Category Archives: Media

1st Ever National Tea Party Convention

It’s been a week since I first made my journey south to Nashville, TN, to attend the first ever National Tea Party Convention put on by Tea Party Nation (TPN), and unfortunately, due to rescheduled flights and Snowmageddon, I haven’t had the opportunity to write about it before now — so here it goes:

I have to honestly say that the Tea Party has been characterized and painted in such a dishonest way by the media.  Everyone I met was incredibly excited to be involved in politics and their government.  There were people from all genders, age groups, and yes, there were minorities at the conference. The tea party represents a broad and expanding group of Americans who are simply “sick and tired of being sick and tired,” with their government and their representatives. {Only 600 tickets were sold to the event so this was just a small representation}

It is accurate to say that many who are part of the tea party movement are not fond of Obama’s policies or his ideology, but it would be disingenuous to stop there.  Most tea partiers are trying to return this country to a republic rather than the oligarchy it is heading towards.  The constitution is the law of the land and should be adhered to and treated as such.  The members of this grassroots movement are average, everyday Americans; many of which have jobs or are retired.  They pay taxes, work hard, believe in personal responsibility, a hand up not a hand out, fiscal responsibility, small government, and strong national defense.

I guess I have difficulty understanding how the media could paint citizens engaging in debate, in civics, in government, and expressing peaceful dissent, as being extremists, nationalists, and racists.  What is so wrong with expressing the principles you believe in?  Protesters were “in” when they were protesting the Iraq War and anything Bush; holding up swastikas, BusHitler signs, and even making a fake guillotine with a Bush head.  But now the media doesn’t like the dissent when it goes against the very principles they espouse.  There is something very wrong when the 4th column can’t remain objective.  I have no problem if you are liberal and in the media, but when you are ‘on duty’ act like it, then take your opinions and ideology home with you.

With that being said – there will always be people on both sides of the aisle that are considered extreme or fringe, which is normal.  The left and right both have their fair share to deal with when it comes to that, but nobody should categorically try to make an assumption of the whole based on its parts.

I personally hope that the tea party remains an independent entity and doesn’t fall into the trap of becoming an established political group.  What is so attractive to the movement is its appeal to all parties that share the same conservative principles.  Many would be surprised that many Democrats (i.e. JFK Democrats) are more conservative especially when it comes to fiscal policy.  Independents are also conservative in different aspects.  I, for one, have never been part of a registered party and have always considered myself unaffiliated because the establishment on both sides of the aisle needs reform.

All in all, I had a blast, and the entire convention surpassed my expectations.  I met a lot of great people, and had tons of fun – believe it or not, Conservatives definitely know how to have a good time! 🙂 There are lots of people working hard to put the right people into office so we the people can clean up our government.  It’s important to note that many involved are still very new to politics and grassroots activism so mistakes and missteps will be made along the way – but as long as we can remember Calvin Coolidge’s words referring to Persistence, the Tea Party can become a force to be reckoned with:

“Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence.
Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent.
Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb.
Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts.
Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent.
The slogan “Press On” has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.”

Here are some photos of the event:

Photobucket

Many people were excited to see Sarah Palin on Saturday – one of her fans taped her poster to his balcony!

Photobucket

The Tea Party Presser where both Judson Phillips & Mark Skoda spoke – the MSM was there in droves

Photobucket

The Presser was held at lunchtime on Friday – Angela McGlowan would speak later that evening and give a wonderful speech and also announce her candidacy as a Republican running in Mississippi. The other men next to her were part of a documentary crew that have already made one movie about the tea party.

Photobucket

There were so many great people who attended and I was afforded the opportunity to have lunch and hang out with Adam Andrzejewski who unfortunately lost the Republican primary for Governor in IL, but I have a feeling there is more in store for him!

Photobucket

The men who wore costumes from our founding era were awesome – many of them were in the Tea Party documentary and it made the event a lot of fun.

Photobucket

Here is a very small portion of the line awaiting Sarah Palin and the tea party banquet on Saturday night (people were in line by 3:30/4pm when the doors weren’t evening opening until 6pm).

Photobucket

Sarah Palin arrives to eat dinner at the banquet – We got some great seats that were about 50 feet away.

Photobucket

We got to hear a new song for the movement, I believe it was called “American Heart” by Jon David.

Photobucket

Sarah Palin begins her speech (I had to take these pictures with my blackberry so the lighting is very bad).

