TAUNTON…Today, State Representative Shaunna O’Connell, 3rd Bristol House District, expressed deep disappointment in Governor Patrick’s decision not to sign onto the federal secure communities program.

“This is an Obama administration program that has been implemented in 41 other states, and yet our Governor thinks it is not a good idea. I am deeply disappointed that Governor Patrick is not willing to put public safety first,” said O’Connell. “The public hearings held by the Patrick administration,which were heavily stacked in favor of illegal immigrants, proved to be a nothing more than an attempt to delay implementation of the program.”

Secure Communities is a federal program designed by the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which is part of the Department of Homeland Security. The program identifies all deportable foreign nationals who are arrested by local police for other state and federal crimes. The criminal illegal immigrants who commit additional crimes are removed from the country instead of being released back into the community.

“Right now we have 24,000 criminal illegal immigrants at-large in Massachusetts. These are people who not only broke our laws crossing the borders, but they are also committing other serious crimes. The Obama administration’s Secure Communities program allows for our local law enforcement to help identify deportable aliens via fingerprinting. This is not something new for the Commonwealth. Our state troopers were helping during the previous administration, and due to Governor Patrick’s support of illegal immigrants, he overturned the public safety measure,” said O’Connell.

Boston already has a pilot program which has resulted in 293 people being taken off the streets. Boston’s Police Chief Ed Davis has said that everyone identified via SC was a public threat.

“This program has bipartisan support. It is time for the Governor to put the interests and safety of our law-abiding citizens first,” added O’Connell.

O’Connell is a lifelong resident of Taunton. She worked her way through college by serving in the food department at Morton Hospital and quickly becoming a department supervisor. Professionally, O’Connell is a self-employed court reporter. She is a devoted wife and mother of two young children and continues to be active in her church and volunteer for numerous community programs.

masslive.com is reporting today that Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick has decided to opt out of the federal Secure Communities program.  This is the program that asks states to check the immigration status of anyone arrested in the state. 

The article reports:

“”The Governor and I are dubious of the Commonwealth taking on the federal role of immigration enforcement. We are even more skeptical of the potential impact that Secure Communities could have on the residents of the Commonwealth,” Public Safety Secretary Mary Beth Heffernan wrote in a letter dated Friday to Acting Secure Communities Director Marc Rapp, informing the Department of Homeland Security that Massachusetts would not sign a memorandum of understanding for participation.”

I guess I’m missing something, but if someone is brought into police custody for breaking the law, why is there a problem in checking to see if they are guilty of breaking another law by being here illegally? 

The article reports:

“(Public Safety Secretary Mary Beth) Heffernan cited concerns in the law enforcement community as well as some mayors that participation would deter the reporting of criminal activity, and “deteriorate relationships with communities that have been carefully cultivated with years of hard work.””

There is a reason illegal aliens are called illegal–they are not here legally.  It is not fair to the people patiently waiting in line for the chance to come to America to allow illegals to come here without any requirements.  This is the wrong decision for the safety of the people of Massachusetts.

Bloomberg.com reported yesterday that OPEC members meeting in Vienna this week find themselves on both sides of a military conflict in the Middle East.  This has not happened since Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990. 

The article reports:

“While Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi is trying to quash a rebellion in a country that holds Africa’s largest crude reserves, Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates are backing the insurgents.”

The article points out that OPEC will probably leave its targeted output of oil unchanged at its current meeting.  As oil hovers around $100 a barrel, there are indications that the world economy is slowing down. 

The article further reports:

“While the group’s 12 members may not reach a formal agreement to increase quotas this week, “an informal pact to ramp up production, most likely by OPEC’s Gulf members as well as Nigeria, may emerge,” the IEA said in a May report. The agency, which advises oil-importing nations, said in April that “revisiting individual production targets may be difficult now,” amid tensions stoked by the Libyan conflict and a political crisis in the Persian Gulf state of Bahrain.”

Two of the forces currently putting upward pressure on the price of oil are the devaluation of the U. S. dollar and the increasing demand for oil from China. 

D Day is something we read about in our history books.  I am not sure (until “Saving Private Ryan” was released) that any civilian understood how difficult and awful that invasion was.  As we remember those events today, we need to understand that victory on D Day was not a given.  We owe our freedom in America to those who stormed the beaches that day.  There was a letter written by General Eisenhower in case it failed.  This is what the free republic website says about that letter:

On the afternoon of July 11, 1944, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower came across a forgotten note tucked inside his wallet. He called in his naval aide, Capt. Harry C. Butcher, who, taking the paper, read:

“Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based upon the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that Bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.”

