I received this letter from a friend and I really think it hits the nail on the head as to why we are in such difficult times. Thanks for allowing me to use it Ron.
OBAMA'S "CZARS"-- Read who is really running our country and realize what their job positions are :
OBAMA'S CZARS
CZAR Position Summary
Richard Holbrooke
Afghanistan Czar
Ultra liberal anti gun former Gov. of New Mexico. Pro Abortion and legal drug use. Dissolve the 2nd Amendment
Ed Montgomery
Auto recovery Czar
Black radical anti business activist. Affirmative Action and Job Preference for blacks. Univ of Maryland Business School Dean teaches US business has caused world poverty. ACORN board member. Communist DuBois Club member.
Jeffrey Crowley
AIDS Czar
Radical Homosexual.. A Gay Rights activist. Believes in Gay Marriage and especially, a Special Status for homosexuals only, including complete free health care for gays.
Alan Bersin
Border Czar
The former [failed] superintendent of San Diego Pub. Ed. Ultra Liberal friend of Hilary Clinton. Served as Border Czar under Janet Reno – to keep borders open to illegal’s without interference from US
David J. Hayes
California Water Czar
Sr. Fellow of radical environmentalist group, “Progress Policy”. No training or experience in water management whatsoever.
Ron Bloom
Car Czar
Auto Union worker. Anti business & anti nuclear. Has worked hard to force US auto makers out of business. Sits on the Board of Chrysler which is now Auto Union owned. How did this happen?
Dennis Ross
Central Region Czar
Believes US policy has caused Mid East wars. Obama apologist to the world. Anti gun and completely pro abortion.
Lynn Rosenthal
Domestic Violence Czar
Director of the National Network to End Domestic Violence. Vicious anti male feminist. Supported male castration. Imagine?
Gil Kerlikowske
Drug Czar
devoted lobbyist for every restrictive gun law proposal, Former Chief of Police in Liberal Seattle. Believes no American should own a firearm. Supports legalization of all drugs
Paul Volcker
E conomic Czar
Head of Fed Reserve under Jimmy Carter when US economy nearly failed. Obama appointed head of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board which engineered the Obama economic disaster to US economy.. Member of anti business “Progressive Policy” organization
Carol Brower
Energy and Environment Czar
Political Radical Former head of EPA - known for anti-business activism. Strong anti-gun ownership.
Joshua DuBois
Faith Based Czar
Political Black activist-Degree in Black Nationalism. Anti gun ownership lobbyist.
Cameron Davis
Great Lakes Czar
Chicago radical anti business environmentalist. Blames George Bush for “Poisoning the water that minorities have to drink.” No experience or training in water management.
395 Search Results for "rights"
Sort by:
- most recent
- highest rated
- most viewed
- top favorites
- most comments
-
Who's really in charge?
- From: dlindberg102
-
Description:
- Blog post
- 1 day ago
- Views: 52
-
Only in America
- From: starrman1
-
Description:
ONLY IN AMERICA .....WE SPEND BILLIONS BECAUSE WE CAN'T LET GM AND CHRYSLER GO BANKRUPT, AND THEN, STILL ALLOW GM and CHRYSLER GO BANKRUPT.
ONLY IN AMERICA ....CAN CONGRESS FORCE FANNIE AND FREDDIE TO BUY SUBPRIME LOANS, AND THEN BLAME FANNIE AND FREDDIE FOR BUYING SUBPRIME LOANS. THEN FIRE THE CEO'S WITH GIANT SEVERENCE PACKAGES AND NATIONALIZE THE COMPANIES SO THE TAX PAYERS CAN PAY OFF ALL THE DEBT!!
ONLY IN AMERICA ....A FINANCIAL CRISIS REQUIRES SWIFT ACTION BY CONGRESS TO PASS A BILL WITHOUT READING IT, THEN THEY GO ON VACATION FOR THREE DAYS BEFORE THE PRESIDENT FINDS THE TIME TO SIGN IT.
ONLY IN AMERICA ....YOU CAN BE LEGALLY ILLEGAL.
ONLY IN AMERICA ....CAN CONGRESS MAKE LAWS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO, OR INTEND TO, FOLLOW.
ONLY IN AMERICA .....THE VICE PRESIDENT DECLARES 'JOBS' A 3 LETTER WORD.
ONLY IN AMERICA .... CAN YOU GET A TAX REFUND FOR TAXES YOU DIDN'T PAY.
ONLY IN AMERICA .... CAN POLITICIANS BLAME OTHERS FOR THEIR OWN FAILURES.
ONLY IN AMERICA .... YOU HAVE MORE RIGHTS BEING ILLEGAL, THAN YOU DO IF YOU'RE LEGAL
ONLY IN AMERICA .... CAN YOU BE 13 AND HAVE AN ABORTION WITHOUT TELLING YOUR PARENTS, BUT YOU MUST HAVE A WRITTEN NOTE FROM YOUR PARENT EXPLAINING WHY YOU MISSED SCHOOL.
ONLY IN AMERICA ....DO WE WORRY ABOUT 3 GUYS THAT GET WATER UP THEIR NOSES, WHILE THEIR ASSOCIATES ARE BEHEADING CAPTIVES AND BLOWING UP CROWDS OF PEOPLE WITH SUICIDE BOMBERS.
ONLY IN AMERICA ....YOU CAN BE PRESIDENT WITHOUT HAVING A BIRTH CERTIFICATE.
ONLY IN AMERICA .... WHATEVER GOES WRONG WILL ALWAYS BE PRESIDENT BUSH'S FAULT.
- Blog post
- 2 days ago
- Views: 79
-
How To Save the News
- From: MeBubbleHead
-
Description:
This is actually the title of a story in the October 2009 issue of The Nation, written by William Baker. What bugs me about this story is Baker claims we Americans spend less than other democratic countries for public broadcasting. He used England and Canada, and Japan etc as examples of spending. But what he didn't include in his story was how much more people in those countries pay in taxes. So he wants to raise taxes to support artists and musicians? Obviously this guy is a true Obamaphite. When he spoke NPR he didn't say one iota on how much royalties they got from the movie "A Prairie Home Companion", and I would expect nothing less from those other socialist democracies than to have public broadcasting employees to sign away copyright rights, something our government probably doesn't do. Then Baker went on to suggest we would not be using the public broadcast services for any propaganda. I immediatley remember a NPR comedy skit where they did a Bush vs Obama insult type humor scene. All the jokes on Bush were cutting and of course the Obama jokes were light. Now isn't that what we call sublime ? But not sublime enough to go without being noticed!
- Blog post
- 3 days ago
- Views: 61
- Not yet rated
-
Sexy HOT Momma ~ Sarah Palin
- From: BornToBeWild
-
Description:
Face it Sarah...you are one HOT Momma, politician, and author! You carry your beauty on the outside just as well as you do on the inside! One thing is for sure, if you pose for photos, you give that photographer/company/individual photo rights which can be sold or shared with others if the price is right! This is nothing new in the world of celebrities so go with it, imbrace it, use it! It's something that can not be denied!
Even the Democrats have their own version line up political sexy women!
NEED WE SAY MORE!!!
