Mood of voters in 9 swing states held GOP "incompetent"
"He who cannot remember the past is doomed to repeat it."-
George Santayana
A year before the primary elections of 2008, Republican
pollster and strategist Wes Anderson called the tune.
He said the voters didn't know what, exactly, the Democratic
Party's plan for the future might be, "But they feel certain
that the Republicans have not gotten the job done and they
are willing to take a chance on the Democrats."
After an exhaustive survey of 1,200 voters in 12 Republican-
held Congressional Districts in 9 states, professionally
trained interviewers concluded that Congressional job
approval stood at 27 percent versus 67 percent disapproval.
"The voters of these swing districts did not simply vote for
change. They voted against what they perceive as
incompetence in the GOP-led Congress."
Democratic candidates, on the other hand, held an 11-point
lead with a voter approval of 48 percent to 37 percent
unfavorable.
President George W. Bush had a voter disapproval rate of 56
percent unfavorable over a 41 percent favorable perception
of his 8-year track record in the Oval Office.
Under the heading "The most glaring and stunning Republican
problem," the report read, was that 42 percent of those
polled chose the Democrats as the party most likely to cut
taxes on the middle class.
They chose Democrats 47 percent over 22 percent as the party
most likely to reduce the deficit.
Surveyors discovered that 38 percent of voters believed the
Democrats would be most likely to keep spending under
control, a 17-point edge over the 21 percent who chose the
Republicans as the party of fiscal responsibility.
A surprising 25 percent chose ending the war in Iraq as the
most pressing issue in their choice for a Congressional
candidate. Only 16 percent chose strengthening National
Security as a major criterion, while 13 percent indicated
getting spending under control as the most burning issue.
A mere 5 percent said the provision of tax relief was the
the most important factor.
The states surveyed included Congressional Districts in
Connecticut, two in Pennsylvania, New York, two in Indiana,
two in Ohio, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Florida and New Mexico.
On Message, Inc., provides polling services, strategy and
media consulting for Repubican candidates and Republican
state and national committees.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Flores launches www.ChetHasToGo.com, billboards
Extensive outdoor and internet ads use Edwards' own words
The Bill Flores campaign is swinging hard to keep the 12-
point lead racked up in the early part of the general
election campaign.
The candidate released a website and a number of billboards
that use Congressman Chet Edwards' own words against him.
He attacks his opponent's judgment in his support of then-
presidential candidate, Illinois U.S. Senator Barack Hussein
Obama as an agent for positive change.
Video clips dating by and large from the Obama primary
campaign against then Senator Hilary Rodham Clinton depict
the veteran Democratic Representative praising Mr. Obama's
good judgment and his ability to lead the country and defend
its borders while at the same decrying "the kind of gotcha
politics we need to get away from" in regard to certain
remarks Senator Clinton had made about conservative members
of the Texas legislature.
There are extensive Fox News and MSNBC film clips of rock
star Ted Nugent protesting Senators Clinton and Obama and
their liberal views on gun control, education, border
control and health care, while espousing his own support of
the right to keep and bear arms and armed surveillance of
the nation's borders.
According to Mr. Flores, the Obama budget and the economic
stimulus plan crafted by his administration, when combined
with the Health Care Reform package he and key liberal
Congressmen sheperheded through the House and Senate has
doubled the size of the national debt and its budget and
will triple it within 10 years.
A retired conservative oil executive from the Panhandle who
recently retired from his position as the CEO of an offshore
petroleum exploration and operations company, Mr. Flores has
retained pollsters out of Washington, D.C., who have
determined that the overall mood of voters in Congressional
District 17 is one of disgust with incumbent office holders
on both sides of the aisle and in the White House.
According to Wes Anderson of OnMessage, Inc., "The bottom line
is this election is being driven by the voters who desire to
send a message that they are fed up with the direction President
Obama and Speaker Pelosi are taking the country. The most
immediate method voters have to voice their frustration is to
vote for Bill Flores and a majority of them intend to do just
that."
