Les Cohortes Célestes ont le devoir et le regret de vous informer que Libres Propos est entré en sommeil. Ce forum convivial et sympathique reste uniquement accessible en lecture seule. Prenez plaisir à le consulter.
Merci de votre compréhension.
Sujet: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 8/11/2008, 13:47
Rappel du premier message :
Browse Newspapers by country http://newsdirectory.com/
Africa Asia Europe North America Canada United States Oceania South America
Resources Breaking News Business Newspapers College Newspapers Media Industry Associations Metropolitan Daily Press Searchable Archives Coffee Break
Television Broadcast TV Stations Network News TV Networks
Additional Research City Governments County Governments Travel Planner College Locator Browse Magazines by subject Arts and Entertainment Automotive Business Computer Culture and Society Current Issues Health Home Industry Trade Publications Pets and Animals Religion Science Sports Travel . . . more subjects
Magazines by Region Africa Asia Europe North America Oceania South America More
Auteur
Message
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2077 - 24/3/2010, 18:47
Ca alors c'est marrant quand on pense qu'il a mis un plan tout a fait comparable a l'OBamacare dans le Machachuchet
J'ai du mal a comprendre des gens super-intelligent (rien a voir avec Bush 43, hein) qui insistent a reproduire ce qui n'a pas marche.
Romney Launches “Prescription for Repeal”
March 24, 2010 - 10:21 AM | by: Anita Siegfriedt
Mitt Romney’s 'Free and Strong America' PAC announced a new donation program today called 'Prescription for Repeal.'
According to a release, the program's aim is to "support conservative candidates who will repeal the worst aspects of Obamacare and restore commonsense principles to healthcare."
The first endorsements go to three conservatives in key Ohio Congressional Districts.
Representative Jean Schmidt of Ohio’s Second Congressional District who is running for reelection to her third full term.
Representative Steve Chabot, who served as Congressman in Ohio’s First Congressional District for fourteen years is running for his old seat.
Steve Stivers, a former State Senator running for Ohio’s Fifteenth Congressional District. His opponent, Representative Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH), voted in favor of healthcare reform.
The PAC will send each endorsed candidate a primary election contribution of $2,500.
“America has unfortunately been taken down the wrong path by President Obama, which is why it’s critical we elect fiscally-responsible conservative leaders who will restore commonsense principles to healthcare,” said Romney.
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2078 - 24/3/2010, 18:59
Les textes complementaires a la nouvelle loi envoyes au Senat par la Chambre des representants pour leur passage et remise pour signature par le POTUS, sont en train d'etre etudies au Senat.
Les choses se passent difficilement entre Republicains et Democrates.
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2079 - 24/3/2010, 22:45
Republicans Use Objections to Stall Senate Hearings, Force Votes on Health Care 'Fixes'
FOXNews.com
Republicans used a procedural move Wednesday to halt hearings in the Senate and force Democrats to vote on a series of politically dicey matters relating to the health care "fixes" sent over by the House this week.
Spoiler:
Republicans used a procedural move Wednesday to halt hearings in the Senate and force Democrats to vote on a series of politically dicey matters relating to the health care "fixes" sent over by the House this week.
Senate Republicans said they would insist that no committee meet after 11 a.m., two hours after the Senate gaveled in on Wednesday.
The objection was used as part of the "two-hour rule," a formality that requires unanimous consent for the Senate to meet two hours after the chamber has come into session.
To start a hearing beyond that time now will require the approval of all 100 senators.
A series of afternoon hearings were canceled as a result, with Senate Judiciary Committee Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., railing against Republicans for action that results in the delay of a hearing on a controversial judicial nominee, Goodwin Liu.
"For months, Senate Republicans have resisted efforts to enact important reforms to our health insurance system. But when the dust settles and the emotions are calmed, history will show that President Obama and this Congress responded to a pressing national issue, and proved once again that we can act with the purpose of advancing an important national interest," Leahy said.
It was the second day hearings were held up by Republican objections. News reports noted that State Rep. Dan Gibbs was forced to return home Tuesday without testifying about the dangers of the bark beetle to the Centennial State's pine trees.
Jim Manley, spokesman to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, expressed frustration at the cancelations.
"For a second straight day, Republicans are using tricks to shut down several key Senate committees. So let me get this straight: in retaliation for our efforts to have an up-or-down vote to improve health care reform, Republicans are blocking an Armed Services committee hearing to discuss critical national security issues among other committee meetings? These political games and obstruction have to stop," Manley said.
Consent is normally a perfunctory action each day and nothing is ever heard about proceeding to committee business. But Republicans are using the objection as a statement against reconciliation.
Approval of the "fix-it" bill at the end of this week is virtually assured, since it's being debated under fast-track budget rules that allow passage with a simple majority instead of the 60 votes usually required for action in the 100-seat Senate. Democrats control 59 Senate seats.
That didn't stop Republicans from raising a series of amendments to derail the "sidecar" bill that aims to make changes demanded by House Democrats when they approved the Senate's health insurance overhaul on Sunday night. President Obama signed the Senate bill into law on Tuesday, declaring it "a new season in America" at a celebrative White House ceremony.
But Republicans are hoping to change any part of the fix-it bill to delay implementation and send it back to the House for additional votes.
Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn said he wants a vote on his amendment to prohibitcoverage of Viagra for sex offenders. New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg wants savings from Medicare cuts plowed back into the health care program for seniors, instead of being used to expand coverage to the uninsured. Wyoming Sen. Mike Enzi wants to gut penalties on employers whose workers wind up getting taxpayer subsidized coverage.
"What we're doing is offering amendments to take out the sweetheart deals, to take out the overcharging of students on the student loans, to take out the taxes on people who make less than $250,000, which the president promised he wouldn't do," said Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., of the overhaul. "And then we'll get into the points of order and there may be some constitutional issues raised during that period of time."
Democrats are vowing to bat down the Republican amendments one-by-one.
Although the battle may soon be over in Congress, opponents already have launched a campaign from the outside, with 13 state attorneys general, all but one Republican, suing Tuesday to overturn the legislation on grounds it is unconstitutional.
And Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell served notice Tuesday of Republicans' continued campaign against the legislation ahead of the November congressional elections. "The slogan will be 'repeal and replace,' 'repeal and replace,"' McConnell said.
The president on Wednesday was to uphold his end of a deal reached with some moderate Democrats by signing an executive order affirming existing law against federal funding of abortions, except in cases of rape, incest or danger to the woman's life. The critical bloc of anti-abortion Democrats in the House had pledged to vote against the health care package unless given greater assurances that it would not amend current law.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2080 - 24/3/2010, 23:03
Uncommon Sense
Resisting ObamaCare, Gandhi Style Shikha Dalmia, 03.24.10, 12:01 AM EDT
Americans will lose control over basic decisions if this law stands. President Barack Obama came into office promising hope and change. But he might get more change than he hoped for. By foisting ObamaCare on a deeply unwilling country he might have set the stage for the largest civil disobedience movement since the civil rights era, which, if it plays its cards right, could undo his legislation and his legacy.
