WebProNews

Tag: Obama

  • Brenda Barton: Calls Obama “De Fuhrer”, Takes Heat

    Brenda Barton, a state representative for Arizona since 2010, is frustrated at the antics of government these days. Since the government shuttered its doors last Tuesday, there have been many critics on both sides. Like many of those, she has taken to social media to vent her anger at the state of the union, especially the closing of the national parks.

    However, some might say she crossed the line with a Facebook post that compared Obama to Hitler. Some would say it’s her constitutional right. Either way, it’s certainly strong language that has people talking.

    Brenda Barton calls Obama “De Fuhrer” on Facebook

    But that wasn’t the only slap she put on the face of the President, and she didn’t spare the First Lady, either.

    “While the POTUS continues to punish the American people,” Barton continued, “he keeps open his golf course, he keeps open Camp David, and he retains his and his wife’s excessive staff and stable of Czars! I’ll bet he has kept in service his 3 food tasters!!!”

    “The Chief Executive is acting as an Imperial President,” she added, “without regard to his citizens, only caring about his agenda. With all the exemptions he has unilaterally bestowed on many interest groups, could he not delay the ACA Individual Mandate for a single year? Without regard for the elected House of Representatives. What do you call that?”

    Barton is not backing down. She has been confronted by the Arizona Capitol Times about her comments and she replies,“He’s dictating beyond his authority,” she said of Obama. “It’s not just the death camps. (Hitler) started in the communities, with national health care and gun control. You better read your history. Germany started with national health care and gun control before any of that other stuff happened. And Hitler was elected by a majority of people.”

    “It got your attention,” she added. “[President Obama is] doing something controversial. It’s not controversial that I’m criticizing him. I don’t think that’s controversial at all.”

    What do you think? Controversial or her right as a citizen?

    Image via youtube

  • Obama: Negotiations Don’t Require Threats

    Obama: Negotiations Don’t Require Threats

    President Obama spoke in a news conference from the White House today and urged the Republicans to end the threats and “get down to work”.

    While House Speaker John Boehner has urged Obama to negotiate on a spending plan, the president is trying to get a House vote on a budget that has no conditions. Republicans, however, are standing firm and say they won’t make the first move. Meanwhile, the federal government will come to its borrowing limit next week.

    “I am happy to talk with him and other Republicans about anything,” Obama said of Boehner, “not just issues I think are important but also issues that they think are important. But I also told him that having such a conversation, talks, negotiations shouldn’t require hanging the threats of a government shutdown or economic chaos over the heads of the American people. Think about it this way. The American people do not get to demand a ransom for doing their jobs.”

    There is talk that the Republicans are considering drafting two bills: one to ensure that all essential government employees get paid on time, and one to put together a negotiating team to raise the debt ceiling. President Obama reiterated that he would be open to talking about a plan, but only if the shutdown is lifted.

    “If they want to do that, reopen the government, extend the debt ceiling,” Obama said. “If they can’t do it for a long time, do it for the period of time in which these negotiations are taking place. Why is it that we’ve got hundreds and thousands of people who aren’t working right now in order for what you just described to occur? It doesn’t make any sense.”

    Image: YouTube

  • Barack Obama Is The First Gay President

    This writer takes both personal interest and joy in the wacky world of conspiracy theories about president Barack Obama. Springing from such fertile lands of crazy as the conservative areas of the internet and the ever-entertaining-yet-simultaneously-infuriating Fox news, theories about who the president “really is” never fail to bring amusement wherever they land. From accusations of him being a Muslim to his new dog being a ploy to cover up the problems in Syria, the zany things people come up with in attempts to “slander” the president are always popping up, and they seem to get more ridiculous each time.

    One of the latest rumors finds its roots in conservative activist and journalist Dean Chambers, the founder of unskewedpolls.com. As his website’s title might suggest, Chambers has previously gained notoriety by “unskewing” polls that “favored” Obama during the 2012 election. According to the description given in his profile over on the Examiner, Chamber’s articles have “been linked or featured by the Drudge Report, The Gateway Pundit, The Rush Limbaugh Show, The Blaze, and others.”

    Chambers, as he expresses thoroughly in this delightful read of his, that Obama is the first gay president. But not in the way that Andrew Sullivan described in NewsWeek, where he commended president Obama for making great strides in marriage equality and other LGBTQAI+ issues. Oh, no. Chambers means something completely different. As he so eloquently puts into his own words, “I think Sullivan is right, but not for the right reason. I do believe that Barack Obama is in fact our first gay president.”

    Obama is gay, and this man is determined to convince us all. Nevermind that president Obama is married with children; as chambers puts it, again, so eloquently, “Don’t tell me his marriage to Michelle and having two children disproves that he’s gay. Remember Jim McGreevey, the former governor of New Jersey, who got himself into some trouble, and then came out of the closet to declare himself a “gay American?” He was married and had children too, but that didn’t stop him from being gay either.”

    Chambers goes on to site multiple sources that imply president Obama’s torrid affairs in the Chicago gay scene. He also goes on to disprove one of the longest-standing conspiracies about Obama; that the president is actually –gasp– a Muslim!! Chambers argues, “This [his homosexuality] might well be why Obama actually is a Christian, and at some point chose to become one. Christians don’t hate gays; Christians who believe that homosexuality is wrong take the humane approach of loving the sinner and opposing the sin. Muslims, on the other hand, have been known to stone someone for being gay.”

    Chambers ends his article with a most thought-provoking question; “Would you be a Muslim if it put you as risk for being killed because of your lifestyle choices?” And this writer simply couldn’t think of any better question to leave than that.

