Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts

Monday, October 27, 2008

McCain’s Health Care Plan Best for Almost Everyone

According to Robert Carroll of the Wall Street Journal, McCain’s health-care insurance tax credit proposal is most misunderstood but “Almost Everyone Would Do Better Under the McCain Health Plan.”

Carroll goes into some detail explaining how the actual McCain proposal contradicts Obama’s statements about it, because the plan “exceeds the value of the current exclusion for all income levels shown.”

The plan would provide more resources for the purchase of health insurance than the existing, or current, exclusion and the total subsidy for health care “would rise from about $3.6 trillion over 10 years today to roughly $5 trillion under his proposal.”

According to some of the nation’s top economists in the Treasury Department's Office of Tax Analysis and estimates by the respected private health-care research firm, The Lewin Group, the McCain credit would increase the number of insured by 15 to 21 million.

The objective of the McCain proposal is to reduce the current tax bias that encourages people to funnel routine health expenses through insurance policies.

It is much more likely to be a plan with higher deductibles that is more focused on providing true insurance against catastrophic losses rather than a more generous plan that includes a lot of prepayment for routine and predictable medical expenses.

Carroll, vice president for economic policy at the Tax Foundation, writes that McCain’s Health Care plan will be good for the economy due to the most important aspect of the proposal.

The unchecked massive unfunded liability associated with the entitlement programs of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid will “double the size of the federal government by 2040, consuming roughly 40% of the nation's output rather than the 20% today.”

The elimination of the income-tax exclusion would reduce private health-care spending and “put downward pressure on the growth of Medicare and Medicaid costs.”

Thus, by removing the tax bias for more generous health coverage, the McCain health credit also has the potential to provide important dividends to the entitlement problem down the road.

Kevin Sack, of the New York Times, writes “Businesses Wary of Details in Obama Health Plan.”

Obama’s Health Plan to provide affordable coverage for the uninsured by subsidize coverage for the uninsured through the taxing of employers who do not cover their workers is causing many to have doubts.

Health experts and economists believe that Obama might have to require medium to large companies to contribute as much as 6 percent of their payrolls! This could be catastrophic to smaller or low-margin businesses.

Obama has failed to release details of his plan so far. Obama has indicated that the “smallest businesses” might be exempted, but so far he has not defined what size firms would be exempted, nor has he defined the penalty for non-compliance despite McCain’s "badgering" Obama about it in two debates.


Obama’s health care spokesman, David M. Cutler, explained the failure to explain the plan in more detail.

“It’s not that there’s a decision out there that we’re not telling. It’s literally that we’ve decided not to decide.”

Trackposted to Democrat=Socialist, Right Voices, and DragonLady's World, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Tuesday, September 02, 2008

Media Palin Assault Strategy Inadvertently Revealed

Before political correctness emerged as the dominant MSM ethic, it was called “Chinese Water Torture.” Water is slowly dripped onto a person's forehead until the person is driven insane, or in the case of McCain/Palin, until Palin is driven off the ticket.

Craig Gordon of Newsday let it slip:

The real danger for Palin would come if this revelation were the first of a steady drip of stories . . .

Here’s what Peter Wallsten of the LA Times wrote:

One Republican strategist with close ties to the campaign described the candidate's closest supporters as "keeping their fingers crossed" in hopes that additional information does not force McCain to revisit the decision. . .

The story about Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy is clearly too dangerous for the Obama folks (including the MSM media) to dwell upon in the long term. Expect media focus to intensify on Alaska’s state ethics investigation of Palin in the the so-called "Troopergate” or “ Wootengate” controversy involving the firing of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. Monegan claims that he was fired because he was reluctant to fire an Alaska state trooper, Mike Wooten, Palin's former brother-in-law, who has been involved in a bitter custody fight with her younger sister. Palin’s staff had contacted Walt Monegan about two dozen times about Wooten.

Here’s an excerpt of a piece of “News Analysis” by Peter Wallsten, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer:

. . .The youthful mother of five whose placement on the ticket was meant to reinforce traditional values has now revealed that her unmarried teenage daughter is pregnant -- a piece of information that the family and the campaign said they had hoped to keep private. . . .

The woman introduced to America as a reform-minded Washington outsider who opposed the infamous "bridge to nowhere" -- the symbol of McCain's hatred of wasteful spending -- originally supported its construction. The governor who in her introductory speech decried the practice of budgetary "earmarks" sought, as the state's chief executive and as mayor of Wasilla, hundreds of millions of dollars in such federal funding for local projects.

