VOLUNTEERS NEEDED: PA & NV!
"Barack Obama did bring us together -- but not in the way he wanted."
Dear Blogger or Web Hoster or other onliner committed to just saying "NoBama": Things are really heating up in the united effort to make sure the next President of the U.S. is NOT named Barack H. Obama. In the most recent Gallup Poll pitting BHO against John McCain, the latter came out ahead by four points among likely voters.
Right now in several states there's an urgent need for people who will volunteer to communicate with their fellow voters (including by e-mail and phone). Two states that are winnable with a sustained effort are Nevada (close) and Pennsylvania (the race has tightened significantly). The people now on the ground in those states (and others) truly need your help.
If you prefer to register at another site, I strongly recommend www.realdemocratsusa.org. I work closely with that group, which is a superb one.
(Ohio, Florida, Colorado, Minnesota, Michigan, and Virginia? Their turns are coming soon.)
I hope you will reprint this message on your blog (if you have one) or otherwise communicate it to your poliitcal allies, especially those in NV and PA.
People in Nevada who want to help beat Obama should contact Angelo, one of the founders of nobamanetwork and nobama mission at: angelo@nobamanetwork.com.
People west of Harrisburg in Pennsylvania who want to assist in defeating Obama should contact me (Steve Maloney) at: TalkTop65@aol.com In fact, anyone in PA who contacts me will be put in touch with people working in the General Election against the Great Pretender.
Again, I'd appreciate it if you'd disseminate this request as widely as possible -- on your blogs, Yahoo Groups, and through e-mails. It's critical that we start now -- and not wait for Labor Day.
If you're a blogger who'd like to join NoBama Mission bloggers (see the widget on the right), please send me an e-mail with your first name, your blog URL, and your state. Also to your right you'll see a widge for Clintons4McCain Blog Talk Radio. It airs every Saturday at 5 p.m., and I'll be co-hosting through August (and perhaps longer). Anyone interested in NoBama activities will like what they hear
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Altmire, Murphy, Holden Backstabbed Clinton
If you're a GOP challenger, can you really get a huge chunk of Hillary Supporters to vote for you? Sure. In the case of congressmen like Altmire, Murphy, and Holden, they stabbed Hillary in the back, going against the wishes of their constituents. Also, they received money, apparently in exchange for their support ($10,000 to Altmire, $18,000 to Murphy). Holden didn't receive money, but he refused to support Hillary, the obvious choice of voters in his district. During the campaign, Sen. Clinton was subject to charges that she was a war-monger, a liar, and a racist. Those charges, as former Pres. Clinton and others noted, derived ultimately from the Obama camp. Misogyny was rampant in the effort to destroy Mrs. Clinton. What were the reactions of Altmire, Murphy, and Holden to the dirty campaigning? They had none -- perhaps because they themselves use sleazy campaign tactics. Point these facts out to voters in your district. When Altmire and his slime-ball associates start hurling mud at Melissa Hart, as they will, I hope she responds something like this: "Jason Altmire is using the same kind of hateful mud-slinging and name-calling that his 'boy' Obama did to destroy Hillary Clinton." Mention her name often when Altmire and his 527s start throwing the pig-slog. Why will Jason bring out the mud-machine? Because he has a record of tax hikes and gas-price inaction that he doesn't want to discuss with PA voters. No Hillary Clinton backer with any self-respect will vote for Jason Altmire. (Note: See http://dncreform.com for information on Obama's payments to Altmire and Murphy.)
My online associate Dr. Lynette Long sent out the following message today about Democratic congressional and senatorial officeholders who basically stabbed Sen. Hillary Clinton in the back. She says as follows:
I worked all weekend on this you tube video with GeekLove. [The video] highlights the members of the Senate and the House of Representatives that met the following for criteria:
1. the states of these members of Congress voted for Senetor Clinton in the Democratic primary;
2. the districts of these Congressmen voted for Clinton in the primary
3. they accepted PAC money from Obama, and
4. they endorsed Obama.
Please forward this video far and wide, and post on all appropriate websites."Money Changes Everything :: Superdelegates Are For Sale"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLPoV4diMjk
Thank you for your help.
Lynette Long
http://www.lynettelong.com/
Dr. Lynette Long is a licensed psychologist practicing in Bethesda,Maryland. She is the author of twenty books and dozens of articles for both popular and professional journals. Dr. Long has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and was the host of her own radio show, One-on-One with Dr. Lynette Long. Dr. Long has served ont he faculties of Loyola College in Maryland, The American University and the University of Maryland, Overseas Division. Dr. Long has livedi n Japan and Korea and has traveled extensively throughout the world.
The opponent of Jason Altmire is former congresswoman Melissa Hart. The opponent of Patrick Murphy is former Marine officer Tom Manion. The opponent of Tim Holden, who now claims he's voting "moot" on Obama, is former PA state policewoman Toni Gilhooley. They need your support to defeat the three men who went against the will of their constituents and have supported Barack Obama, a candidate detested by millions of people in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Please donate to the GOP candidates highlighted!
No supporter of Sen. Clinton who has any integrity will vote for people like Altmire, Murphy, and Holden.
My online associate Dr. Lynette Long sent out the following message today about Democratic congressional and senatorial officeholders who basically stabbed Sen. Hillary Clinton in the back. She says as follows:
I worked all weekend on this you tube video with GeekLove. [The video] highlights the members of the Senate and the House of Representatives that met the following for criteria:
1. the states of these members of Congress voted for Senetor Clinton in the Democratic primary;
2. the districts of these Congressmen voted for Clinton in the primary
3. they accepted PAC money from Obama, and
4. they endorsed Obama.
Please forward this video far and wide, and post on all appropriate websites."Money Changes Everything :: Superdelegates Are For Sale"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLPoV4diMjk
Thank you for your help.
Lynette Long
http://www.lynettelong.com/
Dr. Lynette Long is a licensed psychologist practicing in Bethesda,Maryland. She is the author of twenty books and dozens of articles for both popular and professional journals. Dr. Long has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and was the host of her own radio show, One-on-One with Dr. Lynette Long. Dr. Long has served ont he faculties of Loyola College in Maryland, The American University and the University of Maryland, Overseas Division. Dr. Long has livedi n Japan and Korea and has traveled extensively throughout the world.
The opponent of Jason Altmire is former congresswoman Melissa Hart. The opponent of Patrick Murphy is former Marine officer Tom Manion. The opponent of Tim Holden, who now claims he's voting "moot" on Obama, is former PA state policewoman Toni Gilhooley. They need your support to defeat the three men who went against the will of their constituents and have supported Barack Obama, a candidate detested by millions of people in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Please donate to the GOP candidates highlighted!
No supporter of Sen. Clinton who has any integrity will vote for people like Altmire, Murphy, and Holden.
Monday, July 28, 2008
"McCain, not Hussein"
Bulletin: Right now on TV in PA, Obama is counter-attacking McCain's commercial blaming BHO for high gas prices. (McCain was using a metaphor, tying Obama to all those extremely liberal legislators who never want to produce another kilowatt or barrel of energy.) McCain was correct, and the clueless Obama doesn't even know why. I believe very much in wind and solar -- so does McCain -- but they will be big about 2035 or 2040. Between then and now, we are going to need a lot of energy, and Barack's idea of solving the problem is to let gasoline go to, oh, say, $7-$8 a gallon. Obama has no energy plan, and Emperor Barack has no clothes.
"Country before Party . . . McCain, not Hussein" Scroll down to read my "Response to an Obama Supporter." For outstanding candidates to win congressional races this year, it's essential that John McCain carry the state by a significant margin (at 2-3 percentage points).
About the "your wallet" bumper sticker, I sent the following message today (Monday) to GOP candidates and their supporters:
I hope all GOP candidates for the House and Senate will start printing and distributing these bumper stickers. Hand them out at friendly gas stations! This is a winning approach! Volunteers in PA and elsewhere need to get them and distribute. This is a low-cost, high-impact tactic, and it could get media coverage. This kind of hard-hitting approach is essential in a year when we've got all the brains and they've got all the money. "McCain, not Hussein."
Yes, some people will mindlessly vote Democratic this year -- just as a few will mindlessly vote Republican. However, there's more fluidity in the parties this year than ever before, as exemplified by the millions of Hillary Clinton Supporters who will NOT vote for Barack Hussein Obama. This is the time -- this is the election -- for Republican candidates like Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Tom Manion, Craig Williams, and Marina Kats to reach out to Democrats.
Marina Kats is a Jew running against Allyson Schwartz, also a Jew. But it will be Schwartz who is supporting a candidate, Barack Obama, who's surrounded himself with enemies of the state of Israel, including -- mostly recently -- David Bonior. Obama's military adviser, one Merrill McPeak, has blamed Jews in Miami and New York for the lack of peace in the Mideast. This is a disgrace, although I doubt Allyson Schwartz, whose mother escaped the Nazis and fled to America, is going to call it that. Whatever principles Schwartz may have inherited, she shed long ago.
Consider the following about the value of country over party:
Debbie Bartoshevich is a former Democratic delegate from Wisconsin who supported Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, and vowed to vote for Sen. John McCain. The Wisconsin Democratic Party took away her convention credentials.
Now she's speaking to the press (watch HERE.)
"I have a right to vote for anybody I want to vote for," she says. "I'm putting my country before my party...I'm finished with the party, the Democrat party."
Clearly, the DNC has forgotten what country this is. Ms. Bartoshevich is right to leave the Party, which actually left her and other normal Americans long ago.
Frankly, it's time for Pennsylvania Democrats to proclaim that they're Americans first -- and they will not vote for anyone who doesn't understand that simple fact.
"Country before Party . . . McCain, not Hussein" Scroll down to read my "Response to an Obama Supporter." For outstanding candidates to win congressional races this year, it's essential that John McCain carry the state by a significant margin (at 2-3 percentage points).
About the "your wallet" bumper sticker, I sent the following message today (Monday) to GOP candidates and their supporters: I hope all GOP candidates for the House and Senate will start printing and distributing these bumper stickers. Hand them out at friendly gas stations! This is a winning approach! Volunteers in PA and elsewhere need to get them and distribute. This is a low-cost, high-impact tactic, and it could get media coverage. This kind of hard-hitting approach is essential in a year when we've got all the brains and they've got all the money. "McCain, not Hussein."
Yes, some people will mindlessly vote Democratic this year -- just as a few will mindlessly vote Republican. However, there's more fluidity in the parties this year than ever before, as exemplified by the millions of Hillary Clinton Supporters who will NOT vote for Barack Hussein Obama. This is the time -- this is the election -- for Republican candidates like Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Tom Manion, Craig Williams, and Marina Kats to reach out to Democrats.
Marina Kats is a Jew running against Allyson Schwartz, also a Jew. But it will be Schwartz who is supporting a candidate, Barack Obama, who's surrounded himself with enemies of the state of Israel, including -- mostly recently -- David Bonior. Obama's military adviser, one Merrill McPeak, has blamed Jews in Miami and New York for the lack of peace in the Mideast. This is a disgrace, although I doubt Allyson Schwartz, whose mother escaped the Nazis and fled to America, is going to call it that. Whatever principles Schwartz may have inherited, she shed long ago.