    [Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.]

  • Senate Votes Against Fourth House Plan

    Senate Votes Against Fourth House Plan

    In a completely non-startling move, the Senate voted against a fourth plan put forth by the House to defund Obamacare in order to stop the government shutdown.

    The deadline to actually avoid the shutdown came at midnight last night. When America woke up this morning, it realized that Congress was still plagued by ineptitude, and the government had indeed shutdown.

    Despite failing to convince the Senate to defund the Affordable Care Act (An act that became law in 2010.) 3 previous times, House Republicans believed that a fourth effort would be successful if they only included a negotiating committee to reach a compromise with the healthcare law.

    The Senate voted 54-46 against approving the House bill, straight down party lines. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid stated that the Senate was willing to talk negotiations with the bill, but not “with a gun to our head.”

    In even more fantastically antagonistic rhetoric, Reid said that today was “a good day for anarchists” in the House of Representatives, and that “Speaker Boehner and his band of Tea Party radicals, they have done the unthinkable. They have shut down the federal government. For us, that’s hard to comprehend as being good. For them, they like it.”

    Many Democratic leaders, such as Senator Dick Durbin (D – Il.) have voiced the opinion that they would be willing to talk numbers regarding the ACA and compromise on certain aspects, but that they would not vote to defund the law. The main issue on which Democrats are willing to negotiate is a tax on medical devices, something that could save $30 billion in lost revenue over 10 years.

    Despite the fact that Obamacare is not directly tied to federal funding, many radical Republicans and Tea Party members insists that its defunding is the key to creating a sustainable US budget. Republican Representative Todd Rokita, of Indiana, even went as far as to say that the Affordable Care Act is the “is the most insidious law known to man,” without stating why, of course.

    Because of the lack of political responsibility in DC, 800,000 government employees will be furloughed, hundreds of government institutions will be closed, and the United States could lose around $55 billion if the issue isn’t resolved in 3-4 weeks.

    While the rhetoric of Harry Reid is great in its incendiary nature (Here is another one: “Albert Einstein said when defining insanity as follows, quote, ‘Doing the same thing over and over again and thinking you’re going to get a different result. Einstein was a genius, but it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the proof is watching the House Republicans, because they’ve lost their minds.”), the rhetoric of John Boehner and Mitch McConnell is just as interesting.

    Boehner stated “How can we give waivers and breaks to all the big union guys out there? How do we give breaks to all the big businesses out there, and yet stick our constituents with a bill they don’t want and a bill they can’t afford?” Except for the fact that the Affordable Care Act was passed as a law in 2010, meaning that a majority of Congress voted in favor of the law, and despite the fact that no proof has been given as to the fact that constituents cannot afford it, seeing as the bill has yet to be implemented (and the fact that it is designed to save Americans money over the long-run).

    Mitch McConnell’s words of wisdom are just as ignorant, stating that “They’ve now said they won’t even agree to sit down and work out our differences. They won’t even talk about it. They literally just voted against working out a compromise.” What McConnell fails to recognize is that there is nothing to compromise about – As Obama himself has stated, via his Twitter account, “The Affordable Care Act is moving forward. You can’t shut it down.”

    The President is exactly right. Regardless of whether or not the government is shutdown, the Affordable Care Act is slated to take effect in 2014. Applications to apply for the program opened today. The Republicans are not going to make progress attempting to stop a law that has already been voted and agreed upon, and has been deemed Constitutional by the Supreme Court. Instead, they should focus their efforts on defunding some other inane government expenditure. Perhaps some portion of the monstrous Defense budget…? Just a suggestion.

    Image via Twitter

  • Government Shutdown: Congress Misses Deadline, Obama Tweets

    Another year, another threat of government shutdown–only this time, it happened. After Democrats and Republicans in Congress made the new budget dependent on whether Obamacare remained funded, the October 1 deadline at midnight was missed, and the shutdown is in process.

    Office of Management and Budget director Sylvia Burwell said earlier this evening that there was no “clear indication” that Congress would reach an agreement. “Agencies should now execute plans for an orderly shutdown due to the absence of appropriations,” she said. “We urge Congress to act quickly…to pass a budget for the remainder of the fiscal year, and to restore the operation of critical public services and programs that will be impacted by a lapse in appropriations.”

    The Senate and the House of Representatives have both had multiple chances to avoid the shutdown. The Republican-controlled House worked over the weekend and passed a resolution on Sunday morning that would postpone forcing people to purchase health insurance for a year. The Senate voted 54-46 to reject the resolution on Monday.

    Both sides are passing blame and are accusing the other of essentially holding the government hostage. Democrats are pointing fingers at Republicans for insisting that Obamacare be defunded, while Republicans are accusing President Obama and Democrats of not being open to compromise.

    “One faction in one branch of government doesn’t get to shut down the entire government just to refight the results of an election,” Obama said as the deadline approached. “You don’t get to extract a ransom for doing your job.” House Speaker John Boehner said that he spoke to the president on Monday night, but that Obama’s stance was, “I’m not going to negotiate. I’m not going to negotiate.”

    The president’s Twitter page included a series of tweets on the shutdown just minutes after midnight.

    The big question, of course, is what effect will Congress’s lack of being able to reach an agreement have on the people?

    The good news is that a government shutdown doesn’t mean that all government programs are halted. The bad news is that a lot of government workers will be furloughed until the folks in Washington D.C. can get things straightened out.