It was dated, in Ike’s hand, July 5. Butcher knew it had to have been — and was — written June 5, when “Bravery and devotion” might yet fail the Allies on Normandy’s beaches.

That July afternoon was D plus 35. On June 6, D-Day, the largest armada in history had crossed the English Channel, landing nine divisions of sea and airborne troops in a sweeping assault upon Nazi-occupied France that put the Allies on the road to victory.

Eisenhower penned such notes on the eves of other amphibious operations, secretly tearing each one up afterward. “I told him I wanted it,” Butcher would later recall. Ike gave in, reluctantly.

The sheet of beige paper — at 41/2 by 7 inches, it looks as if it came from a notepad — is brittle and fragile, like many of the once strapping young men who advanced through surf and bullets, each carrying 75 pounds of equipment. The paper doesn’t carry the letterhead of the Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force, which Eisenhower was. It’s cheaply made. The four sentences on it are written in pencil, and were composed on a portable table.

Archivists at the Dwight D. Eisenhower Library & Museum in Abilene, Kan., call it the “In Case of Failure” message. It’s safeguarded in an acid-free folder in the security vault there, a veteran, too, of dark days when freedom hung in the balance.

The gift of freedom is not free.  If you see a member of the military today, say thank you.

One of the claims being made by the Obama administration as they seek to justify the fact that they are going to ask for higher taxes is that America now has the lowest tax rates in sixty years.  That is not quite true.

On Friday Investors.com posted a story explaining exactly what has happened to America’s tax rates and revenues since 2008. 

The article points out:

“It’s true that tax revenues as a share of gross domestic product have fallen in the past three years.

“They were 17.5% in 2008 and 14.9% in 2009 and 2010.

“But this is simply a result of the prolonged recession and terrible recovery that killed incomes and corporate profits, blowing a hole in federal revenues. The amount of money raised through the individual income tax fell 21% from 2007 to 2009, while corporate tax payments plunged 63%.

“That’s neither a sign that we’re undertaxed nor an indictment of the Bush tax cuts. In fact, tax revenues under Bush hit 18.5% of GDP by 2007. That’s higher than the post-World War II average of 17.8%.”

It is interesting to me that when President Bush cut taxes, tax revenues increased as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product.   The article points out that corporations and the wealthiest 5% of Americans pay 41 percent of all federal revenues.  Since these people were the hardest hit by the recession, tax revenues have gone down.  The article also reminds us that almost half of all Americans pay no income tax at all.

The reduction is federal revenues has to do with the fact that the tax burden is laid so heavily on corporations and wealthy taxpayers.  If the burder were more spread out, two things would happen–the revenue would not change so drastically when there was an economic downturn, and the American public might begin to notice and complain about the amount of federal spending.  When half of all Americans ‘have no skin in the game,’ there is no incentive to cut spending.  Since spending is the major part of our deficit problem, the distribution of tax liability might be a good thing to look at to find a solution.

This is a portion of a Michael Yon post on Facebook.

The quotes below are Michael Yon’s comments he posted with the picture:

“Have been in many briefings. Some very high level, others private with with general officers, colonels and others. Good prep for the field. Will meet with General Petraeus privately after lunch. What’s standing out so far is how much SoF are partnered with Afghan SF, and how much they are damaging the enemy. (Like yesterday.) Check out these numbers from last 90 day period:”

I have no idea what the source of this picture is, but I love it!!!!!

This story is based on a Townhall.com story in the June issue of Townhall Magazine and a CBS News story from March.  This is one of the stories I occasionally post that I have a very limited understanding of.  In this case, I am comfortable with that because it seems as if very few people actually know (or are willing to admit) what actually happened.

Townhall Magazine reports that in 2205 the Bush administration began a pilot program called Project Gunrunner. 

The article reports: 

“Project Gunrunner allowed ATF agents to watch the purchase of weapons by “straw men” outside American gun shops, and purchasers were immediately apprehended before crossing back into Mexico. But starting early in 2009, ATF’s actions through Operation Fast and Furious had the opposite result: They actually allowed and encouraged the sale of weapons to known straw-man purchasers for the cartels and let the guns flow across the southern border into Mexico.”

The problem here is not the original program–it is what it morphed into. 

