K's shared items in Google Reader

The Media – Ridiculous or Retarded?

2009-09-15T20:34:41Z

ACORN has become another example of blatant media bias. Can anyone think of a reason why a news sources wouldn’t cover a story where an organization that receives tax payer money is caught red-handed giving advice on how to cheat on taxes, hide/import underage prostitutes, defraud the government, and is now being sanctioned by the United States Congress? Everyone who knows anything about ACORN knows exactly why the media isn’t covering this story; it would embarrass President Obama as he has long-standing ties with ACORN. I in no way blame President Obama for these inept media sycophants, there are few politicians in this world who would turn away such glowing positive coverage. Yet the media has reached a point, as evidenced by this latest ACORN story, where they can’t even defend themselves. The media by ignoring this story with multiple sources of proof is essentially conceding that they are an unofficial Obama PR machine. While the internet leaves much to be desired in many respects, thank goodness there is an unfiltered source that actively uses the first amendment, as the media has forfeited its role as a part of the government’s checks and balances system.

From Fox News ACORN Story Grows But Mainstream Media Refuse to Cover It

Bruce Springsteen once wrote: “From Small Things (Big Things One Day Come).” I doubt he expected that story of love gone wrong would become ideal political commentary for the group known as ACORN.

The small scandal showing an embarrassing video of Baltimore ACORN staffers looking like they were giving tax advice on how to set up a brothel, is now national news. — This story has everything you could ever want – corruption, sleazy actions at tax-funded organizations, firings, government ties, sex, hookers. It is a network news director’s dream. Imagine the ratings!

Only almost no one is covering it.

This is the news media in the era of Van Jones and President Obama. The major outlets cover what they want and create the themes they want. When they find something inconvenient, they let it pass. They didn’t like the Van Jones story, so they ignored it. The network news media liked the financial entity known as Fannie Mae, so they ignored that scandalous organization for years. ACORN is getting the same treatment.

But it isn’t working any more. The ACORN fiasco has now impacted three offices – Baltimore, Washington and New York – with laugh-out-loud videos reminiscent of the hookers and pimps from the 1970s “Starsky and Hutch” show. Huggy Bear returns! Four employees have been fired, with more likely to come. And the controversy was so laughably bad that the Census Bureau cut off all ties to the group known formally as the “Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.” — They called it the “tipping point” to shed themselves of ACORN. More nuts for someone else, I guess.

And yet. And yet it’s still been ignored by the network news. Nothing on ABC, CBS or NBC. The only thing any one of the three broadcast networks has done appeared in a blog post by ABC’s Jake Tapper. It’s hardly worth noting except to show that the networks know about what’s going on. They just don’t care to report it. Only FOX News has bothered to report on the controversy.

Racism and Politics

2009-09-16T15:36:31Z

President Carter recently made a statement saying that the anger at the tea party protests is due to racism. On a similar note Maureen Dowd of the New York Times wrote an article stating that Joe Wilson’s “You Lie” outburst was due to racism. We’re at a strange place when it comes to race. President Obama’s election was obviously a landmark, and clearly showed that race is much less a factor for people than it was not oo long ago. However, his election does not mean that racism is dead. So how do we now gage racism? Do we do it a la Maureen Dowd, and read a motive into an individual’s actions? This is a flawed method, as Joe Wilson is truly the only one who can say all the reasons why he yelled out at that moment. Opposition does not equate to racism. Representative Wilson did take that opposition to the point of being inappropriate, but Dowd has no way of knowing his motivations and is not helping anything by infusing the debate with race-based politics.

President Carter however, while he also questioned Wilson’s motivations, really makes a different point. President Carter says the level of anger and inappropriateness points to racism being present and dangerous. He isn’t saying opposition equals racism, he’s saying something else is at work to bring out this level of anger among protesters. This is an important point for those who oppose President Obama to understand. When protests reach a certain level of anger and nastiness, they no longer appear to be protests based on policy, they appear hate-based. An unfortunate side-effect is that those protesting for logical valid reasons along side the angry over-the-top protester gets lumped into this same category by association.

