Vocal Minority

Star Parker Running for Congress in California?

Just about to call it a night, when I noticed this interesting bit of news by La Shawn Barber (posting at Malkin) that black conservative Star Parker is considering a run for Congress in California district 37 in south/east L.A. 

Star Parker Running for Congress?
By La Shawn Barber • March 23, 2010 02:07 PM

I’ll admit my bias up front: I really dig Star Parker.

When I first met the former “welfare queen” back in 2004, it was like meeting a rock star. I shared a panel with her at a conservative student conference. I was so nervous, my voice shook. She was relaxed, funny, and informative.

In this month’s issue of World magazine, editor Marvin Olasky says Parker is running for U.S. Congress against Rep. Laura Richardson. It’s about time.

Star Parker is an inspirational lady. She came out the worst situation, having been a drug-addicted, multiple-abortion-having teen mother. She was addicted to the welfare state to get by, but ultimately turned herself around. Ever since, she has been a spokesperson for hope through self-reliance, education, and adopting the right values. She's also used her own experience to challenge welfare-dependent Americans to get off the government dole, especially blacks who have been enslaved by what she calls "Uncle Sam's Plantation."

The cited World Magazine article reads in part:

For two decades no Republican has won more than 25 percent of the vote in California’s 37th, and in 2006 and 2008 Republicans didn’t even run a candidate. But by her own admission Parker has “a big mouth” and Richardson has big problems. If the GOP invests some big money in this year’s race, it could be competitive.

Could you imagine a black female conservative Republican running—and winning!—in a Democrat-heavy L.A. district? After Scott Brown, I believe anything’s possible.

As Drudge says: Developing …

What Is It About March 23?

If there are any practitioners of numerology out there, I wonder if they could tell us what 323 might symbolize. Lot of historical extremes on March 23:

1775 Patrick Henry called for America's independence from Britain, telling the Virginia Provincial Convention, "Give me liberty, or give me death!" 

1919 Benito Mussolini founded his Fascist political movement in Milan, Italy. 

1933 The German Reichstag adopted the Enabling Act, which effectively granted Adolf Hitler dictatorial legislative powers.

and now ...

2010 U.S. President Barack Obama signed "health" "care" "reform" legislation, effectively initiating the demise of the United States into a European-style socialist welfare state.

Joe Biden is a Big F*&$king Idiot

Right after introducing President Golden Calf at the signing of the U.S.'s death sentence, Veep Biden was caught saying, "This is a big f*&%king deal." Umm, veep? Those be microphones on that thar podium yer standing next to.

Here's Your Change: Taxes, Fines, Taxes, Penalties, Taxes, Jail, Taxes, Skyrocketing Prices, and Taxes

John Winder at Cypress Times has a sobering piece on the contents of our new health (s)care monstrosity:

“THIS IS WHAT CHANGE LOOKS LIKE” — HIDDEN TAXES, FINES AND BRIBES
John G. Winder, The Cypress Times
Published 03/23/2010 - 5:00 a.m. CST

President Obama and his legion, Pelosi, Reid, Stupak, et al, have said basically that once the American people get to know what’s in the healthcare legislation, they’ll actually like it. We all know how very important it is to the President and Speaker Pelosi that the American people be happy. …

When you buy your federally mandated, IRS enforced — either by penalty of a fine or imprisonment — health care insurance you may be buying from an insurance company that will donate a portion of what you spend for your insurance to a special fund to help pay for abortions. It is now mandatory that certain insurance carriers provide a portion of what you pay them for health care coverage to a special abortion fund – Stupak’s hastily scribbled hall pass aside, this is now law.

• There is no special fund for Breast Cancer
• There is no special fund for Heart Disease
• There is no special fund for Diabetes or MS
• There is ONLY a special fund to pay for abortions

When you sell a home in Mr. Obama’s new and improved America a 4% tax will be levied on your proceeds from the sale which will go to cover Health Care costs.

Tanning? Apparently Dems want us all to be pasty for some reason…if you frequent tanning salons, you will pay a 10% excise tax.

Mobility be damned! If you purchase a wheelchair, you will pay a 2.3% excise tax. I’m sure those confined to wheelchairs will consider this to be a great step forward in care.

Pharmaceutical companies will be allowed to pass a $3 billion annual fee on to you, the consumer, in the form of more expensive drugs and medication.

About those fines — Citizens who don’t purchase insurance would be subject to a fine of $325 in 2015 and $695 in 2016. Individuals may be subject to a charge equal to as much as 2.5 percent of their income in 2016.

The Medicare payroll tax will now be applied to investment income, beginning in 2013.

A new 3.8 percent tax will be levied on interest, dividends, capital gains and other investment income for individuals making more than $200,000 a year and couples making more than $250,000.

The Medicare payroll tax will increase by 0.9 percentage point to 2.35 percent on wages above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for married couples filing jointly.

Those last two taxes are important, as they target only the eeevil “rich.” It’s Obama’s way of redistributing wealth and, as he once said when lying to “Joe the Plumber,” punishing success. As with all Marxist progressive tax schemes, it will motivate people not to attain wealth because they will end up being punished for it. The result is a nation where people strive for mediocrity, because mediocrity is safe. The more Americans who stay mediocre, the less money they earn. The less money they earn, the more likely they end up at what the federal government deems as the “poverty” level. The more Americans at the “poverty” level, the more they end up addicted dependents—and Democrat voters—of the welfare state. Everyone got that?

A 40% tax on health benefits happens in 2018 and applies to premiums exceeding $10,200 a year for individuals and $27,500 for families. In other words, that phrase — “If you like your current insurance, it won’t change” was a big fat lie. If you have great insurance, you’ll now be taxed for the privilege. A 40% tax is a change. …

Doctors and hospitals will receive less compensation than they do now to control revenue streams.

The Medicare program will see $500 billion in cuts to its program along with the Medicare tax being raised.

60% of new enrollees in health care programs will be fully subsidized by you. …

Which means the remaining 40% will have taxes siphoned out of their income to cover them, i.e., redistribution of wealth. It’s the Marxist-socialist Democrat’s wet dream. The majority of Americans will be permanent bloc of Democrat voters as long as they know that Democrat politicians will force the minority to pay for their “free lunch” in perpetuity. 

But notice the ratio is 60%-40%. So much for Obama’s promise that he’d only be imposing that on only 5% of the population and that 95% won’t see any tax increases. If you believed that lie than you deserve to wear a dunce cap with the Obama logo on the front of it.