The CBS story reports:

“Documents show the inevitable result: The guns that ATF let go began showing up at crime scenes in Mexico.  And as ATF stood by watching thousands of weapons hit the streets…the Fast and Furious group supervisor noted the escalating Mexican violence.

“One e-mail noted, “958 killed in March 2010…most violent month since 2005.”  The same e-mail notes, “Our subjects purchased 359 firearms during March alone,” including “numerous Barret .50 caliber rifles.”

“(Federal agent John ) Dodson feels that ATF was partly to blame for the escalating violence in Mexico and on the border.  “I even asked them if they could see the correleation between the two,” he said.  “The more our guys buy, the more violence we’re having down there.””

The increasing violence that might have been avoided seems to be the problem here.  Representative Darrell Issa requested documents related to Operation Fast and Furious on March 16, 2011, from ATF acting Director Kenneth Melson.  Because of his being stonewalled by the Department of Justice, Representative Issa issued a subpoena on March 31.  The documents were supposed to be given to Representative Issa by April 13, but Director Melson refused to turn the documents over, citing ‘on-going criminal investigations.’ 

I don’t know exactly what went on here.  I do know that Congress has the right to see the subpoenaed documents and share them with the American people.  I am also very unhappy that most of the media has overlooked this story.

In case you have not yet seen it, this is the link to the commercial showing granny being pushed over a cliff by a person resembling Paul Ryan put out by the Agenda Project.  The implication is supposed to be that the Ryan budget will kill old people by changing Medicare.  That is not true, but the ad wants you to believe that it is true.  There are numerous articles on the subject of what the Ryan plan is and what the Ryan plan isn’t on this website.  You can find them easily using the search engine.  However, the truth about who is actually taking aim at granny is slowly coming out.

Yesterday, CNS News posted an article about some Congressional hearings that were going on.  On Friday, Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Cass Sunstein testified before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations about the Obama administration’s plans for reviewing and reducing federal regulations.

During that testimony, Mr. Sunstein was asked about a paper he wrote when he was a professor at the University of Chicago titled “Lives, Life-Years, and Willingness to Pay.”

According to the article, Mr. Sunstein wrote:

“”Many analysts, however, have suggested that the government should rely instead on the ‘value of a statistical life year’ (VSLY), in a way that would likely result in significantly lower benefits calculations for elderly people, and significantly higher benefits calculations for children,” the 2003 paper said.

“”I urge that the government should indeed focus on statistical life-years rather than statistical lives. A program that saves young people produces more welfare than one that saves old people.””

Mr. Sunstein said that the paper was an acedemic exercise and not an indication of government policy.  However, Rep. Michael G. Burgess (R-Texas) pointed out that Mr. Sunstein would have input into the establishment of the Independent Payment Advisory Board, part of the health care overhaul law targeting cost reductions for Medicare.  This is not a comforting thought.

The article at CNS News further reports:

“The 2003 Sunstein report, “Lives, Life-Years, and Willingness to Pay,” said, “In protecting safety, health, and the environment, government has increasingly relied on cost-benefit analysis. In undertaking cost-benefit analysis, the government has monetized risks of death through the idea of ‘value of a statistical life’ (VSL), currently assessed at about $6.1 million.”

“”Many analysts, however, have suggested that the government should rely instead on the ‘value of a statistical life year (VSLY), in a way that would likely result in significantly lower benefits calculations for elderly people, and significantly higher benefits calculations for children. I urge that the government should indeed focus on statistical life-years rather than statistical live,” Sunstein’s 2003 paper continued.

“”A program that saves young people produces more welfare than one that saves old people. Nor does a focus on life-years run afoul of ethical limits on cost-benefit analysis. It is relevant in this connection that every old person was once young, and that if all goes well, young people will eventually be old,” Sunstein added.”

“…Under the life-years approach, older people are treated worse for only one reason: They are older. This is not an injustice.”

Wow.  The paper Mr. Sunstein wrote is only eight years old.  I really do not want that kind of philosophy making medical decisions about our elderly population.  It is not Paul Ryan who is pushing granny off the cliff.

The economic reports coming out this week have not been positive.  There is fear of a double-dip recession with very little explanation of why that might happen.  Well, Dan Henninger of the Wall Street Journal has a theory.

Mr. Henninger suggests that some of the blame might fall on President Obama,  not only for his policies, but for his speech at George Washington University in April. 

