Government auditors call for end to $8 billion Medicare bonus program

Published April 23, 2012
Associated Press

FILE : April 4: Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, center, faces off with primary candidates Chris Herrod, left, and and Dan Liljenquist, during a debate. (AP)

WASHINGTON – In a rebuke to the Obama administration, government auditors are calling for the cancellation of an $8 billion Medicare program that congressional Republicans have criticized as a political ploy.

The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office says in a report to be released Monday that the $8.3 billion the administration has earmarked for quality bonuses to Medicare Advantage insurance plans would postpone the pain of cuts to the plans under the new health care law. Most of the money would go to plans rated merely average.

The administration is defending the program, saying that without the bonuses many plans wouldn't have an incentive to improve quality.

But Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, says the GAO report suggests that the administration abused its authority, pumping money to the plans to avoid more criticism over unpopular cuts.

Medicare Advantage is a popular private insurance alternative to the traditional health care program for seniors. More than 3,000 private plans serve nearly 12 million beneficiaries, about one-fourth of Medicare recipients. They offer lower out-of-pocket costs, usually in exchange for some limitations on choice.

President Barack Obama's health care law trimmed Medicare Advantage to compensate for prior years of overpayments that had allowed the plans to offer attractive benefits -- and pocket healthy profits.

Republicans fiercely attacked those cuts during their successful campaign to take control of the House in the 2010 midterm elections. Seniors, a key constituency of swing voters, responded by backing GOP candidates.

After the election, the administration announced what it called a "demonstration program" to test whether a generous bonus program would lead to faster, broader improvements in quality. (The health care overhaul law had already provided a smaller bonus program only for top-rated plans.)

GAO, the investigative agency of Congress, did not address GOP allegations that the bonuses are politically motivated. But, its report found the program highly unusual. It "dwarfs" all other Medicare pilots undertaken in nearly 20 years, the GAO said.

Most of the bonus money is going to plans that receive three to three-and-half stars on Medicare's five-star rating scale, the report said.

Available through 2014, the bonuses will soften much of the initial impact of the Medicare Advantage cuts, acting like a temporary reprieve.

This year, for example, the bonus program offset more than two-thirds of the cuts in the health care law. Indeed, Medicare Advantage enrollment is up by 10 percent and premiums have gone down on average.

But GAO questioned whether the bonus program will achieve its goal of finding better incentives to promote quality. "The design of the demonstration precludes a credible evaluation of its effectiveness in achieving (the administration's) stated research goal."

The administration says it disagrees with the GAO findings and believes the bonuses will improve the quality of care.

Medicare "believes the demonstration supports our national strategy to improve the delivery of health care services, patient health outcomes, and population health," the Health and Human Services department said in its formal response to the GAO report. "Absent this demonstration, we believe that many plans would not have an immediate incentive to improve the quality of care delivered to (Medicare Advantage) enrollees."

Hatch, the ranking Republican on the Senate panel that oversees Medicare, is questioning whether the administration had the legal authority to create the program in the first place.

"The Obama administration seems to be using a technicality to sidestep Congress and write itself a blank check to spend more money for political purposes leading into this year's elections," Hatch said in a statement.

"The White House does not have the authority to green-light spending on whatever program it wants," he added. "This report is just the beginning -- I will be demanding answers."

HHS spokeswoman Erin Shields said the bonus program will help Medicare improve quality.

The Associated Press first reported on concerns about the bonus program last spring. Administration officials said at the time it had nothing to do with politics.

But another nonpartisan agency that advises lawmakers on Medicare also criticized the bonus plan as the administration was pursuing it.

The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission said it amounts to "a mechanism to increase payments" and its design "sends the wrong message about what is important to the program and how improved quality can best be achieved."

At a time when government is urging health care providers to improve quality and cut costs, the bonus plan "lessens the incentive to achieve the highest level of performance," commission chairman Glenn Hackbarth wrote to HHS officials.

The bonus program is the costliest demonstration program in Medicare history. The money for it will come from the Medicare trust fund. On Monday, the Medicare and Social Security trustees are scheduled to release their annual report on the status of the programs, both of which face a long-term financial crunch.

Socialism is ‘Imperative’: Communist Leaders Detail Their Plans for America at Party Conference Over the Weekend

Posted on April 22, 2012 at 11:15pm
by Erica Ritz - The Blaze:

The Communist Party USA opened its national conference in New York this weekend, and the speakers weren’t shy about their plans for the United States of America.

In what constituted a clear step-by-step stratagem, Sam Webb, the party’s chair, opened his remarks by saying that the upcoming elections are only be part of “a grander design [that] will connect the dots between our immediate and longer-range political task.”

“To put it differently,” he elaborated, “we hope to connect the struggle at the ballot box today with the struggle for socialism tomorrow.”

Webb continued to discuss the “catastrophe” that would befall humanity if we did not begin living in a more environmentally friendly manner, before declaring socialism to be “imperative…to preserve peace and our planet, expand democracy, eliminate gross racial, gender, and other forms of inequality, and to provide a secure life for the billions living on this earth.”

But how, exactly, does the party propose to transform America’s system of governing?

The first step, according to People’s World– where the official Communist Party USA Twitter page directs readers– is to defeat right-wing “extremism” (presumably at the aforementioned ballot box).

Sam Webb speaking at the CPUSA Convention (Photo: People's World)

One such Republican to defeat is likely Rep. Allen West of Florida, who has been criticized for noting that there are likely 80 members of Congress who may be Communists.

Rather than deny the charge, Communist Party Vice-Chairman Libero Della Piana remarked: “Is he saying that he would not support the democratic right of the people to elect communists to Congress if that was, in fact, what they wanted to do at some point in the future?”

Once Republicans are successfully subdued, Webb believes that communists will join with workers in an “anti-corporate” struggle.

“[But] this stage of struggle doesn’t supplant capitalism,” he explained. Rather, it “brings the socialist stage closer as tens of millions become convinced in the course of the struggle that capitalism doesn’t work for them” [Emphasis added].

Finally, after a shift among the “core forces” for social change, the Communist Party and other leftist organizations will finally succeed in becoming “the people’s government.”

In this stage, Webb explained, it is important to “control the movement of capital, [institute] a tax policy that weighs heavily on the wealthy, and [place] under democratic control sectors of the economy, such as finance, that are a threat to the peoples’ government and a socialist revolution” [Emphasis added].

While many have long-dismissed the Communist Party and other leftist organizations as fringe political movements, their influence among vocal groups like Occupy Wall Street has granted them more consideration in recent months.

“We are still too small,” Webb said, “but the good news is that we’re growing.”

Three predictions about the House’s post-Obamacare plans.

In order:

If Obamacare is overthrown, the House GOP will not receive any ungrudging positive press from the Media over having contingency plans in place for that result; but if Obamacare is upheld, they will be endlessly criticized for it.
The Democrats will make no real contingency plans whatsoever.
If Obamacare is overthrown, the lack of said contingency plans will not be held against the Democrats by the Media, despite the fact that ‘hope for the best, plan for the worst*’ is a cliche for a reason.

Just saying.

(Via Hot Air Headlines)

Moe Lane

*’Worst’ and ‘best’ are here meant in terms of ‘worst and best for Democrats,’ of course. In real life, the worst-case scenario for the country will be Obamacare being judged fully constitutional, and the best-case one the one where Obamacare has its head cut off and put on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some legislative initiatives come at too high a price.

Behind Earth Day: Ecologists, Marxists, Fascists, & Demons?

Apr 22nd, 2012
by TMH - NoisyRoom.Net

Gulag Bound

Just what does Earth Day and the old and new Marxist and fascist movements have in common?

Happy Vladimir Lenin’s Birthday, this April 22nd.

In The Ignorant Fisherman Blog

Saturday, April 21, 2012
The Demonic Movement Behind Earth Day

As “Earth Day” is upon us, let us look at the demonic and leftist philosophy which is driving this “Baalistic” ideology.

What seems to have a strangle hold on America and the world at present is the godless totalitarian socialistic environmental movement of today. This movement has halted progress and has laid shackles on the capitalistic freedoms at present here in America and in the world. As the environmentalist display their “Green Righteousness” and seek to practice at the same time a relative and godless philosophy when it comes to the Moral Laws of Nature and the Eternal Righteous Absolutes of forever, this “Green Righteousness” movement of environmentalism is seeking to impose its secular will on the world and all it’s inhabitants.