- Blog post
- 3 days ago
- Views: 239
-
If God Was Truly Holy
- From: MeBubbleHead
-
Description:
I take the definition of holy to the max! It is everything you'll find in a dictionary, pious, irreproachable, sacred, free of sin, pure in heart. godly, etc. To me it is intelligence that has reached a plateau above all the rest, perfection of life, flawlessly superior morals and all the virtues wrapped up in one. If God, who I know isn't the creator of the infinite universe was truly holy he would stop the insanity immediately. God is an astornaut king, a Wizard of OzEarth, who may be very generous to the earth munchkins that live in the delusional fantasy of creation by whatever force of mental suggestion that afflicts them, but he is far from being God. The unwillingness to interact with human life here directly is suspiciously a reminder that God was born of evolution on some other planet. Whatever trials and tribulationshe has seen and visited is evidence that we must accept whatever meager handout is our due. "Mny are called but few are chosen, wide are the gates to death and destruction and narrow is the path to eternal life."Mtthew 22-14/ 7-13, a testament that not everybody born will find eternal life. God is a human! WE may be living on the planet of the Truman Show, where each and everyone of us is being watched by high tech,and that includes your every thought and action, by near invisible rods that circle the earth continuosly using computers and transmitters to instantly send your thoughts to Gods home planet, where we are some kind of super Tv reality show. As religion is important to them the show may be interactive, explaining why miracles happen to us somtimes. Perhaps the people on his planet have to pay for miracles here. The worse case scenario is they created us as a supplament for reincarnation on their home planet. As you should know reincarnation is a form of cannabilism and God the FAther may be a interglactic animal rights activist. He's gone so far as to breed with us to show the people of his planet that those he chooses will not be eaten. " And an angel called to all the fowl in heaven, come now let us feast upon the flesh of kings and kings captains and kings horses". Revelations Can you imagine being invited to rip Obamas soul up and eat from it? Have a Nice Day
- Blog post
- 4 days ago
- Views: 67
-
Our country deserves better
- From: dlindberg102
-
Description:
Am I so out of step with the majority in this country? Why is it that every time I turn on the TV or pick up a newspaper I find myself getting angry? This week I couldn’t believe that our illustrious Attorney General, Eric Holder was there on Television telling us that they were bringing our sworn enemies to New York for a civilian trial. Where in our Constitution does it say we have to give our legal rights to our enemies? In my mind I am asking who benefits from this stupidity, the families of the victims, the fire fighters who lost their brethren, the police and port authority who still hear the screams of the dying in their sleep. How about us, the general public who witnessed planes full of everyday people crashing into the buildings, or the bodies of innocent office workers hurling themselves out of the twin towers to keep from burning alive. None of the above is the answer in case you wondered. There is one answer that comes to mind but I can’t even fathom anyone could be so callous, It’s been stated that Attorney General Holders former law firm, the one that he will surely return to when this country finally regains its senses, represents several terrorists already. Could this be a motive? Are they that arrogant that they would even consider this?
Are we so intimidated by European opinion that it is really necessary that we close Gitmo? We have been so smothered in political correctness that it is affecting our ability to survive as a world power. Who has earned the right to judge our system of government? What part of Europe didn’t we save from tyranny? What would China be today if we hadn’t stopped the Japanese in WWII? How have our enemies treated our captives, from WWII through Korea, Viet Nam, or in The Middle East? The people held in Guantanamo have it better than they did in their own countries. I call them people only because I am so influenced by political correctness that I find it hard to call them what they really are. In our history we have always been the savior of the world not the bad guy. This administration seems to be of the belief that we have a lot to apologize for. Even though I didn’t vote for him I actually thought that after Obama was sworn in, he would see the world for what it really is and temper his agenda for the good of America. I was wrong, his agenda seems to be to destroy the America we grew up in and remake it into a socialist society. To accomplish this goal he has to break the spirit of our people and render them impotent to his will. He has surrounded himself with a group of people who actually despise our country. Socialist, Communist and some of the loudest voices against American freedom are entrenched in his cabinet and his army of Czars.
In history we learn what is in our future, if you bother to read the history of Germany and the Soviet Union you will see where we are headed. When the President goes to Copenhagen and signs the treaty on Global Warming, we as a sovereign nation will cease to exist. When we give others the right to make and enforce our laws we will have fought all wars, and left all our battle fields littered with our dead for nothing. America will no longer be the shinning city on the hill that so many have held in reverence. The United States that has been the benefactor to the world deserves better. Shout and shout loud, make these egotistical, narcissists hear your demands. Let them know that this is our land, and we’ll defend it with all we have. - Blog post
- 6 days ago
- Views: 102
-
Protest NYC Terrorist Trial
- From: RightAway
-
Description:
It is clear to me that the Usurper in Chief, and his conflict of interest driven Attorney General are hell bent in bringing down the foundations of our great country. This trial is a slap in the face to fine citizens of NYC and the friends and family who lost loved ones on 9/11.
There is a site you can visit: www.thebravest.com . The site is supported by the NYFD, and memorializes those brave men and women who lost their lives trying to save others that historic and horrific day.
On this site you can add you name to the long list in a letter of protest to Obama, the letter is as follows:
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear President Obama:
On September 11, 2001, the entire world watched as 19 men hijacked four commercial airliners, attacking passengers and killing crew members, and then turned the fully-fueled planes into missiles, flying them into the World Trade Center twin towers, the Pentagon and a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. 3,000 of our fellow human beings died in two hours. The nation's commercial aviation system ground to a halt. Lower Manhattan was turned into a war zone, shutting down the New York Stock Exchange for days and causing tens of thousands of residents and workers to be displaced. In nine months, an estimated 50,000 rescue and recovery workers willingly exposed themselves to toxic conditions to dig out the ravaged remains of their fellow citizens buried in 1.8 million tons of twisted steel and concrete.
The American people were rightly outraged by this act of war. Whether the cause was retribution or simple recognition of our common humanity, the words "Never Forget" were invoked in tearful or angry rectitude, defiantly written in the dust of Ground Zero or humbly penned on makeshift memorials erected all across the land. The country was united in its determination that these acts should not go unmarked and unpunished.
Eight long years have passed since that dark and terrible day. Sadly, some have forgotten the promises we made to those whose lives were taken in such a cruel and vicious manner.
We have not forgotten. We are the husbands and wives, mothers and fathers, sons, daughters, sisters, brothers and other family members of the victims of these depraved and barbaric attacks, and we feel a profound obligation to ensure that justice is done on their behalf. It is incomprehensible to us that members of the United States Congress would propose that the same men who today refer to the murder of our loved ones as a "blessed day" and who targeted the United States Capitol for the same kind of destruction that was wrought in New York, Virginia and Pennsylvania, should be the beneficiaries of a social compact of which they are not a part, do not recognize, and which they seek to destroy: the United States Constitution.
We adamantly oppose prosecuting the 9/11 conspirators in Article III courts, which would provide them with the very rights that may make it possible for them to escape the justice which they so richly deserve. We believe that military commissions, which have a long and honorable history in this country dating back to the Revolutionary War, are the appropriate legal forum for the individuals who declared war on America. With utter disdain for all norms of decency and humanity, and in defiance of the laws of warfare accepted by all civilized nations, these individuals targeted tens of thousands of civilian non-combatants, brutally killing 3,000 men, women and children, injuring thousands more, and terrorizing millions.
It is morally offensive to offer Constitutional protections to individuals charged with murdering 3,000 individuals, in essence, to jeopardize justice for war crimes victims, in order to make an appeal to the Muslim world. The use of Article III courts after the 1993 World Trade Center attack didn't stop any of the subsequent terrorist plots, including the attack on Khobar Towers, 19 Americans killed, the 1998 East African Embassy bombing, 212 killed, the USS Cole bombing, 17 sailors killed. The attacks of 9/11 were a resounding rebuke to the view that federal courts were an appropriate counterterrorism strategy. Afterward, we didn't send law enforcement personnel to apprehend the perpetrators, we sent the United States military, who captured them and held them pursuant to the 2001 Authorization of the Use of Military Force (AUMF).
The American people do not support the use of our cherished federal courts as a stage by the "mastermind of 9/11" and his co-conspirators to condemn this nation and rally their fellow terrorists the world over. As one New York City police detective, who lost 60 fellow officers on 9/11, told members of the Department of Justice's Detainee Policy Task Force at a meeting last June, "You people are out of touch. You need to hear the locker room conversations of the people who patrol your streets and fight your wars."
On May 21, you stated that military commissions, promulgated by congressional legislation and recently reformed with even greater protections for defendants, are a legal and appropriate forum to try individuals captured pursuant the 2001 AUMF, passed by Congress in response to the attack on America. Nevertheless, you announced a new policy requiring that Al-Qaeda terrorists should be tried in Article III courts "whenever feasible."
