A rare bit of good news out of Washington, D.C.
"A broad five-year farm bill went down to a surprise defeat in the House on Thursday when Republican conservatives revolted against the legislation, arguing that it would cost too much, while Democrats defected, saying it would not spend enough on their priorities."
Well I'll be damned...
Senior Republicans accused House Democrats of political
gamesmanship, alleging that the Democrats withdrew their support at the last
minute to embarrass GOP leaders.
Who are these "senior Republicans?" Would the
bill have passed with these allegedly "withdrawn" votes? Wouldn't it
be a breath of fresh air to have competent journalists - reporters and editors
- at the Washington Post willing ask and provide answers for such basic questions?
But conservative advocacy groups claimed victory,
suggesting that the 62 Republicans who opposed the legislation did so with an
intent to draft a more conservative, less costly plan.
In any case... the 62 Republicans who voted
"no" deserve America's thanks!
Democrats, who opposed a $20.5 billion cut to the
food-stamp program in the measure, said the failure was the result of
Republicans’ inability to govern their caucus or count votes. Minority Leader
Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) called it “amateur hour.”
Notice the Washington Post leads with this supposed
"cut" rather than placing it in the larger context of how much
Democrats and RINOs actually proposed to spend? (Again, folks... this isn't
simple incompetence; this is the media attempting to spin public perception.)
Rep. Steve Israel (NY), chairman of the Democratic
Congressional Campaign Committee, said, “They turned what should have been a
non-controversial farm bill into a partisan mess. I cannot imagine what they
will manage to do with a controversial immigration bill.”
"Non-controversial" farm bill...? Obviously
not!
The agriculture sector stands to suffer the most from the
bill’s failure. Without action later this year, American farmers will fall back
to a 1949 law governing the industry, which could lead to steep price increases
on items such as milk.
OH... MY... GOD...!!! Talk about "spin!" Folks...
this so-called "farm bill" which the Washington Post obviously
supported was little more than a food stamp delivery bill... little more than
deficit expanding corporate welfare to "Big Ag." I've covered all
this in Newsbites time and again.
The Senate passed its version of a longer term farm bill
earlier this month on a bipartisan vote of 66 to 27.
Yes, folks... to their shame they did! RINO farm state
Senators voted to steer money to their constituents; big surprise! Left wing
democrat Senators voted to further expand the welfare state... literally! Big
friggin' surprise! (And again... we can see who the Washington Post is in bed
with.)
The measure calls for spending $24 billion less than
current law by ending programs such as a $5 billion direct cash subsidy program
for absentee farmers.
Absentee farmers should get no subsidies! Hell... farmers
should get no subsidies!
The House plan would have resulted in nearly $40 billion
in savings, in large part by slashing the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program, widely known as food stamps.
"Slashing." Nice... Nah... no attempt to spin
public perception there, huh folks? Note that the Washington Post makes no
effort - none - to place the cuts in context with the wild expansion of SNAP
during the past six years? (Again... not an "oversight." This news
"story" is little more than an op-ed disguised as a news article.
Shame on the Washington Post!)
House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-OH) predicted as
recently as Tuesday that his farm bill, drafted by Agriculture Committee
Chairman Frank D. Lucas (R-
OK) over the past two years, would “pass with a broad
bipartisan majority.”
I wish John Boehner would die. Just keel over.
Instead, by the time the gavel fell, Lucas was left in
the middle of the floor collecting condolences from lawmakers on both sides of
the aisle. There is no clear plan for what will happen next, as the Sept. 30
deadline for the expiration of the current stopgap farm bill approaches.
“It’s just disappointing that we have seen now the
Democrats putting partisanship over progress,” Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA)
told reporters as he left the House floor after the vote.
Two points: 1) I wish Cantor would die as well; 2) I
guess this answers my previous question concerning the identity of "senior
Republicans" who allege that only via the democrats withdrawing their
support did the latest porkulus bill fail.
Cantor and senior Republican aides said that Lucas’s
partner in drafting the legislation, Rep. Collin C. Peterson (MN), the ranking
Democrat on the Agriculture Committee, had assured GOP leaders that 40
Democrats were poised to support the plan and send it on to a House-Senate
conference to work out differences between the two measures. “The farm bill has
traditionally been a bipartisan bill, and everyone knows that,” Cantor added.
The 2008 version, for example, received 216 votes from Democrats and 100 from
Republicans.
That's 100 RINOs.
