Blog @ MoreWhat.com

This is a slice from the healthcare reform bill introduced in Congress by Democrats. That can be said since the committee approved it on a party line vote and the GOP may get another bashing from liberals for being the party of ‘no’. But nonetheless THIS IS a Democrat bill. After reading the linked excerpt below feel free to follow it to find out more on this ‘reform’ bill. The question is…… can you find any problems with the little ’slice’ that is presented here?

You might also find a post at Flopping Aces on this topic useful as well. While this blog does not necessarily agree with the characterization of Romney’s role in the Massachusetts version of healthcare reform from 2006 dissin’ the former Presidential candidate from 2008 for the dramatic failure of that state’s plan may be the price one pays for having their name associated with such a bill. But that raises the question of who else was involved and gave their approval of it? Nuff said.

There may be a pressing need to solve problems with healthcare and someone may even have the solution. But the offerings from the White House and Congress may have much in common with past attempts by government to solve problems in the private sector. They simply do not work. But it is fair to say that whatever comes out of Washington to solve healthcare will be something none of us can afford. That is if it looks anything like what is being proposed thus far.

Just one little suggestion for Congress is offered here as an ending note. Just below you will notice the brief description of the bill along with its title. The last four words of the description could be removed from all legislation. ‘And for other purposes’ is just one more free hand politicians should not be given.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009
H.R. 3200

To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes

SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.

(a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term ‘grandfathered health insurance coverage’ means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:

(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-

(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

(b) Grace Period for Current Employment-based Health Plans-

(1) GRACE PERIOD-

(A) IN GENERAL- The Commissioner shall establish a grace period whereby, for plan years beginning after the end of the 5-year period beginning with Y1, an employment-based health plan in operation as of the day before the first day of Y1 must meet the same requirements as apply to a qualified health benefits plan under section 101, including the essential benefit package requirement under section 121.

Many have said Social Security and Medicare are hopelessly flawed and will fail by going bust or bankrupt. In other words, we cannot afford to continue down this road. In their own words the ‘trustees’ of Social Security and Medicare admit that much. The problem is their prediction or forecast may go the way of most other government forecasts. It will be shown in retrospect, some years in the future, to be a woefully inadequate prediction and things will be much worse than they are currently being stated.

Even with that the excerpts from the report below confirm that government knows these programs are failing. And now they want to add government run healthcare for everyone. You have to be a complete fool to believe this can work. As of the date of this post, even with two committee’s in Congress agreeing on a healthcare bill, neither can determine how to pay for it.

No kidding. That is an always has been the problem with government programs especially Social Security and Medicare. We cannot afford to sustain them. In this green and sustainability crazy world how come those same ECO crazy activists and other liberals cannot find a way to make these programs financially viable? Because just like the other liberal fantasies they cannot make this stuff work. The math isn’t there. The math is not on their side. Even Obama’s own who are now trustees of SSI and the rest cannot keep this myth going. That is why they are working on news ones like healthcare reform. It is nothing more than putting lipstick on the old pig. Ain’t gonna work folks.

There are ways to solve the problem with healthcare but those realities are not being addressed. They do not fit the liberal agenda. With liberals in the White House and a liberal majority in Congress all that stands between us and total financial collapse is the American taxpayer. If you do not revolt now it will all be a moot point when the liberal agenda has been put in place by the POLS in DC. That is no exaggeration.

Please note, the trustees mentioned earlier are listed at the bottom of this post’s reference. Tax Cheat Timothy Geithner, Baby Killer Kathleen Sebelius as well as other less well known Obama tax problem, Hilda Solis and a left over from 2007, Michael Astrue are the part of the Obama brain trust in charge of stiffin’ you on SSI and the rest. How’s it workin’ so far?

The conclusion drawn here suggests current healthcare reform is a back door strategy on the third rail of politics. If you are unfamiliar with the terminology simply use you favorite search engine and specify ‘third rail of politics.’ Social security and Medicare are such controversial issues that for decades they have been kept alive with ridiculous infusions of taxpayer funds and no one will fight it for if you touch the third rail you will die. (at least politically speaking) If Obama and Congress are successful in passing their healthcare ‘reform’ it will eventually fold the other social programs into it and we will surely be completely beholdin’ to those who wish to control us and all we earn will go for supporting the state. Just like any other socialist country we will work for the state and they will provide all. All that is available that is, which won’t be much. It never has been with any other political experiment like this in human history. Just ask the former Soviet Union where from each according to their ability and to each according to their need was their founder’s mantra. Ya, keep telling yourself we’re not heading there. Obama is depending on that.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

A SUMMARY OF THE 2009 ANNUAL REPORTS
Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees

A MESSAGE TO THE PUBLIC:

Each year the Trustees of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds report on the current and projected financial status of the two programs. This message summarizes our 2009 Annual Reports.