His poll included dismal figures on the Democratic leadership
in both houses of Congress and the White House, including very
negative opinions by close to two-thirds of voters regarding
budget earmarks arranged by Mr. Edwards and other Congressmen.
The Bill Flores campaign is swinging hard to keep the 12-
point lead racked up in the early part of the general
election campaign.
The candidate released a website and a number of billboards
that use Congressman Chet Edwards' own words against him.
He attacks his opponent's judgment in his support of then-
presidential candidate, Illinois U.S. Senator Barack Hussein
Obama as an agent for positive change.
Video clips dating by and large from the Obama primary
campaign against then Senator Hilary Rodham Clinton depict
the veteran Democratic Representative praising Mr. Obama's
good judgment and his ability to lead the country and defend
its borders while at the same decrying "the kind of gotcha
politics we need to get away from" in regard to certain
remarks Senator Clinton had made about conservative members
of the Texas legislature.
There are extensive Fox News and MSNBC film clips of rock
star Ted Nugent protesting Senators Clinton and Obama and
their liberal views on gun control, education, border
control and health care, while espousing his own support of
the right to keep and bear arms and armed surveillance of
the nation's borders.
According to Mr. Flores, the Obama budget and the economic
stimulus plan crafted by his administration, when combined
with the Health Care Reform package he and key liberal
Congressmen sheperheded through the House and Senate has
doubled the size of the national debt and its budget and
will triple it within 10 years.
A retired conservative oil executive from the Panhandle who
recently retired from his position as the CEO of an offshore
petroleum exploration and operations company, Mr. Flores has
retained pollsters out of Washington, D.C., who have
determined that the overall mood of voters in Congressional
District 17 is one of disgust with incumbent office holders
on both sides of the aisle and in the White House.
According to Wes Anderson of OnMessage, Inc., "The bottom line
is this election is being driven by the voters who desire to
send a message that they are fed up with the direction President
Obama and Speaker Pelosi are taking the country. The most
immediate method voters have to voice their frustration is to
vote for Bill Flores and a majority of them intend to do just
that."
His poll included dismal figures on the Democratic leadership
in both houses of Congress and the White House, including very
negative opinions by close to two-thirds of voters regarding
budget earmarks arranged by Mr. Edwards and other Congressmen.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Do You Smell A Rat?
British Petroleum was formed to exploit Iranian oil fields
Go figure.
You're looking at a $13 trillion national debt.
Over the past decade, there has been a 135 percent increase
in the money supply.
The People's Republic of China holds a $995 billion tab on
the U.S. Treasury.
What happens when the worth of the dollar falls further, as
it will?
They're going to start selling those bonds.
Where does America's credit rating go from there?
That doesn't even deserve an answer.
The implications for American middle class earners and fixed
income pensioners are not good.
Who made these decisions and why did they make them?
You know, it wasn't always that way.
Oil production rose from 8.3 million barrels a day in 1948
to 42 million barrels a day in 1972. U.S. production? It
increased from 5.5 million barrels per day to 9.5 million
barrels during that time.
Reserves?
American reserves rose from 62 billion barrels in 1948 to
534 billion barrels in 1972, an increase of nine times, but
that left American reserves at only 7 percent of the world's
proven supply of crude, down from the 1948 percentage of 34
percent.
Said the Middle East Oil Committee of the British Cabinet
Office in 1954, "A reasonable basis has now been reached for
a partnership between the oil companies and the Middle East
Governments...
"Any further encroachment by the Middle East
Governments...would seriously damage our oil supply system."
To put it mildly.
Then came Enrico Mattei, whom Daniel Yergin termed "a new
Napoleon" in his monumental history of the petroleum
industry, The Prize.
He knew Italy in particular and Europe in general had no
proven petroleum reserves in a world that was rapidly
kicking out old colonial powers and taking on bold new
independence in such spots as Somalia, Yemen, Jordan, Syria
and Iran.
A big part of World War Two was fought over that sticky
conundrum.
