Seniors are very misinformed. Intentionally, of course. AARP (a partner of the DNC) and the MBM (a junior partner of the DNC) are telling them that Paul Ryan’s plan is a threat, and represents cuts in service.
What they are vigorously suppressing with all their might is that Barack Obama already cut trillions from Medicare and, through the Medicare rationing board, has proposed cutting trillions more, in a move he calls “reform” but everyone else knows as simple rationing.
And they’re suppressing the fact that the current “plan” for Medicare is for it to go bankrupt in 8 years or so, with seniors facing automatic across-the-board reductions in what Medicare pays their hospitals and doctors. And there is no law that says a doctor or hospital has to accept very-below-market rates of compensation.
They can turn away your business, and dump you off to the sort of doctor who is willing to take small money as payment. They’re already doing that now, and they’re going to be doing even more of that in the next few years.
The worst seniors-benefits cutter is ObamaCare, which slashed trillions to make room for new Medicaid enrollees. And then on top of that Obama proposed further trillions in cuts as his big idea for balancing the budget. Well, not balancing it, but lying about doing so.
As I’m sure you’ve already heard, even Slick Wilie, himself, was overheard telling Paul Ryan that he hoped Democrats, (feeling encouraged by the NY-26 results), wouldn’t continue to demagogue the Medicare issue and do nothing on their own.
That’s not the only truth-telling Clinton is up to. He also said that the US could easily go days without a debt ceiling increase without inviting calamity, and has already “retracted” these comments, after the White House requests him to do so.
1. How do you “retract” an event that happened? How do you “retract” an honest, private statement, plainly your true belief, in favor of a false, politically coordinated one?
2. Ask Newt Gingrich about the effectiveness of “retracting” a statement-against-party-interest statement. Hell, ask Paul Ryan, who is not feeling any benefit from Gingrich’s supposed “retraction.”
By the way, not enough has made made of this: Every single Democrat in the Senate loves Barack’s budget except for all of them.
On to Obama’s heinous Middle East agenda…
Washington Times: EDITORIAL: Obama’s Mideast bombshell
The Jerusalem Post reported that the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv denied any shift in policy and explained that the odd phrasing was because of “great sensitivity” to words in the region and that America was “trying to be a fair interlocutor.” That’s nonsense because the “fair interlocutor” standard simply affirms Palestinian claims on the city, something Israel rejects and the Obama administration refuses to address openly. In 2008, then-candidate Barack Obama said, “Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided.” He has not made the same pledge recently and has taken a number of steps that demonstrate he has flipped on this issue.
Charles Krauthammer isn’t sure if the policy shift is a result of a “perverse and ultimately self-defeating policy is born of genuine antipathy toward Israel” or “the arrogance of a blundering amateur who refuses to see that he is undermining not just peace but the very possibility of negotiations.”
Simply put, it’s the oft asked question about Obama: – Are we dealing with evil or incompetence?
Note how Obama has undermined Israel’s negotiating position. He is demanding that Israel go into peace talks having already forfeited its claim to the territory won in the ’67 war — its only bargaining chip. Remember: That ’67 line runs right through Jerusalem. Thus the starting point of negotiations would be that the Western Wall and even Jerusalem’s Jewish Quarter are Palestinian — alien territory for which Israel must now bargain.
The very idea that Judaism’s holiest shrine is alien or that Jerusalem’s Jewish Quarter is rightfully or historically or demographically Arab is an absurdity. And the idea that, in order to retain them, Israel has to give up parts of itself is a travesty.
Obama didn’t just move the goal posts on borders. He also did so on the so-called right of return. Flooding Israel with millions of Arabs would destroy the world’s only Jewish state while creating a 23rd Arab state and a second Palestinian state — not exactly what we mean when we speak of a “two-state solution.” That’s why it has been the policy of the United States to adamantly oppose this “right.”
Yet in his State Department speech, Obama refused to simply restate this position — and refused again in a supposedly corrective speech three days later. Instead, he told Israel it must negotiate the right of return with the Palestinians after having given every inch of territory. Bargaining with what, pray tell?
No matter. “The status quo is unsustainable,” declared Obama, “and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace.”
Israel too ? Exactly what bold steps for peace have the Palestinians taken?
I put the “Israel too must act boldly…” in bold because I hadn’t caught that bit rhetorical flimflam, and it’s important. The Palestinians’ “bold steps toward peace” would appear to be putting Hamas in power and launching rockets into Israel. What is he talking about?!