Spoiler:
President Obama is betting that come November the bruising, yearlong battle that he has just dragged the country through will be a distant memory. But that profoundly underestimates the dismay of a large segment of the public that sees what he signed Tuesday as a fraudulent piece of legislation based on fraudulent thinking backed by fraudulent facts enacted through a fraudulent process. (Yes, Americans do care about "process," Mr. President. It's another name for representative government.)
President Obama tried for a year to convince the country that the cure for rising health care costs and the swelling ranks of the uninsured was a de facto government takeover of the health care system--only to be rebuffed in poll after poll. And if there was any doubt as to where the public stood, it was put to rest by Republican Scott Brown's stunning December victory in Massachusetts, the land of Big Government.
But instead of backing down President Obama went for broke using tactics more reprehensible than the "business as usual politics" that he had pledged to change when he came to office.
First, there were the budgetary magic tricks that he and his Congressional enablers got the highly respected Congressional Budget Office to perform. The last CBO assessment--that pushed the bill through--showed that the Obama plan would reduce the federal deficit by $138 billion over 10 years. The reality, once all the double counting and fantasy savings are eliminated, is that it will add $562 billion.
But the CBO is not the only entity whose honor Democrats have violated--perhaps beyond repair. Federal taxpayers will also get royally screwed when they have to pay for all the sweetheart deals that Obama's Cogressional minions cut behind closed doors and whose true scope will only become apparent in the coming months. (Bart Stupak is rumored to have gotten $700,000 for airport repairs as his sell-out price.)
Worst of all were the shameless parliamentary tactics that Democrats deployed. The Founders deliberately constructed many roadblocks for new laws to prevent elected officials from straying too far from the will of the people. But Democrats could care less about parliamentary niceties.
They are poised to use the so-called nuclear option or "reconciliation" to square the House and the Senate bills. This option will allow the Senate to circumvent the normal committee process to make fixes to the House bill through a simple majority without risking a filibuster.
But reconciliation is meant exclusively for budgetary matters--not ramrodding sweeping social legislation on a party-line vote. This is why the Senate parliamentarian--a completely nonpartisan figure--has to approve its use for every fix. But Democrats are poised to have Vice President Joe Biden overrule him should he dare to stand in their way. In short, instead of bending the cost curve, President Obama is bending the rules of accountable government.
It is hardly surprising then that Americans are feeling a growing panic as they watch their constitutional republic descend into a banana republic. President Obama is fond of quoting Mahatma Gandhi's line that "we should be the change we want to see." But Gandhi also said that "civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the state has become lawless and corrupt." Americans instinctively understand this which is why pockets of resistance to ObamaCare are already emerging.
The question is only whether they can be constructively harnessed into a grassroots, Gandhi-style civil disobedience movement powerful enough to undo this monstrosity. The prerequisites for any movement's success are credible leaders and a moral high ground. The first means that opponents of ObamaCare cannot--cannot--let Mitt Romney come within sniffing distance of their cause. He is trying to position himself at the forefront of the Repeal ObamaCare movement to further his presidential ambitions. But he couldn't be a worse spokesman given that as governor he was responsible for implementing a universal coverage program in the Bay State that is identical in every essential respect to ObamaCare, including the individual mandate. He has to be banished from every anti-ObamaCare panel, podium and platform lest the movement be accused of partisanship and hypocrisy.
As for maintaining the moral high ground, ObamaCare opponents have to be very careful when invoking rhetoric from the revolutionary period.
Tea Partiers quote the Founders, especially Thomas Jefferson who said that the "tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of tyrants." But any hint of violence--even inadvertent--will compromise their cause because there are crucial differences between our colonial and current rulers. The colonial rulers were monarchs who used violence to extract taxes from Americans to enrich themselves and their motherland. But Democrats are imposing mandates to force Americans to do something for their own alleged good--and taxes to redistribute wealth among Americans. This is wrong and completely at odds with the spirit of American freedom and self-reliance. But the Repeal ObamaCare movement can only succeed if it convinces potential beneficiaries of redistributionist policies of the rightness of its cause. This can't be done by threatening a civil war--even metaphorically--against them. Gandhi's ahimsa--or nonviolent resistance that seeks to change minds by a firm and calm expression of one's own conscience --is a far better strategy.
To this end, the perpetrators of ObamaCare must be defeated in November and 2012. But right now it is entirely appropriate for Senate Republicans to stall the reconciliation process as much as possible.
They are right in calling every point of order that they can--if only to call attention to the bill's manifest corruption. Likewise, the 30-plus states that are issuing sovereignty resolutions and exploring ballot initiatives that would protect their residents from Uncle Sam's coverage diktat are on the right track. Even if these efforts are ultimately thrown out in court because federal law trumps state law, they will make a powerful statement against the coercive nature of ObamaCare.
But the lawsuits that have a shot at sticking in court are the ones that various attorney generals around the country are preparing under the Constitution's commerce clause. This clause gives the federal government expansive powers to regulate interstate commercial activity. But it has never before been invoked to force Americans to purchase a product as a condition of lawful residence in this country. This crosses a line that might well make five Supreme Court justices balk.
Any strategy of nonviolent civil resistance has to first make a good faith effort to achieve its end through the available political and legal means. But there comes a time when changing the law requires acts of conscience.
For opponents of ObamaCare that time is Dec. 31, 2013. That's when the individual mandate will go into effect. If ObamaCare hasn't been repealed by Congress or nullified in court by then, its opponents would be justified in urging Americans to refuse to buy coverage or pay fines and dare authorities to come after them.
By some estimates, Uncle Sam will need to hire an additional 17,000 IRS agents or so just to enforce the coverage mandate. But even if a few million Americans simultaneously refuse to abide by it, they could easily overwhelm the system. Self-rule or swaraj, Gandhi said, requires a collective understanding of the immense capacity of citizens to "regulate and control" the coercive apparatus of the state through mass nonviolent resistance.
President Obama and his fellow Democrats are counting on this resistance petering out. That could happen. But it will be a lot easier for opponents to maintain this zeal in the age of social networking.
Facebook already has numerous groups with millions of members demanding the repeal of ObamaCare. It won't be impossible to mobilize enough of them when the denouement arrives.
After all, this issue is not just about the fate of an industry. It is about maintaining control over basic decisions about one's own life and health. The stakes are too high to let ObamaCare stand.
Shikha Dalmia is a senior analyst at Reason Foundation and a biweekly Forbes columnist.
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2081 - 25/3/2010, 08:35
Your Freedom and President Obama O'Reilly - Video
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2082 - 25/3/2010, 08:49
BREAKING: Senate parliamentarian Alan Frumin has ruled in favor of the Republicans on two minor provisions in the reconciliation bill, which will send the legislation back to the House for a new vote, according to a spokesman for Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). --Meredith Shiner (2:58 a.m.)
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2083 - 25/3/2010, 09:58
White House photos Irk Press CorpsBy KENDRA MARR | 3/24/10 8:37 PM EDT
Spoiler:
The Obama administration’s decision to bar journalists from the signing of an executive order on abortion Wednesday drew fire from some in the White House press corps, who said it went against President Barack Obama’s frequent pledges of transparency.