We strongly object to the creation of a two-tier system of justice for terrorists in which those responsible for the death of thousands on 9/11 will be treated as common criminals and afforded the kind of platinum due process accorded American citizens, yet members of Al Qaeda who aspire to kill Americans but who do not yet have blood on their hands, will be treated as war criminals. To date, you have offered no explanation or justification for this contradiction, even as you readily acknowledge that the 9/11 conspirators, now designated "unprivileged enemy belligerents," are appropriately accused of war crimes. We believe that this two-tier system, in which war criminals receive more due process protections than would-be war criminals, will be mocked and rejected in the court of world opinion as an ill-conceived contrivance aimed, not at justice, but at the appearance moral authority.
The public has a right to know that prosecuting the 9/11 conspirators in federal courts will result in a plethora of legal and procedural problems that will severely limit or even jeopardize the successful prosecution of their cases. Ordinary criminal trials do not allow for the exigencies associated with combatants captured in war, in which evidence is not collected with CSI-type chain-of-custody standards. None of the 9/11 conspirators were given the Miranda warnings mandated in Article III courts. Prosecutors contend that the lengthy, self-incriminating tutorials Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others gave to CIA interrogators about 9/11 and other terrorist operations--called "pivotal for the war against Al-Qaeda" in a recently released, declassified 2005 CIA report--may be excluded in federal trials. Further, unlike military commissions, all of the 9/11 cases will be vulnerable in federal court to defense motions that their prosecutions violate the Speedy Trial Act. Indeed, the judge presiding in the case of Ahmed Ghailani, accused of participating in the 1998 bombing of the American Embassy in Kenya, killing 212 people, has asked for that issue to be briefed by the defense. Ghailani was indicted in 1998, captured in Pakistan in 2004, and held at Guantanamo Bay until 2009.
Additionally, federal rules risk that classified evidence protected in military commissions would be exposed in criminal trials, revealing intelligence sources and methods and compromising foreign partners, who will be unwilling to join with the United States in future secret or covert operations if doing so will risk exposure in the dangerous and hostile communities where they operate. This poses a clear and present danger to the public. The safety and security of the American people is the President's highest duty.
Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal that "the challenges of terrorism trials are overwhelming." Mr. Mukasey, formerly a federal judge in the Southern District of New York, presided over the multi-defendant terrorism prosecution of Sheikh Omar Abel Rahman, the cell that attacked the World Trade Center in 1993 and conspired to attack other New York landmarks. In addition to the evidentiary problems cited above, he expressed concern about courthouse and jail facility security, the need for anonymous jurors to be escorted under armed guard, the enormous costs associated with the use of U.S. marshals necessarily deployed from other jurisdictions, and the danger to the community which, he says, will become a target for homegrown terrorist sympathizers--like the recent Fort Hood shooter--or embedded Al Qaeda cells.
Finally, there is the sickening prospect of men like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed being brought to the federal courthouse in Lower Manhattan, or the courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia, just a few blocks away from the scene of carnage eight years ago, being given a Constitutionally mandated platform upon which he can mock his victims, exult in the suffering of their families, condemn the judge and his own lawyers, and rally his followers to continue jihad against the men and women of the U.S. military, fighting and dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan on behalf of us all.
There is no guarantee that Mr. Mohammed and his co-conspirators will plead guilty, as in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, whose prosecution nevertheless took four years, and who is currently attempting to recant that plea. Their attorneys will be given wide latitude to mount a defense that turns the trial into a shameful circus aimed at vilifying agents of the CIA for alleged acts of "torture," casting the American government and our valiant military as a force of evil instead of a force for good in places of the Muslim world where Al Qaeda and the Taliban are waging a brutal war against them and the local populations. For the families of those who died on September 11, the most obscene aspect of giving Constitutional protections to those who planned the attacks with the intent of inflicting maximum terror on their victims in the last moments of their lives will be the opportunities this affords defense lawyers to cast their clients as victims.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-conspirators are asking to plead guilty, now, before a duly-constituted military commission. Mr. President, the families of their victims have a right to know, why don't you let them?
Respectfully submitted,
The list of signatures is endless, and starts with family of one of a passenger of American Flight 77 that flew into the Pentagon.
You can add you name by clicking on this link: http://www.keepamericasafe.com/petition_signup/
If you are as outraged as I am, then let you voice be heard.
- Blog post
- 1 week ago
- Views: 236
-
Musical Chairs Sans the Music
- From: ExciteM
-
Description:
Obama has done a great job of shuffling in communist loving czars, then shuffling them out once they are "outed" for their radical backgrounds and value system.
The latest Maoist to officially leave (but not really) is Anita Dunn. But Dunn really isn't done. She is merely going back to the ultra left "consulting" firm where she once worked, even though, it has been reported she will continue to advise the White House on "policy". Maybe Obama thinks that by distancing himself from her (at least not giving her a desk in the White House) will make her shabby and failed attempt to undermine Fox News go away. At least in the public's mind.
But it gets better. Long embattled White House counsel Greg Craig is out, the Washington Post reports.
Craig "is expected to announce his departure as early as Friday, people familiar with the situation said, ending an embattled tenure in which he struggled to lead the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility," the Post wrote.
"Craig will be replaced by Bob Bauer, a prominent Democratic lawyer who is Obama's personal attorney." Guess who Bauer is married to? If you guessed Anita Dunn then you are smarter than a 5th grader.
Obama announced last week that Craig's deputy Cassanda Butts would become a senior advisor to the Millenium Challenge Corporation. Millenium is a government agency that tries to develop 3rd world nations, and was established under Bush's watch
The Obama White House previously denied numerous reports and chatter that Craig was on the way out. "Sounds like typical Washington parlor games to me. These rumors are wrong,” a deputy White House chief of staff, Jim Messina, wrote in an e-mail," as Politico's Josh Gerstein earlier reported.
Craig has been viewed as an ally of the human rights community in the Obama White House concerning the Guantanamo Bay closure issue and other debates.So who will be the next Marxist to lose their White House desk and salary? If it wasn't so serious, I'd think that I was back in Chicago.
- Blog post
- 1 week ago
- Views: 43
-
Ayers, Dohrn accuse Hillary of
- From: zcat
-
Description:
The duo went on to claim the 2008 presidential elections had racist undertones.
Unrepentant radicals charge 2008 elections had 'racist' undertone
JERUSALEM – Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign for the Democrat nomination deliberately appealed to white supremacy, fear and anxiety, charged longtime Barack Obama colleague and Weatherman terrorist William Ayers and wife, Bernardine Dohrn.
In a co-authored article in the socialist Monthly Review magazine, the two radicals argued last year's national elections had "racist" undertones and that President Obama's ascent to power can be used to "build a new society."
"[Hillary] Clinton flagrantly appealed to white voters' identity as 'workers' or 'women' – offering white people any reason to vote against Obama without saying he's black – and followed the ancient and dismal road of racial discourse that appeals to white supremacy, fear and anxiety," wrote Ayers and Dohrn.
The two referenced a New York Times opinion piece by feminist activist Gloria Steinem, "Women are Never Front-Runners," written on the eve of the New Hampshire primary. Steinem argued the gender barrier had not yet been broken and asked, "Why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one?"
Ayers and Dohrn charged Steinem had asserted a "superior victim status on the part of white, powerful women."
"The invisible race talk was about 'blue collar' or 'working class' or 'mainstream' or 'small town' or 'hockey mom' or 'Joe the plumber,' but we were meant to think 'white,'" they wrote.
Continued Ayers and Dohrn: "All the talk of Senator Barack Obama's exotic background, all the references to him as 'unknown, 'untested,' a 'stranger,' or a 'symbolic candidate,' or 'alien,' a 'wildcard,"'or an 'elitist.' ... The discourse was all about race, us and them, understood by everyone in the United States even when the words African American, black or white are not spoken."
The couple, however, took pride in Obama's win.
They said Obama's presidency "calls for us to have to agitate for democracy and egalitarianism, press harder for human rights, link the demands that animate us, and learn to build a new society through our collective self-transformations and our limited everyday struggles.
"We must seek ways to live sustainably; to stop the addiction to consumption and development and military power; to become real actors and authentic subjects in our own history," they wrote.