Mr. Henninger’s article points out:

“The day before that speech, all Washington expected Mr. Obama to make a major policy statement about the big deficit-reduction debate then unfolding. Agree or disagree, Paul Ryan’s budget released the week before was all about policy. The Republicans were actually offering to take part-ownership of the economy by spending the year in dense discussions about the deficit and spending.

“Expectations raised, the president contributed nothing. Instead he dumped ridicule and derision on the Republican leadership seated before him. With that speech, Mr. Obama kicked off his 2012 presidential campaign, and in so doing politicized the economy.”

Actions have consequences.  The article also cites some of the policies and regulations that the Obama Administration has put in place that strangle the private sector as the government sector grows exponentially, gobbling up the private sector along the way. 

Some of the consequences of politicizing the economy:

Congressman Jeff Landry released the following statement on Wednesday after he declined the President’s invitation to the White House this morning:

“”I have respectfully declined the President’s invitation to the White House today. I don’t intend to spend my morning being lectured to by a President whose failed policies have put our children and grandchildren in a huge burden of debt. Over the past two years, President Obama and congressional Democrats have overseen the largest budget deficits in U.S. history. On top of that, the President’s budget adds $1.3 trillion to our national debt every year for the next ten years – a budget that failed to muster a single vote in the Senate. Until the President produces a responsible deficit reduction plan, I’m not going to the White House to negotiate with myself. Our conference has put out for months where we would start the process. The President has done nothing, just like he has for the people of the Gulf Coast. For months, the Louisiana delegation has sent the President numerous requests to meet with him or his chief of staff concerning the de facto moratorium issued in the Gulf of Mexico, a de facto moratorium that has driven gas prices up and now threatens to derail economic recovery; the President hasn’t even had the courtesy to write us a note back. I refuse to partake in his political grandstanding that will ultimately do nothing for debt reduction and job creation.””

On Wednesday the Washington Examiner reported on the meeting between President Obama and the Republicans. 

One Republican commented:

“”Unfortunately what we did not hear from the president is a specific plan of his to deal with the debt crisis,” Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, told reporters outside the White House. Twenty yards away, the full House Republican Conference was filing out of the 90-minute meeting and heading toward two buses that would take them back to Capitol Hill.”

There were other comments made after the meeting.  Paul Ryan stated that he had asked the President to stop calling his plan to cut Medicare spending a ‘voucher plan’ because that was a misrepresentation of the plan.  Eric Canton pointed out the need to stop overregulating the private sector and allow businesses to grow.  The Republicans also restated their desire not to raise taxes but to cut spending to deal with the deficit.

It is very difficult to discuss serious financial matters when Washington has entered into campaign mode.  I hope some of our national leaders will grow up before the country goes bankrupt.

John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line about America’s current energy policies.  The article points out that Canadian oil production is forecast to jump 68 percent to 4.7 million barrels per day by 2025. 

The article at Power Line quotes the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers:

“The rise in production from 2.8 billion barrels in 2010, largely in the Athabasca oil sands of Western Canada, reflects an improved investment climate, more robust commodity prices and increased market demand, the association said.”

Most of us are glad that we are buying oil from Canada rather than from hostile nations, but we need to remember that the improved investment climate caused by Canadian drilling could also be ours but for government energy policies.

Michael Bromwich, Director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement (BOEMRE), testified before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform yesterday.  As usual, he attempted to defend the Obama Administration’s energy policies.  As usual, you need to look past the numbers he was quoting to see what is actually happening.  For instance, according to the article:

“In his written testimony, Mr. Bromwich claims that shallow water drilling permits “have averaged 6 per month since October 2010, compared to an average of 8 per month in 2009.” He is correct. However, he forgets to mention that shallow water permits granted in 2008 averaged 16.8 per month. Mr. Bromwich’s statement highlights the drastic decrease in shallow water permitting since President Obama came into office. …

“But the administration’s shallow water permitting record is fantastic when compared to deepwater permits. BOEMRE has only approved two permits to drill a new well in waters deeper than 500 feet since the end of the moratorium.”

It’s time to use our own resources.  Be aware as a voter that drilling in America could make a drastic difference in unemployment.  The current unemployment rate in North Dakota is 3.2 percent.  That is due to the development of the Bakken Shale reserve which is causing an oil boom in the state.  If you would like to see that kind of prosperity spread to the rest of the nation, vote for people who will allow America to develop her resources.

Today, Dorothy Rabinowitz posted an article at the Wall Street Journal stating her ideas of what the Republican candidate for President will have to do to win in 2012.  It’s an impressive list.

