Sweet Justice: Susan Roesgen’s contract at CNN will not be renewed

I love it, when stuff like this happens to people like her:

Breaking: TVNewser has learned CNN correspondent Susan Roesgen’s contract will not be renewed and she will be leaving the network.

Roesgen, you’ll recall, was criticized for her coverage at the tax day tea parties in April, when she said the event she was covering in Chicago was, “anti-CNN since this is highly promoted by the right-wing, conservative network Fox.”

Roesgen took a break for a few weeks after that reporting and returned to the air in May covering the Drew Peterson arrest. Most recently, she covered Michael Jackson’s death from Los Angeles. Roesgen joined CNN in 2005.

When TVNewser asked whether Roesgen’s comments at the Chicago tea party rally had anything to do with her not being renewed, a CNN spokesperson said, “I can’t comment on personnel matters.”

via Susan Roesgen Out at CNN – mediabistro.com: TVNewser.

Of course, Liberal Blogger Zander the Stupid trots out a silly straw-man argument:

Perhaps we should apply the same journalistic integrity standards to, say, FOX morning host Brian Kilmeade’s recent antics.

Nice try dude; but Kilmeade’s antics, while facepalm worthy, never rise to level of stupidity, not to mention condensation of working class in this country; of Roesgen.

Dan Riehl writes:

Actually, I hope she gets another gig. Out of work is still out of work

With all due respect to Dan; BULLSHIT! I personally hope the little harpy sits out of work, for at least a couple of year. Let her feel the pain of her Obama-Massiah! Let her experience MY WORLD for a year or so. How it feels to have NO MONEY coming in, with bills coming in and no way to pay for them. Sorry Dan, the bitch had it coming; and honestly? It could not have happened to a better person.

Others on this sweet story: AmSpecBlog, Gateway Pundit, NewsBusters.org, Pajamas Media, American Power, Chicago Boyz, Moe Lane, Founding Bloggers, The Other McCain, Macsmind,

Quote of the Day

Oh, yes. Obama also promises everybody a college education.

Coming to America to feast on this cornucopia of freebies is the   world. One million to 2 million immigrants, legal and illegal,  arrive every year. They come with fewer skills and less education than Americans, and consume more tax dollars than they contribute  by three to one.

Wise Latina women have more babies north of the border than they do in Mexico and twice as many here as American women.

As almost all immigrants are now Third World people of color, they qualify for ethnic preferences in hiring and promotions and admissions to college over the children of Americans

All of this would have astounded and appalled the Founding Fathers, who after all, created America — as they declared loud and clear in the Constitution — “for ourselves and our posterity.”

China saves, invests and grows at 8 percent. America, awash in debt, has a shrinking economy, a huge trade deficit, a gutted industrial base, an unemployment rate surging toward 10 percent and a money supply that’s swollen to double its size in a year. The 20th century may have been the American Century. The 21st shows another pattern.

“The United States is declining as a nation and a world power with mostly sighs and shrugs to mark this seismic event,” writes Les Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, in CFR’s Foreign Affairs magazine. “Astonishingly, some people do not appear to realize that the situation is all that serious.”

Even the establishment is starting to get the message.

Follow-Up: Clean up on Freeway Accident and Fire Begins; EnviroNuts Come out in Force.

The Freeway Clean up begins….

Via WXYZ-TV:

Quote:

The damage is being assessed at 9 Mile Road and I-75 after Wednesday night’s massive tanker explosion in Hazel Park.

Northbound and Southbound I-75 is shut down in both directions from 8 mile to I-696 and will remain closed until further notice.

Three vehicles were involved in the accident – the tanker truck, a Meijer semi-truck and a car. The tanker was carrying more than 13,000 gallons of gas and approximately 4,000 gallons of diesel when it exploded right under the 9 Mile overpass.

The intense heat of the explosion forced the overpass to collapse onto the freeway below as hundreds of people watched, stunned by what was happening.

Amazingly, no one was killed. Three people were taken to Beaumont hospital with non-life threatening injuries. They were the 44-year-old tanker driver Michael St. John of Armada, the 38-year-old driver of the Meijer truck Jody Cicero of Monroe, and the 27-year-old driver of the car Saied Haidarian-Shahri of Clawson. All three have been released from the hospital.

Police tell Action News Haidarian-Shahri may have lost control of the vehicle and hit the tanker.