Obama engaged in more rhetorical trickery when he said:
I believe that Hamas, in its own description of its agenda, has not renounced violence and has not recognized the state of Israel. And until they do, it is very difficult to expect Israelis to have a serious conversation, because ultimately they have to have confidence that a Palestinian state is one that is going to stick to its — to whatever bargain is struck.
It all sounds very well and good, doesn’t it? If Hamas would just renounce violence and recognize the state of Israel, everything would be coolio. All Hamas has to do is engage in a little taqiyya, and the ball will be in Israel’s court to “take some bold steps toward peace”. (aka commit national suicide.)
Hello? This is the terrorist group (and former Obama campaign supporter), HAMAS,we’re talking about.
No, Netanyahu’s position is — as long as Hamas has a seat at the table, there will no negotiations, period. Nice try, Obama.
Want a good laugh? Read this “exclusive!” report from Keith Koffler’s White House Dossier: Mr. President, Was This Book Really Necessary?
A sneak peek at Obama’s latest autobiography (that makes 3 now!): The Audacity of Killing Bin Laden –My Gutsiest Call Yet!!!
“I highly recommend this book to anyone who thinks I’m not a true badass. Just because I tried to make friends with Ahmadinejad and am afraid of Nancy Pelosi doesn’t mean I can’t take care of business.
Earlier this year, while trying to figure out whose ass to kick, the CIA brought me some startling information: I could kick Osama Bin Laden’s ass, the biggest ass of all.
This was not surprising to me, because it was the result of my policies, and not of those of George W. Bush, who was not a good president and couldn’t find Bin Laden.
Early in my term, I went to the CIA and told them: “Take out Bin Laden.”
And they said, “What do mean, like take him out for sushi?”
And I said, “No, take him out. Isn’t that how they say it in the movies?”
And they said, “Oh, you mean kill him?”
And I said, “Yes, kill him.”
And they said, “We’re already trying to kill Bin Laden.”
And I said,” You’ve got to try harder.”
Keep reading. It cracked me up.
So does this from Gateway Pundit: Anti-Communist Hero Lech Walesa Snubs Obama Invite – Says He’s Too Busy:
Pic via New Jestic
Anti-communist hero Lech Walesa announced today that he would not meet with Obama.
The former Solidarity Leader said, “It doesn’t suit me.”
Walesa explained that he has “a very tight schedule,” and that his ‘programme is filled to the maximum.”
Nile Gardiner at The Telegraph writes:
I can see why Mr. Walesa has declined to meet with Barack Obama. The Obama administration’s approach to Poland, an important US ally, has been largely dismissive and lukewarm. In contrast to George W. Bush, who went out of his way to build friendships in eastern and central Europe, Barack Obama has paid little attention to ‘New Europe’, and has been far more interested in appeasing the Russians and “resetting” relations with Moscow.
President Obama famously threw the Poles under the bus when he announced that the United States would not proceed with Third Site Missile defences planned for Poland and the Czech Republic, and has largely treated the Poles as an afterthought in his drive to improve ties with the Kremlin and secure the New START Treaty. Obama has at times demonstrated extremely poor judgment when it comes to US-Polish relations, even playing golf during the funeral of Polish President Lech Kaczynski, the Polish First Lady, and 94 senior officials who perished in the Smolensk air disaster.
As you may have noticed, the left tried to co-opt Walesa during the Madison pro-union “Solidarity” protests in Feb. and March of this year. But the anti-communist wants nothing to do with the communist left.
Notre Dame continues to go down hill, I’m afraid. The Cardinal Newman Society reports: New Notre Dame Trustee Gave Thousands to Pro-Abortion Group:
The University of Notre Dame announced the election of Roxanne M. Martino, president and chief executive officer of Aurora Investment Management, to the Board of Trustees at the University’s April 29 spring meeting.
A review of Martino’s contribution history on City-Data.com (see here and here) revealed that she gave a total of $16,150 to the pro-abortion group EMILY’s List between 2005 and 2008. On its website, EMILY’s List states that it is “dedicated to electing pro-choice Democratic women to office.”
Furthermore, it appears that Martino has given a total of somewhere between $3,250 and $5,996 to the pro-abortion Chicago Foundation for Women between 2004 and 2011 (see here, here, here, here and here).
Alumni said to be thrilled with this information.