Again, folks... what "bipartisan" usually means
in terms of Washington politics is that "We The People" are gonna get
screwed. These bastards thought "the fix was in." Thankfully...
thanks to 62 true Republicans (for the moment at least)... the "fix"
fell apart.
Pelosi warned Republicans two days ago that any
amendments that would further restrict programs for the poor would diminish
Democratic support, forcing Republicans to find almost all of the votes from
their side. The Republicans ignored the threat and approved several tough
amendments, including one written by Rep. Steve Southerland II (R-FL) that
would have required more stringent work requirements for food stamp recipients.
How "terrible," huh? Attempting to require
"more stringent" work requirements for food stamp recipients... (In
case anyone misses it... I'm being sarcastic here.)
At that point, Peterson told reporters, he pulled Cantor
aside in the back of the chamber to tell him that Democratic support had
cratered and that he was no longer encouraging support for the farm bill. “I
was basically telling people, ‘At this point, vote your district, vote what you
think your people back home want,’ ” he said. “They can try and blame it on me, but
that ain’t going to work,” he added.
How'bout "do what's right?" What a
typical scumbag politician!
The vote served as the latest demonstration that, on
almost every key issue, House Democrats wield unusual clout in the normally
authoritarian chamber because Republicans consistently face opposition from
several dozen in their own ranks.
Sixty-two on this one... but, yeah... unfortunately I
must agree with the Washington Post regarding the numbers. There are only
between 20-40 Republican House Members whom would pass the overall "Bill
Test" for trustworthiness.
In the end, 171 Republicans voted for the legislation,
but a quarter of the GOP caucus opposed it.
And there you have it, folks. Three-quarters of the GOP
House caucus are basically... Democrats.
Just 24 Democrats supported the measure.
The math regarding the Democrats is a bit different.
While there may be a couple - perhaps a few - exceptions, the reality is that
the vast majority of Democrats want to grown government and grow the welfare
state and they don't give a damn about deficits or debt.
“GOP leaders are trying to pin the farm bill loss on
Pelosi; it’s not. Conservatives killed it because it spent nearly $1 trillion,”
said Daniel Holler, a spokesman for the Heritage Action for America network,
which spent $100,000 on ads opposing the bill.
Senior GOP aides said some Republicans were willing to
vote “yes” if the measure was going to pass...
Again, folks, what sort of "journalism" is
this? Either name names or else don't waste the reader's time!
...but once it became clear that it would not, they
wanted to appease Heritage and others on their side rather than the leaders.
LET'S... HAVE... THE... NAMES...! (And let these
"senior GOP aides" go on the record!)
Boehner and Cantor are now in an all-too-familiar
position, with their rank and file holding firm on demands that will derail
attempts at broad compromise. It is a situation that Republicans faced in 2011
during a debate on lifting Treasury’s borrowing authority and in December during
the “fiscal cliff” showdown.
And each and every time... Boehner and Cantor fucked
everything up. Why? Because they're two unprincipled fuck-ups!
Republicans vowed earlier this year to avoid such a
predicament, but Democrats predict the same dynamic will play out in
negotiations on immigration and budget legislation.
Let's hope so! Let's hope that enough true Republicans
step up to stop - or at least slow down - the advancement of everything that's
bad in the Democrats' - and Republicans' - policy agendas!
On the farm bill, Boehner and Cantor could re-craft it to
appease the right flank, draining Democratic support in a long-shot bid to win
more Republican votes. Rep. Steve King (R-IA), a staunch conservative who often
goes against the leadership but who supported the farm bill, warned that most
of the GOP “nays” on Thursday came from those who are “just simply opposed to
all subsidies.”
In other words... the good guys! (I'm very disappointed
that on this one King wasn't with the good guys.)
The leaders could instead move the legislation to the Left
and remove some of the cuts to the food stamp program, taking away GOP support
in a bid to pick up a few dozen Democratic votes. That would make the House
bill much easier to mesh with the Senate plan, but doing so would further erode
Boehner’s support inside the Republican conference. He has relied several times
this year on Democratic majorities to pass critical legislation.
Boehner is such a scumbag... it's impossible to know what
he'll do. I doubt he'd go this route... on this... but I wouldn't put it past
him.
Just Tuesday, as he vowed victory on the farm bill,
Boehner pledged on the immigration front to move only legislation that had
support from a majority of GOP lawmakers.
Boehner's "vows" aren't worth the paper he
wipes his ass with... and I'm talking after he wipes his ass with it!