A driver who was stopped at a light just ahead of the overpass, told Action News she saw the explosion and flames engulf the bridge. Mary Greiv says she was "in shock" by what she saw. "Oh my god, I’m so grateful to God that I’m alive because I was right there," Greiv told Action News.

Another witness says she actually felt the explosions from a distance. "I’ve never been in an earthquake type situation, but I would dare say that’s what it felt like – like an aftershock."

I am just glad that no one was actually killed in the accident. I mean, the fact those drivers had the frame of mind and the wits about them to get the heck out of dodge before the fire really hit says quite a bit about them. Of course, now your EnviroNuts are out in force:

Via WXYZ-TV:

Video:

Quote:

Once the raging inferno was brought under control following the I-75 accident Wednesday night, environmental concerns emerged.

Ferndale sent a half-million gallons of water to help extinguish the flames.

Also involved, thousands of gallons of fuel inside the tanker that had to go somewhere.

Ferndale DPW officials were up through the night working with the EPA and other agencies.

They were working to figure out where the water went underground in the sewers.

Thursday, crews pumped out the runoff and tried to determine the concentration of the fuel.

There are lingering concerns about fumes that could possibly ignite.

That’s the main concern, because experts can control the flow of anything in the sewer systems.

Fuel left on the road was being soaked up by sand.

There never was a threat to drinking water.

Heh… "ZOMG! Some gasoline and Diesel got into the water and the sewer! We might have to flush it out!" Liberals are such morons, I’ll tell ya!  That Gas and Diesel was so damn diluted from all that water, that what did not burn off was so watered down; the chances of it exploding were slim to none. But then again, this is liberal Michigan. :loser: :struggle:

Anyways, the mess is being cleaned and the overpass will be fixed. The real kicker is, they just rebuilt that overpass; a year ago! D’OH! DohRolling on the floorLaughing I would be willing to bet, that the guys who worked on that little project let out a groan when they found out what happened. Waiting I mean, I could just hear it now; "They could have picked any overpass on that freeway, but they just had to pick the one we worked on!" Angry

chodun2005One thing I will say here is this; Cheryl Chodun is the best. My Mom alerted me to the fact that this accident was happening. She told me to turn to channel 4, which is WDIV in the local area here. They had a lousy picture. So, I flipped over to WXYZ-TV, which is channel 7 here in the local area. There was good ol’ Cheryl Chodun; practically standing on top of the tanker saying stuff like, "Man, this is a really big fire!" God Love her. She really does a excellent job, even it does mean standing way too close to a tanker, that they had no idea, at the time, what was exactly in the taker itself. Heck, even Bill Proctor was not even that brave, He was at least a block away. Not Cheryl, she would have been helping put out the fire, if they would have allowed it.

Update Friday 3:22 A.M. (I really should be in bed…Yawn): I Wrote Cheryl Chodun an e-mail, letting her know that I wrote about her. Much to my shock and surprise; she replied! SurpriseHypnotized Here’s Mrs. Chodun’s Reply:

Thanks for the kind words and thanks for watching us!  I was pretty close but we were up-wind, not in the fumes or smoke and while I am pretty passionate and intense about my job, I think I will leave the fire-fighting to the experts!  To be honest, I was really hoping the explosions were over as I was talking…and talking…for about 2 hours.

All the best to you,

Cheryl

Thanks for reply Mrs. Chodun. Keep up the good work. Big GrinBatting EyelashesHappy

I was not aware that Al Sharpton was looking for help

First off, let me say that I think Cap and Trade is wrong, will kill jobs and so on.

But this is totally disgusting:

Some of my fellow Conservatives are loving it. I personally found it to be most offensive and quite childish. The man was being outmaneuvered and instead of trying to argue the point; he chose to play the race card. How convenient.  :pissedoff:

Al Sharpton would have been proud. So would John Podhoretz possibly.

Not that I am defending Boxer, she is an idiot. But the worst way to fight idiocy; is with MORE idiocy.

Color me among those who are quite unimpressed. :smug:

Others: Townhall.com, Weekly Standard, The Other McCain, Say Anything, Wonk Room, Gateway Pundit and Weasel Zippers

Rationing Healthcare? They already do! It’s called Health Insurance.

I saw this today on the Meme tracker and I wanted to really avoid it. Because I just do not feel that I cannot speak on Healthcare in a objective form, because it is quite the personal issue with me.