Moreover, Palin has now retained a lawyer to represent her in a controversy the McCain campaign said it had fully researched -- Palin's role in dismissing a state police official who had refused to fire a trooper who divorced Palin's sister.

On Monday, the McCain campaign dispatched lawyers to Alaska in a move described as an attempt to manage a growing crowd of journalists who have traveled there to inspect Palin's background. But the move raises the impression that the McCain campaign didn't know everything about his No. 2 and is now racing to learn what it can while trying to avoid tough questions about the Arizona senator's decision-making process. . . .

One Republican strategist with close ties to the campaign described the candidate's closest supporters as "keeping their fingers crossed" in hopes that additional information does not force McCain to revisit the decision. According to this Republican, who would discuss internal campaign strategizing only on condition of anonymity, the McCain team used little more than a Google Internet search as part of a rushed effort to review Palin's potential pitfalls. Just over a week ago, Palin was not on McCain's short list of potential running mates, the Republican said. . . .

Critics continue to question why McCain, after months of assailing Democratic nominee Barack Obama as lacking foreign policy experience, would tap a running mate who has been governor for less than two years and before that was mayor of Wasilla, population 7,000.

The campaign has little room for error. A new CBS News poll found that 66% of registered voters were undecided about Palin. . . .

Here’s an excerpt from Newsday by Craig Gordon:

ST. PAUL, Minn. - Sarah Palin was on a roll, fresh-faced and fiery, just the boost of energy John McCain's slow-but-steady campaign needed.
Now that's over.

So far anyway, it doesn't look as if news that Palin has a pregnant teenage daughter is enough to knock her off McCain's ticket. . . .

Many experts said Palin could weather the story about her daughter because most voters are willing to accept that it's a private, family matter. "She going to get three strikes, and this is one," said independent analyst Charles Cook.
The real danger for Palin would come if this revelation were the first of a steady drip of stories - and already, news came out yesterday of her husband's long-ago drunken-driving charge and the fact that she hired a lawyer to defend herself in an ethics probe in Alaska. . . .

It also dramatically raises the stakes for Palin's acceptance speech to the nation, originally scheduled for tomorrow night. No longer is that speech merely a high-energy, get-to-know-you address, like her appearance Friday as McCain's running mate. Now it becomes a closely watched moment where the country will try to take her measure - as a possible president, and perhaps, rightly or wrongly, as a mother. . . .

And just as the Palin pick all but dared Democrats to challenge her credentials as a two-year Alaska governor, some Republican strategists yesterday said Democrats will pay the price if their activist supporters point out that the "family values" party has a teen pregnancy in the family.
Obama saw the dangers of that yesterday, issuing a statement where he said Palin's daughter was off-limits in the campaign - and noted he was born to an 18-year-old mother, just a year older than Bristol Palin.

See Associated Press take on the McCain camp's detailed review of Palin

Here’s an excerpt:

. . . In the days since, Republicans and Democrats have privately questioned whether the Arizona senator chose the first-term governor without fully looking into her background. McCain's campaign has vehemently defended the review.

Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr., the lawyer who conducted the review, told The Associated Press in an interview Monday that Palin underwent a "full and complete" examination before McCain chose her. Asked whether everything that came up as a possible red flag during the review already has been made public, Culvahouse said: "I think so. Yeah, I think so. Correct."

Stoking the notion of a rushed examination, a timeline issued by the campaign indicated that McCain initially met Palin in February, then held one phone conversation with her last week before inviting her to Arizona, where he met with her a second time and offered her the job.

Raising additional questions was the campaign's disclosure Monday that Palin's unmarried 17-year-old daughter was pregnant, and reports that Palin's husband, Todd, had been arrested in 1986, when he was 22, for driving under the influence of alcohol.

McCain's campaign has dispatched a team of a dozen communications operatives and lawyers to Alaska.

Steve Schmidt, a senior adviser, said the campaign always planned to send a "jump team" to the eventual running mate's home state to work with the nominee's staff, help with information requests from local and national reporters, and answer questions about documents that were part of the review. . . .

The public search also unearthed details of the Legislature's investigation into the dismissal of Alaska's public safety commissioner, allegedly because he would not fire Palin's former brother-in-law as a state trooper.