Photobucket

The view from the jumbotron

Photobucket

Top off the night by celebrating a successful convention with people like Andrew Breitbart, Glenn Reynolds (aka Instapundit), and so many others – Saturday night was a blast!

Photobucket

Of course we had to end the night by signing the official flag for the Tea Party convention. {that’s my friend Burnsy BTW}

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Constitution, Economy, Establishment, Government Spending, Media, MSM, National Debt, National Security, Progressivism, Protests, RINO, Sarah Palin, Tea Party

Holder the Hypocrite; Geneva Convention? What Geneva Convention?

Hypocrite, Eric Holder, in 2002, says the Gitmo terrorists aren’t covered under the Geneva Convention.  What article in the Geneva Convention you ask? Well, it’s Article IV and it goes a little something like this:

Click here for the Eyeblast video

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy: 

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfill the following conditions:  

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.  

3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government [not a deity] or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.

4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model.

5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law. 

6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war. 

B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention: 

1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment. 

2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties.

C. This Article shall in no way affect the status of medical personnel and chaplains as provided for in Article 33 of the present Convention. 

In summary, these terrorists are not covered under the Geneva Convention because they are not normal soldiers, conducting war by international rules and guidelines.  They are not regularly uniformed armed forces that abide by this Convention or any other treaties. These terror cells do not act on the behalf of a government, but rather as underground radical factions set up to terrorize other cultures and individuals.  If they were uniformed soldiers, I would agree that they should be treated in a manner that abides by the Convention, however that has not, nor was it ever, the case. 

A lot of thought and legal drafting went into the appropriateness of interrogation techniques used against Al-Qaeda and the terrorists at Gitmo who initiated the attacks on 9/11.  I fail to see where the means of interrogation were unjust and completely inhumane? Waterboarding did not take place for every single prisoner and for those who were waterboarded, they could only be waterboarded so many times, while our men and women serving get waterboarded more often.  Doctors are also required to stand by during a waterboarding session.  As far as bugs in a corner or sleep deprivation – well that just reminds me of college, so what’s the big deal? Did these terrorists consider the lives or feelings of anybody before they attacked innocent civilians? I will never understand how the liberal mind works – and maybe that’s a good thing.

Oh, and it would be nice for all the Bush bashers and the liberal elite media to at least acknowledge the hypocrisy of Holder and this administration…

Leave a comment

Filed under Double Standards, Hypocrisy, Media, National Security, Obama Administration, Terrorism

Narcissist in Chief Gives Himself a B+ for the Year

Jake Tapper Reports:

“Good, solid B-plus,” the president said. 

Explaining, he said, “we have inherited the biggest set of challenges of any president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt. 

“We stabilized the economy, and prevented possibilities of a Great Depression or a significant financial meltdown. The economy is growing again.

“We are on our way out of Iraq. I think we’ve got the best possible plan for Afghanistan.

“We have reset our image around the world.

“We have achieved an international consensus around the need for Iran and North Korea to disable their nuclear weapons.

“And I think that we’re going to pass the most significant piece of social legislation since Social Security, and that’s health insurance for every American,” he concluded.

Pressed by Oprah as to why only a B-plus, the president said, “B-plus because of the things that are undone. Health care is not yet signed. If I get health care passed we tip into A-minus.”

If this doesn’t scream sheer ego and arrogance, I don’t know what does.  Most intelligent individuals usually know that when a question of this sort is thrown at you, the proper response would be “I believe the American people are more apt at giving me a grade than I would be…” But of course, Mr. Mirror, mirror on the wall, had to answer and gave himself a high score.

If recent polls like Gallup or Rasmussen are any indication of how the American public actually feels about him and his grade, it would seem that he really needs some extra credit or maybe some one-on-one time with his professor, the public.  Obama’s approval rating has taken a nose dive while he sits at only 44% approval and he technically still has 1 more month until he reaches his one year mark.

All of the things that Obama mentions are outright lies as far as being accomplishments or things that most people look at much differently than he does. 

Take for example the assertion that he has stabilized the economy; many argue that just because stocks are rising that does not mean the economy has stabilized or gotten better.  We are on unprecedented territory and the unemployment rate is still in double digits.  Stocks also correct themselves for inflation which is what would appear to be happening, as well as the fact that many businesses have had to cut their workforces and become more efficient with less people.  For now, companies are reaping the rewards of more efficiencies, but eventually that will plateau if they want to move forward and stay ahead of their competition. There is still a chance that the economy could experience a double dip, and if it doesn’t, the most likely situation will be heavy inflation or Japanese style deflation with no growth for years to come.