I have no healthcare insurance at all. :-((

Anyone this is in the New York Times Magazine:

You have advanced kidney cancer. It will kill you, probably in the next year or two. A drug called Sutent slows the spread of the cancer and may give you an extra six months, but at a cost of $54,000. Is a few more months worth that much?

If you can afford it, you probably would pay that much, or more, to live longer, even if your quality of life wasn’t going to be good. But suppose it’s not you with the cancer but a stranger covered by your health-insurance fund. If the insurer provides this man — and everyone else like him — with Sutent, your premiums will increase. Do you still think the drug is a good value? Suppose the treatment cost a million dollars. Would it be worth it then? Ten million? Is there any limit to how much you would want your insurer to pay for a drug that adds six months to someone’s life? If there is any point at which you say, “No, an extra six months isn’t worth that much,” then you think that health care should be rationed.

In the current U.S. debate over health care reform, “rationing” has become a dirty word. Meeting last month with five governors, President Obama urged them to avoid using the term, apparently for fear of evoking the hostile response that sank the Clintons’ attempt to achieve reform. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published at the end of last year with the headline “Obama Will Ration Your Health Care,” Sally Pipes, C.E.O. of the conservative Pacific Research Institute, described how in Britain the national health service does not pay for drugs that are regarded as not offering good value for money, and added, “Americans will not put up with such limits, nor will our elected representatives.” And the Democratic chair of the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Max Baucus, told CNSNews in April, “There is no rationing of health care at all” in the proposed reform.

Remember the joke about the man who asks a woman if she would have sex with him for a million dollars? She reflects for a few moments and then answers that she would. “So,” he says, “would you have sex with me for $50?” Indignantly, she exclaims, “What kind of a woman do you think I am?” He replies: “We’ve already established that. Now we’re just haggling about the price.” The man’s response implies that if a woman will sell herself at any price, she is a prostitute. The way we regard rationing in health care seems to rest on a similar assumption, that it’s immoral to apply monetary considerations to saving lives — but is that stance tenable?

Health care is a scarce resource, and all scarce resources are rationed in one way or another. In the United States, most health care is privately financed, and so most rationing is by price: you get what you, or your employer, can afford to insure you for. But our current system of employer-financed health insurance exists only because the federal government encouraged it by making the premiums tax deductible. That is, in effect, a more than $200 billion government subsidy for health care. In the public sector, primarily Medicare, Medicaid and hospital emergency rooms, health care is rationed by long waits, high patient copayment requirements, low payments to doctors that discourage some from serving public patients and limits on payments to hospitals.

The case for explicit health care rationing in the United States starts with the difficulty of thinking of any other way in which we can continue to provide adequate health care to people on Medicaid and Medicare, let alone extend coverage to those who do not now have it. Health-insurance premiums have more than doubled in a decade, rising four times faster than wages. In May, Medicare’s trustees warned that the program’s biggest fund is heading for insolvency in just eight years. Health care now absorbs about one dollar in every six the nation spends, a figure that far exceeds the share spent by any other nation. According to the Congressional Budget Office, it is on track to double by 2035.

Now the Right Wing Blogs are doing some seriously loud howling about this right here. I guess that I break away from that pack. I tend to be a bit more clearer thinking about it. Hence my Moderate label. For some better perspective, Riverdaughter over at The Confluence, who is a Moderate Democrat; puts some of this in perspective:

Peter Singer is an ethicist who espouses a utilitarian view of ethics, meaning that his interpretation of general welfare extends to an economic calculation of costs versus benefits. For example, he proposes that it is acceptable to identify specific measures of when a treatment is effective enough to warrant the cost of providing such treatment.

[….]

First, it is critical to note that healthcare is already “rationed” in our country. It is “rationed” each and every day when the uninsured or under-insured are denied the same high quality treatments afforded to those without financial constraints. Anyone who has seen Michael Moore’s movie “Sicko” saw through this film the soulless rationing of treatment in our country such as how the poor and indigent were treated by a for-profit hospital that dumped them on a street corner after providing only minimal care. I will never forget the morning I broke down in tears after reading about a man in our community who had cancer, lost his job and with it his health insurance. His statement “I’m just waiting to die because I cannot afford the chemotherapy drugs” exposed the unimaginable truth that our society is willing to allow people to die with little protest from its citizens.  If this is already unacceptable, why would we want to factor such a strategy into any plan we devise?