With the cash he found in natural gas reserves in Italy's Po
Valley, he gathered the various Italian hydrocarbon
producers into one umbrella conglomerate, Ente Nazionale
Idrocarburi. Through its subsidiary newspaper, "El Giorno,"
he financed and promoted various politicians and they formed
a new, anti-fascist government.
The problem: the "seven sisters" - the four Aramco
partners, Jersey (Exxon), Socony-Vacuum (Mobil), Standard of
California (Chevron), and Texaco - joined Gulf, Royal
Dutch/Shell and British Petroleum, to form a new consortium
tied up in the massive Kuwaiti oil field under the new name
Anglo-Iranian had taken on during World War One, British
Petroleum.
Mattei's problem: he wasn't a member of this exclusive new
club and he needed to become one.
But things didn't work out all that well. The partnerships
he formed with the Shah of Iran were based on oil properties
that didn't have very lucrative pools of oil.
Now what?
For American companies, staying at home was far too risky.
Standard of Indiana made the first penetration into the non-
Arabic kingdom of Iran, its Persian forbears Aryan and not
Arabic.
Arab nationalism had begun to ascend under the leadership of
Egypt's Nasser. He wasn't alone.
The Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammed Mossadegh, nationalized
British Petroleum in 1951.
He had to go, and go he did when the CIA put a British
Sergeant Major on the Peacock Throne as the Shah.
Our story so far: in 1979, Ayatollah Khomeini was placed in
charge by zealous Shiite student militants after they ran
the Shah into exile, nationalized the oil fields and took
everyone in the American Embassy hostage.
The crisis was resolved after certain back room deals were
reached with the incoming Reagan Administration. They let
the hostages go just minutes after The Gipper took the Oath
of Office.
That's the way it is.
The problem is this.
We are stuck. The balance of trade has been in the toilet
since post-war years, Americans pay any outrageous price
they are charged for petroleum products and our government
scrambles and scrambles to finance the whole pyramid
constructed of cards by selling bonds to stone enemies of
the Marxist variety.
Meanwhile, British Petroleum's "company man" made what is
being passed off as a blunder, an error of judgment, on
Earth Day, no less, and told the Halliburton's crew on
Deepwater Horizon that the alarming figures showing on the
pressure checks weren't all that important, to start
cementing the well on top of seawater pumped into the hole,
to forego the expense and trouble of stabilizing the
situation with mud that is way, way heavier than seawater.
The Transocean crew, Halliburton's people and everyone else
on the rig argued against his decision, but he said that was
the way it was going to be.
Casing pipe, mud, oil and a natural gas came rumbling out of
the ground at terrifying pressure. The resulting explosion
was nothing short of spectacular.
That's the way it is.
Boy, was he ever right. It blew out, burned, then sank the
rig in water a mile deep. They are no closer to plugging
the hole today than they were on Earth Day, and the Obama
Administration, chief among its players, Attorney General
Eric Holder, is talking about filing criminal charges.
There is an across the board moratorium on offshore drilling
in American waters.
Do you smell a rat?
Go figure.
You're looking at a $13 trillion national debt.
Over the past decade, there has been a 135 percent increase
in the money supply.
The People's Republic of China holds a $995 billion tab on
the U.S. Treasury.
What happens when the worth of the dollar falls further, as
it will?
They're going to start selling those bonds.
Where does America's credit rating go from there?
That doesn't even deserve an answer.
The implications for American middle class earners and fixed
income pensioners are not good.
Who made these decisions and why did they make them?
You know, it wasn't always that way.
Oil production rose from 8.3 million barrels a day in 1948
to 42 million barrels a day in 1972. U.S. production? It
increased from 5.5 million barrels per day to 9.5 million
barrels during that time.
Reserves?
American reserves rose from 62 billion barrels in 1948 to
534 billion barrels in 1972, an increase of nine times, but
that left American reserves at only 7 percent of the world's
proven supply of crude, down from the 1948 percentage of 34
percent.
Said the Middle East Oil Committee of the British Cabinet
Office in 1954, "A reasonable basis has now been reached for
a partnership between the oil companies and the Middle East
Governments...