Ms. Rabinowitz points out that the Republican candidate will have to be able to talk about Social Security and Medicare without scaring the electoriate.  He (or she) will be aided in this by the fact that many Americans fear Obamacare more than they fear redesigning Social Security or Medicare.  Ms. Rabinowitz points out that Americans are more concerned about jobs than about discussions about the size of government.  She reminds us that the Republican candidate should talk about the Justice Department and how President Obama has politicized it.  He should remind us of the effort to try 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a civilian court in America.  He should also remind us that the Attorney General has still not dropped charges against two CIA employees who used enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists.

According to Ms. Rabinowitz, the Republican candidate needs a coherent foreign policy (and the ability to explain it clearly).  The candidate might remind Americans of some of the things the Obama administration has done in the area of foreign policy that have hurt allies and broken promises–cancelling the planned missile defense system that had been promised to Poland and the Czech Republic, and the State Department announcement in March 2010 by Hillary Clinton that stated America no longer supported the British in the matter of the Falkland Islands.  The State Department then began referring to the Falklands as the Malvinas (the Argentinian name).

According to Ms. Rabinowitz, the Republican candidate needs to remind us that America is something we can take pride in.  He will need to remind us that even though America is not perfect, there is not a more perfect place on earth.  That is the candidate we need to defeat President Obama in 2012.

Personal success depends on a lot of things–opportunities, ambition, education, self-discipline, and a willingness to work.  I am sure there are other factors, but to me, those are the major ones.  Anyway, America was founded on the idea that success in this country was available to anyone who was willing to work for it.  Aside from the numerous government regulations that complicate starting a new business, success is still available to anyone with the ambition, drive and perseverance to pursue it.  However, somewhere along the line, the idea has crept in that success should be punished in order to improve the financial situations of those who are not willing to work for it.  I am a firm believer in charity, but I think that we have traded charity for dependency and enabling.  Unfortunately, there is a recent poll to confirm that.

Yesterday Gallop reported the results of one of their recent polls.  According to the Gallop polling data, 47 percent of Americans believe that the wealth in the United States should be redistributed by heavily taxing the rich.  This is a very interesting number when you consider that according to Smart Money, in 2009 an estimated 47% of U. S. households did not pay any federal income tax.

The poll results showed a difference in philosophy between the parties on the redistribution of wealth–Democrats were 71 percent for redistribution, Republicans were 69 percent against.

If you follow the link to the Gallop website, you can see all of the questions asked in the poll and how the results broke down.  The thing that is of concern to me in this poll is that there is a significant segment of our population that would rather take something from someone else than earn it themselves.  That is not a good sign for the future of America.

Beginning sometime around February of this year, we heard stories about an Arab Spring beginning with the ‘democratization’ of Egypt.  I suspect Arab Spring is in the process of turning into a long hot summer.  Evidently, I am not alone in that idea.

Cal Thomas posted an article today at Townhall.com commenting on the Arab Spring. 

Mr. Thomas points out:

“At its recently concluded G-8 meeting of industrial economies in Deauville, France, Western governments pledged $40 billion to “newly democratic” nations in North Africa and the Middle East. One might as well throw money at Chicago and hope for electoral reform so the dead are no longer allowed to vote on Election Day.”

Mr. Thomas points out that if money were the answer to bringing democracy to this area, OPEC has more than enough money to do the job. 

Mr. Thomas reminds us:

“Democracy doesn’t spring up of its own accord. It must have a base from which it can blossom. That was a point made by Timur Kuran, a professor of economics and political science at Duke University, in a recent op-ed column for The New York Times entitled “The Weak Foundations of Arab Democracy.” Kuran wrote, “Democracy requires checks and balances, and it is largely through civil society that citizens protect their rights as individuals, force policymakers to accommodate their interests, and limit abuses of state authority. Civil society also promotes a culture of bargaining and gives future leaders the skills to articulate ideas, form coalitions and govern.””

The countries involved are very willing to take our money.  The are not necessarily willing to take any real steps to form democracies.  In Egypt, Coptic Christians are still being persecuted and the Muslim Brotherhood is consolidating its power.  It might be a good time to remember that one of the goals of the Muslim Brotherhood, openly stated in its charter, is the establishment of a worldwide Muslim caliphate. 