    According to the L.A. Times, there are three major groups that won’t be affected. The first group includes programs such as Social Security and Medicare. The second group includes groups that are “necessary to protect life or property,” such as law enforcement, military and intelligence agencies. The final group that will remain open, at least temporarily, are those that have other sources of income, such as courts.

    Close to a million government employees will be furloughed, which means they will be out of work with no pay until the government shutdown is over. This includes those who work for national parks, federal museums and IRS call centers. Department of Health and Human Services has said it will furlough 52 percent its employees if there’s a shutdown. Military personnel will remain active, but won’t get paid until Congress makes the funds available.

    Despite the finger pointing between members of Congress, it looks like a lot of people, regardless of whether they identify as Republican, Democrat or otherwise, are uniting against the politicians for being unable to do their jobs, so maybe something positive will come from the current mess.

    What do you think about the government shutdown? Respond below.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMpHmy26M4Q

    Image via YouTube

  • Obamacare Exemptions: Is Congress Exempt?

    Obamacare Exemptions: Is Congress Exempt?

    So far several rumors have been spread in an attempt to get citizens to take a stand against Obamacare (also known as the Affordable Care Act) and ask their Congressmen to repeal the law. We’ve heard about the death panels that were going to leave the elderly and disabled out to dry and about healthcare rationing, both of which are myths.

    The latest story that is making rounds while the threat of a government shutdown looms (again) is that members of Congress will be exempt under Obamacare, which has certainly riled up some people. After all, if Obamacare isn’t good enough for Congress, it’s not good enough for us, right? As it turns out, that’s not quite the truth, which is a lot less interesting than the rumor that has left many outraged:

    According to Republican Senator David Vitter, “President Obama recently issued a special rule for Congress and congressional staff to get a special subsidy to purchase health insurance on the Obamacare Exchange unavailable to every other American at similar income levels,” said Vitter. “That’s an exemption, plain and simple.”

    There are several exemptions under Obamacare, but Congress members aren’t on the list:

    Individuals who cannot afford coverage.
    Individuals with household income below the filing threshold.
    Members of federally recognized Indian tribes.
    Individuals who experience a hardship.
    Individuals who experience a short coverage gap.
    Members of certain religious sects.
    Members of a health care sharing ministry.
    Incarcerated individuals.
    Individuals who are not lawfully present.

    Vitter is right that there is a special provision for Congress, but calling it an exemption doesn’t fit the bill, especially not in the way most people think when they hear about Obamacare exemptions. According to The Hill, members of Congress and their staff won’t be allowed to get coverage under the Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan (the insurance plan they’re currently on) under Obamacare. Instead, they will have to purchase their insurance through the Obamacare exchange.

    So, no, Congress isn’t exempt under Obamacare–at least not in the way you probably thought. Should there be any provisions for Congress under the Affordable Care Act? You decide, but at least rest easy knowing that no matter what happens at midnight tonight, that things aren’t quite as bad as you thought.

    Image via YouTube

  • FAQ Obamacare Health Plan: What You Need to Know

    FAQ Obamacare Health Plan: What You Need to Know

    Despite Republican attempts to stop the Affordable Care Act, most commonly referred to as “Obamacare,” some of the major changes the new healthcare law brings about are almost here.

    The bill was signed by President Obama in March 2010 and open enrollment begins October 1. While information about the law has been around for a while, there are still a lot of questions about what Obamacare will actually change, as well as some misconceptions. Read below for a few FAQs regarding Obamacare.

    Q: What are some changes that are already in effect as a result of Obamacare?

    A: One big change people with insurance have seen so far is that parents can keep their children on their health insurance plans until they turn 26. Another major change already into effect is that insurance companies aren’t allowed to drop you if you get sick.

    Q: Am I going to lose my current health insurance plan and be forced to purchase a different plan?

    A: No; most people who already have insurance won’t see any changes. People will have the option, however, to shop around for a different health insurance plan.

    Q: Am I required to purchase health insurance, even if I’m young, healthy and don’t need it?

    A: Everyone is required to have health insurance, per the Affordable Care Act. Since it’s impossible to foresee emergency situations that can bring about high hospital bills, everyone must have health insurance. Otherwise, according to HealthCare.gov, “everyone else ends up paying the price.”

    Q: Where do I purchase health insurance under Obamacare?

    A: Through the Health Insurance Marketplace. Fifty-one online health exchanges (one from every state and the District of Columbia) will offer enrollment from different insurance companies. While enrollment doesn’t begin until October 1, people can start reviewing their options now.

    Q: What kind of penalties will I pay under Obamacare if I decide that I don’t want health insurance?

    A: In 2014, the yearly penalty is $95 for an adult, $47.50 per child and up to $285 per family or one percent of family income, whichever is greater. Penalties will rise over the years, with the maximum set for $695 per family or 2.5 percent by 2016.

    Q: How much will Obamacare cost me?

    A: This depends on your age, location, family size and income. While some people will see drops in what they’re currently paying, according to Forbes, it “is estimated to run an average family of four between $650 and $1,000 per year over the next decade.”

    Q: How long is open enrollment for Obamacare?

    A: Open enrollment through the Health Insurance Marketplace is from October 1st, 2013 to March 31st, 2014.

    Image via YouTube

  • Detroit: “Bailout Would Have Been Better”

    Detroit: “Bailout Would Have Been Better”

    Back in July, Detroit became the largest U.S. city to file for bankruptcy. To help matters, the Obama administration made a pledge this week to send $300 million to Detroit. Considering that Detroit has $18 billion in debt, some residents aren’t exactly thrilled with the pledge and wish the government would have bailed them out instead.

