Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for April 1st, 2010

Stupak, the Democrat who vowed to fight publicly funded abortion in Obamacare … stepped to the podium … in front of a live national TV audience and announced he would support Obamacare with nothing but a meaningless executive order as his cover.

Dan Benishek, a 57-year-old surgeon from Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, was watching the news on TV when Stupak announced he was changing his vote, and the doctor’s phone began ringing off the hook. Stupak’s capitulation made Benishek a nationwide sensation:

Within 24 hours, he [Benishek] boasted 20,000 Facebook “friends.”

Within 48 hours, Benishek had raised $50,000 in online donations.

“We were doing the best we could, but we didn’t raise much money. And then Bart flipped like that and suddenly the money started pouring in.”—Dan Benishek

 


 

Bart Stupak meets his match

By Kerry J. Byrne 

Meet the doctor who symbolizes the nationwide rebellion against Obamacare.

His name is Dan Benishek. He’s a 57-year-old surgeon from Michigan’s Upper Peninsula and he’s never held political office at any level. He announced on March 15 that he was running as a Republican for Michigan’s First Congressional District – that’s Bart Stupak’s district, in case you were wondering.

Today Benishek is a rising political force and an Internet phenomenon who could upset the balance of power in Washington, D.C.

Six days after Benishek announced his candidacy, he was handed an unexpected gift by Stupak, the Democrat who vowed to fight publicly funded abortion in Obamacare. Stupak stepped to the podium that fateful Sunday afternoon in front of a live national TV audience and announced he would support Obamacare with nothing but a meaningless executive order as his cover.

The congressman’s capitulation made Benishek a nationwide sensation.

Within 24 hours, he boasted 20,000 Facebook “friends.”

Within 48 hours, Benishek had raised $50,000 in online donations.

“No way is he [Stupak] going to win,” said Benishek. “I’m going to beat him. Actually, he beat himself by doing that dramatic flip-flop. He could have been a hero.”

Benishek, just a week into his campaign at the time, was watching the news on TV when Stupak dramatically announced he was changing his vote. The doctor’s phone began ringing off the hook.

“We just organized my friends and neighbors when we started out,” Benishek said. “I was upset about the stimulus plan being passed in the cover of darkness. The arrogance just drove me nuts.”

He finally decided to take the plunge into politics while ice fishing with friends a few months ago. Instead of taking the school committee-city council-state rep route, he gunned right for Washington, D.C.

“I had no idea what to do or how to do it, but you learn fast. We were doing the best we could, but we didn’t raise much money. And then Bart flipped like that and suddenly the money started pouring in.”

Stupak’s cave-in instantly nationalized the race for Michigan’s First District. Benishek’s contributors have come from all over the country, much like Scott Brown’s did here in Massachusetts when it appeared that he offered a chance to stop Obamacare.

“It’s mostly $5 and $10 donations,” Benishek said.

Nationalizing Ted Kennedy’s former Senate seat in Massachusetts is one thing. Nationalizing the race for Michigan’s rural First Congressional District is another.

The Upper Peninsula is small-town, Middle America, 300 miles north of Detroit. It’s conservative country.

Benishek, the political neophyte, certainly carries Washington “outsider” street cred. He also believes he knows a hell of a lot more about health care than the Democrats in D.C.

“You learn a lot about the system,” he said, “battling the bureaucracy that bogs down medical care while paying $40,000 a year in malpractice insurance.

“This is a disaster. It’s just a disaster. It’s just another layer of federal bureaucracy that doctors must comply with. Nurses already spend half their time documenting procedures. So you have to pay two nurses to get the work of one. [Obamacare] is only going to make things worse.”

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Latest Gallup Poll says registered voters prefer the Republican to the Democratic candidate in their district by 47 percent to 44 percent in the midterm elections. The shift toward Republicans points to the healthcare bill’s negative impact on the Democrats’ political fortunes.

Since Republicans usually vote at higher rates than Democrats, the Republicans’ edge in voter preferences would likely exceed what the registered voter results indicate.

A Republican advantage among all registered voters in midterm elections has been rare in Gallup’s 60-year history of tracking congressional voting preferences, happening only a few times each in the 1950, 1994, and 2002 election cycles — all years in which Republicans had strong Election Day showings.