Consider the following about the value of country over party:
Debbie Bartoshevich is a former Democratic delegate from Wisconsin who supported Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, and vowed to vote for Sen. John McCain. The Wisconsin Democratic Party took away her convention credentials.
Now she's speaking to the press (watch HERE.)
"I have a right to vote for anybody I want to vote for," she says. "I'm putting my country before my party...I'm finished with the party, the Democrat party."
Clearly, the DNC has forgotten what country this is. Ms. Bartoshevich is right to leave the Party, which actually left her and other normal Americans long ago.
Frankly, it's time for Pennsylvania Democrats to proclaim that they're Americans first -- and they will not vote for anyone who doesn't understand that simple fact.
I received the following note from a young friend today. He has decided to support Obama, and he says :
"Steve, Having been a good blogging friend with you for the last year, I wanted to tell you something before it goes up on my blog within the week. I've decided to support Barack Obama this election. It was not an easy decision and one I do not enjoy making. I really feel that McCain has lost what made McCain great fighting the far left and the far right in equal measure. But I still respect him and all of his supporters including you alot. I'm still calling myself a Republican but the party I joined has gotten off track and I'm hoping Obama will take this nation in a place where I know Republicans will not. I've haven't always been a conventional Republican in my politics but I will continue my political journey and hope to count you as a friend now and in the future."
Here's my response to Christopher:
Christopher, I find your support for Obama (which I've seen coming) quite mystifying. Which of his "accomplishments" impresses you most? His proposal to invade Pakistan (an ally and a nation with nuclear weapons?) or his "option" to reinvade Iraq?), or his vague suggestion to AIPAC that he might use nuclear weapons against Iran? You are young, Christopher, and you've been "rolled" by a skillful orator.
John McCain has been a leader in campaign finance reform, educational reform, and comprehensive immigration reform, which Obama has not. He has been a leader in the attempt to reduce global warming, which Obama has not. He supports producing more domestic energy, which Obama does not.
He supported the surge, which has worked, while Obama did not support it and seems clueless about its great success.
I wrote the mission statement for Mission NoBama that said Obama is inexperienced (which he is), unqualified (he hasn't even been a U.S. Senator for one term), untrustworthy (just ask his former friends on the far left), and dangerous (as in his plans to invade Pakistan, reinvade Iraq, and do "everything . . . everything" to keep Iran from developing a nuke).
The man is dangerous, Christopher. Do you deny that, and if so, on what basis?
Many people this year will support Barack Obama, mainly on the basis of his eloquent, but empty, rhetoric. They will offer such support for various reasons, but given the points I've made (not opinions) they will not be able to do so in good conscience.
Friday, July 25, 2008
McCain Meetup in WB-Scranton!
URGENT BULLETIN TO NEW YORKERS, NEW JERSEYITES,
AND PENNSYLVANIANS!
Any residents of PA, NJ, or NY that want to offer their support to John McCain should e-mail me at: TalkTop65@aol.com. Tell me where you live, and I'll put you in touch (as quickly as possible) with campaign organizers in your area.
As for those who live in the NYC/NJ area, the critical message to get across to Hillary Supporters (and they total in the millions) is that the DNC doesn't like them or respect them. They do, however, want their votes. The woman in WI was duly elected and there is no reason for the DNC to dump her. There is at least one McCain delegate who appeared in a pro-Obama commercial. I haven't heard anybody saying he should be thrown up the bus.
The McCain Campaign intends to win New York and New Jersey . . . states that went strongly for Sen. Clinton in the primaries but are being taken for granted by Barack H. Obama.
That "loud bang" we all just heard was the beginning of the General Election.
I urge all Hillary Supporters in PA NOT to vote for Jason Altmire (4th CD), Patrick Murphy (8th CD), or Tim Holden (17th CD). All of them went against their constituents and stabbed Sen. Clinton in the back. Vote instead for Melissa Hart, Tom Manion, and Toni Gilhooley, all of whom are honorable and courageous people. They need your support.
As for Allyson Schwartz (13th CD), Paul Kanjorski (11th CD), and Joe Sestak (7th CD), they're all now apparently supporting Barack H. Obama. He's the same man who called Pennsylvanians "bitter" people "clinging" to guns and God. Obama has no grasp of who Pennsylvanians are -- and frankly, neither do the Congressmen I've cited.
There are much better candidates, including Marina Kats, Lou Barletta, and Craig Williams. They deserve the backing of Hillary Supporters all others seeking to bring integrity to Pennsylvania politics.
First of many McCain Nation meetings in PA scheduled for August 7, 2008 @ 7pm. Go to http://johnmccain.com/McCainNation/ to sign up on-line! Our focus is to bring people together that are concerned about the future of America...Country before party! ALL former Clinton supporters are encouraged to attend. All members HCSFJM, PUMA/Just say NO DEAL , Clinton4Mccain, Risehillaryrise, Hireheels, realdemocrats, NOBAMA, The list and any other organizations that will not vote for the DNC's "selected" candidate are welcome to attend.If you know someone that is interested in attending that lives in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre area, please forward this to them.
Thanks!
Laureen
It's not a bad idea for everyone who supports John McCain and/or other GOP candidates to JOIN the groups Laureeen mentions above. They are going to play a critical role in the defeat of Barack H. Obama and those congressmen and congresswomen who are unwise enough to support him. A woman in east-central PA sent out 500,000-plus e-mails yesterday to people who are committed to the "NoBama" Movement. That is the first barrage in an effort that will end with John McCain elected POTUS. Thanks for you help in this effort, one that always puts country over Party.
Note: To see the anti-Obama ad that appeared yesterday on MTV, please go to: http://www.bothwaysbarack.com/.
CLINTONS FOR MCCAIN BLOG TALK RADIO
BLOCKBUSTER ON SATURDAY, 5 P.M. ET!
This Week on Clintons 4 McCain Radio:
"Will Black America Wake Up"
Rev. James David Manning Addresses Obama's Racism, Michelle Obama's Comments and Faith Issues
DNC Watchdog, Roger Ryan addresses the Downfall of the Dems
Right VS. Left Go Head to Head on the Issues. Can We All Come Together by November?
This weeks Guests:
Rev. James David Manning of Atlah World Ministries Weighs in on the racism and 'evil' of the Obama camp.
Michelle Obama says, "Black America will Wake Up" but how does Manning feel about that statement?
Tune in as the honorable Rev. James David Manning addresses the racial issues and touches on the Faith issues as hype builds that BaraCk Obama is Anti-Christian and Anti-Semitic
Roger Ryan, a Democrat and DNC watchdog with the National Sentinel Committee of the Democratic Party will discuss the Smoke and Mirrors of the RBC May 31st meeting and The DNC Party Leadership.
Right VS Left: Tune in as the Right and the Left go head to head on the issues. A die-hard dem and staunch GOP-ER discuss their voting issues...and we discover if they they can come together by November.
Clintons4McCain Radio
When: Saturdays 5 PM EST
Where: Computer, World Wide
Call: (347) 633-9273
Dial: http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=0011hf8cq8VpLqN1xO4QW5bArVCeq-hkU5YEpLzVvvuEiaQB4qHFob9_M0cvj2pfntC2NwKgsVjfMsQBd10_bW36TYFNbQVW4bj_OaWR8ukq7ZpwsS38L2LrdTJyOyBQSh14GRb3ffSozc=
Radio Co-Host, Steve Maloney
Join us Saturday July 26, 2008 at 5 PM EST on Clintons4McCain Radio
This week's Co-Host Steve Maloney, full-time blogger and former College Professor who was hired as a professional speech writer for major oil, heath and pharmaceutical industries gives his take on Obama, the Republican Party and the issues.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Make Health Care Like Wal-Mart
If Wal-Mart ran U.S. health care, service would be better and the cost lower. We should be so lucky . . .
[Note: If you have a blog or know someone who does, scroll down to the bottom to get the code for the Clintons4McCain radio show, which "happens" every Saturday at 5 p.m. I'll be on this Saturday with Rev. Manning of Harlem, as well as on through August.]
This is Part III of my series on health care . . . and why the Democrats' plans will be a disaster. The problem with health care in America is not that we don't Democratic plans that make us all increasingly dependent on government for how and where we get medical treatment. The problem is that health care (for reasons described in the columns below) has become separated from the private enterprise system, from capitalism.
Look at it this way: In a time of economic downturn, companies like Wal-Mart and Target are reporting sharp increases in revenues, while high-end department stores are floundering. Why is that? Obviously, people are fulfilling their retail needs at discount stores. They're voting with their pocketbooks. They're choosing to be more careful with their dollars. That's a choice we have in retail stores.
Where are the health care equivalents of Wal-Mart and Target? They don't exist. When it comes to medical care, it's Saks Fifth Avenue or nothing. My brother went into a hospital three years ago with a very minor ailment -- syncope, faintness -- and when he walked out 30 hours later, the bill was $22,600. He had no insurance, so various entities paid for it, one of which was you as a taxpayer.
We have no real choices in health care. In my area (Pittsburgh/Beaver County, western PA) all the doctors charge basically the same price, and the same is true of hospitals. When it comes to choice, customers -- patients -- have very little of it. Beyond that, patients have very little knowledge of which caregivers are good -- and which are mediocre. We have less knowledge about health care providers than we do about choices in underwear.
Also, if we're covered by insurance -- or by government payouts -- we have almost no incentive to shop around. If we need a wart removed -- or an appendix -- we go where we go.
Since we're not paying for it, at least directly, the service is basically free. Why should we care how much it costs?The health plans proposed by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton don't deal with the problem -- and it's a whopper -- that I outline.
The Democrats' plans talk about cost controls, but that's all it is -- talk. Those plans are recipes to drive costs up -- and services down.
Some people are mystified by John McCain's health care proposals. Basically, they're simple. He wants to bring the private enterprise system into play. He wants people to be able to choose their own insurers and level of coverage. He also wants them to be able to choose the quality of services and even negotiate the price of the services they purchase.
It's a very good idea. It won't work out perfectly, but it will begin the process of driving health costs down, increasing choice, and -- ultimately -- improving care.
The Democrats' proposals? They'll have the opposite effect, leading to all the bad results found in universal health care programs in Canada, Britain, and similar countries. If Obama becomes President, prepare to wait in long lines . . . and receive indifferent care. That's what happens in Canada, and it's exactly what eventually will happen here.
1. Code for your blogs to paste and copy:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/mediaplayer.swf?displayheight=&file=http://www.blogtalkradio.com%2fclintons4mccain%2fplay_list.xml&autostart=true&shuffle=false&callback=http://www.blogtalkradio.com/FlashPlayerCallback.aspx&width=180&height=152&volume=80&corner=rounded' width='180' height='152' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer' quality='high' wmode='transparent' menu='false'>
This code will automomatically put the radio show on your blog with a 'radio player' and it will also automatically upload the newest shows
[Note: If you have a blog or know someone who does, scroll down to the bottom to get the code for the Clintons4McCain radio show, which "happens" every Saturday at 5 p.m. I'll be on this Saturday with Rev. Manning of Harlem, as well as on through August.]