The financial condition of the Social Security and Medicare programs remains challenging. Projected long run program costs are not sustainable under current program parameters.

The deficits will be made up by redeeming trust fund assets until reserves are exhausted in 2037, at which point tax income would be sufficient to pay about three fourths of scheduled benefits through 2083. Medicare’s financial status is much worse. As was true in 2008, Medicare’s Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund is expected to pay out more in hospital benefits and other expenditures this year than it receives in taxes and other dedicated revenues. The difference will be made up by redeeming trust fund assets. Growing annual deficits are projected to exhaust HI reserves in 2017, after which the percentage of scheduled benefits payable from tax income would decline from 81 percent in 2017 to about 50 percent in 2035 and 30 percent in 2080. In addition, the Medicare Supplementary Medical Insurance (SMI) Trust Fund that pays for physician services and the prescription drug benefit will continue to require general revenue financing and charges on beneficiaries that grow substantially faster than the economy and beneficiary incomes over time.

The projected exhaustion of the HI Trust Fund within the next eight years is an urgent concern. Congressional action will be necessary to ensure uninterrupted provision of HI services to beneficiaries. Correcting the financial imbalance for the HI Trust Fund—even in the short range alone—will require substantial changes to program income and/or expenditures.

Social Security could be brought into actuarial balance over the next 75 years with changes equivalent to an immediate 16 percent increase in the payroll tax (from a rate of 12.4 percent to 14.4 percent) or an immediate reduction in benefits of 13 percent or some combination of the two. Ensuring that the system remains solvent on a sustainable basis beyond the next 75 years would require larger changes because increasing longevity will result in people receiving benefits for ever longer periods of retirement.

Conclusion

The financial difficulties facing Social Security and Medicare pose serious challenges. For Social Security, the reform options are relatively well understood but the choices are difficult. Medicare is a bigger challenge. Its cost growth can be contained without sacrificing quality of care only if health care cost growth more generally is contained. But despite the difficulties—indeed, because of the difficulties—it is essential that action be taken soon, particularly to control health care costs.

By the Trustees:

Timothy F. Geithner,
Secretary of the Treasury,
and Managing Trustee

Hilda L. Solis,
Secretary of Labor,
and Trustee

Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary of Health
and Human Services,
and Trustee

Michael J. Astrue,
Commissioner of
Social Security,
and Trustee

Not much to get excited about these days. The debut of another Harry Potter movie should be one small bright spot. Of course how small is 104 million on a movie’s first day? Tiny compared to the $600 billion healthcare plan from the Democrats. And even smaller compared to the more likely 1 to 1 1/2 trillion dollar price tag it will likely reach.

Microsoft and Yahoo are haggling about a search engine deal. And in these tough economic times and scaled back consumer spending you have to wonder how the kids got the 104 million to give Harry Potter a good send off? It would seem parents found a way to send the kids to the movies this week even though paying that credit card bill or house payment may be tougher than it once was.

Most would probably say Sotomayor is a lock for the Supreme Court but that doesn’t stop the pundits from analyzing and reanalyzing the hearings and the judge’s resume’, etc. The GOP can go along with Obama or vote against his nominee. They can also filibuster but with the sixty vote liberal advantage what does it matter?

Foreclosures or those in trouble with making payments has risen to a record level and the nation’s 2nd largest bank just posted a profit. Must be nice to have someone take those toxic assets off your books. Yes, bash those who may have made less than wise choices about buying a house and now facing foreclosure. And bash the banks for getting bailouts. It is easy to criticize when the complaint is not directed at yourself. With all the bad news and problems to solve you could think everyone has a share in it and we should look inward for some of the answers.

Healthcare would be one of those problems if not for the political use of that issue to gain power and control over citizens with legislation. You might want to inquire of your elected reps on one feature of the bill approved in committee. If it becomes law, one year from that date employer’s will not be allowed to add anyone to their health plans. Gee, Wally, could that be how the liberals plan on forcing us to take the public or government option? They claim you will be allowed to keep your coverage if you like it. But the plan feature mentioned will make your current coverage really unaffordable when no one else can enter the plan. This is what this post means by bad news.