"Any further encroachment by the Middle East
Governments...would seriously damage our oil supply system."
To put it mildly.
Then came Enrico Mattei, whom Daniel Yergin termed "a new
Napoleon" in his monumental history of the petroleum
industry, The Prize.
He knew Italy in particular and Europe in general had no
proven petroleum reserves in a world that was rapidly
kicking out old colonial powers and taking on bold new
independence in such spots as Somalia, Yemen, Jordan, Syria
and Iran.
A big part of World War Two was fought over that sticky
conundrum.
With the cash he found in natural gas reserves in Italy's Po
Valley, he gathered the various Italian hydrocarbon
producers into one umbrella conglomerate, Ente Nazionale
Idrocarburi. Through its subsidiary newspaper, "El Giorno,"
he financed and promoted various politicians and they formed
a new, anti-fascist government.
The problem: the "seven sisters" - the four Aramco
partners, Jersey (Exxon), Socony-Vacuum (Mobil), Standard of
California (Chevron), and Texaco - joined Gulf, Royal
Dutch/Shell and British Petroleum, to form a new consortium
tied up in the massive Kuwaiti oil field under the new name
Anglo-Iranian had taken on during World War One, British
Petroleum.
Mattei's problem: he wasn't a member of this exclusive new
club and he needed to become one.
But things didn't work out all that well. The partnerships
he formed with the Shah of Iran were based on oil properties
that didn't have very lucrative pools of oil.
Now what?
For American companies, staying at home was far too risky.
Standard of Indiana made the first penetration into the non-
Arabic kingdom of Iran, its Persian forbears Aryan and not
Arabic.
Arab nationalism had begun to ascend under the leadership of
Egypt's Nasser. He wasn't alone.
The Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammed Mossadegh, nationalized
British Petroleum in 1951.
He had to go, and go he did when the CIA put a British
Sergeant Major on the Peacock Throne as the Shah.
Our story so far: in 1979, Ayatollah Khomeini was placed in
charge by zealous Shiite student militants after they ran
the Shah into exile, nationalized the oil fields and took
everyone in the American Embassy hostage.
The crisis was resolved after certain back room deals were
reached with the incoming Reagan Administration. They let
the hostages go just minutes after The Gipper took the Oath
of Office.
That's the way it is.
The problem is this.
We are stuck. The balance of trade has been in the toilet
since post-war years, Americans pay any outrageous price
they are charged for petroleum products and our government
scrambles and scrambles to finance the whole pyramid
constructed of cards by selling bonds to stone enemies of
the Marxist variety.
Meanwhile, British Petroleum's "company man" made what is
being passed off as a blunder, an error of judgment, on
Earth Day, no less, and told the Halliburton's crew on
Deepwater Horizon that the alarming figures showing on the
pressure checks weren't all that important, to start
cementing the well on top of seawater pumped into the hole,
to forego the expense and trouble of stabilizing the
situation with mud that is way, way heavier than seawater.
The Transocean crew, Halliburton's people and everyone else
on the rig argued against his decision, but he said that was
the way it was going to be.
Casing pipe, mud, oil and a natural gas came rumbling out of
the ground at terrifying pressure. The resulting explosion
was nothing short of spectacular.
That's the way it is.
Boy, was he ever right. It blew out, burned, then sank the
rig in water a mile deep. They are no closer to plugging
the hole today than they were on Earth Day, and the Obama
Administration, chief among its players, Attorney General
Eric Holder, is talking about filing criminal charges.
There is an across the board moratorium on offshore drilling
in American waters.
Do you smell a rat?
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Your Name Here: Where It Says No Guns!
Okay, you're on, just stand by and say nothing - Presto!
Have you heard about the pro-gun control doll, the one that
resembles a Congressman?
You wind it up and it takes away your right to keep and bear
arms - without any evidence or a unanimous verdict of guilty
from a jury of your peers for the conviction of a felony
crime.
No real due process of law would be required under a certain
set of proposed bills pending in the current Congress.