The other option on the farm bill: Do nothing now, then
pass a temporary extension of the law in September.
Now this sounds like Boehner/Cantor...
That, however, would not reform the food stamp or subsidy
programs, something conservatives have long urged.
But would the 62 votes hold? Unfortunately... my guess...
"no." (We'll see!)
“If you overreach, you get nothing. And that’s what we’ve
been trying to tell people. You carry this too far, and you’ll get no reduction
in the deficit, you’ll get no reform of the farm programs, you will continue
food stamps just exactly like they are,” Peterson said.
13 comments:
http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/19/morning-bell-congress-is-trying-to-fool-you-on-immigration/?roi=echo3-16008174310-13273152-3c1c2b3e88c3aa89c3edf6d86dca02ce&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
Congress is trying to fool you.
* WHAT ELSE IS NEW?!
Here’s how they do business. A piece of legislation is going to cost trillions of dollars, but Members of Congress don’t want the public to see that. Instead, they have the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) look at the bill for just the first 10 years — and they move any costly items off into the future on purpose.
They did it with Obamacare...
* YEP!
Now they’re trying to do it with immigration.
* ABSOLUTE FUCKING DIRTBAGS...!!!
Yesterday, the CBO released its score of the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill. Heritage experts are still analyzing the full report, but a few things jumped out immediately:
The Gang of Eight bill: WILL NOT stop illegal immigration.
Despite promises of a secure border, the bill would slow future illegal immigration by only 25%, according to the CBO. In the next couple of decades, that means 7.5 million new illegal immigrants.
The Gang of Eight bill: WILL drive down wages.
For legal American workers, the CBO estimates the bill would drive down their average wages. The bill will [also] burden taxpayers with trillions of dollars in welfare and entitlement costs for the newly legalized immigrants under amnesty. Heritage’s Robert Rector explains:
"S.744 provides only a temporary delay in eligibility to welfare and entitlements. Over time, S.744 makes all 18.5 million eligible for nearly every government program, including: ObamaCare, 80 different welfare programs, and Social Security/Medicare. When this occurs, spending will explode, but nearly all the real costs do not appear in the CBO score."
* FOLKS... UNDERSTAND... IT'S NOT THAT THE CBO ARE SCUMBAGS. NO. IT'S THAT THEY CAN ONLY WORK WITH THE NUMBERS AND ASSUMPTIONS - AND WITHIN THE PEREMETERS - OF WHAT CONGRESS TELLS THEM REPRESENT CONGRESSIONAL REALITY. IN OTHER WORDS... "GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT."
Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, explained how the Gang of Eight purposefully hid the true costs of the bill:
"The bill’s drafters relied on the same scoring gimmicks used by the ObamaCare drafters to conceal its true cost from taxpayers and to manipulate the CBO score. There is a reason why eligibility for the most expensive federal benefits was largely delayed outside the 10-year scoring window - to mislead the public. As Ranking Member of the Budget Committee, I asked CBO to provide a long-term estimate. Sadly, CBO did not provide the long-term estimate as requested."
Sessions added, “This bill guarantees three things: amnesty, increased welfare costs, and lower wages for the U.S. workforce. It would be the biggest setback for poor and middle-class Americans of any legislation Congress has considered in decades.”
It’s easy to get the result you want when you don’t have to account for a bill’s cost. That’s exactly what the Gang of Eight is trying to get away with.
* HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I TOLD YOU, FOLKS... YOU CAN'T TRUST RUBIO.
http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/20/morning-bell-washington-is-cuckoo-for-food-stamps/?roi=echo3-16024891831-13290702-10ed6a154f62e1aabb3955d7a1923fce&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
The “farm” bill [which was defeated yesterday]...is actually 80% food stamps.
[T]he food stamp program has doubled under the Obama Administration.
House Republicans like John Boehner (R-OH) threw their support behind this bill - which would have locked in the Obama era’s historically high levels of food stamp spending.
The nearly $1 trillion bill in the House was projected to cost 56% more than the last farm bill in 2008. Actual costs would likely be much greater, just like in 2008.
One in seven Americans receives food stamp benefits each month.
The House’s bill actually would spend MORE than President Obama’s budget called for on the most expensive farm program. How did that happen?
* JOHN... FUCKING... BOEHNER...!
* ERIC... FUCKING... CANTOR...!
