Why would Obama venture into this issue???? It's frankly NONE of his business...it's being handled by the state and the DOJ....and it's a hispanic buy that shot and killed the black kid....He needs to stay focused on the problems that he IS responsible for and start to get some of them fixed....
Obama calls Florida shooting death 'tragedy,' says his son would 'look like Trayvon'
Published March 23, 2012 | FoxNews.com
President Obama, during a brief Rose Garden press conference meant to announce his nominee for World Bank president, ventured into the high-intensity controversy over the unarmed black teenager fatally shot in Florida -- calling the case a "tragedy" and saying if he had a son, "he'd look like Trayvon."
The death of Trayvon Martin, 17, is now under investigation by the Justice Department and FBI.
Obama, asked about the case Friday, noted that he doesn't want to interfere with the probe being led by his attorney general, Eric Holder. But he made clear that he empathizes deeply with the parents in the case, and called for investigators to "get to the bottom" of what happened.
"Obviously, this is a tragedy. I can only imagine what these parents are going through. And when I think about this boy, I think about my own kids. And, you know, I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this and that everybody pulls together -- federal, state and local -- to figure out exactly how this tragedy happened," Obama said.
He added: "But my main message is to the parents of Trayvon Martin. You know, if I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon. "
The president said "all of us have to do some soul-searching to figure out how does something like this happen."
Federal investigators have opened a civil rights probe into the shooting. George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, claimed he shot Martin in self-defense.
Friday, March 23, 2012
Obamacare HAS to GO!.....by the Supreme Court or by being Repealed....
Obamacare's Dreadful Anniversary
Two years ago today, President Barack Obama signed into law Obamacare, a 2,700-page bill that will radically alter America's health care system and wreak havoc on medical costs, quality of care, and fundamental rights in ways that are beyond the scope of our imagination.
Much of what was contained in Obamacare was hatched behind closed doors where not even the slightest ray of light could find its way in. Even the men and women in Congress who were entrusted to represent the people cast their votes blindly, not knowing what lay in store. As even then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) famously admitted, "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it."
The American people have already spoken, however. They want this law repealed and tossed out, as we have seen in poll after poll for the past two years. None of the activities being planned by the White House to gussy up this law will likely make a dent on the unpopularity of Obamacare.
Though even today, two years later, much of Obamacare remains to be written by unelected bureaucrats in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), we know some of what's contained in the law and the ramifications for the American people. Most broadly, Obamacare rips vast powers from the hands of individual patients and their families, and it vests control in Washington bureaucrats. And the costs are far greater than the Administration claim -- heading as high as $2.134 trillion with millions Americans dependent on government for their health care.
Last week, the Congressional Budget Office predicted that under the President's health care law, 20 million Americans could lose their employer-sponsored health benefits and the individual and employer penalties related to the mandates could hit $221 billion. At the time of passage, many people warned as much.
But wait, there's more.
For the last two years, Heritage has continued to dissect Obamacare and its poisonous side effects. Like a virulent disease spiraling out of control, Obamacare inflicts harm on all that it touches.
Seniors will suffer as Obamacare robs savings from Medicare in order to fund new government spending while threatening seniors' access to care and ending Medicare as we know it. On top of that, as Heritage's Alyene Senger writes, Obamacare makes extreme cuts to Medicare Advantage, which allows seniors to receive their Medicare benefits through a private health care plan of their choice. And it puts a group of 15 unelected officials in charge of finding cuts in Medicare to meet new spending limits.
Young Americans will suffer as well. Though the President brags that his law allows young adults to stay on their parents' health plans until age 26, they ultimately will face higher premiums, perverse incentives to stay uninsured, and the burden of paying the extraordinary costs that the law brings with it.
There are even more consequences under Obamacare: families will pay higher taxes; businesses will face new mandates and costs; investment income will get hit with new taxes, discouraging investment and harming economic growth; Americans who purchase medicine with Health Savings Account or Flexible Savings Accounts will face new limitations; those who purchase medical devices will face higher taxes; and marriage is penalized as a result of the new subsidy scheme.
There are significant moral implications, too. Heritage's Sarah Torre wrote yesterday of news about an abortion surcharge, which follows the HHS mandate that insurance plans must cover on abortion-inducing drugs and contraception:
These episodes are rapidly becoming the status quo of Obamacare implementation, with a familiar and predictable plot line: an unaccountable bureaucracy releases complicated rules on morally fraught healthcare decisions, runs roughshod over Americans' moral concerns and personal freedom, and then tries to obscure the flaws of the legislation with accounting legerdemain and limited disclosure.