Never did I hear Obama promise to ignore the will of the people.

Since last night, Obama, Pelosi and their legion have taken time to grin and pose for the cameras and proclaim the passage of this bill as “historic”. They’ve taken time to pat themselves on the back and to say that this legislation compares to the passage of Medicare, the passage of Social Security and the passage of Civil Rights.

In terms of the monumental impact this law will have on our nation, they are correct to rank it up there with all of those past life-changing pieces of legislation. There is however one incredibly glaring difference. Those milestone pieces of legislation all passed with bi-partisan support.

The only bi-partisanship exhibited in the passing of this legislation was on the side of dissent with more than 30 Democrats crossing over to the Republican side of the aisle to cast their “No” votes. The only Democratic Representative from the state of Texas to vote “No” was Waco’s Chet Edwards.

There’s another, more significant glaring difference: The passage of Civil Rights legislation (although arguably not Social Security or Medicare) was an expansion of constitutionally-prescribed liberty and individual freedom. This passage of this bill is unconstitutional on its face and is arguably the largest usurpation of freedom and private property (i.e., your income) in U.S. history. Oh, here’s another big difference: Although bi-partisan, the Civil Rights bills of the 1960’s, as well as voting rights bills of the late 1950’s were supported by a Republican majority. It was the that by and large opposed voting and civil rights.

The condescending attitude from this President and this Congress is unprecedented. The President added to the insult by saying, “We proved that this government—a government of the people and by the people—still works for the people.”

Mr. President that is perhaps your boldest and most condescending lie to date.

56% of the people in this nation opposed this health care reform legislation. Your actions have proven that your words have no meaning and that your government—a government of the politician and for the politician—views the people with absolute disdain.

Including sending Congressmen out to lie to the dutiful Obama-adoring media that the Tea Partiers they walked past hurled racist and homophobic epithets at them. Oh yeah, that’s working for the people: his people.

As others already have done, Winder has shown by itemizing all the taxes to be imposed with this bill that Obama’s vision of “spreading the wealth” is about to begin.

Welcome to the future, suckers.

While D.C. Burns, NJ Tries to Rise from Its Ashes

I suppose every cloud has a silver lining. While the President and Congress put in motion their agenda to bankrupt the nation and put every human living within our borders dependent on the state, NJ Republican governor Chris Christie signed a bunch of bills yesterday in Trenton, making good on his promise to reform the Garden State’s broken pension system.

For those of you not familiar with NJ politics, the state has been reeling in billions of debt. For years public employees - particularly school teachers, administrators, and superintendents - have gotten union-guaranteed fully paid health care benefits and pensions. Public officials like mayors and even emergency personnel have been able to turn decades of unused sick days into six-figure payouts at retirement, as well as generous pensions. Not to mention that the Garden State has had "double dipping" problems - people holding two taxpayer-funded jobs and collecting two salaries, two benefit plans, and two pensions.

No governor has had the balls to do anything about this unsustainable situation - until Christie came into office.

Kevin McArdle at NJ 101.5 has the story. There’s video available at the link:

Posted: Tuesday, 23 March 2010 5:01AM
CHRISTIE SIGNS PENSIONS AND HEALTH BENEFITS REFORMS INTO LAW (WITH VIDEO)
Kevin McArdle Reporting

Governor Chris Christie has signed his first bills into law. Last night, Christie signed the three measures designed to save taxpayers billions by making pensions and health benefits for government workers less generous.

“The passage of today’s set of bills is a solid start to reforming our pension system and I applaud the Senate and Assembly Leadership and the entire bipartisan efforts of the legislature for taking this necessary first step,” says Christie. “It is clear that our state can no longer afford a system that is rife with abuse, that promises substantial payouts with little buy-in, and that provides benefits that are wildly out of proportion with the private sector.”

To hear full audio of Christie’s press conference go www.nj.gov and click on the Governor’s page. …

“This is a key step toward fixing our broken pension and benefit system with a comprehensive bipartisan package that’s been studied and analyzed to ensure it will eventually save taxpayer money,” says Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver. “Our system is unsustainable for both taxpayers and public workers, but with this expanded and sweeping package we will bring real reform and relief to taxpayers and create a reliable system for public workers.”

“The bills represent the first step towards achieving important and necessary reforms to the state’s pension and health benefits program,” says Assembly Republican Leader Alex DeCroce. “Everyone acknowledges the current structure cannot be supported by taxpayers alone and needs to be revamped. We are past the point of talking about the problem and I am pleased that the long overdue changes the system requires are finally becoming a reality.”

Christie says the legislation has far-reaching savings. Two of the bills are projected to save $8 billion over 15 years. The third bill, which requires a health care contribution from all workers, is projected to save local governments and school boards $315 million in the coming year alone. …

Yesterday, The Senate also passed a resolution that would require the state to begin making its annual pension system contribution. The constitutional amendment requires voter approval.

Two other reform bills, both originating in the Assembly, were held. One would bar quasi-government employees from enrolling in the pension system. The other would apply pension reforms to employees of authorities, boards and commissions. Oliver says those bills would be worked on over the next couple of months and returned for consideration when the Legislature returns from a break in May.

Thank you, governor, for defending us NJ taxpayers, and especially for standing up to the teachers union. These spoiled brats need to understand that they've milked the cow dry enough.

This morning at NJ 101.5 they announced that school budgets were being delivered to Trenton, most of which contain property tax hikes. Why? Without any cut in state aid, my property taxes have gone up 25% in five years while teachers, administrators, and superintendents win the lottery. For years their union contracts have guaranteed automatic raises, accumulated sick days, and paid-for pensions and health benefits. And for what? Are NJ’s public schools the best in the country? In the world? Hardly. As with most government-run endeavors, we’re giving a whole lot and getting very little return on the investment. Enough. The gravy train is closed!

Around the Web in 80 Minutes (03/22/10)

March 22, 2010 | American Thinker
Where Were You When the Republic Died?
By Matt Patterson

In November 2008, Americans elected a socialist as their president. In March 2010, they woke up stunned to find themselves living in a socialist country.