The two added, "Now their experience can be put to use mobilizing those same people to insist on the changes they imagined."
Ayers became a name in last year's presidential campaign when it was disclosed the radical worked closely with Obama for years.
Ayers, and his wife, Dohrn, were two of the main founders of the Weather Underground, which bombed the New York City Police headquarters in 1970, the Capitol in 1971 and the Pentagon in 1972. The group was responsible for some 30 bombings aimed at destroying the defense and security infrastructures of the U.S.
Characterizing Weathermen as "an American Red Army," Ayers summed up the organization's ideology: "Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, Kill your parents."
"Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon," Ayers recalled in his 2001 memoir, "Fugitive Days." "The sky was blue. The birds were singing. And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them."
Ayers brandished his unrepentant radicalism for years to come, as evidenced by his now notorious 2001 interview with the New York Times, published one day after the 9/11 attacks, in which he stated, "I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough."
Ayers posed for a photograph accompanying the New York Times piece that showed him stepping on an American flag. He said of the U.S.: "What a country. It makes me want to puke."
Ayers and Dohrn helped launch Obama's political career with a fundraiser in their home. WND columnist Jack Cashill has produced a series of persuasive arguments that it was Ayers who ghost-wrote Obama's award-winning autobiography, "Dreams from My Father."
- Blog post
- 1 week ago
- Views: 41
- Not yet rated
-
TRUTHS TO HOLD ON TO
- From: sgin_NV
-
Description:
Champion First Principles
Our first principles—Liberty first and foremost, Equality, Natural Rights, The Consent of the Governed, Private Property, Religious Freedom, The Rule of Law, Constitutionalism, Self-Government, and Independence—are powerful ideas. It is imperative that conservatives actively champion these principles in both the policy arena, as well as in our culture. It does not require a revolution in the common meaning of the word, but rather a radical reapplication of these principles to the policy questions of the day. We need to make these principles relevant again—so that they are an “expression of the American Mind,” as Jefferson said.
To this day, so many years after the American Revolution, our first principles—proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence and embodied in the United States Constitution—still define us as a nation and inspire us as a people. These principles are responsible for a prosperous and just nation unlike any other—a powerful beacon to all those who strive for freedom. They are the unchanging standards that inform and guide us in changing times. We must rediscover them so that we can reclaim our future.
Source: http://www.askheritage.org/Issues.aspx?ID=549
When someone asked Pelosi about her healthcare reform bill being unconstitutional ...she replied. "Are you serious?" One has to wonder if she has ever read the constitution. How could she believe it is lawful to force Americans to get healthcare or be punished? I see many lawsuits in the future unless, as I have said before, the supreme court does away with our constitutional rights as we have known them. JMO
- Blog post
- 1 week ago
- Views: 58
-
Political Correctness or Cowar
- From: bassman3
-
Description:
The political correct BS is really getting to be just way too over the top.... I mean this guy gunned down our troops ON OUR SOIL, WHILE YELLING "ALLAH ACKBAR"..... He also was in contact with Al-Quada.....I mean how much proof does one need!!!!
I Know the liberals are affraid to single out the muslims but all the attacks, WTC 93, 9/11, the Cole, Fort Hood, there are many others were done by muslims...I mean we didn't "profile" them, they profiled themselves!! Even some Americans that turned coat were muslim converts......
The dems LOVE FDR right.....well in 1942 FDR, the liberals liberal, went and rounded up all the japs after Pearl Harbor and wanted to know who they were why they were here etc......If they had nothing to hide they had nothing to fear, right? why would it be so wrong to find and interview all the muslims in this country? Don't give me the "what about their rights" crap, WHAT ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF THOSE THEY KILLED?
Obama is a damn coward...period...... he even gave his BS babbling before acknowledging the Ft. Hood incident....what an insult, IMO!!!!!!!!I am of sicilian backround.......if the mob was going nuts killing people and declaring war basically on our country, people, and values, I would expect the govt to question all of us of that backround.....Would I like it...no, of course not, but would I participate...yes; as long as they were decent about it and didn't hall me off to jail to be questioned......Why is it so terrible to answer some questions??.....is it not your duty to answer questions if the police come to you? Why is this any different..........?
Obama said, "The Cambridge police acted "stupidly""......( yet he had NO FACTS ON WHICH TO BASE HIS COMMENTS.......where was his comment on Ft Hood?......I mean this guy MURDERED PEOPLE......yet he didn't want to "jump to any conclusions"
A COWARD and an A_HOLE.....certainly not presidential IMO.....what do you think?
God help the victims and families.
- Blog post
- 1 week ago
- Views: 115
-
Justice Dept. Asked For News S
- From: zcat
-
Description:
*Another bully tactic from the White House....idiots!
In a case that raises questions about online journalism and privacy rights, the U.S. Department of Justice sent a formal request to an independent news site ordering it to provide details of all reader visits on a certain day.
The grand jury subpoena also required the Philadelphia-based Indymedia.us Web site "not to disclose the existence of this request" unless authorized by the Justice Department, a gag order that presents an unusual quandary for any news organization.
Kristina Clair, a 34-year old Linux administrator living in Philadelphia who provides free server space for Indymedia.us, said she was shocked to receive the Justice Department's subpoena. (The Independent Media Center is a left-of-center amalgamation of journalists and advocates that – according to their principles of unity and mission statement – work toward "promoting social and economic justice" and "social change.")
The subpoena (PDF) from U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison in Indianapolis demanded "all IP traffic to and from http://www.indymedia.us" on June 25, 2008. It instructed Clair to "include IP addresses, times, and any other identifying information," including e-mail addresses, physical addresses, registered accounts, and Indymedia readers' Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, and so on.
"I didn't think anything we were doing was worthy of any (federal) attention," Clair said in a telephone interview with CBSNews.com on Monday. After talking to other Indymedia volunteers, Clair ended up calling the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco, which represented her at no cost.
Under long-standing Justice Department guidelines, subpoenas to members of the news media are supposed to receive special treatment. One portion of the guidelines, for instance, says that "no subpoena may be issued to any member of the news media" without "the express authorization of the attorney general" – that would be current attorney general Eric Holder – and subpoenas should be "directed at material information regarding a limited subject matter."
Still unclear is what criminal investigation U.S. Attorney Morrison was pursuing. Last Friday, a spokeswoman initially promised a response, but Morrison sent e-mail on Monday evening saying: "We have no comment." The Justice Department in Washington, D.C. also declined to respond.
Kevin Bankston, a senior staff attorney at the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, replied to the Justice Department on behalf of his client in a February 2009 letter (PDF) outlining what he described as a series of problems with the subpoena, including that it was not personally served, that a judge-issued court order would be required for the full logs, and that Indymedia did not store logs in the first place.
Morrison replied in a one-sentence letter saying the subpoena had been withdrawn. Around the same time, according to the EFF, the group had a series of discussions with assistant U.S. attorneys in Morrison's office who threatened Clair with possible prosecution for obstruction of justice if she disclosed the existence of the already-withdrawn subpoena -- claiming it "may endanger someone's health" and would have a "human cost."
Lucy Dalglish, the executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of The Press, said a gag order to a news organization wouldn't stand up in court: "If you get a subpoena and you're a journalist, they can't gag you."
Dalglish said that a subpoena being issued and withdrawn is not unprecedented. "I have seen any number of these things withdrawn when counsel for someone who is claiming a reporter's privilege says, 'Can you tell me the date you got approval from the attorney general's office'... I'm willing to chalk this up to bad lawyering on the part of the DOJ, or just not thinking."
Making this investigation more mysterious is that Indymedia.us is an aggregation site, meaning articles that appear on it were published somewhere else first, and there's no hint about what sparked the criminal probe. Clair, the system administrator, says that no IP (Internet Protocol) addresses are recorded for Indymedia.us, and non-IP address logs are kept for a few weeks and then discarded.
EFF's Bankston wrote a second letter to the government saying that, if it needed to muzzle Indymedia, it should apply for a gag order under the section of federal law that clearly permits such an order to be issued. Bankston's plan: To challenge that law on First Amendment grounds.