All it takes is a "preponderance of evidence" under the
proposed changes to the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the
Brady Bill.
Not only that, but if the Attorney General sees it that way,
you would not be allowed to make a request for the reasons
you've been denied your Second Amendment rights.
Why? National Security.
Who knows, you could be a terrorist!
Might be. Could be. No telling.
Say what?
That's right. They don't even have to charge you or get an
indictment from a Grand Jury. They just put your name on a
list - and that's that.
It all goes back to 2004 when Attorney General Alberto
Gonzales told the Justice Department's Office of Legal
Policy to form a working group to review federal firearms
and explosives laws as they apply to background checks.
You know the kind. The ones they do when the sales clerk calls
a certain toll-free number back east and reads them your
application over the phone?
The goal: Determine if the government should seek additional
authority from Congress to prevent firearms and explosives
transfers to known and suspected terrorists.
Suspected.
Terrorists.
That's when Sen. Frank Lautenberg, (D-NJ), and Rep. Peter
King, (R-NY), stepped up and added the measure to a proposed
bill, S. 2820, the PROTECT Act of 2009 (Preserving Records
of Terrorist & Criminal Transactions Act) and S. 3117,
Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act.
There is a matching bill in the House, H.R. 2159, authored
by Rep. King.
The PROTECT Act would establish a national gun registry that
would require record-keeping of gun transfers for ten years
for anyone who is suspected of being a member of a terrorist
organization, and 180 days for all other criminal background
checks relating to firearms transfers.
In addition, there is the requirement for repeal of "certain
provisions that require the destruction within 24 hours of
identifying information for individuals who legally possess
firearms."
All such determinations would be taken out of the court
system and placed in the hands of the AG and the Justice
Department.
Things did not progress too far back then, but never mind.
Now it's back again. The Congressmen mentioned above have
re-introduced the same laws and they're up for consideration
in the current Congress.
If it passes, you could go to the gun store to purchase a
firearm and the clerk on the other end of the NICS line, the
one who performs the Brady Bill check, could just say that
you may not have a firearm. Don't sell the gun to this
person.
There would be no reason given.
National Security.
There would be no appeal because your name is on a list and
there is not telling why - at least, under these new laws,
if they pass and the President signs the bills.
National Security.
Yeah.
National Security.
Have you heard about the pro-gun control doll, the one that
resembles a Congressman?
You wind it up and it takes away your right to keep and bear
arms - without any evidence or a unanimous verdict of guilty
from a jury of your peers for the conviction of a felony
crime.
No real due process of law would be required under a certain
set of proposed bills pending in the current Congress.
All it takes is a "preponderance of evidence" under the
proposed changes to the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the
Brady Bill.
Not only that, but if the Attorney General sees it that way,
you would not be allowed to make a request for the reasons
you've been denied your Second Amendment rights.
Why? National Security.
Who knows, you could be a terrorist!
Might be. Could be. No telling.
Say what?
That's right. They don't even have to charge you or get an
indictment from a Grand Jury. They just put your name on a
list - and that's that.
It all goes back to 2004 when Attorney General Alberto
Gonzales told the Justice Department's Office of Legal
Policy to form a working group to review federal firearms
and explosives laws as they apply to background checks.
You know the kind. The ones they do when the sales clerk calls
a certain toll-free number back east and reads them your
application over the phone?
The goal: Determine if the government should seek additional
authority from Congress to prevent firearms and explosives
transfers to known and suspected terrorists.
Suspected.
Terrorists.
That's when Sen. Frank Lautenberg, (D-NJ), and Rep. Peter
King, (R-NY), stepped up and added the measure to a proposed
bill, S. 2820, the PROTECT Act of 2009 (Preserving Records
of Terrorist & Criminal Transactions Act) and S. 3117,
Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act.
There is a matching bill in the House, H.R. 2159, authored
by Rep. King.
The PROTECT Act would establish a national gun registry that
would require record-keeping of gun transfers for ten years
for anyone who is suspected of being a member of a terrorist
organization, and 180 days for all other criminal background
checks relating to firearms transfers.