Health insurers—once private companies—are now organs of the federal government. Every citizen is a ward of the state, which can now compel you to have insurance, punish you if you don’t; determine if your insurance is acceptable, punish you if it isn’t. Thousands of new federal bureaucrats will soon spill from the D.C. Beltway and flood the country, scrutinizing our finances to verify compliance with this new law. A government that grants itself this kind of power over us can conceivably do anything to us. For our own good, of course. Such a country is in no meaningful sense “free.” And this is only the beginning. Liberals are salivating in contemplation of all the fanciful window trimmings that can in the future be hung from this legislative framework. Public option will soon appear as prelude to single payer, as was the intent all along. Soon, Americans won’t even have the illusion of a choice—the government will move from subsidizer to provider, and it will be the only game in town. … 

There’s a reason why Democrats were desperate to ram this through at any cost—once enacted, such things are all but perpetual. Former freedom-loving peoples begin to tell themselves that it’s really not so bad. Sure, government is forcing you to eat state-approved gruel, but hey, at least they hold the spoon, and they even pour a little sugar on top when you’re good. The worst part of watching the proceedings unfold on Sunday was the endless stream of commentators and pundits calmly discussing this bill as if it were just one more piece of bad legislation that we will have to live under. In fact, what has transpired is nothing less than an overthrow of the old Constitutional order. In 1776, the American Republic boldly announced its birth with the Declaration of Independence. In 2010, it quietly expired with a declaration of dependence—on government, on entitlement, and on the Democratic party.

March 22, 2010 | American Thinker
America Lost
By Steve McCann

… Many of us who came to the United States did so to escape the brutal hand of government or as survivors of the consequences of tyranny run amok.

It has become difficult to watch, as our adopted land appears to have chosen a path that will lead to a nation we dare not imagine: a nation beginning to resemble what we left behind.

We see in Washington, D.C. the spectacle of a Congress whose members are no longer responsive to the people or the Constitution, but instead are captive to their personal whims and greed, as well as their allegiance to a president, political party, and statist ideology.

We recognize that in the White House, in the office once occupied by some of the greatest men in history, the nation has as its president the person most hostile to the founding tenets of the United States since its inception. Mr. Obama appears more desirous of creating a "cult of personality" and a socialist utopia by any means necessary than in acting in the best interest of all the people.

We have witnessed, despite the overwhelming opposition of the people, the arrogance of power as the Obama administration and the Democrats in Congress forced through a Health Care Reform bill—a bill whose objective is not to improve the health care of the citizens, but to expand by geometric proportions the power of the state over the individual.

We know that this bill will be nearly impossible to fully repeal, but more importantly, it will pit the government against the individual, foment class warfare, create additional unemployment, shackle the economy, and exacerbate the national debt crisis, while ultimately rationing health care to the most vulnerable in society.

We notice that the (once-)mainstream media are no longer the watchdogs of the machinations of government, but rather the cheerleaders for the present administration. The current health care debate was viewed not as a vital national issue, but rather as a sporting event with the requisite reporting on which team would win.

We see an economy, the engine of wealth and security, hamstrung by regulations, taxes, government policies, lawsuits, and mandates no longer able to generate jobs and income for our citizens. American businesses can no longer compete in a new global economy and must therefore leave our shores, taking employment opportunities and wealth with them. Small businesses and entrepreneurs will no longer be able to generate jobs or even open their doors, as they too will be hobbled by this same myopic and rigid socialist ideology.

We realize, as do many of our fellow citizens, that the United States is on a collision course with national bankruptcy. Yet the present government appears determined, by their policies, to make certain that there is little or no economic growth so necessary to mitigate the future debt crises and make certain that the standard of living for all Americans continues to increase. …

New Health-Care Taxes Help Obama ‘Spread the Wealth’ (Update1)
By Ryan J. Donmoyer

March 22 (Bloomberg) – President Barack Obama said on the campaign trail in October 2008 that he wanted to “spread the wealth around.” With Obama on the verge of signing sweeping health-care overhaul legislation, he’s about to do just that. …

March 22, 2010 | Jewish World Review
Dark dawn of deemocracy
By Mark Steyn

… Investor’s Business Daily argues that the “health” debate is really a proxy fight on the size and role of government. According to its poll, 64 percent of people think the federal government has “too much power.” Correct. But a big chunk of that 64 percent voted less than 18 months ago for a man and a party explicitly committed to more government with more power, and they’re living with the consequences. Mr. Obama is government, and government is Mr. Obama. That’s all he knows and all he’s ever known. You elected to the highest office in the land a man who has never run a business or created wealth or made a payroll and for his entire adult life has hung out with guys who have demonized (deemonized) such grubby activities. Many of those associates he appointed to high office: Mr. Obama’s Cabinet has less experience of private business than any in the last century. What it knows is government, and government’s default mode is to grow and grow. California is bankrupt: The dependent class and the government class that issues the checks to the dependent class have squeezed out the poor boobs in the middle who have to pay for it all. Everybody knows this. But a state that already has a Bureau of Home Furnishings cannot restrain itself from setting up a Bureau of Motion Picture Condom Regulation—or, anyway, an impact study to study whether the Bureau of Impact Studies should study the impact of a Bureau of Motion Picture Condom Regulation.

Look around you, and take it all in. From now on, it gets worse. If you have children, they’ll live in smaller homes, drive smaller cars, live smaller lives. If you don’t have children, you had better hope your neighbors do, because someone needs to spawn a working population large enough to pay for the unsustainable entitlements the Obama party has suckered you into thinking you’re entitled to. The unfunded liabilities of current entitlements are $100 trillion. Try typing that onto your pocket calculator. You can’t. There isn’t enough room for all the zeroes, and even if they made a pocket calculator large enough, and a pocket large enough, you’d be walking with a limp. To these existing entitlements, Mr. Obama and his enforcers in Congress propose to add the grandest of all: health care, on a scale no advanced democracy has ever attempted. Whatever is “deemed” to have passed doesn’t end the debate but begins it. If you’re sick of talking about health care, move to Tahiti, because in the United States, we’re going to be talking about it until the end of time, or at least until the Iranians nuke Cleveland. ...

March 22, 2010 | National Review Online
Obamacare Isn’t Inevitable

“Nil desperandum” — never despair. That is a sentiment that conservatives need to take to heart now that Congress has narrowly passed a bill that simultaneously undermines life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

It takes some ingenuity to add to the costs, inefficiency, and dysfunctions that government has already bequeathed to our health-care system, but the Democrats have proven themselves up to the challenge. Almost nothing about this legislation is free of dispute, but we are convinced that it will increase taxes, increase premiums, and increase debt, while decreasing economic growth, job growth, and the quality of health care.

