Mona Eltahawy: "Mubarak is Our Berlin Wall"

video details and more

Mona Eltahawy on Democracy Now this morning, discussing the Egyptian uprising.

AMY GOODMAN: You have called Mubarak the Berlin Wall.

MONA ELTAHAWY: Absolutely, because, as you remember, in 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell, you saw revolution?revolutions and freedom movements across Eastern Europe. Mubarak is our Berlin Wall. When Tunisia had its revolution and toppled Ben Ali, everyone thought, "Beautiful little Tunisia, you?re so brave. But it?s never going to happen anywhere else." Now it?s happening in the traditional leader of the Arab world. Egypt is a country of 80 million people. Once Mubarak falls?and he will fall; I mean, he?s crumbled. Several days ago, as far as I was concerned, he was done. Once Mubarak falls once and for all, you will see what will happen in the Arab world. This is going to?every Arab leader is watching right now in terror, and every Arab citizen is elated and cheering Egypt on, because they know the significance of this.

AMY GOODMAN: Mona Eltahawy, I want to thank you very much for being with us, Egyptian-born columnist and speaker on Arab issues, based here in New York. Al Jazeera English, by the way, is now reporting up to two million people in and around Tahrir Square. And, of course, there are protests all over Egypt.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Reagan’s Solicitor General Charles Fried:
‘I Am Quite Sure That The Health Care Mandate Is Constitutional’

In a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing today on “The Constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act,” President Ronald Reagan’s former Solicitor General — Harvard Law Professor Charles Fried — tore into the reasoning of Judge Roger Vinson’s decision striking down the Affordable Care Act, saying the issue should be a “no brainer”:

I am quite sure that the health care mandate is constitutional. … My authorities are not recent. They go back to John Marshall, who sat in the Virginia legislature at the time they ratified the Constitution, and who, in 1824, in Gibbons v. Ogden, said, regarding Congress? Commerce power, ?what is this power? It is the power to regulate. That is?to proscribe the rule by which commerce is governed.? To my mind, that is the end of the story of the constitutional basis for the mandate.

The mandate is a rule?more accurately, ?part of a system of rules by which commerce is to be governed,? to quote Chief Justice Marshall. And if that weren?t enough for you?though it is enough for me?you go back to Marshall in 1819, in McCulloch v. Maryland, where he said ?the powers given to the government imply the ordinary means of execution. The government which has the right to do an act??surely, to regulate health insurance??and has imposed on it the duty of performing that act, must, according to the dictates of reason, be allowed to select the means.? And that is the Necessary and Proper Clause. [...]

I think that one thing about Judge Vinson’s opinion, where he said that if we strike down the mandate everything else goes, shows as well as anything could that the mandate is necessary to the accomplishment of the regulation of health insurance.

Watch it:

video details and more

Fried does explain that he is “not a partisan” for the Affordable Care Act, and that he has some doubts about whether it is good policy. But Fried’s position on the law’s requirement that all people carry insurance reflects exactly how the Constitution is supposed to operate. Elected officials are supposed to make policy decisions, not judges who have to ignore entire constitutional provisions in order to impose their policy preferences on the law.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Rand Paul Email Touts False Gun Conspiracy About
U.N. Treaty That Doesn’t Exist

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has a real knack for paranoia. Playing the hero in his contrived world of made-up threats, Paul battles the menacing enemies of pregnant women, American babies, and the Department of Education. On Monday, Paul’s right-wing fan base got a sneak peek at Paul’s next target: the U.N. Small Arms Treaty.

In an email to supporters, Paul warned that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the “global gun-grabbers” are out to “strip you and me of ALL our freedoms” by signing a treaty designed by the “petty dictators and one-world socialists who control the UN” to “CONFISCATE and DESTROY” all civilian firearms across the world. With his trusty sidekick the National Association For Gun Rights and a financial contribution from his base, Paul can “lead the fight to defeat this radical treaty“:

Gun-grabbers around the globe believe they have it made.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently announced the Obama Administration will be working hand-in-glove with the UN to pass a new ?Small Arms Treaty.?

Disguised as an ?International Arms Control Treaty? to fight against ?terrorism,? ?insurgency? and ?international crime syndicates,? the UN?s Small Arms Treaty is in fact a massive, GLOBAL gun control scheme.