Republicans remain more likely to say they are more enthusiastic about voting this year, by 69% to 57%.

Over the past four midterm elections, the party with the net advantage in enthusiasm has typically been the one to gain congressional seats in the election.

 


 

Republicans Move Ahead in 2010 Vote for Congress

By Jeffrey M. Jones

Hold 47% to 44% advantage in registered voters’ preferences

Registered voters now say they prefer the Republican to the Democratic candidate in their district by 47% to 44% in the midterm congressional elections, the first time the GOP has led in 2010 election preferences since Gallup began weekly tracking of these in March.

The March 22-28 results were obtained after the U.S. House’s passage of landmark healthcare reform legislation on March 21. The shift toward Republicans raises the possibility that the healthcare bill had a slightly negative impact on the Democrats’ political fortunes in the short run.

A separate USA Today/Gallup poll conducted March 26-28 showed a similar result, with Republicans ahead by 46% to 45%.

These results suggest the Republicans would have a strong showing if the midterm elections were held today. Since Republicans usually vote at higher rates than Democrats, the Republicans’ edge in voter preferences would likely exceed what the registered voter results indicate.

A Republican advantage among all registered voters in midterm elections has been rare in Gallup’s 60-year history of tracking congressional voting preferences, happening only a few times each in the 1950, 1994, and 2002 election cycles — all years in which Republicans had strong Election Day showings.

Voters More Enthusiastic

Supporters of both parties are more energized about voting than they were before the healthcare bill passed. Fifty percent of Republicans and 35% of Democrats say they are very enthusiastic about voting this fall, up from the prior week’s 43% and 25%, respectively.

Among all registered voters, the increase in the percentage very enthusiastic about voting was eight percentage points from last week, 32% to 40%.

The USA Today/Gallup poll also shows a spike in voter enthusiasm in response to a different question, as now 62% of voters say they are “more enthusiastic about voting than usual,” up from 47% in early February. That is higher than Gallup has measured at any point in any of the past four midterm elections. The previous high of 49% was measured during the 2006 campaign.

Supporters of both parties show similar gains on this enthusiasm measure, with a 14-point increase among Republicans (including Republican-leaning independents) and a 16-point increase among Democrats (including Democratic-leaning independents). As a result, Republicans remain more likely to say they are more enthusiastic about voting this year, by 69% to 57%.

Over the past four midterm elections, the party with the net advantage in enthusiasm has typically been the one to gain congressional seats in the election.

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews with a random sample of 1,623 U.S. registered voters, aged 18 and older, conducted March 22-28, 2010. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

Read Full Post »

“Like the devil in Needful Things, he has something for everyone. To the young generation who overwhelmingly supported him, he promised them a free college education and stressed that it is a “right.” … If we are to take his words at face value, he can only be doing this as an overture toward “free college for all.”

Over the past few years, Sallie Mae, the largest provider of student loans has seen its bond ratings plunge toward the very border of “junk” status …  What the bond market is telling you is that defaults are increasing and it is going to get much worse.”—Mr. Arbitrage

 


 

Obama’s Overtures toward Free College for All

By MrArbitrage

Obama went to a community college the day before yesterday to sign the final package of fixes to the healthcare bill.  He did this because a major part of the healthcare scam was to directly nationalize the student loan business.  There used to be a buffer between the Federal government and student loans but not anymore.

“A great battle pitting the interest of the banks and the financial institutions – against the interest of students – finally came to an end.  For almost two decades we have been trying to fix a sweetheart deal in federal law that essentially gave billions of dollars to banks to act as unnecessary middle-men in administering student loans,” Obama said.

Could it have anything to do with the fact that lending is the business they are in and there may be some similarities in the due-diligence and administrative duties?  It’s just a guess but I would think the reason why this so-called “sweetheart deal” existed -for 45 years- before this genius and his mummified corpse leading Congress came along, was because there are tens of thousands of lending institutions spanning the nation with qualified people who are experienced in this area and have locations with people who work inside of them.  Nevertheless, starting July 1st, those loans will be offered –only- by the Department of Education and I cannot wait to see how well they run this business!

Here’s something you can take to the bank.  Obama’s (The False Prophet’s) true intensions are for this charade to amount to another $85 Billion dollar per year entitlement that will add to the crippling debt he is deliberately mounting to destroy this country he, his wife, his pastor, his domestic terrorist and Marxist cabinet so loathes.