Maybe we can borrow some of Harry Potter’s magic and tricks to end healthcare reform, reject the SCOTUS nominee and return some sense to the White House and Congress. Remember those promises from the likes of Obama and Pelosi? The culture of corruption is over. Transparency and accountability are the rule. We will change Washington and it won’t be business as usual, etc.,etc. So much for your hope and change.

As for the requisite hope and change joke, you better hope you at least have some change left after Washington gets done spending all your money.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

You cannot find this on MySpace, Facebook, Twitter or any other nonsense location. Oh, and about the guy from Twitter and the hack problem…… who cares?

Obama’s ’signature domestic policy goal’ on healthcare sounds familiar. Familiar enough that no one has to tell you Bill and Hillary Clinton had this as their flagship policy in the nineties. It was a collosal failure. And if it is again that will be a good thing. We simply cannot afford the price. If supporters claim we cannot afford not to then we have the double whammy here. We can’t afford to do this and we can’t afford not to.

Aside from the massive cost of a bill that is supposed to rein in the massive cost of healthcare what the liberal administration and majority in Congress want to do is grab the power to compel you to do what they want in every aspect of your life. If you think this is just repeating the alarms on conservative talk radio think again.

The liberals claim they want to protect you from the financial industry and Wall Street. So what do they do? They continue the bailouts started in the last administration to gain power over that industry rather than simply enforcing existing regulation.

They want you to drive ‘green’ cars. Even though the free market has spoken to the tune of every car maker being totally in the red or bankrupt due to falling sales. The government has bought into US automakers to gain control over what you drive.

They want to tax the energy you use, the food you eat and healthcare you cannot afford in order to take control of your life through dangerously expensive government programs. And President Obama is looking for Republican support for his healthcare takeover.

If the American public allows this to happen they deserve what they get. And then amnesty will happen and the selling of America will just about be complete. Unless you do something about it with your family, friends, neighbors and anyone else you know. This will take a massive public outrage to turn around. But if you don’t do it now you may not get another chance.

Sound alarmist? Maybe so but it may have sounded that way when Paul Revere did his famous ride. But who was sorry he did besides the British? The current situation and how it turns out will determine whether or not we are a nation of sheep.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Obama looks for Republican healthcare backing
Reuters - Kim Dixon -

WASHINGTON, July 16 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Thursday sought to convince Republicans to support overhaul of the US healthcare industry, his signature domestic policy goal, as the measures moved on a fast-track through …

A committee in the House of Representatives has passed a healthcare bill. A question you might want to ask of your elected reps is why it features federal aid to families and individuals who earn FOUR TIMES the poverty level? We already have Medicaid, SCHIPS and other programs for aid to low income persons for the purposes of healthcare. In addition to this penalizing employers for not offering health plans or targeting the rich for tax revenue to pay for it does not demonstrate a contribution by everyone to solve the problem. If anything it reduces choice as has been said and forces those selected by Congress to pay for it. All the while there is no guarantee or even expectation that it will provide even a partial solution.

The Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee voted 13-10 along party lines to pass a $600-billion measure that would expand coverage to nearly all Americans by requiring individuals get insurance and employers to contribute to the cost. The bill would provide federal aid to families and individuals making less than four times the poverty level, or about $88,000 for a family of four.

In the reference below some may find optimism that the plan that has yet to pass in the full House will not have an easy time in the Senate.

July 13 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. Senate is unlikely to back a proposal that House leaders plan to introduce tomorrow to raise taxes on high-income Americans to pay for a health-care overhaul, Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois said.

Durbin, the Senate’s No. 2-ranking Democrat who serves as his party’s vote-counter, said in an interview on the MSNBC television program “Morning Joe” that the Senate would take a “more conservative approach” to raising needed tax revenue.

And more reports like the one below support the notion that the House and Senate versions of healthcare will be far apart. With any luck at all these pitiful attempts raising the ante on government mandates and spending on healthcare which have plagued this country for decades will begin to see an end of life scenario.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. House bill’s proposed tax on wealthy Americans to help pay for broader healthcare insurance is unlikely to be in the Senate’s version of legislation to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system, a senior Democrat told Reuters on Wednesday.