How long until people get fed up with his blame game rhetoric that he has inherited this situation?  He has inherited the situation from every corruptocrat dating back more than just Bush’s 8 years.  We should throw in Greenspan, Clinton and even Carter for that matter if we want to really get at the heart of the issue.  He should also include himself since was in fact legal council for ACORN and lead the charge in the 90’s to obtain a settlement on a lawsuit indicating that credit scores are apparently discriminatory and the CRA should be expanded – hence subprime… I could go on, but I’ve vented enough on that topic.  I just can’t stand people who continuously play the victim, meanwhile, as they point the finger, opportunities and life pass them by.  I have no respect for individuals who can’t take responsibility – and this is supposed to be the leader of the only super power left in the world!?

I’m not sure where he comes off saying that we are pulling out of Iraq?  I’ll believe it when I see it.  Seems like he is carrying out Bush’s policies for now.  I think that stating his plans for Afghanistan are the best are delusional at best.  Maybe, if he had listened to his general in the first place, we wouldn’t have had so many killed over the couple of months (more so than any time when Bush was in office).  He still did not give them the # of troops requested but merely cut the request in half – I will forever call it Halfghanistan.

We have reset our image around the world? Funny, those whom I know living abroad who were excited about Obama, even after I tried to tell them the truth about his record and his ideology, are only now realizing what a disaster he is.  He continues to snub our allies, bow to other leaders, and apologize for all of America’s perceived wrongs on his travels abroad — this has made him a laughing-stock.  The liberal media lets him get away with it, but I don’t expect it to continue forever, if he continues to decline in the polls — eventually real sentiment will bubble to the surface.

When has Obama done anything about North Korea or Iran? His foreign policy seems to be avoidance.  He has not called for harsher sanctions, he is not using anything other than words to try to disarm Iran.  While he stares at himself in the mirror and relishes the media attention, Iran is creating weapons of mass destruction with their plutonium/uranium enrichment plants.

Health care legislation will definitely be significant but significance doesn’t always mean good.  It is absolutely maddening that those in DC could care less about the polls on health care. Most of America disapproves of this bill and the way the government is handling it.  I’ve seen the way government has screwed up business, the economy, and everything else it has touched, there is no way I want them making decisions about my health! 

So continue to grade yourself a B+ Mr. Ego… I can only hope that one of these days somebody in the media has a ‘Come-to-Jesus’ moment of clarity and decides to do his/her job for the good of the country. 

I suspect that the true grade will come for Mr. President in November 2010 – EPIC FAIL.

Leave a comment

Filed under Economy, Health Care, Media, MSM, National Security, Obama, Obama Administration, Progressivism

Crikey! The Government Is Monitoring Twitter & Facebook

*Banging head against the keyboard* – the government is monitoring the internet more now than ever.  If I wasn’t so politically charged, I probably wouldn’t care, nor would I really hear much about this, but much of my twitter and Facebook use is for political activism and pontificating on the issues of the day. If that gets me into trouble with the government, then so be it.  I’d rather get carted off for practicing my first amendment right of free speech than for doing something that was truly illegal like stealing my neighbor’s car. 

Both parties are at fault for this obvious breach of personal privacy, but I believe one could make the argument where there are certain circumstances that warrant wire tapping or other similar techniques if it saves lives and stops terrorism.  However, the slippery slope is easily becoming not just a theory, but a reality.  I do not see the need to monitor Facebook or twitter.  These are mainly tools used by citizens to get short points across that consist of 140 characters.  Some people tweet articles, some tweet opinions, some tweet their daily activities, while others tweet photos – why should that be monitored by the government?  Does the government seriously care that I just got back in touch with Sally Muckenfuch from 3rd grade? 

I don’t want to seem like a ‘Debbie Downer’ but would terrorists really be using twitter? “Just strapped a bomb onto my back, headed to airport, can’t wait for virgins.” I am not naive, either, and believe that anything could be used for the wrong purpose, but twitter just doesn’t seem like the place to strategize and plan an attack.  Information can definitely be sent out to meet up, but whole terror plots are difficult to type in 140 characters or less, let alone hope that ADD riddled people already tweeting will follow.  Based on the latest NY Times editorial, however, that is not the intent of the government’s monitor at all though:

The government is increasingly monitoring Facebook, Twitter and other social networking sites for tax delinquents, copyright infringers and political protesters. A public interest group has filed a lawsuit to learn more about this monitoring, in the hope of starting a national discussion and modifying privacy laws as necessary for the online era.