The Democrats had no mandate to take these steps. In 2008, the president campaigned both against forcing people to buy insurance and against taxing their benefits. The legislation runs counter to the campaign on both points. The president promised to change Washington. He has made its stench more noisome, winning this vote by using every kind of deceit and (legal) corruption, and over the objection of a bipartisan coalition representing most Americans.

We are now being told that the campaign to repeal this legislation is over before it has even begun, that Americans will come to appreciate the benefits that a bountiful government is giving them, and that the growth of the welfare state can never be reversed. We understand the odds against repeal. We understand, indeed, that complete repeal of every provision of the bill is impossible. The doughnut hole — a gap in Medicare’s prescription-drug coverage designed to encourage seniors to economize — has been filled, and it is not going to be re-opened.

But the larger thesis seems as superficially plausible, and as ultimately convincing, as were earlier predictions that state socialism or secularization were our inevitable future. It is quite possible that the majority of America that rejects this legislation will get its way in the next few years — if it is given the right leadership. And it is worth the effort to try. …

Sensible Liberals: The 34 Democrats Who Voted NO

The health (s)care bill last night was actually bi-partisan—bi-partisan opposition, that is. For what it's worth, these are the 34 Dems who voted no yesterday. And if any of them are in your district, call and thank them. They deserve it:

Rep. John Adler (N.J.), Rep. Jason Altmire (Pa.), Rep. Michael Arcuri (N.Y.), Rep. John Barrow (Ga.), Rep. Marion Berry (Ark.), Rep. Dan Boren (Okla.), Rep. Rick Boucher (Va.), Rep. Bobby Bright (Ala.), Rep. Ben Chandler (Ky.), Rep. Travis Childers (Miss.), Rep. Artur Davis (Ala.), Rep. Lincoln Davis (Tenn.), Rep. Chet Edwards (Texas), Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S.D.), Rep. Tim Holden (Pa.), Rep. Larry Kissell (N.C.), Rep. Frank Kratovil (Md.), Rep. Dan Lipinski (Ill.), Rep. Stephen Lynch (Mass.), Rep. Jim Marshall (Ga.), Rep. Jim Matheson (Utah), Rep. Mike McIntyre (N.C.), Rep. Mike McMahon (N.Y.), Rep. Charlie Melancon (La.), Rep. Walt Minnick (Idaho), Rep. Glenn Nye (Va.), Rep. Collin Peterson (Minn.), Rep. Mike Ross (Ark.), Rep. Heath Shuler (N.C.), Rep. Ike Skelton (Mo.), Rep. Zack Space (Ohio), Rep. John Tanner (Tenn.), Rep. Gene Taylor (Miss.), Rep. Harry Teague (N.M.)

A Day That Will Live in Infamy

December 7, 1941 ... September 11, 2001 ... March 21, 2010

These are days that will forever live in infamy.

The above pic courtesy of Patriot Post, which also provides this apt quote:

"[G]iving [Congress] a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole [Constitution] to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please. Certainly, no such universal power was meant to be given them." - Thomas Jefferson

For the first time in American history, its citizenry has been attacked by their own government. I think of my precious children and weep for my country.

Liberal Media Bias: MSM Depicts Anti-GovCare Rally as Spitting, Epithet-Spewing Racists

As this weekend we possibly come to the end of freedom as we know it, the mainstream media has done its job as President Golden Calf and the DemocRATs’ propaganda arm. AP (which should stand for Absolutely Pathetic) especially worked their magic in their coverage of yesterday’s anti-GovCare rally in D.C. Here is how this “news article” began:

Ugly build-up to House health care vote
Demonstrators hurl N-word, spit at black members of Congress

WASHINGTON - House Democrats heard it all Saturday — words of inspiration from President Barack Obama and raucous chants of protests from demonstrators. And at times it was flat-out ugly, including some racial epithets aimed at black members of Congress.

Who said they heard such epithets and endured spitting?

‘N-word’ 15 times 

The motorcade that carried Obama to Capitol Hill to whip up support for the bill drove past crowds waving signs that read “Stop the spending” and “Get your hands out of my pocketbook and health care.” Many booed and thrust their thumbs down as Obama rode by.

So the hell what? When libs swarmed upon D.C. to do that to George W. Bush and Congressional Republicans, AP was more than happy to tell their inspiring stories! No “ugliness” when Bushie was getting booed!

As police held demonstrators back to clear areas for lawmakers outside the Capitol Obama’s speech, some protesters jeered and chanted at the officers, “You work for us.”

Nothing wrong there. Then comes the juicy part:

Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind., told a reporter that as he left the Cannon House Office Building with Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a leader of the civil rights era,

They had to add that “civil rights” thing in to put in the readers mind the idea that (a) this unconstutional freedom-shredding bill is somehow remotely morally and legally similar and (b) to set Lewis’ background against what allegedly followed:

some among the crowd chanted “the N-word, the N-word, 15 times.” Both Carson and Lewis are black, and Lewis spokeswoman Brenda Jones also said that it occurred.

Oh, I see. Two black Democrats and one of their spokespeople tell a reporter that people in the crowd chanted the N-word. Fifteen times. Not 14, not 13, but 15 exact times.

I call Bravo Sierra. These sleazy Democrats—and their dutiful sheep in the MSM—will do anything to get this piece of unconstitutional garbage passed. Ask Democrat Rep. Alcee Hastings who said just the other day:

“I wish that I had been there when Thomas Edison made the remark that I think applies here: ’There ain’t no rules around here — we’re trying to accomplish something.’ And therefore, when the deal goes down, all this talk about rules, we make ‘em up as we go along.

And if it means continuing to paint the anti-GovCare and Tea Party movement as intolerant racists until the very last day, then so be it. Notice how AP reports the name-calling as fact, not as an “as told to.”

Oh, here’s how AP described the upcoming vote:

Most of the day’s important work leading up to Sunday’s historic vote on health care was being done behind closed doors. Democratic leaders cajoled, bargained and did what they needed to nail down the votes they will need to finally push Obama’s health care overhaul bill through the House.

“Cajoled, bargained, and did what they needed”? How about bribed, strong-armed, and threatened? 

Eventually, other MSM outlets picked up on the story. And this time it just wasn't black Congressmen being called the N-word. Barney Frank was also allegedly called f*ggot. This according to McClatchy:

Tea party protesters use racial epithet against Georgia’s John Lewis

Demonstrators outside the U.S. Capitol , angry over the proposed health care bill,shouted “nigger” Saturday at U.S. Rep. John Lewis , a Georgia congressman and civil rights icon who was nearly beaten to death during an Alabama march in the 1960s.

