Posts Tagged ‘20%’

Nancy Pelosi’s District ‘Somehow’ Ends Up With 20% Of ObamaCare Waivers

May 19, 2011

Remember how Nancy Pelosi famously crowed, “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy“?

Whatever it is, it turns out that it smells like bull feces even in  überliberal San Francisco.  Why is that???

 20% of New ObamaCare Waivers Go To Nancy Pelosi’s District – Will Media Notice?
By Noel Sheppard | May 17, 2011

As NewsBusters previously noted, there were 204 ObamaCare waivers issued in April, and almost 20 percent of them went to establishments in former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) San Francisco district.

The Daily Caller’s Matthew Boyle reported Tuesday:

Pelosi’s district secured almost 20 percent of the latest issuance of waivers nationwide, and the companies that won them didn’t have much in common with companies throughout the rest of the country that have received Obamacare waivers.

Other common waiver recipients were labor union chapters, large corporations, financial firms and local governments. But Pelosi’s district’s waivers are the first major examples of luxurious, gourmet restaurants and hotels getting a year-long pass from Obamacare.

For instance, Boboquivari’s restaurant in Pelosi’s district in San Francisco got a waiver from Obamacare. Boboquivari’s advertises $59 porterhouse steaks, $39 filet mignons and $35 crab dinners.

Boyle noted a number of the establishments getting these waivers are very high-priced eateries in Pelosi’s district, many of which as a Bay Area resident I can attest to being some of the finest in the nation.

As Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey noted Tuesday:

[O]ne might think that a restaurant that charges $59 for a porterhouse steak as Boboquivari’s does could afford to fit its health care plan to Pelosi’s own specifications. The same goes for Café Mason, with its $60 entrees, and Tru Spa, which Allure Magazine calls “the best day spa in San Francisco.” If these kinds of high-tone joints can’t afford ObamaCare, then how can anyone else?

The odds of one Representative getting 20% of a batch of waivers from the Obama administration as a coincidence seems rather high. Once again, we have to wonder exactly how waiver applications are judged and approved. With its high percentage of unions and party leader constituents, this is looking more and more like a mechanism for political payoffs.

Indeed.

Just think if current Speaker John Boehner (R-Oh.) had procured these waivers for his district in Ohio. Can you imagine the media uproar?

Let’s see whether Pelosi’s shenanigans get much attention from her sycophants in the press.

Stay tuned.

While you’re staying tuned, consider the fact that over HALF of all ObamaCare waivers are being granted to UNIONS:

In what is fast becoming a weekly event, the Obama administration granted 200 more companies aivers from the Democrats’ sweeping health care law in the Friday night news dump. That brings the number of companies receiving waivers to 1,372. (You can get a full list of the companies exempted here.)

Not surprisingly, it helps to be a Democratic ally when seeking a waiver. The Republican Policy Committee reports that over half of the workers that have been exempted so far belong to unions:

The plans newly approved for waivers cover more than 160,000 people, bringing to nearly 3.1 million the number of individuals in plans exempted from the health law’s requirements.  Of the participants receiving waivers, more than half – over 1.55 million – are in union plans, raising questions of why such a disproportionate share of union members are receiving waivers from the law’s requirements.  The percentage of participants receiving waivers that come from unions also continues to rise – the number was 48% in April, and 45% in March.

Unions already received a generous concession in the health care bill. Their generous “cadilac” insurance plans were exempted from being taxed until 2018, adding about $120 billion to the bill’s cost over ten years. For more on how the administration has helped unions, see my story in THE WEEKLY STANDARD from a few weeks ago.

The total fiasco fondly known as “ObamaCare” is going to be a total disaster for America.  And even the liberals who actually have to make payrolls understand that.

Every Democrat who even APPLIES for a waiver ought to go to prison.  You voted for this load of sh*t, dammit YOU EAT IT.

Instead, Obama is very clearly granting waivers from his vile healthcare destroying law to his political supporters, such that the people who voted for Obama’s socialist takeover of America will be exempted from it, while those who decried it are going to get stuck with it.

It’s kind of like socialists who vote themselves other people’s money; only now they’re also voting for other people’s death panels, too.

Advertisements

The Obama Administration Just Can’t Stop Comparing Terrorists To Shoplifters

February 16, 2010

Twenty percent of terrorists returning to terrorism and trying to murder Americans “isn’t that bad” for the Obama administration.