Now, I have a great deal of respect for Peter Singer and his general view of the world, but his utilitarian ethical approach to healthcare reform in our country is one I cannot embrace; and the reason I cannot embrace it is because our political leaders do not use a utilitarian view when dealing with banks, Wall Street barons, and corporations. How does a society continue to exist when those who have little are turned away from life saving treatments while the wealthy live in a world where money is no object? There is something inherently wrong with standing before a nation and acting as though there is no limit to the funds our country should expend so that banks and Wall Street traders are allowed to continue to feed at the trough of excess, yet a discussion over saving the lives of our fellow citizens erodes into debate over cutting costs. Yet this is exactly what our legislators and president are doing to us on a daily basis — on both sides of the political aisle.

I agree with on all point, except when it comes to Michael Moore. Michael Moore, In my humble opinion; is a socialist Propaganda maker. Who yowls about the evils of a capitalistic society —- All the whole driving around in a limousine himself.  Moore is the perfect example of a Limousine Liberal; kind of like John Kerry.  However, she is correct about the whole Health-care issue. If you have good insurance, you get good care, if you have none. You get treated and released most usually.

Like I said; I do not have any sort of health insurance at all. But I just cannot get up and cheer madly about something ran by our Federal Government. I just cannot. Because this is same Government that allowed the Siege at the Waco Compound to happen; of which I have never forgiven Bill Clinton for, nor will I ever.  Also Ruby Ridge and the list goes on and on. Not to mention the Medicare and Medicaid systems, how screwed up they are.

However, the Compassionate side of me, that sees the suffering and poor getting stiffed; wants to see a better system. So far, from what I have read. Obama’s plan is STILL going to leave many people uninsured. So, what is the big change? There is not really going to be any change, of great importance anyhow. The far left and special interest people are figuring this out.

So, anyhow, hopefully I did not lose any Conservative credo in this posting. 😀 :-/

Others: Don Surber, Tammy Bruce, Say Anything, The Strata-Sphere, Winds of Change.NET, PoliGazette, Sweetness & Light and The Rhetorican

Breaking News: Major Tanker Accident, Explosion, Overpass collapse

There has been a horrific crash and explosion in Hazel Park, Michigan…

tankerfire

Video Via WXYZ, Shot earlier:

Better Via via Fox 2 Detroit:

The Story WXYZ-TV:

HAZEL PARK, Mich. (WXYZ) – A tanker truck–and possibly two or three semi trucks–has exploded in the vacinity of northbound I-75/I-696/Nine Mile Road in Hazel Park, causing a massive fire and explosion. Eyewitnesses say the tanker tried to make it under the Nine Mile overpass but the top of the tanker hit the bridge, causing the explosion. It is not known what the tanker was carrying. A Michigan State Police officer told Action News reporter Cheryl Chodun that there were “two or three” trucks involved in the explosion.

Preliminary reports indicate one person has been injured, but it is still not known how many vehicles are involved in the accident/explosion.

Michigan State Police say Eastbound I-696 ramps to northbound and southbound I-75 are now closed, and I-75 has been shut down in both directions at Nine Mile from the center of the fire. Response teams from Hazel Park, Madison Heights and Ferndale are at the scene, along with the Michigan State Police.

Multiple sources have told Action News that the Nine Mile Road overpass has collapsed at the center of the fire. The explosion, according to witnesses, occurred around 8:15 p.m.

According to what I’ve just heard from on WXYZ, the tanker driver is alive and a friend of theirs, which relayed it to the local news station that someone “T-Boned” or stuck his truck. Which caused the accident.

Consider this a live Blog, I will be posting more information; once I receive. If you are on twitter; if you have information or saw the accident or have a picture. Please, reply to my tweet and/or e-mail me via the Blog and I will post it here.

Update @ 1:24 A.M: Via WXYZ:

HAZEL PARK, Mich. (WXYZ) – Investigators at the scene of a massive tanker truck fire on I-75 say the fire is under control but crews are letting it burn itself out.

Officials say the tanker truck and two other vehicles were involved in the crash and explosion in the vacinity of northbound I-75/I-696/Nine Mile Road in Hazel Park Wednesday evening.

Officers say the tanker truck was hit by another vehicle and slammed into one of the concrete supports under the Nine Mile Road overpass. Multiple sources have told Action News that the overpass collapsed at the center of the fire. This overpass was rebuilt just one year ago; now it will have to be rebuilt again.