There is genuine anger based on policy. President Obama is a big government politician, and that doesn’t sit well with many people. The media, unwilling to question the President’s policies and legislation, adds to the anger as people feel that they are not being heard. That typical role of skeptic that a responsible media provides is markedly absent under this administration creating a new and bitter dynamic not really seen before. Yet that is not an excuse for a section of protesters taking it too far, and being too nasty. Whether the anger is race-based only the individual can say for sure, but that’s how it’s coming off. Some are sure to state examples where the left has been inappropriate too. That’s just not a good enough excuse anymore. Yes, both sides have their crazies, and anger isn’t always inappropriate, but there is enough ridiculous Nazi references, disfiguring pictures of the President, and wildly outrageous and ignorant remarks being made, that President Carter’s analysis can’t be ignored.

Unfortunately, there will likely continue to be those like Maureen Dowd who use claims of racism as a political weapon. Ironically the answer is not black and white. Protest and anger doesn’t automatically mean racism, but when seething anger and inappropriate actions reach a fevered pitch it warrants the concerns stated by President Carter. Anger can be appropriate, rage rarely is, and again we’re facing a very partisan and bitter political climate where people need to exhibit more thoughtfulness, self-control, and reason, and less craziness.

The Plain and Simple Truth On Tort Reform from Howard Dean

2009-09-03T00:07:40Z

One of the major concerns about health care reform is the cost. This makes leaving tort reform out of health care reform ridiculous. Frivolous law suits have a significant effect health on care costs, and they also effect the quality of care. Howard Dean made it clear why tort reform was not included in the bill; they don’t want to take on the trial lawyers. At least he’s honest…

Are Health Co-ops Coming and What Will They Mean?

2009-09-08T00:23:15Z

The health care debate has been not only one of the most contentious issues in recent times, it has been one of the most confusing. A rather poorly written bill that passed in one committee has been scrutinized and left many people worried, angry, and/or confused. Yet the crux of much of this debate has been about a public option. Three of the major complaints about a public option have been the cost of starting a new government program particularly when the deficit is already so high; the doubts about whether people (particularly those who work at small companies and get employer based health insurance) will be pushed off their current plan and forced into a government-run insurance plan; and the concerns about what exactly will and won’t be covered under that public option.

Since the future of the public option is looking bleak, the idea of health insurance co-ops is re-emerging. It isn’t yet clear if that will be the next step in the health care debate, but they are worth taking a look at. Creating a pool of people, like small business owners, those who are self-employed, farmers, or others who aren’t in a position to obtain employer-based health insurance is potentially a very good way to increase access and reduce costs for those who have had a difficult time obtaining health insurance.

Yet there is a political obstacle. Unfortunately, a handful of prominent Democrats have stated that if the public option is not accepted then co-ops would essentially be used as a front for instituting a public option. These were unfortunate statements as there is already some opposition to co-ops building due to the belief that they will lead to government run health care. Yet in their purest form co-ops are exactly what they say they are, they are cooperatives between groups of people who are basically looking for the same thing – affordable health insurance.

Certainly don’t begrudge anyone their distrust in the government, it is a healthy logical American tradition. Yet hopefully people won’t put the cart before the horse when it comes to forming an opinion on insurance co-ops. If they are the next phase of the health care debate, it makes sense to take a careful look at how they will be structured. Hopefully they won’t automatically be opposed based on unwise political statements. If well-formed and well-implemented co-ops could be a rather unobtrusive low-cost solution to insuring more Americans. That leaves a significant ‘if’ out there as good concepts don’t always lead to solid legislation, but giving co-ops a chance makes sense.

Outline Of Senator Baucus’ Health Care Proposal

2009-09-09T21:20:24Z

Senator Baucus released an outline for health care reforms (Click for full PDF version). Below is essentially an outline of the outline, or an index page for the reform summary. It should be noted that Senator Baucus qualified the outline as not being a mark-up for a bill and that elements are changable/adaptable.

In this summary the Senate appears to be taking a more reasonable approach to health care reform than the House. There is no government run health insurance or public plan. Likely the co-ops will be what receives the most scrutiny. It would have been nice to see tort reform included, and little detail is given on combating fraud, but hopefully fraud will be addressed more substantively in a full mark-up.

Page 1

IMMEDIATE RELIEF FOR FAMILIES AND SMALL BUSINESSES

Small Business Tax Credits

Part D Drug Discount Program

Health Insurance Exchange

Ombudsman

Transparency

High Risk Pools .