I?m helping lead the fight to defeat this radical treaty in the United States Senate and I want your help.

Please join me by taking a public stand against this outright assault on our national sovereignty by signing the Official Firearms Sovereignty Survey.

Ultimately, the UN?s Small Arms Treaty is designed to register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms owned by private citizens like YOU.

So far, the gun-grabbers have successfully kept the exact wording of their new scheme under wraps. [...]

And along with your signed survey, I hope you?ll send a generous contribution of $250, $100, $50 or even just $35 to help finance this battle.

With your generous contribution, the National Association for Gun Rights will continue contacting Second Amendment supporters to turn up the heat on targeted U.S. Senators.

Paul’s conspiratorial email is missing one tiny footnote: there is no U.N. Small Arms Treaty. While the U.N. has been considering the feasibility of such a treaty, Paul’s “piece of scarelore” is “erroneous in all its particulars.” Clinton has never signed such a treaty. Nor could she, Congress, or the President ever do so. The Supreme Court’s Reid v. Covert decision established that the Constitution — which still includes the Second Amendment — supersedes international treaties. In fact, the only treaty that Clinton said the U.S. would possibly consider is a treaty that combats the illegal, international trade of small arms by setting “international standards” to “close gaps” that “allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market.” The policy has “nothing to do with restricting the sale or ownership” of guns inside the U.S. A point so salient that even the NRA felt compelled to squash the nonsense.

But the National Association of Gun Rights feels compelled to fundraise on it. As Kentucky progressive blog Barefoot and Progressive notes, Paul’s email “appears to have originated” from the NAGR, “a far far right 2nd Amendment group that endorsed Rand Paul early in the 2010 primary” and celebrates him as a “pro-gun hero.”

To see the entire email, see below:

Gun-grabbers around the globe believe they have it made.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently announced the Obama Administration will be working hand-in-glove with the UN to pass a new ?Small Arms Treaty.?

Disguised as an ?International Arms Control Treaty? to fight against ?terrorism,? ?insurgency? and ?international crime syndicates,? the UN?s Small Arms Treaty is in fact a massive, GLOBAL gun control scheme.

I?m helping lead the fight to defeat this radical treaty in the United States Senate and I want your help.

Please join me by taking a public stand against this outright assault on our national sovereignty by signing the Official Firearms Sovereignty Survey.

Ultimately, the UN?s Small Arms Treaty is designed to register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms owned by private citizens like YOU.

So far, the gun-grabbers have successfully kept the exact wording of their new scheme under wraps.

But looking at previous versions of the UN Small Arms Treaty, you and I can get a good idea of what?s likely in the works.

If passed by the UN and ratified by the U.S. Senate, the UN ?Small Arms Treaty? would almost certainly FORCE the U.S. to: *** Enact tougher licensing requirements, making law-abiding Americans cut through even more bureaucratic red tape just to own a firearm legally;

*** CONFISCATE and DESTROY ALL ?unauthorized? civilian firearms (all firearms owned by the government are excluded, of course);

*** BAN the trade, sale and private ownership of ALL semi-automatic weapons;

*** Create an INTERNATIONAL gun registry, setting the stage for full-scale gun CONFISCATION.

I?m sure I don?t have to tell you that this is NOT a fight we can afford to lose.

Ever since its founding 65 years ago, the United Nations has been hell-bent on bringing the United States to its knees.

To the petty dictators and one-world socialists who control the UN, the United States of America isn?t a ?shining city on a hill? ? it?s an affront to their grand designs for the globe.

These anti-gun globalists know that so long as Americans remain free to make our own decisions without being bossed around by big government bureaucrats, they?ll NEVER be able to seize the worldwide power they crave.

And the UN?s apologists also know the most effective way to finally strip you and me of ALL our freedoms would be to DESTROY our gun rights.

That?s why I was so glad to hear that the National Association for Gun Rights is leading the fight to stop this assault on our Constitution!

The truth is there?s no time to waste.

You and I have to be prepared for this fight to move FAST.

The fact is the last thing the gun-grabbers at the UN and in Washington, D.C. want is for you and me to have time to mobilize gun owners to defeat this radical legislation.

