Tuesday, June 7, 2011

Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, June 7, 2011


NEWSBITES ARE BACK...!

Well, folks, it was a week without news for yours truly. Literally! Oh, sure, O'Reilly was on in the background as we hit the sack, but frankly, I paid even less attention to him while on vacation than I usually do!

Driving in the car... country music, my friends!

Anyway... I see nothing has changed much. Obama and his fellow Leftists are still doing their best to destroy our country. Anthony Weiner is the new (digital) poster child of the Democratic Party.

Yep...

(*SIGH*)

Well, folks... in any case... I'm back.

13 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-06-06-us-owes-62-trillion-in-debt_n.htm?loc=interstitialskip

The federal government's financial condition deteriorated rapidly last year, far beyond the $1.5 trillion in new debt taken on to finance the budget deficit, a USA Today analysis shows.

* WOW... IMAGINE THAT! WITH THE DEMS RUNNING BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS LAST YEAR AND OBAMA IN THE WHITE HOUSE... WHO COULD HAVE EVER ANTICIPATED SUCH A DEBACLE...?

(*SMIRK*) (*SNORT*) (*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

The government added $5.3 trillion in new financial obligations in 2010... That brings to a record $61.6 trillion the total of financial promises not paid for.

(*SARCASTIC CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

This gap between spending commitments and revenue last year equals more than one-third of the nation's gross domestic product.

* AIN'T OBAMANOMICS GRAND?!

Medicare alone took on $1.8 trillion in new liabilities...

* AIN'T THAT OBAMACARE WORKING OUT JUST SWELL, FOLKS!?

Social Security added $1.4 trillion in obligations...

* YEAH... THE SAME SOCIAL SECURITY THAT'S BEEN RUNNING DEFICITS SINCE LAST YEAR...

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

* FOLKS... SERIOUSLY... I APPLAUD USA TODAY FOR OUTTING A PART OF THE TRUTH... (*PAUSE*)... BUT, FOLKS, YOU KNOW AS WELL AS I DO THAT FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR FELLOW CITIZENS THIS COMES ACROSS AS "WHITE NOISE" - AND NO MATTER HOW MANY FACTS THERE ARE POINTING TO THE REALITY THAT OBAMA'S POLICIES ARE DISASTROUS, YOU KNOW THAT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA ARE STILL LARGELY BEHIND HIM AND WILL CONTINUE TO SKEW THE NEWS WHENEVER AND WHEREVER POSSIBLE IN ORDER TO SUPPORT HIS RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN.

Corporations would be required to count these new liabilities when they are taken on - and report a big loss to shareholders. Unlike businesses, however, Congress postpones recording spending commitments until it writes a check.

* FOLKS... WEINER AND HIS "SELF-PORTRAITS" ARE THE LEAST OF OUR FRIGG'N PROBLEMS WHEN IT COMES TO CONGRESS! (STILL... THE BASTARD SHOULD EITHER RESIGN OR BE THROWN OUT - WHICH UNFORTUNATELY IS SIMPLY ANOTHER BARKER FANTASY.)

The $61.6 trillion in unfunded obligations amounts to $534,000 per household. That's more than five times what Americans have borrowed for everything else - mortgages, car loans and other debt.

* FOLKS... THESE BASTARDS ARE DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY! IT'S NOT A FRIGG'N JOKE!

The government has promised pension and health benefits worth more than $700,000 per retired civil servant. The pension fund's key asset: federal IOUs.

(*SNORT*) FOLKS... DOESN'T THAT JUST SAY IT ALL...?

William R. Barker said...

http://detnews.com/article/20110607/AUTO01/106070368/1148/rss25

[Government] Motors CEO Dan Akerson wants the federal gas tax boosted as much as $1 a gallon to "nudge" consumers toward more fuel-efficient cars...

(*SIGH*)

Akerson isn't the first auto exec to float the idea of a gas tax to "encourage" consumers to buy fuel-efficient vehicles. Ford Chairman Bill Ford Jr. has previously advocated a gas tax increase.

* FOLKS... THIS IS WHAT CRONY CAPITALISM LEADS TO. THE GOVERNMENT IS POWERFUL. LARGE CORPORATIONS ARE POWERFUL. UNIONS ARE POWERFUL. AMERICANS AS INDIVIDUALS....? (*SIGH*) THINK ABOUT IT, FOLKS; JUST THINK ABOUT IT.