Amy Geiger-Hemmer puts it pretty well:

John Brennan says 20% terrorist recidivism rate “not bad”
By Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer
Feb. 15, 2010 12:00 p.m.

On February 13, 2010, the top White House adviser for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, John Brennan, stated that a 20% recidivism rate for terrorists released from Club Gitmo wasn’t that bad.

Brennan was comparing the terrorist recidivism rate with that of the United States prison system.  In the U.S. prison system, the recidivism rate averages around 50%.  Yet,  Brennan seems to ignore that many prisoners in the United States aren’t terrorists.  The average criminal in the United States isn’t intent on killing fellow Americans simply because they do not agree with one’s own religious beliefs.  The average criminal in the United States isn’t out to wage jihad on innocent Americans if they do not adhere to the same religious practices.  The average criminal isn’t going to strap on explosive devices to their own body to blow up innocent civilians.  The average criminal isn’t going to behead American soldiers and journalists on television.    And the real biggie:  the average criminal isn’t waging a war in the Middle East right now against America and our soldiers.

When a country is at war, as the United States is, doesn’t it make sense to keep any enemies that are captured in custody until the war has ended?  Those supportive of Obama will claim that Bush released prisoners from Club Gitmo, too.  That is true.  But what needs to be taken into context is that Bush had the Democrats, the media, and many liberals,  breathing down his neck to do such a thing – and no pattern of recidivism had been established at the time.  And for some insane reason, Bush always tried to play nice and placate those across the aisle. In hindsight,   Bush should never have released terrorists from Gitmo.  Years have now gone by and we KNOW that many terrorists released from Gitmo have gone back to the battlefields to fight and kill U.S. soldiers.  Obama has the knowledge and past history of what happens when terrorists are set free, yet is still insisting on letting them go and closing Club Gitmo.   Are we our own worst enemy?

20% of terrorists from Gitmo return to fight against us!  Twenty percent!  That is an increase of 6 points from last year.

The flippant, cavalier attitude of the White House advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, John Brennan, speaks volumes for how the White House perceives the terrorism threat.  No big deal.

Clearly, the Obama White House thinks there are more important things to fight against….like FOXNews, Republicans, Conservatives, and people who go to Tea Parties and oppose Obama’s socialist agenda!

On this side we have a guy who masterminded the murder of 3,000 innocent Americans, and gladly would have murdered 300 million if he could have done so.  On the other side, we have a common shoplifter.  Who to let go?  Who to make sure never sees the light of day?  Oh, these tough decisions!!!

Bottom line: the reason we should have Gitmo is to lock up every single terrorist we capture (so we can waterboard them until they grow gills and extract everything they know from them) and allow them to leave only if they’re corpses.

This is the same mindset that produces the following mind-boggling stupidity:

MARJAH, Afghanistan (AP) — Some American and Afghan troops say they’re fighting the latest offensive in Afghanistan with a handicap — strict rules that routinely force them to hold their fire.

Although details of the new guidelines are classified to keep insurgents from reading them, U.S. troops say the Taliban are keenly aware of the restrictions.

“I understand the reason behind it, but it’s so hard to fight a war like this,” said Lance Cpl. Travis Anderson, 20, of Altoona, Iowa. “They’re using our rules of engagement against us,” he said, adding that his platoon had repeatedly seen men drop their guns into ditches and walk away to blend in with civilians.

If a man emerges from a Taliban hideout after shooting erupts, U.S. troops say they cannot fire at him if he is not seen carrying a weapon — or if they did not personally watch him drop one.

What this means, some contend, is that a militant can fire at them, then set aside his weapon and walk freely out of a compound, possibly toward a weapons cache in another location. It was unclear how often this has happened. In another example, Marines pinned down by a barrage of insurgent bullets say they can’t count on quick air support because it takes time to positively identify shooters.

What do you even say?

The fact that John Brennan is perfectly okay with the fact that one in every five terrorists goes back to the battlefield where they try to keep murdering our soldiers is a powerful evidence that the Obama administration has no business being in charge of our war against terror, and John Brennan has no business having a job.

Democrat Bailout Package: 20% Would Go To Partisan And Corrupt Fund

September 26, 2008

As Democrats and their media lackeys create a fictional narrative of an agreed-upon bailout deal gone bad because John McCain came into town, it is important to look at why this package has REALLY failed.  In short, the answer is an acronym: A.C.O.R.N.