Wired magazine reported in October:

America’s spy agencies want to read your blog posts, keep track of your Twitter updates — even check out your book reviews on Amazon.

In-Q-Tel, the investment arm of the CIA and the wider intelligence community, is putting cash into Visible Technologies, a software firm that specializes in monitoring social media. It’s part of a larger movement within the spy services to get better at using ”open source intelligence” — information that’s publicly available, but often hidden in the flood of TV shows, newspaper articles, blog posts, online videos and radio reports generated every day.

This is what scares common sense independents about the government — we allow them to have more power than ever should have been necessary and our rights and personal freedoms continue to disappear right from under us because we allow them to be taken PROGRESSIVELY… funny how we appear to be turning into those much storied frogs that are unable to jump out of a pot of luke warm water after it has boiled.

And as Noel Sheppard of Newbusters points out, the fact that this isn’t being reported as much as it would be if a Republican was in office, is just another hypocritical chink in the liberal media’s armor:

So be careful with your next Tweet or Facebook status, for you never know who’s watching.

On the other hand, it will be interesting to see how Obama-loving media follow this story.

After all, the press were constantly bashing the Bush White House concerning electronic surveillance designed to protect the nation from terrorist attacks.

The Times might be pleased with itself by publishing an editorial on this subject in its opinion section, but under the previous administration, this would have resulted in a front page story with thousands of words.

Leave a comment

Filed under Big Brother, Constitution, Double Standards, Hypocrisy, Media, MSM, Progressivism

Cass Sunstein Is Certifiable; Absolutism, First Amendment New Deal & More Executive Power

Cass Sunstein is one of the scarier of Obama’s czars and the fact that he was confirmed by the Senate makes it 10x worse!  Sunstein may be a very nice man, but when it comes to ideology, theory, ideas, and his views on the constitution, it makes me want to pull my hair out and scream.  I’m not sure what it is about the world of academia and the absolute detachment from reality that many hold, but it’s time for America to get past the status  of holding ivy league degrees; the superficial, and vote for people with real world experience.  Teachers do live in the real world, but my question would be whether not they have actually worked in a job or a place where they have implemented these ideas first to see if they actually work and help people, not hurt.

Besides, Cass Sunstein’s idea of Internet regulation, whereby a panel or individual of some sort would decide what is inaccurate or false and ban content via their own opinion (more detail on this can be found in his book entitled On Rumors), he has also argued that animals should be able to have a lawyer and sue humans, and guns and hunting should be banned.  There is much more to Cass Sunstein and his regulatory ideas in Nudge, another book penned by the newly approved czar.

More information about Sunstein is slowly but surely beginning to trickle out as time passes.  Cass Sunstein is a proponent of absolutism which really is a sick, twisted theory of “no liberty without dependency”:

You owe your life — and everything else — to the sovereign. The rights of subjects are not natural rights, but merely grants from the sovereign. There is no right even to complain about the actions of the sovereign, except insofar as the sovereign allows the subject to complain. These are the principles of unlimited, arbitrary, and absolute power, the principles of such rulers as Louis XIV. Intellectuals have assiduously promoted them; think of Jean Bodin and Thomas Hobbes.

A new intellectual champion of absolutism has now emerged. Mild-mannered University of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein has been advancing the radical notion that all rights — including rights usually held to be “against” the state, such as the right to freedom of speech and the right not to be arbitrarily imprisoned or tortured — are grants from the state. In a book co-authored with Stephen Holmes, The Cost of Rights, he argued that “all legal rights are, or aspire to be, welfare rights,” that is, positive grants from the state. There is no difference in kind between the right not to be tortured and the right to taxpayer-subsidized dental care.
In his new book, The Second Bill of Rights, Sunstein seeks to give constitutional status to welfare rights. The title comes from Franklin Roosevelt’s 1944 State of the Union address, in which he proclaimed that “necessitous men are not free men” and proposed a “second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all.” Among the rights FDR proposed were the rights to “a useful and remunerative job,” “a decent home,” “adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health,” “adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment,” and “a good education.”

To further understand the radical nature of Sunstein’s theories, it’s imperative that we also take a look at his proposed First Amendment New Deal which would act as a new Fairness Doctrine, following the same lines of his Internet regulation ideas.

President Obama’s newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, drew up a “First Amendment New Deal,” a new “Fairness Doctrine” that would include the establishment of a panel of “nonpartisan experts” to ensure “diversity of view” on the airwaves.