Food stamps are in the “farm” bill for only one reason: “It helps get the farm bill passed.” That’s how Senator Thad Cochran (R–MS), ranking Republican on the Senate Agriculture Committee, explained it.
That’s not a good reason.
* VIOLENCE. (*SHRUG*) YES... WE WON THIS ONE... BUT LONG TERM...? VIOLENCE IS THE ONLY OPTION. THERE ARE JUST TOO MANY OF THE SCUMBAGS.
http://blogs.wsj.com/middleeast/2013/06/19/luxor-residents-rally-against-new-islamist-governor/?mod=WSJBlog&mod=middleeast
Residents of Luxor, a key tourist destination in Upper Egypt, are mobilizing against their newly appointed governor who hails from the same ultra-conservative religious group responsible for a terror attack that took the lives of of 62 people in the same city some 16 years ago.
* APPOINTED BY...
(*DRUM ROLL*)
On Sunday Egypt’s president Mohammed Morsi appointed 17 new governors across Egypt, including eight Islamists, seven of whom belong to the president’s Muslim Brotherhood party. But the most controversial appointment was the naming of Adel al-Khayat as governor of Luxor. Mr. Al-Khayat is a member of the Building and Development party, the political arm of Gamaa Islamiya, the group responsible for a 1997 attack at Luxor’s Hatshepsut Temple, where 58 foreign tourists and four Egyptians were gunned down by six members of the movement.
* ARAB SPRING, HUH? GREAT FUCKING JOB OBAMA! GREAT FUCKING JOB HILLARY!
“We’ve been protesting for three days now in front of the governorate’s building. We’ve bolted the doors shut and many of us are currently blocking the city’s main road in order to keep the new governor from entering his office,” said Abu Bakr Fadel, a protest organizer, speaking from Luxor by telephone.
Tourism workers, who say they’re worried about their jobs and the preservation of Egypt’s pharaonic heritage, joined the protests against Mr. Al-Khayat, vowing to remain in the streets until the new governor is removed. “I can’t trust this man to preserve my heritage when he comes from a group that believes our antiquities are blasphemous,” said Hisham Desouky, the manager of Dream for Air Balloon Travels in Luxor.
* O-BAM-A! HIL-LAR-Y! O-BAM-A! HIL-LAR-Y! O-BAM-A! HIL-LAR-Y!
* HEY, FOLKS... DON'T FORGET... AS I TYPE THIS WE'RE "NEGOTIATING" WITH THE FUCKING TALIBAN! WE'VE BEEN NEGOTIATING WITH THE TALIBAN! IT'S A FUCKING DISGRACE...!!!
As well as the attack on Hatshepsut Temple, Gamaa Islamiya was responsible for a series of attacks on government institutions and Egypt’s Christian minority during the Mubarak era.
Since his appointment, Al-Khayat has appeared in several local media outlets denying his involvement in the 1997 attack...
Gamaa Islamiya [in] 2003 renounced violence.
“We reject this governor completely because of his backward past. They have renounced violence since then, but what happened in 1997 is unforgettable,” Mr. Fadel said.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/20/bowe-bergdahl-trade-taliban-guantanamo_n_3470457.html
* YEP... HUFFPOST...
The Taliban proposed a deal in which they would free a U.S. soldier held captive since 2009...
* A U.S. SOLDIER HELD CAPTIVE SINCE 2009...
The idea of releasing these Taliban prisoners has been controversial. U.S. negotiators...
* WE'RE NEGOTIATING WITH TERRORISTS... TERRORISTS WHO HAVE HELD A U.S. SOLDIER CAPTIVE SINCE "THE YEAR OF OBAMA."
The proposal to trade U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl for the Taliban detainees was made by senior Taliban spokesman Shaheen Suhail in response to a question during a phone interview with The Associated Press from the militants' newly opened political office in Doha, the capital of the Gulf nation of Qatar.
* THE "MILITANT'" (CUTE...)
The prisoner exchange is the first item on the Taliban's agenda before even starting peace talks with the U.S., said Suhail, a top Taliban figure who served as first secretary at the Afghan Embassy in the Pakistani capital of Islamabad before the Taliban government's ouster in 2001.
* FOLKS... WE'VE BEEN IN TALKS WITH THE TALIBAN! FOR YEARS! IT'S BEEN REPORTED IN THE MSM FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!
"First has to be the release of detainees," Suhail said Thursday when asked about Bergdahl. "Yes. It would be an exchange. Then step by step, we want to build bridges of confidence to go forward."