This is Part III of my series on health care . . . and why the Democrats' plans will be a disaster. The problem with health care in America is not that we don't Democratic plans that make us all increasingly dependent on government for how and where we get medical treatment. The problem is that health care (for reasons described in the columns below) has become separated from the private enterprise system, from capitalism.
Look at it this way: In a time of economic downturn, companies like Wal-Mart and Target are reporting sharp increases in revenues, while high-end department stores are floundering. Why is that? Obviously, people are fulfilling their retail needs at discount stores. They're voting with their pocketbooks. They're choosing to be more careful with their dollars. That's a choice we have in retail stores.
Where are the health care equivalents of Wal-Mart and Target? They don't exist. When it comes to medical care, it's Saks Fifth Avenue or nothing. My brother went into a hospital three years ago with a very minor ailment -- syncope, faintness -- and when he walked out 30 hours later, the bill was $22,600. He had no insurance, so various entities paid for it, one of which was you as a taxpayer.
We have no real choices in health care. In my area (Pittsburgh/Beaver County, western PA) all the doctors charge basically the same price, and the same is true of hospitals. When it comes to choice, customers -- patients -- have very little of it. Beyond that, patients have very little knowledge of which caregivers are good -- and which are mediocre. We have less knowledge about health care providers than we do about choices in underwear.
Also, if we're covered by insurance -- or by government payouts -- we have almost no incentive to shop around. If we need a wart removed -- or an appendix -- we go where we go.
Since we're not paying for it, at least directly, the service is basically free. Why should we care how much it costs?The health plans proposed by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton don't deal with the problem -- and it's a whopper -- that I outline.
The Democrats' plans talk about cost controls, but that's all it is -- talk. Those plans are recipes to drive costs up -- and services down.
Some people are mystified by John McCain's health care proposals. Basically, they're simple. He wants to bring the private enterprise system into play. He wants people to be able to choose their own insurers and level of coverage. He also wants them to be able to choose the quality of services and even negotiate the price of the services they purchase.
It's a very good idea. It won't work out perfectly, but it will begin the process of driving health costs down, increasing choice, and -- ultimately -- improving care.
The Democrats' proposals? They'll have the opposite effect, leading to all the bad results found in universal health care programs in Canada, Britain, and similar countries. If Obama becomes President, prepare to wait in long lines . . . and receive indifferent care. That's what happens in Canada, and it's exactly what eventually will happen here.
1. Code for your blogs to paste and copy:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/mediaplayer.swf?displayheight=&file=http://www.blogtalkradio.com%2fclintons4mccain%2fplay_list.xml&autostart=true&shuffle=false&callback=http://www.blogtalkradio.com/FlashPlayerCallback.aspx&width=180&height=152&volume=80&corner=rounded' width='180' height='152' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer' quality='high' wmode='transparent' menu='false'>
This code will automomatically put the radio show on your blog with a 'radio player' and it will also automatically upload the newest shows
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Democrats Will Destroy Health Care
Some people are mystified by John McCain's health care proposals. Basically, they're simple. He wants to bring the private enterprise system into play. He wants people to be able to choose their own insurers and level of coverage. He also wants them to be able to choose the quality of services and the price of the services they purchase.
It's a very good idea. It won't work out perfectly, but it will begin the process of driving health costs down, increasing choice, and -- ultimately -- improving care. The Democrats' proposals? They'll have the opposite effect, leading to all the bad results found in universal health care programs in Canada, Britain, and similar countries.
Right now, if you have insurance (or lots of money) the U.S. provides health care second to none. The Democrats, under Obama and his willing stooges in Congress, are poised to destroy American health care. John McCain is proposing changes that would bring our health care into the free enterprise economy -- and make a basically good system better and more cost-effective. Scroll down to read Part 1 of this three-part series.
Previously, I referred you to Dr. David Gratzer's superb book The Cure: How Capitalism Can Save American Health Care. He described how the much-praised (over-praised) Canadian system leads to endless waits, needless deaths, and a poor quality of care. The "good news" is that it pretends to be free. The "bad news" is that it should be.
What we don't want is a Canadian-style system. That's the one Gratzer describes as having elderly patients waiting for days on stretchers in emergency room corridors. They're lying there drenched in their own sweat and urine.
Gratzer notes that the downside of American health care is that the cost has spiralled. He points to the example of Vice-President Cheney's pacemaker, which "costs more than fifty times the average annual health-care expenditure of an American in 1950." Thus, care is in the U.S. is superb, but a lot of people can't afford it. Eventually, the government may not be able to afford it either.
Two factors have led to the challenges America faces in health care. One if the fact that, in 1943, the government announced that "employer-sponsored health insurance would not be taxed." Thus, for tax reasons and as a recruitment-retention tool, most employers began offering health insurance to employees. The burden of providing health care -- unlike every other burden (housing costs, food, etc.) -- fell to employers. Later, part of the burden would be assumed by government.
A second factor affecting the health system is the advance of medical technology. A generation ago, Dick Cheney would not have had a pacemaker, because it hadn't been invested. A generation ago, someone like Dick Cheney would have been dead. Technology that preserves life is wonderful, but it comes at an extremely high cost.
In Gratzer's words, here's what happens: "These two forces, the insurance model and technological advances, are mutually reinforcing: because insured patients don't pay directly for their own state-of-the-art care, they can't make the consumer choices that would curb the cost of this high-end treatment. As costs have increased to the point of crisis, reformers have sought to reduce them."
Gratzer thinks the reforms favored by Democrats (basically, Medicare and Medicaid) have been a disaster, sharply raising costs without really improving the overall quality of care. But Dems can relax, because Gratzer believes the reform favored by Republicans -- basically, the HMO model -- also has been a catastrophe. It brought a large, expensive -- and often ham-handed -- bureaucracy into the system.
Overall, a major problem with health care -- in our country and others -- is the illusion that it's free. In life, every good and service comes at a cost. In health care, however, the cost is hidden -- or, more accurately, paid by someone other than the user (patient).
When things appear to be free, people tend to overuse them. If tomorrow, the service station near you were to start offering a tank of gasoline for free, the line of "customers" would stretch for miles. If steak and lobster were free, I would have had them for all three meals.
Do people overuse medical services that don't directly cost them money. Yes. In fact, I do it (to a small extent) myself. There are stories of elderly people in Florida and elsewhere who look at visits to the doctor as social occasions. Some of them would go every day if the doctor would allow it -- and perhaps some doctors do.
A heart bypass operation in the U.S. costs about $35,000 to $40,000. In this country there are more heart bypass surgeries than in the rest of the world combined. What's that all about?!
The same with expensive MRI procedures. Do some doctors and hospitals encourage overuse? In my experience, the answer is yes. Why? Because the more patients, the more money the physicians make.
The problem with Obama plan or the Hillary Clinton plan or the congressional Democrats plan is that they will encourage more demand for services. Also, they will continue the illusion that health care is free. John McCain's plan would remove the illusion. It would turn relatively clueless health care consumers into savvy health care shoppers.
(More tomorrow)
It's a very good idea. It won't work out perfectly, but it will begin the process of driving health costs down, increasing choice, and -- ultimately -- improving care. The Democrats' proposals? They'll have the opposite effect, leading to all the bad results found in universal health care programs in Canada, Britain, and similar countries.
Right now, if you have insurance (or lots of money) the U.S. provides health care second to none. The Democrats, under Obama and his willing stooges in Congress, are poised to destroy American health care. John McCain is proposing changes that would bring our health care into the free enterprise economy -- and make a basically good system better and more cost-effective. Scroll down to read Part 1 of this three-part series.
Previously, I referred you to Dr. David Gratzer's superb book The Cure: How Capitalism Can Save American Health Care. He described how the much-praised (over-praised) Canadian system leads to endless waits, needless deaths, and a poor quality of care. The "good news" is that it pretends to be free. The "bad news" is that it should be.
What we don't want is a Canadian-style system. That's the one Gratzer describes as having elderly patients waiting for days on stretchers in emergency room corridors. They're lying there drenched in their own sweat and urine.
Gratzer notes that the downside of American health care is that the cost has spiralled. He points to the example of Vice-President Cheney's pacemaker, which "costs more than fifty times the average annual health-care expenditure of an American in 1950." Thus, care is in the U.S. is superb, but a lot of people can't afford it. Eventually, the government may not be able to afford it either.
Two factors have led to the challenges America faces in health care. One if the fact that, in 1943, the government announced that "employer-sponsored health insurance would not be taxed." Thus, for tax reasons and as a recruitment-retention tool, most employers began offering health insurance to employees. The burden of providing health care -- unlike every other burden (housing costs, food, etc.) -- fell to employers. Later, part of the burden would be assumed by government.
A second factor affecting the health system is the advance of medical technology. A generation ago, Dick Cheney would not have had a pacemaker, because it hadn't been invested. A generation ago, someone like Dick Cheney would have been dead. Technology that preserves life is wonderful, but it comes at an extremely high cost.
In Gratzer's words, here's what happens: "These two forces, the insurance model and technological advances, are mutually reinforcing: because insured patients don't pay directly for their own state-of-the-art care, they can't make the consumer choices that would curb the cost of this high-end treatment. As costs have increased to the point of crisis, reformers have sought to reduce them."
Gratzer thinks the reforms favored by Democrats (basically, Medicare and Medicaid) have been a disaster, sharply raising costs without really improving the overall quality of care. But Dems can relax, because Gratzer believes the reform favored by Republicans -- basically, the HMO model -- also has been a catastrophe. It brought a large, expensive -- and often ham-handed -- bureaucracy into the system.
Overall, a major problem with health care -- in our country and others -- is the illusion that it's free. In life, every good and service comes at a cost. In health care, however, the cost is hidden -- or, more accurately, paid by someone other than the user (patient).
When things appear to be free, people tend to overuse them. If tomorrow, the service station near you were to start offering a tank of gasoline for free, the line of "customers" would stretch for miles. If steak and lobster were free, I would have had them for all three meals.
Do people overuse medical services that don't directly cost them money. Yes. In fact, I do it (to a small extent) myself. There are stories of elderly people in Florida and elsewhere who look at visits to the doctor as social occasions. Some of them would go every day if the doctor would allow it -- and perhaps some doctors do.
A heart bypass operation in the U.S. costs about $35,000 to $40,000. In this country there are more heart bypass surgeries than in the rest of the world combined. What's that all about?!
The same with expensive MRI procedures. Do some doctors and hospitals encourage overuse? In my experience, the answer is yes. Why? Because the more patients, the more money the physicians make.
The problem with Obama plan or the Hillary Clinton plan or the congressional Democrats plan is that they will encourage more demand for services. Also, they will continue the illusion that health care is free. John McCain's plan would remove the illusion. It would turn relatively clueless health care consumers into savvy health care shoppers.