The White House did not allow news reporters or photographers into Wednesday’s Oval Office signing of the order reaffirming a ban on federal funding of abortion. Instead, it released an official photograph by White House photographer Pete Souza that some news organizations, including CNN and POLITICO, declined to use.
“That is not independent coverage,” CNN’s Ed Henry said of the photo on “The Situation Room.” “While Pete Souza is a great photographer, he’s on the White House payroll.”
Not all news organizations are protesting; Fox News displayed the photo on Neil Cavuto’s 4 p.m. show, and ABC News displayed it prominently on its homepage.
Nonetheless, reporters took their frustration out on the press secretary, Robert Gibbs, in Wednesday’s daily briefing, after no pool reporters were allowed to cover the signing of the executive order, or the meeting between President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Tuesday evening.
“What about allowing us in, for openness and transparency?” a reporter asked, to which Gibbs shot back, “We’ll have a nice picture from Pete that will demonstrate that type of transparency.”
Gibbs’ response evoked a few howls of protest in the briefing room. Reporters pointed out that a picture doesn’t carry the same information as a pool report produced by journalists who are routinely brought in to witness presidential events.
Gibbs tried to turn the argument into an attack on Souza, a veteran photographer who formerly worked for the Chicago Tribune. “Well, I don’t know why you’d want to attack Pete,” Gibbs said, “but I’m going to stand up here and defend Pete’s. . .”
“It’s not transparent, and it’s a vital issue,” said NBC’s Chuck Todd.
“And you will have a lovely picture from Pete,” Gibbs said.
The White House Correspondents’ Association has no official policy on whether member organizations should use White House handouts. "We always encourage greater transparencys said WHCA president Ed Chen of Bloomberg
A number of photographers have complained to the press office about the lack of access, said Chen. But this also isn't an Obama administration issue. Photographers also took issue during the Bush administration when they weren’t let into presidential events. *
AP is one new organization that’s made its policy clear. When the Dalai Lama visited the White House in February, the wire services told its subscribers: “AP Photo Advisory: The AP will not be distributing an official White House photograph of today’s meeting between President Obama and the Dalai Lama. The AP declines to accept or use handout photos when we feel access would have been possible by the media, either as a group or through a pool photo arrangement.” Reuters and Getty photo service also declined to distribute the photo.
“That’s the visual equivalent of being fed a completed news story by PR firm or official as opposed to reporting it ourselves,” AP Director of Photography Santiago Lyon, explained further on Facebook.
CNN’s Henry, who is also a board member of the correspondents association, told Wolf Blitzer: “This was an event that we believed should have been open to cameras. There have been several of these events recently. The king of Spain was recently here – that was closed press. Last night, you mentioned, the Israeli prime minister was here – that was closed to cameras as well. Obviously, this administration has spoken a lot about transparency. And we believe in this case, the cameras should have been allowed in.”
The tussle over photographs is yet another battle over information control, said Martha Joynt Kumar, a presidential historian who has worked in the White House briefing room since December 1975.
A White House staff photographer became a fixture under President Lyndon B. Johnson to capture historic moments for the presidential record. And since then, “they always want to have upbeat pictures, one showing the president is in control and that he’s resolute,” she said. Especially in times of crisis, the White House never wants to release a photo where the president could be “deemed weak positioned.”
“The White House has always had strong control over photographs of the president,” she said. “They never wanted to relinquish that control.”
Kumar added, “In the White House, they want to use every resource they can. And their most important resource is the president.”for reform.
* Vive le CHANGEment! En fait il y en a un tout-de-meme, c'est tout ce qui a pu etre reproche aux Republicains en general et a Bush 43 en particulier super-sized!
Invité Invité
Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 25/3/2010, 10:28
What Republicans Should Do Now
Repeal and reform will be a winning issue this fall. By KARL ROVE
Democrats are celebrating victory. The public outcry against what they've done doesn't seem to bother them. They take it as validation that they are succeeding at transforming America.
Spoiler:
But we've seen this movie before and it won't end happily for Democrats. Their morale rose when the stimulus passed in February 2009. The press hailed it as a popular answer to joblessness and a sluggish economy. At the time, Democrats thought it brightened their chances in the 2009 gubernatorial elections.
But a flawed bill, bumbling implementation, and unfulfilled expectations turned the stimulus into a big drag on Democrats in Virginia and New Jersey. A CBS News/New York Times poll recently reported that only 6% of Americans believe the stimulus package created jobs.
Democratic hopes that passing health-care reform will help them politically will be unfulfilled because ObamaCare only benefits a small number of people in the short run. Until the massive subsidies to insurance companies fully ramp up in 2017, this bill will be more pain than gain for most Americans.
For example, changes in insurance regulations in 2011 and two new mandates in 2014 that force everyone to buy insurance and require everyone to be charged a similar price regardless of age or health will cause insurance premiums to rise more than they would have otherwise. The 10 million people who have a health savings account will also be hurt starting in 2011. With each passing year after that, they will be able to put less away tax free for medical expenses.
Associated Press
ObamaCare cuts $1.8 billion in support for Medicare Advantage this October, another $5.8 billion in October 2011, and an additional $9.2 billion right before the 2012 presidential election. This will increase premiums and reduce benefits for the 4.5 million people in the program.
Drug companies will start raising prices to pay billions in new taxes they will have to pay starting next year. New taxes on medical devices and insurance companies will show up in higher prices and premiums before long.
Polls may show a temporary increase in the president's popularity, but underlying public opinion about this law is not likely to change just because the president hits the trail to sell it. After all, he made 58 speeches before the measure passed, including two in prime time.
Before that string of speeches the public was in favor of the concept of health-care reform by a ratio of 2 to 1. Afterward, about 60% of the public was opposed to the president's plan. Those who strongly opposed outnumbered those strongly in favor by 2 to 1 or better in most polls.
Tens of millions of ordinary people watched the deliberations, studied the proposals, and made up their minds. Their concerns about spending, deficits and growing government power are not going away.
Nor is their opposition to ObamaCare. According to a new CNN poll, majorities of Americans believe that they will pay more for medical care, the federal deficit will increase, and that government will be too involved in health care under the president's plan.
Democrats claim they've rallied their left-wing base. But that base isn't big enough to carry the fall elections, particularly after the party alienated independents and seniors. The only way Democrats win a base election this year will be if opponents of this law stay home.
To keep that from happening, Republican candidates must focus on ObamaCare's weaknesses. It will cost $2.6 trillion in its first decade of operation and is built on Madoff-style financing. For example, it double counts Social Security payroll taxes, long-term care premiums, and Medicare savings in order to make it appear more fiscally responsible.
In reality, ObamaCare isn't $143 billion in the black, as Democrats have claimed, but $618 billion in the red. And giving the IRS $10 billion to hire about 16,000 agents to enforce the new taxes and fees in ObamaCare will drive small business owners crazy. Republicans have a powerful rallying cry in "repeal, replace and reform." Few voters will want to keep onerous mandates that hit individuals and taxes that hobble economic growth. Rather than spending a trillion dollars on subsidies for insurance companies and Medicaid expansion, as ObamaCare does, Republicans should push for giving individuals the same health-insurance tax break businesses get, which would cost less.