They?ve made that mistake before, and we?ve made them pay, defeating EVERY attempt to ram the ?Treaty on Small Arms? into law since the mid-1990s.

But now time may not be on our side.

In fact, we?re likely to only have a few weeks to defeat the treaty when they make their move.

And we definitely don?t have a President in the White House who will oppose this treaty.

So our ONE AND ONLY CHANCE to stop the UN?s ?Small Arms Treaty? is during the ratification process in the U.S. Senate.

As you know, it takes 67 Senate votes to ratify a treaty.

With new pro-gun champions joining me in the Senate, rounding up enough votes to kill this thing should be easy, right?

Unfortunately, that couldn?t be further from the truth.

Even with the Republican tidal wave in November, there still isn?t a pro-gun majority in the Senate to kill ratification of the treaty.

You know just as well as I do how few Senators are truly ?pro-gun.?

Not only that, but many Senators get ?queasy? about killing treaties for fear of ?embarrassing? the President ? especially with ?international prestige? at stake.

They look at ratifying treaties much like approving the President?s Supreme Court nominees.

Remember how many Senators turned their back on us and voted to confirm anti-gun Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor?

A dozen more only voted against Sotomayor after receiving massive grassroots pressure from the folks back home.

So if we?re going to defeat the UN?s Small Arms Treaty we have to turn the heat up on the U.S. Senate now before it?s too late!

Do you believe the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Second Amendment are the supreme law of the land?

Do you believe any attempt by the United Nations to subvert or supersede your Constitutional rights must be opposed?

If you said ?Yes? to these questions, please sign the survey the National Association for Gun Rights has prepared for you.

Your survey will put you squarely on the record AGAINST the UN?s Small Arms Treaty.

And along with your signed survey, I hope you?ll send a generous contribution of $250, $100, $50 or even just $35 to help finance this battle.

With your generous contribution, the National Association for Gun Rights will continue contacting Second Amendment supporters to turn up the heat on targeted U.S. Senators.

Not only that, but they?re preparing a massive program to launch the second this treaty is brought before the Senate.

Direct mail. Phones. E-mail. Blogs. Guest editorials. Press conferences. Hard-hitting internet, newspaper, radio and even TV ads if funding permits. The whole nine yards.

Of course, a program of this scale is only possible if the National Association for Gun Rights can raise the money.

But that?s not easy, and we may not have much time.

In fact, if gun owners are going to defeat the UN?s Small Arms Treaty pro-gun Americans like you and me have to get involved NOW!

So please put yourself on record AGAINST the UN?s Small Arms Treaty by signing NAGR?s Firearms Sovereignty Survey.

But along with your survey, please agree to make a generous contribution of $250, $100, $50 or even just $35.

And every dollar counts in this fight so even if you can only chip in $10 or $20, it will make a difference.

Thank you in advance for your time and money devoted to defending our Second Amendment rights.

For Freedom,

Rand Paul
United States Senator

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Neo-liberal denial & the impact of poverty on
educational acheivement

Writing about Egypt & the worldwide neoliberal failure, I couldn't help but think about the[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/OpenLeft-FrontPage/~3/4C-KBqJfANM/neoliberal-denia
l-the-impact-of-poverty-on-educational-acheivement

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Wisconsin, Florida refusing to implement
Affordable Care Act

Two of the states participating in the challenge to the Affordable Care Act, which Judge Roger Vinson voided in his dubious decision, have decided that the decision is enough to stop implementation efforts at the state level.

Greg Sargent got a statement from the Office of the Wisconsin Attorney General, J.B. Hollen, "flatly declaring the law "dead" for his state unless it's revived by a higher court, and asserting that this relieves state government of any and all its responsibilities to implement the law."

"Judge Vinson declared the health care law void and stated in his decision that a declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction. This means that, for Wisconsin, the federal health care law is dead -- unless and until it is revived by an appellate court. Effectively, Wisconsin was relieved of any obligations or duties that were created under terms of the federal health care law. What that means in a practical sense is a discussion I'll have in confidence with Governor Walker, as the State's counsel."

It's unclear what this means in practice; a spokesman for the attorney general declined to detail what this might mean for Wisconsin residents. But it seems likely that other state officials hostile to the law may follow suit. My understanding is news organizations are canvassing state governments around the country to see if they're going to threaten to stop implementing the law in the wake of Vinson's decision. So we'll soon get a better sense of how widespread this will be.