I don’t know if anyone has noticed but there’s a bit of a problem here.  The people who catapulted this Bolshevik wannabe to office are the same people who are supposed to be paying off these college loans.  Throughout his campaign and his first year in office Obama has done a masterful job of inspiring the fallen angels of their nature.  Like the devil in Needful Things, he has something for everyone. To the young generation who overwhelmingly supported him, he promised them a free college education and stressed that it is a “right”.  He didn’t just do this throughout his campaign; he did so during his recent State of the Union Address.  If we are to take his words at face value, he can only be doing this as an overture toward “free college for all”.

The False Prophet and The Mummy (Nancy Pelosi) sold this swindle as a blow to “sweetheart deals” against the evil bankers and elimination of the proverbial “middle-man” as though they are going to now reap tremendous profits for us.  Bond investors are more conservative than the stock market and their actions can tell you a lot about this situation.  Over the past few years, Sallie Mae, the largest provider of student loans has seen its bond ratings plunge toward the very border of “junk” status and is probably only above that line because of politics.  (We have seen the integrity of these agencies with regard to securitized mortgages and their willingness to play ball.)   What the bond market is telling you is that defaults are increasing and it is going to get much worse. 

It makes perfect sense.  Capitalism and democracy only work for a moral and God fearing people (as Adams said) and we are now seeing why.  These promises they made to pay back those loans are a trifling matter to a generation of ingrates who were raised by the government and M-TV.  Many of these kids care about two things, getting laid and getting paid, none of which is a catalyst for them to compensate taxpayers for something they have been inculcated to believe is owed to them.  If The False Prophet and The Mummy have not yet been charged, tried and convicted of treason by then, next election time he will convince these ingrates that we should be paying them a full-time salary to go to college.

According to Obama’s “news reader,” Brian Williams and “spokesman” Chuck Todd, there were some other goodies in the healthcare bill to bribe the kids, like increases in Pell grants to keep up with tuition inflation, which will probably encourage further increases for college tuition. It also included a limitation on repayment of loans to 10% of income because “I know what that’s like” said Obama, “Michelle and I had big debts coming out of school. Debts we weren’t able to fully repay until just a few years before I started running for office.”  I guess he means that Tony Rezko paid them off about four years ago because I don’t think he spent more than a year in each office as he traversed the road to the White House.  It’s not like the Treasury actually needs that money back. 

These gestures are only a good faith overture because he promised these ingrates FREE and they will not forget.  These kids have been looking for something to protest and riot about.  They are holding protests and getting arrested all over the country with their signs demanding free college education.  The scene about which everyone was making a big deal with Ann Coulter at a Canadian University doesn’t look much different than the scene here in the U.S.  By the news coverage you would think that the activities of those Canadian students were unusual.  That’s because you barely see these left-wing protestors in American universities in a negative light in our media.  It’s time to wake up. 

This is just a friendly piece of advice.  If you are like many ambivalent Americans supporting a child in college, you may have a Marxist on your hands and be totally oblivious to that fact.  You may want to do some further due diligence on your investment.

In the final analysis, I guess the federal government would have ended up nationalizing it all regardless.  Why wait to bail out Sallie Mae and all of these lenders as the deadbeat kids bleed them dry slowly – when you can sneak it all into a “healthcare bill?”


 

Take a minute to watch this piece with Brian Williams and Chuck Todd.  At the end Todd refers to the observation by insurance companies that allow them to continue using generally accepted underwriting procedures on child policies.  Todd referred to the threatening letter sent by Kathleen Sebelius to the insurance companies and the fact that the insurance industry said they would comply with The False Prophet’s interpretation of the law.  The revealing part occurs at the end when he tosses back to Brian Williams who said “we’re actually going to track that story and HOLD THEM TO IT”.  So much for hiding their status as White House tail-waggers.  What’s amazing is this is the same crowd that wouldn’t wear an American Flag lapel after Sept 11, 2001, after our country just went to war – for fear that they might show partiality.   They were supposedly worried that people should not see them take a side!  They also won’t use the word “terrorist” for that reason.