In his conclusion, Mr. Thomas reminds us:

“In C.S. Lewis’ “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe,” Narnia has been transformed by a white witch into a land where it is “always winter, but never Christmas.” That pretty much describes the lands of North Africa and the Middle East where the “white witch” is radical Islam and spring will never arrive as long as it holds sway over the minds and hearts of the people.”

I would love to see a true Arab Spring.  I just don’t think it will happen.  The thing these events do remind me of is the unique conditions (and people) that created America.  The events in America in the late 1700’s moved us to freedom.  We were blessed to have leaders who put the good of the country and the value of freedom over their own personal ambitions.  I don’t see a Thomas Jefferson or a George Washington in the current Middle East.  America was blessed by these men, and we need to remember that.  I wish we could project freedom and democracy on to Egypy, Yemen, Libya, Syria, etc., but we can’t.  Until those countires accept the idea of equality among people and the concept of freedom of religion, there will be no democracy in that region.

Yesterday John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line reminding us that the Democrats in Congress have failed to produce a budget.  They have been very quick to denounce and vote down the Paul Ryan budget, but they have not produced an alternative. 

The Washington Post pointed out on Tuesday:

“Since passage of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, Congress has failed to pass a budget resolution only five times, and until last year, a budget resolution always passed at least one chamber.

“Now, for the first time in a decade, the Senate Budget Committee isn’t even considering a budget. Two weeks ago, Chairman Kent Conrad said he would “defer” action on the budget, which was due April 15, to see what comes of debt-reduction talks led by Vice President Biden.”

It’s time to stop the name calling, look at the financial situation of the country, and get to work. 

The Power Line article concludes:

“As the Democrats fiddle, America’s economy burns. Today’s bad news–private sector job creation falling, home prices dropping, food and energy costs sky-high–sent the stock market into a tailspin. One Wall Street analyst says that “[w]e’re on the verge of a great, great depression.” The Democrats’ economic policies have failed, and pretty much everyone knows it. For them to fail even to propose a budget is, as Milbank says, a dereliction of duty. One can only hope that the voters will punish them for it.”

Meanwhile, the focus has changed to the debate over raising the debt ceiling.  Washington is NOT broken–it is simply in need of some leadership.

The Ryan Plan for Medicare has gotten a lot of publicity lately.  There is even an ad showing a Paul Ryan lookalike pushing granny off the cliff.  But it is really hard to find out exactly what the plan is if your only source of information is major media outlets. 

Today’s Daily Caller posted an article contrasting some of the myths about what Paul Ryan’s budget proposal means to Medicare with the actual facts.  The artice takes the statements of Democratic National Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla, made on “Face the Nation” on Sunday and contrasts them with the truth.

Ms. Wasserman Schultz accuses the Ryan plan of abandoning all people under the age of 55.  She states that the plan ‘throws them to the wolves’ and puts them at the mercy of insurance companies that will deny them coverage and drop them for pre-existing conditions.  The facts tell a different story.

The Ryan Plan explicitly forbids insurance companies from denying coverage to anyone eligible for Medicare.  The Ryan Plan provides subsidies beginning in 2022 to help seniors pay for their insurance.  It also has provisions to insure that insurance companies insure all Medicare recipients–not just the healthiest.  No government plan is perfect, but Paul Ryan has attempted to reform Medicare to insure its success in the future and to bring it closer to the concept of competition in health insurance plans in order to reduce costs for everyone.  I am sure that there will be changes needed along the way if the Ryan Plan is adopted, but I suspect they would be minor, and I suspect that his plan will keep Medicare solvent long into the future.

None of the current claims made by Democrat leadership are valid.  Those claims are even less valid when you consider that Obamacare drastically cuts Medicare.

On May 20, I reported at RightWingGranny that:

On September 9, 2010, the Wall Street Journal reported:

“Altogether, ObamaCare cuts $818 billion from Medicare Part A (hospital insurance) from 2014-2023, the first 10 years of its full implementation, and $3.2 trillion over the first 20 years, 2014-2033. Adding in ObamaCare cuts for Medicare Part B (physicians fees and other services) brings the total cut to $1.05 trillion over the first 10 years and $4.95 trillion over the first 20 years.”

As the budget debate continues, I would strongly advise that you look past the MediScare tactics being used by the Democrats, and look up the facts for yourself.  We are being seriously mislead by people attempting to gain political advantage.  It is up to the voters to find the truth and vote accordingly.