In his interview with The News, Akerson also weighed in on the nation's debt ceiling, saying Congress should raise it from its current $14.3 trillion mark.

(*SNORT*) (*RUEFUL CHUCKLE*) OF COURSE THAT'S WHAT HE BELIEVES!

Akerson, who describes himself as "a Colin Powell Republican - not a Sarah Palin Republican" - said President Barack Obama has "done a pretty good job on the economy," which, he said, was "a nightmare.

* AND, FOLKS... (*STILL CHUCKLING*)... THAT PRETTY MUCH TELLS YOU ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW!

"...I think we just have to stay the course," he said.

(*FALLING TO THE FLOOR*) (*LAUGHING HYSTERICALLY*)

Despite his Republican stripes...

* YEP! SERIOUSLY! THIS IS HOW THE MAN DESCRIBES HIMSELF - AS A REPUBLICAN!

* FOLKS... SERIOUSLY... IF "MOVERS AND SHAKERS" LIKE THIS GUY ARE THE KIND OF "REPUBLICANS" YOU WANT TO SEE IN CHARGE OF THE GOP... (*PAUSE*)... THEN ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT YOU MUST BE A DEMOCRAT.

* TRULY, FOLKS... SARAH PALIN LOOKS BETTER AND BETTER DAY BY DAY...

(*NOD*)

* THERE'S A REASON THE DEMS AND THEIR MEDIA ALLIES HAVE FROM DAY ONE BEEN DOING EVERYTHING WITHIN THEIR POWER TO MARGINALIZE PALIN. THE WOMAN IS FAR FROM THE PERFECT CANDIDATE... BUT COMPARED TO THE AMORAL SELF-SERVING SCUM OUT THERE...

(*SHRUG*)

William R. Barker said...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/06/05/eveningnews/main20069136.shtml

* HERE'S THE HEADLINE, FOLKS:

Chronic unemployment worse than Great Depression

* THE SUBHEADER...?

The unemployed have, on average, remained unemployed longer than in the 1930s...

* CHANT IT WITH ME, FOLKS... O-BAM-A! O-BAM-A! O-BAM-A!

About 6.2 million Americans, 45.1% of all unemployed workers in this country, have been jobless for more than six months - a higher percentage than during the Great Depression.

* O-BAM-A! O-BAM-A! O-BAM-A!

William R. Barker said...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/06/us-usa-immigration-education-idUSTRE7553KV20110606

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a challenge to [and illegal] California law that gives illegal immigrants the same in-state college tuition rates as legal state residents...

* OF COURSE WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THE VOTE TALLY CONNECTED TO THIS "REJECTION." I'M SURE WE CAN GUESS THOUGH... (*SHRUG*)

The [illegal] 2001 [California] law provides that any student [legal resident or not] who attends a California high school for three years and graduates can get in-state college and university tuition.

Attorneys for the students who pay higher out-of-state rates [argued]...the California measure was trumped by a 1996 federal law barring any state from providing illegal immigrants any higher education benefits based on residency unless U.S. citizens were eligible for the same benefit.

* OH, FIDDLE-FADDLE! WHO CARES ABOUT FEDERAL LAW?!

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD IN DISGUST*)

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected the appeal without comment.

* NOTE: A cert petition is voted on at a session of the court called a conference. A conference is a private meeting of the nine Justices by themselves; the public and the Justices' clerks are excluded. If four Justices vote to grant the petition, the case proceeds to the briefing stage; otherwise, the case ends.

* ASSUMING THAT THIS WAS A CERT PETITION... (*PAUSE*)... THERE'S SOMETHING AMISS. (IN OTHER WORDS, WHO WAS THAT SIXTH JUSTICE WHO REFUSED TO VOTE FOR HEARING THE CASE...?)

William R. Barker said...

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1870:enabling-a-future-american-dictator&catid=62:texas-straight-talk&Itemid=69

* QUOTING THE HON. RON PAUL (R-TX)

Our Presidents can now, on their own: order assassinations, including American citizens; operate secret military tribunals; engage in torture; enforce indefinite imprisonment without due process; order searches and seizures without proper warrants, gutting the 4th Amendment; ignore the 60 day rule for reporting to the Congress the nature of any military operations as required by the War Power Resolution; continue the Patriot Act abuses without oversight; wage war at will; and treat all Americans as suspected terrorists at airports with TSA groping and nude x-rays.