The protesters also shouted obscenities at other members of the Congressional Black Caucus , lawmakers said.

“They were shouting, sort of harassing,” Lewis said. “But, it’s okay, I’ve faced this before. It reminded me of the 60s. It was a lot of downright hate and anger and people being downright mean.”

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver , D- Mo. , said he was a few yards behind Lewis and distinctly heard “nigger.”

“It was a chorus,” Cleaver said. “In a way, I feel sorry for those people who are doing this nasty stuff – they’re being whipped up. I decided I wouldn’t be angry with any of them.”

Protestors also used a slur as they confronted Rep. Barney Frank , D- Mass. , an openly gay member of Congress . A writer for Huffington Post said the crowd called Frank a “faggot.”

Again, more unsubstantiated hearsay being reported as fact. Oh, well if a writer for HuffPo said something, then it must be true. Give me a break!

And finally a “news article” in this morning’s Washington Post, which is described by blogger Walter Scott Hudson thus:

For those who are counting, that’s 287 words out of 1,223, nearly 1/4 of the article devoted to how protesters against Obamacare are racist homophobes. Conspicuously missing is any mention whatsoever of any substantive objection to the bill, as if folks traveled from across the nation to gather at their capital for the sole purpose of calling John Lewis the n-word. The other three-quarters of the article is naturally replete with quotations and summaries of Democratic rationale in favor of the bill.

This is an outrageous eleventh hour smear of the majority the public, who have made their position on health care reform abundantly clear in poll after poll. There is no indication of any attempt to follow-up with the accused protesters or obtain their side of the story. It is inconceivable that racial epitaphs represented a proportion of the day’s protest significant enough to exclude all other substantive reporting.

By the way, Walter Scott Hudson is black. (Yes, it does matter.)

Next, Ann Althouse has this to say about the racism and spitting accusations:

I have no idea who was the source of any saliva and nasty words, but it’s important to realize how easy it is for someone who isn’t typical of the group or who is even its adversary to do things like this. It’s one of the oldest dirty tricks.

It’s also important to distinguish “angry protesters” from particular individuals who cross the line into the kind real ugliness or violence that should be condemned. There’s nothing wrong with showing anger at the thing that motivates you to protest. That’s what protests are for! The members of Congress have a lot of power, and they ought to have to hear the anger their exercise of that power is causing. It’s outrageous for them to pose as victims without very good cause. So what if some idiot said a bad word? That’s a trivial distraction compared to the power they are about to exercise in the face of such strong opposition to what they are about to do.

From what I heard — from Meade, who was there — the people at yesterday’s protest were unusually nice and friendly and well-behaved. Still, the Washington Post uses the term “angry protesters.” That’s a journalistic device to delegitimitize the demonstration by merging everyone into the few persons who said something racist/homophobic. That’s not fair and it’s not accurate, but it has been the stock MSM treatment of the Tea Party movement all along.

Exactly.

UPDATE - Video shows NO epithets: Jim Hoft at BigGovernment even provides video of the black Congressmen walking past the crowd. Is there booing? Hells yeah. Just like libs and lefties did to Bush and Co., so big effing deal. Is there a single inappropriate comment made? No.

Conclusion: These Dems are politically-motivated liars. And so are the MSM outlets who parroted their lies.

Bob Parks, who links to the same video, says:

Journalism 1.01: verify.

It’s sad I have to remind the media professionals of the rules and equally sad Tea Party officials issued a premature acknowledgement of this fraud.

Unfortunately, Bob - and there are plenty of journalists and even journalism professors to corroborate this - Journalism 101 is now to “change the world” and “make a difference.”

P.S. Bob Parks is also black. Yes, it does matter.

MSM, you are pathetic. You can spread Democrat propaganda and lies all you want. There is nothing you can do to dissuade patriotic Constitution- and freedom-loving Americans like myself that we are on the right side of history. If I didn’t have work yesterday in New York state, I would have been down in D.C. with those protesters. And proudly so.

The only thing ugly here is your sleazy biased reporting.

Quote of the Day (3/20/10): Educating Ms. Pelosi

I have three simple questions, Ms. Pelosi. Are you so arrogant that you think you know what’s best for the American people? Are you so ignorant that you are oblivious to the wishes of the American people? And are you so incompetent that you are going to ignore the Constitution of the United States, use tricks, deceptions, bald faced lies to try to ram down the throat of the American people something that they do not want and is going to be absolutely worse for their healthcare? 

- Rep. and family doctor Paul Broun, (R-GA) [Hot Air via IHateTheMedia]

Liberal Fascism: GovCare to Give IRS Unprecedented Overreaching Power

ObamaCare is going to be great! If you’re the IRS.

You might be thinking: What does the IRS have to so with any promise made to the American people by President Hope&Change and his Congressional goons? Watch over you like Big Brother, including:

• IRS agents verify if you have “acceptable” health care coverage
• IRS has the authority to fine you up to $2,250 or 2 percent of your income (whichever is greater) for failure to prove that you have purchased “minimum essential coverage”
• IRS can confiscate your tax refund
• IRS audits are likely to increase
• IRS will need up to $10 billion to administer the new health care program this decade
• IRS may need to hire as many as 16,500 additional auditors, agents and other employees to investigate and collect billions in new taxes from Americans Nearly half of all these new individual mandate taxes will be paid by Americans earning less than 300 percent of poverty ($66,150 for a family of four). There goes that less than $250,000 thing the POTUS promised.

And then, as Sammy at YidWith Lid points out:

• The IRS is barred from imposing these taxes and penalties on immigrants

You might be asking, "Is this the same IRS who just this week sicked some agents on a Sacramento, California car wash for 4 whopping cents?" The one and the same.

What does any of this have to do with offering coverage to uninsured Americans, keeping the insurance companies honest, providing quality and efficient care to Americans, keeping costs down, or any other Marxist class-warfare talking point Obama-Pelosi-Reid have been spewing for over a year?

Nothing.

What does this have to do with the federal government shackling you like a slave to an unconstitutional requirement that you pay “your fair share” for what is sure to be a lethal bureaucratic disaster of historic proportion?

Everything.

For all you liberals/Democrats who for eight years were bitching and moaning about how the Bush-Cheney-Ashcroft junta was supposedly shredding the Constitution, lemme point something out to you: This is shredding the Constitution!