Culvahouse said he asked follow-up questions, and "spent a lot of time with her lawyer" on the matter.

"We came out of it knowing all that we could know at the time," he said.

Throughout the process, the campaign said, Davis had multiple conversations with Palin.

Saturday, May 10, 2008

New Life for an Old Symbol: “Come And Take It!”


Whether it’s Obama’s elitist disdain for the great unwashed who, “cling to guns or religion,” or McCain’s disregard for the majority of American citizens who don’t want to grant amnesty to ILLEGAL ALIENS, one symbol stands out as the symbol of the day! It’s the Come And Take It" symbol, flag, and slogan used in the Texas Revolution in 1835. This symbol is no longer hiding in a dusty history book. It is now being resurrected as the symbol of America’s fight against Illegal immigration.
&
Since the 1980’s gun-rights advocates have modified the original cannon symbol; using instead an aggressive looking assault rifle. But the original cannon has behind it the strength and subtle symbolic power of our long history with Mexico. The symbol of that little original 6 pound Come And Take It cannon now belongs to all American citizens who stand up in defiance of the Mexican invasion!
&
&
We will not be overwhelmed!
&
Imagine May Day 2009. Instead of retching at the sight of Mexican flags flying over our American streets, imagine a sea of white and black Come and Take It flags flying as a sign of American Unity against illegal immigration!
&
Imagine walking into your local grocery store or Wal-Mart any day and seeing many other Americans proudly wearing their Come And Take It T-shirts or ball caps.
&
Imagine thousands of bumper stickers in this election year with the simple words “Come And Take It!” Talk about sending a message to both candidates!!!
&
If we can’t see ourselves flying the Come And Take it Flag, or wearing the T-shirt or ball cap, then we better be able to envision ourselves living under the domination of Mexican Flag!
&
&
Note to Mexico: Those who fail to remember history are doomed to repeat history!
&
Here’s the brief history of Come And Take It from the Gonzales, Texas Chamber of Commerce.
&
“In 1831 the Mexican government loaned the citizens of Gonzales a six-pound cannon as protection against the Indians. In September of 1835, as political unrest grew, Mexican officials at San Antonio de Bexar demanded the cannon be returned.”
&
Well that just didn’t happen! Read the entire story here.
&
Here’s how it ended:
&
“There, in the early-morning hours of Oct. 2, 1835, the colonists crossed the river with their cannon, surprising the troops and waving their hastily fashioned flag, which proclaimed "Come and Take It." Almost immediately the cannon fired, killing one of Castenada's men and scattering the rest, forcing them to retreat to San Antonio de Bexar. Thus was fired the shot that set off the struggle for Texas independence from Mexico.”
&
It’s such a simple symbol that anyone with a black permanent marker and white cloth can quickly duplicate it! But wouldn’t it be nice to find a place where we can buy Come and Take It! items?
&
When I suggested a line of Come And Take It gifts, clothing, and caps to Texas Fred, he immediately got with the folks at CafePress and added an entire page of Come And Take It goodies. Fred wisely included both the original and modified symbols on his products.
&
Disclaimer: I am not involved in Texas Fred’s financial ventures but I applaud his initiative in getting the ball rolling! Check out the Come And Take It gifts here.
&
&
Here are some Come and Take It Flag resources:
&
&
&
&
“ . . .The truth is that the overwhelming evidence proves that a super majority of Americans oppose Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Guest Worker Program, Temporary Worker Program, Path to Citizenship, etc... That is why the supporters of amnesty have to keep changing the name!
&
A majority of Americans support the enforcement of our existing immigration laws only, which results in illegal aliens returning home on their own or with government assistance.
&
Any lawmaker, candidate, reporter, activist, or organization that supports the current lack of enforcement of the existing laws, or supports the overthrow of these laws by passage of new legislation, which a majority of Americans oppose, is a traitor to the American republic and an enemy of the citizens of the United States. . . .”


Friday, March 14, 2008

The Release of Barack Obama's 2005-06 Earmark Requests Brings up Questions

Cross-posted from Wake up America

Barack Obama has released his earmarked federal spending requests for 2005 and 2006 having previously released his requests for 2007. In the recent release there are specific requests that are being questioned in the media today.
In the midst of all three presidential candidates, Clinton, Obama and McCain, backing a proposal in the Senate to ban all earmarks for one year, an amendment to the Senate's 2009 budget act, which the Senate rejected with a vote of 29-71, Barack Obama has released his list of requested earmarks for 2005-06, then calling on Hillary Clinton to release a list of hers.