* WELCOME TO THE AGE OF OBAMA! (WHICH WAS ITSELF PRECEDED BY THE AGE OF BUSH... AND BEFORE THAT THE AGE OF CLINTON...)

Perhaps the most troubling power grab of late is the mission creep associated with the 9/11 attacks and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Initiated as targeted strikes against the perpetrators of 9/11, a decade later we are still at war. With whom?

* GOOD FRIGG'N QUESTION! (I KNOW WE'RE AT WAR IN AFGHANISTAN; WE'RE ALSO AT WAR WITH LIBYA; AND AMERICANS ARE STILL BEING REGULARLY BLOWN TO BITS AND SHOT TO DEATH IN IRAQ.)

Last week Congress passed a Defense Authorization bill with some very disturbing language that explicitly extends the president's war powers to just about anybody.

Section 1034 of that bill...

* SECTION 1034...?!?! AS IN 1033 SECTIONS BEYOND SECTION 1...??? FOLKS... THIS IS INSANITY...

...states that we are at war with the Taliban, al Qaeda, and associated forces. Who are the associated forces?

It also includes anyone who has supported hostilities in aid of an organization that substantially supports these associated forces. This authorization is not limited by geography, and it has no sunset provision. It doesn't matter if these associated forces are American citizens. Your constitutional rights no longer apply when the United States is "at war" with you.

(*SCREAMING TOWARDS THE HEAVENS*)

Would it be so hard for someone in the government to target a political enemy and connect them to al Qaeda, however tenuously, and have them declared an associated force?

* THE QUESTION IS... WOULD WE KNOW ABOUT IT IF THEY DID...?!

My colleague Congressman Justin Amash spearheaded an effort to have this troubling language removed, but unfortunately it failed by a vote of 234 to 187. It is unfortunate indeed, that so many in Congress accept unlimited war-making authority in the hands of the executive branch.

William R. Barker said...

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1874:holding-the-president-accountable-on-libya&catid=62:texas-straight-talk&Itemid=69

* (AGAIN) QUOTING THE HON. RON PAUL (R-TX)

Last week, more than 70 days after President Obama sent our military to attack Libya without a congressional declaration of war, the House of Representatives finally voted on two resolutions attempting to rein in the president.

This debate was long overdue...

* DAMN RIGHT IT WAS!

According to a CNN poll last week, 55% of the American people believe that Congress, not the president, should have the final authority to decide whether the U.S. should continue its military mission in Libya.

* LISTEN... I DON'T CARE IF IT'S 55%, 95%, OR 5%; THE FACT IS, THE CONSTITUTION GIVES THIS AUTHORITY TO CONGRESS AND ONLY CONGRESS!

Yet for more than 70 days Congress...ignored its constitutional obligations and allowed the president to usurp its authority.

* THAT'S BECAUSE MOST MEMBERS OF CONGRESS ARE UNWORTHY OF THEIR SEATS. (*SHRUG*) IT REALLY IS JUST THAT SIMPLE.

Finally, Congressman Dennis Kucinich was able to bring to the floor a resolution asserting that proper constitutional war power authority resides with Congress. His resolution simply stated that "Congress directs the President to remove the United States Armed Forces from Libya by not later than the date that is 15 days after the date of the adoption of this concurrent resolution."

I was pleased that 87 Republicans were able to put the Constitution first and support this resolution.

(*NOD*)

Opponents of the withdrawal resolution said the 15 day deadline was too abrupt. But as I pointed out during debate, the president attacked Libya abruptly - he didn't even bother to consult Congress - so why can't he order an end to military action just as abruptly?

(*CHUCKLE*) (*NOD*)

When members of Congress took an oath of office to defend the Constitution, we did not pledge to defend it only gradually, a little bit at a time. On the contrary, we must defend it vigorously and completely from the moment we take that oath.

* IF ONLY MORE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS COULD BE TRUSTED TO HONOR THEIR OATHS.

William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/president-obamas-phony-accounting-on-the-auto-industry-bailout/2011/06/06/AG3nefKH_blog.html

“Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency.” -- President Obama, June 4, 2011.

