Guest Article - Evil Personified

Obama Walks Away from 9/11 Family Member...
by Emily Esfahani Smith - The Blaze.com

"Debra Burlingame, who lost her pilot brother on 9/11 when his plane crashed into the Pentagon, had a reportedly chilly exchange with President Barack Obama today. During a meeting with a select group of 9/11 families, Obama greeted Burlingame and even hugged her after a few pleasantries.

But when Burlingame asked about Eric Holder’s plan to file criminal charges against CIA interrogators, Obama’s friendly manner allegedly stiffened.

Burlingame asked Obama if he would voice his opinion to Holder on the matter of the investigation of the CIA interrogators. She said, "I know that as a former attorney … you can’t tell the AG what to do in an investigation, but these [the interrogators] are unsung heroes….and they have been exonerated in two justice department investigations. But that didn’t satisfy Eric Holder….Would you, in light of what’s happened, speak to him about standing them [the investigating prosecutors] down?"

Obama allegedly responded that Burlingame is right, that he cannot tell Holder how to conduct his investigation. Burlingame jumped in, saying, yes but “You can give him your opinion, will you do that?”

Obama said, "No I won’t." And then he allegedly turned and walked away.

Burlingame suggested, “You can do it privately.”

Obama allegedly responded, "No.""

==============================
So Let's Get This Straight
The people who used enhanced interrogation techniques to get the information that helped lead to Bin Laden's whereabouts, are being "investigated" and possibly prosecuted by Eric Holder (Attorney General) and Obama refuses to stop this activity. He wants it to continue and refuses to direct Holder to quit.

Who's side is President Obama on?
Don't you wonder who's side Obama is REALLY on? He wants to continue investigating and possible prosecuting the people that helped get Bin Laden? Does this make ANY sense to you at all? Obama takes all the credit for KILLING Bin Laden but refuses to help stop the prosecution of the ones who got the information? WHAT THE HELL is Obama DOING HERE?

Can we trust Obama? Why won't he defend the people who helped get America's number one enemy?

Guest Article - America's Loss of Power

Vanishing American Footprint
by Patrick J. Buchanan - syndicated columnist.

"With his order to effect the execution of Osama bin Laden by Navy SEALs, 40 miles from Islamabad, without asking permission of the government, Barack Obama made a bold and courageous decision.

Its success, and the accolades he has received, have given him a credibility as commander in chief that he never had before.

The law professor, it turns out, is a gunslinger.

Should the president now decide on a major withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan in July, or side with his generals and make a token pullout, either way, the country will accept his decision.

Yet, as one looks to the Maghreb and Middle East, to the Gulf and Pakistan, events of this historic year point to an inexorable retreat of American power and the American presence.

Consider Pakistan. Today, that nation is red-faced that its military and intelligence services lied or did not know Osama was living in a mansion a mile from their West Point. And Pakistan is humiliated that U.S. commandos flew in by chopper at night, killed Osama in his compound, and made off with his body, computers and cell phones.

Relations are close to the breaking point. Mobs are burning American flags. Angry congressmen are talking of cutting off aid to Pakistan for disloyalty and duplicity in hiding bin Laden. Pakistanis are enraged Americans would trample on their sovereignty like that.

Even before Sunday's killing of Osama, Pakistan's prime minister had reportedly told Hamid Karzai in Kabul to let the Americans leave on schedule in 2014, and let Pakistan and China help him cut his deal with the Taliban. In the long run, this is likely to happen.

U.S. and NATO forces leave, the Taliban returns, and Pakistan moves into the orbit of China, which has far more cash -- $3 trillion in foreign currency reserves -- and more of a long-term interest in South Asia than a busted United States on the far side of the world.

The "Great Game" will go on in Afghanistan, but without Western players -- only Iran, Russia, China, Pakistan and India.

In the other two critical Islamic nations in the region, Turkey and Egypt, we see a similar unraveling of ties to Washington.

Turkey has been going its own way since she refused George W. Bush permission to use Turkish bases to invade Iraq.

Ankara has become less secular and more Islamic, and begun to highlight her identity as a Middle Eastern nation. She has repaired relations with neighbors America regards as rogue states: Iran and Syria. And she has become the champion of the Gaza Palestinians.