“I don’t think that is going to be part of the Senate Finance Committee’s proposal,” Kent Conrad, a member of the Senate Finance Committee, said in a brief interview before a meeting of committee Democrats. Conrad is chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.

The Senate Finance Committee has been meeting privately to prepare healthcare reform legislation. On Tuesday, the House unveiled its plan, which would create a public insurance option to compete with private companies, penalize employers that do not offer health insurance and tax the wealthiest Americans to help pay for the changes.

As polls indicate more people in the US are moving to conservative views and those supporting or opposing healthcare reform are at an even split the tide may already be turning on President Obama and Congress. It is no wonder, in terms of healthcare, that giving a family of four who earns $88,000 per year aid from taxpayer funds is not going to solve the problem. And voters are beginning to understand that the White House and Congress are not being realistic. They are just pushing their agenda, like it or not.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Short of a ‘meltdown’, which one lawmaker suggested would be the only way Sotomayor does not get confirmed, the following two items again demonstrate that the tag ‘activist judge’ applies to the current nominee for the Supreme Court.

Sotomayor Says Identity Won’t Distort Her Decisions
New York Times - David Stout - ?1 hour ago?
WASHINGTON - Judge Sonia Sotomayor insisted on Tuesday, in the face of sometimes skeptical questioning from Republicans, that she would never allow her background or life experiences to determine the outcome of a case if she were …

That contradicts an earlier statement by the same judge….

from “A Latina Judge’s Voice” (from 2002)

‘I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate.’

And she blames her opinion on SCOTUS. When will people, including the President and Congress, finally admit she is not fit for service on the bench? If they ever do it will most likely be AFTER she is confirmed.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

That a participant in a case of Sotomayor’s which was overturned by SCOTUS will appear at her confirmation hearings provides a little comic relief.  This situation too is not without potential controversy.

Frank Ricci as described in the report below is at the very least an interesting profile. So the activist judge may face the activist firefighter during her hearing.  The distinction that is important to draw about the activist word in this story relates to the occupations of both individuals.

For Ricci to be an activist in his role as a firefighter or consultant should not raise any eyebrows.  The same cannot or should not be said of a nominee for the Supreme Court.

Stanford Matthews
Morewhat.com

Firefighter to Take Spotlight in Sotomayor Hearings

As both a firefighter and independent consultant, Mr. Ricci often pushed back against his employers, challenging their decisions to fire him and pass over him for promotions and to lobby for broad firefighter safety concerns.

As stated here earlier the Senate confirmation process is entirely political theatre. And Judge Sotomayor presents her arguments in just that manner. Criticize society, the court, the country for being prejudiced and then to look impartial feature a few references which compliment the same people whom you hold in contempt and seek to nullify.

Announce your bias and explain you will try to control it yet will use it if the case before the court requires. How convenient it is to admit you advocate for what is important to you but will not allow it to influence your decisions on the bench unless you decide to allow it to influence your decisions on the bench as you believe the case requires.

I further accept that our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions. The aspiration to impartiality is just that–it’s an aspiration because it denies the fact that we are by our experiences making different choices than others. Not all women or people of color, in all or some circumstances or indeed in any particular case or circumstance but enough people of color in enough cases, will make a difference in the process of judging.

Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.

However, to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench. Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage.

Each day on the bench I learn something new about the judicial process and about being a professional Latina woman in a world that sometimes looks at me with suspicion. I am reminded each day that I render decisions that affect people concretely and that I owe them constant and complete vigilance in checking my assumptions, presumptions and perspectives and ensuring that to the extent that my limited abilities and capabilities permit me, that I reevaluate them and change as circumstances and cases before me requires. I can and do aspire to be greater than the sum total of my experiences but I accept my limitations. I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate.

And of course the advocacy role of Sotomayor is not a new trend. Her stance on promoting her own cultural heritage is evident in the item below as well as her statements that special interest groups supporting her Latina views are necessary to promote her personal views along those lines. For someone who claims to want equality in America her track record suggests she only wants that equality for the groups she selects. And that is Sotomayor’s version of justice for all.

Anti-Latino discrimination at Princeton

By Sonia Sotomayor
May 10, 1974

On April 18, 1974, the Puerto Rican and Chicano students of Princeton filed a complaint with HEW charging the university with an institutional pattern of discrimination.