Last week, a CBS/New York Times poll on the HHS mandate showed strong support for religious liberty, with 57 percent of respondents saying that religious employers should not be coerced to violate their doctrine and conscience by providing coverage for abortion-inducing drugs and contraception in their health plans, compared to 36 percent who thought they should. A sizable majority -- 51 percent to 40 percent -- favored a religious and moral exemption for all employers.
Today at noon Americans will rally in 140 locations across the country to protest Obamacare's trampling of religious liberty. In Washington, D.C., they'll gather right in front of HHS and demand that the moral compass for personal health decisions be pried out of the hands of unelected bureaucrats and put back in the hands of the people.
And on Monday, the Supreme Court will begin hearing three days of oral arguments on the constitutionality of Obamacare's controversial individual mandate, which for the first time ever forces Americans to buy a product -- health care -- against their will. This provision is the core of the President's health care law, and it is a direct attack on individual liberty. Unless the Court strikes down Obamacare in its entirety, Congress must stand ready to finish the job. The American people should continue to make their voices heard, demand a repeal of Obamacare, and insist on real health care reform that increases access without forcing Americans to fall under government control.
Join Heritage in voicing your support for this cause, raise your voices against this intolerable act, take a stand to defend liberty, and sign our Repeal Obamacare petition today.
Two years ago today, President Barack Obama signed into law Obamacare, a 2,700-page bill that will radically alter America's health care system and wreak havoc on medical costs, quality of care, and fundamental rights in ways that are beyond the scope of our imagination.
Much of what was contained in Obamacare was hatched behind closed doors where not even the slightest ray of light could find its way in. Even the men and women in Congress who were entrusted to represent the people cast their votes blindly, not knowing what lay in store. As even then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) famously admitted, "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it."
The American people have already spoken, however. They want this law repealed and tossed out, as we have seen in poll after poll for the past two years. None of the activities being planned by the White House to gussy up this law will likely make a dent on the unpopularity of Obamacare.
Though even today, two years later, much of Obamacare remains to be written by unelected bureaucrats in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), we know some of what's contained in the law and the ramifications for the American people. Most broadly, Obamacare rips vast powers from the hands of individual patients and their families, and it vests control in Washington bureaucrats. And the costs are far greater than the Administration claim -- heading as high as $2.134 trillion with millions Americans dependent on government for their health care.
Last week, the Congressional Budget Office predicted that under the President's health care law, 20 million Americans could lose their employer-sponsored health benefits and the individual and employer penalties related to the mandates could hit $221 billion. At the time of passage, many people warned as much.
But wait, there's more.
For the last two years, Heritage has continued to dissect Obamacare and its poisonous side effects. Like a virulent disease spiraling out of control, Obamacare inflicts harm on all that it touches.
Seniors will suffer as Obamacare robs savings from Medicare in order to fund new government spending while threatening seniors' access to care and ending Medicare as we know it. On top of that, as Heritage's Alyene Senger writes, Obamacare makes extreme cuts to Medicare Advantage, which allows seniors to receive their Medicare benefits through a private health care plan of their choice. And it puts a group of 15 unelected officials in charge of finding cuts in Medicare to meet new spending limits.
Young Americans will suffer as well. Though the President brags that his law allows young adults to stay on their parents' health plans until age 26, they ultimately will face higher premiums, perverse incentives to stay uninsured, and the burden of paying the extraordinary costs that the law brings with it.
There are even more consequences under Obamacare: families will pay higher taxes; businesses will face new mandates and costs; investment income will get hit with new taxes, discouraging investment and harming economic growth; Americans who purchase medicine with Health Savings Account or Flexible Savings Accounts will face new limitations; those who purchase medical devices will face higher taxes; and marriage is penalized as a result of the new subsidy scheme.
There are significant moral implications, too. Heritage's Sarah Torre wrote yesterday of news about an abortion surcharge, which follows the HHS mandate that insurance plans must cover on abortion-inducing drugs and contraception:
These episodes are rapidly becoming the status quo of Obamacare implementation, with a familiar and predictable plot line: an unaccountable bureaucracy releases complicated rules on morally fraught healthcare decisions, runs roughshod over Americans' moral concerns and personal freedom, and then tries to obscure the flaws of the legislation with accounting legerdemain and limited disclosure.