Page 2

ENSURING AFFORDABLE HEALTH COVERAGE

INSURANCE MARKE T REFORMS

Insurance Reform in the Small Group Market

Risk Sharing.

Interstate Sale of Insurance

Page 3

State Health Insurance

Benefit Options .

ENSURING AFFORDABLE COVERAG E

Health Care Affordability Tax Credits

Page 4

Small Business Tax Credits

SHARED RESPONSIBI L I T Y

Individual Responsibility

Page 5

Employer Responsibility.

HEALTH CARE COOPERATIVES
In order to be eligible for federal funds under the CO-OP program, an organization must meet
the following requirements:
1. It must be organized as a nonprofit, member corporation under State law.
2. It must not be an existing organization that provides insurance as of July 16, 2009, and ust not be an affiliate or successor of any such organization.
3. Its governing documents must incorporate ethics and conflict of interest standards rotecting against insurance industry involvement and interference.
4. It must not be sponsored by a state, county, or local government, or any government nstrumentality.
5. Substantially all of its activities must consist of the issuance of qualified health benefit lans in the individual and small group markets in each state in which it is licensed to ssue such plans.
6. Governance of the organization must be subject to a majority vote of its members (i.e., eneficiaries).
7. As provided in regulations promulgated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services HHS), it must operate with a strong consumer focus, including timeliness, esponsiveness, and accountability to members.
8. Any profit must be used to lower premiums, improve benefits, or for other programs ntended to improve the quality of health care delivered to members.

Page 7

ROLE OF PUBLIC PROGRAMS

Medicaid Coverage for the Lowest Income

Page 8

Children’s Health
Enrollment
Prescription Drug

Page 9

Transparency in Medicaid and CHIP

Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital Payments.

Dual Eligibles

Medicaid Quality

Indians

Addressing Health Disparities

Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood

Page 10

PROMOTING DISEASE PREVENTION AND WELLNESS

MEDICARE

Coverage for a Personalized Prevention and Wellness

Coverage of Preventive

Incentives for Healthy

MEDICAID

Improving Access to Preventive Services for Eligible

Removing Barriers to Preventive

Incentives for Healthy

Medical Home State Option for Beneficiaries with Chronic Conditions

Page 11

IMPROVING THE QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY OF HEALTH CARE

LINKING PAYMENT TO QUALITY OUTCOMES IN MEDICARE

Hospital Value-Based Purchasing

Physician Value-Based Purchasing

Medicare Home Health Agency and Skilled Nursing Facility Value-Based Purchasing

Quality Reporting for Other

Strengthening the Quality Infrastructure

ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT OF NEW PATIENT CARE MODELS

Accountable Care Organizations

Page 12

CMS Innovation

National Pilot Program on Payment Bundling

Reducing Hospital Acquired

Reducing Avoidable Hospital

STRENGTHENING PRIMARY CARE AND OTHER WORKFORCE IMPROVEMENTS

Primary Care and General Surgery

Graduate Medical Education

ENSURING BENEFICIARY ACCESS TO PHYSICIAN CARE AND OTHER SERVICES
Medicare Sustainable Growth Rate

Page 13

Ensuring More Appropriate Physician Payment

Provider Access

IMPROVING PAYMENT ACCURACY

Home Health Payment Reform

Hospice Reform

Medicare Disproportionate Share Hospital

Medicare Improvement Fund

Imaging Use-Rate

Oxygen Payment Improvements

Page 14

Power Wheelchair Payment

Wage Index

Durable Medical Equipment Outlier Payment Rule

Updating Outpatient Payments for PPS-Exempt Cancer

MEDICARE ADVANTAGE

Page 15

MEDICARE PART D

Low-Income Subsidy

Part D Premium Means Testing and Indexing

Other Provisions

ENSURING MEDICARE SUSTAINABILITY

Revisions to Annual Market-Basket Adjustments for Part A

Part B Productivity

Temporary Adjustment to the Income-Related Premium for Part B of Medicare

Medicare

PATIENT ENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH

Page 16

ADMINISTRATIVE SIMPLIFICATION

TRANSPARENCY AND PROGRAM INTEGRITY

Limitation on the Medicare Exception to the Prohibition on Certain Physician Referrals forHospitals