The question at hand is, should we be conservative and conversationalist in the area that we live in? The rhetorical reply is, Yes… Of course! None of us will deny that. We all should do our part to make for a healthier and beneficial environment for all. In fact, many regulations have made America cleaner and better. In that we do not find any fault. What we do find fault with is the green fascist mandates that are crippling our society and shackling our freedoms. What is key for a true healthy society is not fascist green legislation, but the adherence to the moral laws that have been instilled into the creation by Almighty God the Creator.

“What is key for a true healthy society is not green legislation but the adherence to the moral laws that have been instilled into the creation by Almighty God”

Notice how hard core green groups such as PETA, Hollywood, the Music Industry, the ACLU and the American secular progressive Left are super radical on regulations on environmental issues and greenology, but are absolutely reprobate in social and sexual morality which has been the key vices which has laid waste this country and our present world (Isaiah 24:5,6; Romans 1:18-32).

The Two Hands of Greenology

In one hand, the radical environmentalist oppress with an iron fascist glove the mandates and oppressive green philosophy. On the other hand, they fight tooth and nail against the moral absolutes and the Eternal Righteousness of Almighty God. These two absolutes are crucial to produce a health society and culture. God’s Word states that the creation groans to be free and looks forward to that Day when it will be unleashed from the inhabitants of sinful man (Isa. 24:5,6, Romans 8:22).

Today’s “Green Righteousness” is that attitude and spirit in which all is Machiavellian when done for the furtherance and protection of the earth (ones sensual harmony with the creation). It is this subjective sensual (5 senses driven) “wisdom” and perception which holds in high esteem the evolutionary philosophy of time and chance and valiantly condemns the Judean/Christian Laws of Nature and of Natures God (1 Cor. 1:18-32). Science and godless secular theories are it’s dogmas and bible, and this fallen planet is its god (Rom 1:22-26). These seeks to be the world’s savior and deliverer from its arch enemy, man. The radical environmentalist attitude and their green righteousness is manifested on how they serve and honor the environment (the creature and creation) and it’s “green” dogmas and mandates (Romans 1:18-32).

continues

Don’t fail to catch the remainder of this important article.

Michael Savage – Why All the Mystery Surrounding Barack Obama?

Apr 22nd, 2012
by TMH - NoisyRoom.Net
Hat Tip: BB

The Progressive impulse to totalitarianism …

April 22, 2012
The Progressive impulse to totalitarianism … [Darleen Click]

… because, in the words of David Thompson, they care so very, very much.
The prime minister must act decisively on unhealthy eating and poor nutrition.

Because it is Government’s job to police your every mouthful. And those unhelpful government members who believe in such quaint concepts as liberty and ::::shudder::: personal responsibility?

Andrew Lansley, the health secretary, prefers to address the country’s profound problems of bad diet via a voluntary “responsibility deal” with the food industry, rather than through legislation. It is a naive response, and one which the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, the most influential medical body in the land, described last week as “inherently flawed” and doomed to fail.

The experts have spoken, top experts. It’s not like we haven’t had your best interest at heart before …

Jamie Oliver, interviewed in today’s Observer Food Monthly, laments the lack of government action on obesity. His judgment is a harsh one, but difficult to dispute, given the coalition’s lack of effective action. Professor Terence Stephenson, the doctor leading the academy’s new inquiry into obesity, has floated possible measures, including “fat taxes”, limits on fast-food outlets near schools and an end to “irresponsible” marketing of unhealthy foodstuffs. He believes the history of public health, on issues such as seatbelts, drink-driving and smoking, shows that sometimes government action is needed, and that obesity’s worsening effects – as a cause of illness, a drain on the NHS and a drag on people’s self-esteem – make this another such moment.

Shut up, we say …

[I]f the answers, whatever they are, involve challenging corporate power and practices, legislating to improve the content of food or even limiting individuals’ freedom to consume junk, then so be it.

SOURCE: Protein Wisdom

History of Barack Obama

Apr 22nd, 2012
by TMH - NoisyRoom.Net
Hat Tip: BB
MRCTV

Free Speech Found Guilty by Europe

by Soeren Kern
April 23, 2012 at 4:30 am
Gatestone Institute.Org:

The ruling showed that while Judaism and Christianity can be disparaged with impunity, speaking the truth about Islam is subject to swift and hefty legal penalties. The Supreme Court stressed that the substance of the charges -- public criticism of Islam – is still a crime punishable by imprisonment. Under Danish law, it is immaterial whether a statement is true or false. All that is needed for a conviction is for someone to feel offended.

Lars Hedegaard, the president of the Danish Free Press Society, has been acquitted by the Danish Supreme Court on charges of "hate speech" for critical comments he made about Islam.

The verdict, however represents only a partial victory for free speech in a Europe that is being stifled by politically correct restrictions on free speech, particularly on issues related to Islam.

Although Hedegaard was acquitted, it was on a legal technicality; in its ruling, the Supreme Court stressed that the substance of the charges against Hedegaard -- public criticism of Islam, -- is still a crime punishable by imprisonment.

Hedegaard's legal problems began in December 2009, when he said in a taped interview that there was a high incidence of child rape and domestic violence in areas dominated by Muslim culture. Although Hedegaard insisted that he did not intend to accuse all Muslims or even the majority of Muslims of such crimes, Denmark's thought police were incensed at such effrontery:

the Danish public prosecutor's office declared that Hedegaard was guilty of violating Article 266b of the Danish penal code, a catch-all provision that Danish elites use to enforce politically correct speech codes.

The infamous Article 266b states: "Whoever publicly or with the intent of public dissemination issues a pronouncement or other communication by which a group of persons are threatened, insulted or denigrated due to their race, skin color, national or ethnic origin, religion or sexual orientation is liable to a fine or incarceration for up to two years."

In January 2011, a Danish lower court acquitted Hedegaard of any wrongdoing. But public prosecutors appealed that verdict and in May 2011, a Danish superior court found Hedegaard guilty of hate speech in accordance with Article 266b because he "ought to have known" that his statements regarding family rape in Muslim families were intended for public dissemination.

On April 20, 2012, the Danish Supreme Court decided that the prosecution had failed to prove that Hedegaard was aware that his statements would be published. Although Hedegaard was thus acquitted, the court also made a special point of ruling that the substance of his statements, namely the public criticism of Islam, is a violation of Article 266b.

As a result, although Hedegaard has been cleared of wrongdoing, the Supreme Court has affirmed the legal restrictions on free speech in Denmark.

Hedegaard's case is similar to recent or current ones in Austria, Finland, France, Italy and the Netherlands and exemplifies the growing use of lawfare: the malicious use of European courts to silence public discussion about the growing problem of Muslim immigration.

In Austria, for example, an appellate court in December 2011 upheld the politically correct conviction of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, a Viennese housewife and anti-Jihad activist, for "denigrating religious beliefs" after she gave a series of seminars about the dangers of radical Islam. The ruling showed that while Judaism and Christianity can be disparaged with impunity in postmodern multicultural Austria, speaking the truth about Islam is subject to swift and hefty legal penalties.

Also in Austria, Susanne Winter, an Austrian politician and Member of Parliament, was convicted in January 2009 for the "crime" of saying that "in today's system" the Islamic prophet Mohammed would be considered a "child molester." She was referring to Mohammed's marriage to nine-year-old Aisha. Winter was also convicted of "incitement" for saying that Austria faces an "Islamic immigration tsunami." Winters was ordered to pay a fine of €24,000 ($31,000), and received a suspended three-month prison sentence.

In Denmark, Jesper Langballe, a Danish politician and Member of Parliament, was found guilty of hate speech in December 2010 for saying that honor killings and sexual abuse take place in Muslim families.

Langballe was denied the opportunity to prove his assertions because under Danish law it is immaterial whether a statement is true or false. All that is needed for a conviction is for someone to feel offended. Langballe was summarily sentenced to pay a fine of 5,000 Danish Kroner ($850) or spend ten days in jail.

In Finland, Jussi Kristian Halla-aho, a politician and well-known political commentator, was taken to court in March 2009 on charges of "incitement against an ethnic group" and "breach of the sanctity of religion" for saying that Islam is a religion of pedophilia. A Helsinki court later dropped the charges of blasphemy but ordered Halla-aho to pay a fine of €330 ($450) for disturbing religious worship. The Finnish public prosecutor, incensed at the court's dismissal of the blasphemy charges, appealed the case to the Finnish Supreme Court, where it is now being reviewed.

In France, novelist Michel Houellebecq was taken to court by Islamic authorities in the French cities of Paris and Lyon for calling Islam "the stupidest religion" and for saying the Koran is "badly written." In court, Houellebecq (pronounced Wellbeck) told the judges that although he had never despised Muslims, he did feel contempt for Islam. He was acquitted in October 2002.