But the Justice Department never replied. "This is the first time we've seen them try to get the IP address of everyone who visited a particular site," Bankston said. "That it was a news organization was an additional troubling fact that implicates First Amendment rights."
This is not, however, the first time that the Feds have focused on Indymedia -- a Web site whose authors sometimes blur the line between journalism, advocacy, and on-the-streets activism. In 2004, the Justice Department sent a grand jury subpoena asking for information about who posted lists of Republican delegates while urging they be given an unwelcome reception at the party's convention in New York City that year. A Indymedia hosting service in Texas once received a subpoena asking for server logs in relation to an investigation of an attempted murder in Italy.
Bankston has written a longer description of the exchange of letters with the Justice Department, which he hopes will raise awareness of how others should respond to similar legal demands for Web logs, customer records, and compulsory silence. "Our fear is that this kind of bogus gag order is much more common than one would hope, considering they're legally baseless," Bankston says. "We're telling this story in hopes that more providers will press back and go public when the government demands their silence."
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/09/taking_liberties/entry5595506.shtml?tag=mncol;txt
- Blog post
- 1 week ago
- Views: 49
-
Michael Connelly – Retired att
- From: zcat
-
Description:
"From Michael Connelly – Retired attorney, Constitutional Law Instructor, Carrollton, Texas
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.
To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularl y where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.
However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.
The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.
This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.
If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is “definitely depriving someone of property without the due process of law”.
So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.
I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American
people would hold me accou ntable.
For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
And another to the Bill of Rights:
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.
Michael Connelly
Retired attorney,
Constitutional Law Instructor
Carrollton, Texas " - Blog post
- 1 week ago
- Views: 36
- Not yet rated
-
Stand for Patriotism
- From: mcb1369
-
Description:
When the storm finally hits (and it will), those of you who supported the Obama administration will be affected as well. It won’t just be us gun owners or Flat Taxers, or Pro-Lifers that get hit. You’ll be right there next to us.
You see, you all thought the Conservatives were nut cases. You know, all of us who believe in God, small government, the Second Amendment, etc. And you thought you could just go back to sleep after the election was over. In your world, America will continue as before. You’ll still have the same rights, the same nice house, the same big screen television – it’s all good. After all, your high school football team won and the other team lost – go team! Even if you have bothered to look up from the daily grind since Nov 4th, you dismissed everything that has occurred as “politics as usual” – “the same old stuff”.
In the end, it’ll all be OK won’t it?
Not this time. There are a growing number of citizens in the US that are ready to fight to shut down the government’s grab of personal freedom, it’s blatant abuse of the constitution, and it’s attempt to replace the American way of life with socialism. You have to listen carefully to hear them, but they are there. I won’t start that fight, but when it goes down I will join it.
As for you, why… you’ll be shocked because you didn’t see it coming. And eventually you’ll be saddened when you see that we have truly lost the way of life with which you grew up. You’ll be saddened that your children and grandchildren live in a socialist, government-controlled gulag where their every movement from cradle to grave is tracked by the government.. But most of all, you’ll be saddened by the death of friends and relatives who are brave enough to fight and die for something they believe in. You know, McCain wasn’t much of a candidate. I’ll give you that. He was the lesser of two evils for most of us. I don’t blame you for not voting for him since, at the time, you didn’t know what we all know now. But at least John McCain was an American. He was a supporter of the American way of life and he understood that you can’t negotiate with terrorists. He understood and appreciated the sacrifice made by my father and other members of the Greatest Generation.
Mark my words friends. All across America groups are forming. They are forming out of anger and out of desperation at the thought of losing America. They’re not militia groups, terrorists as the Department of Homeland security would have you believe; they are Americans, loyal to the constitution. They are mothers and fathers and grandparents. They belong to groups like the Minutemen Civil Defense Corps, the Peaceful Resistance, the Constitution Party, the Young Conservatives, the 9/12 Project, and Grassfire. Right now they are fragmented, each focused on their own cause. But sometime in the next two years, our government is going to do something really stupid and these groups will come together. Watch for it, wait for it…get ready. It will happen.
When that event happens, whatever “it” is, our great country is going to plunge into chaos for a while. I pray to God that we make it through that time and emerge a stronger, smarter country.
Live Free or Die Fighting - Blog post
- 1 week ago
- Views: 62
-
AARP’s Stealth Fees Often Stin
- From: sgin_NV
-
Description:
Dec. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Arthur Laupus joined AARP because he thought the nonprofit senior-citizen-advocacy group would make his retirement years easier. He signed up for an auto insurance policy endorsed by AARP, believing the advertising that said he would save money.
He didn’t. When Laupus, 71, compared his car insurance rate with a dozen other companies, he found he was paying twice the average. Why? One reason, he learned, was because AARP was taking a cut out of his premium before sending the money to Hartford Financial Services Group, the provider of the coverage.
Laupus stumbled onto something that many members of the world’s largest seniors’ organization don’t know: The group, formerly called American Association of Retired Persons, collects hundreds of millions of dollars annually from insurers who pay for AARP’s endorsement of their policies.
The insurance companies build the cost of these so-called royalties and fees, which amounted to $497.6 million in 2007, into the premiums they charge AARP members, according to AARP’s consolidated financial statement for that year.
AARP uses the royalties and fees to fund about half the expenses that pay for activities such as publishing brochures about health care and consumer fraud -- as well as for paying down the $200 million bond debt that funded the association’s marble and brass-studded Washington headquarters.
In addition, AARP holds clients’ insurance premiums for as long as a month and invests the money, which added $40.4 million to its revenue in 2007.
‘Fatting the Coffers’
“At the end of the day, it’s all about fattening the coffers of the organization,” says Thomas Orecchio, who was chairman of the Arlington Heights, Illinois-based National Association of Personal Financial Advisors until September. AARP, he says, is sponsoring insurance for its members at inflated prices.
“It’s the dirty little secret,” he says.
During the past decade, royalties and fees have made up an increasing percentage of AARP’s income, rising to 43 percent of its $1.17 billion in revenue in 2007 from 11 percent in 1999, according to AARP data.
Laupus, a former teacher in Baltimore, and millions of others joined AARP in the belief it would provide discounts, services and publications. The organization ranks behind only Consumer Reports and the American Red Cross as the most trusted large group that influences U.S. politics and business, a 2007 Harris Poll found.
AARP has helped millions with tax returns, estate planning and health care advice.
‘Turbulent Economy’
With stock markets around the world plunging, savings plans in turmoil and medical costs soaring, older Americans need an organization such as AARP in their corner.
“The turbulent economy puts more people in the difficult situation of being under- or uninsured,” says Iowa Republican Senator Charles Grassley. “That’s why we need to make sure individuals aren’t taken advantage of with misleading marketing, especially by a name brand advocate who carries a high level of trust.”
Grassley sent letters to AARP Chief Executive Officer William Novelli and state insurance commissioners Nov. 3 inquiring into whether the AARP misrepresented what is covered by some health insurance policies it sold. Four days later, Novelli announced AARP would review its marketing and suspend sales of those policies.
AARP’s mission to help seniors has been compromised by its reliance on royalties and fees, says Marilyn Moon, who was director of AARP’s Public Policy Institute from 1986 through 1989.
‘Conflict of Interest’
“There’s an inherent conflict of interest,” she says. “A lot of people there are trying to do good, but they’re ending up becoming very dependent on sources of income.”
Moon is now vice president and director of the health program at American Institutes for Research in Washington.
Novelli, who co-founded a public relations company in 1972, became CEO of AARP in 2001. Since then, the organization has increasingly focused on marketing as a means to increase revenue, Moon says.
AARP officials say the organization always gives priority to the needs of seniors.
“There is no conflict of interest between the marketing of products and services to our members and our policy work,” spokesman Adam Sohn says. “Policy always comes first.”
AARP declined requests to make Novelli available for comment.
‘Benefit From Our Brand’
John Wider, executive vice president of AARP Services Inc., a for-profit subsidiary, says AARP uses royalty revenue to fund its member services. In addition, he says, insurers selling products through AARP find royalty payments are worthwhile because AARP’s endorsement lowers insurance company marketing costs and increases sales.