Ed Morrissey has the story:

House Republicans refused to support the Henry Paulson/Chris Dodd compromise bailout plan yesterday afternoon, even after the New York Times reported that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson got down on one knee to beg Nancy Pelosi to compromise.  One of the sticking points, as Senator Lindsey Graham explained later, wasn’t a lack of begging but a poison pill that would push 20% of all profits from the bailout into the Housing Trust Fund — a boondoggle that Democrats in Congress has used to fund political-action groups like ACORN and the National Council of La Raza:

Morrissey then provides the relevant portion of the Senate Democrat proposa which Democrats claim that the Republicans ‘agreed to’:

TRANSFER OF A PERCENTAGE OF PROFITS.

  1. DEPOSITS.Not less than 20 percent of any profit realized on the sale of each troubled asset purchased under this Act shall be deposited as provided in paragraph (2).
  2. USE OF DEPOSITS.Of the amount referred to in paragraph (1)
    1. 65 percent shall be deposited into the Housing Trust Fund established under section 1338 of the Federal Housing Enterprises Regulatory Reform Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4568); and
    2. 35 percent shall be deposited into the Capital Magnet Fund established under section 1339 of that Act (12 U.S.C. 4569).

REMAINDER DEPOSITED IN THE TREASURY.All amounts remaining after payments under paragraph (1) shall be paid into the General Fund of the Treasury for reduction of the public debt.

Of this clearly poison pill, Morrissey goes on to say:

Profits? We’ll be lucky not to take a bath on the purchase of these toxic assets. If we get 70 cents on the dollar, that would be a success.

That being said, this section proves that the Democrats in Congress have learned nothing from this financial collapse.  They still want to game the market to pick winners and losers by funding programs for unqualified and marginally-qualified borrowers to buy houses they may not be able to afford — and that’s the innocent explanation for this clause.

The real purpose of section D is to send more funds to La Raza and ACORN through housing welfare, via the slush fund of the HTF.  They want to float their political efforts on behalf of Democrats with public money, which was always the purpose behind the HTF.  They did the same thing in April in the first bailout bill, setting aside $100 million in “counseling” that went in large part to ACORN and La Raza, and at least in the former case, providing taxpayer funding for a group facing criminal charges in more than a dozen states for fraud.

It’s bad enough that taxpayers have to pay the price for Congress’ decade-long distortions of the lending and investment markets.  If we realize a profit from the bailout, that money should go to pay down the debt or get returned to taxpayers as dividends from their investment — not to organizations committing voter fraud, and not to restarting the entire cycle of government meddling in lending markets.  I’d support a rational bailout package, but anything that funds the HTF needs to get stopped.

The American people need to become aware that the Democratic leadership are liars without shame.  They literally closed the House Republicans out of the loop in participating in the proposal that they then falsely claim the Republicans agreed to.  They make a full fifth of the total bailout package dedicated to a fund that has historically been a naked partisan tool that has participated in outright pro-Democratic voter fraud.  They claim that John McCain has not done enough to bring about an agreement on the bailout package, and then attack him the moment he shoes up to devote himself to helping come to an agreement.  And they engage in naked “Presidential politics” even as they claim that John McCain’s participation was an act of “Presidential politics.”

In chapter 10 of His Mein Kampf, Hitler wrote:

In this they proceeded on the sound principle that the magnitude of a lie always contains a certain factor of credibility, since the great masses of the people in the very bottom of their hearts tend to be corrupted rather than consciously and purposely evil, and that, therefore, in view of the primitive simplicity of their minds, they more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a little one, since they themselves lie in little things, but would be ashamed of lies that were too big. Such a falsehood will never enter their heads, and they will not be able to believe in the possibility of such monstrous effrontery and infamous misrepresentation in others; yes, even when enlightened on the subject, they will long doubt and waver and continue to accept at least one of these causes as true. Therefore, something of even the most insolent lie will always remain and stick — a fact which all the great lie-virtuosi and lying-clubs in the world know only too well and also make the most treacherous use of.

Hitler claimed that it was the Jews that employed the strategy of “the big lie.”  But the clear verdict of history is that it was he who did so.  And it was he who named Joseph Goebbels as his “Minister of Propaganda.”  It was the accuser who was the biggest liar of all.  Just like what the Democrats are doing now in their attacks.

Sadly, this is where the United States of America is today.  We are at a point where a major political party can use the strategy of “the big lie” to advance their political position.  And we are to a point where a liberal-dominated media will do everything it can to publish and perpetuate the big lie to the American people.