* HMM...

We [here at the Washington Post] take no view on whether the administration’s efforts on behalf of the automobile industry were a good or bad thing; that’s a matter for the editorial pages and eventually the historians. But we are interested in the facts the president cited to make his case.

What we found is one of the most misleading collections of assertions we have seen in a short presidential speech.

Virtually every claim by the president regarding the auto industry needs an asterisk, just like the fine print in that too-good-to-be-true car loan.

Let’s look at the claims in the order in which the president said them.

“Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency - and it repaid that money six years ahead of schedule. And this week, we reached a deal to sell our remaining stake. That means soon, Chrysler will be 100% in private hands.”

Wow, “every dime and more” sounds like such a bargain. Not only did Chrysler pay back the loan, with interest - but the company paid back even more than they owed. Isn’t America great or what?

Not so fast. The president snuck in the weasel words “during my presidency” in his statement. What does that mean?

According to the White House, Obama is counting only the $8.5 billion loan that he made to Chrysler, not the $4 billion that President George W. Bush extended in his last month in office.

* WHICH - BTW - THEN-SENATOR OBAMA BACKED TO THE HILT...!!!

Under the administration’s math, the U.S. government will receive $11.2 billion back from Chrysler...

* HMM... (*SNORT*)

Through this sleight-of-hand accounting, the White House can conveniently ignore Bush’s loan, but [Obama's own] Treasury Department admits that U.S. taxpayers will not recoup about $1.3 billion of the entire $12.5 billion investment when all is said and done.

* NEXT...

The White House justifies saying that Chrysler will be in 100% “in private hands” because there will no longer be government ownership once Fiat completes its purchase of the U.S. stake. For the record, the United Auto Workers will own 46% of the company.

The president is straining too hard. If the auto industry bailout is really a success, there should be no need to resort to trumped-up rhetoric and phony accounting to make your case. Let the facts speak for themselves.

* FOLKS, FEEL FREE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE LINK PROVIDED AND READ THE ENTIRE "FACT CHECK" AND THEN READ THE ADMINISTRATION'S RESPONSE. (*SHRUG*)

William R. Barker said...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/07/us-libya-idUSTRE7270JP20110607

Waves of NATO aircraft hit Tripoli on Tuesday in the most sustained bombardment of the Libyan capital since Western forces began air strikes in March.

* NATO AIRCRAFT...??? NOTICE THE DELIBERATE COVER-UP OF EXACTLY WHOSE PLANES - AND WHOSE PILOTS - WE'RE TALKING ABOUT?!

* AND BTW... WASN'T THIS SUPPOSED TO BE A HUMANITARIAN MISSION... YOU KNOW... TO PROTECT CIVILIANS - NOT BOMB THEM?

William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER (Part 1 of 2)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303745304576357751015958560.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop

[Environmental extremists, other Leftists, and people who mean this country no good] know that if the [Alaskan Oil] pipeline is shut down, by law it must be dismantled.

If they can starve the pipeline of supply, they can kill Alaskan drilling.

[Presently, there is a] determined "environmental campaign," abetted by the Obama Administration, to shut down the 38-year-old Trans-Alaska Pipeline.

(*NOD*)

In its 1980's heyday, the 800-mile pipeline pushed some 2.2 million barrels of oil a day from Alaska's North Slope to the port of Valdez. Yet as the rich fields of Prudhoe Bay and Kuparuk River have declined, oil flow has dropped to one-third of that volume. The drop-off is now causing serious technical problems, as slow-flowing oil drops in temperature and clogs and corrodes the pipe. Failing a technological fix, or more oil, the pipe's near-term viability is at risk.

* AGAIN, FOLKS...

[I]f the [Alaskan Oil] pipeline is shut down, by law it must be dismantled. [S]tarve the pipeline of supply...kill Alaskan drilling.

(*SHRUG*)

Prudhoe Bay and the Kuparuk are the two largest U.S. oil fields and have sent some 16.2 billion barrels of oil southward. Yet these state lands are dwarfed by the oil-heavy federal lands and waters that surround them. To the west is the 23-million-acre National Petroleum Reserve Alaska, created in 1923 by Warren Harding and by some estimates holding up to 15 billion barrels of oil. To the east is the 19-million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), including its smaller permafrost plain specifically set aside for development. This area - only 2,000 acres of which is necessary for oil drilling - holds up to 16 billion barrels. To the north are the vast Chukchi and Beaufort Seas, estimated to hold 30 billion barrels of oil equivalent - a reserve even bigger than Prudhoe.