“There is an efficiency they gain in being able to benefit from our brand,” he says.
Novelli, 67, has broadened AARP’s reach and increased its clout in Washington. The association recently joined with industry and labor groups in a campaign known as Divided We Fail. That effort is seeking ways to ensure health care for all Americans.
Novelli has expanded AARP’s marketing to include 17 types of insurance. The association collects royalties on each of those products. Its membership rose to 40 million from 35 million, and its total revenue grew to $1.17 billion in 2007 from $520 million when Novelli took charge.
Medicare Lobbying
Nowhere were AARP’s conflicting roles more evident than in its lobbying in support of a 2003 bill proposed by President George W. Bush to expand Medicare, the federal health insurance program for people older than 65.
The bill, which for the first time added a prescription drug plan to Medicare, passed by a vote of 220-215 in the House of Representatives and 54-44 in the Senate. Thousands of AARP members complained that the legislation was a bad deal for seniors because it provided incomplete coverage and raised costs for seniors with low income.
After the Medicare bill was signed into law by Bush in December 2003, AARP was able to expand its contract with Minnetonka, Minnesota-based UnitedHealth Group Inc., which underwrites AARP’s Medicare supplemental insurance plan.
AARP increased its annual revenue from royalties by $197 million to $497.6 million from 2003 to 2007.
Not the Least Expensive
AARP advertises that its Medicare supplemental insurance can save people thousands of dollars. While every type of supplemental policy sold by all companies must offer the same exact coverage under federal rules, AARP doesn’t sell the least expensive.
The AARP/UnitedHealth basic policy costs $582 a year more than a lower-cost competitor in New York and $428 more in Los Angeles, according to data on Medicare’s Web page. AARP spokesman Sohn says everyone should shop carefully.
“The products and services AARP makes available are competitively priced,” he says. “Price is not the only factor. Service and features need to be factored in to determine full value.”
AARP’s muscle on Capitol Hill is vested in the size and geographic reach of its membership, as well as its lobbying budget. The association donated no money to candidates in 2007, federal election records show.
‘AARP’s Clout’
“They don’t even have to give any campaign contributions,” says James Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University in Washington. “AARP’s enormous clout comes from the threat they could defeat people in Congress who don’t do what they want. They are the most powerful interest group in Washington.”
Rob Simmons, who served as a Republican congressman from Connecticut during 2001 through 2006, says he waited to learn AARP’s position on the 2003 Medicare legislation before deciding how to vote.
“Some people tore up their AARP cards in protest,” he says. “I told my constituents 10 days before the vote that I would wait to see what AARP had to say.”
Simmons praises AARP’s efforts to stand up for seniors. In 2005, Novelli fought President Bush’s plan to overhaul Social Security by creating private accounts. AARP launched what it called its largest political advertising campaign ever, using newspapers and television to attack the proposal.
As the president toured the country holding town meetings to win support, AARP sponsored its own forums nearby to criticize the plan. It argued that like an old-fashioned pension, Social Security should remain as a fixed payment to retirees -- and the money shouldn’t be gambled in investments.
AARP Won Battle
Responding to requests from the association, AARP members wrote or e-mailed Congress hundreds of thousands of times, AARP says. AARP won the battle, and Bush dropped the proposal.
“AARP in my opinion is one of the foremost defenders of the rights of senior citizens,” Simmons says. “It has the staff, expertise and national stature to be an organization to be respected.”
AARP has provided free tax preparation assistance to 47.7 million people with middle-range and low incomes. Other services include career counseling, driver safety training, financial education programs and home heating assistance.
To help pay for its advocacy, training and lobbying, AARP gets royalties and fees for selling insurance. In 2007, the group spent $157.2 million, about 13 percent of its revenue, on advertising. It runs daily -- sometimes hourly -- spots on television and Internet ads saying its insurance policies can save members money.
‘Compare Us’
Its Web page on car insurance says, “Get on the road to better coverage and bigger savings. Compare us to your current policy and you could save hundreds in the first year alone!” A TV ad for AARP’s Medicare supplemental insurance says customers can save thousands of dollars.
At the bottom of its insurance Web page, AARP says, “Insurers and providers pay a fee to AARP and its affiliates for use of the AARP trademark and other services.”
AARP has been in the insurance business since its founding in 1958. Ethel Percy Andrus, a former school principal, discovered that a retired teacher couldn’t afford an apartment and was living in a chicken coop.
Andrus worked with Colonial Penn Group to provide health insurance to retired teachers starting in 1947. She expanded AARP’s offer to include health insurance for all retirees 11 years later.
Expanded Marketing
AARP stopped selling basic health insurance for seniors in 1965 after President Lyndon Johnson signed Medicare into law. The organization continued to offer several kinds of insurance, including a supplement to Medicare, offering additional coverage.
Novelli has been able to expand AARP’s marketing, having co-founded New York-based public relations firm Porter Novelli. He and his partners sold the company for an undisclosed amount to Omnicom Group in New York, the world’s largest owner of advertising agencies.
From 1991 to 1995, he was executive vice president of CARE, an international group that fights poverty. From 1995 to 1999, he ran the Campaign for Tobacco-free Kids, which works to block cigarette advertising to children.
“There isn’t any organization like AARP, and Novelli understood it,” says Tess Canja, who was president of AARP’s 21-member board in 2001, when Novelli got the post. “He’s taken AARP a notch higher.”
‘Everybody’s Happy’
Novelli has reached out to younger Americans. TV commercials portray active middle-aged people, a switch from the scenes shown in the pre-Novelli era of elderly Americans sitting in wheelchairs.
In a 29-second video on YouTube, young and old people celebrate birthdays by blowing out candles, throwing cake, spinning in office chairs and ripping paper off packages while the British punk band Buzzcocks’ song “Everybody’s Happy Nowadays” plays.
“AARP is an organization for people who have birthdays,” a female voice-over says. “That’s because what we do, we do for all. Join us in championing your future, and the future of every generation.”
What AARP has done for Laupus hasn’t made him want to celebrate. The former social studies teacher, now a lecturer on films at Towson University in Towson, Maryland, says AARP let him down.
“I was under the assumption I would get discounts for automobile insurance, health insurance, house insurance,” Laupus says. Earlier this decade, he signed up for an AARP- endorsed auto policy for a 1997 Honda Accord and a 2002 Mitsubishi Lancer.
‘Best Possible Rate’
In 2007, he followed AARP’s Internet-based advice and went shopping for rates from other companies for the same coverage. He says that of the 13 companies he checked, AARP/Hartford -- a unit of the Hartford, Connecticut-based insurance company Hartford Financial -- charged $700 a year more than the average.
“I figured they would be negotiating for me as a large group and get the best possible rates,” says Laupus, a tall, gray-haired man who lives in Elkridge, Maryland. “But, dumb me, when I first bought their insurance I really didn’t check around to find out what other companies were charging.”
On March 16, 2007, Laupus wrote a letter to Novelli.
“I have been a customer of AARP/Hartford auto insurance for many years and never had a claim,” Laupus wrote. He told Novelli he had compared his rates with eight companies and found AARP/Hartford to have the highest premiums.
Price Shopping
Laupus says he checked four other companies and found the same. He wrote that AARP/Hartford billed him $1,444 annually for the two cars. Laupus says Geico Corp., the insurance company owned by Warren Buffett’s Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., offered a price that was half as much.
He then decided to lower that further by eliminating collision insurance on the Honda and raising the deductible for his Mitsubishi to $1,000 from $500. At the same time, he increased his bodily injury liability insurance to $300,000/$300,000 from $100,000/$300,000.
That brought the annual cost of insurance from Geico to $683.60.
In his letter, he explained those changes to Novelli. An AARP employee, Sharman Greber, replied two weeks later.
“I can certainly understand your concern over the cost of insurance coverage and would like to assure you that The Hartford’s goal is to provide the highest quality product at as fair a price as possible,” Greber told Laupus in an April 2, 2007, letter.
‘Dare I Say Kickbacks?’