(More tomorrow)
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Democrats Making Health Care Sicker
[Note to candidates and supporters: The new John McCain commercial hits a home run. It emphasizes this year's most important issue -- to our surprise -- is gasoline prices. At one point it has a picture of BHO with his trademark goofy smile, and the voice over asks who's responsible for high gas prices. In the background, a crowd is chanting "Obama! Obama!" It is striking and effective. Consider doing the same with your opponents. When Democrats oppose adding ANY energy to our supply, the costs skyrocket to keep demand in sync with supply. That's what has happened in our country. ]
“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.” - Obama
"The smell of urine and sweat." (Dr. David Gratzer)
You may have heard from Democrats during the primaries what a great plan they have for universal health care. They generally compared US health care unfavorably with the national health plans in countries like Canada, Great Britain, and Germany. The last things they wanted you to know about were the deficiencies of government-dominated health care systems.
The following material is from David Gratzer's book The Cure: How Capitalism Can Save American Health Care. Gratzer is a medical doctor certified in both Canada and the US and currently works and writes in New York City. His book is a compelling read.
In it he says, "In medical school, I learned my most important lesson not in a classroom, but on the way to one. On a cold Canadian morning about a decade ago, late for a class, I cut through a hospital emergency room and came upon dozens of people on stretchers -- waiting, moaning, begging for treatment. Some elderly patients had waited for up to five days in corridors before being admitted to beds. They smelled of urine and sweat. As I navigated past the bodies, I began to question everything I thought I knew about health care -- not only in Canada, but also in the United States. Thought I didn't know it then, I had begun a journey into the heart of one of the great policy disasters of modern times."
Gratzer points out that he had grown up in Canada believing its "system was better than America's, with its uneven quality and absurdly high cost."After he entered medical school, however, his view of Canada's universal health care began to change.
He says, "The more I was exposed to the system, the more familiar I became with the shortcomings of government-run health care. I trained in emergency rooms that were chronically, chaotically, dangerously overcrowded, not only in my hometown of Winnipeg, but all across Canada. I met a middle-aged man with sleep problems who was booked for an appointment with a specialist three years later; a man with pain following a simple hernia repair who was referred to a pain clinic with a two-year wait list; a woman with breast cancer who was asked to wait four more months before starting the life-saving radiation therapy. According to the government's own statistics, some 1.2 million Canadians couldn't get a family doctor."
What would I recommend to John McCain and other GOP candidates? Please read the above material verbatim to audiences who might have been attracted to the Democrats' false promise of "free health care." In this life, alas, nothing is free. Everything comes at a cost. one that, in this case, is much too high.
Later today (Tuesday) I'll put up more material about health care and the terrible pitfalls of so-called "Universal Coverage." I don't mean to suggest that there aren't some serious problems with health care in America, because there are. But the difficulties exist mainly because of flawed government policies related to the tax code. Those bad policies result in a health system that exists in a nether-world between capitalism and socialism, with the result that coverage is not affordable -- or readily available -- for many people. The Democrats' proposals would make a flawed system much worse. Everything in life reflects the principles of supply and demand, iincluding health care. Disastrously, the Democrats want to increase the demand for health care (needed AND unneeded) without increasing the supply of QUALITY care. The result is going to be higher prices followed quickly by poorer service, just as happened in Canada, Great Britain, Germany, and elsewhere..
“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.” - Obama
"The smell of urine and sweat." (Dr. David Gratzer)
You may have heard from Democrats during the primaries what a great plan they have for universal health care. They generally compared US health care unfavorably with the national health plans in countries like Canada, Great Britain, and Germany. The last things they wanted you to know about were the deficiencies of government-dominated health care systems.
The following material is from David Gratzer's book The Cure: How Capitalism Can Save American Health Care. Gratzer is a medical doctor certified in both Canada and the US and currently works and writes in New York City. His book is a compelling read.
In it he says, "In medical school, I learned my most important lesson not in a classroom, but on the way to one. On a cold Canadian morning about a decade ago, late for a class, I cut through a hospital emergency room and came upon dozens of people on stretchers -- waiting, moaning, begging for treatment. Some elderly patients had waited for up to five days in corridors before being admitted to beds. They smelled of urine and sweat. As I navigated past the bodies, I began to question everything I thought I knew about health care -- not only in Canada, but also in the United States. Thought I didn't know it then, I had begun a journey into the heart of one of the great policy disasters of modern times."
Gratzer points out that he had grown up in Canada believing its "system was better than America's, with its uneven quality and absurdly high cost."After he entered medical school, however, his view of Canada's universal health care began to change.
He says, "The more I was exposed to the system, the more familiar I became with the shortcomings of government-run health care. I trained in emergency rooms that were chronically, chaotically, dangerously overcrowded, not only in my hometown of Winnipeg, but all across Canada. I met a middle-aged man with sleep problems who was booked for an appointment with a specialist three years later; a man with pain following a simple hernia repair who was referred to a pain clinic with a two-year wait list; a woman with breast cancer who was asked to wait four more months before starting the life-saving radiation therapy. According to the government's own statistics, some 1.2 million Canadians couldn't get a family doctor."
What would I recommend to John McCain and other GOP candidates? Please read the above material verbatim to audiences who might have been attracted to the Democrats' false promise of "free health care." In this life, alas, nothing is free. Everything comes at a cost. one that, in this case, is much too high.
Later today (Tuesday) I'll put up more material about health care and the terrible pitfalls of so-called "Universal Coverage." I don't mean to suggest that there aren't some serious problems with health care in America, because there are. But the difficulties exist mainly because of flawed government policies related to the tax code. Those bad policies result in a health system that exists in a nether-world between capitalism and socialism, with the result that coverage is not affordable -- or readily available -- for many people. The Democrats' proposals would make a flawed system much worse. Everything in life reflects the principles of supply and demand, iincluding health care. Disastrously, the Democrats want to increase the demand for health care (needed AND unneeded) without increasing the supply of QUALITY care. The result is going to be higher prices followed quickly by poorer service, just as happened in Canada, Great Britain, Germany, and elsewhere..
Monday, July 21, 2008
GOP Change Candidates: Marina Kats
Tomorrow: "The odor of sweat and urine" (the Democrats' health plan for you)
Mark your calendar! This Sunday at 5 p.m. ET, I'll be on Clintons for McCain Blog Talk Radio with hostess Cristi Adkins and Rev. Manning, a prominent Harlem preacher who's a strong opponent of the candidacy of Barack H. Obama. It should be fun.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/clintons4mccain
This piece on education shows how the Republican candidate, John McCain, is the one supporting real, positive change. In fact, the GOP congressional candidates are also people who can spearhead the changes -- the improvements -- the country obviously needs in areas such as education, health care, and crime prevention. The Democrats are OPPOSED to change because they've sold out to special interests who benefit from the status quo.
[Please scroll down to see the terrific introductory message on Marina Kats's web site.]
By Steve Chapman
I know, because admirers of Barack Obama tell me, that this year's election poses a choice between a candidate who represents a fresh approach to problems and one who offers a dreary continuation of the status quo. That much I understand. What I sometimes have trouble keeping straight is which candidate is which.
On the subject of elementary and secondary education, the two seem to have gotten their roles completely mixed up. Obama is the staunch defender of the existing public school monopoly, and he's allergic to anything that subverts it. John McCain, on the other hand, went before the NAACP last week to argue for something new and daring.
That something is to facilitate greater parental choice in education.McCain wants to expand a Washington, D.C. program that provides federally funded scholarships so poor students can attend private schools. More than 7,000 kids, he reported, have applied for these vouchers, but only 1,900 can be accommodated.
Here's my response to Steve Chapman's post:
The real candidate of change in this election is John McCain. Within the past month, The (London) Economist had an article about charter schools in Chicago and Harlem. The students in those schools are performing very well, equalling or exceeding the performance of white students in the public schools.
The magazine described parents in Harlem, desperate to get their children into the high-performing schools, participating in a lottery system, recognizing that their children's futures were on the line.
I believe John McCain is sincerely concerned about those children and their parents. I believe Barack Obama has sold out to special interests (educational and political) who are concerned about themselves and NOT the children.
If I truly believed Barack Obama had a commitment to improving education, health care, and other problem areas, I'd probably be voting for him. I have no such belief that he has freed himself from special interests committed to the status quo.
So, Chapman is right on target. Barack and Michelle are not warehousing their own children in schools where they're destined to fail, and they shouldn't ask other parents, black or white, to sentence their children to a life of under-performance.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/change_he_cant_believe_in.html
Thank you for coming to my website! (Marina Kats, GOP candidate 13th congressional district)
I came to America as a legal immigrant from the Ukraine in 1979 with barely any money and no understanding of the English language. Today, I am a businesswoman, an attorney, a mother of two fantastic daughters, and a proud citizen of this incredible country. I am an American who has been presented with the opportunity to give back to the country that has given me so much.
I want to restore effective and reasonable government that works for everybody. On issues ranging from the economy to a national energy policy to balancing the budget, we can no longer afford to play politics in Washington while the average American has to choose between driving to work or buying food for their family.
Ultimately, I came to this country with nothing but a love for freedom and the belief that through hard work, anything is possible. I want to represent you in Congress so we can move Washington beyond party politics and get back to doing the peoples business.
With your support and through hard work, I know that we can make it happen.
I look forward to earning your trust and your vote on Tuesday, November 4th.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Marina Kats
Mark your calendar! This Sunday at 5 p.m. ET, I'll be on Clintons for McCain Blog Talk Radio with hostess Cristi Adkins and Rev. Manning, a prominent Harlem preacher who's a strong opponent of the candidacy of Barack H. Obama. It should be fun.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/clintons4mccain
This piece on education shows how the Republican candidate, John McCain, is the one supporting real, positive change. In fact, the GOP congressional candidates are also people who can spearhead the changes -- the improvements -- the country obviously needs in areas such as education, health care, and crime prevention. The Democrats are OPPOSED to change because they've sold out to special interests who benefit from the status quo.
[Please scroll down to see the terrific introductory message on Marina Kats's web site.]
By Steve Chapman
I know, because admirers of Barack Obama tell me, that this year's election poses a choice between a candidate who represents a fresh approach to problems and one who offers a dreary continuation of the status quo. That much I understand. What I sometimes have trouble keeping straight is which candidate is which.
On the subject of elementary and secondary education, the two seem to have gotten their roles completely mixed up. Obama is the staunch defender of the existing public school monopoly, and he's allergic to anything that subverts it. John McCain, on the other hand, went before the NAACP last week to argue for something new and daring.
That something is to facilitate greater parental choice in education.McCain wants to expand a Washington, D.C. program that provides federally funded scholarships so poor students can attend private schools. More than 7,000 kids, he reported, have applied for these vouchers, but only 1,900 can be accommodated.
Here's my response to Steve Chapman's post:
The real candidate of change in this election is John McCain. Within the past month, The (London) Economist had an article about charter schools in Chicago and Harlem. The students in those schools are performing very well, equalling or exceeding the performance of white students in the public schools.