The accident and explosion, according to witnesses, occurred around 8:15 p.m. Police say three persons were hurt. They were taken to Beaumont Hospital with non-life threatening injuries.

A Michigan State Police officer told Action News reporter Cheryl Chodun that the tanker truck was carrying 13,000 gallons of fuel and 4,000 gallons of diesel fuel.

I’m sure this will be a mess for a while. Oy. 🙄

Update July 16, 2009: The Clean up Begins!

Breaking News: Firefox 3.5 vulnerable to JavaScript exploit

This is not good. 😯

A zero-day exploit affecting Firefox 3.5 is on the loose and Mozilla doesn’t have a fix. To make matters worse, the exploit is leveraging a JavaScript vulnerability. Simon Berry-Byrne of Secunia explains:

The vulnerability is caused due to an error when processing JavaScript code handling e.g. “font” HTML tags and can be exploited to cause a memory corruption.

Successful exploitation allows execution of arbitrary code.

The vulnerability is confirmed in version 3.5. Other versions may also be affected.

Experts recommend

In situations like this, security experts recommend that JavaScript be disabled until Mozilla comes up with a patch. That works, but then almost every Web site visited will be broken as most of Web sites use JavaScript.

My fix

I’d like to suggest a different approach, it’s a simple lightweight application that allows you to decide whether you want JavaScript to run or not. The application is called NoScript. I explain NoScript and other security add-ons in the article Firefox: Some security tips.

Final thoughts

It appears (unconfirmed) that the exploit is a variant of Milw0rm and could be serious. Be especially careful when you visit unfamiliar Web sites.

via Firefox 3.5 vulnerable to JavaScript exploit – Examiner.

I will be running Google chrome until it is fixed. Hopefully something comes up soon.

One of the reasons why I do not use WorldNetDaily as a news source

WorldNetDaily, I have always felt; is the National Enquirer of Conservative News. Well, they have given me another reason to feel that way. They are reporting on an American Solider, who is refusing to reporting for duty, because he does not believe that President Obama is an American citizen.

Quote:

His attorney, Orly Taitz, confirmed to WND the military has rescinded his impending deployment orders.

“We won! We won before we even arrived,” she said with excitement. “It means that the military has nothing to show for Obama. It means that the military has directly responded by saying Obama is illegitimate – and they cannot fight it. Therefore, they are revoking the order!”

She continued, “They just said, ‘Order revoked.’ No explanation. No reasons – just revoked.”

Confederate Yankee is baffled:

I have no ready explanation for why the military would rescind his deployment orders, unless they plan to keep him stateside to begin a disciplinary investigation against him. Frankly, for the sake of our nation, I hope this is the case.

Because if the Pentagon allows soldiers to simply declare Obama an an illegitimate Command in Chief—as the article would have you believe—it would seem to set a precedent that would lead to chaos in the military, allowing service members to question all orders for the executive branch. It would be anarchy.

WorldNet Daily simply must have this wrong. The larger ramifications of the case being dismissed for the reasons alleged by the attorney are too terrible to consider.

John Cole, A blogger on the left, that I happen to respect; is a bit more direct:

This guy is going to get court-martial-ed so quickly, brutally, and publicly that it isn’t even funny, and his lunatic lawyer thinks they have won something. It hasn’t even occurred to them that the order to deploy was rescinded because they are about to hammer him with disciplinary action.

I think I tend to agree with John here. That this ol’ boy is about get put through the meat grinder with the Military. 😯 :hypnotized: 😮

Congress Delivers a Healthcare Bill

You can read about it here.

You can read the details here. (Adobe Reader Required)

Commentary up the wazoo here.

A couple of rubs:

The proposal would also impose a “play-or-pay” requirement on employers, who would either have to offer qualifying insurance to their employees and contribute  a substantial share toward the premiums, or pay a fee to the federal government that would generally equal 8 percent of their payroll. Small employers (those with an annual payroll of less than $250,000) would be exempt from those requirements. As a rule, full-time employees with a qualifying offer of coverage from their employer would not be eligible to obtain subsidies via the exchanges, but an exception to that “firewall” would be allowed for workers who had to pay more than 11 percent of their income for their employer’s insurance. In that case, the employers would have to pay an amount equal to the per-worker fee due for firms subject to the “play-or-pay” penalty. Firms with relatively few employees and relatively low average wages would also be eligible for tax credits to cover up  to half of their contributions toward health insurance premiums.