Since Hosni Mubarak's fall, Egypt has pursued a similar course. Cairo has allowed Iranian warships to transit Suez and is about to re-establish ties to Tehran. She has brokered an agreement uniting Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, and is about to reopen the border crossing between Egypt and Gaza. Israeli anger and American alarm are politely ignored.

Though their population, like Pakistan's, is anti-American, neither Turkey nor Egypt is openly hostile. Yet both pursue policies that clash with U.S. policy. And this new distance from Washington is being met with the approval of Turks and Egyptians. For the one thing all of the uprisings of the Arab Spring have had in common is a desire of these peoples to be rid of American hegemony.

Indeed, taking inventory after four months of Arab revolts, it is difficult not to declare America a net loser.

Our ally of 30 years, Mubarak, was overthrown. The new government is moving away from us. Our ally in Tunisia was ousted.

Our unpopular and ruthless ally in Yemen is still fighting for survival. The brutality shown by our friend, Bahrain's King Khalifa, against peaceful Shiite demonstrators probably means eventual loss of basing rights for the U.S. Fifth Fleet.

We are to begin pulling troops out of Afghanistan this summer and complete the withdrawal in 2014. We are down from 170,000 troops in Iraq to 50,000. All are to be gone by year's end.

Americans have had their fill of nation-building. We cannot afford any more decade-long wars where the benefits to the American people have to be endlessly explained.

Why is America's footprint shrinking in that part of the world?

First, Americans have never been less popular there, and one demand of every revolution is for a new government, independent of the United States, that will defend the national sovereignty.

Second, we are broke. We can no longer afford the bases. We can no longer afford the wars. We can no longer afford the aid.

Third, the true vital interest of the United States in this part of the world is that these Islamic countries not become base camps of terror, especially nuclear terror, targeted against the United States.

That end is surely better served by packing and departing than by staying and fighting."

Do the Ends Justify the Means?

Bin Laden Is Dead
That is a good thing. He was a mass murderer. He killed innocent US citizens. Good riddance.

So How Much Power Does He have?
Obama decided to go to war in Libya without Congressional approval. That was a violation of the US Constitution. And yet, no one in Congress made him accountable. Now Obama is killing people in foreign countries because HE decides where and when to do so. Has Obama overstepped his granted authority once again?

Do Two Wrongs Make It Right?
Granted, Bin Laden was a dirt bag but does his extermination justify how we did it? I'm not condoning or defending Bin Laden. It's good that he's dead. America needed justice for the 911 attacks. This helps.

However, we need to look at the overall picture of Obama's actions. Unless we are in a "declared" war with Pakistan, Obama broke the law. Obama's actions are ILLEGAL! He broke four treaties, three Federal statutes and an executive order. It also violates basic American values, the rule of law, and the US Constitution.

So here we all are celebrating. WHY?

Look at Obama's actions. The laws allow the President to capture and charge someone - NOT KILL THEM! Only kings and dictators kill whomever they want under the guise of "safety." It's a fact that Obama violated the law in order to get (and kill) Bin Laden. If the President thinks he can kill on his own volition, what else can we expect from him? Where does it stop?

Proof? Who Needs It?
Now he refuses to provide photographic evidence of his actions and the results of the international raid that used American military to violate Pakistani sovereignty. We cannot withhold evidence from him, so how can he withhold evidence from American citizens? Obama has ILLEGALLY entered a war in Libya without the consent of Congress. His advisory team gives the American public conflicting reasons for HIS actions. We are told he ordered the killing of the Libyan air force to "save lives." Next he ordered the bombing of the Libyan government to "help the rebels oust Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi."

Now he's responsible for killing Libyan children! His administration has announced that "we like the rebels better than al-Gaddafi." Wikileaks informs us that some of the Libyan rebels are former detainees of Gitmo, as well as known terrorists, and mercenaries! Obama's latest decision is to send money (several million dollars) to the rebels as "non -lethal aid" with no one's approval.

Ironically, this administration is prosecuting a man for aiding a terrorist. Isn't that what Obama's doing now? Is Obama above the law? Hasn't he abused his powers once again? When will someone have the guts to challenge his authority and abuses?

Where is Congress?
Our government is based on checks and balances. The President should comply with international treaties, and our own Constitution. Why isn't Congress stopping him and making him obey the laws - just like the rest of us?