Republicans must also continue to press for curbing junk lawsuits, enabling people to buy insurance across state lines, increasing the amount of money they can sock away tax free for medical expenses, and permitting small businesses to pool risk.
Opponents of ObamaCare have decisively won the battle for public opinion. As voters start to feel the pain of this new program, Republicans will be in a stronger position if they stay in the fight, make a principled case, and lay out a competing vision.
Mr. Rove, the former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush, is the author of "Courage and Consequence," published this month by Threshold Editions.
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2085 - 25/3/2010, 10:44
Meme le LA Times...
The Reality of Obamacare
ByJonah Goldberg
First: Congratulations to President Obama and the Democratic leadership. You won dirty against bipartisan opposition from both Congress and the majority of Americans. You've definitely polarized the country even more, and quite possibly bankrupted us, too. But hey, you won. Bubbly for everyone.
Spoiler:
Simply, you have nationalized health care by proxy. Insurance companies are now heavily regulated government contractors. Way to get big business out of Washington and our lives! These giant corporations will clear a small, government-approved profit on top of their government-approved fees. Then, when health-care costs rise - and they will - Democrats will insist, yet again, that the profit motive is to blame, and out from this Obamacare Trojan horse will pour another army of liberals demanding a more honest version of single-payer.
Suite
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2086 - 25/3/2010, 10:55
Breath in - Breath out
In Chicago, Obama Aide Had V.I.P. List for Schools
By TAMAR LEWIN and MONICA DAVEY
Published: March 23, 2010
When Arne Duncan, the secretary of education, was chief executive of the Chicago Public Schools, his office kept a log of nearly 40 pages listing the local politicians and business people and others who sought help getting children into the city’s most selective public schools.According to an article Tuesday in The Chicago Tribune, which first obtained and reported on the confidential log, those who sought such help included 25 aldermen, Mayor Richard M. Daley’s office, the State House speaker, the state attorney general, the former White House social secretary and a former United States senator.
Spoiler:
A spokesman for the Department of Education said Tuesday that the log was a record of those who asked for help, and that neither Mr. Duncan nor the aide who maintained the list, David Pickens, ever pressured principals to accept a child. Rather, he said, the creation of the list was an effort to reduce pressure on principals.
Suite...
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2087 - 25/3/2010, 14:22
Quelques soient les calculs, voila plusieurs milliers de famille qui retrouvent l'espoir. (j'entendais l'autre jour un psyquelque chose expliquer que perdre son travail pouvait etre aussi devastateur que de perdre une personne proche). Esperons que nous sommes sur le bon chemin et que bien d'autres personnes retrouveront du travail rapidement.
New Weekly Jobless Claims Drop 14,000 to 442,000
AP
WASHINGTON -- New claims for unemployment benefits fell more than expected last week as layoffs ease and hiring slowly recovers.
The Labor Department said first-time claims dropped by 14,000 to a seasonally adjusted 442,000. That's below analysts' estimate of 450,000, according to Thomson Reuters.
But most of the drop resulted from a change in the calculations the department makes to seasonally adjust the data, a Labor Department analyst said. The department updates its methods every year.
Excluding the effect of those adjustments, claims would have fallen by only 4,000.
The four-week average of claims, which smooths volatility, dropped by 11,000 to 453,750, the lowest since September 2008, when the financial crisis intensified.
----
On se demande ce que peut bien etre la raison officielle pour ces changements constants de calculs, mais bon.
Invité Invité
Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 25/3/2010, 14:33
Le genre de message qui unifie les Americains quelque soit leurs sentiments a ce moment precis.
Purported Bin Laden message hints at retaliation March 25, 2010 --
Updated 1305 GMT (2105 HKT)
March 25, 2010 -- Updated 1305 GMT (2105 HKT)
(CNN) -- An audio tape purportedly from al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden hints at retaliation if alleged 9/11 mastermind Khaled Sheikh Mohammed is executed. The tape was aired Thursday by the Arabic-language TV network Al-Jazeera.
Spoiler:
"The White House declared that they will execute the hero Khaled Sheikh Mohammed and his comrades in arms. They think that America will be safe behind the oceans. Justice is to be treated in the same manner," the message said.
"To the American people, peace be upon those who follow the right path, my message towards you is in regards to our prisoners that you have in your custody. Your president is still following the course of his predecessor."
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2089 - 26/3/2010, 07:10
Lorsqu'O'Reilly parlait des Democrates utilisant la force pour imposer leurs programmes aux Americains, il n'exagerait rien.
Pelosi sends chill By Cheri Jacobus - 03/25/10 07:52 PM ET
“The principle that the end justifies the means is in individualist ethics regarded as the denial of all morals. In collectivist ethics it becomes necessarily the supreme rule.” — Dr. Von Hayek
“A great wave of oppressive tyranny isn’t going to strike, but rather a slow seepage of oppressive laws and regulations from within will sink the American dream of liberty.” — George Baulmer, libertarian blogger
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered a most disturbing promise to PBS’s Jim Lehrer on Wednesday, proudly announcing that the methods employed and nearly employed to force ObamaCare on the American people (formerly the most free people on the planet) would, from this day forward, serve as her “model for future reforms.”
Chilling words, indeed.
Bribes, payoffs, backroom deals, secret Democrat meetings, holding members hostage in Washington to prevent them from speaking with their constituents (Stockholm Syndrome, perhaps?), threats and intimidation, lying about the content and cost of the bill, ignoring the plainly and loudly stated will of the people, demonizing opponents, twisting parliamentary rules into a pretzel to get a “win” — this is Nancy Pelosi’s “model” for future reform legislation?
On Jan. 28 of this year, Pelosi stated, without any guilt, guile or conscience regarding plans to ram healthcare reform through a hesitant House of Representatives and down the throats of an unwilling, resistant American public, “We will go through the gate. If the gate is closed, we will go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we will pole-vault in. If that doesn’t work, we will parachute in. But we are going to get healthcare reform passed.” Her words seemed extreme and hyperbolic at the time. But she was deadly serious — something that a nation accustomed to freedom and democracy could not entirely fathom even just a few short months ago. Comrade Pelosi cared not a whit about the will of the people, nor about the conversations democratically elected officials in both parties were having with their constituents whom they serve. Damn the torpedoes, damn the consequences, and damn the Constitution.
While heralded by The Economist as “The Most Powerful Woman in American History,” Nancy Pelosi, in truth, is actually The Most Frightening Woman in American History and is testament to the fact that tyranny and dangerous abuse of power are gender-neutral. So much for the fairer sex. While the feminist in me should normally feel pride, as I often do for accomplished women even if I disagree withtheir politics, Nancy Pelosi, quite simply, scares me.
It is preferable in a democracy, however, for the government to fear the people, and dangerous when the opposite is true. If angry constituents rise up and create something akin to anarchy as a result of the healthcare law, the methods utilized to make the bill become law and the price the nation will pay for this hegemony, Pelosi and many of her Democratic colleagues will no doubt blame it on Republicans. But responsibility for the anger and fear among the electorate lies solely at the feet of congressional Democrats and President Obama.