* BUT IF WE DON'T TAKE THE OIL OUT OF THE GROUND AND REFINE IT... (*SHRUG*)

William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)

[L]ittle or no commercial oil has flowed from these federal lands.

"Environmentalists" have lobbied Congress to block drilling in ANWR for decades, and their strategy elsewhere has been to flood commercial leases with litigation.

The Bush Administration in 2008 held the first lease sale in the Chukchi Sea since 1991, successfully auctioning 2.7 million acres. Environmental groups immediately sued, and last July a judge halted exploration.

(*SIGH*)

Greens have also gamed the regulatory system, which can require companies to obtain an average of 35 permits to drill an exploratory well. Shell earlier this year canceled plans to drill in the Beaufort Sea, after five years of struggling to get a federal air-emission permit. The Environmental Protection Agency initially granted that permit only to have greens appeal to an internal EPA review board - which denied it earlier this year.

(*GRITTING MY TEETH*)

In response to $4-a-gallon gasoline, the Obama Administration recently proposed lease sales in the National Petroleum Reserve Alaska.

* OF COURSE THERE ARE PROPOSALS... AND THEN THERE ARE "PROPOSALS." (IN OTHER WORDS, LOOK WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DO - AND DON'T DO!)

Yet...

* WAIT FOR IT... WAIT FOR IT...

...the Administration has also used the Gulf of Mexico spill as an excuse to sit on most permits out of Alaska and the Gulf.

The Army Corps of Engineers as recently as February denied ConocoPhillips a permit it had been working on for five years to access a lease it owns in the National Petroleum Reserve.

The Corps is also sitting on a North Slope permit for Exxon Mobil.

Thanks to these roadblocks, the Alaska pipeline has about 1.5 million barrels of unused capacity a day, and environmental attorneys like Brendan Cummings of the Center for Biological Diversity can boast that the pipeline is "past its expiration date." Americans who want to import less oil from abroad should understand how close Washington is to closing off Alaskan oil drilling.

(*NOD*)

William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304066504576341291618063126.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion

If you want to understand the power of special interests in Washington, all you have to know is that a [supposedly] conservative Republican - Rep. John Campbell of California - has introduced a bill (H.R. 1859) to set up a government-based housing finance program that is even worse than Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The tip-off about H.R. 1859 is in the brief summary that appears under the bill's number on the first page: "To ensure the availability," it says, "of reasonably priced conventional mortgages to borrowers in all economic cycles."

(As a rule of thumb, any time you see the phrase "reasonably priced" in a piece of legislation, you can be confident it is proposing to subsidize something...)

(*NOD*)

That's what this bill is all about, and a trip through its many pages tells us that some people have learned nothing from the financial crisis.

To "replace" Fannie and Freddie, which guarantee mortgage-backed securities, the bill would create "housing finance guarantee associations" that will have the power - you guessed it - to guarantee mortgage-backed securities.

(*ROLLING MY EYES*)

Although Fannie and Freddie were only implicitly backed by the federal government, the guarantees of these new associations will be explicitly backed by "the full faith and credit of the United States." If you had been worried about the government's $14.3 trillion in outstanding debts, you will now have more to worry about.

(*SARCASTIC CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

Fannie and Freddie were not required to register their mortgage-backed securities with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This allowed them to accumulate a vast quantity of sub-prime and other risky mortgages - the mortgages that eventually drove them to insolvency - without anyone realizing what they were doing.

(*PAUSE*)

(*DRUM ROLL*)

* WAIT FOR IT... WAIT FOR IT...

The Campbell bill also exempts the housing finance guarantee associations from SEC registration.

* SOUNDS TO ME AS IF THIS CAMPBELL GUY IS EITHER STUPID... OR ON THE TAKE. (*SHRUG*)

William R. Barker said...

* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 2)

For 15 years before their failure, Fannie and Freddie were "regulated" by a government agency.

* JUST MULL ON THAT FOR A MOMENT.