Bill McGurn takes Notre Dame’s Chairman of the Board to the woodshed:
When Notre Dame decided to honor Barack Obama at the 2009 commencement, both the President, Father John Jenkins, and the Board of Trustees took pains to insist that the invitation should in no way be taken as endorsement of the President’s position on abortion or indeed indifference to Catholic teaching on life. Now we have a new issue: one of the newest members of the board, Roxanne Martino, has a record of contributing to Emily’s List — a group designed to support pro-choice Democratic women for office. This week the chairman of the ND board, Dick Notebaert, has now sent out an email to board members that suggests that it’s not just Ms. Martino’s judgment that is called into question. It’s his too.
Just a Conservative Girl at Potluck: The Progressive View of Herman Cain
I came across an article on Herman Cain by Dr. Boyce Watkins. It isn’t exactly what one may expect.
Whether we like it or not, Herman Cain is expanding the definition of what it means to be black in America. He reminds us that the divides in America are driven more by wealth and class than by race or gender. America is more capitalist than it is racist, sexist or homophobic, so it is no surprise that even Sarah Palin went out of her way to mention how much she loves Herman Cain.
So it seems that Dr.Watkins is willing to be an honest broker that while racism does exist in this country, it is not the driving force in politics even though we have many examples of those who like to make it so. But, don’t get me wrong, he still plays the race card:
With popular Republicans such as former governor Mike Huckabee, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Donald Trump bowing out of the election, Cain has the opportunity to take his appeal to the next level. It will be interesting to see if those on the far right truly have the stomach to treat Cain with decency, rather than throwing him under the bus as they did Michael Steele.
Keep reading at link.
The Minority Report: Claire McCaskill politicizes Joplin, Missouri disaster.
Senator McCaskill ended speculation whether or not she was behind in polls for her re-election Wednesday after chiding Majority Whip Eric Cantor from the floor of the United States Senate and using the disaster in Joplin, Missouri as a political football.
In a statement, Senator McCaskill chided Majority Whip Eric Cantor’s call to ensure there would be offsets for disaster spending.
Andrew McCarthy NRO:
Please read this whole thing. McCarthy takes us on trip down memory lane to make a point about how this Alinskyite President disseminated during the yearlong ObamaCare debate, and ties it in beautifully with what he’s doing with Israel, now.
As Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proudly boasted in his speech to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, “America has no better friend than Israel.” That would be reason enough for those consumed by a blame-America-first mentality to loathe Israel. Palestinian Muslims live on global largesse and complain that it’s not enough, epitomize the culture of victimhood, and lionize terrorist “martyrs” who are no more savage (though a good bit more competent) than the iconic Bill Ayers and his Weather Underground. In short, the Palestinians check all the Left’s boxes. Even if Obama’s circle of Chicago friends did not include the rabidly anti-Israel Ayers and former PLO mouthpiece Rashid Khalidi, there would be little mystery about who is assigned the hero’s role and who is the villain in the president’s estimate of this long-running drama.
But Obama could not say such a thing and remain politically viable. He knows that. Anyone who watched the rousing bipartisan ovation that washed over his bête noire, Netanyahu, in Congress on Tuesday would know that. This is an ardently pro-Israel country, and Obama’s Palestinian sympathies are no more representative of where Americans stand than is the longing for single-payer health care. Just like leading from the rear, governing from the fringe is a skill. It is necessary to dissemble.
The 1967 borders the president floated last week are the single-payer of American Middle East policy. Just as single-payer is code for socialized medicine, the ’67 borders are code for an indefensible Israel that cannot survive as a Jewish state. Such an Israel is the dream of every leftist who has deluded himself into believing that Israel is a guilt-induced mistake of the post-Holocaust era, and that Israel’s continued existence as an outpost of Western liberalism in the Islamic world is the cause of Muslim animus and terror. You’ll never hear Obama or the Left say that. They will repeat the mantra that America’s bond with Israel is unbreakable, just as they repeated the mantra that the goal of “reforming” health care is to “control costs” (as opposed to controlling Americans). But it is what they really think, just as they really think health care should be nationalized to promote their idea of social justice, regardless of how much it costs.
Always remember that these are just chess moves. Obama eyes the whole board, and he makes the occasional blunder, but he never kicks over the table: He keeps his eyes on ultimate goal. To beat him, it is necessary to know that — and make sure America knows it. The next time around, there’d be no reelection to worry about.
Linked by Pirate’s Cove, thanks!