The magazine described parents in Harlem, desperate to get their children into the high-performing schools, participating in a lottery system, recognizing that their children's futures were on the line.
I believe John McCain is sincerely concerned about those children and their parents. I believe Barack Obama has sold out to special interests (educational and political) who are concerned about themselves and NOT the children.
If I truly believed Barack Obama had a commitment to improving education, health care, and other problem areas, I'd probably be voting for him. I have no such belief that he has freed himself from special interests committed to the status quo.
So, Chapman is right on target. Barack and Michelle are not warehousing their own children in schools where they're destined to fail, and they shouldn't ask other parents, black or white, to sentence their children to a life of under-performance.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/change_he_cant_believe_in.html
Thank you for coming to my website! (Marina Kats, GOP candidate 13th congressional district)
I came to America as a legal immigrant from the Ukraine in 1979 with barely any money and no understanding of the English language. Today, I am a businesswoman, an attorney, a mother of two fantastic daughters, and a proud citizen of this incredible country. I am an American who has been presented with the opportunity to give back to the country that has given me so much.
I want to restore effective and reasonable government that works for everybody. On issues ranging from the economy to a national energy policy to balancing the budget, we can no longer afford to play politics in Washington while the average American has to choose between driving to work or buying food for their family.
Ultimately, I came to this country with nothing but a love for freedom and the belief that through hard work, anything is possible. I want to represent you in Congress so we can move Washington beyond party politics and get back to doing the peoples business.
With your support and through hard work, I know that we can make it happen.
I look forward to earning your trust and your vote on Tuesday, November 4th.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Marina Kats
Sunday, July 20, 2008
You Should Know John Maszka
What on earth does a brilliant scholar on America's foreign relations and terrorism have to do with John McCain and the various congressional candidates I'm supporting? Well, those candidates, when they win, will be exercising oversight on our country's relations with other countries an on our Homeland Security. In doing so, American congressmen and congreswomen will need to consult experts, and there's none better than John Maszka, author of Terrorism and the Bush Doctrine.
Recently, I received a brilliant comment from John on one of my blog posting (scroll down to see). On impulse, I asked him if he's like to join NoBama Mission Bloggers, a group I head, and to my delight, he said yes. Here's some information following about John, his blog, and his important political theory of constructive sovereignty. I hope if you're a blogger committed to the concept of "NoBama" that you'll also join, which you can do by e-mailing me at: TalkTop65@aol.com.
John Maszka is an International Relations scholar. Look for his most recent book everywhere books are sold: Terrorism And The Bush Doctrine by John Maszka ISBN-13: 9781606100103 Pub. Date: May 2008 John Maszka is primarily interested in American foreign policy and its impact on global terrorism. You can find his blog at: http://blogger.com
Theories: Maszka is most notable for his theory of Constructive Sovereignty
[1] An emerging theory intended to address globalization's increasing onslaught against state sovereignty. The theory maintains that states are not the primary actors, their constituents are. Therefore, their preferences are not fixed. Since states merely represent the preferences of their constituents, they will only adhere to and ultimately embed those international norms their constituency will accept.
Rather than push for larger and more powerful international organizations that will impose global norms from the outside in, the theory of Constructive Sovereignty posits that ultimately change must come from the inside out. That is to say, from each state's own constituency. As each state's constituents become more and more international, they will become more receptive to international norms. In this way, international norms are embedded and viewed with legitimacy while each state's sovereignty is maintained and respected.
John's Publications Include:Countering International Terrorism [2]Democrats or Demagogues[3]Groupthink or Gross Incompetence [4]International Cooperation vs. Unilateralism [5]Political vs Military Solutions to Terrorism [6]Terrorism and the Bush Doctrine[7]US Unilateralism in the Global Order [8]Searching For The Min Laung
Below is John's comment that he left on one of my blogs. It was in response to my post saying that Obama's idea of invading Pakistan (in search of bin Laden) was a particulary bad idea.
John said:
Recently, I received a brilliant comment from John on one of my blog posting (scroll down to see). On impulse, I asked him if he's like to join NoBama Mission Bloggers, a group I head, and to my delight, he said yes. Here's some information following about John, his blog, and his important political theory of constructive sovereignty. I hope if you're a blogger committed to the concept of "NoBama" that you'll also join, which you can do by e-mailing me at: TalkTop65@aol.com.
John Maszka is an International Relations scholar. Look for his most recent book everywhere books are sold: Terrorism And The Bush Doctrine by John Maszka ISBN-13: 9781606100103 Pub. Date: May 2008 John Maszka is primarily interested in American foreign policy and its impact on global terrorism. You can find his blog at: http://blogger.com
Theories: Maszka is most notable for his theory of Constructive Sovereignty
[1] An emerging theory intended to address globalization's increasing onslaught against state sovereignty. The theory maintains that states are not the primary actors, their constituents are. Therefore, their preferences are not fixed. Since states merely represent the preferences of their constituents, they will only adhere to and ultimately embed those international norms their constituency will accept.
Rather than push for larger and more powerful international organizations that will impose global norms from the outside in, the theory of Constructive Sovereignty posits that ultimately change must come from the inside out. That is to say, from each state's own constituency. As each state's constituents become more and more international, they will become more receptive to international norms. In this way, international norms are embedded and viewed with legitimacy while each state's sovereignty is maintained and respected.
John's Publications Include:Countering International Terrorism [2]Democrats or Demagogues[3]Groupthink or Gross Incompetence [4]International Cooperation vs. Unilateralism [5]Political vs Military Solutions to Terrorism [6]Terrorism and the Bush Doctrine[7]US Unilateralism in the Global Order [8]Searching For The Min Laung
Below is John's comment that he left on one of my blogs. It was in response to my post saying that Obama's idea of invading Pakistan (in search of bin Laden) was a particulary bad idea.
John said:
Friday, July 18, 2008
Pennsylvania Hero and Hillary Clinton
This column focuses on ways for Republican congressional candidates to defeat incumbent Democrats, such as Jason Altmire (opposed by Melissa Hart), Tim Holden (opposed by Toni Gihooley), Patrick Murphy (opposed by Tom Manion), Joe Sestak (opposed by Craig Williams), and Allyson Schwartz (opposed by Marina Kats). The critical need for all the GOP candidates is to attract people who formerly supported Hillary Clinton. The way to get their votes is to ask -- forcefully but politely) for them. People like Altmire, Murphy, and Holden are especially vulnerable because they essentially stabbed Sen. Clinton in the back.
All the highlighted candidates need your support.
In the world of Hillary Supporters, which I now inhabit (as a supporter of John McCain), I hear endless rationalizations of Sen. Clinton's behavior -- particularly her endorsing Barack Obama, a thoroughly inferior candidate. Here's my response to such rationalizations.
No political figure should be immune from criticism. As I've said before, I wish Sen. Clinton had taken other steps than the ones she has tracing back to the "Unity" speech. In a difficult and dangerous world, the need for "party unity" is about number 999 on the list of priorities for any true leade. What the country needs more of might just be "party disunity."
In a previous endless comment about enthanol, I talked about one leader (John McCain) who took the right -- the honest -- position on that fuel, one which has such a devastating effect on food prices. I also talked about other supposed leaders -- Nancy Pelosi mainly, along with Harry Reid and Barack Obama -- who are treating a terrible energy crisis as just another opportunity to take pot shots at George W. Bush. It's shameful, disgusting.
Meanwhile, gas becomes unaffordable, the economy crumbles, people lose their jobs, and others are unable to buy food, but apparently, Nancy is securing her majority in Congress. She's solidifying her (miserable) career.
.I criticized the McCain campaign several times in the last few months. I said that John was naive about the nature of his opponent. I said his campaign manager should be fired. I said he should support drilling in ANWR. I said he should stay several miles away from certain evangelicals. Needless to say, that went over not so well with McCain people.
I respect Hillary Clinton, but the concept of "St. Hillary-who-can-do-no-wrong" is not helpful to her supporters, her country, or even to her. I have problems with the idea that the advancement of her "career" should be her single most important consideration.
We live in a world where crazed Muslims fly airplanes full of people into buildings, and where countries that hate us are trying to develop nuclear bombs. My career, your career, and her career are very secondary to people of character providing real leadership.
There's a Pennsylvania boy (Rod Maginiss) who recently won the Medal of Honor -- posthumously.. He dove on a grenade and saved the lives of four comrades. Obviously, concepts of the primacy of one's "career" would have been meaningless to him -- as well they should have been.
Hillary Clinton can learn from him. We all can.
All the highlighted candidates need your support.
In the world of Hillary Supporters, which I now inhabit (as a supporter of John McCain), I hear endless rationalizations of Sen. Clinton's behavior -- particularly her endorsing Barack Obama, a thoroughly inferior candidate. Here's my response to such rationalizations.
No political figure should be immune from criticism. As I've said before, I wish Sen. Clinton had taken other steps than the ones she has tracing back to the "Unity" speech. In a difficult and dangerous world, the need for "party unity" is about number 999 on the list of priorities for any true leade. What the country needs more of might just be "party disunity."
In a previous endless comment about enthanol, I talked about one leader (John McCain) who took the right -- the honest -- position on that fuel, one which has such a devastating effect on food prices. I also talked about other supposed leaders -- Nancy Pelosi mainly, along with Harry Reid and Barack Obama -- who are treating a terrible energy crisis as just another opportunity to take pot shots at George W. Bush. It's shameful, disgusting.
Meanwhile, gas becomes unaffordable, the economy crumbles, people lose their jobs, and others are unable to buy food, but apparently, Nancy is securing her majority in Congress. She's solidifying her (miserable) career.
.I criticized the McCain campaign several times in the last few months. I said that John was naive about the nature of his opponent. I said his campaign manager should be fired. I said he should support drilling in ANWR. I said he should stay several miles away from certain evangelicals. Needless to say, that went over not so well with McCain people.
I respect Hillary Clinton, but the concept of "St. Hillary-who-can-do-no-wrong" is not helpful to her supporters, her country, or even to her. I have problems with the idea that the advancement of her "career" should be her single most important consideration.
We live in a world where crazed Muslims fly airplanes full of people into buildings, and where countries that hate us are trying to develop nuclear bombs. My career, your career, and her career are very secondary to people of character providing real leadership.
There's a Pennsylvania boy (Rod Maginiss) who recently won the Medal of Honor -- posthumously.. He dove on a grenade and saved the lives of four comrades. Obviously, concepts of the primacy of one's "career" would have been meaningless to him -- as well they should have been.
Hillary Clinton can learn from him. We all can.
Hillary Dems Should Vote Republican
Cynthia Ruccia, Ohio Democratic activist and McCain Supporter.
Cynthia Ruccia's column today on Clintons4McCain is a good one and worth reading. As you might imagine, I quarrel with Cynthia (and her friends, ALL of whom seem to be Democrats) about the relative merits of the two parties.