“Tyranny and anarchy are never far apart.” — Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) British philosopher
Jacobus, president of Capitol Strategies PR, has managed congressional campaigns, worked on Capitol Hill and is an adjunct professor at George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management. She appears on CNN, MSNBC and FOX News as a GOP strategist.
La seule facon d'arreter la demence politique causee par Nancy est un retour de la Chambre aux Republicains en Novembre, mais la...
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2090 - 26/3/2010, 07:21
Nouvelle page, mais si vous etes interesse/e(s? ) par les promesses de Nancy et ce qu'elle fera pour les tenir, elle met tout en perspective dans l'article precedent (2089).
---------- Cuban leader applauds US health-care reform bill
By PAUL HAVEN (AP) – 14 hours ago
HAVANA — It perhaps was not the endorsement President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress were looking for.
Suite ...
(Cuba provides free health care and education to all its citizens, and heavily subsidizes food, housing, utilities and transportation, policies that have earned it global praise. The government has warned that some of those benefits are no longer sustainable given Cuba's ever-struggling economy, though it has so far not made major changes.)
Et notre POTUS nous attelle avec son harnais lourd, envahissant et contraignant alors que nous ne sommes meme pas encore sortis de la mare boueuse dans laquelle nous nous trouvons.
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2091 - 26/3/2010, 08:02
Sarah Palin apporte son soutien politique a John McCain. Les Tea Partiers sont decus.
Ca n'a pas du etre facile pour elle, mais elle fait le bon choix. (personnellement, elle avait interet a s'instituer leader du nouveau mouvement et faire passer les interets du pays apres les siens.
C'est pour ca que je ne vois reellement pas la comparaison faite par certains avec la "dame du Poitou".
Palin Makes Fans Uneasy by Backing McCain
The Wall Street Journal
Tea party favorite heads to Arizona to help running mate battle primary challenge from immigration foe Hayworth.
AP/NBC Mar. 2: Sarah Palin cracks jokes with host Jay Leno, left, on "The Tonight Show."
PHOENIX -- Like many of his fellow tea party activists, Lee Earle adores former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. But when Palin shows up at a pair of rallies in Arizona on Friday and Saturday, he won't be attending.
That's because Ms. Palin is coming to stump for her former running mate, Sen. John McCain. Earle is backing J.D. Hayworth, McCain's challenger in the Republican primary on Aug. 24. Hayworth, a former congressman and talk-radio host, has become a darling for some in the tea party movement.
"Most of the tea party people I know are disappointed with her decision" to support McCain, says Earle. "But we understand she's fulfilling an obligation to Sen. McCain for pulling her from obscurity."
Like many Republicans, Palin is trying to navigate a political order transformed from 2008. McCain was the Republican nominee for president in 2008, but he is now fighting off an aggressive primary challenge in a state he has represented since 1983.
A Rasmussen Report released March 16 shows McCain ahead by seven points, with a margin of error of plus or minus four points. Earlier polling put McCain ahead by 22 points.
Arizona's primary race "went from very sleepy to being very captivating," says Randy Pullen, chairman of the state's Republican Party.
Palin has served as a rallying force for the tea party movement. In February, a gathering billed as the first national tea party convention, which had been marked by infighting and cancellations, heard a rousing keynote address from Palin in which she took aim at President Barack Obama. On Saturday, organizers say she will attend a tea party rally in Searchlight, Nev., the hometown of Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, after campaigning that day for McCain.
Continue reading at The Wall Street Journal
Biloulou
Nombre de messages : 54566 Localisation : Jardins suspendus sur la Woluwe - Belgique Date d'inscription : 27/10/2008
Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 26/3/2010, 08:06
Sylvette a écrit:
Sarah Palin apporte son soutien politique a John McCain. Les Tea Partiers sont decus. Ca n'a pas du etre facile pour elle, mais elle fait le bon choix. (personnellement, elle avait interet a s'instituer leader du nouveau mouvement et faire passer les interets du pays apres les siens. C'est pour ca que je ne vois reellement pas la comparaison faite par certains avec la "dame du Poitou".
Bien évidemment...
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2091 - 26/3/2010, 08:09
====
Desolee, j'ai oublie de reformater le 2091
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2094 - 26/3/2010, 08:52
Sans doute pas ce qu'esperait le POTUS. Selon le WSJ du 25 Mars 2010, Israeli Leaders Rally Behind Netanyahu in U.S. Standoff
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2095 - 26/3/2010, 09:38
Alors leur "machin" vient de re-passer au Senat et apres un dernier vote a l'Assemblee, le POTUS ajoutera encore son petit paraphe et on aura, sans doute, encore droit a un discours dans lequel il nous dira la fierte et sa joie.
Un qui est presqu'aussi content que Nancy avec ses 7 points d'approbation aux sondages, c'est Reid (il n'est meme loin d'etre certain qu'il soit re-elu dans le Nevada!)
Il faut tout de meme le rappeler, Nancy , elle, le bat a plat de coutures avec 11 points.
Year-long fight ends as health bill clears CongressBy CARRIE BUDOFF BROWN | 3/26/10 12:40 AM EDT Harry Reid and Chris Dodd celebrate after the Senate approves a package of changes to the health care bill. | AP Photo Close
A sa droite, Mr. Dodd, un de ceux qui nous donne egalement grande envie de respirer bien fort un grand bol d'air frais.
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2096 - TVA/VAT 26/3/2010, 17:43
March 26, 2010
The VAT Cometh
ByCharles Krauthammer
WASHINGTON -- As the night follows the day, the VAT cometh. With the passage of Obamacare, creating a vast new middle-class entitlement, a national sales tax of the kind near-universal in Europe is inevitable.
We are now $8 trillion in debt. The Congressional Budget Office projects that another $12 trillion will be added over the next decade. Obamacare, when stripped of its budgetary gimmicks -- the unfunded $200 billion-plus doctor fix, the double counting of Medicare cuts, the 10-6 sleight-of-hand (counting 10 years of revenue and only 6 years of outflows) -- is at minimum a $2 trillion new entitlement.
It will vastly increase the debt. But even if it were revenue-neutral, Obamacare pre-empts and appropriates for itself the best and easiest means of reducing the existing deficit. Obamacare's $500 billion of cuts in Medicare and $600 billion in tax hikes are no longer available for deficit reduction. They are siphoned off for the new entitlement of insuring the uninsured.
This is fiscally disastrous because, as President Obama himself explained last year in unveiling his grand transformational policies, our unsustainable fiscal path requires control of entitlement spending, the most ruinous of which is out-of-control health care costs.
Obamacare was sold on the premise that, as Nancy Pelosi put it, "health care reform is entitlement reform. Our budget cannot take this upward spiral of cost." But the bill enacted on Tuesday accelerates the spiral: It radically expands Medicaid (adding 15 million new recipients/dependents) and shamelessly raids Medicare by spending on a new entitlement the $500 billion in cuts and the yield from the Medicare tax hikes.