Also in France, Brigitte Bardot, the legendary actress turned animal rights crusader, was convicted in June 2008 for "inciting racial hatred" after demanding that Muslims anaesthetize animals before slaughtering them.

Elsewhere in France, Marie Laforêt, one of the country's most well-known singers and actresses, appeared in a Paris courtroom in December 2011 to defend herself against charges that a job advertisement she placed discriminated against Muslims.

The 72-year-old Laforêt had placed an ad on an Internet website looking for someone to do some work on her terrace in 2009. She specified in the ad that "people with allergies or orthodox Muslims" should not apply "due to a small Chihuahua." Laforêt claimed that she made the stipulation because she believed the Muslim faith views dogs as unclean animals.

The case was taken up by an anti-discrimination group called the Movement against Racism and for Friendship between Peoples (MRAP), which lodged a criminal complaint against Laforêt. Her lawyer said Laforêt "knew that the presence of a dog could conflict with the religious convictions of orthodox Muslims. It was a sign of respect." But Muslims rejected her defense.

In The Netherlands, Geert Wilders -- the leader of the Dutch Freedom Party who had denounced the threat to Western values posed by unassimilated Muslim immigrants -- was recently acquitted of five charges of inciting religious hatred against Muslims for comments he made that were critical of Islam. The landmark verdict brought to a close a highly-public, two-year legal odyssey.

Also in The Netherlands, Gregorius Nekschot, the pseudonym of a Dutch cartoonist who is a vocal critic of Islamic female circumcision and often mocks Dutch multiculturalism, was arrested at his home in Amsterdam in May 2008 for drawing cartoons deemed offensive to Muslims. Nekschot (which literally means "shot in the neck," a method the cartoonist says was used by "fascists and communists to get rid of their opponents") was released after 30 hours of interrogation by Dutch law enforcement officials.

Nekschot was charged for eight cartoons that "attribute negative qualities to certain groups of people," and, as such, are insulting and constitute the crimes of discrimination and hate according to articles 137c and 137d of the Dutch Penal Code.

In an interview with the Dutch newspaper de Volkskrant, Nekschot said it was the first time in 800 years in the history of satire in the Netherlands that an artist was put in jail. (That interview has since been removed from the newspaper's website.) Although the case against Nekschot was dismissed in September 2010, he ended his career as a cartoonist on December 31, 2011.

In Italy, the late Oriana Fallaci, a journalist and author, was taken to court for writing that Islam "brings hate instead of love and slavery instead of freedom." In November 2002, a judge in Switzerland, acting on a lawsuit brought by Islamic Center of Geneva, issued an arrest warrant for Fallaci for violations of Article 261 of the Swiss criminal code; the judge asked the Italian government either to prosecute or extradite her. The Italian Justice Ministry rejected this request on the grounds that the Italian Constitution protects freedom of speech.

But in May 2005, the Union of Islamic Communities in Italy (UCOII), a group that is linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, filed a lawsuit against Fallaci, charging that "some of the things she said in her book 'The Force of Reason' are offensive to Islam." An Italian judge ordered Fallaci to stand trial in Bergamo on charges of "defaming Islam." Fallaci died of cancer in September 2006, just months after the start of her trial.

Back in Denmark, Hedegaard was circumspect about his acquittal. In a statement he said: "I am pleased that the Supreme Court has handed down a judgment in accordance with the evidence that was presented in the District Court and High Court."

But, Hedegaard also acknowledged: "This judgment cannot be interpreted as a victory for freedom of speech. Article 266b, under which I was charged, remains unchanged. It remains a disgrace to any civilized society and is an open invitation to frivolous trials. Thus, we still have no right to refer to truth if we are indicted under this article. There have been several attempts to bring Article 266b into accordance with general principles of law, but successive governments and the parliamentary majority has stubbornly refused."

Hedegaard concluded: "I am delighted that my acquittal sets a limit to how deeply the state can interfere in private life. The Supreme Court has clearly upheld the principle that for a statement to be criminal, it must have been made with the intent of public dissemination. We may still talk freely in our own homes."

But then he added a qualification: "My personal reaction to more than two years of fatiguing litigation is that from now on I will be demanding written guarantees from people who want to talk to me. With their signatures they must confirm that nothing that I say will be passed on to the public without my express approval and without me having had a chance to vet it… I would advise everybody to do the same for we all know that the prosecutor lies in wait."

Soeren Kern is Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook.

Freedom vs. The Welfare State

By Sven R Larson
Apr 22, 2012
CDN:

The average American college student is too young to even have been born when the Soviet Union was still around. An entire generation has grown up since the Cold War ended. They have put a big distance of time between us and the Soviet Union, the most formidable threat to freedom the world has ever seen.

In one way this is of course very good. Despite the problems Russia faces today, life is indeed better for hundreds of millions of people from Saxony in East Germany to Sakhalin in East Russia. But this also means that the younger generation can no longer witness with their own eyes what Communism means. They cannot share the very tangible experience I had in 1988 when I walked along the East Side of the Berlin Wall, realizing the profound nature of the evil that Communism represented.

You need not have hands-on experience with tyranny to understand that it is evil. It helps, of course, but a thorough education on it should suffice.

I am concerned, though, that we are slowly but steadily forgetting what the evil face of totalitarianism looks like. I worry that with time, we will lose our collective memory of oppression in the name of an ideology.

As we lose sight of the Evil Empire and its desire to eradicate the free world, we also lose our ability to recognize totalitarian character traits in our own policies, right here at home. Legislation that would never have been passed into law in the 1980s can now become the law of the land. Without the absolute evil of communism staring us in the face, we lose the ability to see the absolute good in freedom.

It is against this background that I believe we need to view the following change in how the IRS enforces tax compliance among American citizens. A report by Fox Business News reports about a new, bizarre law authorizing the IRS to revoke your travel rights:

A new bill making its way through Congress could allow the federal government to prevent Americans who owe back taxes from leaving the country. The provision is part of Senate Bill 1813, which was introduced by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) in November and passed by the Senate on March 14 “to reauthorize Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs, and for other purposes.” Those “other purposes” have come to include a little-known amendment recently introduced by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that would allow the State Department to revoke, deny or limit passports for anyone the Internal Revenue Service certifies as having “a seriously delinquent tax debt in an amount in excess of $50,000.”

In other words, this bill would allow the federal government to effectively put a Berlin Wall around the country and only allow people to leave who, according to the Internal Revenue Service, have paid their taxes in good order. If the individual taxpayer says he has paid his taxes, he does not have the right to contest the ruling by the IRS in court. When it comes to your travel rights, the IRS is the final arbiter of whether or not you owe any taxes.

First of all, this is a frightening perspective on the abuse of government powers given that both presidents Nixon and Obama have been accused of using the IRS to target political enemies. Since all it would take now for someone to be deprived of the right to travel abroad is an accusation from the IRS, the threshold for power abuse has been lowered to disturbing levels.

Secondly, beyond the immediate concerns for individual freedom there is the question of the purpose of this law. It is put in place, evidently, to guarantee tax compliance by high-income earners. The federal government sees this need, in turn, because Congress wants to preserve all its spending, all its entitlements – its welfare state, for short.

This means that Congress is willing to let the ideology of the welfare state supersede the inalienable right of American citizens to freely travel as they please.

It is important to point out that the federal government’s eagerness to defend the welfare state is not the result of the same profoundly evil intentions that drove the communist governments in the Soviet empire. I grew up during the Cold War, I visited both the Soviet Union and most of its Eastern European satellite states. I know it as well as you can know it without actually having lived under its boot. There is a world of difference between one single law to restrict the freedom of some Americans, and an all-out assault on individual freedom as in the Soviet Union.

That said, let us also notice the metaphorical meaning of the old Swedish saying: many small creeks add up to a mighty river. An individual piece of legislation such as this one, that places one type of restriction on individual freedom, does not make America a totalitarian country. But the cumulative effect of many small pieces of legislation can be very troubling, much sooner than we tend to believe.

A common denominator to all authoritarian legislation is that it puts the interests of government above the interests of the people. This piece of legislation is a case in point. Government, in the form of Congress, has an interest in preserving our entitlement programs and our welfare state. It is willing to do so even if it means that they have to make very deep incursions into our liberty.

It has been said that the difference between the welfare state and the totalitarian state is a matter of time. Europe has recently had experiences that reinforces this chilling warning. The more of these draconian, freedom-stifling pieces of legislation we pass, the closer we nudge ourselves to the edge of tyranny. When each piece of legislation is motivated by an allegedly good cause – in this case to raise more taxes for government spending – the slow slide into the dungeons of totalitarianism is even less visible to the naked eye.