They really are an embarrassment and disgrace to our nation and the founding fathers who took such solicitude to assure a “free press” as an essential pillar of democracy.  I mean, in other communist countries the press at least waits to be nationalized before they start humping the leg of their master.  I guess since these guys know with their abysmal ratings it’s only a matter of time, so they want to earn enough Scooby Snacks to get to the front of the line. 

WARNING:  Also on that page is a link to a story titled:  “President Obama goes One-on-One with Matt Lauer”.  I cannot vouch for that one because I didn’t dare click on it.  But if you must, make sure there are no children in the room.

Don’t miss the latest Budget Buster “The Mummy 2010”.  The Mummy (played by Nancy Pelosi) is sent to Congress by a radical district of trans-gendered, sexual deviants and drug addicts to hijack the entire US Congress.  Will she and her partner The False Prophet (Barack Hussein Obama) succeed in their overt scheme to bleed the country dry and convert it to tyranical hybrid of Islam-O-Marxism?  Or will the nation wake up and charge them for the treachery they personify?

Read Full Post »

Mandatory ObamaCare Doesn’t Apply to Muslims

By Jerry A. Kane

ObamaCare’s “pay-or-play” mandates require that “all” Americans carry essential health insurance coverage or face penalties; however, “all” really doesn’t mean all after all.  The recently signed bill contains a clause exempting certain religious groups, American Indians, illegal immigrants, and hardship cases (prison inmates) from ObamaCare’s health insurance mandate.

Senate Health Care Bill H.R. 3590 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, statute 18 (5) EXEMPTIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS reads—

—In the case of an individual who is seeking an exemption certificate under section 1311(d)(4)(H) from any requirement or penalty imposed by section 5000A, the following information:

(A) In the case of an individual seeking exemption based on the individual’s status as a member of an exempt religious sect or division, as a member of a health care sharing ministry, as an Indian, or as an individual eligible for a hardship exemption, such information as the Secretary shall prescribe.

The Amish are exempt because they believe it is their church’s responsibility to care for the material needs of the members, not the government or insurance companies. When members of the Amish community have need of a doctor or a hospital, they get financial help from their church and neighbors and pay in cash for the services.

The clause is not exclusive to the Amish alone; it also applies to any individual whose religion does not believe in insurance.

“[P]eople who are conscientiously opposed to paying for health insurance don’t have to do it where the conscientious objection arises from religion,” said Mark Tushnet a Harvard law professor.

According to a reputable Islamic Web site managed by Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid, Islam’s Council of Senior Scholars have issued fatwas (decrees) that not only prohibit Muslims from purchasing risk insurance, the fatwas also prohibit them from working for companies that provide such insurance or any other form of commercial insurance.

The Council’s fatwas brand risk insurance contracts “haraam” (forbidden) declaring that such contracts are based on probability and extreme ambiguity, gambling and riba (usury). However, Muslims are permitted to use health insurance that is paid for through a compulsory tax, such as the so-called “free” health care provided by U.S. hospital emergency rooms for those without insurance or can’t pay or government programs such as Medicaid and Medicare for people with low incomes and senior citizens respectively.

Members of religious groups applying for exemption from ObamaCare must prove to Health and Human Services bureaucrats that they are citizens and actual members of the recognized religious groups. The law requires the HHS Secretary to match the applicant’s personal information with the records on file at the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security to prove citizenship and religious status. 

While the new law requires most Americans to sign up with insurance companies or government insurance plans, it’s clear that the Amish, Muslims, and possibly Christian Scientists will be permitted to claim exemption from the government mandates as conscientious objectors of having to carry health insurance.

“If the government can tolerate a religious exemption, then it must do so evenhandedly among religious believers with the same beliefs. This is sheer favoritism for a certain class of religions, or even for one religion,” wrote Marci A. Hamilton, a professor and lawyer at Yeshiva University’s Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York.  

It is highly unlikely though that HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius will grant equal permission to members of Christian and Jewish sects who will also face a serious moral dilemma when they are forced to purchase health insurance from providers that pay for abortions under the pretext of providing preventive care.

ObamaCare’s religious conscience exemption clause embodies the change Brother O’s Bread and Circuses regime brings to the new America. While Brother O considers all religious groups equal, being nuanced, he recognizes that some groups are more equal than others.

Read Full Post »