Obama knows that the debt bomb is looming, that Moody's is warning that the Treasury's AAA rating is in jeopardy, that we are headed for a run on the dollar and/or hyperinflation if nothing is done.
Hence his deficit reduction commission. It will report (surprise!) after the November elections.
What will it recommend? What can it recommend? Sure, Social Security can be trimmed by raising the retirement age, introducing means testing and changing the indexing formula from wage growth to price inflation.
But this won't be nearly enough. As Obama has repeatedly insisted, the real money is in health care costs -- which are now locked in place by the new Obamacare mandates.
That's where the value-added tax comes in. For the politician, it has the virtue of expediency: People are used to sales taxes, and this one produces a river of revenue. Every 1 percent of VAT would yield up to $1 trillion a decade (depending on what you exclude -- if you exempt food, for example, the yield would be more like $900 billion).
It's the ultimate cash cow. Obama will need it. By introducing universal health care, he has pulled off the largest expansion of the welfare state in four decades. And the most expensive. Which is why all of the European Union has the VAT. Huge VATs. Germany: 19 percent. France and Italy: 20 percent. Most of Scandinavia: 25 percent. American liberals have long complained that ours is the only advanced industrial country without universal health care. Well, now we shall have it. And as we approach European levels of entitlements, we will need European levels of taxation.
Obama set out to be a consequential president, on the order of Ronald Reagan. With the VAT, Obama's triumph will be complete. He will have succeeded in reversing Reaganism. Liberals have long complained that Reagan's strategy was to starve the (governmental) beast in order to shrink it: First, cut taxes -- then ultimately you have to reduce government spending.
Obama's strategy is exactly the opposite: Expand the beast, and then feed it. Spend first -- which then forces taxation. Now that, with the institution of universal health care, we are becoming the full entitlement state, the beast will have to be fed.
And the VAT is the only trough in creation large enough.
As a substitute for the income tax, the VAT would be a splendid idea. Taxing consumption makes infinitely more sense than taxing work. But to feed the liberal social-democratic project, the VAT must be added on top of the income tax.
Ultimately, even that won't be enough. As the population ages and health care becomes increasingly expensive, the only way to avoid fiscal ruin (as Britain, for example, has discovered) is health care rationing.
It will take a while to break the American populace to that idea. In the meantime, get ready for the VAT. Or start fighting it.
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2097 - Indoctrination 27/3/2010, 08:36
Is Nickelodeon Getting Political? Why is the children's network honoring Michelle Obama?
Video
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2098 - 27/3/2010, 14:00
Les consequences de la nouvelle loi commencent a se faire sentir.
Kneale: 7 Prickly Question for Obamacare Published: Friday, 26 Mar 2010 | 3:19 PM ET CNBC Media & Technology Editor
Spoiler:
OK, so it passed. President Obama just rammed through his trillion-dollar gut renovation of U.S. health care. He takes a giddy leap toward government nationalization and one of the biggest redistributions of wealth in U.S. history.
All without one single vote of bipartisanship—what a Change!
Now what? The financial toll already has begun to pile up, and the social and psychological implications will begin to unfold soon. Here are six provocative questions on what we have wrought. The wrong answers could crush our recovery and add hundreds of billions to the cost of this medical Moby Dick.
Question 1: Will ObamaCare end up covering 50 percent more uninsured?
We used to hear, constantly, about 45 million uninsured people. ObamaCare will insure 32 million of ’em. Those left uncovered are, for the most part, illegal aliens, and the President wants to grant them the status of legal residents. Would that qualify them for ObamaCare and swell the ranks by half—and thereby increase costs by another half a trillion dollars?
So far, the White House hasn’t provided a clear answer on this point.
Question 2: Does ObamaCare’s price tag include corporate writedowns?
We’re told this medical miracle will cost us $938 billion over 10 years. I doubt that sum includes the toll taken this week. ATT today said it will take a $1 billion charge related to ObamaCare.
Earlier this week, Caterpillar drew first blood (its own), taking a $100 million writedown. The heavy-metal giant provides generous drug benefits to retirees, enticed by tax-free subsidies from the feds; that program now will be taxed. Deere says it will take a $150 million hit, and AK Steel, $31 million.
Betchya other big companies take hits, too. That hurts their shareholders (including pension funds for workers that ObamaCare seeks to help). It may prompt companies to cut back on drug benefits for retirees, all due to a new law with the opposite aim.
Question 3: Will ObamaCare not cover medical treatments for moral reasons?
ObamaCare passed the House by only seven votes, of 431 votes cast. To buy the votes of eight anti-abortion Democrats, the Dems ditched any pretense of being the “pro-choice” party and blocked all funding for abortion in ObamaCare. Now that we’re rationing care on moral grounds, no need to stop at abortion. Let’s ban liver transplants for alcoholics (they made their bed). And refuse to cover stomach-stapling surgery for the massively and morbidly obese (where’s their will power?). And welch on paying for any treatment for sexually transmitted diseases. Oh, and when a drunk driver is maimed horribly in a car accident, let him (or her) pay out of pocket.
Question 4: Will the millionaire tax really have no bad impact at all?
One study says ObamaCare will cost, from the get-go, an extra $46,000 in taxes for a person who earns $1 million a year. No big deal, right? Wrong! That one million bucks is actually $500,000 after-tax; $46k is almost a 10% surcharge. And that means that million-dollar guy or gal will spend $46,000 less on other items that lead to more jobs: cars, private planes, fat-cat pleasure boats, jet skis, vacations, home renovations.
Question 5: Why does ObamaCare subsidize families earning $88,000 a year?
One main aim of this paternalistic program is to insure the poorest Americans. Ninety large ain’t poor. One explanation is that some middle-class Americans’ insurance costs will go up, at first, under ObamaCare, so we need subsidies to offset that pain. Um ... sorry to be picky here, but I thought this facelift was supposed to bring costs down.
Question 6: Will millions drop their insurance coverage because of ObamaCare?
We could be looking at a surge in creative ways to game this loopy new system. Say you’re a freelancer who pays $10,000, out of pocket, for insurance. Now that no insurer can turn you down for a “pre-existing condition,” you can drop your own policy and go bare. Pay the feds’ new penalty fee of, what, $695 a year? Then, after you are diagnosed with lung cancer or after you get hit by a city bus, go ahead and buy insurance again. If you never get sick, you reap a going-bare windfall of $9,000-plus a year.
Now say you’re an employer who insures your workers, at a cost of $10,000 a year per minion. Why not just cut ’em loose to buy insurance on their own? (Or they can go bare and surf the pre-existing-condition wave, see preceding paragraph. Pay the new federal penalty of $3,000 a year, per person. Voila! A $7,000-a-year savings, per head.
Question 7: Will ObamaCare infantilize freeloaders pushing age 30?
This plan forces insurers to let “children” up to age 26 stay under the umbrella of their parents’ plan (sorry for metaphor, Travelers cnbc_comboQuoteMove('popup_trv_ID0ENFAG15839609'); http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/CNBC_Images/componentbacks/watchlist_up.gif[/img] 0.27 (+0.5%) ]
President Obama is especially magnanimous when it comes to filching money from “the rich” to fund entitlements for those who pay almost nothing at all. It will be alternately fascinating and painful to watch the side-effects spill over our country in coming months, only to learn that we couldn’t afford it, after all.