Last week, a CBS/New York Times poll on the HHS mandate showed strong support for religious liberty, with 57 percent of respondents saying that religious employers should not be coerced to violate their doctrine and conscience by providing coverage for abortion-inducing drugs and contraception in their health plans, compared to 36 percent who thought they should. A sizable majority -- 51 percent to 40 percent -- favored a religious and moral exemption for all employers.
Today at noon Americans will rally in 140 locations across the country to protest Obamacare's trampling of religious liberty. In Washington, D.C., they'll gather right in front of HHS and demand that the moral compass for personal health decisions be pried out of the hands of unelected bureaucrats and put back in the hands of the people.
And on Monday, the Supreme Court will begin hearing three days of oral arguments on the constitutionality of Obamacare's controversial individual mandate, which for the first time ever forces Americans to buy a product -- health care -- against their will. This provision is the core of the President's health care law, and it is a direct attack on individual liberty. Unless the Court strikes down Obamacare in its entirety, Congress must stand ready to finish the job. The American people should continue to make their voices heard, demand a repeal of Obamacare, and insist on real health care reform that increases access without forcing Americans to fall under government control.
Join Heritage in voicing your support for this cause, raise your voices against this intolerable act, take a stand to defend liberty, and sign our Repeal Obamacare petition today.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Barack Obama - Do NOT Mess with TEXAS!
March 22, 2012 4:00 A.M.
HHS Messes with Texas
Obama’s real agenda is clear: abortion.
By Patrick Brennan
While opposition to the HHS mandate has caused many liberals to accuse Republicans of a “war on women,” the Obama administration itself has just declared the first front in its own war on women’s health care. Its casus belli? The Texas government’s restriction on funding for abortion providers.
As of last week, President Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services has withdrawn $30 million worth of funding from a Texas Medicaid program that provides health-care services for low-income women. This HHS policy begins to confirm what conservatives have suspected all along: While the Obama administration has made it clearer than it would like to claim the mantle of “protecting women’s health,” its real aim is unfettered access to abortion and ubiquitous, free contraception.
The affected program, Texas’s Women’s Health Program (WHP), which provides family-planning services to low-income women who earn too much to qualify for regular Medicaid, is a waiver initiative that funds services beyond the purview of standard Medicaid. Texas is what is called a “pass through” Medicaid state, which means that state legislators set funding priorities for the state agencies that disburse federal funds. Texas adopted a rule last year to prevent any of the WHP funds from going to clinics that provide or refer for abortions — most notably, Planned Parenthood franchises, which had received 40 percent of the program’s funding.
But in December, the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) informed the Texas Health and Human Services Commission that, in its opinion, Texas’s restrictions on the waiver program were unlawful. Essentially, CMS contends that Texas cannot restrict the distribution of its WHP funds because patients have the right to choose any Medicaid provider — and threatened to withdraw the funds entirely unless the restrictions were removed. The two parties agreed to a negotiation period ending March 14, and, after the federal government refused to make any concessions, all federal funding for WHP was withdrawn.
Governor Rick Perry has insisted that he will ensure that the program continues without federal support, at the state’s expense. The state may, unfortunately, be bearing this burden for a while: HHS’s funding withdrawal evinces a steadfast commitment to funding abortion providers, and the Texas government and Texans themselves are equally adamant that they will do everything they can to avoid such support.
Elizabeth Graham, director of Texas Right to Life, calls HHS’s funding cuts a “transparently political move.” Indeed, the showdown in Texas isn’t, broadly speaking, just about these specific Medicaid funds, but about the larger, highly effective efforts by Texas Right to Life and pro-life legislators to defund the state’s abortion industry — which, as Graham explains, is now “feeling the pain, and has decided to lash out.”
Recently, Texas conservatives have taken dramatic strides to ensure that federal women’s health-care funding didn’t specifically fund or encourage abortion — and thus dealt serious blows to the abortion industry in Texas. Over the past year, with legal help from advocacy groups such as Texas Right to Life, the Texas legislature has continually redirected “family planning” funds away from health-care providers that provide or refer for abortions to other clinics.
The legislature’s rules and funding priorities have reduced the federal funding for abortion providers in Texas by 37 percent over the past year, resulting in the closure of twelve Planned Parenthood branches. The funding has been merely redirected, and thus has in no way restricted poor women’s access to necessary and preventive care (as abortion proponents might have claimed).