Sunstein compared the need for the government to regulate broadcasting to the moral obligation of the U.S. to impose new rules that outlawed segregation.

Until now, Sunstein’s radical proposal, set forth in his 1993 book “The Partial Constitution,” received no news media attention and scant scrutiny.

In the book – Sunstein outwardly favors and promotes the “fairness doctrine,” the abolished FCC policy that required holders of broadcast licenses to present controversial issues of public importance in a manner the government deemed was “equitable and balanced.”

Sunstein introduces what he terms his “First Amendment New Deal” to regulate broadcasting in the U.S.

It appears that Sunstein and Lloyd are two peas in a pod.  Both of these men believe that commercial broadcasting companies should fund strictly public broadcasting.  He also proposes more “democratic” means of control like “compulsory public-affairs programming, right of reply, content review by nonpartisan experts or guidelines to encourage attention to public issues and diversity of view.”

Believe it or not, that’s not the worst to come out of Sunstein’s mouth or from his pen lately.  Sunstein actually believes that Obama and those working as part of his administration should interpret federal laws, not the federal courts.

“There is no reason to believe that in the face of statutory ambiguity, the meaning of federal law should be settled by the inclinations and predispositions of federal judges. The outcome should instead depend on the commitments and beliefs of the President and those who operate under him,” argued Sunstein.

This statement was the central thesis of Sunstein’s 2006 Yale Law School paper, “Beyond Marbury: The Executive’s Power to Say What the Law Is.” The paper, in which he argues the president and his advisers should be the ones to interpret federal laws.

See why I’m pulling my hair out and screaming? This is sheer insanity and the man still argues that this is all constitutional!

2 Comments

Filed under Big Brother, Constitution, Czars, Establishment, Fairness Doctrine, FCC, Media, Net Neutrality, Obama Administration, Progressivism, Radicals, Sunstein

Al Qaeda Operative Found With $50K Worth of Unsecured Loans From Bailout Banks

Najibullah Zazi, the man captured and being questioned for the terrorist raid in New York was found to have $50K in unsecured loans in the form of unsecured credit cards from the banks that were bailed out by the government.  So far the only mentions of this come from the Jawa Report, Market Ticker, and the NY Daily news.  This is a HUGE story – where is the media and the outrage of the American public? Oh that’s right, the media is still too busy talking about the continuing aftermath of Jackson’s death and now Teddy Kennedy’s.  Journalism is dead! 

The New York Daily News stated the following:

Between 2005 and 2008, he opened credit card accounts with Bank of America, Chase, Capital One, Discover and Citibank and ran up a debt of more than $50,000.
 
When he filed for bankruptcy, Zazi said he hadn’t worked in two months.

Denniger from Market Ticker puts it bluntly:

HOW IN THE HELL DO OUR BANKING REGULATORS ALLOW THIS SORT OF OUTRIGHT FRAUDULENT GRANTING OF CREDIT? $50,000 IN UNSECURED CREDIT LINES TO A FREAKING DELIVERY DRIVER WHO APPEARS TO BE A FOREIGN NATIONAL WITH NO ASSETS IN THE UNITED STATES AGAINST WHICH TO SECURE THE LOAN?

THE BANKS THAT WE BAILED OUT FAILED TO STOP THIS CRAP ALL THE WAY UP TO MARCH OF THIS YEAR AT LEAST (WHEN THIS GUY FILED BANKRUPTCY) AND PROBABLY STILL ARE DOING IT!

This is an OUTRAGE. Not only did this guy effectively stick the US Taxpayer with the $50,000 in debt it appears he may have been using the freaking money to plot some sort of terrorist attack as part of an Al-Qaida cell INSIDE THE UNITED STATES?

TO PUT THIS IN ONE SENTENCE: BANKS THAT WE BAILED OUT WITH TAXPAYER MONEY ARE FUNDING TERRORISTS INSIDE THE US?!

I’m sure more government regulation will really help thwart all of the corruption and criminal activity – especially when it comes to our own country funding terrorist plots on our own soil.

Leave a comment

Filed under Corruption, Illegal Aliens, Media, National Security, Stimulus, Terrorism

An Inconvenient Health Care Truth For Media Conveniently Afraid Of Statistics

The media during Bush’s 8 years certainly was not afraid to pull out any statistics that would discredit Republicans or the administration.  One of their favorite statistics was the number of deaths during the Iraq War. 