In her column, Cynthia says the following about the implications of her deciding to support McCain: "My decision to protest the treatment of Hillary Clinton was going to be the maximum protest -- I was going to vote for John McCain. Period. My Democratic friends and family reacted with horror, “You’re NOT going to vote for MCCAIN?!!!” as if I had decided to endorse a vicious disease. I understood where they were coming from, and although my mind was made up, it was hard to deal with their incredulity towards my decision. I guess I still had a Democratic hangover."
To every Democrat in America, I'd like to offer the following comment: "Relax, in no way is voting for John McCain equivalent to an immoral act. In fact, it might be the most morally sound decision you've ever made."
With all due respect, my response when I read Cynthia's words above was as follows: Have these friends sought professional help? Sometimes the Democratic candidate is far superior to the Democratic. AND SOMETIMES THE REVERSE IS TRUE. I don't regard that statement as profound, but instead obvious.
In a Pennsylvania House race in 2006 (in my district), there was a contest for between powerful Democratic House whip Mike Veon and unknown Republican, Jim Marshall. The Veon ads (he raised a whole lot of money) were simple.
They featured a seriously overweight guy with a vacant look who said the following: "It's really simple. Mike Veon, dimmiecrat [his pronunciation]. Jim Marshall, Republican." (Our district is heavily Democratic).
My response to the ads was this: "Mike Veon, crook. Jim Marshall, honest man."
To the amazement of everybody in Pennsylvania, Jim Marshall won handily. I fear many of Cynthia's friends, the Beaver County version, would have voted for Mike Veon, because he was in fact a Democrat.
Late last week, Mike Veon, along with many of his Democratic associates in the PA House, was indicted. There were 59 counts (and could have been many more) of bribery, misuse of taxpayer funds, violation of campaign laws, and on and on. He faces possible fines of $860,000 and (theoretical) jail terms of 381 years, which would mean he'd have to live a very long time.
The correct person to vote for in the 2006 election was Jim Marshall, Republican. Sometimes Republicans are criminals and no one should vote for them -- I certainly wouldn't. Some Democrats are cynics and inferior people -- go read CREW's (Committee on Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) analysis of the 20 most corrupt congressmen -- and no one should vote for them.
For me, this has been one of the most startling discoveries I've made in my lifetime: that some people assume a Party membership confers some sort of righteousness/worthiness on a candidate. Obviously, it does not.
I also strongly disagree with Cynthia on where the right political home is for feminists. If she assumes the treatment of HRC, feminist, is some sort of strange aberration that will be ended by vigorous demonstrations in Denver, she's dead wrong. The kind of "feminism" the Party is encouraging is exemplified by Nancy Pelosi, Donna Brazile, Kathleen Sibelius, Claire McCaskill, Rachel Madow, and Michelle Obama.
I'm glad Cynthia is going to vote for John McCain -- almost overjoyed -- but I hope that wise vote is accompanied by some fundamental re-thinking about her Party.
Frankly, why did so many luminaries in that Party (Dean, Kerry, Kennedy, Rockefeller, Daschle, Gore, Casey, and others) stab Hillary in the back? And why did they believe -- and still believe -- that they can get away with it?
I fear they're assuming that Cynthia's friends -- and tens of millions like them -- will come around in the end and vote for the pathetic Obama. Are their assumptions correct?
We shall see.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Altimre, Murtha: Orange Jump Suits?
Hi my friends: On Thursday I'm going to have to (key phrase) have our 21-year-old cat, Larry Bird, put down. It's the only humane thing to. Thus, my next new column will be up on Friday. Hope to see you back!
"I'm shocked, shocked to find that there's gambling at Ricks!" (Claude Rains, "Casablanca")
I'm sure Jason Altmire and his "campaign manager," John Murtha, are "shocked, shocked" to find out that there's pervasive, systemic corruption in Pennsylvania Democratic politics. Of course, Murtha (opposed by William Russell) and Altmire (opposed by Melissa Hart) have a lot in common. In 2006, Murtha's PAC gave money to Altmire and helped raised him lots of $$$$ from the same unsavory influence-buyers who support Murtha's own campaign.
Some people have recurrent nightmares. My recurrent dream is a pleasant one: it has Altmire and Murtha being led off in leg irons and orange jump suits. Could there truly be such justice in this lifetime? One can only dream . . .
Jack Murtha has close relationships with Pennsylvania Democrats, especially those in his 12th district. Of course, as the previous colum indicates, many of those Democrats are in fact getting ready for their own orange jump suits. The political boss in Greene County, a mostly rural area in Murtha's 12th district is a man named Bill DeWeese, the majority leader of the House Democrats.
DeWeese has not been indicted . . . yet.
His chief of staff, Michael Manzo, is not quite so lucky. He's charged with 47 counts, including theft and criminal conspiracy. His maximum penalties are $660,000 in fines and 113 years in prison. Trust me, Michael, you can go through a lot of orange jump suits over a century-plus.
Manzo is charged with using truckloads of political funds for campaigns -- and worse. In 2004, he also began an affair with a 21-year-old intern. Instead of working for the state as was supposed to be the case, the young woman attended graduate school in Pittsburgh. Manzo created a "job" for her -- a great one that involved little or no work and paid as much as $36,000 in one year.
How did Mrs. Manzo feel about all this? Well, she -- a legislative aide for the House Democratic Caucus -- has her own problems. She's been charged with 12 counts, including conflict of interest and theft. Her thoughts about her husband's young, long-time mistress are not yet a matter or record.
How did Manzo's boss -- and Murtha's political ally -- Bill DeWeese feel about all this? Unlike Claude Rains, he didn't claim to be shocked; he did claim to be "outraged." DeWeese is a man who isn't easily outraged. His tolerance for bad behavior by Democratic staffers is legendary.
However, if DeWeese didn't know what his chief of staff was up to, he must qualify as the worst manager in world history. Deniability seems to be DeWeese's guiding principle of life.
I seriously wonder how much campaign work DeWeese and his staff did for Murtha's campaigns -- on taxpayer's money. Perhaps someone might ask Murtha and his minions, although I doubt they'll get an answer. Also, how much money did Murtha funnel into Greene County politics -- directly and indirectly?
As for Altmire, his main problem is a man named Mike Veon, who formerly served as House Democratic whip. Veon "served" as the House representative from my area. He's charged with 59 counts, including conflict of interest, theft, and criminal conspiracy.
His maximum penalty is $805,00 fines. He could theoretically spend 381 years in prison -- at which point he would be the oldest living man in the history of the world.
Veon and his people specialized in running campaigns -- his and that of other Democrats. Whenever possible, they did it with taxpayers' money.
I hope we find out soon if one of those other campaigns was that of Jason Altmire. How much money did Veon funnel to him -- presumably under some sort of "good government" fig leaf?
Anyone who wants to learn how Murtha "does business," his favorite phrase, can look up his place of dishonor in the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington's list of the "20 most corrupt congressmen." Remember, this is the man Jason Altmire called his "campaign manager." This is Altmire's role model.
One of the great unanswered questions in American politics is: where does Murtha's campaign money go? In 2006, against Diana Irey, he spent more than $3 million. But during the campaign, he was almost invisible. How much of that money went in the direction of men named DeWeese and Veon? And how much did such people help their favorite Democratic candidates?
"Follow the money," as Deep Throat said during Watergate.
As time goes on, I'm going to pick up Democratic rocks -- and we can all see what creepy crawlies clamber out.
Are we having fun yet, Jason? John?
"I'm shocked, shocked to find that there's gambling at Ricks!" (Claude Rains, "Casablanca")
I'm sure Jason Altmire and his "campaign manager," John Murtha, are "shocked, shocked" to find out that there's pervasive, systemic corruption in Pennsylvania Democratic politics. Of course, Murtha (opposed by William Russell) and Altmire (opposed by Melissa Hart) have a lot in common. In 2006, Murtha's PAC gave money to Altmire and helped raised him lots of $$$$ from the same unsavory influence-buyers who support Murtha's own campaign.
Some people have recurrent nightmares. My recurrent dream is a pleasant one: it has Altmire and Murtha being led off in leg irons and orange jump suits. Could there truly be such justice in this lifetime? One can only dream . . .
Jack Murtha has close relationships with Pennsylvania Democrats, especially those in his 12th district. Of course, as the previous colum indicates, many of those Democrats are in fact getting ready for their own orange jump suits. The political boss in Greene County, a mostly rural area in Murtha's 12th district is a man named Bill DeWeese, the majority leader of the House Democrats.
DeWeese has not been indicted . . . yet.
His chief of staff, Michael Manzo, is not quite so lucky. He's charged with 47 counts, including theft and criminal conspiracy. His maximum penalties are $660,000 in fines and 113 years in prison. Trust me, Michael, you can go through a lot of orange jump suits over a century-plus.
Manzo is charged with using truckloads of political funds for campaigns -- and worse. In 2004, he also began an affair with a 21-year-old intern. Instead of working for the state as was supposed to be the case, the young woman attended graduate school in Pittsburgh. Manzo created a "job" for her -- a great one that involved little or no work and paid as much as $36,000 in one year.
How did Mrs. Manzo feel about all this? Well, she -- a legislative aide for the House Democratic Caucus -- has her own problems. She's been charged with 12 counts, including conflict of interest and theft. Her thoughts about her husband's young, long-time mistress are not yet a matter or record.
How did Manzo's boss -- and Murtha's political ally -- Bill DeWeese feel about all this? Unlike Claude Rains, he didn't claim to be shocked; he did claim to be "outraged." DeWeese is a man who isn't easily outraged. His tolerance for bad behavior by Democratic staffers is legendary.
However, if DeWeese didn't know what his chief of staff was up to, he must qualify as the worst manager in world history. Deniability seems to be DeWeese's guiding principle of life.
I seriously wonder how much campaign work DeWeese and his staff did for Murtha's campaigns -- on taxpayer's money. Perhaps someone might ask Murtha and his minions, although I doubt they'll get an answer. Also, how much money did Murtha funnel into Greene County politics -- directly and indirectly?
As for Altmire, his main problem is a man named Mike Veon, who formerly served as House Democratic whip. Veon "served" as the House representative from my area. He's charged with 59 counts, including conflict of interest, theft, and criminal conspiracy.
His maximum penalty is $805,00 fines. He could theoretically spend 381 years in prison -- at which point he would be the oldest living man in the history of the world.
Veon and his people specialized in running campaigns -- his and that of other Democrats. Whenever possible, they did it with taxpayers' money.
I hope we find out soon if one of those other campaigns was that of Jason Altmire. How much money did Veon funnel to him -- presumably under some sort of "good government" fig leaf?
Anyone who wants to learn how Murtha "does business," his favorite phrase, can look up his place of dishonor in the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington's list of the "20 most corrupt congressmen." Remember, this is the man Jason Altmire called his "campaign manager." This is Altmire's role model.
One of the great unanswered questions in American politics is: where does Murtha's campaign money go? In 2006, against Diana Irey, he spent more than $3 million. But during the campaign, he was almost invisible. How much of that money went in the direction of men named DeWeese and Veon? And how much did such people help their favorite Democratic candidates?
"Follow the money," as Deep Throat said during Watergate.