    Make no mistake–the $300 million isn’t a bailout. After the bailout in 2008 and the stimulus plan that followed in 2009, that’s the last thing most people want to hear about. Instead, what some are calling the “Detroit bailout” is federal aid that will go towards improving transportation, tearing down old buildings and paying for more police officers. The Obama administration is not bailing out Detroit, as none of the funds will go towards erasing Detroit’s debt.

    Many residents wish the government would have given Detroit a bailout, though. Bridgette Shephard, a social worker from Detroit commented on the federal aid. “Something is better than nothing. A bailout would have been better, but if we can sustain some of our needs with grants, that would be a start,” Shephard said.

    While $300 million doesn’t sound like a lot in the grand scheme of things, U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan thinks the federal aid will help Detroit have a comeback. “We all believe this will be one of the great comeback stories in the history of American cities,” Donovan said.

    There have been some discussions in Washington over whether to give Detroit a real bailout, something Kentucky senator Rand Paul is vehemently against. Paul, the son of former Texas congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul, said that Detroit would receive a bailout “over my dead body because we don’t have any money in Washington.”

    Fortunately for Detroit, the $300 million in federal aid is just the first step in the plan the government has for helping the city. Gene Sperling, the director of the National Economic Council, called the federal aid “unlocking money” and said that more help will be on the way. “We’re in the second inning,” Sperling said. “This is just one step along the way. We don’t expect this to be easy, we expect it to be successful.”

    Should the government bailout Michigan? Respond below. Many Twitter users are against the idea, especially at a time when national debt is as high as it is.

    Image via YouTube

  • Obamacare Fines: Not Prohibitive for Some

    WIth less than a week to go before Americans can start signing up for and buying health insurance through exchanges provided by the controversial Affordable Care Act (ACA), many are seeking to understand the penalties that will be levied on those who opt to go without insurance.

    The enrollment period opens up October 1 and continues through the end of March for 2014 coverage. Despite the fact that open enrollment continues through March, however, people who haven’t signed up by December 15 risk incurring a penalty.

    US Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has said that ” … these new options will finally make health insurance work” with the budgets of millions of Americans who have previously been unable to afford health insurance premiums.

    But what about those who decide that even with the income-based subsidies provided by the ACA, they just can’t spare the extra money for premiums?

    The ACA requires nearly everyone to either buy health insurance or pay a penalty. This provision has came to be known as the “individual mandate.”

    It’s one of the more controversial aspects of the ACA. It was challenged in the Supreme Court last year as unconstitutional, but the court upheld it on the basis that the individual mandate is essentially a tax, which as we all know is a right afforded our government under the Constitution.

    So, if you opt to incur the penalty instead of buying insurance, how much will you pay?

    You’ll get a bit of a break the first year. For 2014, you’ll pay $95 per uninsured adult* in the household (capped at $285 per household) or 1% of the household income over the filing threshold, whichever results in a larger fee. For now, the filing threshold is $10,000 for an individual and $20,000 for a family.

    In 2015, that changes to $325 per uninsured adult* (capped at $975) or 2% of the household income over the filing threshold.

    By 2016, the amounts will be upped to $695 per uninsured adult* (capped at $2,085 per household) or 2.5% of household income over the filing threshold.

    *The penalty is half the amount for those under age 18.

    Taking the penalty will be the less expensive option for many such as these CNNMoney readers.

    But some worry that the ACA has set the fine too low, making it too attractive an option for the young and healthy, who don’t necessarily need insurance to the extent that the elderly and infirm do. They speculate that this lack of healthy participants in the healthcare exchanges will throw the entire system off balance.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons.

  • Wayne LaPierre, NRA: More Good Guys with Guns Needed

    According to Wayne LaPierre, CEO of the National Rifle Association (NRA), there is something that could have prevented the Navy Yard shooting that killed 12 people: more good guys with guns. The shooting occurred last Monday when former Navy Reservist Aaron Alexis opened fire at the Washington Navy Yard.

    “There weren’t enough good guys with guns,” LaPierre said during an interview with Meet the Press. “When the good guys with guns got there, it stopped…All the outrage this week–the first two days of the elite media and the politicians trying to stir this toward firearms–the outrage ought to be placed on an unprotected naval base.”

    LaPierre said that in addition to making sure the right people are armed to prevent such tragedies, that we also need to focus more on problems with the mental health system. The NRA expressed a similar sentiment during the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shootings last December.

    “The outrage ought to be placed on an unprotected naval base, on a criminal justice system…that doesn’t even enforce the federal gun laws when we could dramatically cut violence, on a mental health system that is completely broken, on a check system that is a complete joke in terms of stopping the bad guys,” LaPierre said. “Let’s do whatever we can, let’s fix the broken system right now.”

    President Barack Obama questioned whether people care enough about such tragedies to change their views during a eulogy he delivered for those who lost their lives in the Navy Yard shootings.

    Obama said that the issue isn’t “whether as Americans we care in moments of tragedy.” Instead, “The question is do we care enough? It ought to be a shock to all of us, as a nation and a people,” he said. “It ought to obsess us. It ought to lead to some sort of transformation.”

    While many people would like to see changes in gun laws, quite a few people were bothered that Obama used that particular moment to bring up such changes.

    Image via YouTube

  • Government Shutdown: Its Marco Rubio vs Rand Paul

    With their eyes on 2016 GOP presidential nomination, Republican Senators Marco Rubio and Rand Paul are staking out carefully crafted positions on the looming government shutdown in an effort to defund Obamacare.

    From the outset it appears that Rand Paul is more strategic and better prepared in his approach towards the much reviled healthcare law within the Tea Party and Republican electorate.

