Government Scorned While Ryan's Supporters Reap Benefits

Tweet

From the moment Paul Ryan walked into the Craig auditorium and received a loud round of applause was when I knew most in attendance were his hometown partisans. It caught me by surprise because a good half in attendance looked to be Social Security and Medicare recipients or only a few years away - the very people Ryan has been working against most of his career. Go figure.

Ryan spoke fast and loose during his well rehearsed power point presentation on HR3200 as well as throughout the meeting before taking questions from the audience. He offered no new information or willingness to collaborate with the majority party.

As far as attendance goes, I'm not good at counting heads but if I had to guess there were at least 600 people in attendance for Ryan's InsuroCorp meeting. Possibly more.

One person getting a chance with the microphone claimed to have a degree in accounting, described himself as neither a Democrat or a Republican, but admitted he voted for Ryan before taking verbal potshots at Pelosi and Reid. Who would'a known? Still, this guy was representative of the audience when he complained about the amount his social security was being "taxed" to pay for his current health care (Medicare, I suppose he expected it was free), at the same time insinuating we don't need no "socialized medicine." The crowd roared in agreement. This general theme was repeated throughout much of the event.

Ryan of course came pre-loaded with all the talking points and only used the word "insurance" when he really had to while overusing "government" at every chance available. Regarding his own plan, he described the $5,700 tax credit as a "subsidy" that would help families pay their premiums under their current plans. Never mind the fact that if you accept the subsidy, you are no longer a member of your employers' group plan. Apparently, Ryan's plans never add to the deficit because the money to fund "Patients Choice" comes from out of nowhere. And how does Ryan's "Patients Choice" work for employees of the government? It doesn't.

Neither does Ryan ever clarify the reality that the public option is merely government sponsored insurance, meaning the actual health care is still administered by private health care professionals.

A spokesperson from the League of Women Voters gently implied that Ryan’s rigid opposition to HR3200 is premature since many changes can happen before the bill is finalized. This was a sharp observation because Ryan has disengaged himself from the architectural planning of HR3200. Instead of working with Congress, he has chosen to present his own weakly written and unworkable insurance proposal.

Ironically, the one person from the audience who asked Ryan to take a stand against the astro-turf thugs disrupting health care town halls held by democrats was the only person who was heckled and almost shouted down astro-turf style by Ryan's cane-carrying brigade. But it was a mild outburst and the citizen was given the chance to finish her statement. Other than a few more rounds of loud applause mingled with a few grunts and boo's, the meeting went along without any real shout-downs or threats. None was expected after all since Ryan is a Republican.

It did seem like there were one or two applause starters near the center rear of the auditorium. Ryan could have passed gas and they would have clapped. But by far the most glaring irony of the event was the insanely illogical mindset and gullibility of the socialized pensioners in attendance supporting Ryan and his deceptive plans. As long as they got theirs (Social Security and Medicare, etc.), they are fully prepared to take a stand to make sure others don't.

SNL or Comedy Central can't touch it.

WKOW's report on the event

Clarification: Ryan's InsuroCorp Clinic At Craig H.S.

Tweet

Rep. Paul Ryan's Janesville listening session on health care was originally scheduled to be held at the Janesville Municipal Building on Jackson St.

It has since come to my attention the location has been changed to Craig High School, Large Auditorium, 401 South Randall Avenue to accommodate larger crowds.

Paul Ryan's Insurance Clinic Coming To Janesville

Tweet

Fact.

JSonline Excerpt:
Top donors for Madison Democrat Tammy Baldwin this year include the National Association of Retail Druggists, which has given $2,000 to her campaign. Doctors, nurses and other health professionals have made roughly $295,000 in donations to Baldwin since she was elected to the House in 1998.

Fact.

JSonline Excerpt:
Health professionals have given Kind $335,000 in donations since his first congressional election in 1996, putting them among his top contributors.

Fact.

JSonline Excerpt:
The Janesville Republican has collected more money from the insurance industry - $493,000 - than from any other interest group during his 10 years in Congress.

There's no denying the numbers, they're out there for all to see. This is the ugly part of politics that I will always detest no matter who is collecting the money.

Still, all things being equal, certain facts remain. The two Democrats above have the weighted support from health care professionals. You know, the people who come between you and the insurance spreadsheet analysts. Paul Ryan has the total support from the insurance industry. They have little to do with health care and all to do with profits coming at the expense of our health. They're the ones who stand between us and the health care professionals. Who would you rather have in the operating room?