The facts of the complaint are these: 1) There is not one Puerto Rican or Chicano administrator or faculty member in the university; 2) There are two million Puerto Ricans in the United States and two and a half million more on the island itself. Yet there were only 66 Puerto Rican applicants this year, and only 31 Puerto Rican students on campus. While there are 12 million Chicanos in the United States, there were only 111 Chicano applicants and 27 students on campus this year; 3) Not one permanent course in this university now deals in any notable detail with the Puerto Rican or Chicano cultures.

That there is any question this nominee is not fit for service on the bench defies the evidence. Of course the latest news on her hearings suggests her attempt to characterize herself as something she is not.

Sotomayor Pledges ‘Fidelity to the Law’
Hearings Begin: Nominee for High Court Faces Senate Panel

By Robert Barnes, Amy Goldstein and Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor said yesterday that a simple “fidelity to the law” is at the heart of her judicial philosophy, as her confirmation hearings began with Senate Republicans delivering a surprisingly strong critique of her fairness and President Obama’s reliance on ephemeral qualities of life experience and “empathy” in nominating her.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

crossposted to:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts

Barack Obama did not choose to be black and white.  You did not choose to be whatever your racial or ethnic heritage is.  It is not an accident of birth.  It is obviously linked to a choice selected by those two people who happen to be your parents. So why is race and ethnicity so important?

Using a word without the current hot button issue significance like ‘race card’ can render this term, ethnocentrism.  Borrowing from Wordnet, this is the ‘belief in the superiority of one’s own ethnic group.’ Your race or your ethnicity and cultural heritage are viewed as the most important and it influences your view of the world and what is important.

We are all to some degree racist or xeonphobic or at the very least, prejudice.  We should all simply agree that it is the way things are and we are not likely to change it or make it go away.  So let’s just deal with it and accept the fact we all participate and contribute to the problem.

Because the Senate confirmation hearings on the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor are being held this week the ‘race card’, our ‘ethnocentrism’ is again at center stage.  For all the posturing on the ideal of judges being objective interpreters of the law and how it applies to matters brought before the court this process is entirely political.

Could we please stop pretending it is anything else?  After all, any reports, discussion, analysis of the process or even the process itself is reduced to a battle between two political philosophies.  The primary question is whether or not the nomination will be of a liberal or conservative, essentially a Democrat or Republican and which party will the confirmed choice benefit.

What seems to be the only practical matter centers on two points.  Past confirmations have not guaranteed the perceived left or right leaning translating to the expected vote on the court.  And the party affiliation of the President dictates the selection of a nominee perceived to be a benefit to that party.  There appears to be no practical matter for forcing all participants to adhere to the objective ideal.

So the nomination and confirmation process of advice and consent is strictly political theatre.  It also seems clear that Sotomayor is not objective and her published body of work demonstrates that.  But the show must go on.  And both teams (since that is all we have) will act out this foolish attempt to appear objective pursuing the ideal in this political charade.

All that is left to do is express one’s opinion.  Accepting my ethnocentrism and expressing my intent to be objective I respectfully submit the Senate should reject the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor as Associate Justice to SCOTUS.  This opinion comes from a white male who believes his rich experience results in a better conclusion than a Latina woman.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Sen. Chuck Hagel Joins Faculty
Former U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) will join the Walsh School of Foreign Service (SFS) faculty this semester as Distinguished Professor in the Practice of National Governance.

Hagel will teach undergraduate and graduate student courses in U.S. foreign policy in the fall.

“Senator Hagel brings great expertise on important foreign and domestic issues facing our nation,” said Georgetown President John J. DeGioia. “He is a great addition to our community of distinguished scholars, and I look forward to his contributions to Georgetown.”

In addition to his teaching commitments, Hagel also will conduct seminars and other educational activities for SFS students and the broader university community.

“I am honored to become part of this respected institution and look forward to contributing to the important efforts that Georgetown continues to make in educating our next generation of leaders,” said Hagel.

First elected to the U.S. Senate in 1996, Hagel served two consecutive terms. He also served as chair of both the Senate Global Climate Change Observer Group and the Senate Oversight Task Force and as co-chair of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China. Hagel has been a member of four Senate committees — the Committee on Foreign Relations; the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs; the Select Committee on Intelligence; and the Committee on Rules and Administration.

“I am pleased to welcome Senator Hagel to the School of Foreign Service and know he will offer valuable insight and understanding on critical issues in foreign policy and on the policymaking process,” said SFS Dean Robert L. Gallucci.