The Senate roll call on that vote found here.

"Earmarking" is the word used for a provision in legislation that directs funds to be spent on specific projects. Usually, legislators seek to insert earmarks which direct a specified amount of money to a particular organization or project in his/her home state or district.

John McCain has long been known to be a vocal critic of earmarks and has refused to request spending for projects in his home state of Arizona. McCain recently challenged both of his Democratic rivals to reveal their earmarks for transparency.

Hillary Clinton ranked 10th highest in the list of Senators, for her $342 million worth of earmarks last year and has not released the details of her requests for 2007.

Barack Obama secured $98 million for Illinois projects for the fiscal year of 2008, but his requests totaled $311 million, according to the list he has just released.

Furthermore, according to information released Thursday by Obama, he had 138 earmark requests for the 2007 fiscal year.

His total requested funding was about $330 million.

One of those earmarks is being questioned. The earmark is listed as being for a "High Explosive Air Burst Technology Program".

Obama Requested $8 Million And Helped Secure $1.3 Million For The High Explosive Air Burst Technology Program. In 2006, Obama requested $8 million and helped secure $1.3 million for High Explosive Air Burst Technology funding. Through General Dynamics, this project supported the 25mm Bushmaster cannon, the primary weapon on the Army Bradley Fighting Vehicle (BFV) and the US Marines’ Light Armor Vehicle (LAV). Under contract for System Design and Demonstration (SDD), GD-OTS is developing a Family of Ammunition for the Army’s Future Combat System (FCS) to include a High Explosive Air Burst (HEAB) round. This program will upgrade the capability of the current forces BFV and LAV. Additional funding for the 25mm HEAB for the SFV and LAV will ensure this program will run effectively during its planned service until 2051. [House Report 109-676 (109th Congress); Obama Request Letter To The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, 2006]


That request resulted in $1.3 million in funding for the program, which was a defense project that was overseen by General Dynamics, one of the nation's largest military contractors. Obama's Illinois finance chairman, James S. Crown, serves on the company's board of directors and his family holds a large stake in the company.

Crown and his wife, Paula Crown, are members of Obama's National Finance Committee and have raised more than $200,000 for the Obama campaign, according to a list of fundraisers posted on Obama's campaign website.


Another one of the earmarks on the lists of requests was for the Construction Of A New Hospital Pavilion At The University Of Chicago, where Michelle Obama works:

Obama Requested $1 Million For Construction Of A New Hospital Pavilion At The University Of Chicago. In 2006, Obama requested that the University of Chicago receive $1 million to support its Construction of New Hospital Pavilion. For more than 75 years, the University of Chicago Hospitals (UCH) has provided state of the art medical care on the South Side of Chicago. UCH is one of the largest Medicaid providers in Illinois, and it provided more than $90 million in uncompensated care for Medicare and Medicaid patients this past year. To continue providing the best care for patients from all walks of life, UCH is proceeding with the construction of a new 600,000 square foot facility that will ensure their ability to provide the best care for patients well into the future. Funding will go towards assisting the construction and equipping a new hospital pavilion that will increase the Hospitals' clinical capacity by over one-third. [Obama Request Letter to the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water, 4/7/06]


The reason the media is questioning that particular earmark is because of what could be considered a conflict of interest.

His wife, Michelle Obama, has worked for the University of Chicago Hospitals since 2002, at the time she was executive director of community affairs, making a salary of, according to the CNN Money, $121,910. That salary rose to $316,962 in 2005 as she became vice president of community affairs, right after Barack Obama became the Senator for Illinois.

The Obama campaign says that neither of those earmarks were discussed with Michelle Obama or James S. Crown.

The complete list of requested earmarks for Barack Obama can be found here.

Aides to the Obama campaign say he will not be requesting any earmarks this year.

Now that Obama has released this list for public scrutiny, he is joining McCain is challenging Hillary Clinton to release her requested earmarks, in a release from the Obama Campign that says, "If Sen. Clinton will not agree to join Sen. Obama in releasing her earmark requests, voters should ask why she doesn't believe they have the right to know [how] she wants to spend their tax dollars."