In Florida, the state insurance commissioner is returning $1 million in federal healthcare grants paid to states to help with reform implementation.

The money would have paid for a system to provide information to consumers on the rates of large-group insurers.

"The purpose of this letter is to inform you that after deliberate consideration, I hereby rescind the acceptance of the above-referenced $1 million rate review grant, which occurred in a letter to you dated September 15, 2010. No drawdown of any of the $1 million will occur," McCarty wrote in a letter to the director of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Center for Consumer Information and Oversight.

The state already reviews rates for individual and small group policies. But Florida lawmakers need to file legislation to match state law to the federal health care provisions and expand the review to large group rates, a spokeswoman for McCarty said in an e-mail. That wasn't likely to happen before Vinson's ruling, and it's certainly not likely to happen now.

Judge Vinson did not issue an injunction stopping implementation of the law, and the government is appealing the ruling, but in the meantime is within the law in continuing that implementation. Where that legally leaves these states, and the others that will be sure to follow, and how the federal government deals with them remains to be seen.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Help Us Pick Our New FDL Membership Logo

For months now, everyone at FDL has been working together to come up with a membership association program that will give our community members a way to increase their involvement with FDL as well as expand our ability to cover and impact public issues.[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/firedoglake/fdl/~3/euVfkSSgViE/

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Conservative Media Look At Hosni Mubarak And See
Barack Obama

In the wake of protests in Egypt, right-wing media have compared President Obama to corrupt Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who has ruled that country as a police state for 30 years. Conservative media have long accused Obama of being "anti-Democratic" and a "dictator."

Right-Wing: Obama Just As Corrupt, Oppressive, And Intolerant As Mubarak

Beck Suggests Obama Is Exhibiting "A Sign Of A Dictator." On Fox News' Fox & Friends, Glenn Beck stated:

BECK: Did anybody notice the remarkable statements from the president last week where the president was saying, look, as long as people are peacefully assembling, they have a right to speak and the government should listen to them. All of -- when he's saying that, all I can think of was the speech where he's walking around going, "And they're carrying tea bags," and mocking the American people.

And then, while they're pushing for an Internet kill switch for the president, that does not have judicial review -- in fact, it specifically says courts cannot review the decision. While they're pushing for that in our own Congress on Friday, he's telling Mubarak, anybody who tries to control the Internet and television and radio, that's a sign of a dictator. Come on. [Fox News, Fox & Friends,

[Twitter, Michelle Malkin,

[Twitter, HeyTammyBruce, 1/28/11]

Conservatives Routinely Accuse Obama Of Being "Anti-Democratic"

Limbaugh: China's Political System Is "Very Different" From Ours: "Yeah, Maybe -- But Not For Long." On his radio show, discussing Obama's press conference with Chinese President Hu Jintao, Limbaugh seized on Obama's remark that China's political system is "very different" from the United States', saying, "Obama's up there telling the press corps that China has a very different political system than we do. Yeah, maybe -- but not for long. [Premiere Radio Networks, The Rush Limbaugh Show, 1/19/10]

Wash. Times' Kuhner: "Obama's Regime Has Abused Its Power And Fostered Anti-Democratic Behavior." In his Washington Times column, Jeffrey Kuhner referred to Obama as an "anti-American political thug," writing that Obama "despises the Constitution and capitalism" and "bristles under the restraints of democratic governance and the system of checks and balances." Kuhner went on to compare Obama with Vladimir Lenin, Fidel Castro, and Hugo Chavez, saying that "they have one goal: revolution." Kuhner later stated:

Mr. Obama's regime has abused its power and fostered anti-democratic behavior. He is slowly erecting a soft police state. It is not one with a fascist jackboot on your face but with a unionized TSA bureaucrat in your crotch -- all in the name of public safety. Say hello to Big Brother Barack. [The Washington Times, 11/26/10]   