Welcome to the future, suckers.

Quote of the Day (3/19/10): L. Brandeis on Government and Liberty

Yesterday I picked up a copy of Milton and Rose Friedman's book Free to Choose. On the page in between the Preface and Intro was this quote by Justice Louis Brandeis from a 1928 ruling:

Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.

How bone-chillingly prophetic. 

The only part of this quote I take issue with here is the second sentence. I don't think men (or in our PC age, people) born to freedom are naturally alert to threats to their liberty. I think too many Americans are too complacent and uninvolved to know what plans "men of zeal" have for them. Not all Americans, but too many. Otherwise, why would Barack Obama still have a nearly 50% job approval rating?

To be sure, there are Americans who are, as Brandeis said it, alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers: constitutional originalists, Reaganesque conservatives, and libertarians, and others. It's gratifying to know that audiences of Fox News' commentary/analysis shows and conservative talk radio keep growing. It's heartwarming to know that a sleeping giant has awoken in the form of the Tea Party movement.

Liberal Media Bias: Kristof Thinks ObamaCare Brings Immortality

Clay Waters at TimesWatch is a little suspicious of a study cited by Nicholas Kristof at the NY Times. Think he's justified in his skepticism?

Health Insurance: Your Ticket to Eternal Life 

From Nicholas Kristof's Thursday column pushing greater access to health care:

One careful study after another has shown that uninsured people are significantly more likely to die than insured people. That’s because diseases are caught at later stages on uninsured people, and they don’t get treated so well.

A truly careful study would have verified that the likelihood of a person dying remain, as always, a perfect 100%.

This isn't the first time Kristof touted the wonders of the government making every health-related decision in your life, and exaggerated the supposed horrors of not having such a system unconstitutionally imposed on you.

Pic of the Day (3/17/10): Democracy Denied

Thanks to the Tea Party Patriots group on Facebook:

 

 Any questions?

Liberal Hypocrisy: $ome Executive Bonu$e$ Are $eemingly OK [UPDATED 3/17]

The other day a New York paper had an article about a company whose top executives were rewarded with enormous raises and bonuses. At the same time, their company was suffering with diminishing profits, declining ad revenue, and dropping stock prices. The low-level workers faced pay cuts, layoffs, unpaid vacations, and frozen pension plans:

Top executives at the beleaguered … Company reaped hefty rewards last year, with [the] Chairman … more than doubling his total compensation to $6 million.

[The] CEO … got even more, reaping $6.3 million, a 31.9 percent hike.

The increases come against a backdrop of declining ad revenue, layoffs, frozen pension plans, unpaid vacations and a 5 percent pay cut for most of the rank-and-file workers last year.

“Our members are really unhappy with what is happening,” said Bill O’Meara, president of the [workers guild]. “They made a voluntary sacrifice to give up some of their pay to help the company out. People are losing their jobs still.”

One corporate governance expert warned that even if a publicly traded company’s compensation committee OK’d the compensation, it could backfire in the court of public opinion.

“I think the board may want to weigh the consequences of rewarding their executives, who may be worthy of the increases, against the damage that may occur to the company’s reputation,” said William Sannwald, a business professor at San Diego State University.

Michael Golden, a first cousin of [the CEO]’s who is vice chairman and chief operating officer of the [Company]’s Regional Media Group, took home $2.4 million in total compensation last year, up 71 percent. CFO Jim Folo received a 20 percent boost, earning $1.3 million.

As mentioned above, the company itself is facing financial crisis:

At the current rate of cash consumption, assuming no one-time expenses (highly unlikely), we estimate that the company will max out its current borrowing capacity in 4 quarters. At that point, it will owe about $1.2 billion in debt. This estimate does not include any payments on the company’s $600+ million pension and benefit obligation, of which $181 million is due next year.

The bottom line: [This c]ompany remains on the brink of insolvency.

...and they are a public company now. So do the shareholders and holders of debt for this company feel comfortable with such ridiculously generous payouts? …

Doesn’t this make your blood boil? How can greedy executives “take the money and run” while their stock holders and lowly employees take it in the neck?

Surely this story is tailor fit for the NY Times, which has been at the forefront of those media outlets lambasting greedy CEO’s and other big wig execs who always seem to ride atop the waves while the plebes drown.

Except for one small detail. The company in question is the NY Times.

The Chairman whose compensation doubled to $6 million is none other than Arthur “Pinch” Sulzberger. 

The CEO who saw her pay increase by nearly a third to $6.3 million is Janet Robinson. 

It is “Pinch”’s cousin who got a 71% raise to $2.4 million. (Yeah, I’m sure the guy really earned that position.)

All this while the NY Times faces a debt of $1.2 billion, not including its pension and benefits obligations. All this while the Grey Lady’s own workers have been hit with layoffs, 5% pay cuts, unpaid vacations, and frozen pension plans. (You know: the masses, the proletariat, the Little Guy whom the Times is always looking out for.)

By the way, how many minorities are executives at the NY Times and benefited from these generous rewards? Just aksin’.

The NY Times is always there to blast every other company that pulls this crap. (Examples here and here. [h/t Jay Golub at Urban Elephants]

And because of that I can only think of two words to describe these high-ups at the NY Times:

F**king hypocrites.

UPDATE 3/17: Clarification on executive pay at the NY Times. First, CEO Janet Robinson’s base pay decreased by 4%, but that was offset—and then some—by nearly $4 million in bonuses and stock options. AP reports:

An analysis by The Associated Press shows that New York Times Co. CEO Janet Robinson got roughly $4.9 million in compensation in 2009.

Robinson’s base salary fell 4 percent to $962,500. But she got a bonus of about $2.3 million, four times the size of her 2008 bonus.

Robinson also received stock options that were worth $1.6 million when they were granted. About $560,000 of that was meant to replace options that had been given in 2008 and were later voided because they exceeded a limit set by company bylaws.

Can’t wait for the NY Times to take to task this greedy company which compensates its CEO so generously while laying off 8% of its workers in the newsroom. Oh wait …

Liberal Media Bias: More Free Publicity for the "Coffee Party," Courtesy of the MSM

Last Friday I blogged on CNN’s embarrassingly slanted “news” story on the nascent “Coffee Party.” Since then, CBS, the NY Times and NPR—your tax dollars at work—have stepped up to serve as a free P.R. firm for this partisan well-funded Astroturf.