Don't Loose Sight

Short Memory
America, don't be guilty of having a short memory. Yes, Bin Laden is dead. That's all the Left-Wing media has been talking about since announced on Sunday. Yes, this has helped Obama. However, we shouldn't forget that there are other important things on the agenda. Americans are already forgetting that we should get rid of ObamaCare for a variety of reasons. This should be a high priority, but we are getting distracted by the latest news.

First and Foremost
The number one priority of our Congress should be focusing on the issue of the debt ceiling. Rumours around Washington, DC say that the GOP leadership is seriously thinking about caving-in AGAIN and allowing Obama to get his wish for more borrowing.

We cannot allow this to happen. Why not? This is irresponsible. If you like the standard of living we all share in America, you'd better start caring about the debt ceiling! If we continue raising the debt ceiling, we are literally selling our country and putting it in an irreversible direction of decline. Our economy will collapse and we will never be the same "home of the free and the brave." We will become a third-rate country. Believe it, this can happen if we ignore uncontrolled government spending and excessive borrowing.

Do Something!
Don't just sit there any longer. You need to become vocal. Let your reps know that you do not want them to raise the debt ceiling unless we get a balanced budget amendment. Also, if you belong to a political party, re-register yourself as an Independent. Stop giving political donations to the party you just left.

Start supporting Tea Party candidates. Volunteer your time and money to help them get elected instead of the same old politician incumbents. We need to literally "FLUSH" DC of all the incumbents who are NOT serious about cutting spending and stop borrowing. Don't just say you will do something - DO IT!

Here's a Thought

Tired yet Of the $100 Fill-ups?
As gasoline prices to climb to over $5.00 per gallon, what has Obama done to help us out? Well, let's see...

• Obama banned deep well drilling in the Gulf of Mexico - but OKayed it for Brazil to deep drill.


• He also gave Petrobras [Brazil oil company] 3 BILLION dollars to do so they can sell-back what they drill to the USA.


• He won't allow ANY new oil exploration in Alaska (ANWR-Artic National Wildlife Refuge).


• He refuses to build new coal plants to generate power because HE HATES COAL.


• Obama won't drill for natural gas - even though America has enough natural gas to last the USA 100 years!


• He's allowed the EPA to "regulate" carbon which raises all your energy costs.


• He's allowed Timothy Geithner (US Treasury Secretary) to borrow outrageous sums of money.


• Obama encourages Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke to continue buying America's debt and printing money - causing serious INFLATION and devaluation of the dollar.

Well, isn't that Special? (Church Lady - Saturday Night Live)

Those Policies Don't Work
Some would argue that Obama is incompetent. Maybe. What we do know is that the cost of filling up is getting downright prohibitive for American families. We are spending more and more on gas and less and less on life's necessities. Quite a paradox. Can't drive to work unless you fill up, but can't buy food and clothes if you do! This of course, assumes that you're lucky enough to be working!

You would think that after a while, Obama would "get it." Well, maybe he does but just doesn't care. He's just hired another commission to look into the problem. Yeah, that should make voters think he's doing something!

Try This...
We still give farmers subsidies. Why? Why does the Federal government decide what a farmer can and cannot plant and grow on their land? They try to regulate prices. Instead of creating a "false" market, why not try something different for a change?

If oil is going for $116 per barrel, then start charging $116 a bushel for corn, wheat and any farm product that we sell abroad. If oil goes up - so do our exported food prices. If oil prices go down - likewise our exported food prices also go down. Simple.

We also need to get back to the gold standard. So far, two states (Utah and North Carolina) are entertaining this idea big time. Try backing up the currency with something of REAL value - like gold instead a a "promise" from Ben Bernanke and Tim Geither.

Try it, you'll like it!

Guest Article - Doctor Shortage

Doc holiday
By MICHAEL D. TANNER -a Cato Institute senior fellow.


"The doctor is not in.

The United States already faces a growing physician shortage. As our population ages, we require more and more intensive health care. At the same time, enrollment in medical schools has been essentially flat, meaning we are not producing new physicians at anywhere near the rate we need to. In fact, according to the American Association of Medical Colleges, we face a shortfall of more than 150,000 doctors over the next 15 years.

And it could get a whole lot worse.

The health reform bill signed into law last year is expected to significantly increase the number of Americans with health insurance or participating in the Medicaid program. Meanwhile, an aging population will increase participation in Medicare. This means a greater demand for physician services.

But at the same, the bill may drive physicians out of practice.