    While acknowledging that overturning Obama’s career defining achievement is next to impossible, so long as Democrats control the Senate and the White House, Senator Paul appeared optimistic today that the law will be revised to remove some of the “bad” parts, including the individual mandate and the IRS tax penalties for refusing to obey government edicts.

    On the other side, Paul’s tea-party colleagues Ted Cruz and Mike Lee have made common cause with GOP establishment pick, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, to shut down the federal government in an effort to defund Obamacare.

    Although Rubio ratcheted down the rhetoric a few notches by issuing a press release this past weekend in favor of continued government funding, he comes across as confused and vacillating, lacking in leadership qualities that demand firmness and vision.

    Whichever way the political wind is blowing, there Rubio seems to tip-toe. One day Rubio is cheer-leading Obama’s efforts to bomb Syria. The next, he is condemning him when he sees the firestorm of public outcry in opposition to another Trillion dollar war.

    Even the far-left, which harbors an atavistic hatred for Paul, has begun to notice who is winning the battle for leadership within the Republican Party. And it definitely isn’t Rubio.

    Paul’s “speak softly” rhetoric, but “big stick” voting, bi-partisan lobbying, and filibuster record, is winning more fans on social media networks than ever.

    Even the establishment henchman and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell has taken notice. McConnell is making sure he gets plenty of face time rubbing shoulders with Paul every week to soothe the anxieties of Tea-Party.

    “I think it’s a dumb idea to shut down the government…I am in favor of the House, which Republicans control, using their leverage and every possible means to make the bill less bad,” said Paul, in response to CNN’s John King’s question on federal government shutdown. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EbDlNUTHAo

    In sharp contrast, by using harsh, belligerent rhetoric against President Obama, Senator Rubio is increasingly painting himself as a mean-spirited person, who is obsessed with juvenile “he said, she said” back and forth, but accomplishes little in the realm of fruitful action towards safeguarding GOP voters’ interests.

    Regardless of how this week’s events transpire, the high stakes game between Rand Paul and Marco Rubio will continue deep into the 2016 GOP Presidential primaries. However, at least for now, its advantage Paul.

    [image from Youtube]

  • Healthcare Law, Is Everyone Ready For It?

    Healthcare Law, Is Everyone Ready For It?

    It’s rapidly approaching. That time when laws within the United States force a change in the healthcare payment structure. Are we all ready for it? What were the steps that led to this change?

    President Obama shared his reasoning behind promoting an overhaul of the United States healthcare system. In a speech presented to the American Medical Association President Obama explained his decision to continue pressing for reform within the complex system. “The cost of our health care is a threat to our economy. It’s an escalating burden on our families and businesses. It’s a ticking time bomb for the federal budget. And it is unsustainable for the United States of America. If we fail to act, one out of every five dollars we earn will be spent on health care within a decade. So, to say it as plainly as I can, health care is the single most important thing we can do for America’s long-term fiscal health. That is a fact. That’s a fact,” President Obama said.

    Regarding opposition to such a reform, the president claimed that the result for health care programs would eventually, “swamp our federal and state budgets, and impose a vicious choice of either unprecedented tax hikes, or overwhelming deficits, or drastic cuts in our federal and state budgets.”

    The healthcare reform will begin on October 1st of this year where millions of uninsured Americans will have the opportunity to receive governmental subsidies in order to purchase health insurance. Though the possibility of technical glitches occurring is possible, the likely outcome of a complete shutdown is unlikely. According to Paul Van de Water from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “The effects of a government shutdown on the implementation of the ACA (Affordable Care Act) are likely to be pretty small.”

    Government officials are bracing for the activity next month by monitoring the Twitter account, Healthcare.gov and posting frequent updates.

    Not everyone is convinced that his reform will do what is says. Many hope further improvements are on the horizon.

    [Image Via Wikimedia Commons And Courtesy Of Elizabeth Cromwell]

  • Healthcare Law: Republicans Threaten to Shut Down Gov if Obamacare Isn’t Defunded

    Healthcare Law: Republicans Threaten to Shut Down Gov if Obamacare Isn’t Defunded

    After the fiscal cliff crisis talks in late 2012 to early 2013, another budget crisis is the last thing anyone wants to hear about as we near the end of 2013. Unfortunately, House representatives are talking of a partial government shutdown (again) that could happen in less than two weeks. This possible shutdown depends on one thing: stopping the new healthcare law, Obamacare.

    House Republicans signed legislation on Friday that pulls funding from the healthcare law in order to keep the government funded from October 1 to December 15. This is yet another attempt by House Republicans to halt Obamacare. The House vote on the legislation was 230-189 in favor of keeping the government afloat as long as the healthcare funding is stripped. While the bill had majority support in the House, it is expected to be shot down in the Senate.

    “In case there’s any shred of doubt in the minds of our House counterparts, I want to be absolutely crystal clear: Any bill that defunds Obamacare is dead, dead. It’s a waste of time,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said. However, Republican Senator Mike Lee says otherwise: “We have support in the Senate. All forty-five Republicans in the Senate in March voted to defund Obamacare. We’ll keep those and add a forty-sixth, Jeff Chiesa…I hope that a few Senate Democrats…will consider joining us. This is what the American people asked us to do.”

    President Obama has also said that he will not consider any proposals to amend or remove funding from the healthcare reform law. “We’re hearing that a certain faction of Republicans, in the House of Representatives in particular, are arguing for government shutdown or even a default for the United States of America…if they don’t get 100 percent of what they want,” Obama said.