As time goes on, I'm going to pick up Democratic rocks -- and we can all see what creepy crawlies clamber out.
Are we having fun yet, Jason? John?
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
The Cesspool: PA Democratic Politics
Any Pennsylvanian -- Democrat, Republican, or Independent -- who votes for someone like John Murtha, Jason Altmire, or Patrick Murphy should immediately go home and take a long, hot shower. Those Representatives are cynical. They are corrupt. And, with the exception of the chronically dyspeptic Rep. Murtha -- they are generally amiable.
[Some people subscribe to "The Book of the Month Club." PA Dems subscribe to "The Crook of the Month Club."] Clean out Harrisburg, and Clean Out Washington, DC.
Today's column will be on the pervasive corruption in the Pennsylvania Democratic Party. Some Democrats apparently believe that's what needed is a "special session" of the Pennsylvania legislature to deal with "ethics reform." In fact, that would mean many corrupt individuals, some soon to be indicted, would be debating the issue of ethics. The notion alone is monstrous.
Yes, the people indicted so far have been state legislators -- and their minions. The PA Attorney-General, Tom Corbett, says more indictments will follow from all caucases in the Senate and the House. We can't wait.
In the words of Philadelphia Daily News columnist John Baer, what's needed is "a thorough cathartic cleansing." Baer suggests it should involve not so much the charade of a special session, as "flamethrowers followed by fire hoses."
The Democrats in Pennsylvania who are fleecing the taxpayers in order to maintain their offices include every Democratic congressman in this state. Someone like John Murtha has enriched his brother, Kit, as well as his former aide, Paul Maggliochetti. In return, Murtha has received huge -- obscene -- campaign contributions. Then, he has poured the campaign money into the coffers of his political supporters.
Jason Altmire? He called Murtha his "campaign manager."
Why isn't Murtha (opposed heroically by William Russell) being indicted? Go to OpenSecrets.org and type in the names "John Murtha" and "Jason Altmire." Then, you can read exactly who is buying and paying for these characters. The same with Patrick Murphy (opposed by Tom Manion) and Allyson Schwartz (opposed by Marina Kats). Also, check out Joe Sestak (opposed by Craig Williams) to find out who's paying him off -- and not for "good government."
You don't raise as much campaign cash (way up in the millions each) as these Democratic "worthies' without selling out almost everything -- including your soul but maybe not the family silver-ware. As http://www.dncreform.com/ illustrates, Atlmire and Murphy sold out to Chicago politician Barack Obama for much more than the legendary thirty pieces of silver. With people like them in government, Pennsylvania is lucky that it's still a state.
Did Schwartz, formerly a fixture in the thoroughly dishonest Democratic caucus in the state senate, know what was going on? I'm sure Marina will ask her.
How tight were Jason Altmire (opposed by Melissa Hart) and Mike Veon, disgraced and indicted former Beaver County "fixer" and Democratic boss? Try as tight as ticks. Just about as tight as Murtha has been with Greene County Democratic czar Mike DeWeese, whose top aide was indicted for bribery, sexual and other offenses. Said aide had his mistress on the payroll for a no-work job. This is more than sleaze. It's a human sewage plant. It's, in short, Democratic politics Pennsylvania style.
Did DeWeese know? Guess. Did John Murtha know what was going on? Gee, we should ask him.
Where is Tom Corbett when we need him? Where are the flamethrowers and fire hoses we need to clean up the PA Democrats in Congress?
More to come on Wednesday and Thursday . . .
[Some people subscribe to "The Book of the Month Club." PA Dems subscribe to "The Crook of the Month Club."] Clean out Harrisburg, and Clean Out Washington, DC.
Today's column will be on the pervasive corruption in the Pennsylvania Democratic Party. Some Democrats apparently believe that's what needed is a "special session" of the Pennsylvania legislature to deal with "ethics reform." In fact, that would mean many corrupt individuals, some soon to be indicted, would be debating the issue of ethics. The notion alone is monstrous.
Yes, the people indicted so far have been state legislators -- and their minions. The PA Attorney-General, Tom Corbett, says more indictments will follow from all caucases in the Senate and the House. We can't wait.
In the words of Philadelphia Daily News columnist John Baer, what's needed is "a thorough cathartic cleansing." Baer suggests it should involve not so much the charade of a special session, as "flamethrowers followed by fire hoses."
The Democrats in Pennsylvania who are fleecing the taxpayers in order to maintain their offices include every Democratic congressman in this state. Someone like John Murtha has enriched his brother, Kit, as well as his former aide, Paul Maggliochetti. In return, Murtha has received huge -- obscene -- campaign contributions. Then, he has poured the campaign money into the coffers of his political supporters.
Jason Altmire? He called Murtha his "campaign manager."
Why isn't Murtha (opposed heroically by William Russell) being indicted? Go to OpenSecrets.org and type in the names "John Murtha" and "Jason Altmire." Then, you can read exactly who is buying and paying for these characters. The same with Patrick Murphy (opposed by Tom Manion) and Allyson Schwartz (opposed by Marina Kats). Also, check out Joe Sestak (opposed by Craig Williams) to find out who's paying him off -- and not for "good government."
You don't raise as much campaign cash (way up in the millions each) as these Democratic "worthies' without selling out almost everything -- including your soul but maybe not the family silver-ware. As http://www.dncreform.com/ illustrates, Atlmire and Murphy sold out to Chicago politician Barack Obama for much more than the legendary thirty pieces of silver. With people like them in government, Pennsylvania is lucky that it's still a state.
Did Schwartz, formerly a fixture in the thoroughly dishonest Democratic caucus in the state senate, know what was going on? I'm sure Marina will ask her.
How tight were Jason Altmire (opposed by Melissa Hart) and Mike Veon, disgraced and indicted former Beaver County "fixer" and Democratic boss? Try as tight as ticks. Just about as tight as Murtha has been with Greene County Democratic czar Mike DeWeese, whose top aide was indicted for bribery, sexual and other offenses. Said aide had his mistress on the payroll for a no-work job. This is more than sleaze. It's a human sewage plant. It's, in short, Democratic politics Pennsylvania style.
Did DeWeese know? Guess. Did John Murtha know what was going on? Gee, we should ask him.
Where is Tom Corbett when we need him? Where are the flamethrowers and fire hoses we need to clean up the PA Democrats in Congress?
More to come on Wednesday and Thursday . . .
Sunday, July 13, 2008
PA: Republican Congressional Sweep Possible
BULLETIN FROM ANCHORAGE DAILY NEWS: BP to begin developing Liberty oil field BP said it will begin developing its Liberty oil field, which will involve drilling the world's longest wells to reach an offshore reservoir in the Beaufort Sea. [If Barack Obama, Jason Altmire and their fellow Democrats in Congress had any say in it, this oil development would NOT be taking place. The Beaufort Sea oil is well off the Alaska coast.]
After you enjoy the Barack-Michelle image, scroll down to the bottom to see my "medical malpractice" story.
This image (Hillary-McCain) above on www.JohnMcCain.com is unprecedented, and I hope it will serve as a model for Republican candidates all over the country.
I'm in a one e-mail Groups full of moderate-to-liberal Democrats. They make me feel like Prof. Nabholz, because they truly don't know anything.
After you enjoy the Barack-Michelle image, scroll down to the bottom to see my "medical malpractice" story.
Above is the already famous New Yorker cover of Michelle, fashionable in an Afro and (bitterly?) toting an AK-47, while Barack is decked out in a turban, as the two do their signature fist-bump. I wrote about the cover and the way images and videos are being used against Mr. and Mrs. Obama. Go to: http://camp2008victorya.blogspot.com/.
This image (Hillary-McCain) above on www.JohnMcCain.com is unprecedented, and I hope it will serve as a model for Republican candidates all over the country. No self-respecting Hillary Supporter will ever vote for candidates like Jason Altmire (whose district went two-to-one for Hillary) or Patrick Murphy (whose own Bucks County went 72,000 to 41,000 for Hillary).
They also won't vote for Pelosi favorites like Sestak Holden, and Schwartz, because Nancy played Lady MacBeth when it came to Hillary's campaign. Altmire and Murphy sold Hillary out for the modern equivalent of 30 pieces of silver -- hefty campaign contributions from Obama, a weak and cynical candidate who apparently doesn't like white people (too "bitter" for his tastes, too apt to value religion and Second Amendment rights, too unlikely to vote for a race-baiter like him).
Please feel free to repost any material here -- and tell your friends and supporters that I exist. Thanks. (On Altmire's and Murphy's contributions from Obama -- obviously in exchange for their support -- go to: www.dncreform.com) If you see Jason and Patrick palling around, ask them to return the money.
For the first time, the Rasmussen Poll shows John McCain catching up to Barack Obama and running even nationally. At this point, with Barack Obama spending $100 million on commercials in 24 key states, that is very good news for John McCain. As congressional candidates know, I'm predicting a substantial victory for McCain in PA, something in the 53% to 47% range. That wuold mean victory for Melissa Hart and, probably, Tom Manion. It would mean Toni Gilhooley, Craig Williams, Lou Barletta, and Marina Kats would be competitive with their opponents.
If McCain could pull off a 57% to 43% win in PA, he could bring all those candidates along with him. How could that happen? It would do so if the Obama Campaign collapses like a two-dollar tent. We may already be seeing something like that happening. Obama's left-wing supporters, who agreed with his "principles," are finding out that in fact he doesn't have any principles.
As the Wall Street Journal recently put it, there's a reason Obama keeps talking about "a third George Bush term." As the Journal notes, Obama seems to be running for that third term. His recent embrace of capital punishment, the new FISA bill, faith-based initiatives, and Second Amendment rights has alarmed many people who thought they knew Barack.
Obama's current "energy" ad in PA is clownish and ineffective. It mainly accuses John McCain of once posing for a picture with the President of the U.S. Obama's "plan" seems to be to let gasoline go to $8 a gallon under his presidency -- at which point he would blame his predecessor.
I've been saying for many months that Republican candidates need to embrace John McCain -- in ways that congressional aspirants rarely do. What they should be embracing in fact is McCain's chance to do extremely well in the Keystone State.
For Tuesday morning's column, I'm going to write about one of the "forgotten issues": health care. The crucial issue in this campaign is the economy, particularly gas prices. But health care is still a concern and, as with energy, the Democrats are the wrong side of the issue.
One thing I'll ask everyone to do is to go to http://www.clintons4mccain.com/ and join the group. Also, check out another web site: http://www.nobamamission.com/. The organizations represented by those two sites are going to play a crucial role in John McCain's carrying PA.
See YouTube below:
Obama's economic policies don't add uphttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_SRpuTQAvw
Obama = Bush IIIhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_kSdaD0pnY
My Medical Malpractice Story
Many years ago an English professor (John Nabholz) at the University was discussing the pros and cons of teaching first-year students: He said, "I love teaching freshmen. They don't know ANYTHING." Presumably, that meant he was never at a loss for things to teach.
I'm in a one e-mail Groups full of moderate-to-liberal Democrats. They make me feel like Prof. Nabholz, because they truly don't know anything.