In addition, there is the requirement for repeal of "certain
provisions that require the destruction within 24 hours of
identifying information for individuals who legally possess
firearms."
All such determinations would be taken out of the court
system and placed in the hands of the AG and the Justice
Department.
Things did not progress too far back then, but never mind.
Now it's back again. The Congressmen mentioned above have
re-introduced the same laws and they're up for consideration
in the current Congress.
If it passes, you could go to the gun store to purchase a
firearm and the clerk on the other end of the NICS line, the
one who performs the Brady Bill check, could just say that
you may not have a firearm. Don't sell the gun to this
person.
There would be no reason given.
National Security.
There would be no appeal because your name is on a list and
there is not telling why - at least, under these new laws,
if they pass and the President signs the bills.
National Security.
Yeah.
National Security.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Why Re-Elect Anyone?
What rational purpose is thereby served by that act?
Your government has:
Enacted laws that allow the seizure of property, both
public and private, and its subsequent acquisition by
foreign corporations;
Passed Bills of Attainder in contravention of the United
States Constitution;
Caused certain legislation to come to the floor and be
passed without bothering to read the thousands upon
thousands of pages of attendant verbiage;
Suspended or nullified such basic freedoms as the right to
an application for a writ of habeas corpus, the insistence
upon affidavits of probable cause in the issuance of
warrants or search and arrest, and the obdurate and
obstinate attitude that citizens have no right to keep and
bear arms;
Simply refused to hear, consider or even vote upon the
confirmation of judges and justices appointed by the
President, of cabinet secretaries and ambassadors, and has
caused the conditions in which "czars" have been appointed
to rule and govern without representative or senatorial
Congressional approval;
Taxed its citizens in amounts disproportionate between
classes of earnings and corporate status without so much as
a fare-thee-well;
Increased its debt by manifold proportions, thereby saddling
our grandchilren, great and great great grandchildren with
debt service that can only skyrocket as time goes by;
Prosecuted undeclared wars and other foreign adventures
without seeking the approval of Congress or the people;
Sought to "dumb down," confuse and frustrate the desires of
our youth who would like to learn the core academic skills
of written communications, mathematics and history;
and eagerly assumed the cost of doing business of very
large, vertically integrated multinational corporations
doing business in this nation in banking, securities,
insurance, energy and other key economic areas while the
leadership of these corporations blithely pay themselves
massive bonuses, seemingly to reward themselves for their
ineptitude.
Are term limits the answer? Hardly, since the entire
representative form of government is based on rules adopted
by both houses of Congress that reward seniority as a virtue
and penalizes freshmen for their lack of longevity and
experience.
To return to a strict construction of the Constitution is an
understatement of an emergency procedure which fairly shouts
for recognition.
I put it to you, fellow Americans.
Why the hell would you choose to re-elect anyone - anyone at
all - above the rank of dog catcher, doorkeeper or chaplain?
The Legendary
Your government has:
Enacted laws that allow the seizure of property, both
public and private, and its subsequent acquisition by
foreign corporations;
Passed Bills of Attainder in contravention of the United
States Constitution;
Caused certain legislation to come to the floor and be
passed without bothering to read the thousands upon
thousands of pages of attendant verbiage;
Suspended or nullified such basic freedoms as the right to
an application for a writ of habeas corpus, the insistence
upon affidavits of probable cause in the issuance of
warrants or search and arrest, and the obdurate and
obstinate attitude that citizens have no right to keep and
bear arms;
Simply refused to hear, consider or even vote upon the
confirmation of judges and justices appointed by the
President, of cabinet secretaries and ambassadors, and has
caused the conditions in which "czars" have been appointed
to rule and govern without representative or senatorial
Congressional approval;
Taxed its citizens in amounts disproportionate between
classes of earnings and corporate status without so much as
a fare-thee-well;
Increased its debt by manifold proportions, thereby saddling
our grandchilren, great and great great grandchildren with
debt service that can only skyrocket as time goes by;
Prosecuted undeclared wars and other foreign adventures
without seeking the approval of Congress or the people;
Sought to "dumb down," confuse and frustrate the desires of
our youth who would like to learn the core academic skills
of written communications, mathematics and history;
and eagerly assumed the cost of doing business of very
large, vertically integrated multinational corporations
doing business in this nation in banking, securities,
insurance, energy and other key economic areas while the
leadership of these corporations blithely pay themselves
massive bonuses, seemingly to reward themselves for their
ineptitude.