* HOW'BOUT THEY RELEASE OUR GUY OR WE KILL SUHAIL?
The Obama administration was noncommittal about the proposal, which it said it had expected the Taliban to make. "We've been very clear on our feelings about Sgt. Bergdahl and the need for him to be released," State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said. "We have not made a decision to ... transfer any Taliban detainees from Guantanamo Bay, but we anticipate, as I've said, that the Taliban will all raise this issue."
* FEELING CONFIDENT IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, FOLKS?
The U.S. began secret talks with the militants more than two years ago in off-and-on discussions that lasted several months.
If the Taliban hold talks with American delegates in the next few days, they will be the first U.S.-Taliban talks in nearly 1 1/2 years.
* THAT WE KNOW OF... (*SMIRK*)
The Taliban held a ribbon-cutting ceremony Tuesday in Doha in which they hoisted their flag and a banner that evoked the name they used while in power more than a decade ago: "Political Office of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan." (Later, the Taliban replaced the sign to read simply: "Political office of the Taliban.") At the ceremony, the Taliban welcomed dialogue with Washington but said their fighters would not stop fighting. Hours later, the group claimed responsibility for a rocket attack on Bagram Air Base outside the Afghan capital, Kabul, which killed four American service members.
* THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WE'RE "NEGOTIATING" WITH. (DID YOU EVEN KNOW THAT ANOTHER FOUR AMERICANS WERE KILLED IN AFGHANISTAN THE OTHER DAY?)
Suhail said the Taliban are insistent that they want their first interlocutors to be the United States. "First we talk to the Americans about those issues concerning the Americans and us (because) for those issues implementation is only in the hands of the Americans," he said. "We want foreign troops to be pulled out of Afghanistan," he added. "If there are troops in Afghanistan, then there will be a continuation of the war."
* AND WE'RE PLANNING ON KEEPING TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN...
(*SHRUG*)
Suhail indicated the Taliban could approve of American trainers and advisers for the Afghan troops, saying that "of course, there is cooperation between countries in other things. We need that cooperation."
* PROBABLY BECAUSE MANY OF THE "AFGHAN TROOPS" WE'RE TRAINING ARE ACTUALLY TALIBAN MEMBERS OR AT LEAST SYMPATHIZERS!
http://heritageaction.com/congress/11798/#representative-king
* THIS IS WHO PETE KING IS...
* A SCUMBAG...
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/06/20/OReilly-immigration-bill
* SPEAKING OF PIECES OF...
(*SHRUG*)
Thursday night on Fox News’s "The O’Reilly Factor," host Bill O’Reilly came out in full-scale support for the immigration "reform" bill currently making its way through the Senate.
* FOLKS... HOW MANY TIMES DO I NEED TO TELL YOU ABOUT O'REILLY - AND INDEED FOX NEWS IN GENERAL?
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said, “We must stop this Gang of 8 immigration bill, which would give amnesty to an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants with no guarantee of a secure border.”
(*SHRUG*)
* NOTICE O'REILLY DIDN'T ATTEMPT TO MODERATE A DEBATE BETWEEN CRUZ AND RUBIO...
* NO. O'REILLY'S NOT A PIECE OF SHIT. THAT'S UNFAIR. HE'S JUST DUMB. AND PROUD OF IT! ACCESS THE LINK AND WATCH THE VIDEO OF HIM DEBATING LAURA INGRAHAM. WHEN INGRAHAM ASKS O'REILLY IF HE'S ACTUALLY READ THE BILL (AS SHE HAS) O'REILLY LOOKED AT HER AS IF SHE HAD TWO HEADS. THE CONCEPT OF ACTUALLY READING THE BILL... O'REILLY COULDN'T EVEN WRAP HIS HEAD AROUND IT!
* O'REILLY IS A MORON. IT'S JUST THAT SIMPLE.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jun/21/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-foreign-intelligence-surveillanc/
* JUST READ IT...
(*SIGH*)
http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/20/the-new-york-times-admits-its-reporting
A New York Times story about jury selection in George Zimmerman's trial says the case is "spotlighting Florida's Stand Your Ground law."
In the very next sentence, however, the Times concedes "that law has not been invoked in this case."
* IF YOU'RE SCRATCHING YOUR HEAD... YOU HAVE GOOD REASON TO. READ ON!