This makes our slow, steady move in the wrong direction all the more serious. It is motivated by the pursuit of a “good cause”, namely the spending on entitlements that supposedly makes life easier for the poor. Consequently, government can motivate its virtual Berlin Wall with its self-purported benevolence. Thereby it looks like the price paid by those who lose their freedom is worth paying.

In reality, this type of legislation represents the moral decay of government. It also raises some serious questions as to what Congress would be willing to do tomorrow to defend its welfare state. Today it is the travel rights of American citizens; what are they willing to do tomorrow – in the name of the welfare state?

Change! 1 in 2 new graduates are jobless or underemployed

Sunday, April 22, 2012
Change! 1 in 2 new graduates are jobless or underemployed

I'm no Charles Rove, but methinks the Obama Get Out The Vote effort will have a tad more difficulty this year than in 2008.

The college class of 2012 is in for a rude welcome to the world of work.

Young adults with bachelor's degrees are increasingly scraping by in lower-wage jobs -- waiter or waitress, bartender, retail clerk or receptionist, for example -- and that's confounding their hopes a degree would pay off despite higher tuition and mounting student loans.

An analysis of government data conducted for The Associated Press lays bare the highly uneven prospects for holders of bachelor's degrees...

...Taking underemployment into consideration, the job prospects for bachelor's degree holders fell last year to the lowest level in more than a decade.

...About 1.5 million, or 53.6 percent, of bachelor's degree-holders under the age of 25 last year were jobless or underemployed, the highest share in at least 11 years. In 2000, the share was at a low of 41 percent, before the dot-com bust erased job gains for college graduates in the telecommunications and IT fields.

Obama 2012
Hey, Kids! We're pretty sure more class warfare will work if you just give us another four years!

Cartoon: TobyToons.com.

Former Justice official: Obama worse than Bush on civil liberties [VIDEO]

Published: 1:38 AM 04/23/2012
By Grae Stafford
The Daily Caller

The Obama administration’s use of executive power has gone further than the Bush administration’s toward diminishing Americans’ civil liberties, author John Yoo told The Daily Caller.

“Somehow the Obama administration has increased the protections for terrorists, while at the same time reducing them for the rest of us law-abiding citizens in the United States,” Yoo said after a panel discussion on his new book “Taming Globalization” at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C.

Yoo was deputy assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel at the U.S. Department of Justice during the Bush administration. During his tenure, he authored what came to be derided as the “torture memos,” which defined what techniques were acceptable to use during interrogations of terrorist suspects.

Anti-war organizations branded him and many others in the Bush administration, including Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and President Bush himself, as “war criminals.”

Yoo said the anti-war movement has not criticized President Barack Obama, despite his administration’s formalization of a process for “targeted killing[s]” of American citizens without trial.

“You don’t see the same critics who so thrashed President Bush, for allegedly thinking he was a king, making the same arguments and engaging in the same criticism of President Obama,” Yoo told TheDC.

“I think a reasonable person can only conclude that is because President Obama happens to be a Democrat, where as President Bush was a Republican.”

Feds eye retirement-fund tax to cut $16 trillion-plus deficit

By GREGORY BRESIGER
Last Updated: 8:25 AM, April 22, 2012
Posted: 11:16 PM, April 21, 2012

Uncle Sam, in a desperate attempt to fix its $16 trillion-plus deficit, is leering over Americans’ retirement nest egg as its new bailout fund.

Capitol Hill politicians are assessing tax changes that could let the Internal Revenue Service lay claim to a portion of the $18 trillion sitting in 401(k) accounts and other tax breaks used by middle-class workers, including cutting the mortgage tax deduction.

A commission looking for ways to close the deficit, and, noting the extent of 401(k) tax breaks, recommends an examination of the system as one way to prevent government bankruptcy.

Besides 401(k)s, other possibilities include the mortgage-interest deduction on second homes, as well as benefits from employer-provided health insurance, which are untaxed now.

Under current 401(k) rules, total employee/employer contributions can’t exceed $50,000. In the proposed rule change, employer/employee contributions would be limited to 20 percent of the employee’s compensation, with a maximum of $20,000, the so-called 20/20 proposal.

Another proposal being discussed in Congress says all tax deductions on 401(k)s and IRAs to be replaced with an 18 percent credit. The credit, according to a proposal that has been endorsed by economist William Gale, would be placed directly in a person’s retirement account.

“Unlike the current system,” Gale told Congress, “workers’ and firms’ contributions to employer-based 401(k) accounts would no longer be excluded from income and would be subject to taxation, contributions to IRAs would no longer be tax-deductible and any contributions to a 401(k) plan would be treated as taxable income.”

In other words, the employee and employer would no longer get a deduction under the Gale plan, they would qualify for a credit. And the credit would “increase [government] revenues by about $458 billion,” Gale says.

Last week a group of retirement industry experts went to Capitol Hill to criticize these proposed changes in retirement-plan rules. “These changes could have unintended consequences,” warns Lynn Dudley of the American Benefits Council (ABC).

Testifying before the House Ways and Means Committee about the proposals, Randolf Hardock, of ABC’s board of directors, said, “[The idea] could seriously undermine the retirement savings system.”

Jack VanDerhei, research director of Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI), believes either of the two proposed 401(k) changes under review would have a “catastrophic” effect on the current retirement saving system.

The 20/20 plan provisions curtailing non-taxable contributions would freeze out many higher-paid employees from signing up for a 401(k), which could lead some companies, according to critics, to question if plans would still be worth offering employees.

Reducing retirement-plan contributions for those at the higher end of the wage scale will inevitably have a bad effect on those in the middle and at the bottom, ABC’s Dudley says.

SOURCE: NY Post

Iran claims to be building copy of captured U.S. drone

Apr 22, 6:40 AM (ET)
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran claimed Sunday that it had reverse-engineered an American spy drone captured by its armed forces last year and has begun building a copy.

Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, chief of the aerospace division of the powerful Revolutionary Guards, related what he said were details of the aircraft's operational history to prove his claim that Tehran's military experts had extracted data from the U.S. RQ-170 Sentinel captured in December in eastern Iran, state television reported.

Among the drone's past missions, he said, was surveillance of the compound in northwest Pakistan in which Osama Bin Laden lived and was killed.

Tehran has flaunted the capture of the Sentinel, a top-secret surveillance drone with stealth technology, as a victory for Iran and a defeat for the United States in a complicated intelligence and technological battle.

U.S. officials have acknowledged losing the drone. They have said Iran will find it hard to exploit any data and technology aboard it because of measures taken to limit the intelligence value of drones operating over hostile territory.

Hajizadeh told state television that the captured surveillance drone is a "national asset" for Iran and that he could not reveal full technical details. But he did provide some samples of the data that he claimed Iranian experts had recovered.

"There is almost no part hidden to us in this aircraft. We recovered part of the data that had been erased. There were many codes and characters. But we deciphered them by the grace of God," Hajizadeh said.

He said all operations carried out by the drone had been recorded in the memory of the aircraft, including maintenance and testing.

Hajizadeh claimed that the drone flew over Osama Bin Laden's compound in Pakistan two weeks before the al-Qaida leader was killed there in May 2011 by U.S. Navy SEALs. He did not say how the Iranian experts knew this.

Before that, he said, "this drone was in California on Oct. 16, 2010, for some technical work and was taken to Kandahar in Afghanistan on Nov. 18, 2010. It conducted flights there but apparently faced problems and (U.S. experts) were unable to fix it," he said.

Hajizadeh said the drone was taken to Los Angeles in December 2010 where sensors of the aircraft underwent testing at an aerospace factory.

"If we had not achieved access to software and hardware of this aircraft, we would be unable to get these details. Our experts are fully dominant over sections and programs of this plane," he said. "It's not that we can bring down a drone but cannot recover the data."

There are concerns in the U.S. that Iran or other states may be able to reverse-engineer the chemical composition of the drone's radar-deflecting paint or the aircraft's sophisticated optics technology that allows operators to positively identify terror suspects from tens of thousands of feet in the air.

There are also worries that adversaries may be able to hack into the drone's database, as Iran claimed to have done. Some surveillance technologies allow video to stream through to operators on the ground but do not store much collected data. If they do, it is encrypted.

Media reports claimed this week that Russia and China have asked Tehran to provide them with information on the drone but Iran's Defense Ministry denied this.

Arrested 35 times, but still U.S. can't deport him

Immigration officials say they've tried to remove convicted criminal from the U.S. but no country will take him

Published: Friday, April 20, 2012, 11:28 AM
Updated: Friday, April 20, 2012, 11:54 AM
By Carol Robinson -- The Birmingham News

HUEYTOWN, Alabama - Federal authorities said they have tried to remove a Palestinian man who has been arrested 35 times in 12 years in Alabama, but said other countries have refused to take him.