So that ends my column, guys. Your comments welcome, post them below. And to obviate the first few posts, let’s just go ahead and stipulate for the record: I look like Beaker, I’m a shill for Wall Street, I’m incredibly stupid, my forehead is the size of a billboard and CNBC should have fired me long ago. There! Feel better?
Now weigh in with your wisdom rather than your vitriol ...
Dennis Kneale CNBC Media & Technology Editor
Dernière édition par Sylvette le 27/3/2010, 14:25, édité 2 fois
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2099 - 27/3/2010, 14:07
Kneale: With NJ Governor Christie, a Star Is BornPublished: Thursday, 18 Feb 2010 | 12:35 PM ET
By: Dennis Kneale CNBC Media & Technology Editor
At long last I have found my new hero. He is rotund and profound, graced with a hint of "Sopranos" and a hefty dose of obstinate common sense.
Spoiler:
He is Chris Christie, the newly elected governor of New Jersey, and this morning on CNBC’s "Squawkbox" he his first national TV appearance since his Obama-smiting election—and Christie crushed it.
The rookie governor, who faintly resembles the actor Steve Schirripa, the Big & Tall “Bacala” on “The Sopranos,” has a message for all of government—a simple, anti-spending, anti-tax declaration of "Enough!" It needs to go viral. Take this video clip and post it on YouTube, resend it to Twitter and Facebook, and zap it out to your entire e-mail list. This guy is a blunt-spoken political star in the making. He warned of a state budget deficit that will run past $11 billion in 2011—and then he declared what is unthinkable in the Era of Obama: He won't raise taxes to fix it. Cut spending, period.
“We know that we’ve taxed too much, we’ve spent too much and we’ve borrowed too much,” Gov. Christie said on-air. “The only way to fix that is to stop spending so much—it’s the only way to do it.”
Wait a minute, anchor Becky Quick prodded him—you won’t raise taxes? “No, we’re not raising taxes—that’s it,” Gov. Christie retorted. Not even property taxes? “We can’t,” he declared, noting that in four years $70 billion in wealth had fled New Jersey “because we are the most overtaxed people in America.”
“We’ve done enough of that already,” he said. “It’s time to get tough, and to say no.” Fuhgeddaboudit!
Dennis Kneale CNBC Media & Technology Editor
The way Gov. Christie said it made me feel this wasn’t just some handler-crafted talking point softened with mealy-mouthed hedges like, “We’ll have study it.” Nope, this came straight from the gut—and this governor has quite an abundant gut; it was uttered with dead-eyed certainty.
And I believed him.
So did New Jersey resident Michael Pento, a fiscal conservative at Delta Global Advisors who is a frequent guest on CNBC. “I was blown away,” he says. “Cut spending—how radical!” He notes that in ten years the U.S.’s Gross Domestic Product grew from $10 trillion to $14 trillion, up 40%; yet the federal budget rose more than 100% from $1.8 trillion to $3.8 trillion in the same period.
Cris Christie bears the Republican label, but his own party has a lot to learn from him, given eight years of George W. Bush as the most fiscally irresponsible President of all time. (Albeit, President Obama graces that list of dubious distinction and is rising with a Billboard bullet.)
“Republicans, when they get in power, act like Democrats,” Pento says. “This guy Christie is a constitutional Ron Paul conservative. We need to cut spending, as painful as that can be in the short-term.”
The governor pointed out that New Jersey has the highest taxes in the nation already, leading to the drain of $70 billion in wealth moving out of the state. Tax increases only would make that drain worse.
And he cited a stunning stat: A 42-year-old state government worker in New Jersey who gets a 20-year pension has paid in all of $124,000—and will take out $3.8 million in payments and health coverage for the rest of his life.
This simply can’t continue, yet few other politicians are talking about the government pension bubble that could bankrupt some cities. A new report from the Pew Center on the States says states have promised to pay $3.35 trillion to current and retired workers—and are running $1 trillion short in funding that obligation.
The worst-off state: President Obama’s home state of Illinois, which has funded only 54% of what it will have to pay out. Unions now represent 40% of all government workers, and they are especially powerful at the local and state levels. Given the Dems’ union ties, ya gotta question whether benefit cuts are a viable option, as I wrote about here.
But I now hold out new hope, thanks to Gov. Christie of New Jersey. He brings a fresh new face and a voluble, emphatic voice to politics. Let us pray we hear a lot more from him.
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2100 - 27/3/2010, 22:12
White men shun Democrats
[tr vAlign="top"][td class=txBase]var omniture_APvSTAFF; By DAVID PAUL KUHN
First published in print: Saturday, March 27, 2010
[/td][/tr][tr vAlign="top"][td class=txStoryText width="100%"]Millions of white men who voted for Barack Obama are walking away from the Democratic Party, and it appears increasingly likely that they'll take the midterms elections in November with them. Their departure could well lead to a GOP landslide on a scale not seen since 1994.[/td][/tr]
Spoiler:
For more than three decades before the 2008 election, no Democratic president had won a majority of the electorate. In part, that was because of low support -- never more than 38 percent -- among white male voters. Things changed with Obama, who not only won a majority of all people voting, but also pulled in 41 percent of white male voters.
Polling suggests that the shift was not because of Obama but because of the financial meltdown that preceded the election. It was only after the economic collapse that Obama's white male support climbed above the 38 percent ceiling. It was also at that point that Obama first sustained a clear majority among all registered voters, according to the Gallup tracking poll.
It looked for a moment as though Democrats had finally reached the men of Bruce Springsteen's music, bringing them around to the progressive values Springsteen himself has long endorsed. But liberal analysts failed to understand that these new Democrats were still firmly rooted in American moderation.
Pollsters regularly ask voters whether they would rather see a Democrat or Republican win their district. By February, support for Democrats among white people (male and female) was three percentage points lower than in February 1994, the year of the last Republican landslide.
Today, among whites, only 35 percent of men and 43 percent of women say they will back Democrats in the fall election. Women's preferences have remained steady since July 2009. But white men's support for a Democratic Congress has fallen eight percentage points, according to Gallup.
White men have moved away from Obama as well. The same proportion of white women approve of him -- 46 percent, according to Gallup -- as voted for him in 2008. But only 38 percent of white men approve of the President, which means that millions of white men who voted for Obama have now lost faith in him.
The migration of white men from the Democratic Party was evident in the election of Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts. His opponent, a white woman, won 52 percent of white women. But white men favored Brown by a 60 percent to 38 percent margin, according to Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates polling.
It's no accident that the flight of white males from the Democratic Party has come as the government has assumed a bigger role, including in banking and health care. Among whites, 71 percent of men and 56 percent of women favor a smaller government with fewer services over a larger government with more services, according to ABC/Washington Post polling.
Obama's brand of liberalism is exactly the sort likely to drive such voters away. More like LBJ's than FDR's, Obama-style liberalism favors benefits over relief, a safety net over direct job programs, health care and environmental reform over financial reform and a stimulus package that has focused more on social service jobs -- health care work, teaching and the like -- than on the areas where a majority of job losses occurred: construction, manufacturing and related sectors.