    After Obama said he wouldn’t negotiate on healthcare law, Speaker John Boehner released a video on Thursday bashing Obama for being unwilling to negotiate with Republicans on the healthcare law while being willing to work with Russians regarding Syria:

    Obama further said that House Republicans aren’t concerned about the people, but are instead obsessed with messing with him. “They’re not focused on you,” Obama said at a Ford plant in Liberty, Missouri. “They’re focused on politics. They’re focused on how to mess with me.”

    A lot of people are critical of Republicans for continuing to pursue pulling funding from Obamacare. Discuss your opinions on the healthcare law issues below.

    Image via YouTube

  • House Votes for $4 Billion Cut in SNAP Funding

    The House has just voted to cut roughly $4 billion a year from food stamp funding, a program 1 in 7 Americans are now using. The 217-210 vote will call for a 5% spending reduction, and was a victory for conservatives, as Democrats saw the cut as being too high.

    The cuts will be implemented through drug tests for applicants, as well as broader work requirements. The new bill would also do away with waivers given to able-bodied adults who have no dependents, who receive benefits indefinitely. More specifically, here’s a list of proposed food stamp alterations:

    – Reinstating the asset and income test in the supplemental nutrition assistance program (SNAP) law by limiting categorical program eligibility to only those households receiving cash assistance from other low-income programs;
    – Closing a loophole related to Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) payments that increases SNAP benefits;
    – Eliminating state performance bonuses;
    – Preventing USDA and states from advertising or promoting SNAP;
    – Cracking down on waste, fraud and abuse by ending SNAP benefits for lottery winners and traditional college students, demanding outcomes from the SNAP Employment and Training program, and increasing oversight of SNAP programs for the homeless, elderly, and disabled; and
    – Improving the quality of SNAP-approved retail stores.

    Still, the new Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) bill likely won’t go through in a Democratic-led senate, and President Obama has said he’d veto it regardless.

    “These cuts would affect a broad array of Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, including working families with children, senior citizens, veterans, and adults who are still looking for work,” a White House spokesperson said in a statement.

    SNAP benefits cost roughly $78 billion in 2012, a price which has more than doubled since 2008. In 2007, 11.1% of American households were “food insecure.” As the recession hit in 2008, this number rose to 14.6%, and hasn’t changed much since. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 14.5% of American households still fell under SNAP eligibility.

    In related news, actor/director Ben Affleck, who’s been taking a bit of heat for his casting as Batman in the upcoming Man of Steel sequel, has recently taken the Live Below the Line challenge, to where he lived off $1.50 a day for a week, to raise poverty awareness. Other celebrities who’ve taken the challenge are Debi Mazar, Josh Groban and Sophia Bush.

  • Ann Curry Interviews President of Iran

    Ann Curry Interviews President of Iran

    Yesterday, Ann Curry, former reporter for the Today Show, sat down with new Iranian president Hassan Rouhani for his first interview with the American press since his election. The interview aired on NBC Nightly News last night, and other portions aired on the TODAY show this morning.

    Curry had several bold questions to ask President Rouhani, especially since tensions between Iran and the US have only increased in recent years. Perhaps the most important question of the night had to deal with Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Since the events of 9/11, the United States has increased the pressure on Iran to divulge all information pertaining to its nuclear program. In an interview with Ann Curry in 2011, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad repeatedly stated that Iran was only using its nuclear program for energy and that it had more than cooperated with the International Atomic Energy Organization (IAEO). Ahmadinejad also proclaimed that Iran saw no use in nuclear weapons; Ahmadinejad stated that nuclear weapons had only brought harm to the countries that had them, and that Iran was a a country seeking peace, not war.

    Yesterday, newly elected president Hassan Rouhani had the same message for the American people. When asked “Can you say that Iran will not build a nuclear weapon under any circumstances whatsoever?”, Rouhani responded: “The answer to this question is quite obvious. We have time and against said that under no circumstances would we seek any weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, nor will we ever… We solely are looking for peaceful nuclear technology.”

    Why American journalists ask the same questions over and over and expect different responses is still befuddling (they easily fit the definition of insanity as posited by Einstein). Curry did, however, ask a couple of more pertinent questions (They were not necessarily better questions, however.) When asked “Can you assure the world that President Assad will give up all of his chemical weapons?”, Rouhani stated that “We are not the government of Syria. We are one of the countries of this region which is asking peace and stability and the elimination of all weapons of mass destruction in the entire region.” – once again reiterating the idea that Iran is against nuclear weapons and for peace.

    Curry followed up this question about Syria with one concerning Obama’s actions surrounding the Syrian situation: “Do you believe the United States, President Obama looked weak in backing off an air strike on Syria?” To which Rouhani responded: “We consider war a weakness. Any government or administration who decides in order to wage a war, we consider a weakness. And any government that decides on peace we look on it with respect to peace.”

    Perhaps that is why Rouhani plans to visit the United Nations in New York next week. Thus far, Rouhani has not ruled out a meeting with President Obama. There is much speculation surrounding why Rouhani has chosen to visit the UN. Most guesses point to the fact that Iran is still under severe economic sanctions due to their suspected nuclear weapons program and development. Since sanctions were handed down in 2011, Iran’s oil production has dropped from 2.4 million barrels per day to less than 1 million today. During this time, the people of Iran have also pushed for more rights and freedoms.

    With still heightening tensions in the Middle East and the ever-present danger of getting involved in another foreign conflict, this would seem to be the prime-time for Obama and the UN to reach an agreement with Iran and how it should handle its nuclear energy program. Iran has seemingly cooperated with all the sanctions and directions from the IAEO, so it is hard to imagine what else the US could want. However, now would be the time to put this issue to a rest and potentially strengthen US relations with Iran in the Middle East.