Sofyan Eldani, 45, was arrested by Hueytown police earlier this week after he was found during a traffic stop to be in possession of crack cocaine. Police Chief Chuck Hagler said he was frustrated to find out that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials were familiar with the convicted felon, but couldn't send him to his native country because the U.S. doesn't recognize Palestine as a country. Eldani said he is a native of Palestine, though he carries an Egyptian passport.


Temple Black, a spokesman for ICE, today released the following statement regarding the predicament with Eldani.

"Sofyan Eldani was previously detained by ICE and ordered removed to Egypt. ICE made a travel document request to Egypt. Mr. Eldani made travel document requests to Egypt, Israel and Kuwait," the statement read. "When authorities in those countries declined to provide the appropriate travel documents to facilitate Mr. Eldani's removal, he was released from ICE custody due to the Supreme Court's ruling in Zadvydas v. Davis."

"The Zadvydas decision generally allows ICE to detain aliens who are subject to a final order of removal only for a period of time deemed reasonably necessary to effectuate their removal. ICE makes every possible effort to remove all final-order aliens within a reasonable period, which the Supreme Court has determined is 180 days. After that period, if the actual removal cannot occur within the reasonably foreseeable future, ICE must release the alien."

Eldani's arrests including assault, fraudulent checks, criminal mischief, resisting arrests, reckless endangerment, shoplifting, burglary, drug possession, failure to appear, probation violation, possession of a drug paraphernalia and DUI.

He has at least nine convictions, including four felonies, and served six months in an Alabama prison for receiving stolen property.

So, for now, Eldani will remain in Alabama and face his most recent drug trafficking charge in state court.

"I understand what they're saying, but it's not a satisfactory answer," Hagler said. "It doesn't seem fair to us that if they refuse to take their problem child back, we are stuck with him. If an American gets convicted of being a serial child rapist in France, do we refuse to take him back? I doubt it. Am I the only one who thinks this is insane?"

Another “novelty” swipe at a conservative Tea Party woman

By Michelle Malkin • April 22, 2012 10:59 AM

The opposite of “novelty” Establishment Republicans are really getting unhinged by fresh, conservative voices — especially female and minority ones — who are on the rise. You’ll recall that earlier this month, Romney supporter Ann Coulter took to ABC News to put down Sarah Palin and Marco Rubio as “novelty” candidates. Yesterday at the Utah Republican convention, where crusty incumbent Sen. Orrin Hatch failed in his $6 million bid to avoid a primary fight for the nomination, the state’s attorney general attacked 4th CD candidate and Tea Party favorite Mia Love as a…”novelty.” Many Republicans were shocked Saturday when Attorney General Mark Shurtleff seemingly dismissed Mia Love — the first black woman nominated for Congress in Utah — as a “novelty.” “You have to please pick a person with a proven record who can beat Jim Matheson this fall. Not a novelty,” Shurtleff said. The reference drew boos from many in the audience and outrage from many Republicans. Republican National Committeewoman Enid Mickelsen said she had an angry confrontation with Shurtleff over the comment. “At first I didn’t believe it,” Mickelsen said. But Shurtleff, she said, didn’t back away from the comment. “He said, ‘Enid, what else is her appeal?’ And I lost it,” Mickelsen said. Shurtleff’s “apology” is as phony as any non-apology apology I’ve heard from Beltway crapweasels. Read all about it here. He argues that she doesn’t have enough experience over his chosen candidate (the defeated state legislator Carl Wimmer) — even though Wimmer has served less time in public office than Love (a former city council member and current mayor of Saratoga Springs). The gracious Love accepted Shurtleff’s lame apology. But it leaves the same bitter taste that Coulter’s swipe at Palin and Rubio did. What the hell are they thinking? The Left does enough to marginalize Tea Party candidates and minority conservatives without extra piling on by thoughtless establishment Republicans threatened by new competition. As with so many ad hominem attacks, the most effective way to fight back is to hijack their language. They see “novelty” as a pejorative. But the opposite of novelty is staleness, sameness, and idleness. The voters yesterday endorsed “novelty” over entrenched incumbency. Election 2012: Out with the same old, same old. In with the fresh, new, and novel. Love faces Democrat Rep. Jim Matheson in the general. Support her campaign here.

Rachel Maddow Demands Dismissal of $50 Million Defamation Lawsuit

In court papers, rocker/preacher/radio host Bradlee Dean is said to want to punish the MSNBC host for espousing “leftist, socialist, activist ‘gay rights’, pro-choice, pro-government and anti-religious” ideals.

5:03 PM PDT 4/19/2012
by Eriq Gardner
The Hollywood Reporter:

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow has hit back hard against a $50 million defamation lawsuit brought by heavy metal rocker-turned-radio host and conservative preacher Bradlee Dean. Maddow and NBC Universal are looking to punish Dean for bringing an allegedly meritless suit by filing an anti-SLAPP motion to end the case and force him to hand over legal fees.

According to court papers filed this week in D.C. federal court, the defendants say, "With this lawsuit -- his second -- Dean seeks to move one step closer in his self-described mission to stop the 'radical gay agenda.' The law does not permit him to use the judicial process in this fashion."

Dean brought a defamation lawsuit in July, arguing that Maddow twisted Dean's words in an effort to undermine Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann. On The Rachel Maddow Show, Dean's comments on his own radio show were clipped to become:

"Muslims are calling for the execution for homosexuals in America. ... They themselves are upholding the laws that are even in the Bible, the Judeo Christian God. They seem to be more moral than even the American Christians do. Because these people are livid about enforcing their laws, they know homosexuality is an abomination. ... If America won't enforce the laws, God will raise up a foreign enemy to do just that's what you're seeing in America today."

Maddow then ran Dean's later disclaimer that he has "never and will never call for the execution of homosexuals," and followed it up with some commentary, but it was enough for a defamation lawsuit -- first filed in state court, then dropped, then filed again in federal court to escape the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act.

For Dean's full quote on his radio show, and a video clip of how Maddow treated it in her show, see our post at the time the first lawsuit was filed.

Larry Klayman, the attorney for Bradlee Dean, commented: "Maddow and MSNBC clearly defamed my client. Maddow went way over the line, particularly in her second broadcast by claiming that Dean and Republicans like then-presidential candidate Michele Bachmann are 'bloodthirsty' and want to see more gays and lesbians killed. This was outrageous and harmful and for this, Maddow and MSNBC will be held legally accountable."

Maddow, MSNBC, and NBCU -- the defendants -- responded in court this week, saying the First Amendment protects what the TV host had to say. The defendants give three reasons in a 51-page motion why Dean's lawsuit is likely to fail:
"One, the broadcasts truthfully reported on Dean’s May 15th statements. Those broadcasts re-played original audio of Dean speaking on the May 15th radio show. Dean does not – and cannot – allege that he did not make those controversial statements. The fact that NBCUniversal broadcast the essence but not the entirety of what Dean said during that radio show, as he now protests, does not change this analysis. Dean bears sole responsibility for the consequences of his words, however much he may try to distance himself from the backlash."
"Two, the commentary or rebuke Maddow offered about Dean’s statements was classic opinion and rhetorical hyperbole, and thus, cannot be actionable as a matter of law. As Dean is entitled to his opinions, however objectionable, so too is Maddow entitled to hers."
"Three, the fair comment privilege protects Maddow’s commentary. The broadcasts featured Dean’s actual statements and clearly indicated the source of those statements. Viewers were free to make up their own minds as to whether they agreed with Maddow’s remarks."

The defendants, represented by Laura Handman at Davis Wright Tremaine, also attack Dean for delivering a lawsuit that "reads as a political tirade against NBCUniversal and its on-air hosts, especially Maddow, for their support of liberal causes and their alleged 'attacks' on Congresswoman Bachmann, who is notably not a plaintiff in this action."

The District of Columbia enacted its anti-SLAPP Act of 2010 to dissuade lawsuits aimed at stifling free speech. One of the first tests was in Shirley Sherrod's lawsuit against the late Andrew Breitbart. In January, another lawsuit was dismissed under D.C.'s Act when a firefighter failed in a defamation claim against a local Fox television affiliate. There are 27 states that currently have anti-SLAPP statutes, according to the Citizen Media Law Project.

Read Maddow/MSNBC's full anti-SLAPP motion on the following page.