As I have been saying since this story began attracting national press attention, Zimmerman's defense does not hinge on the right to stand your ground when you are attacked in a public place because he claims he shot Trayvon Martin during a violent struggle in which there was no opportunity to retreat.
So why is "Florida's Stand Your Ground law" relevant? According to the Times, because it "was cited by the Sanford police as the reason officers did not initially arrest Mr. Zimmerman." But the provision cited by police, although it was included in the same 2005 bill that eliminated the duty to retreat, has nothing to do with the "stand your ground" principle.
The police said they did not charge Zimmerman right away because of a provision that prohibits a law enforcement agency from arresting someone who claims to have used deadly force in self-defense "unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful."
In other words, the fact that Zimmerman killed Martin (which he has always admitted) was not enough; the police also needed reason to doubt his self-defense claim.
We can argue about whether that is a reasonable requirement, but it is completely distinct from the right to stand your ground. Even a state that imposes a duty to retreat could still require police to meet this test before arresting someone who claims self-defense.
From the beginning press coverage of this case has routinely conflated these issues, implying that Florida's definition of self-defense is so broad that it gave Zimmerman a license to kill in circumstances that did not justify the use of deadly force.
The New York Times has been one of the worst offenders in this respect, running one story after another that either obscured or misstated the legal issues while suggesting that both Martin's death and the delay in arresting Zimmerman somehow hinged on the absence of a duty to retreat. Now the Times is implicitly admitting that its reporting was based on a fundamentally mistaken premise.
* SO WHAT'S NEW...?!?!
Opening arguments in Zimmerman's trial are expected next week.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323393804578557802237872788.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Everyone remember the origins of the so-called Affordable Care Act? The Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, Gator-Aid, and other buyoffs for the votes of key Senate Democrats?
Three years on, yet another sweetheart deal has declared itself... The president can blame this latest embarrassment on none other than Secretary of State John Kerry. At issue are the dollars that Medicare pays to hospitals for the wages of doctors and staff.
Before the new health law, states were each allocated a pot of money to divvy among their hospitals. The states are required to follow rules in handing out the funds, in particular a requirement that state urban hospitals must be reimbursed for wages at least at the levels of state rural hospitals.
* I KNOW... I KNOW... SOUNDS LIKE INSIDE BASEBALL. READ ON THOUGH...!
Enter Mr. Kerry, who slipped an opaque provision into the Obama health law to require that Medicare wage reimbursements now come from a national pool of money, rather than state allocations.
* MEANING 50 "EQUAL" SHARES... BUT "EQUAL" ONLY IN THE SENSE OF FITTING WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF KERRY'S OBAMACARE SCAM! (READ ON!)
The Kerry kickback didn't get much notice, since it was cloaked in technicality and never specifically mentioned Massachusetts. But the senator knew exactly what he was doing. You see, "rural" hospitals in Massachusetts are a class all their own. The Bay State has only one, a tiny facility on the tony playground of the superrich — Nantucket.
* STARTING TO GET IT, FOLKS...? (KEEP READING!)
Nantucket College Hospital's relatively high wages set the floor for what all 81 of the state's urban hospitals must also be paid.
* FOR ALL OF THE MASSACHUSETTS HOSPITALS!
And since these dramatically inflated Massachusetts wages are now getting sucked out of a national pool, there's little left for the rest of America.
(Clever Mr. Kerry!)
The change has allowed Massachusetts to raise its Medicare payout by $257 million, forcing cuts to hospitals in 40% states.
* STATES WITH LOWER RURAL FLOORS...
The National Rural Health Association and 20 state hospital associations in January sent a panicked letter to President Obama, noting that the Massachusetts manipulation of the program would hand that state $3.5 billion over the next 10 years at the expense of Medicare beneficiaries everywhere.
* YEP...
They quoted Mr. Obama's former head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Donald Berwick, admitting that "What Massachusetts gets comes from everybody else."
* FOLKS... YA CAN'T MAKE THIS SHIT UP...
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/351633/uncovering-camp-bastion-cover-michelle-malkin
Nine months after the deadly September 14 raid on Camp Bastion in Afghanistan, the families of two fallen Marines may finally get some answers.
(Real accountability, of course, is another story.)
Camp Bastion belongs in the bloody-scandal lexicon with Benghazi and Fast and Furious. This trio of national security disasters under the Obama administration didn’t just involve run-of-the-mill corruption and cover-ups. They cost American lives.