Consider:

Looking for change, but not quite ready for a revolution? Disappointed in President Obama and Congress, but not ready to turn your back on Washington? Prefer a double, non-foam latte over a cup of Earl Grey? The Coffee Party might be for you.

Is that from a radio commercial? A magazine or newspaper ad? A flyer found on your windshield?

Nope, nope, and nope. It’s the first paragraph of a supposedly objective news story at CBSNews’ Political Hotsheet blog.

The title of this so-called news story, by the way, is: “Is the Coffee Party the Next Big Thing?” To which Candace Moore at NewsBusters quips:

It’s easy to be the next big thing when the media give you all the publicity you need.

Indeed.

On the NPR “news” story Thomas Lifson at American Thinker reports:

Taxpayer-subsidized National Public Radio wrote, “In just a few weeks, fans of the Coffee Party on Facebook mushroomed from a few hundred to more than 100,000—making Park the accidental leader of a political movement.”

Accidental leader? Are you freaking kidding me?

Lifson continues:

The new and much-publicized Coffee Party movement sports a fairy-tale narrative about a spontaneous uprising of concerned Americans appalled at the Tea Parties and determined to restore civility. The truth, easily researchable on the internet, is that plenty of left-wing establishment fingerprints are all over the birth of this supposedly spur-of-the-moment operation.

Professional leftists, who assert that they speak for the people, just hate it when the people manage to organize themselves to speak out against the Left, as in the prairie-fire spread of the Tea Parties. Something had to be done, and in this case, “something” meant creating the Coffee Party movement. …

And make no mistake: CBS, NPR, and all the other lib MSM outlets are happy to abdicate their journalistic integrity and prop them up as much as they can. They never gave fair and balanced coverage to the Tea Parties—a truly grassroots, patriotic, and pro-Constitution movement—because they hate them. By glorifying the “Coffee Party” and whitewashing its organizers' easily searchable radical and non-grassroots background, these media outlets ridicule and marginalize the Tea Party movement even more.

No wonder their viewership keeps dropping.

Pic of the Day (3/15/10): Real Hope & Change

Via Ed Morrissey at Hot Air, a new billboard that has mysteriously popped up in Minnesota: Incidentally, when those customizable Obamicon.Me posters were popular last year, yours truly created this:

  

Liberal Media Bias: CNN's Nauseating Puff Piece on the "Coffee Party"

Get the barf bag ready. In what is arguably the most egregious example of liberal bias in the mainstream media since … um, yesterday, CNN online has a fawning propaganda piece disguised as an objective news story on the “Coffee Party.” The article is called Meet the people who are percolating in the Coffee Party (aw, how cute) by some lib hack with a journalism degree named Jessica Ravitz. My blood is boiling as I type this, but I’ll suffer through it for you, dear readers.

First ingredient in this free infomercial is its glowing, exaggerated “grassroots” description:

They’re professionals, musicians and housewives. They’re frustrated liberal activists, disheartened conservatives and political newborns. They’re young and old, rich and poor, black, white and all shades of other.

Umm, wouldn’t that be a description of the Tea Party? “Professionals, musicians, and housewives”? What the hell does CNN think Tea Partiers are? “Frustrated liberal activists”? The only thing they’re frustrated about is that they can no longer have Bush and Cheney in the White House to march around calling terrorists, Nazis, and war criminals.

Disheartened conservatives? Ravitch scoured the country to find one whopping conservative (a gay man) who defected from the Tea Party movement to this one. The Tea Party is mostly disheartened conservatives. Not only that, but there are a lot of disheartened liberals too. Since the Tea Party movement began, CNN was wanted to ignore the growing liberal disillusionment in Obama and the Democrat Congress, as well as the mass abandonment of independents—including Obama voters—to movements like the Tea Party.

But CNN—like the rest of the MSM—chose to initially ignore, and then deride and slander Tea Partiers as racist violence-prone angry mobs. When you’re in the Tea Party you’re angry, but if you’re in the “Coffee Party,” you’re frustrated and disillusioned.

Second ingredient: Taking gratuitous digs at the Tea Party (remember this is supposed to be an objective news story):

Born on Facebook just six weeks ago, the group boasts more than 110,000 fans, as of Friday morning. The Coffee Party is billed by many as an answer to the Tea Party (more than 1,000 fewer fans) [Read: Nya nya nya nya!], a year-old protest movement that's steeped in fiscal conservatism and boiling-hot, anti-tax rhetoric.

This new group calls for civility, objects to obstructionism and demands that politicians be held accountable to the people who put them in office.

What do you mean “this new group demands that politicians be held accountable to the people who put them in office? That’s exactly what the Tea Party was created for, you dunce! If you and your lib media drones weren’t so busy counting white people and “swastika” posters, maybe you would’ve noticed that.

The message is loud and clear: Tea Party = boiling hot, rhetoric (used pejoritavely to mean empty talk), obstructionist, and fiscal conservatism (also used pejoratively). Coffee party = civil, level-headed, substantive.

Third ingredient: Make the organizers of the movement look like sympathetic, ordinary citizens to which you can relate. Omit any inconvenient truths that detract from your fairy tale:

In the subsection called “The one who was 'never active in this stuff,'” heretofore politically dormant Americans are celebrated for finally getting involved in the political process. Um, hello? Who the heck do you think many of the Tea Partiers are? Unbelievable.

The next subsection, called “The Atlanta coordinator,” reads in part:

Hopkins was 5 when she stared at the two water fountains: one marked "colored," the other "white." The New Yorker was somewhere in Virginia at a train stop with her mother and grandmother, and, well, she'd never drunk colored water before and figured white was what she wanted. But her grandmother yanked her away from that water, muttering something about her getting them all killed.

Are you kidding me? They’re actually trying to connect in the readers mind the Coffee Party with the Civil Rights Movement of 45-50 years ago. By doing this they are legitimizing it, and deligitimizing the Tea Party. Because the Tea Partiers have nothing to do with civil rights, and certainly no one who’s a Tea Partier could have been affected by racial discrimination that happened those many years ago. (At the same time, the Tea Party movement has been ridiculed as “angry old white men,” which means they would more likely than the young and fresh “Coffee Partiers” have been alive during that time in American history.)

That moment, and her childlike understanding of what it meant, stuck with Hopkins and has driven her ever since. The stay-at-home mom used to work in the real-estate mortgage field but left when she became disheartened by the industry.

Oh, I see. This coordinator is just a simple stay-at-home mom who became dishearted by … not the overspending overcontrolling federal government but the mortgage industry.