Jon Corzine Still Bundling for Obama

4:09 PM, Apr 20, 2012
By DANIEL HALPER
The Weekly Standard:

Barack Obama's reelection campaign has released the most recent list of names of fundraising bundlers. On that list is Jon Corzine, the former governor of New Jersey and embattled money man, the former head of MF Global:

Corzine, according to the Obama campaign, has once again helped raise more than $500,000.

(He was likewise named a bundler in January, when the Obama campaign last released the names of their money men.)

"MF Global and its brokerage sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy after a $6.3 billion bet on the bonds of some of Europe’s most indebted nations prompted regulator concerns and a credit rating downgrade. Corzine quit MF Global Nov. 4," Bloomberg reported.

As ABC reported, "President Obama once hailed [Corzine] as an 'honorable man' and one of his 'best partners' in the White House." Since that time, Obama has tried to distance himself from Corzine, who at one point was considered for the treasury secretary slot.

But apparently Obama is still willing to use campaign funds from the embattled Corzine.

Obama again attempting his "bribes for votes" spoof on young voters

Obama wooing young voters with student loan focus

By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press
Saturday, April 21, 2012

WASHINGTON (AP)

Eager to energize young voters, President Barack Obama is depicting Republicans as obstacles to an affordable college education as he previews an argument he will make on university campuses next week in states crucial to his re-election.

"This is a question of values," Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday. "We cannot let America become a country where a shrinking number of people do really well while a growing number of people struggle to get by."

Obama wants Congress to extend a law that cut interest rates on a popular federal loan program for low- and middle-income undergraduates. If the law expires, the rates will double on July 1, from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent.

Obama blames Republicans for voting against new ways to make college more affordable for middle-class families. But it was House Democrats who cut interest rates on the school loans in 2007 and included an expiration provision that placed the looming increase in the middle of an election year.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan said Friday that more than 7 million students would be financially squeezed if rates were to rise, to the cost of an additional $1,000 on average.

Obama is visiting to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the University of Colorado at Boulder on Tuesday and the University of Iowa on Wednesday. The three schools are in states Obama won in 2008 but are in play this year in his race against the likely Republican nominee, Mitt Romney.

"In America, higher education cannot be a luxury," Obama said. "It's an economic imperative that every family must be able to afford."

He argued that at a time of high joblessness, the rate of unemployment for Americans with a college degree is about half the national average. "It's never been more important," he said.

The courting of young voters will include an appearance on NBC's "Late Night With Jimmy Fallon" show, which will be taped while Obama is in North Carolina.

While Obama addressed education as his newest election-year theme, Republicans stuck to their criticism of Obama's energy policies. Citing still high gasoline prices, Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri said Obama is focusing on the wrong issues.

Blunt chided Obama and Senate Democrats in the GOP's weekend address for pushing unsuccessfully for a tax increase on millionaires instead of focusing on consumer pain at the pump. He pressed Obama to drop his opposition to the Keystone XL Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline, which the president blocked earlier this year. The administration says it is waiting for the pipeline developer, TransCanada, to submit a new route that avoids environmentally sensitive lands. The company unveiled a preferred route on Thursday.

"The Keystone pipeline is one common-sense step in the right direction to help put more people back to work, reduce prices at the pump and position our nation for greater energy security now and in the future," Blunt said.

USAID training foreign workers for English-speaking jobs

Published: 10:53 PM 04/20/2012
By Caroline May
The Daily Caller:

While the president has been urging “insourcing,” the government has been sending money to the Philippines to train foreign workers for jobs in English-speaking call centers.

According to New York Democratic Rep. Tim Bishop and North Carolina Republican Rep. Walter Jones, this is unacceptable and “shocking.”

The pair are calling on the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to immediately suspend what is known as the Job Enabling English Proficiency (JEEP) program.

According to Jones’ office, in 2010, after the two men compelled USAID to end a similar training program in Sri Lanka, the agency assured the congressmen that they would “conduct a review to ensure the project will not take any jobs away from Americans.”

In a letter to the USAID administrator, Rajiv Shah, Bishop and Jones expressed their displeasure at learning of the effort they thought the agency had explicitly promised against.

“I believe it was reasonable to conclude from that statement that your agency’s outsourcing training program was terminated, particularly in light of President Obama’s ‘insourcing’ initiative announced earlier this year,” the pair wrote. “Therefore, I was shocked to learn that USAID has used taxpayer dollars to invest in outsourcing training programs in the Philippines at the expense of American workers.”.

According to Bishop, more than 4.5 million Americans currently work in call centers, but since 2007 more than 500,000 call center jobs have been outsourced to foreign countries.

Business Week broke the story about the JEEP program this week. According to Business Week, the program is part of the Growth and Equity in Mindanao (GEM) initiative, which costs $100 million annually.

“The JEEP program was developed to promote peace and stability in Mindanao by teaching English to youth in conflict-prone areas to help them pursue gainful employment in tourism, nursing and other locally-based industries and to break the cycle of violence which had gripped that region of the Philippines,” a USAID spokesperson told Business Week, adding that it is set to expire at the end of the year.

The congressmen want it gone yesterday.

“Using Americans’ hard-earned taxpayer dollars to fund the training of foreign nationals to take our jobs is absolutely crazy and totally unacceptable,” Jones said in a statement. “Uncle Sam is over $15 trillion in debt and unemployment is still elevated because of policies like this, and it’s got to stop.”

The pair pledged in their letter to “use every legislative option available to permanently prohibit USAID from engaging in such practices in the future.”

“I support the international development mission of USAID but my top priority is protecting American jobs and American taxpayers,” Bishop concluded. “I anticipate working closely with USAID in a bipartisan manner to ensure that none of its programs overseas will hurt workers here at home.”

The Post fails a young blogger

By Patrick B. Pexton
Published: April 20
WaPo:

The Post just had a rough few days. It was shut out of the 2012 Pulitzer Prizes, which were announced Monday. On the same day, journalists here had to accept or reject The Post’s fifth buyout offer in nine years. The union representing newsroom workers says that at least 32 accepted, and probably more. And the prior Friday, a Post blogger, Elizabeth Flock, resigned.

I think that the most noteworthy event was the resignation of Flock, a woman in her mid-20s whose job was filling The Post’s breaking news blog, called blogPost. It was designed to be about the national and international stories popular from hour to hour — trending — on the Internet.

Flock’s job entailed some original reporting from Washington but a lot more of what we call “aggregation.” This is an imprecise term. At its best, aggregation can mean collecting stories on a topic from a variety of news outlets and directing readers toward them through Web links. At its worst, as Bill Keller, the former editor of the New York Times has written, it verges on theft.

In the middle, where most aggregation is, it is repackaging. A digital journalist reads a raft of stories on a given subject from different publications, summarizes and rewrites them in a bright way, provides links and, at The Post, adds a Washington angle. The goal is to surf the trend waves on the Internet, hoping to catch a few thousand page views as a story crests. It’s cashing in on the passing popularity of a story even if you don’t have a reporter covering it.

BlogPost was supposed to attain 1 million to 2 million Web hits a month, Flock said, a huge number. On many days Flock was the only reporter filing for blogPost. Last month, she averaged 5.9 blog posts per day. These are not 100-word briefs but often 500-word summaries of complicated news events that ranged from the killing of Trayvon Martin to the use of pink slime in ground beef to the impact of general strikes in Spain.

Flock made two mistakes in the past four months, which earned her two tough editor’s notes disavowing her actions.

She did a roundup on Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney allegedly using an old Ku Klux Klan slogan in his stump speech — a story that went viral online yet was untrue — and she didn’t call the Romney campaign for comment, nor did any editor make sure she did. And on April 13, she aggregated a story trending online about life on Mars. Scientists reexamining data collected from the 1976 Viking lander on the red planet concluded that there might be bacterial life there.

Flock says that in haste she read about 10 stories about Mars life, including some of the research papers, and forgot to credit and link to the originator of the story, Discovery News. It appears that she copied, pasted and slightly rewrote two paragraphs from the Discovery story. Plagiarism perhaps, but also a perpetual danger in aggregated stories.

After Discovery News raised objections, Flock resigned voluntarily. She said that the mistakes were hers. She said it was only a matter of time before she made a third one; the pressures were just too great.

But The Post failed her as much as she failed The Post. I spoke with several young bloggers at The Post this week, and some who have left in recent months, and they had the same critique.

They said that they felt as if they were out there alone in digital land, under high pressure to get Web hits, with no training, little guidance or mentoring and sparse editing. Guidelines for aggregating stories are almost nonexistent, they said. And they believe that, even if they do a good job, there is no path forward. Will they one day graduate to a beat, covering a crime scene, a city council or a school board? They didn’t know. So some left; others are thinking of quitting.