Hagel has authored “America: Our Next Chapter: Tough Questions, Straight Answers” (Ecco 2008), in which he explores domestic issues — including the health care crisis, immigration and Social Security and Medicare reform. He also examines foreign policy problems, including China’s growing economy, India and Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities, and Iran’s aggressive political, ideological and nuclear stances.

Source: Blue & Gray (February 5, 2009)

If you want to know what happens to has been POLS after they leave the government, here’s an example. And no report was found of Hagel also working as a lobbyist but that would be no suprise.

Is Hagel being a ‘distinguished professor’ at Georgetown have any relationship to actually having credentials to teach or is this just a perk of being a former short term senator?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The only good news to be found lately comes from a not so unlikely place. Or more correctly, the news is from a not so unlikely person. Meredith Whitney, if you don’t know, is quite the interesting woman. Not only does she have an impressive resume’ of sorts but her significant other and her take on most things are extraordinary. Many unique combinations feature in this person’s life not the least of which is her reputation for being right.

She came up on the radar here from past accounts of her ability to predict things financial. While her focus in finance may be narrow her insight may be more than that. Now that she is above stealth mode to others besides her competitors, rivals or envious counterparts a question remains. Is she a flash in the pan or the real deal?

Just a little financial news to help you get going this week. Don’t look for bright spots in the economy or world of money beyond Whitney’s take below.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Whitney Gives Goldman Sachs Stock Her Only ‘Buy’ Recommendation

By Josh Fineman and Ambereen Choudhury
July 13 (Bloomberg) — Meredith Whitney gave Goldman Sachs Group Inc. her only “buy” recommendation among the eight banks she covers, saying the shares may climb 30 percent.

Nothing like Sunday good news/bad news to get you ready for the week ahead.  Some time back Dick Cheney was getting good reviews for bringing attention to what’s right and what’s wrong about the US and how we deal with terrorism.  Something some other members of the GOP would do well to take a stand on.  Now, ooh, new revelations from inside the CIA via Leon Panetta start another controversy on this same topic.

Where do you draw the line between national security and the ideals in this republic intended to govern those who govern?  May be no one is handling this correctly.  From the liberals obsessed with using their current majority to punish the opposition under the guise of democracy to the occasional conservatives looking for political cover, how about we have a real discussion on the subject.

It would have been better had politicians found the courage to deal on these matters with each other in private rather than possibly damaging national security by trying to score points in the media.

And the good news is Sarah Palin is not leaving politics. Contrary to the opinion of those who hold an unfavorable opinion of Governor Palin she is good for politics whether you are left or right.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Democrats slam Dick Cheney over secret CIA program
Los Angeles Times - Julian E. Barnes -

Sen. Richard Durbin says Congress should investigate whether Cheney ordered the counter-terrorism program not be disclosed to lawmakers.

Senator: Cheney and alleged secret CIA program ‘a problem’
CNN - Pam Benson -

WASHINGTON (CNN) — CIA Director Leon Panetta testified to a congressional committee that he was told former Vice President Dick Cheney ordered the intelligence agency to withhold information about a secret counterterrorism program from Congress, …

Palin says she’s not leaving politics
The Associated Press -

WASHINGTON (AP) - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said she’s not only staying involved in national politics, but she plans to jump back into the national scrum when she leaves office at the end of the month.

HOUSE COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Friday, July 10, 2009

HOUSE MEETS AT 9:00 AM

AGRICULTURE—–10:00-Open

Full Committee and Financial Services Full Committee. Joint hrng. on the administration’s proposal to regulate the over-the-counter derivatives market. Timothy Geithner, Secretary, Department of the Treasury. 1100 LHOB.

APPROPRIATIONS—8:30-Open

Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Subc. Markup of H.R. ____ - Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations Act for FY 2010. 2358-C RHOB.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS-11:00-Open

Western Hemisphere Subc. On the crisis in Honduras. Public witnesses. 2172 RHOB.

OVERSIGHT & GOVERNMENT REFORM————————————–10:00-Open

Full Committee. Markup of H.R. 22 - To amend Chapter 89 of Title 5, United States Code, to allow the United States Postal Service to pay its share of contributions for annuitants’ health benefits out of the Postal Service Retiree Health Benefits Fund. 2154 RHOB.