She feels hopeful about the people who are re-engaging in and taking ownership of the political process

Again, a perfect description of the Tea Party movement being co-opted to describe this (and only this) movement instead.

Of all the members of this faux movement, notice one person not mentioned? That would be founder Annabel Park, who has a high-up in the infantry of Obamatons ever since the presidential campaign. Nothing less than whitewashing to give the impression that the “Coffee Party” was an authentic Facebook-born grassroots movement—and again insinuating that Tea Party movement was not.

Final ingredient: Pictures

Unlike CNN footage of the Tea Parties, which featured red-faced angry yelling white people carrying signs that “provoked violence” and even caused people to worry about President Hope&Change’s physical safety, the photos of the Coffee Party members are all rosy and smiley. Message: These people may not be greedy corporate CEO’s, or gun- and Bible-clingers who are pissed off there’s a black man in the White House. They’re just simple Americans and they caaaare.

This whole thing, photos and all, is just painful to look at. If CNN had any journalistic integrity, this is exactly what they would have done when the Tea Party—a true grassroots movement devoted to seriously demand accountability from Washington—came on the scene. Instead, they played the typical Democrat mouthpiece and railed against them on the T.V. screen on the web.

“Saturday Night Live” or The Onion could not have created such a grotesque caricature of a lib/Dem propaganda piece as CNN has done itself.

I have just one question for “journalist” Jessica Ravitch: How much money did Obama, Emanuel, and Axelrod pay you and your “news” company to concoct this free infomercial?

Sensible Liberals: 9th U.S. Circuit Court Upholds "Under God"

Freedom 1, Michael Newdow 0 (well, technically 1)

The Creator, to whom our Founders looked to for guidance in the formation of their fledgling republic, is surely smiling down on us today. A double blow was handed to athiest Michael Newdow and those who have sought to pervert the notion of “Separation of Church and State”—which doesn’t even appear in the Constitution but in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson decades after the Constitution was ratified.

Yesterday evening AP reported:

Court upholds 'under God' in Pledge of Allegiance

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court in San Francisco has ruled that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is constitutional.

In a 2-1 ruling, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel rejected arguments by Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow that the phrase violates the separation between church and state.

Newdow’s previous lawsuit against the pledge in public schools reached the U.S. Supreme Court in 2004. But the high court said he didn’t have the legal standing to make the challenge on behalf of his daughter.

So Newdow, who is a doctor and lawyer, filed a similar challenge on behalf of other parents who objected to their children being required to recite “under God.”

In a separate ruling Thursday, the appeals court also upheld the use of the phrase “In God We Trust” on coins and currency.

These two rulings are tremendously surprising, to say the least, given they were made by the notoriously leftist 9th Circuit Court. Then again, even a broken clock is still right twice a day.

Greg Halvorson at American Thinker quips:

The Court set Mike down. And the reason is that the Founding Fathers embraced God. Separation of church and state, constitutionally, meant that no specific religion was to be sanctioned, and that worship should be local and free of coercion. 

In more news (bad, if you’re atheist), the Court also upheld “In God We Trust” on coins and currency. Looks like Mr. Newdow will have to write checks.

And Robert Moon at the Conservative Examiner says:

Imagine that. “Pro-tolerance,” “pro-diversity” liberals really don’t have a constitutional right to deny everyone else free religious exercise.

Indeed.

By the way, can—and will—Newdow appeal? Any Constitutional law scholars out there?

Listen & Learn: Mark Levin on 40-y.o. Canadian Whose Gov't Refused Him Health Care (3/10/10)

How’s this for an infuriating, yet eye-opening article from this past weekend’s Toronto Sun:

Sick man faces bankruptcy — or death
Cancer patient must pay for drug needed to keep him alive
By MARK BONOKOSKI, TORONTO SUN
Last Updated: March 6, 2010 9:12pm

Kent Pankow lives in Edmonton, in a province and a country that is trying to either kill him or bankrupt him.

No sense mincing words.

Suffering from brain cancer, Kent Pankow was literally forced to go to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. for lifesaving surgery — at a cost to family and friends of $106,000 — after the health-care system in Alberta left him hanging in bureaucratic limbo for 16 crucial days, his tumour meanwhile migrating to an unreachable part of the brain, while it dithered over his case file, ultimately deciding he was not surgery worthy.

Now, with the Mayo Clinic having done what the Alberta Cancer Board wouldn’t authorize or even explain, but with the tumour unable to be totally removed, the province will now not fund the expensive drug, Avastin, that the Mayo prescribed to keep him alive and keep the remaining tumour from increasing in size — despite the costs of the drug being totally funded by the province for other forms of cancer.

Kent Pankow, as it turns out, has the right disease but he has it in the wrong place.

Had he lung cancer, breast cancer, or colon cancer, then the cost of the drug — $4,555 per treatment, two times a month — would be totally covered by Alberta’s version of OHIP.

But he doesn’t.

And so he is not only a victim of brain cancer, he is also a victim of arbitrary discrimination. …

“He’s a fighter,” says his wife [Deborah Hurford], admitting, however, that the cost of the drug has been a significant drain on friends and family who have not only donated large sums of their own money, but have also organized fundraisers to keep hope alive, including school penny drives.

“When Kent goes for his Avastin IV injection, he sits next to patients who receive the same drug for free because they have another type of cancer — like colon cancer,” Hurford says.

“Brain tumour patients deserve the same rights as other cancer patients, including access to the same lifesaving treatments — and without additional costs.

“I can’t begin to tell you how frustrated, angry, disgusted and appalled I am with both the Alberta health system and the individuals within the system who continue to perpetuate such an archaic and inhumane approach to the treatment of patients.” she says. “It seems like they are doing everything in their power to ensure that Kent succumbs to an early and unnecessary death.” …

Wait a minute. I thought this couldn’t happen when the government is in charge of your health care. I thought everyone was covered, everyone got readily available quality health care and no one was denied treatment just because, unlike with greeedy eeevil insurance companies, the decision-makers weren’t concerned only with making a profit.

What happens if Canada's current nightmare becomes the U.S.’s future? Where would we and Canadians go once our government starts to do what President Hope&Change promises us it wouldn’t and deny you life-saving treatment?

There’s a lot that can be said about this situation. And who better to say it than the “Great One” Mark Levin:

[Edited for commercials, long pauses, and other extraneous content]

Download levin2010-03-10_80kbps-1.mp3