Comment on the underlined part: Which would of course, run some Businesses out of business. Either you play along or pay taxes out the nose. The small Employers part is nice. But this would put the squeeze on the Medium to large businesses.

Of course, you’ve got your “Let’s Cover our backsides” Caveats:

Important Caveats Regarding This Preliminary Analysis

There are several reasons why the preliminary analysis that is provided in this
letter and its attachments does not constitute a comprehensive cost estimate for
the coverage provisions of America’s Affordable Health Choices Act:

• First, our analysis was based on specifications regarding insurance coverage that were provided by the tri-committee group and that differ in important ways from the “discussion draft” version of legislative language that was
released on June 19, 2009. The specifications that we analyzed are supposed to be reflected in the draft language released by the three committees today, but we have not yet been able to analyze that language to determine whether it conforms to those specifications. Our review of that language could have a significant effect on our analysis. More generally, as our understanding of the specifications improves, that also could affect our future estimates.

• Second, some effects of the proposal have not yet been fully captured in our analysis. In particular, we have not yet estimated the administrative costs to the federal government of implementing the specified policies, nor have we
accounted for all of the proposal’s likely effects on spending for other federal programs. We expect to include those effects in the near future, but we also  expect that they will not have a sizable impact on our analysis.

• Third, the budgetary information shown in the attached table reflects many of the major cash flows that would affect the federal budget as a result of implementing the specified policies, and it provides our preliminary assessment of the proposal’s net effects on the federal budget deficit (subject  to the caveats listed above). Some additional cash flows would appear in the budget—either as outlays and offsetting receipts or outlays and revenues—but would net to zero and thus would not affect the deficit. CBO and the JCT staff have not yet estimated all of those cash flows but expect to do so in the near future.2 Those additional cash flows would include the premiums collected by the public plan and its outlays as well as risk-adjustment transfers from plans with relatively healthy enrollees to plans with relatively unhealthy enrollees.

The Requirements:

The proposal’s major provisions—including the establishment of an individual mandate to obtain insurance, an expansion of eligibility for the Medicaid program, and the creation of new insurance exchanges through which certain people could purchase subsidized coverage—would be implemented beginning in 2013.

All legal residents would be required to enroll in a health insurance plan meeting certain minimum standards or face a tax penalty (described below). Individuals not required to file a tax return would be exempt from the penalty; exemptions for hardship and other  reasons would be determined by a new and independent federal agency overseeing the health insurance exchanges (also described below).

The penalty assessed on people who would be subject to the mandate but did not obtain insurance would equal 2.5 percent of the difference between their adjusted gross income (modified to include tax-exempt interest and certain other sources of income) and the tax filing threshold. The amount of the penalty could not exceed the national average
premium for plans offered in the exchanges.

New health insurance policies sold in the individual and group insurance markets would be subject to several requirements regarding their availability and benefits. Insurers would be required to issue policies to all applicants and could not limit coverage for people with preexisting medical conditions. In addition, premiums for a given plan could not vary because of enrollees’ health but could vary because of their age by a factor of two (under a system known as adjusted community rating). Individual policies that were purchased before 2013 and maintained continuously thereafter would be “grandfathered,” meaning that they would not have to conform to the new rules but would still fulfill the individual mandate. Existing group policies would have to conform to the new rules by
2017.

In order to fulfill the individual mandate, policies that were not grandfathered would have to cover a broadly specified minimum benefit package (which was assumed to have the same scope of benefits as seen in a typical employer-sponsored plan) and would have to have a minimum actuarial value of 70 percent and a limit on out-of-pocket costs no
greater than $5,000 for individual coverage and $10,000 for family coverage. (A health insurance plan’s actuarial value reflects the share of costs for covered services paid by the plan.) After 2013, the maximum levels of those out-of-pocket caps would be indexed to general inflation.

The proposal would establish a national exchange through which certain individuals and employers could purchase health insurance; states could also opt to operate their own exchanges (either one per state or one covering several states). All insurance plans sold  through an exchange would be required to cover the “basic” benefit package described above. “Enhanced” plans would have an actuarial value of 85 percent, and “premium” plans would have an actuarial value of 95 percent.

Except as specified below, individuals and families who enroll in exchange plans and have income between 133 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) would be eligible for premium subsidies and cost-sharing subsidies (see table below).

