our Guns, Our Lives.”

I remember when conservatives were deemed by the left… neo-cons. I had to research what this meant.

What do neoconservatives believe?

“Neo-cons” believe that the United States should not be ashamed to use its unrivaled power – forcefully if necessary – to promote its values around the world. Some even speak of the need to cultivate a US empire. Neoconservatives believe modern threats facing the US can no longer be reliably contained and therefore must be prevented, sometimes through preemptive military action. Source Christian Science Monitor downloaded today at 10:03pm http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101.html

I have come up with the left wing Democrats version of neo con. Neo Comms aka Neo Communists.

What do Neo Comms believe:

“We want our country to be liked by Europe, and thus we want to model our society after the government-run societies of Europe which are built on fairness. Since Americans don’t really understand socialism we can create government programs that will “take care of people”, and make them beholden to us thus Americans will elect our philosophies, and thus move American toward communism instead of consumerism”.  Our tag line is: “You deserve more taxes because we say so.”

Scary…