Katharine Zaleski, executive director of digital news, said that bloggers are made aware of The Post’s high standards: “We’re deeply conscious of the imperatives our bloggers face and go to great lengths to ensure they have the editorial support they need. We tell bloggers that their first and central priority is accuracy, not speed, not buzziness. The Washington Post’s standards apply every bit as much to our digital work as they do to our print edition. And our bloggers honor that.”

The Post lets go nearly three dozen veterans in the newsroom to cut costs, and it falls short in cultivating its young and future talent. No, not a good few days.

Now The Post, also this week, announced a new program to cross-train journalists — digital journalists will learn the ways of street reporters, and reporters will learn the ways of digital and social media. This is an excellent, and overdue, idea.

But it comes too late for Elizabeth Flock and some of her young and promising colleagues.

Suspect: I Beat Up White Man Because I Am Mad About Trayvon Martin Case

Updated: Friday, 20 Apr 2012, 4:31 PM CDT
Published : Friday, 20 Apr 2012, 3:40 PM CDT

Sun-Times Media Wire

Maywood, Ill. - Alton L. Hayes III, a west suburban man charged with a hate crime, told police he was so upset about the Trayvon Martin case in Florida that he beat up a white man early Tuesday.

Hayes and a 15-year-old Chicago boy walked up behind the 19-year-old man victim and pinned his arms to his side, police said. Hayes, 18, then picked up a large tree branch, pointed it at the man and said, “Empty your pockets, white boy.”

The two allegedly rifled through the victim’s pockets, then threw him to the ground and punched him “numerous times” in the head and back before running away, police said. Hayes and the boy are black; the victim is white.

After being arrested, Hayes told police he was upset by the Trayvon Martin case and beat the man up because he was white, Cook County State’s Attorney’s office spokeswoman Tandra Simonton said, citing court records.

Martin, 17, was fatally shot Feb. 26 in Sanford, Fla., by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, who was charged April 11 with second-degree murder. Zimmerman is Hispanic, while Martin was black.

Hayes, 18 of the 1200 block of North Woodbine Avenue in Oak Park, was charged with attempted robbery, aggravated battery and a hate crime, all felonies, Oak Park police Detective Cmdr. Ladon Reynolds said.

Hayes was ordered held on $80,000 bond and remained in the Cook County Jail on Friday. He will next appear in court May 11. The boy was referred to juvenile court.

Hugo Chavez's weeklong silence spurs uncertainty

By JORGE RUEDA, Associated Press – 4.21.12

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has been out of sight for a week, speaking only through Twitter messages and written statements while undergoing cancer treatment in Cuba.

The lack of any appearances on television has Venezuelans wondering about what his unusual silence might say about his struggle with cancer, and whether Chavez may be coping with a particularly tough phase of radiation therapy.

More than 30 messages have appeared on Chavez's Twitter account since he left for Cuba on April 14. He has cheered on supporters with slogans such as "Let's continue building socialism!" In others, he has praised his military commanders, announced funding for local governments and vowed to survive and win re-election in October.

But he has seldom mentioned his cancer treatment.

National Assembly President Diosdado Cabello reiterated on Friday that Chavez is expected to return to Venezuela soon.

"God willing, next week he'll be here again with us once he has finished the treatment," Cabello said in a televised speech. He insisted that even when Chavez is away in Cuba, "he leads just the same as if he were here in Venezuela."

"The commander's presence here isn't necessary, because just the same he's the commander of the revolution," Cabello said.

But even some of Chavez's supporters have been saying recently that they wonder what's going on with his health.

"It makes me sad, but my Comandante must not be as well as they say," said Guillermo Suarez, a street vendor selling sunglasses. "It's already been many days that we haven't seen him, heard him."

Chavez, who has been president since 1999, has long been a constant presence on Venezuelan television, often addressing the nation for several hours most days in addition to his marathon Sunday program "Hello, President." But recently there have been no episodes of "Hello, President," and Chavez said he expected his final rounds of radiation therapy, which began last month, to be rough.

Chavez has not discussed details of the radiation treatments, saying they have diminished his strength but have been going well. Last weekend, he decided not to attend the Summit of the Americas in Colombia, the sort of high-profile international event where he would previously have taken center stage. Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro announced the decision, saying Chavez was skipping the summit on the advice of his doctors.

Chavez began radiation treatment in Cuba in late March after undergoing an operation in February that removed a second tumor from his pelvic region. The first was taken out last June. He has kept secret some details of his illness, including the type of cancer and the precise location of the tumors.

Chavez also was away in Havana regularly last year while undergoing chemotherapy after the initial surgery.

During previous trips to Cuba, Chavez periodically appeared on television, either in phone calls or appearances with his aides or daughters, and gave the appearance of continuing to work and keeping abreast of affairs at home.

Before his latest trip to Cuba, Chavez said he planned to stay away longer to allow for his last two rounds of radiation treatment. He urged his supporters to remain united and said an "anti-coup command" was being formed within his political movement to focus on maintaining stability and countering any possible attempt to destabilize his government.

In the past week, his Twitter messages have been read aloud by his Cabinet ministers at televised events. At one event Friday, Chavez's supporters responded with shouts of "Onward, Comandante!"

In several Twitter messages Saturday, Chavez urged his party to mobilize "toward the big victory of Oct. 7" in the election. Another said: "Comrades you make me happy! Let's keep fighting very hard to defeat the bourgeoisie! A downpour is falling over Havana, and I'm with you!"

Chavez's online messages aim to "make it appear that the president is active, that the president is in control of what's going on in Venezuela," said Jose Vicente Carrasquero, a political science professor at Venezuela's Simon Bolivar University.

Carrasquero, a government critic, said that while Chavez has been coping with illness, long-standing problems such as rampant crime, inflation and sporadic shortages of some food items are going unresolved.

Without Chavez on the air, state television has instead shown a salsa concert, documentaries and a Mass. Such programs and newscasts are interspersed with a short segment showing a healthy Chavez embracing children in slow motion against a background of folk music.

Columnist Fausto Maso wrote in the newspaper El Nacional that "never has the uncertainty been greater in Venezuela."

Pro-Chavez lawmaker Dario Vivas dismissed concerns about Chavez keeping a lower profile, saying the president remains fully in charge and is regaining his health.

"The same people who complain that he talks a lot are the ones who get panicked when they don't hear him," Vivas said.

Copyright © 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Muppets Revenge: Outraged Homeless Muppets to Converge on Goldman Sachs

PRWeb
4.21.12

At 11:00 a.m., April 23, 2012, artist Joey Skaggs will lead a band of outraged costumed muppets down to Goldman Sachs offices at 200 West Street in NYC. Skaggs will be peddling his Mobile Homeless Homes prototype -- a low cost alternative living space for the millions of upside-down, underwater or foreclosed homeowners who have lost their houses due to the banking crisis that caused the real estate collapse.

New York, New York (PRWEB) April 21, 2012
"Homelessness is a great American tragedy. Our financial system and government have let us down and we, together, must take a stand to change the way the system works. With over 11 million homes underwater and millions in foreclosure, people are frightened, distressed and angry," says Joey Skaggs.



Although not a cure, Mobile Homeless Homes (MHH) offers a temporary solution -- low cost alternative living spaces for the millions of upside-down, underwater or foreclosed homeowners who have lost their houses due to the banking crisis that caused the real estate collapse. The MHH centerpiece is a camouflage, stealth, mobile home made from a series of connected plastic garbage cans, propelled by a tricycle, that will be undetectable by authorities. It blends into any urban environment.


This trojan house was designed by artist Joey Skaggs. "I've created this to focus attention on the disastrous effects of government deregulation on the welfare of the general public and to underscore the fact that people are not powerless to create change; that people should not be afraid to use their First Amendment rights to denounce actions they believe are unethical and criminal," says Skaggs.


On Monday, April 23, 2012 beginning at 11:00 a.m. at 287 Spring Street (between Varick and Hudson) in New York City, Skaggs will parade his Mobile Homeless Homes prototype down to Goldman Sachs. He will be accompanied by his troupe of costumed muppets including the Fresh Juice Party band, performing their original “Mobile Homeless Blues” ballad (lyrics). They will head from Spring Street to West Street and then down West Street to Goldman Sachs at 200 West Street. Other targeted sites will be announced at a later date on the MHH website.


Goldman Sachs has been selected as the destination for the MHH debut. The muppets are there to help hold them accountable, because Goldman Sachs employees commonly have disrespectfully referred to their clients as muppets. The word muppet in British slang is a derogatory term commonly used to mean idiot or loser.