But the redirections have put a serious financial strain on abortion providers. Planned Parenthood and other groups are thus loath to see more of their federal dollars snatched away, and, as Graham puts it, consider any more restrictions as “salt in the wound.” It looks now as if the federal government is stepping in specifically in order to bail them out. The state of Texas has done an exemplary job of proving that liberal concern for “women’s health” has as much to do with support for abortion providers as it does with ensuring equity and access.
HHS’s recent contraception mandate, its most infamous policy, isn’t primarily concerned with “women’s health,” despite claims to the contrary. Claims that free coverage of birth control is an essential health benefit because women take it for other hormonal or prescriptive reasons ring hollow, since, if the administration were actually so concerned with protecting particular women’s health issues, it could require coverage of all the relevant treatments, such as other treatments for certain kinds of cancer, rather than just those that happen to double as contraception. The HHS mandate is thus, on closer inspection, another politically tinged program trumpeted as a groundbreaking expansion of women’s health care.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration has indicated that it would reduce its support for health care in Texas rather than allow the state to decide that the money shouldn’t go to supporting abortion providers. Its agenda could not be clearer.
— Patrick Brennan is the 2011 William F. Buckley Fellow at National Review.
Obama - He just doesn't give a Damn!
Obama - More truth he doesn't give a damn about jobs...or about energy....or about the American People....and as Obama keeps lying to the American People he will be seeing more and more protests at his campaign stops...
Barack Hussein Obama - The Blamer in Chief....The Liar in Chief....
TODAY Obama blames Congress for the failure of Solyndra...Can you believe this bold face liar???
TODAY Obama Blames Congress for the Keystone Pipeline not being approved....and the truth is Obama does NOT have to approve this lower leg of the pipeline and he DID not approve the Real Keystone Pipeline from Canada...even though he implies that he did....He is a real liar!
TODAY Obama Blames Congress for the Keystone Pipeline not being approved....and the truth is Obama does NOT have to approve this lower leg of the pipeline and he DID not approve the Real Keystone Pipeline from Canada...even though he implies that he did....He is a real liar!
Obama must be totally Delusional to Lie like he Does!
Obama just tells BOLD FACE LIES to the American People...Does he think we are that stupid?.....Now he's blaming Congress for the failure at Solyndra??? Who would ever belive that! Is this guy delusional?
Posted on March 22, 2012
Obama Blames Congress For Solyndra: "Not Our Program, Per Se"
In an interview with Marketplace.org (full audio), President Obama defends using U.S. taxpayer money to invest in solar energy projects. During the interview, Obama was asked about Solyndra, one of the more well-known solar panel companies that failed after receiving a loan guarantee from the Department of Energy.
However, Obama told Marketplace that "this was not our program." Obama attempts to make the case that this falls on the lap of Congress because they put together the loan guarantee program. Read the transcript below.
Marketplace's Kai Ryssdal : With all respect, it was kind of a gutsy move I think to come to a solar facility. Your administration has staked a lot on clean technology, green jobs. The biggest item most people know about that strategy is, of course, a company named Solyndra, which your administration gave loan guarantees to, that then went bankrupt and has been the subject of many investigations. Are you doing your "all of the above" strategy right if that's what we have to show for it -- Solyndra?
Obama: We are doing the "all of the above" strategy right. Obviously, we wish Solyndra hadn't gone bankrupt. Part of the reason they did was because the Chinese were subsidizing their solar industry and flooding the market in ways that Solyndra couldn't compete. But understand: This was not our program, per se. Congress -- Democrats and Republicans -- put together a loan guarantee program because they understood historically that when you get new industries, it's easy to raise money for startups, but if you want to take them to scale, oftentimes there's a lot of risk involved, and what the loan guarantee program was designed to do was to help start up companies get to scale. And the understanding is is that some companies are not going to succeed, some companies will do very well -- but the portfolio as a whole ends up supporting the kind of innovation that helps make America successful in this innovative 21st century economy.
Do I wish that Solyndra had gone bankrupt? Absolutely not. And obviously it's heartbreaking what happened to the workers who were there. When you look at the overall portfolio, is it right for us to make sure that we're not just cashing in our chips and letting the Chinese or the Germans develop the technologies that we know are going to be critical in the future? I'm proud to say that we're going to continue to support it.