A formal internal investigation into lax security at the base — a British-run NATO compound that adjoins our Marines’ Camp Leatherneck — is now under way.
[T]he Taliban waged an intricately coordinated, brutal attack on Camp Bastion in Afghanistan last fall — three days after the deadly siege on our consulate in Libya and after months of prior security incidents and warnings.
Fifteen jihadists disguised in stolen American combat fatigues penetrated the complex. They used rocket-propelled grenades, assault rifles, and other weapons to wipe out nearly an entire squadron of Marine Harrier jets worth an estimated $200 million.
* AND YET HOW MANY AMERICANS ARE AWARE THIS EVEN HAPPENED...? MENTION "CAMP BASTION" TO A FRIEND, COLLEAGUE, OR FAMILY MEMBER AND CHANCES ARE YOU'LL GET A BLANK STARE IN REPLY.
Along with the most devastating loss of U.S. airpower since Vietnam, two heroic U.S. Marines — Lieutenant Colonel Christopher Raible and Sergeant Bradley Atwell — were killed in the battle, and nearly a dozen others were injured.
Military officials [have long] refused to release details of the fateful budget and strategy decisions that led to the attack. But Deborah Hatheway, aunt of Sergeant Atwell and the family’s spokesperson, and other Camp Bastion families, learned on their own that their loved ones were left vulnerable to attack by military leaders who outsourced watchtower security on the base to soldiers from Tonga.
* OUTSOURCED WATCHTOWER SECURITY ON THE BASE TO SOLDIERS FROM TONGA.
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
The neglect of security at Bastion was widely known. Nick Francona, a former Marine Corps ground-intelligence officer with 3rd Battalion, 4th Marines, who served as a scout sniper platoon commander in Helmand Province in 2011 recounted on Foreign Policy magazine’s “The Best Defense” blog in April: “It was obvious to even a casual observer that many of the posts were unmanned and were comically left with a ‘green Ivan’ silhouette target as a halfhearted attempt at deterrence.”
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
Francona added: “The attack only occurred because of an egregious failure in basic infantry practices. . . . It is painfully obvious that this attack would not have been successful, or likely even attempted, if not for multiple security failures at Leatherneck/Bastion.”
(*PURSED LIPS*)
The families zeroed in on Major General Charles “Mark” Gurganus, who recently returned to the U.S. after commanding coalition forces in Afghanistan, as the man responsible for shortchanging security at Bastion.
(Gurganus was the same one who ordered Marines to disarm — immediately after a failed jihadi attack on then-defense secretary Leon Panetta last year — because he wanted them “to look just like our unarmed Afghan partners.”)
* HAS GURGANUS BEEN COURT-MARTIALED? NOPE.
The Camp Bastion families are not the only ones scrutinizing Gurganus’ decisions. A few weeks ago, Washington Post reporter Rajiv Chandrasekaran reported that the U.S. military finally launched a formal probe into whether Gurganus and his subordinates bear responsibility for lax security at Bastion. A planned promotion for Gurganus has been put on hold.
* NOT... GOOD... ENOUGH...
Chandrasekaran confirmed that watchtowers were indeed left to Tongans (notorious at the base for sleeping on the job). In addition, reports Chandrasekaran, “Security patrols of the perimeter, which were conducted by the Marines . . . had been scaled back substantially in the months leading up to the attack.”
Simply blaming the Tongans, however, is not accountability.
U.S. staff decisions “made it easier for the Taliban to reconnoiter the compound and then enter without resistance,” according to Chadrasekaran’s sources with direct knowledge of the incident.
While U.S. Central Command investigates, there is now movement on Capitol Hill to help Camp Bastion families whose information requests have been stymied. Rep. Todd Rokita (R-IN) has written Marine/CENTCOM leadership on behalf of the victims’ families (Sergeant Atwell and his family are from Indiana). Rokita told me in a statement this week: “This is about transparency and accountability. I want to make sure that Sgt. Atwell’s family, Lt. Col. Raible’s family, and the American people get the full truth about the Camp Bastion attack.”
It’s a start. But as with Benghazi and Fast and Furious, getting the truth about Camp Bastion is only half the battle. Truth without consequences is a recipe for more dead Americans.
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324577904578557903396922628.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Right now the IRS story looks stalled and confused. When the scandal broke in early May, the Obama administration vowed to get to the bottom of it with an FBI investigation. Many of us were skeptical. There's a sign we were right.