Sure enough, the housing finance guarantee associations created by Mr. Campbell's bill will be regulated by a government agency to assure their safety and soundness. (Anyone feel comforted by that?)

(*SNORT*)

The bill's defenders will undoubtedly claim that the regulator of these new associations, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, will have the authority to impose a fee for the government's guarantee. The argument is that the government will be compensated for the risks it is taking.

(*GUFFAW*)

The reality is that Congress always sees to it that its favored groups don't have to pay for the risks they create. Instead, we wait for the collapse of these programs, when the taxpayers are required to pick up the tab.

(*NOD*)

A legitimate question is qui bono - who benefits from the Campbell bill? We can start with the homebuilders. Low government-subsidized mortgage rates allow them to build bigger and more expensive houses. Then there are the realtors, who will be able to sell more of those bigger houses. There are also the large banks - H.R. 1859 explicitly allows them to get in on the action by organizing and owning the guarantee associations.

* YOU SON OF A BITCH... (*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

Today Republicans and tea party members are struggling to limit government involvement in the economy, government debt is spiraling out of control, and Fannie and Freddie are still gaping holes into which the U.S. Treasury is shoveling money. It is truly shocking that anyone would propose legislation to expand the government's role in the housing market instead of winding it down. Or add to the government's obligations instead of paying them off. Or create new Fannies and Freddies even before the stupendous losses of the originals have been totaled up.

But, hey, that's business as usual in your nation's capital.

William R. Barker said...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/07/us-cancer-drugs-shortages-idUSTRE75653V20110607

Cancer medicines desperately needed by sick children and adults are in short supply, undermining the ability of U.S. doctors to administer treatments, top oncologists warned this week.

* FOLKS... THIS USED TO BE AMERICA. ALL MY WISEASS REMARKS ASIDE, IT'S NOT MY GOD DAMNED IMAGINATION THAT WE'RE IN DEEP DECLINE AS A NATION.

Many drugs are scarce because there is no incentive for drugmakers to manufacture low-cost generics, which have slim profit margins for pharmaceutical companies. Doctors do not expect that equation to change any time soon, making them scramble to find acceptable alternatives, or to ration or delay treatment when they cannot.

* SO LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT: NOT ONLY DO GENERIC MANUFACTURERS TAKE PROFITS FROM THE ACTUAL ORIGINATORS OF NEW DRUGS - THUS DISINCENTIVISING R&D INTO NEW DRUGS... BUT NOW THE GENERIC COMPANIES "CAN'T BE BOTHERED" TO KEEP MAKING THE OLD DRUGS IN SUFFICIENT QUANTITIES...?!?!

* FOLKS... THE AGE OF OBAMA SUCKS...!!!

Generic chemotherapy drugs are in particularly tight supply at the nation's hospitals, including mainstay cancer treatments such as cisplatin, doxorubicin, cytarabine and leucovorin.

"These are chestnuts. These are not old-fashioned drugs. They remain incredibly important drugs which serve as the backbone for treating many of the most common and treatable cancers," said Dr. Robert Mayer of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston and a past president of American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) which held its annual meeting in Chicago this week.

Dr. Michael Link, a pediatric oncologist at the Mayo Clinic and current ASCO president, called it a disheartening crisis. "Here we have highly effective drugs, they've been shown they work and to think we don't have them available is almost unconscionable," Link said. "We don't see an end in sight."

* BUT, HEY... ISN'T IT MORE IMPORTANT TO ENSURE MORE PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE NEWLY INSURED WILL ACTUALLY GET TREATED OR NOT? (*SMIRK*) FOLKS... OBAMA IS AN IDIOT AND EVERYONE CONNECTED TO HIM IS AN IDIOT!

For some of these medicines in short supply, there may not be acceptable alternatives.

(*BANGING MY HEAD AGAINST THE GOD DAMNED WALL*)

Dr. Richard Schilsky, cancer specialist at the University of Chicago and a past ASCO president, said the shortages have been going on for about nine months with no sign of abating. "When you talk to the drug companies, they say there are manufacturing problems or they are taking plants offline and then it takes a while to get them back up," he said. "They point the finger at the FDA, saying the FDA is under-resourced and they can't get plants inspected to allow resumption of drug production. The drug suppliers are in the middle of this as well," he said.