This past Friday’s House committee events help you keep your eye on the ball. The political ball that is. Not interested? You find it boring? If the critical situations, decisions and political agendas of the power and influence crowd have not caused you to be concerned and even interested in the less exciting events of the day which actually do affect you personally you are the reason they get away with all they do. They expect you to be apathetic and disinterested.

Ever notice how panic-stricken they (politicians) become when placed in the spotlight over their reckless adventures? It does not happen near enough. So pay attention and start helping to fire up that spotlight.

Above in the schedule Tim Tax Cheat Geithner is moving ahead with a part of Obamanation’s agenda to not limit his reach to the auto industry or banks alone. Under the guise of regulatory oversight to appease the masses and gain points the Obama administration seeks to control everything they can get their hands on. And most of it is your’s.

Already planning to spend more record amounts of your tax dollars on the same thing the porkulus bill just sent out as reported by the GAO. Appropriations’ subcommittee will target three dept’s for more bloated handouts which further the Obamanation agenda. That is exactly where billions in pork went as indicated in the 2nd GAO report available on this blog and elsewhere for your reading pleasure. You might as well read about where your tax dollars are going since they’re spending money the Treasury doesn’t have and will need to raise your taxes with things like cap and trade to appear as though we’re paying as we go. Cap and trade is the liberal version of trickle down economics. They spend from the top and the bill trickles down to the rest of us.

Foreign Affairs will work on expanding Obama’s socialist agenda to Honduras. Prop up a commie dictator to gain points with Chavez and others who are already laughing in the face of President Obama. Maybe he should have bowed to Chavez like he did the Saudis or give Hugo an idiotic ipod like was given to the Queen of England by our top executive.

Okay, more health related Obamanation agenda items at the Postal Service compliments of the US taxpayer. You may think this is federal employee money but how do you suppose the fund is managed? Is there employer, aka, government contributions to the fund? That wouldn’t be uncommon. But by default Mr and Mrs Taxpayer, you’re the employer.

No need to thank anyone for this cheery news from YOUR government. Same goes for the top notch analysis provided by this blog. Have a nice day.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

We, meaning all of us, do not spend enough time on the topic of security for information technology. Nor do we spend enough time, effort or money producing an effective, continuously advancing set of tools to combat malicious hackers and other cyber criminals.

So what should we do about it?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

An attack on hundreds of web sites in South Korea earlier this week continues to clog websites in the United States.

Officials say cyber attacks have affected U.S. government Web sites including those of the White House, departments of Homeland Security, Defense and Treasury and the Voice of America.
The attackers do not appear to be interested in breaking into computers to steal information but to give the impression that something is wrong with the entire system.

“These attacks are causing targeted websites to slow to a crawl or even stop working altogether,” says Jayson Street, an informational warfare specialist for the website Netragard.com in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

South Korean officials suspect the attacks originated in North Korea but they have been unable to confirm their suspicions. Finding out who is behind these attacks may be impossible.

The masterminds of these attacks spread a virus from one personal computer to another which directs data traffic to the targeted Web sites.

“When 30,000 or 40,000 computers ask for the same information at the same time, this becomes a real mess,” says Street. Even if an investigation finds the owners of some of those personal computers it could takes years to find the computer that originated the cyber mischief.

What’s the story on economic recovery, foreign affairs and a shared view by the US President and Vice-President? The porkulus bill is working. No it’s not. ‘We misread the economy’. If the porkulus is not working and the White House misread the economy why would they be currently considering another one? And in foreign affairs are POTUS and VPOTUS on the same page. Seems Biden would give Israel the ‘green light’ for a strike against Iran nukes and Obama would not.

Could that be the famous ‘test’ everyone was talking about after Joe Biden suggested it some months ago? The following emphasizes the ‘public face’ of the White House on matters of out of control spending and the lack of sunlight contrary to liberal leaders suggestion that transparency and accountability have ended the culture of corruption in the nation’s capital.

Vice President Joe Biden speaks at a recovery act event outside the American Can Factory building in Cincinnati, Ohio, Thursday, July 9, 2009. Official White House Photo by David Lienemann)

Biden Acknowledges Administration ‘Misread’ The Economy
Washington Post - Scott Wilson - Jul 5, 2009
Vice President Biden acknowledged today that the administration underestimated the depth of the economic recession months ago as it prepared …

Biden: Administration “Misread” Economy

In an interview on ABC News’ This Week, Vice President Joe Biden said that although the Administration relied on consensus economic forecasts in crafting its economic stimulus package, the White House erred in its assumption about the unemployment rate. Biden said, “The truth is, we and everyone else misread the economy. The figures we worked off of in January were the consensus figures in most of the blue chip indexes out there. … No one was talking about that we would be moving towards — we’re worried about 10.5 percent, it will be 9.5 percent at this point. … We’re much too high.” The remarks were tepidly reported by news wires and print sources, which also noted congressional criticism. The AP reports Republican congressional leaders “expressed disappointment about the impact of stimulus spending,” while Biden “cited the economic conditions inherited from the Bush administration.”