Recently, the question of skyrocketing costs for medical malpractice insurance came up. Several of the Demcorats believed the current system, emphasizing lots of lawsuits is just fine. One person said doctors guilty of malpractice should be put in jail.
Another person (a Republican?) suggested that maybe it was the malpractice attorneys who should be incarcerated. He also observed that, in the end, it's the patients who end up paying.
Here's how I responded: "Bingo! The person or company who hands over the money isn't the one who really "pays." Good sound Republican principles would point out the inconvenient truth that it's the patient or taxpayer who pays -- not the "evil" insurance company. This I must admit is another problem I have with the Democratic Party's approach to the issue -- i.e., allowing unlimited lawsuits by plaintiff's attorneys. In the end, that results in poorer treatment, excessive testing, and higher costs, which is not what we should be aiming for.
"Look at it this way. You go to the doctor with a headache. One thing he could do is sign you up for brain scans that might cost thousands of dollars. Or he could say, 'Go home, take two Tylenol, and get some rest. If the headache doesn't go away, call me.'" The first approach -- the brain scans -- is one we'll see more and more with malpractice. The old-fashioned approach is the Tylenol one that costs a nickel a tablet."
Professor Nabholz would be proud of me.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Advantage Marina Kats on Iraq
This image (Hillary-McCain) above on www.JohnMcCain.com is unprecedented, and I hope it will serve as a model for Republican candidates all over the country. No self-respecting Hillary Supporter will ever vote for candidates like Jason Altmire (whose district went two-to-one for Hillary) or Patrick Murphy (whose own Bucks County went 72,000 to 41,000 for Hillary). They also won't vote for Pelosi favorites like Sestak Holden, and Schwartz, because Nancy played Lady MacBeth when it came to Hillary's campaign. Altmire and Murphy sold Hillary out for the modern equivalent of 30 pieces of silver -- hefty campaign contributions from Obama, a weak and cynical candidate who apparently doesn't like white people (too "bitter" for his tastes, too apt to value religion and Second Amendment rights, too unlikely to vote for a race-baiter like him). Ah, much more to follow, my friends. Please read below about what you can learn from Marina Kats about Iraq policy. Please feel free to repost any material here -- and tell your friends and supporters that I exist. Thanks. (On Altmire's and Murphy's contributions from Obama -- obviously in exchange for their support -- go to: www.dncreform.com) If you see Jason and Patrick palling around, ask them to return the money.
“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.” - Barack H. Obama. He is one scary dude. Read below on his plan to "reinvade" (!!!) Iraq.
Marina Kats, one tough cookie running for the congressional seat in PA's 13th District
"I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops [from Iraq] as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests." (Marina Kats, GOP candidate for Congress in PA's 13th district)
When I left Bartlesville, OK, in July, 1979, the price of gasoline was at 99.9 cents for unleaded regular. In my (very happy) years as a speechwriter/policy analyst for Phillips Petroleum (now Conoco-Phillips), I had urged top executives to say, "Gasoline will NOT go a dollar-a-gallon." I guess I left Bartlesville (for U. S. Steel and later Gulf Oil in Pittsburgh) in a nick of time!
The columns below this one deal mainly with the key issue of 2008: the high -- and rising -- price of gasoline. I have suggested that John McCain and other GOP candidate blame it on the Democrats. And since Democrats have been adamantly opposing energy production -- and not only oil production -- for more than 20 years, they seem like the right people to blame.
There is another issue which we all thought (wrongly, it appears) and that's the Iraq War. Because it's rarely on our TV -- not bloody enough anymore for the news channels, who hate George Bush and are totally mystified by the high morale and intense patriotism of America's servicemen and servicewomen -- the war had faded as an issue.
On Fridady (today) and through the weekend I'll be writing about the war. How should Republicans handle it when the issue arises (as it will, albeit rarely)?
Let's focus on the approach taken by Republican Marina Kats. She's running in PA's 13th district (Montgomery County and Northeast Philly) against Allyson Schwartz. Rep. Schwartz raises tons of money but doesn't have an ounce of ideas about how to solve any of America's problems, including Iraq. The idea of America actually taking aim at terrorists and rogue nations seems to distress her mightily.
Here's what The Bulletin of Philadelphia had to say when Marina stepped into the political ring against Schwartz:
"Ms. Kats differs with Mrs. Schwartz strongly on whether Washington should act presently to phase out the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. Speaking to The Bulletin from her law office in Feasterville, she described looking upon an American flag that was flown for a year and a half over the base of her colleague Christopher Hudock when he was called to active duty in Iraq. Upon returning, he gave Ms. Kats the flag to hang in her office. She describes it as a reminder of the imperative that America prevail."
Marina Kats, one tough cookie running for the congressional seat in PA's 13th District"I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops [from Iraq] as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests." (Marina Kats, GOP candidate for Congress in PA's 13th district)
When I left Bartlesville, OK, in July, 1979, the price of gasoline was at 99.9 cents for unleaded regular. In my (very happy) years as a speechwriter/policy analyst for Phillips Petroleum (now Conoco-Phillips), I had urged top executives to say, "Gasoline will NOT go a dollar-a-gallon." I guess I left Bartlesville (for U. S. Steel and later Gulf Oil in Pittsburgh) in a nick of time!
The columns below this one deal mainly with the key issue of 2008: the high -- and rising -- price of gasoline. I have suggested that John McCain and other GOP candidate blame it on the Democrats. And since Democrats have been adamantly opposing energy production -- and not only oil production -- for more than 20 years, they seem like the right people to blame.
There is another issue which we all thought (wrongly, it appears) and that's the Iraq War. Because it's rarely on our TV -- not bloody enough anymore for the news channels, who hate George Bush and are totally mystified by the high morale and intense patriotism of America's servicemen and servicewomen -- the war had faded as an issue.
On Fridady (today) and through the weekend I'll be writing about the war. How should Republicans handle it when the issue arises (as it will, albeit rarely)?
Let's focus on the approach taken by Republican Marina Kats. She's running in PA's 13th district (Montgomery County and Northeast Philly) against Allyson Schwartz. Rep. Schwartz raises tons of money but doesn't have an ounce of ideas about how to solve any of America's problems, including Iraq. The idea of America actually taking aim at terrorists and rogue nations seems to distress her mightily.
Here's what The Bulletin of Philadelphia had to say when Marina stepped into the political ring against Schwartz:
"Ms. Kats differs with Mrs. Schwartz strongly on whether Washington should act presently to phase out the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. Speaking to The Bulletin from her law office in Feasterville, she described looking upon an American flag that was flown for a year and a half over the base of her colleague Christopher Hudock when he was called to active duty in Iraq. Upon returning, he gave Ms. Kats the flag to hang in her office. She describes it as a reminder of the imperative that America prevail."
An emigre from Russia, Marina is a red-white-and blue American. Ms. Schwartz's mom escaped the Nazis in Austria, but when it comes to daughter Allyson, she's about as patriotic as your door-knob. In today's congressional Democratic climate, flag-waving doesn't pay.
Asked when America should leave Iraq, Marina replied, "I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests."
To me, this is Marina's shot heard round the world. Her statement is getting adopted by GOP candidates across the nation. She might even shorten it to, "We should leave Iraq only when it's safe to do so." There is a rhetorical term for what she's doing, but I prefer to call it, "Making swiss cheese out of Allyson Schwartz types."
We should leave when it's safe for our soldiers to defeat al Qaeda. We should leave when it's safe for Iraqi citizens, so al Qaeda don't murder them by the tens of thousands. We should leave when doing so wouldn't lead to catastrophic price rises in oil."
Above all, we should avoid the Obama Doctrine: "Let's leave, but if we have to, we can re-invade." Nice, Barack, you're retaining the option to go back with guns blazing in Iraq if everything, as the late Tim Russert put it, "goes to hell." Of course, if we leave precipitously, everything surely will go to Hell. Then, commander-in-chief Obama could engage in a re-run of the original invasion of Iraq.
If you "google" two words: "Obama" + "Reinvade," you come up with 1.5 million links. You won't hear much about it from Obama's cheerleaders in the national media, but it is certainly a big deal on the Web. I bet McCain uses it to turn Barcack H. Obama into a human pinata. I would (says he with a wry smile).
If Rep. Schwartz has a different view from Obama -- bail out immediately and then rush back -- she's keeping it a secret. She may be waiting for new talking points from Obama backers Nancy Pelosi and John Murtha.
I don't know about you, but Marina Kats sounds a lot sounder in her Iraq policy than Barack does in his. As for Ms. Schwartz, a former Hillary backer, she's now on board apparently with Obama, which means she must also support leaving Iraq quickly -- and then inevitably going back.
Somehow, I don't think the Obama-Schwartz policy will go over well with Pennsylvania voters.
Republican congressional candidates? I hope your policy is the same as Marina's.
Allyson Schwartz will be tough to beat. As you'll see on OpenSecrets, she's sold out to every special interest group that happened by with a bag-full of money.
Asked when America should leave Iraq, Marina replied, "I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests."
To me, this is Marina's shot heard round the world. Her statement is getting adopted by GOP candidates across the nation. She might even shorten it to, "We should leave Iraq only when it's safe to do so." There is a rhetorical term for what she's doing, but I prefer to call it, "Making swiss cheese out of Allyson Schwartz types."
We should leave when it's safe for our soldiers to defeat al Qaeda. We should leave when it's safe for Iraqi citizens, so al Qaeda don't murder them by the tens of thousands. We should leave when doing so wouldn't lead to catastrophic price rises in oil."
Above all, we should avoid the Obama Doctrine: "Let's leave, but if we have to, we can re-invade." Nice, Barack, you're retaining the option to go back with guns blazing in Iraq if everything, as the late Tim Russert put it, "goes to hell." Of course, if we leave precipitously, everything surely will go to Hell. Then, commander-in-chief Obama could engage in a re-run of the original invasion of Iraq.
If you "google" two words: "Obama" + "Reinvade," you come up with 1.5 million links. You won't hear much about it from Obama's cheerleaders in the national media, but it is certainly a big deal on the Web. I bet McCain uses it to turn Barcack H. Obama into a human pinata. I would (says he with a wry smile).
If Rep. Schwartz has a different view from Obama -- bail out immediately and then rush back -- she's keeping it a secret. She may be waiting for new talking points from Obama backers Nancy Pelosi and John Murtha.
I don't know about you, but Marina Kats sounds a lot sounder in her Iraq policy than Barack does in his. As for Ms. Schwartz, a former Hillary backer, she's now on board apparently with Obama, which means she must also support leaving Iraq quickly -- and then inevitably going back.
Somehow, I don't think the Obama-Schwartz policy will go over well with Pennsylvania voters.
Republican congressional candidates? I hope your policy is the same as Marina's.
Allyson Schwartz will be tough to beat. As you'll see on OpenSecrets, she's sold out to every special interest group that happened by with a bag-full of money.
If anybody can knock her off her perch, however, it's Marina. You go, gal!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