Beck Says "The Trends That We're Headed Towards" Is To "Install A Dictator." On his Fox News show, Glenn Beck purported to explain the "trends that we're headed towards," saying "the whole dictator thing" is not just a "crazy theory." Beck added: "What more is there to be done? Have we not given everything he has asked for? ... After financial reform, the government controls 70 percent of the economy. How much more control do they want?" Beck continued: "Plus, phase two of the Weather Underground is to install a dictator. Now, I know that's heavy, man -- to use the 1960s lingo -- but is it possible? Step one is grab control, grab control of the economy, grab control of the imperialistic system and then, step two is to install a dictator." [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 7/27/10]

Levin On Obama Administration: "We Have Been Tormented And Abused Far More Than The Colonists Were By The King Of England." Discussing the tea party on his radio show, Mark Levin said: "The tea party activists are acting out of history and patriotism. I said many months ago that we have been tormented and abused far more than the colonists were by the King of England. Far more, far oftener, and far more aggressively." [ABC Radio Networks, The Mark Levin Show, 7/20/10]

Levin: What Obama Is Doing Is No Different Than "What's Going On In Venezuela." On his radio show, Levin stated:

LEVIN: No, there isn't going to be a robust recovery, ladies and gentlemen. No, foreign individuals are not going to continue invest in this country, when they can get a better deal somewhere else. This is a disaster. And so what is Obama going to do about it? Keep building and building and building his empire. Keep seizing more assets. This is what's going on. This is what the quote-unquote bailout is all about. They're seizing private-sector assets, transferring them from private parties and turning them over to politicians and government. Now, they put smiles on their faces. They do it with legislation. Sometimes they don't.

But how is this any different in the end, and in theory, to what's going on in Venezuela? I ask you. No aspect of the private sector feels safe from this president and his administration and this Congress. No aspect. That's why people aren't spending and investing in R&D. We're not even standing still. We're regressing. Because we have a man in office who is a destroyer. He's destroying all the magnificence that was created before him. Because he's petulant, because he is inexperienced, because he's immature, and most of all because he's a Marxist. [ABC Radio Networks, The Mark Levin Show, 6/30/10]

Rove Accuses Obama Of Engaging "Intimidation" Tactics "Worthy Of A Third World Dictator." In his Wall Street Journal column, Karl Rove wrote:

Before his health-care bill passed, Mr. Obama sent a tough letter to health-insurance CEOs and then castigated them 22 times in a follow-up prime-time televised speech. This is behavior worthy of a Third World dictator -- not the head of a vibrant democracy.

[...]

But it is the president's intimidation that is most troubling. Mr. Obama has the disturbing tendency to question the motives of those who disagree with him, often making them the objects of ad hominem attacks. His motives, on the other hand, are pure.

Mr. Obama often makes it seem illegitimate to challenge his views, and he isn't content to argue issues on the merits. Instead, he wants to make opponents into pariahs. And it's not just business executives who are on the receiving end. We've also seen this pattern with the administration's attacks on the tea party movement and those who attended town-hall meetings last summer on health care.

This is a bad habit -- and a dangerous one. The presidency is a very powerful office, and presidents need to be careful not to use it to silence dissenting voices. [The Wall Street Journal, 4/29/10]   

Limbaugh: "If I Didn't Know Better, I Would Say That Hugo Chavez Is Actually Running This Country." On his radio show, Limbaugh claimed that "this regime and its willing accomplices are engaged in the effort to vilify the backbone of this country -- the people who work and thus make it work. They are the objects of derision. They are the targets for destruction." Limbaugh went on to accuse the administration of treating critics and business owners like the "enemy," concluding: "If I didn't know better, I would say that Hugo Chavez is actually running this country. And I'm probably downplaying this a bit." [Premiere Radio Networks, The Rush Limbaugh Show, 4/15/10]

Savage: Obama "Is A Neo-Marxist Fascist Dictator In The Making." On his radio show, Savage accused Obama of being a "neo-Marxist fascist dictator in the making," saying:

SAVAGE: "Super aides for health, the economy, energy, and urban issues, with more to come, prompt lawmakers and groups to worry he may be concentrating power and bypassing Congress." Of course he is. He's a fascist. I know that you don't want to hear this, but the man is a neo-Marxist fascist dictator in the making. He is not using his fascism yet, because he doesn't have enough power to wield the fascist instruments of power, but he is aggrandizing enough power to become a very dangerous president, and you must understand this is an important story. [Talk Radio Network, The Savage Nation, 3/5/09]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.mediamatters.org/~r/mediamatters/latest/~3/8bpF0apstMw/201102020016

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

MT-Sen: Rehberg to challenge Tester

The GOP gets another top Senate recruit:

Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) will announce Saturday he is challenging Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.).