    Image via Facebook

  • Breaking News: Police Searching for other Navy Yard Shooting Suspects

    At least four people were killed on Monday morning when at least one gunman opened fire at the Washington Navy Yard. Eight others have been confirmed injured so far, including two Washington D.C. police officers.

    Media reports on the situation have been conflicting so far regarding the number of shooters involved at the historical Navy Yard, which serves as an administrative center for the U.S. Navy. Some news reports have said one person was involved in the shooting while others are saying that at least two gunmen were involved. One suspect is dead and police are looking into other suspects. Regardless of the number, police don’t have any other suspects in custody at the time and have placed the Navy Yard and area schools on lockdown.

    The Navy Yard is about two miles away from Capitol Hill. Security has been increased at the White House, but officials don’t believe there is any threat to President Obama or others at the Capitol. Obama has promised to find the people involved and bring them to justice:

    Eyewitness Accounts

    Some witnesses have given their accounts of the horrifying shooting, and one woman says she narrowly missed being shot. Terrie Durhams said she saw the gunman firing at her. “He aimed high and missed,” Durhams said. “He said nothing. As soon as I realized he was shooting, we just said, ‘Get out of the building.’” Todd Brundidge, an executive assistant with Navy Sea Systems Command, was with Durhams at the time and described the shooter as wearing blue. “He just turned and started firing,” Brundidge said.

    “We heard two shots and started wondering if that was the sound of someone dropping [something] or if they were really shots,” Omar Grant, another employee at the Navy Yard, said. “We heard three more shots and that’s when people started running out of the building and getting the hell out of there.”

    While the status of some of the shooting victims remains unknown, one area hospital has reported that three victims under her hospital’s care have a “very good” chance of survival. According to Janis Orlowski, chief medical officer of Medstar Washington Hospital Center, her shooting victims include two women and one man. The man is one of the police officers that was shot and he reportedly has multiple gunshot wounds.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz7WIdyfHC0

    Image via YouTube

  • Ann Coulter: Neocon bomb thrower thinks Obama is “Monkey”?

    Yesterday evening, the popular neoconservative commentator and author Ann Coulter felt impulsive enough to call Barack Obama a “monkey” who is apparently being danced around by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    To put it mildly, Coulter is not new to controversy. Like a precision clock, she has the remarkable penchant for saying something so outrageous every month that you can almost bet your mortgage on it.

    If it weren’t for Coulter’s academic accomplishments – she is an alumnus of Cornell University and Michigan Law School – her wildly successful writing career, and vast knowledge base, one could almost write her off as a crackpot venting her spleen on live TV. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTxLfSw8Gvc

    But given the huge audience she commands through her columns, books and TV appearances, the shock value her comments represent cannot be taken lightly.

    Most of us who are aware of the dark history of slavery across the world, know that certain words and phrases carry an extraordinary degree of offensiveness to certain races or ethnic groups. The word “monkey” when used to describe a Black person, carries a special connotation which is deeply revolting to say the least.

    Outrageous as it may be, do such remarks serve Coulter’s political cause well? Her earlier twitter comment on Syria sounded vastly more normal compared to her TV shock-jock theatrics, where she made a valid point about American diplomacy and military involvement in Syria:

    Perhaps a more poignant assertion can be made here that the level of discourse across the political spectrum, from far right to far left, has taken the form of verbal twerking, where political points, viewership volume, and TV ratings are scored based on how much outrage, titillation and drool it can create.

    While the casualties in Syria are mounting to a level not seen since Iraq war, the Dollar is on life support thanks to endless wars, “free” trade, and inflationary printing, national debt is spiraling out of control, Medicaid is delivering half of all babies in America, the last thing we need is to distract America with yet another verbal “twerk” that causes gnashing of teeth, raised eyebrows, flurry of condemnations throughout social media, but little thoughtful debate, introspection and decision making.

    [image via wikipedia]

  • Obama Asks To Head Down “Diplomatic Path” With Syria

    President Obama addressed the nation tonight regarding Syria and said he has asked Congress to delay a vote on whether or not to use military force while he pursues Russia’s plan to take over and destroy Syria’s chemical weapons.

    Obama acknowledged that the “diplomatic path” must be handled carefully in order to convince Syria that the U.S. means business, something that Secretary of State John Kerry agrees with.

    “It has to be swift, it has to be real, it has to be verifiable,” Mr. Kerry told the House Armed Services Committee. “It cannot be a delaying tactic.”

    “It’s too early to tell whether this offer will succeed, and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitment,” Obama said, “but this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force, particularly because Russia is one of Assad’s strongest allies.”

    Many are in favor of Russia’s plan if it means the U.S. doesn’t have to get involved in the civil war that has divided Syria for almost three years. But despite backing the plan to seize their chemical weapons–and promising not to “put American boots on the ground” in Syria if the plan fails–President Obama said that doesn’t mean he won’t organize a targeted attack via the U.S. military if diplomacy gets them nowhere.

    Image: Wikimedia Commons

  • Senator Ted Cruz on Obama, Syria and Benghazi

    In an interview with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, Senator Ted Cruz discussed his take on the U.S.’s handling of Syria and Benghazi.

    The Republican Texas senator said that President Obama doesn’t have the “authority” to issue an attack on Syria and says such an attack would be a “mistake.” Cruz also said that an attack “would be contrary to the Constitution,” something he thinks could get Obama impeached. While Cruz is concerned with Syria, he believes that all of the talk about an attack on Syria is making Americans forget about another issue–Benghazi.