Greber didn’t respond to requests for comment. On April 10, 2007, Laupus wrote back, questioning AARP’s dealings with The Hartford.
“What I’m asking, bottom line, is this: Does AARP have some ‘special relationship’ with The Hartford by which it receives commissions, incentives, rebates or dare I say ‘kickbacks’?” he wrote.
Greber replied on April 25, 2007, writing that AARP contracts with The Hartford and other insurance companies include royalties. She first wrote that AARP talked to The Hartford.
“The representative did compare the quotations you received from Geico and Allstate, but was unable to match Geico’s premium,” she wrote.
She added, “The royalty fee paid to the Association is used to finance the many programs and services of AARP. The Association produced and distributed more than 11 million booklets and brochures last year free of charge to help older persons become better informed about issues from caregiving and widowhood to housing and consumer fraud.”
Laupus responded on May 2, 2007.
‘Rather Selfish’
“I don’t purchase auto insurance to provide booklets and brochures about caregiving and widowhood,” he wrote. “This may seem rather selfish of me, but I purchase auto insurance to insure my auto.”
Laupus says AARP is playing games with words. “Notice it’s not kickbacks, it’s royalty fees,” he says. “What a great euphemism.”
David Snowden, spokesman for The Hartford, says his company offers competitive rates.
“While we lack information to speculate we could match the other company’s rate in 2007, there’s little doubt we could have come closer if Mr. Laupus requested the same policy features,” Snowden says.
Landscaped Atrium
After Laupus discovered his AARP car insurance rate was too high, he became determined to learn more about how his membership money was being spent. In September, he traveled to AARP’s Washington headquarters -- two 10-story buildings that are connected by an enclosed, landscaped atrium.
He strode into the lobby, dressed in khaki pants and a blue checkered shirt, hoping to take a tour. He noted the brass doors and the marble that stretched as far as he could see.
“It says to people that we’re a very wealthy organization and we can afford to spend your money,” Laupus says. After showing his AARP card and telling a guard he’d been a member for more than 20 years, he was turned away.
“We don’t give tours,” the guard told him. Laupus asked again, and the guard called AARP’s membership department, which also denied the request.
Alan Simpson, a former Republican U.S. senator from Wyoming who chaired a subcommittee in 1995 that examined AARP, says he’s not surprised the association keeps its doors closed.
‘It’s a Temple’
“It’s no wonder they don’t let you see,” Simpson, 77, says. “It’s a temple. Opulent would be the word.”
AARP spokesman Sohn says the building is closed to visitors so the staff can work.
“AARP takes the role of fighting for its 40 million members very seriously and this necessitates that our offices remain a place of business,” he says.
AARP says it uses some of the money it gets from insurance royalties to fund its efforts on behalf of seniors. But not everyone agreed its 2003 lobbying for a Medicare drug prescription plan was in the best interests of members.
President Bush pressed for prescription drug coverage for Medicare. He also wanted to turn administration of Medicare over to private companies instead of the government. AARP opposed the second goal.
Novelli and AARP’s lobbyists met with the Bush Administration and Congress and succeeded in removing privatization from the bill, says Christopher Hansen, who as AARP’s group executive officer for state and national initiatives oversaw the association’s Medicare lobbying.
‘We Forced That Out’
“We forced that out of the bill,” he says. “How? By refusing to support the legislation with that provision. It drew AARP into a big political fistfight. All AARP wanted was to get a drug benefit for its members.”
Thousands of AARP members said they objected to the legislation altogether. One reason was that the lowest-income seniors, people who had been using Medicaid, a federal health insurance program for low-income citizens, would have to pay more for medicine under the new law.
During the debate on the bill, two doctors at Harvard Medical School in Cambridge, Massachusetts, released a study that said the proposed changes would bring revenue to AARP at the expense of seniors.
“AARP derives significant income from the sale of health insurance policies, and stands to make hundreds of millions more under the Medicare Prescription Drug bill,” David Himmelstein and Steffie Woolhandler wrote on Nov. 22, 2003, as AARP was lobbying for the legislation.
AARP knew the proposal didn’t ensure complete prescription coverage, Hansen says.
‘It Wasn’t Perfect’
“It wasn’t perfect; it was flawed,” he says. AARP’s biggest concern was that the bill lacked adequate funding to fully cover the cost of drugs, Hansen says. Hansen, now CEO of Santa Clara, California-based AeA Inc., a trade association for technology companies, says Novelli had only good intentions.
Hansen also sympathizes with those who complained. “People who were against it had a right to be angry,” he says.
AARP felt it had to push an imperfect bill because it may not have had another opportunity to add a drug plan to Medicare, former board member Canja says.
“We thought our members could motivate Congress later to fix the things we didn’t like,” she says. After the legislation passed, 40,000 AARP members dropped out of the organization in protest, according to AARP.
For a While
Some members who didn’t quit have since concluded that their AARP-endorsed insurance costs are inflated. Richard Ostor of Indialantic, Florida, says he joined AARP seven years ago to get the lowest-cost car insurance.
He was satisfied with the insurance for a while -- until his rates started going up even though he had had no accidents or traffic tickets. In April, his AARP/Hartford premium rose to $950 a year. He shopped and switched to Geico after he found similar insurance for $640.
“AARP has great buying power, and people should be able to get the best deal,” says Ostor, 62, a retired divorce lawyer and bar owner. “AARP fell asleep at the switch or has a very sweet deal with The Hartford. This is unconscionable, what AARP has allowed to happen.”
Bill and Helen Cochran, an Abington, Maryland, couple who retired nine years ago, say they felt the same way when they learned they were paying more than they had to with AARP’s Medicare supplemental insurance.
Met at Shoe Factory
Relying primarily on Social Security income of just less than $1,400 a month, they had sold their 1,300-square-foot (121-square-meter) condominium and moved to a subsidized apartment less than half that size.
Bill and Helen, who married 34 years ago when they both worked at the Beta Shoe Co. factory in Belcamp, Maryland, looked for other ways to trim spending. They purchased AARP Medicare supplemental insurance.
At a picnic for seniors in June 2008, the Cochrans learned they were spending $1,079 a year more than Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co. charged for the same coverage. Bill, 72, says he called AARP to see if it could match the lower price.
“They didn’t want to hear that,” he says. “I told them I’d found a better price, and they didn’t ask me who I was going with, but they said they couldn’t do anything about it.”
Bill says his experience changed his view of AARP.
“I was kind of shocked,” he says. “They’re making money on the backs of the old people. I don’t think AARP is looking out for me.”
In the current economic crisis, $1,000 a year makes a big difference to a couple living on a fixed income, he says. “It just gets you to thinking about how much money they’re getting kicked back, and then we’re suffering by paying more for our premium,” he says.
‘Rates Are Competitive’
UnitedHealth spokesman Jonathan Stone says his firm’s insurance is affordable. “We believe our rates are competitive,” he says. “Our plans all give overall value.”
AARP-endorsed life insurance policies are also more expensive than comparable coverage by competitors, says Mark Maurer of Tampa, Florida-based Low Load Insurance Services Inc., which sells policies to seniors.
A New York Life $50,000 permanent life insurance policy for a 65-year-old man available through AARP costs $286.17 a month, Maurer found. He says the same man can buy a $50,000 policy for 51 percent less from Cincinnati-based Columbus Life Insurance Co.
After a half century of serving seniors, AARP may be slipping in its mission to members as its power grows, former AARP official Moon says.
“AARP grew often for the sake of growing, and not thinking about, Is this the best way to be?” she says.
With the U.S. economy suffering the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, AARP has to decide if charging higher insurance rates in order to bolster its revenue by $497.6 million a year is the kind of help that seniors need.
Source:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=a4OkPQIPF6Kg&refer=home
- Blog post
- 1 week ago
- Views: 42
-
An Immigrant In My Own Country
- From: MeBubbleHead
-
Description:
I grew up a army brat, and like most we moved from country to country every three years. At my age 13 dad retired and couldn't adjust to civilian life, so we moved from state to state every year until I graduated from high school. I was a mess psychologically and became addicted to drugs and alcohol very quickly.