Existing government programs already reimburse physicians at rates that are often less than the actual cost of treating a patient. Estimates suggest that on average physicians are reimbursed at roughly 78% of costs under Medicare, and just 70% of costs under Medicaid. Physicians must either make up for this shortfall by shifting costs to those patients with insurance — meaning those of us with insurance pay more — or treat patients at a loss.

As a result, more and more physicians are choosing to opt-out of the system altogether. Roughly 13% of physicians will not accept Medicare patients today. Another 17% limit the number of Medicare patients they will see, a figure that rises to 31% among primary care physicians. The story is even worse in Medicaid, where as many as a third of doctors will not participate in the program.

Traditionally, most doctors have been willing to take some Medicare patients either out of altruism or as a “loss leader,” to reach other family members outside the Medicare program. Others try to get around Medicare’s low reimbursement rates by unbundling services or providing care not covered through the program. (Nearly 85% of seniors carry supplemental policies to cover these additional services). With many office and equipment costs fixed, even a low reimbursement patient may be better than no patient at all for some doctors. This is even more true for hospitals where Medicare patients may account for the majority of people they serve. And doctors can take some comfort in the fact that Medicare is pretty much guaranteed to pay and pay promptly. The same is not always true of private insurance.

But if reimbursements fall much more, the balance could be tipped.

The government’s own chief actuary says that reimbursement cuts could mean “reductions in access to care and/or the quality of care.” Once the cuts hit hospitals, they too will be in trouble. Medicare’s actuaries estimate that 15% of hospitals could close. Inner-city and rural hospitals would be hardest hit.

Nor is the pressure on reimbursement rates likely to be felt solely in government programs. The health care law contains a number of new regulations that are already driving up insurance premiums. The government is responding by cajoling and threatening insurers. If insurers find their ability to pass on cost increases limited, they too may begin to cut costs by cutting reimbursements.

For a lot of older physicians, retirement in Florida may begin to look like a very good option. Roughly 40% of doctors are age 55 or over. Are they really going to want to stick it out for a few more years if all they have to look forward to is more red tape (both government and insurance company) for less money? Those that remain are increasingly likely to join “concierge practices,” limiting the number of patients they see and refusing both government and private insurance."

And, at the same time, fewer young people are likely to decide that medicine is a good career. Remember, the average medical school graduate begins their career with more than $295,000 in debt.

A 2010 IBD/TPP Poll found that 45% of doctors would at least consider leaving their practices or taking early retirement as a result of the new health care law. And, an online survey by Sermo.com, a sort of Facebook for physicians, found that 26% of physicians in solo practices were considering closing. Of course, not every doctor who told these polls that he or she would consider leaving the field will actually do so. But if even a small portion depart, our access to medical care will suffer.

In fact, we have already seen the start of this process in Massachusetts, where Mitt Romney’s health care reforms were nearly identical to President Obama’s. Romney’s reforms increased the demand for health care but did nothing to expand the supply of physicians. In fact, by cracking down on insurance premiums, Massachusetts pushed insurers to reduce their payments to providers, making it less worthwhile for doctors to expand their practices. As a result, the average wait to get an appointment with a doctor grew from 33 days to over 55 days.

Promising universal health coverage is easy. But what does universal coverage mean if you can’t actually see a doctor?"

New Texas Law Proposed

TSA Take Notice
Finally, there's a new Texas legislature bill would make TSA (Transportation and Security Administration - a division of Homeland Security) groping a felony! The bill would make it illegal for any security officer to intentionally touch someones genitals (even with clothes on), unless they have a probable cause that the person is carrying a weapon or something illegal!

THREE CHEERS FOR TEXAS!
It's about time someone somewhere got some guts and did the right thing to stop these illegal search and seizure tactics used buy TSA at our airports under the guise of "security." Hopefully, this new law will also include CHILD MOLESTATION as well!

How Much Freedom to Give Up
Does the new TSA "screening" procedure really make air travel safer? Seriously, what are the statistics? Do we have any documented proof that these invasive procedures have been effective in preventing a terrorist attack?

The answer is "NO." These security procedures have NOT prevented any attacks. So why do we still permit them? Good question.

Action To Take
Let your reps in Congress know that you want them to support a similar effort to block TSA from using these invasive techniques any longer. It just isn't right to sacrifice freedom for an unjustified and ILLEGAL seach in a public airport!