On June 13, FBI Robert Director Robert Mueller testified before the House Judiciary Committee and was questioned by Rep. Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) about former tax-exempt office chief Lois Lerner's claim that the targeting of conservative groups was due to the incompetence of workers in the Cincinnati office.
Jordan: "What can you tell us — I mean you started a month ago, what can you tell us about this, have you found . . . the now-infamous two rogue agents, have you discovered who those people are?"
Mueller: "Needless to say, because it is under investigation, I can't give out any of the details."
Jordan: "Can you tell me . . . how many agents, investigators you've assigned to the case?"
Mueller: "Ah, may be able to do that, but I'd have to get back to you."
Jordan: "Can you tell me who the lead investigator is?"
Mueller: "Off the top of my head, no."
Jordan: "This is the most important issue in front of the country in the last six weeks, you don't know who's heading up the case, who the lead investigator is?"
Mueller: "Ah, at this juncture, no. . . . I have not had a recent briefing on it."
Jordan: "Do you know if you've talked to any of the victims — have you talked to any of the groups who were targeted by their government—have you met with any of the tea-party folks since May 14, 2013?"
Mueller: "I don't know what the status of the interviews are by the team that's on it."
Wow.
* WOW IS RIGHT!
He'd probably know something about the FBI's investigation of the IRS if he cared about it, if it had some priority or importance within his agency.
This week an embarrassed Mr. Mueller was ready for questions from senators. There is an investigation, he said, and "over a dozen" agents have been assigned.
(Well... better than nothing.)
Attorneys for the best-known of the targeted groups confirm that they've heard nothing.
From the American Center for Law and Justice: "None of our clients have been contacted or interviewed by the FBI."
From lawyer Cleta Mitchell: "I hear from people around the country, and no one has been contacted."
All of which is strange. If the FBI were investigating a series of muggings, you'd hope they'd start by interviewing the people who'd been mugged.
* IF THEY WANTED TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF IT... (*SHRUG*)
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
[W]hat is historic about this scandal, what makes it unique and uniquely dangerous, is that it is different in kind from previous IRS scandals. In the past it was always elite versus elite, power guys using the agency against other power guys. This scandal is different because it's the elite versus the people. It is an entrenched and fearsome power versus regular citizens.
(*NOD*)
The scandal broke, of course, when Lois Lerner deviously planted a question at a Washington conference. She was trying to get out ahead of a forthcoming inspector general's report that would reveal the targeting. She said that "our line people in Cincinnati who handled the applications" used "wrong" methods. Also "in some cases, cases sat around for a while." The Cincinnati workers "sent some letters out that were far too broad," in some cases even asking for contributors' names. "That's not appropriate."
Since that day, the question has been: Was the targeting of conservative groups in fact the work of incompetent staffers in Cincinnati, or were higher-ups in the Washington office of the IRS involved? Ms. Lerner said it was all Cincinnati.
But then the information cascade began.
* YEP... IT DID!
The Washington Post interviewed Cincinnati IRS workers who said everything came from the top.
The Wall Street Journal reported congressional investigators had been told by the workers that they had been directed from Washington.
Word came that one applicant group, after receiving lengthy and intrusive requests for additional information, including donor names, received yet another letter asking for even more information — signed by Lois Lerner.
* OF THE HEAD OFFICE... IN WASHINGTON!
Catherine Engelbrecht of True the Vote, which sought tax-exempt status, recently came into possession of a copy of a 20-month-old letter from the IRS's Taxpayer Advocate Service in Houston, acknowledging that her case had been assigned to an agent in Cincinnati. "He is waiting for a determination from their office in Washington," the advocate said. The agent was "unable to give us a timeframe" on when determination would be made.
* AGAIN... WASHINGTON IS NOT CLEVELAND.
The evidence is overwhelming that the Washington office of the IRS was involved. But who in Washington? How high did it go, how many were involved, how exactly did they operate? Those are the questions that remain to be answered. That's what the investigations are about.
* AND YET THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA DOESN'T SEEM ALL THAT INTERESTED...
What investigators have to do now is follow the trail through the IRS in Washington, including political appointees.
Congress, including both its battling investigative committees, must get the answers to these questions.
The House speaker should make sure it's a priority.
(*PAUSE*)
There's no sign the FBI will.
* AND THERE'S NO SIGN THE MSM WILL. AND UNFORTUNATELY... THERE'S LITTLE SIGN BOEHNER AND MCCONNELL WILL.
Post a Comment