H/T Talk Left and the Campaign Spot.

NYT is also discussing Obama calling for Hillary to release her requested earmarks.

.

Friday, April 06, 2007

What About Fred? What About Tom?

Well it’s good to see that conservative op ed columnists and bloggers are finally starting to write about conservative candidates and potential candidates for the Presidency instead of just reacting to the disastrous Democratic menu.

I’m not about to endorse any candidate at this point, but I can say what I’m looking for in a conservative candidate. I suspect that many conservatives are looking for the same qualities.

1. I want a candidate who is strong on traditional/conservative American values. I will not vote for a compromised candidate who is a Republican in name only.

Chris Ademo said it best in his article “Why Fred Thompson’s Day Has Arrived”

Throughout 2006, Republican compromise and capitulation to the big-spending, morally bankrupt agenda of the Democrats left the public largely disillusioned and demoralized. And that public sentiment was clearly reflected in the upheaval of the midterm elections, which shifted the country decidedly into the dominion of the Democrats.

Yet the GOP hardly recognized the lesson of last November, and instead has all too frequently appeared to concede to the guiding philosophies of the political left. While Americans grow increasingly outraged by the Democrats’ “cut and run” response to an ever encroaching Islamist malignancy, Republican reaction to the elections have, until recently, been excessively conciliatory and accommodating. . .

2. I want a candidate who can galvanize the majority of conservatives into one strong voting block. Nothing could be more dangerous to the fate of this nation than to have a Democratic President and a Democratic dominated Congress. It’s highly doubtful that I would vote for an independent candidate because history has proven that this would only serve to dilute the conservative vote.

A Rasmussen poll conducted 4/3/07: Giuliani 26%, McCain 16%, Fred Thompson 14%, Gingrich 11%, and Romney 8%.

Cook Political Report/RT Strategies Poll. March 29-April 1, 200: Giuliani 34%, McCain 17%, Fred Thompson 10%, Gingrich 9%, Romney 6%, and Tancredo 0%.

Republican Fundraising Leaders from YourHub.com

Romney $23, Giuliani $15, McCain $12.5, Brownback $2, Tancredo $1.4 million.

3. I want a candidate who is strong on enforcing a much stricter immigration policy! From my point of view, controlling immigration is the key to every other issue – especially how we conduct the War on Terrorism.

A nation that cannot even keep count of the number of potential terrorists on its own soil cannot successfully conduct a War on Terrorism abroad.

A nation that cannot control its own borders is not a sovereign nation.

A nation of immigrants, who have no desire to assimilate, is just a piece of “up for grabs” balkanized land.

That means that we need a candidate who is not afraid to demand that we seal the borders and slap hefty fines on companies that hire illegals. That means we need a candidate who will not sell out America’s sovereignty to corporate globalization. That means we need a candidate who isn’t afraid to call illegals – ILLEGAL! That means we need a candidate who will not back down from red herring debates about nationalism and xenophobia.

Americans for Better Immigration Congressional Career Grade Cards

Tom Tancredo A+
Fred Thompson C
Newt Gingrich D
John McCain D
Sam Brownback D
Giuliani N/A
Romney N/A

Giuliani is pro-immigration

According to Jason Horowitz in the NY Observer . . .

Giuliani strongly supported a guest worker program supported by President Bush and said during a newly interesting appearance on Meet the Press the following: "There isn't a mayor or a public official in this country that's more strongly pro-immigrant than I am, including disagreeing with President Clinton when he signed an anti-immigration legislation about two or three years ago, which we got some amendments of to protect the rights of immigrants.

Mitt Romney ??? Does anyone really know?

Here’s some of what Romney says today about immigration reform.

Here’s a short excerpt from a recent O’Reilly interview with Romney:

O'REILLY: Would you build a wall between Mexico and the United States and would you put the National Guard on the border?

ROMNEY: Absolutely. We'd put the National Guard there because we don't have the wall yet. You have to have a wall or a fence or electronic surveillance. And you have to have a tamper-proof document to make sure that people who are here are aliens are identified and registered, and people can not hire them unless they're here legally.



Top Blogs

Technorati Tags:
politics, conservative, congress, news, election, immigration, illegal immigration, illegal, america, war on terror, border, mccain, 2008, mitt romney, terrorism, terrorist, congress, Republican Candidates, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain
Follow faultlineusa on Twitter