If the Obama/Biden admiinstration can ‘misread’ the economy how does that apply to their spending habits and claiming this will be good for Americans?

Vice President Biden outlined how the Recovery Act is helping Ohio:

“Roads plus teachers plus cops plus jobs equals a community — and that equals paychecks and prosperity. In other words, it equals a better future right here in Southwest Ohio.”

According to the GAO’s 2nd report on porkulus, education pork went to retaining staff and programs. Is this saving jobs or rewarding the NEA for their support? Those are public sector jobs not private sector. So how is that helping SW Ohio?

Later in the day in Saratoga County, he announced the release of over $275 million in unemployment insurance (UI) modernization funds authorized by the Recovery Act. Vice President Biden was joined in New York by Congressman Scott Murphy, who noted that in addition to addressing workers’ immediate needs by financing unemployment benefits, the Recovery Act is addressing the nation’s long-term needs as well:

“By improving our roads, bridges and water infrastructure, we are not only creating jobs in the short term, but building a base upon which we can attract businesses to our area and foster long-term economic growth.”

Again, the GAO report indicates all the money right now is going to transportation, education and Medicaid. Maybe there will be some jobs in the private sector in transportation but what will that accomplish for all the money being spent? Temporary make work jobs and timetables suggesting they are spread out over three years and may have no speedy effect on the economy. Plus GAO indicates accountability will miss the mark. In other words no sunlight is projected. Yet, below, the POLS continue to suggest Recovery.gov uncovers all. The ‘breakdowns’ mentioned have always been available. It doesn’t show the details needed to analyze performance so the campaign promises are not being met.

For additional information on the Recovery Act, including breakdowns by category, state and agency, please visit Recovery.gov.

And with all the misreading, lack of sunlight and no indication of positive performance, they want to do another out of control porkulus spending spree.

Obama Advisor Urges Another Economic Stimulus Plan
By Michael Bowman
Washington

The Obama administration appears to be sending mixed signals on whether a second stimulus package will be needed to pull the U.S. economy out of a deep and prolonged recession. Democrats and Republicans are expressing dissatisfaction with the impact of the $787 billion stimulus package President Barack Obama signed into law in February.

And what about the other issues? Biden seems to indicate Israel has the White House blessing to do a first strike on Iran’s nukes.

from VOA…..
US Vice President Backs Israel’s Right to Preemptive Military Action
By Michael Bowman
Washington

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden says Israel is entitled to decide for itself how best to respond to Iran’s growing nuclear capabilities. Mr. Biden also says America’s willingness to engage in dialogue with Iran is unchanged, despite Tehran’s violent crackdown on demonstrators following last month’s disputed presidential vote.

Vice President Biden says Israel has the right to deal with foreign threats as it sees fit.

But it seems Biden’s take is not a perfect fit with Obama on Israel and first strikes.

Obama: No green light for Israel to attack Iran
Tue Jul 7, 2009 4:29pm EDT

WASHINGTON, July 7 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama said on Tuesday the United States had “absolutely not” given Israel a green light to attack Iran over its nuclear program, but he said Washington cannot “dictate to other countries what their security interests are.”

“It is the policy of the United States to try to resolve the issue of Iran’s nuclear capabilities in a peaceful way through diplomatic channels,” Obama told CNN in an interview during his trip to Russia.

Vice President Joe Biden said in an interview with ABC’s “This Week” program on Sunday that Israel had a sovereign right to decide what is in its best interest in dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions, a comment seen by some as giving Israel a green light to attack.

Asked if that was the intent of his administration, Obama said: “Absolutely not.”

How’s that for a confidence builder on YOUR leader’s in DC? Unsure about the economy, foreign affairs but not about spending like there’s no tomorrow. And the way they’re spending your money there may not be a tomorrow. And their relative stances on foreign affairs do not paint a pretty picture for a tomorrow either.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com