Are term limits the answer? Hardly, since the entire
representative form of government is based on rules adopted
by both houses of Congress that reward seniority as a virtue
and penalizes freshmen for their lack of longevity and
experience.
To return to a strict construction of the Constitution is an
understatement of an emergency procedure which fairly shouts
for recognition.
I put it to you, fellow Americans.
Why the hell would you choose to re-elect anyone - anyone at
all - above the rank of dog catcher, doorkeeper or chaplain?
The Legendary
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Obama To Proclaim Moratorium On Offshore Drilling
President Barack Obama is expected to announce an extension
of the moratorium on deep water petroleum drilling offshore
at a noon-time press conference.
White House sources also say the President will announce a
delay on approval of proposed offshore drilling in Virginia,
Florida and Alaska pending an investigation by a commission
studying the long-term environmental effects of bolder,
deeper exploration and drilling in those areas.
of the moratorium on deep water petroleum drilling offshore
at a noon-time press conference.
White House sources also say the President will announce a
delay on approval of proposed offshore drilling in Virginia,
Florida and Alaska pending an investigation by a commission
studying the long-term environmental effects of bolder,
deeper exploration and drilling in those areas.
21 Percent Medicare Cut Looms For Doctors, Elders
Speaker Nancy Pelosi vows, "We will not have that cut."
Medicare clients should look in the mail for a glossy
government brochure explaining how Obamacare "keeps Medicare
strong and solvent."
This is in the face of a fast approaching June 1 deadline
that will cause a 21 percent decrease in payments to doctors
if Congress does not act.
Medicare payments are already substantially lower than those
paid by private insurers, something one general practitioner
says makes it "harder to accept new Medicare patients."
Such deadlines are nothing new, but critics of socialized
medicine say that the history of brinksmanship with Medicare
cuts only adds on to the bill in the long run. Somewhere,
they say, there must be a reckoning.
Some doctors are starting to cast a jaundiced eye on the
entire problem, what with rising costs of staff, insurance
and supplies.
Obamacare put a huge strain on the Medicare budget,
according to financial analysts. To bail out senior medical
care would have pushed the total bill way over the $1
trillion, 10-year limit President Obama imposed during the
Congressional battle to pass his monumental "reform" package
aimed at covering all those uninsured patients in the U.S.
Elderly patients should keep a vigil on the unfolding drama,
though House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi is on
record, saying "We will not have that cut."
Medicare clients should look in the mail for a glossy
government brochure explaining how Obamacare "keeps Medicare
strong and solvent."
This is in the face of a fast approaching June 1 deadline
that will cause a 21 percent decrease in payments to doctors
if Congress does not act.
Medicare payments are already substantially lower than those
paid by private insurers, something one general practitioner
says makes it "harder to accept new Medicare patients."
Such deadlines are nothing new, but critics of socialized
medicine say that the history of brinksmanship with Medicare
cuts only adds on to the bill in the long run. Somewhere,
they say, there must be a reckoning.
Some doctors are starting to cast a jaundiced eye on the
entire problem, what with rising costs of staff, insurance
and supplies.
Obamacare put a huge strain on the Medicare budget,
according to financial analysts. To bail out senior medical
care would have pushed the total bill way over the $1
trillion, 10-year limit President Obama imposed during the
Congressional battle to pass his monumental "reform" package
aimed at covering all those uninsured patients in the U.S.
Elderly patients should keep a vigil on the unfolding drama,
though House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi is on
record, saying "We will not have that cut."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