However, now that there are wars still being fought in Afghanistan and Iraq, the media has conveniently left that tiny issue to the way-side.  The only individual who still has her principles is Cindy Sheehan.  I may not agree with Ms. Sheehan’s politics, but I can at least commend her for her consistency. (via the Examiner): 

After receiving the email, I asked Sheehan to give me a call, so I could verify that the note in fact came from her.  She did, and we discussed her plans to protest next week in Martha’s Vineyard, where President Obama will be vacationing.  “I think people are starting to wake up to the fact that even if they supported Obama, he doesn’t represent much change,” Sheehan said.  “There are people still out here who oppose the war and Obama’spolicies, but it seems like the big organizations with the big lists aren’t here.”

I asked Sheehanabout the fact that the press seems to have lost interest in her and her cause.  “It’s strange to me that you mention it,” she said.  “I haven’t stopped working.  I’ve been protesting every time I can, and it’s not covered.  But the one time I did get a lot of coverage was when I protested in front of George Bush’s house in Dallas in June.  I don’t know what to make of it.  Is the press having a honeymoon with Obama?  I know the Left is.”

I have more appreciation for those who stay true to their beliefs no matter what those beliefs are, rather than changing them based on whichever way the political wind is blowing, especially when your guy won the biggest office in the land. 

So I sit here scratching my head wondering why the media hasn’t reported the latest news coming out of Canada and their health care system?  The new president of the Canadian Medical Association states that Canada’s health care is imploding.  Canada has also encouraged its citizens to buy and use private insurance to ween them off of government-run health care. 

The former president of the Canadian Medical Association was on O’Reilly last night and confirmed the same thing.  Although O’Reilly, as usual, wasn’t letting him get his statements in completely, he intimated that there are not enough doctors able to cover the volume of people covered under their system.  This leads to rationing of care and increased costs to attempt to fund everyone.  Rationing is the only way to say you are covering everyone, and try to cut costs at the same time.

France also reported that it’s health care system is going bankrupt, nearly two weeks ago.  No mention of their single-payer system and the nightmare it created for the citizens of that country by the MSM.

The English system also has horrible statistics.  Their rate of survival for any cancer or serious illness is significantly worse than it is in the States.  The National Center for Policy Analysisalso conducted a study and concluded the NHS was putting the patient last.  If NHS was a business it would fail miserably based on its standard operating procedures and business practices that it chooses to implement.

The CBC has just released new statistics that show Americans’ life expentency is on the rise while deaths are not.  But I thought American health care was ranked last?  It’s amusing to hear liberals use the common argument that the US ranks 37th out of 37 countries when comparing their health care systems.  However, when you ask for the context of those statistics, since stats can be masterfully manipulated based on outside factors/variables used to conduct studies, it’s no wonder that the CATO Institute was able to debunk that ranking. 

Those who cite the WHO rankings typically present them as an objective measure of the relative performance of national health care systems. They are not. The WHO rankings depend crucially on a number of underlying assumptions–some of them logically incoherent, some characterized by substantial uncertainty, and some rooted in ideological beliefs and values that not everyone shares. Changes in those underlying assumptions can radically alter the rankings.

[…]while the United States ranks 37th, there is no ranking for which both claims are true. Using OP, the United States does rank 37th. But while France is number 1 on OP, Canada is 30. Using OA, the United States ranks 15th, while France and Canada rank 6th and 7th, respectively. In neither ranking is the United States at 37 while France and Canada are in the top 10.

Which ranking is preferable? WHO presents the OP ranking as its bottom line on health system performance, on the grounds that OP represents the efficiency of each country’s health system. But for reasons to be discussed below, the OP ranking is even more misleading than the OA ranking. This paper focuses mainly on the OAranking; however, the main objections apply to both OP and OA.

But, as Newsbusters reports, the media has conveniently overlooked the story regarding Canadian health care, especially when early proponents of Universal health care, like Hillary touted the system as a model the US should use. 

One would think that the media would want to get all facts out to the public, and unfortunately, if some of those facts get in the way of what they idealistically felt was the answer, then so be it.  The people will be better off knowing the truth and making their decisions on health care from there.  It may also help certain representatives who are on the fence.  It’s scary to know that the media is willing to throw the country down the toilet and inevitably bankrupt the nation in order to reach their liberal ‘Utopia.’ 

Facts just seem to get in their way.

1 Comment

Filed under Congress, Double Standards, Economy, Government Spending, Health Care, Hypocrisy, Media, MSM, National Debt, Obama, ObamaCare, Progressivism