The Hill reported yesterday that the House of Representative voted against a ‘clean’ bill to raise the debt ceiling.  The vote was 318-97, with 82 Democrats joining every Republican, not to raise the debt ceiling.  If this was, as Democrats charge, a purely symbolic, political vote, then there were an awful lot of Democrats who joined in. 

John Hinderaker at Power LIne pointed out yesterday that Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer and new DNC chief Debbie Wasserman-Schultz voted with the Republicans.  Obviously they are watching the polls and understand that a large percentage of Americans are disgusted with the level of spending in Washington.

The article at The Hill reports:

“The Treasury breached the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling on May 16, but the administration says it can stave off a first-ever default until Aug. 2.

“Obama has invited the entire House Republican Conference to the White House on Wednesday; Carney said the president wanted to “hear and listen to their ideas, their concerns.” He will meet with House Democrats on Thursday. The Biden group will hold its next meeting June 6.”

It will be very interesting to see what the bill to deal with the debt ceiling looks like when it is eventually passed. 

I Watch, the website of the Center for Public Integrity, posted an article about the increase in the number of government limosines in use over the first two years of the Obama administration. 

According to the article:

“But the number of limos owned by Uncle Sam increased by 73 percent during the first two years of the Obama administration, according to an analysis of records by iWatch News.”

The majority of the increase is said to be in the State Department.  The article points out:

“The increase in limos comes to light on the heels of an executive order from President Obama last week that charges agencies to increase the fuel efficiency of their fleets.”

If you are looking for a place to start cutting government spending…

It is amazing to me that an administration that makes such a fuss about increasing the mileage standards for American cars and driving ‘green’ cars is increasing the number of limosines used be the government.  It really does seem as if there is one set of rules for the ‘ruling class’ and another set of rules for us common people.

Erick Stakelbeck at CBN News posted a story today about Fetullah Gülen, who has been called the world’s top public intellectual and the face of moderate Islam.  The 70-year-old Muslim leader directs a global Islamic movement from the Pennsylvania mountains. 

The article reports:

“”It’s not just a religious movement; it’s the Fetullah Gülen movement. They call themselves that. So it is, you can say, a cult. It is a highly personalized movement,” Ariel Cohen, a Middle East analyst with the Heritage Foundation, said. Cohen has been tracking the Gülen movement closely.”

The article also reports that French-Turkish scholar Bayram Balci claims that the Gülen movement has three goals:

“the Islamization of the Turkish nationalist ideology; the Turkification of Islam; and the Islamization of modernity.””

The article reports:

“Currently, there are about 125 Gülen schools spread out over 25 states. One school in Philadelphia receives some $3 million annually in taxpayer money.”

This is part of the government’s outreach to so-called moderate Muslims.  Meanwhile the schools select the students they feel will be most likely to spread Islam and the concept of close ties between religion and state, and the United States taxpayer underwrites the effort.

It’s not news to anyone that there will be a presidential campaign in 2012.  This silly season seems to have begun early in this election cycle.  I am sure there are Republicans out there saying stupid things, but the air-headed statements award of the moment has to go to Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D.-Fla.), chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee.

Yesterday CNS News reported on some of Ms. Wasserman’s recent statements:

• recently Ms. Wasserman denounced Republicans last week for believing illegal immigration “should in fact be a crime.
• recently Ms. Wasserman stated “If it were up to the candidates for president on the Republican side, we would be driving foreign cars; they would have let the auto industry in America go down the tubes.”  It should be noted that according to Florida motor vehicle records, Ms. Wasserman drives a Japanese car.
• “One of the most tremendous sources of pride for me is that I am the first Jewish woman to represent the state of Florida in Congress. And another tremendous source of pride is that I am a pro-Israel Jewish member of Congress and I probably support a president that is pro-Israel,” Wasserman Schultz said.

• The new chairwoman has made a number of attention grabbing comments. In an April 6 interview on MSNBC, Wasserman Shultz voiced her opposition to the proposal by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to reduce the deficit by $6 trillion in 10 years.

• This plan would literally be a death trap for some seniors,” Wasserman Schultz said.Last week she said on MSNBC, that the passage of the health care law has strengthened Medicare.

• “In fact, we added 12 years of solvency to Medicare and ensure that it would be better for senior,” she said on Andrea Mitchell Reports on May 25.

  That’s contrary to the assessment of the Congressional Budget Office, the non-partisan accounting arm of Congress that predicted the Medicare trust fund will be exhausted by 2020 at the current path, almost a decade sooner than the last year’s forecast.