   "It's happening Saturday," said a knowledgeable Montana GOP political operative. "He's running. There is a lot of support and enthusiasm back home, and Denny knows he can win."

Rehberg has served in the House since 2000. He ran for the Senate once before, losing a close race to Democratic Sen. Max Baucus in 1996.

PPP polled this matchup several months ago, in November, and found a very close race:

Public Policy Polling. 11/10-13, 2010. Registered voters. MoE 2.9%.

Denny Rehberg (R) 48
Jon Tester (D-inc) 46

Tester had a double-digit lead among independents and a 30-point edge among moderates, but still trailed slightly.

On the other hand, Rehberg hasn't had a tough race in 10 years, and he could have problems of his own.

Tester is building a strong operation in preparation for what has always looked to be a difficult reelection bid, so he shouldn't be caught flat-footed. This race should start as perhaps the most competitive Senate battle of 2010.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Health Care Repeal Vote Expected in the Senate
Today

Senate Republicans have attached an amendment to the FAA funding bill currently pending to repeal the Affordable Care Act. It appears that Harry Reid is willing to allow the vote to go forward, in order to "get it out of their systems quickly".

"We want to get this out of their system quickly," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at a press conference with his top deputies Tuesday afternoon, who said the vote could come up "sometime today," depending on how long the floor debate drags on. Aides suggest the vote's more likely to come Wednesday.

"A budget point of order lies against it. It breaks the budget by a trillion dollars, they don't show any way of making up that trillion dollars." said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) told reporters. "I for one was hoping that Senator McConnell would not do this on this bill... but he did, its his right."

To waive the point of order, Republicans will need 60 votes. They won't come close.

Meanwhile, they are at least (finally) admitting that the goal of their tweaks isn't "repeal and replace", but rather to kill the whole thing and allow the status quo to remain for everyone.

I caught a few minutes of Senator Tom Coburn bloviating on the Senate floor this afternoon with the same old mantra about free-market health care, and how government will interfere with the doctor-patient relationship, etc. etc. ad infinitum. I could only wonder how he can stand there with a straight face and do that. The man is an OB/GYN who wants the government to execute doctors who perform legal procedures on women, robbing them of choices rightfully made with the advice of a doctor and without the US government in the examining room.

Finally, in what could be the ultimate irony of the day, Forbes wonders aloud why the uninsured aren't protesting in the streets like Egyptians.

Put plainly, the political and legal peril in which health reform finds itself is directly attributable to the failure of the uninsured to visibly advocate on their own behalf. Those without health insurance have allowed a civil rights issue of guaranteed access to medical care to become a referendum on Big Government rather than a test of basic human compassion for brain-damaged husbands. And, even more ironically, have left the heavy lifting on lobbying against repeal to the big insurance companies of the world such as Aetna, Humana, UnitedHealth Group and WellPoint

Worse, while the prestigious Institute of Medicine characterizes the consequences of a lack of access to care as ?needless illness, suffering, and even death,? it is Republican physicians in Congress brazenly lead the effort to repeal care coverage.

By coincidence, there are about the same number of elderly on Medicare as there are uninsured. Egyptians understand the power of an aroused populace. Do the uninsured? In Red States and Blue States in 2012, there will be Congressional districts and senatorial races up for grabs and a contest for the presidency featuring a man who made a historic effort on their behalf. Will Republicans whose party has never put forth a serious proposal to provide access to care for all suffer any consequences at the ballot box from turning to the sick, the scared and the suffering with a curt, ?Government is not the answer.?

It's a good question, though. We should be in the streets. Every damn day.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Michele Bachmann: Naked pictures of me could show
up on the Internet

Mother of God, no.

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) recently announced her opposition to the federal Transportation Security Administration's full-body scanners due to worries that "naked pictures" of herself could somehow end up on the internet for the world to see after being screened.

According to MinnPost, Bachamann told patrons at an Iowa coffee shop that she planned on opting out of such security procedures in order to avoid the possibility that such exposing images could end up online.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!