Federal premium subsidies in a given area would be tied to the average premium of the three lowest-cost plans providing basic coverage in the exchange in that area. The subsidies would limit an enrollee’s contribution to a percentage of income ranging from 1.5 percent to 11.0 percent (see table); those caps would not be indexed over time. The federal government would fully fund cost-sharing subsidies, which would increase the actuarial value of enrollees’ coverage to specified tiers based on income.

Say goodbye to your freedoms folks. Because in a socialist society. You have none, at all.

Besides all that, how the hell are we going to pay for all this? Seeing our Economy is in the toilet and all. Stupid is, stupid does, I guess. :struggle: :silly:

Update: Ed Morrissey, As always, does a bang up job analyzing this new Bill and as I suspected; There’s some crap in it. :pissedoff:

Just an FYI….

You may notice some new stuff in the comments section…

1. A comment preview…

2. Smiles :evilgrin: :rotfl: :yawn:

3. The Ability to Quote text now…. Bold and other stuff!

anyhow… adds a personal touch….

Enjoy! 🙂

Oh Wonderful….: The Economy is screwed to hell, worse than originally thought!

Hope and Change……and Unemployed:

The recent unemployment numbers have undermined confidence that we might be nearing the bottom of the recession. What we can see on the surface is disconcerting enough, but the inside numbers are just as bad.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics preliminary estimate for job losses for June is 467,000, which means 7.2 million people have lost their jobs since the start of the recession. The cumulative job losses over the last six months have been greater than for any other half year period since World War II, including the military demobilization after the war. The job losses are also now equal to the net job gains over the previous nine years, making this the only recession since the Great Depression to wipe out all job growth from the previous expansion.

Here are 10 reasons we are in even more trouble than the 9.5% unemployment rate indicates:

  • – June’s total assumed 185,000 people at work who probably were not. The government could not identify them; it made an assumption about trends. But many of the mythical jobs are in industries that have absolutely no job creation, e.g., finance. When the official numbers are adjusted over the next several months, June will look worse.
  • – More companies are asking employees to take unpaid leave. These people don’t count on the unemployment roll.
  • – No fewer than 1.4 million people wanted or were available for work in the last 12 months but were not counted. Why? Because they hadn’t searched for work in the four weeks preceding the survey.
  • – The number of workers taking part-time jobs due to the slack economy, a kind of stealth underemployment, has doubled in this recession to about nine million, or 5.8% of the work force. Add those whose hours have been cut to those who cannot find a full-time job and the total unemployed rises to 16.5%, putting the number of involuntarily idle in the range of 25 million.
  • – The average work week for rank-and-file employees in the private sector, roughly 80% of the work force, slipped to 33 hours. That’s 48 minutes a week less than before the recession began, the lowest level since the government began tracking such data 45 years ago. Full-time workers are being downgraded to part time as businesses slash labor costs to remain above water, and factories are operating at only 65% of capacity. If Americans were still clocking those extra 48 minutes a week now, the same aggregate amount of work would get done with 3.3 million fewer employees, which means that if it were not for the shorter work week the jobless rate would be 11.7%, not 9.5% (which far exceeds the 8% rate projected by the Obama administration).
  • – The average length of official unemployment increased to 24.5 weeks, the longest since government began tracking this data in 1948. The number of long-term unemployed (i.e., for 27 weeks or more) has now jumped to 4.4 million, an all-time high.
  • – The average worker saw no wage gains in June, with average compensation running flat at $18.53 an hour.
  • – The goods producing sector is losing the most jobs — 223,000 in the last report alone.
  • – The prospects for job creation are equally distressing. The likelihood is that when economic activity picks up, employers will first choose to increase hours for existing workers and bring part-time workers back to full time. Many unemployed workers looking for jobs once the recovery begins will discover that jobs as good as the ones they lost are almost impossible to find because many layoffs have been permanent. Instead of shrinking operations, companies have shut down whole business units or made sweeping structural changes in the way they conduct business. General Motors and Chrysler, closed hundreds of dealerships and reduced brands. Citigroup and Bank of America cut tens of thousands of positions and exited many parts of the world of finance.

Job losses may last well into 2010 to hit an unemployment peak close to 11%. That unemployment rate may be sustained for an extended period.

via Average length of unemployment highest since 1948. – WSJ.com.

So much for “The One” fixing the economy. Oh, right; he misread it. Looks like this Blogging gig get might be my only job for a long time to come.  The Left is now spinning saying it will never recover.