That is the stark reality.

"Everybody knows where I stand," said Ryan. We sure do congressman.

Believe it or not, the opening act for Ryan's "health care" event with the Waukesha Chamber of Commerce was a sales pitch coming from an insurance executive!

Ryan's Janesville insurance clinic is scheduled to start today at 3:30 PM. It will be held at Craig High School auditorium, 401 South Randall Avenue.

Note: It is important to note here that the location has changed. Ryan's InsuroCorp clinic was originally scheduled to be held at Janesville city hall.

Media Profits Trump Public's Right To Open Government?

Tweet

At Monday night's Janesville City council meeting, council members discussed the feasibility of televising city council study sessions on public access JA-TV.

The debate centered mostly around two key elements: more government transparency and how to accomplish the task with as little disruption as possible. At one point during the discussion, Council member Tom McDonald seemed disinterested when he made it clear that he was not inclined to vote either way on televising the study sessions. He later re-entered the discussion and in a startling statement that garnered at least one gasp from the audience, he expressed a deep concern for how the camera's might hinder the Janesville Gazette's (Bliss Communications) ability to exploit the public meetings for profit. He then went on to ask if any folks from the Gazette would like to share their view on this matter.

The city council eventually approved of allowing public access TV to televise the study sessions. McDonald abstained from the vote.

Will Fox News Take Down The Obama Presidency?

Tweet

I had a moment of deja'vu as I watched Jon Stewart from Comedy Central call the hypocrites at Fox News "liberals" since the Fox cranks have repeatedly referred to protesters against the Bush Administration as "liberals" and "loons."

Although in a slightly different context, last year I referred to Fox News as a member of the liberal media and never thought anyone would attempt to tackle that perspective again. Stewart did and ratcheted it up to the next level. He stuck a pitchfork in the eyes of the phonies at Fox.

On a more serious note though, I believe Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh along with the rest of the jack wads at Fox News Channel are as serious as a heart attack in their efforts to take down the President. Our country is faced with the prospect that a single cable news channel has thoroughly and effectively neutralized the office of the president by repeatedly and deliberately spreading lies. We should not take this lightly.

I have never before in my lifetime seen such a concerted presentation of political activism from a television station. On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with offering the occasional strong opinion and even mocking legislators and authority, it comes with the territory. It's part of America. Instead, we have a cable news channel that broadcasts 24/7 nothing but malicious lies, half-truths and hatred against our government. Unwilling to give Obama the benefit of the doubt after only six months in office, they regularly describe him as a racist and weak and have demonized nearly every one of his moves as a calculated stroke towards socialism.

Say what you will, but the Left does not have a fully staffed 100 billion dollar 24/7 cable news channel working tirelessly to counter the lies from Fox. As good as Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann are, their daily shows don't stand a chance against the Fox smear machine, and any move by the White House against the network would be viewed as an affront to the 1st amendment.

No matter what happens after the dust settles from the health care debate, we will still be left with a powerful cable news channel that truly remains the enemy within. Somehow, "we the people" should not let that stand.

Van Hollen Legislating From His Mind?

Tweet

Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen issued a statement on Friday for refusing to represent the state against a petition challenging the constitutionality of the creation of the legal status of domestic partnerships in Wisconsin.

Van Hollen Excerpt:
In November 2006, Wisconsin voters amended our State Constitution to declare that marriage was between one man and one woman. The amendment prohibits our government from recognizing any other legal status substantially similar to marriage. But the general domestic partnership provisions contained in Act 28 do just that – recognize a legal status that is substantially similar to the legal status of marriage.

Wisconsin Constitution Excerpt:
Article VI, §3 - ANNOT.
The attorney general does not have authority to challenge the constitutionality of statutes. State v. City of Oak Creek, 223 Wis. 2d 219, 588 N.W.2d 380 (Ct. App. 1998), 97-2188.

....as a valid reason to refuse a state defense in the court of law?

Look, I understand Van Hollen is not the one challenging domestic partners (Chapter 770), but by refusing to defend against a challenge based on his interpretation of the law's constitutionality, he has pre-determined that the domestic partnership registry under the amendment is unconstitutional.