It is amazing to me that Ms. Wasserman sees President Obama as pro-Israel.  The path the President has started down in terms of creating a Palestinian state is a recipe for the destruction of Israel.  It is also interesting that she makes statements about Medicare that can easily be proven false.  I also wonder why she feels that illegal immigrants are called illegal if they are not committing a crime.

I suspect Ms. Wasserman might make this a much more interesting political season than it might otherwise be.  She’s almost as good as Howard Dean!

As we gear up for the 2012 election (yes, I know it is waaay too early), many states are looking at ways to cut back on the amount of voter fraud.  Many states saw fraudulent voter registration in the last election.  There have been many stories across the internet about the investigations of these problems.  Houston Votes was an organization that registered 25,000 new voters for the 2008 election.  A later investigation by an organization called True The Vote found that only 1,793 of those were actually legally registered voters.  (RightWingGranny.com).

On Sunday the San Francisco Chronicle posted an article stating:

“Less than 18 months before the next presidential election, Republican-controlled statehouses around the country are rewriting voting laws to require photo identification at the polls, reduce the number of days of early voting or tighten registration rules.”

Why is it that only Republican-controlled statehouses are trying to prevent voter fraud?  Where are the Democrats? 

Democrats complain that the requirement for voter ID blocks young voters, elderly voters and minority voters from being able to vote.  I am not an expert on this, but how do the people in that group buy cigarettes, alcohol, or cough medicine?  I really think that if you have to show identification to purchase these things, it is not unreasonable to have to show some form of identification to vote.

Again, it is the interesting that the Democrats don’t seem to support measures to prevent voter fraud.

The Hill reported today that this will be the week for Congress to begin work on the debt ceiling.  The first vote, tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, will be on a bill to raise the debt ceiling with no spending cuts or reforms.  Representative Dave Camp (R-Mich.), the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, sponsored the bill.  Representative Camp says that he does not plan to vote for the bill and expects the bill to be voted down.  The purpose of the bill is to send a clear message to the President that the House is serious about spending cuts and debt reduction. 

The article at The Hill lists the schedule for Washington this week.  Some of the events scheduled fof the coming week:

The House Appropriations Committee takes up the spending bill for the Food and Drug Administration.

 The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is holding a hearing on “Cybersecurity: Assessing the Nation’s Ability to Address the Growing Cyber Threat.”

A House Appropriations subcommittee will hold a hearing on the 2012 budget for the U.S. Capitol Police.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will hold a hearing on “Making the Gulf Coast Whole Again: Assessing the Recovery Efforts of BP and the Obama Administration After the Oil Spill.”

The House (Select) Intelligence Committee will have a closed hearing on “Israel/Palestinian Authority Update.”

The House Energy and Commerce Committee will hold a hearing on “The American Energy Initiative: H.R.909, A Roadmap for America’s Energy Future.”

A House Homeland Security subcommittee will hold a hearing on “Denying Safe Havens: Homeland Security’s Efforts to Counter Threats from Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia.”

This is definitely a week to pay attention.

This story comes from the Democratic Underground.  It can be found at different places on the internet.  Supposedly it comes from a police log in Sarasota, Florida.  I have no idea whether or not it is true–I just think it is a great story.  Unfortunately, as a senior citizen, I can relate.

This is directly from the website listed above:

An elderly Florida lady did her shopping and, upon returning to her car, found four males in the act of leaving with her vehicle. She dropped her shopping bags and drew her handgun, proceeding to scream at the top of her lungs, “I have a gun, and I know how to use it! Get out of the car!”

The four men didn’t wait for a second threat. They got out and ran like mad. The lady, somewhat shaken, then proceeded to load her shopping bags ino the back of her car and got into the driver’s seat. She was so shaken that she could not get her key into the ignition. She tried and tried, and then she realised why. It was the same reason she had wondered why there was a Frisbee and two 12 packs of beer on the front seat.

A few minutes later, she found her own car parked four or five spaces farther down. She loaded her bags into the car and drove to the police station to report her mistake. The sergeant to whom she told th story couldn’t stop laughing. He pointed to the other end of the counter, where four pale men were reporting a car-jacking by a mad elderly woman described as white, less than five feet tall, glasses, curly white hair, and carrying a large handgun. No charges were filed.

There is nothing I can add to this!

Please take the time today to remember those who have given their lives so that we may be free.

Happy Memorial Day