I envied you Americans that had those one lifetime roots. Then one day I met a woman that had it all. She married her childhood sweetheart and they had a son and a successful life. One day they went to the seashore and she waited while father and son went sailing. They never came back, drowning from a capsized boat. This woman was a pathetic wreck, addicted far worse than me and prostituting herself for a fix. She had nothing to live for.
I outgrew my problems one at a time. Now I'm starting to feel like a immigrant again. I don't know if it's because of a black foreign like president, combined with the war , and this Ft, Hood shooting, and the insinuation that illegal immigrants will be getting free health insurance, and all the rest of our immigration problems, along with a higher minority birth rate. I'm growing to old to be left out in the cold. Whats going to happen to us real americans? Matt Damon in The Good Shepard was asked, "what will you people do? You don't have any family like the jews, blacks, muslims and( the question was being asked by an italian mob boss) us italians, we have our family and religion? Matt answered, we have our country. He is an american, like many of us that had ancestors come here in the 1600and 1700's from europe that have fully embraced America and have forgotten the old country. We are being overrun and our own peers are bending over to serve the left because of some pesonal gripe with the system. It may be smoking pot or sexual rights but it's enough to cause millions to be antiamerican.
Now this hispanic guy in Orlando that shoots 5 people is another problem. I feel sorry for him, he probably was a nice guy once. He'll probably spend the rest of his life in prison. There is no taking it back now. There is no taking it back for any of us.
What is going to happen to this country? Anybody know?
- Blog post
- 2 weeks ago
- Views: 83
-
Are sex offenders as dumb as e
- From: Wiseone
-
Description:
I recently read an article how sex offenders are not allowed within 1000 ft of a school bus. as laws go they normally can't be applied retroactively, or at least if they are they must allow some allowance for little things such as the bill of rights or constitutional amendments. For example registered sex offenders currently can't live within 2500 feet of schools or parks, UNLESS they already lived there before the law was past. So doesn't that mean if a sex offender already lives near a school or park then there is no incentive to move? After all if he does move they may not be able to live where they want? So why move? Also a sex offender is just a felon so any law that can be made to stick to them may be applied to all felons. I'm for that: There are 37,000 traffic deaths every year and 40% of all accidents are caused by drunks. so lets have a law that registered alcoholics can't live within 2500 feet of a bar! Sounds crazy, it's just as crazy as the Sex offender laws, they don't work, and they do nothing but whittle away on all our rights. They where created by vigilantes because they were hurt, yet they didn't stop john couie, or even that recent mass murderer. Sad but true.
- Blog post
- 2 weeks ago
- Views: 95
- Not yet rated
-
Wake up, the alarms are ringin
- From: dlindberg102
-
Description:
As we find ourselves in the throes of a mini depression let examine the causes and try to find the cure. It’s obvious that Congress is too embroiled in petty politics to solve our dilemma in a reasonable fashion.
First we have to examine the obvious; the financial meltdown of Wall Street and the terrible crash of the housing market. The finger points at greed in both cases. Both political parties, and the past 4 administrations are just as guilty as the other. This constant blame game that has gone on for the last 8 years has exacerbated the problem and driven us farther and farther away from a positive solution. We know the Wall Street problem stems from the housing situation, as huge amounts of capital were invested in these high risk loans. When the Real Estate crash hit it depleted equity positions and caused a run on the industry never before experienced. Banks failed at an alarming rate causing the Federal Reserve to stretch beyond its means.
What caused this catastrophe in the first place? I believe it was the long term effect of the desire of the Clinton administration to open the Housing market to those who normally couldn’t afford one. Their instructions to Fannie Mae Lowered the standards for loan qualifications. At once this became a boon to the industry as millions of previously unqualified buyers flooded the market. Prices soared and everyone was convinced they would never go back down only up and up. Suddenly real estate was the gold standard of the world. The Bush administration made one half hearted attempt to control this runaway train but was rebuffed by the likes of Frank, Dodd and Waters and retreated into a cocoon of silence. The attempt by Bush’s Secretary of the Treasury Paulson to bailout the banks was the worst decision that could have been possible. $780 Billion of our tax dollars simply disappeared into a whirlpool of greed and fraud. The Obama administration has worsened the situation with their attempt to Nationalize the banking and auto industry. The so called stimulus they pushed down our throat was more Pork than substance and just paid back the liberal establishment for their loyalty.
Unemployment; Now that the rate has hit over 10% even the diehard Union establishment must be questioning the process. Jobs are created by small business not government programs is not going to solve the unemployment situation. The trickery of numbers being thrown about by the administration are a farce. Show me 640,000 saved jobs and I’ll eat my hat. Jobs are created by an active market and a population that has confidence in the economy. If only a smidgeon of the bailout and stimulus money that has been wasted on the auto industry and banking was used for tax incentives and low interest loans for businesses that were willing to expand and hire new workers there wouldn’t have been a need for an auto bailout.
Congressional arrogance; We are in the midst of an attempted takeover of our country by an elite group of supposed Representatives, that could care less what you think. They believe that they are the supreme power in this country and will do whatever they think is in their best interest. The fact that they were elected to do the bidding of the people who put them there is irrelevant, they feel they know what’s best for America. We were warned about this happening when our founding fathers wrote the Constitution. These elitist arrogant egotists, have ignored all aspects of the Constitution and our rights in general. If we allow these people to force a vote on medical reform, without allowing both parties of the Congress and the people to study the content of the bill, we might as well have capitulated to The Soviet Union in the 60’s. It’s time to find your Cahonies America, it’s time to recall the entire bunch and start over with people who understand the American way and our Constitution.
- Blog post
- 2 weeks ago
- Views: 83
-
Gucci Handbag: A wise investme
- From: ff123
-
Description:
I was in Italy,Gucci handbags timing of land together to create the most unique design, elegant clothing and bold fashion some of the industry has ever known. Together they form what we know today, the Dolce and Gabbana.
History
Two masters, Gucci handbags, 1980, held in Venice, the work of co-operation in the same industry? Fashion design. In 1982, they finally decided to join forces in 1986, his first collection was presented to the public, this is a popular commodity in the world. Through dedication, hard work, attention to detail over the years, the name of Dolce and Gabbana, great respect and expectations of today.
Gucci Products
Once the launch of its first collection, Gucci handbags turning back, they are designed, such as handbags, clothing, Gucci shoes, watches and othe Gucci small accessories large number of items. Their initial collection and accessories are mostly dedicated to women, which is of course very much appreciated and the same welcome.
Gucci handbags are women's rights, because they offer quality and stylish appearance. Women know is very strict, especially when it comes to handbags, after all, we are there for half of our lives, it never left our side. Who is willing to use a hand-bag does not match your personality, or to meet your needs met?
Gucci handbag is also very strong and bold touch, no one will miss the women. Gucci Woman’s handbags need not only in style, but it is very important, it is also in line with her character. Dolce and Gabbana handbags style provides a wealth of available options, such as classical, bold, unique, daily use of large, evening wear, as well as a small backpack.
What expect a Gucci handbags
When you purchase a Gucci handbag you buy more than just designer handbags, you buy quality, style and durability combine, which is sustained as long as you put it good care of you. Gucci handbags are timeless works, you can pass your child you should take good care of its requirements. This bag will be there for you when you need it most and will never let you down, increasing your style and personality. Therefore, the bought Dolce and Gabbana handbags are confident is a good investment funds. - Blog post
- 2 weeks ago
- Views: 40
- Not yet rated
Terms of Service
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Community Policy | Feedback | Jobs | TV Ratings | Advertise with Us | News Corp
News | Weather | Traffic | Sports | Money | Entertainment | Health | Blogs | Mornings | Contact Us
Many pages in this Fox Television Stations, Inc. web site feature links to other sites, some of which are operated by companies unrelated to Fox Television Stations, Inc. Fox Television Stations, Inc. has no control over the content or availability of any linked site.
TM and (c) 2008 Fox Television Stations, Inc., and its related entities. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, duplication, or distribution in any form is expressly prohibited