How can an attorney general establish the unconstitutionality of any state law or statute before the courts have had a chance to hear the challenge and decide? What do we need courts for? Why do we need an attorney general?

Dr. Cuffe or Dr. Kevorkian?

Tweet

Doctor Admits Current Health Care Industry Inadequate To Serve America



So how many sick people has Dr. Cuffe denied care to?

If your answer is "none," then those 50 million patients he's talking about - don't exist.

Newspaper's Anonymous Column: A Place To Offend

Tweet

Today, one of the Janesville Gazette editors scoffed at the idea of a conspiracy theory purportedly leveled against the newspaper and references this blog as an example of those who help perpetuate the paper's credibility problems.

Gazette Editor's Blog Excerpt:
A few months ago, I ran a column by Sen. Judy Robson, D-Beloit. I don't recall the subject, but I do recall that I forgot to change our little standing header from "Other Views" to "State Views" above that column. A local blogger suggested I did it on purpose, as some sort of conspiracy.

He was referring to this observation I made in December of '08.

Excerpt:
Partisan Publishing?
On Tuesday, the Gazette published another op-ed written this time by Sen. Judy Robson titled Civilian Corps Served As Bailout During Depression under the heading "OTHER VIEWS. Robson is a Democrat.....and a woman, of course.

That's interesting. To bring this up after eight months have passed by. Time does fly. But calling a title a standing header and not a default header implies it remains (standing) until it is changed. The day before Robson's column, the header was "State Views" for Kedzie's op-ed. But I'm not blogging here to play "gotcha" with the Gazette, and one little editing mistake would hardly qualify for a conspiracy. Yet these little “forgot to” events in editing by the newspaper always seem to be driven against one particular political ideology or in favor of another.

Back in July of 2008, they posted an op-ed written by private citizen James Buchen in defense of the WMC under the heading “state views.” So when the newspaper posts an op-ed written by a democratic state legislator under “other views” it does look partisan. But a conspiracy? Not!

Hey, no big deal. Maybe that was another minor oversight or perhaps it wasn’t. I really don’t care what their reasons are now because these seemingly minor mistakes make up only a tiny, tiny portion of the newspaper's mountain of distortions and omissions I've archived here over the past three years, and I've missed dozens more. Yet, I’ve never implied any of it was a conspiracy. Bias? Absolutely. Do they use their presses to shape public opinion? I think so. Do they project a quasi-conspiratorial behavior and distort the news for their own political and social agenda? I believe my blog has dozens of examples to build a solid case for that one. But an actual "WaterGate" type of conspiracy? Again, I have no proof of that.

I don’t really pay much attention to these so-called header editing "mistakes" anymore. When I brought up a few examples on this blog, my point was to have people become aware of them and the power these so-called mistakes can have over a reader's understanding of important issues. Or you can just ignore it all.

Others can read my observations and draw their own conclusions. In fact, I’ve asked readers not to interpret some of my postings as proof of a conspiracy. But they are what they are. Besides, the Janesville Gazette is entitled to its opinion and I’m in no position to scold these educated professionals – they know exactly what they’re doing. But I'll take issue with their pattern of political and social bias and slanted editorial behaviors as often as I can and post my findings here.

Now back to the editor's blog. After accusing me of creating some sort of a conspiracy, he then twists and ties my observations in together with a phone call he recently received.

Gazette Editor's Blog Excerpt:
This week, I got a phone message from a woman who wondered if we let politicians listen to messages in our Sound Off call-in line. I'm not making this up, folks. I talked to the woman yesterday. She says she's in business with her husband, so she likes to share her opinions through Sound Off so as not to offend any potential customers. That's understandable.

The Gazette has a twice-a week newspaper column called "Sound Off," which is filled with a dozen or so supposedly random and sometimes offensive rants collected from anonymous phone calls. This column has been used by gutless cowards (its a double negative but it works) to tear down hardworking GM workers, labor unions, politicians, school teachers and of course their own neighbor while at the same time prop up a right-wing conservative political and social agenda. Yet, the Gazette has defended the column against questions about its programming honesty and mission. They have no intentions of shutting it down and have in fact expanded its deception by selecting on-line comments from their blogs for a Web-based version in Friday hard-copy editions.

It's like the lady implied, the Sound Off column is a great place where you can offend your customers - anonymously. Now that's the community spirit!