Here’s ol’ Floppy ears talking about it:

Others: Hot Air, Pajamas Media, QandO, The Strata-Sphere, Stop The ACLU and Balloon Juice

An Aunt’s Grief

(H/T MRC)


Watch CBS Videos Online

I wonder, what would Lew Rockwell say now?

Pssst! Hey Liberals! Sarah Palin knows what she’s talking about!

As I am sure you all know Sarah Palin wrote in the Washington Post, an Op-Ed about the purposed Cap and Trade legislation.

Government Palin Writes:

There is no shortage of threats to our economy. America’s unemployment rate recently hit its highest mark in more than 25 years and is expected to continue climbing. Worries are widespread that even when the economy finally rebounds, the recovery won’t bring jobs. Our nation’s debt is unsustainable, and the federal government’s reach into the private sector is unprecedented.

Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:

I am deeply concerned about President Obama’s cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president’s cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.

There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn’t lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America’s economy.

Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.

In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.

Of course, as if right on cue, every liberal in America is laughing at her and is saying that she is an idiot; and that she is trying to stay in the spotlight and so forth. Well, guess what? Not too long ago; on March 5, 2009. My own home paper, The Detroit News, wrote a similarly written editorial, basically saying the SAME THING. The Article itself is now offline, and you have to pay to get it. But luckily for me; I blogged about it.  The Article says and I quote:

President Barack Obama’s proposed cap-and-trade system on greenhouse gas emissions is a giant economic dagger aimed at the nation’s heartland — particularly Michigan. It is a multibillion-dollar tax hike on everything that Michigan does, including making things, driving cars and burning coal.

The president is asking for a system of government limits on carbon emissions. The right to emit carbon would be auctioned off to generate revenue for more government spending programs.

The president’s budget projects receipts totaling $646 billion through 2019 from the sale of these greenhouse gas permits.

The goal, according to the president’s budget outline, is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions such as carbon dioxide to 14 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.

Doing so will drive up the cost of nearly everything and will amount to a major tax increase for American consumers.

Such a tax will hit the Midwest particularly hard, which is why House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, told the New York Times, “let’s just be honest and call it a carbon tax that will increase taxes on all Americans who drive a car, who have a job, who turn on a light switch, pure and simple.”

The carbon tax will be paid by energy companies, manufacturers and public utilities, who will pass the cost on to their consumers. Michigan will be especially targeted. It gets 60 percent of its electric power from coal plants, and the state’s economy is still reliant on heavy manufacturing such as car and truck assembly and auto parts production.

Michigan will lose as carbon tax money is shifted to states with a greater presence of high-tech and service businesses.

The proposed tax would take effect in 2012 and has the very real potential to throw the nation back into recession, if indeed the expected recovery has arrived by then. It’s impossible to raise costs for such basics as manufacturing and energy production by more than half a trillion dollars over a decade and not have the effects felt across the economy.

The nation’s gross domestic product contracted at an annualized rate of 3.8 percent in last year’s fourth quarter — the worst economic record in nearly three decades. Is this really a good time to be talking about a carbon tax? How will such talk impact investment decisions?

Obama promises to use some of the revenues for tax relief for certain workers and some of the rest for subsidies for alternative energy. But that won’t make up for the damage this huge new tax will do to the economy, especially in Michigan.

So, maybe, perhaps maybe, Sarah Palin is not as stupid as these liberals want to make her out to be. At least, she right on point about this Cap and Trade Legislation. It would raise taxes and be a job killer for Michigan and yes, for the rest of the Country.

Others, Yes, Including idiot liberals who are mocking her: The Fix, The Atlantic Business Channel, The New Republic, The Huffington Post, Washington Wire, The Daily Dish, The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room, Ezra Klein, Boston Globe, Hot Air, Right Wing News, PERRspectives, PoliGazette, The Strata-Sphere, Wake up America, Moe Lane, The Note, The Daley Gator, Democratic Strategist, Zandar Versus The Stupid, NY Daily News, The Politico, The Swamp, NewsBusters.org, No More Mister Nice Blog, Gawker, Gathering of Eagles: NY, Sister Toldjah, YID With LID, Macsmind, Classical Values, GOP 12, Stop The ACLU, TBogg, American Power, Real Clear Politics, Green Inc., Gateway Pundit, Cold Fury, PoliBlog, Balloon Juice, Latest Open Salon Blog and Left in the West