“I’m not a bank regulator. I’m not a legislator. I’m not a politician. I’m an artist. I believe it’s my responsibility to do what I can to bring attention to the issues and inspire our lawmakers to make the critically necessary changes to protect the public from greed and fraud,” says Joey Skaggs.


The MHH performance has been designed to be a fully legal public expression of individual rights. With the current rash of arrests of Occupy Wall Street protestors and the forcible removal of personal belongings from people sitting peacefully in parks, Skaggs says the MHH procession will be on the move at all times, except when waiting for street lights to change. And, since Mayor Bloomberg just the other day kissed Ms Piggy and announced that the Muppets (of Sesame Street fame) are now the official New York City family ambassadors, it might prove embarrassing if the police arrest Ms. Piggy as she exercises her First Amendment rights.


Joey Skaggs
Mobile Homeless Homes

Campus diversity suffers under race-blind policies

Published April 21, 2012
Associated Press

April 6, 2012: In this photo, protesters and students stage a sit in protest at the Sproul Hall Student Services Office at the University of California in Berkeley, Calif.

BERKELEY, California – Fifteen years ago, California voters were asked: Should colleges consider a student's race when they decide who gets in and who doesn't?

With an emphatic "no," they made California the first state to ban the use of race and ethnicity in public university admissions, as well as hiring and contracting.

Since then, California's most selective public colleges and graduate schools have struggled to assemble student bodies that reflect the state's demographic mix.

Universities around the U.S. could soon face the same challenge. The U.S. Supreme Court is set to revisit the thorny issue of affirmative action less than a decade after it endorsed the use of race as a factor in college admissions.

The high court agreed in February to take up the case of a white woman who claims she was rejected by the University of Texas because of its race-conscious admissions policy. The justices are expected to hear arguments this fall.

College officials are worried that today's more conservative court could limit or even ban the consideration of race in admissions decisions. A broad ruling could affect both public and private universities that practice affirmative action, a powerful tool for increasing campus diversity.

"If the decision is very broad and very hostile to affirmative action, the future of the rest of country may look very similar to California," said Barmak Nassirian, associate executive director of the American Association of College Registrars and Admissions Officers. "It would be very disruptive at many institutions."

The effects of California's ban, known as Proposition 209, are particularly evident at the world-renowned University of California, Berkeley campus, where the student body is highly diverse but hardly resembles the ethnic and racial fabric of the state.

With affirmative action outlawed, Asian American students have dominated admissions. The freshman class admitted to UC Berkeley this coming fall is 30 percent white and 46 percent Asian, according to newly released data. The share of admitted Asians is four times higher than their percentage in the state's kindergarten to 12th grade public schools.

But traditionally underrepresented Hispanic and black students remain so. In a state where Latinos make up half the K-12 public school population, only 15 percent of the Berkeley students are Hispanic. And the freshman class is less than 4 percent African Americans, although they make up 7 percent of the K-12 students.

Junior Magali Flores, 20, said she experienced culture shock when she arrived on the Berkeley campus in 2009 after graduating from a predominantly Latino high school in Los Angeles.

Flores, one of five children of working-class parents from Mexico, said she feels the university can feel hostile to students of color, causing some to leave because they don't feel welcome at Berkeley.

"We want to see more of our people on campus," Flores said. "With diversity, more people would be tolerant and understanding of different ethnicities, different cultures."

UC Berkeley has tried to bolster diversity by expanding outreach to high schools in poor neighborhoods and considering applicants' achievements in light of the academic opportunities available to them.

But officials say it's hard to find large numbers of underrepresented minorities competitive enough for Berkeley, where only about one in five applicants are offered spots in the freshman class.

In addition, California's highest-achieving minority students are heavily recruited by top private colleges that practice affirmative action and offer scholarships to minorities, administrators say.

"It's frustrating," said Harry Le Grande, vice chancellor of student affairs at Berkeley. "Many times we lose them to elite privates that can actually take race into account when they admit students."

Backers say affirmative-action policies are needed to combat the legacy of racial discrimination and level the playing field for minorities who are more likely to attend inferior high schools. Colleges benefit from diverse student bodies, and minority students often become leaders in their communities after graduating from top colleges.

"It's critical that our most selective institutions look at least somewhat like the rest of our society," Nassirian said.

Ward Connerly, an African-American businessman who has led a national campaign against affirmative action, sees the practice as a form of racial discrimination.

"I don't believe in proportionality," said Connerly, who heads the American Civil Rights Institute. "The taxpayers have a right to say that we want every kid to be treated without regard to race, color, creed or national origin."

Connerly became wary of UC's efforts to admit more underrepresented minorities when he was a university regent in the 1990s. He pushed the board to bar UC from considering race in school admissions in early 1996 before he helped qualify Proposition 209 for the ballot that year.

"I looked at the extent of our diversity efforts and I concluded we were a lawsuit waiting to happen," Connerly said. "There was a very clear view that we had to be concerned about the growing Asian influence at the University of California."

The year after California's ban took effect, the number of black, Latino and Native American students plummeted by roughly half at Berkeley and UCLA, the UC system's most sought-after campuses.

Voters in Arizona, Michigan, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Washington state and Nebraska have since approved similar bans with similar results.

At the University of Washington, the number of underrepresented minorities dropped by a third after voters banned affirmative action in 1998.

Despite consistent opposition, California's ban has remained enshrined in law. Earlier this month, U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Proposition 209 for the second time. The three-judge panel rejected a legal challenge in which Gov. Jerry Brown joined minority students in arguing the law is unconstitutional.

Affirmative-action advocates say Proposition 209 has created an unfair situation in California, where elite public colleges are dominated by white and Asian students while black and Hispanic students are relegated to less prestigious campuses.

"It is extraordinary that the vast majority of high school graduates in this state are minorities, and they're denied the opportunities to go to their state universities," said attorney Shanta Driver for the group By Any Means Necessary, which filed suit to overturn the ban.

UC officials have tried to increase campus diversity by admitting the top 9 percent of graduates from each high school, conducting a "holistic review" of applications that decreases the weight of standardized test scores and eliminating the requirement to take certain scholastic aptitude exams in individual subjects.

Administrators note the number of Hispanic students at UC's nine undergraduate institutions has been steadily increasing. The California residents admitted to the UC system for this fall are 36 percent Asian American, 28 percent white, 27 percent Hispanic and 4 percent African American, according to the latest figures.

"We're very interested in a diverse student body that reflects the state of California and the nation," said UC provost Larry Pitts. "We have reasonable diversity, but not as much as we would like."

Gun Gripes Episode 20: "The Shame of Waco"

Published on Apr 21, 2012 by Iraqveteran8888

In this weeks gun gripe, we discuss the fiasco of Waco, the mass massacre of the Branch Davidians, April 19th, 1993.

Mark Levin: The Senate GOP establishment is trying to disenfranchise conservatives

Posted by The Right Scoop
April 18th, 2012

Levin talks about what he says few have the guts to talk about, and that is how the Senate GOP establishment, McConnell, is trying to minimize conservative Sen. Ron Johnson who has made it clear he isn’t in the Senate to buddy up with the leadership, but rather to represent his constituents and fight for conservatism. And on the other hand, the establishment types like McCain are teaming up with one of the go-along-to-get-along increasingly liberal senators, Dick Lugar, to help him defeat a great conservative he’s running against.

So while they claim to be conservative, what they really want more than anything are people who will do their bidding and Levin isn’t going to keep quiet about it. He explains it in full HERE

N.O.W. Launches 'Enough Rush' Campaign

by Breitbart News
The feminist bullies are at it again.

Nearly two months after Rush Limbaugh apologized for terming professional activist Sandra Fluke a “slut” after Fluke appeared before Congress and demanded that a Catholic organization pay for her birth control, the National Organization for Women have launched their “Enough Rush” campaign.

Terry O’Neill, president of NOW, told The Daily Caller, “He is going to be whining and calling us out about his First Amendment rights. There is nothing in the Constitution that says Rush Limbaugh gets $38 million a year for being on a radio show.”

There is also nothing in the Constitution that prevents Rush’s folks from calling out NOW. And Brian Glicklich, Rush’s spokesman, did just that, pointing out, “It’s instructive and telling that NOW added a ‘donate’ button to their website to ‘support their campaign.’ … They have a store, too. Selling T-shirts.”

This isn’t about getting Rush off the air – that campaign has failed dramatically. It’s about NOW making a splash and trying to use their bully pulpit to bully.

NOW actually went even further, defaming Rush by claiming that when he jokingly suggested that if taxpayers were going to pay for her birth control, they should get to see the tape of her having sex, that constituted “fantasizing about pornography and violence.” That sort of accusation is borderline actionable.