Posted on March 22, 2012
Obama Blames Congress For Solyndra: "Not Our Program, Per Se"
In an interview with Marketplace.org (full audio), President Obama defends using U.S. taxpayer money to invest in solar energy projects. During the interview, Obama was asked about Solyndra, one of the more well-known solar panel companies that failed after receiving a loan guarantee from the Department of Energy.
However, Obama told Marketplace that "this was not our program." Obama attempts to make the case that this falls on the lap of Congress because they put together the loan guarantee program. Read the transcript below.
Marketplace's Kai Ryssdal : With all respect, it was kind of a gutsy move I think to come to a solar facility. Your administration has staked a lot on clean technology, green jobs. The biggest item most people know about that strategy is, of course, a company named Solyndra, which your administration gave loan guarantees to, that then went bankrupt and has been the subject of many investigations. Are you doing your "all of the above" strategy right if that's what we have to show for it -- Solyndra?
Obama: We are doing the "all of the above" strategy right. Obviously, we wish Solyndra hadn't gone bankrupt. Part of the reason they did was because the Chinese were subsidizing their solar industry and flooding the market in ways that Solyndra couldn't compete. But understand: This was not our program, per se. Congress -- Democrats and Republicans -- put together a loan guarantee program because they understood historically that when you get new industries, it's easy to raise money for startups, but if you want to take them to scale, oftentimes there's a lot of risk involved, and what the loan guarantee program was designed to do was to help start up companies get to scale. And the understanding is is that some companies are not going to succeed, some companies will do very well -- but the portfolio as a whole ends up supporting the kind of innovation that helps make America successful in this innovative 21st century economy.
Do I wish that Solyndra had gone bankrupt? Absolutely not. And obviously it's heartbreaking what happened to the workers who were there. When you look at the overall portfolio, is it right for us to make sure that we're not just cashing in our chips and letting the Chinese or the Germans develop the technologies that we know are going to be critical in the future? I'm proud to say that we're going to continue to support it.
Democrat Idiocy....
This is typical Democrat idiocy....what does Congress have to do with the NFL???..they need to be worrying about gas prices, the economy, the debt, our national security, preserving American Freedoms etc...NOT wasting their time and our money on crap like this....I am not certain I agree with the commissioner of football's decision here, but it's certainly not Congress' place to make comment....
And if you want to talk about taking someone out...any one of them would take out someone on the opposite party if they had the ability to do so....look what they did to Palin and her family....it was disgusting, but they kept doing it anyway....I'd get rid of Durbin in flash...the establishment in Washington has to go...Along with that pathetic excuse of a President, Obama...
Lugar wants hearing on NFL bounties
Published March 22, 2012 | FoxNews.com
Sen. Dick Durbin is setting up a Judiciary Committee hearing about bounties in the NFL and other major sports in the wake of news that New Orleans Saints players received extra cash for hits that hurt particular opponents.
The assistant Senate majority leader, an Illinois Democrat, said Thursday he wants to examine whether federal law should make such bounty systems a crime.
Durbin's announcement comes a day after the NFL took a harsh stand on bounties, suspending Saints head coach Sean Payton for all of next season, and indefinitely banning their former defensive coordinator, Gregg Williams.
Durbin calls the Saints' bounties a "disturbing practice." He plans to ask representatives of the NFL, Major League Baseball, NBA, NHL and NCAA to testify at the hearing.
And if you want to talk about taking someone out...any one of them would take out someone on the opposite party if they had the ability to do so....look what they did to Palin and her family....it was disgusting, but they kept doing it anyway....I'd get rid of Durbin in flash...the establishment in Washington has to go...Along with that pathetic excuse of a President, Obama...
Lugar wants hearing on NFL bounties
Published March 22, 2012 | FoxNews.com
Sen. Dick Durbin is setting up a Judiciary Committee hearing about bounties in the NFL and other major sports in the wake of news that New Orleans Saints players received extra cash for hits that hurt particular opponents.
The assistant Senate majority leader, an Illinois Democrat, said Thursday he wants to examine whether federal law should make such bounty systems a crime.
Durbin's announcement comes a day after the NFL took a harsh stand on bounties, suspending Saints head coach Sean Payton for all of next season, and indefinitely banning their former defensive coordinator, Gregg Williams.
Durbin calls the Saints' bounties a "disturbing practice." He plans to ask representatives of the NFL, Major League Baseball, NBA, NHL and NCAA to testify at the hearing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)