    “This is the one-year anniversary of the attack on Benghazi” Cruz said. “In Benghazi, four Americans were killed, including the first ambassador since 1979. When it happened, the president promised to hunt the wrongdoers down, and yet a few months later, the issue has disappeared. You don’t hear the president mention Benghazi. Now it’s a phony scandal.”

    The president has been criticized by many for how the Benghazi situation was handled, and CNN released a report in early August alleging that the CIA was taking extreme measures to cover up Benghazi secrets. “One of the problems with all of this focus on Syria, is it’s missing the ball from what we should be focused on,” Cruz said during the interview. “We ought to be defending U.S. national security, and going after radical Islamic terrorists.”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JAcS74yzII

    Even though Cruz doesn’t think Obama is giving Benghazi the proper attention, he is making sure that everyone knows he thinks intervening in Syria is the wrong path to take. “It is not the responsibility of the United States military to serve as the policeman of the world,” Cruz said during a briefing last week. The senator posted a Tweet a few days ago criticizing how the Syrian conflict has been handled:

    What do you think–is Cruz right about Benghazi being an afterthought now? Respond below.

    Image via YouTube

  • Russian Warships Head to Syria’s Coast

    The St. Petersburg central naval command has announced the large landing warship “Nikolai Filchenkov” will set sail for the Syrian coast to join two Russian destroyers which have already left, as Moscow boosts it’s presence in the region ahead of expectations that the US will not wait for the world to support them. The US is unlikely to wait for any support from world leaders or the United Nations but use the expected approval of its Congress to launch a two-month “limited” campaign as early as the end of the month.

    The US also has warships in the area and, as president Barack Obama has previously revealed, any military engagement would likely come from air strikes – most likely fired from (warships) on suspected chemical weapons plants and the mechanisms of delivery including the Syrian airforce.

    The Russian warships will join a Russian anti-submarine ship, a frigate and three other landing ships in the eastern Mediterranean coast. The Russians say the latest warship deployed would be collecting “special cargo” but would not elaborate.

    “The ship will make call in Novorossiisk, where it will take on board special cargo and set off for the designated area of its combat duty in the eastern Mediterranean,”

    a Russian official said.

    The deployment comes amid high tensions at the G20 summit of world leaders, which took place in the Russian city St. Petersburg, the Summit was intended to debate the economy and poverty in developing nations but instead the agenda has been hijacked by the Syrian crisis.There is a clear split in opinion at the conference as to the evidence that the Bashar al-Assad regime used chemical weapons on its citizens which killed more than 1400 people including 400 children last month.

    There now appears to be little debate chemicals were used but a split on who actually used them. Both Russia and China, which held private talks at the summit, do not believe the evidence sustainable, while on the other hand, the US, UK, France and Australia believe it is and that retaliation is required.

    UN chief Ban ki-moon has been attending the summit urging support for a peace conference, while Russian President Vladimir Putin, overnight Summit host, held a dinner for the leaders during which they made their case for entry into the Syria crisis. President Obama said he had ”very high confidence” in the evidence showing that chemical weapons were used and urged strong condemnation. He was supported by Prime Minister David Cameron, and Australia’s Foreign Minister Bob Carr, who also said that they also had strong evidence of an atrocity by the regime. France’s Francois Hollande said he was prepared to enter the conflict.

    The leaders have precious little time to bridge very bitter gaps and quell the animosity between nations, notably the US, Russia, and the UK. The tensions in forums have made talks difficult. Mr Putin’s official spokesman Dmitry Peskov yesterday dismissed Britain as “just a small island no-one pays any attention to” and boasted how rich Russians were buying up most of Chelsea, an upmarket suburb in London, and the US has made clear it’s disdain for Putin. Who wouldn’t love to be a fly on that wall?

  • John Boehner backs Obama for Military Action in Syria

    Despite many constituents strongly disagreeing, John Boehner has verbally backed Obama after he called for American military action in Syria after learning Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, possible use of chemical weapons in the country’s civil war.

    “I’m going to support the president’s call for action. I believe my colleagues should support this call for action,” Boehner said. “We have enemies around the world that need to understand that we’re not going to tolerate this type of behavior.”

    “The use of these weapons has to be responded to and only the United States has the capability and capacity to stop Assad and to warn others around the world that this type of behavior is not going to be tolerated,” said Boehner after meeting with Obama. “I appreciate the president reaching out to me and my colleagues in the Congress over the last couple of weeks. I also appreciate the president asking the Congress to support him in this action. This is something that the United States as a country needs to do. I’m going to support the president’s call for action. I believe my colleagues should support this call for action. We have enemies around the world that need to understand that we’re not going to tolerate this type of behavior.[emphasis me] We also have allies around the world and allies in the region who also need to know that America will be there and stand up whether it is necessary.”

    Other conservatives, among others, are urging support for military action including Nancy Pelosi and Eric Cantor.

    Pelosi sent a letter to her colleagues Tuesday urging support for military action saying, “It is in our national interest to respond to the Syrian government’s unspeakable use of chemical weapons.”

    President Barack Obama was confident that Congress would pass a resolution. Obama said, “So long as we are accomplishing what needs to be accomplished, which is to send a clear message to Assad, to degrade his capabilities to use chemical weapons, not just now but also in the future.”

    After congress returns from summer recess next week, the house and senate will be expected to vote on whether or not they will also be in agreement with Boehner, Pelosi and Cantor, in their task to seek approval of the military action.

    Main Article Image Courtesy: Wikimedia Commons