This recession remains disproportionately a "he-cession." Men account for at least seven of 10 workers who lost jobs, according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Nearly half of the casualties are white men, who held 46 percent of all jobs lost.
In 1994, liberals tried to explain their thinning ranks by casting aspersions on the white men who were fleeing, and the media took up the cry. The term "angry white male" or "angry white men" was mentioned 37 times in English-language news media contained in the Nexis database between 1980 and the 1994 election. In the following year, the phrases appear 2,306 times.
Tarnishing their opponents as merely "angry" was poor politics for the Democrats. Liberals know what it's like to have their views -- most recently on the war in Iraq or George W. Bush -- caricatured as merely irrational anger. Most voters vote their interests. And many white men by the 1980s had decided the Democrats were no longer interested in them.
Think about the average working man. He has already seen financial bailouts for the rich folks above him. Now he sees a health care bailout for the poor folks below him. Big government represents lots of costs and little gain.
Meanwhile, like many women, these men are simply trying to push ahead without being pushed under. Some once believed in Obama.
Now they feel forgotten.
Government can only do so much. But recall the Depression. FDR's focus on the economy was single-minded and relentless. Hard times continued, but men never doubted that FDR was trying to do right by them. Democrats should think about why they aren't given that same benefit of the doubt today.
David Paul Kuhn is chief political correspondent for RealClearPolitics and the author of "The Neglected Voter: White Men and the Democratic Dilemma." He wrote this for the Los Angeles Times.
55% des electeurs americains souhaitent voir Obamacare abrogee contre 42%
Dernière édition par Sylvette le 27/3/2010, 22:50, édité 1 fois
Invité Invité
Sujet: 2111 - 27/3/2010, 22:46
Tea Party Targets Reid, Health Care Law in 'Showdown in Searchlight'
FOXNews.com
Thousands of conservative tea party activists streamed into Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's hometown in Nevada Saturday morning, bringing American flags, "Don't Tread on Me" signs and outspoken anger toward President Obama and his health care overhaul. William Temple attends a Tea Party rally in the desert outside Searchlight, Nev. Saturday, March 27, 2010. (AP)
LAS VEGAS -- Fewer taxes, less government and no "Obamacare."
That's the message thousands of conservative Tea Party activists were hoping to send to Washington as they streamed into Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's hometown in Nevada Saturday morning.
Spoiler:
"Harry Reid is symbolic of the problems in Washington in the sense that he's been the leader in the Senate of all the things we've been against -- expanding the government, increasing the deficit, and raising taxes," Sal Russo, chief strategist of the Tea Party Express, told FoxNews.com.
"He campaigned as a moderate but has moved so far to the left," Russo said of Reid. "Voters are tolerate of different views, but what they don't like is when someone campaigns one way and then governs by another."
The Tea Party Express, one of the most visible factions of the national Tea Party Movement, officially kicked off its cross-country, 42-city bus tour with Saturday's rally.
Activists brought American flags, "Don't Tread on Me" signs and outspoken anger toward President Obama and his health care overhaul.
The activists' star, Sarah Palin, spoke to the rally Saturday from a makeshift stage in a patch of dusty desert about 60 miles north of Las Vegas.
Organizers predict as many as 10,000 people could come to tiny Searchlight, the hardscrabble former mining town where the Senate Democratic leader grew up and owns a home. By midmorning, cars and recreational vehicles filled the area as people set up lawn chairs and braced against a stiff wind whipping up dust clouds and blowing dozens of flags straight out.
The rally takes place just days after Obama signed into law the historic health care reform bill approved by Congress last weekend that ushered in near-universal medical coverage and left the nation deeply divided. The vote was followed by reports of threats and vandalism aimed at some Washington lawmakers, mostly Democrats who supported the new law.
Police don't expect problems at Saturday's rally, but the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department is sending dozens of uniformed and plainclothes officers to patrol the crowd.
The Tea Party Movement is a far-flung coalition of conservative groups angered by Washington spending, rising taxes and the growth and reach of government. It takes its name from the Boston Tea Party in 1773, when colonists dumped tea off English ships to protest what they considered unfair taxation by the British crown.
Now Tea Partiers are protesting Obama's health care overhaul.
"There's great frustration with that policies within the health care reform bill run counter to our view as to the proper role between government and the individual," Joe Wierzbicki, coordinator for the Tea Party Express, told FoxNews.com.
Ketha Verzani, 60, said she's a Republican, and came to the rally from her home in Las Vegas "to stand with those who want to clean house."
She opposes the health care bill and worries Americans are losing their rights, including parental rights and gun rights.
"It seems like every day more and more of our rights are being taken away," Verzani said, sporting a Palin 2012 button to show support for the former Alaska governor who "doesn't beat around the bush."
Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee, is scheduled to appear after spending Friday and Saturday morning campaigning for Sen. John McCain, the Arizona Republican who led the 2008 ticket.
McCain is seeking re-election but faces a Republican primary challenge from the right by former congressman and radio talk show host JD Hayworth.
Now a Fox News analyst and potential 2012 presidential candidate, Palin faced criticism after posting a map on her Facebook page that had circles and cross hairs over 20 Democratic districts. She also sent a tweet saying, "Don't Retreat, Instead - RELOAD!"
She said Friday she was alluding to votes, not guns.
A string of polls has shown Reid is vulnerable in politically moderate Nevada after pushing Obama's agenda in Congress. His standing has also been hurt by Nevada's double-digit unemployment and record foreclosure and bankruptcy rates.
Saturday's rally kicks off a 42-city bus tour that ends in Washington on April 15, the deadline for filing federal income tax returns.
Reid supporters planned their own rally Saturday about a mile (1.6 kilometers) from the Tea Party event.
Luis Salvador, 55, an unemployed fire sprinkler fitter, drove up from Las Vegas to support Reid, who he said has done a lot for the state and doesn't deserve the protest brought to his hometown.
"You don't come to a man's house and start creating a ruckus," said Salvador, a registered independent. He and several others taped signs saying "Nevada Needs Harry Reid" to the side of a truck near the highway that runs through town.
Another Reid supporter, Judy Hill, 62, said she doesn't understand the hatred of Reid. The longtime Democrat from Searchlight, a town of about 1,000, said she thinks people just don't know the man she calls a friend.
"They listen to the rhetoric. I think he's very misunderstood and under-appreciated," she said
FoxNews.com's Cristina Corbin and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
.gif)
Les Cohortes Célestes ont le devoir et le regret de vous informer que Libres Propos est entré en sommeil. Ce forum convivial et sympathique reste uniquement accessible en lecture seule. Prenez plaisir à le consulter.
Merci de votre compréhension.
est un retour de la Chambre aux Republicains en Novembre, mais la...
Harry Reid and Chris Dodd celebrate after the Senate approves a package of changes to the health care bill. | AP Photo Close 
]
William Temple attends a Tea Party rally in the desert outside Searchlight, Nev. Saturday, March 27, 2010. (AP)