Transparency Reports and Reporting of Physician Ownership or Investment

Improving Transparency of Nursing Home Information

Prescription Drug Sample Transparency

Page 17

FRAUD, WASTE, AND ABUSE

REVENUE PROVISIONS

High Cost Insurance Excise Tax

Increasing Transparency in Employer W-2 Reporting of Value of Health

Limit Health Flexible Savings Account Contributions

Eliminate Exclusion for Employer Part D Subsidy

Standardize the Definition of Qualified Medical Expenses

Increase the Penalty for Use of Health Savings Account Funds for Non-qualified Medical Expenses

Corporate Information Reporting

Page 18

Non-profit Hospitals Requirements

Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Companies Fee

Medical Device Manufacturers Fee

Health Insurance Provider Fee

Clinical Laboratories Fee

President Obama Misses on Bipartisanship and Cost

2009-09-10T17:10:58Z

The President’s speech last night apparently was a final kiss off to his 2004 statement that, “We aren’t red states, and blue states, we are the United States.” Certainly President Obama is within his right to tell Republicans where to put their health care plans, as it wasn’t so long ago that Republicans would have done the same to Democrats. Yet this isn’t the ‘change’ that his campaign promised. The irony is that President Obama used a letter from Ted Kennedy to push for health care reform, mentioned two Republican Senators (Hatch and McCain) who had worked with Kennedy on bipartisan bills, who clearly feel affection for the late Senator as evidenced by their attendance at his memorial services, yet neither one supports the President’s health care reforms. The President hasn’t even won over Maine Senator Olympia Snowe who routinely crosses party lines. Last night’s speech was the clearest example to date that President Obama’s only attempts at bipartisanship are rhetorical.

So after about two dozen health care speeches from President Obama what remains is that basic question – How? How do you pay for these reforms when the non-partisan CBO has already stated that the current health care plans are not budget neutral? How do you keep a public option on the table, when the American people have been very clear that they don’t want one, and when Senator Baucus earlier in the day stated that a public option could not pass in the Senate? President Obama is excellent at giving speeches, the problem isn’t form it’s substance. No one knows any more about the health care reform plans today than they did yesterday, and the most basic element of the plan, cost, is still left unaddressed.

From the AP Obama uses iffy math on deficit pledge

President Barack Obama used only-in-Washington accounting Wednesday when he promised to overhaul the nation’s health care systemwithout adding “one dime” to the deficit. By conventional arithmetic, Democratic plans would drive up the deficit by billions of dollars.

The president’s speech to Congress contained a variety of oversimplifications and omissions in laying out what he wants to do about health insurance.

OBAMA: “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits either now or in the future. Period.”

THE FACTS: Though there’s no final plan yet, the White House and congressional Democrats already have shown they’re ready to skirt the no-new-deficits pledge.

House Democrats offered a bill that the Congressional Budget Office said would add $220 billion to the deficit over 10 years. But Democrats and Obama administration officials claimed the bill actually was deficit-neutral. They said they simply didn’t have to count $245 billion of it — the cost of adjusting Medicare reimbursement rates so physicians don’t face big annual pay cuts.

Their reasoning was that they already had decided to exempt this “doc fix” from congressional rules that require new programs to be paid for. In other words, it doesn’t have to be paid for because they decided it doesn’t have to be paid for.

The administration also said that since Obama already had included the doctor payment in his 10-year budget proposal, it didn’t have to be counted again.

That aside, the long-term prognosis for costs of the health care legislation has not been good.

CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf had this to say in July: “We do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount.”

Federal Deficit Soaring

2009-08-20T14:50:14Z

Out of control government spending is on display again as reports on the federal deficit show that it is shooting through the roof. The rate of deficit growth is at a level that is unsustainable for this country. Reports are to show that the deficit is between $1.6 trillion or $1.8 trillion. That’s $1,600,000,000,000.00

The federal deficit this year will total $1.58 trillion, a senior White House official said late Wednesday. That’s three times more red ink than last year. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the report before its release next Tuesday while President Barack Obama will be on vacation in Massachusetts.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is expected to release its mid-session review the same day. It estimated in June that it expected a deficit of $1.825 trillion.

The report for the budget year that ends Sept. 30 also will predict Washington to spend $3.653 trillion this year, the official said. Revenue, however, would reach only $2.074 trillion.

The new deficit numbers are record shattering, but would give the administration the opportunity to say that its policies have avoided a more extreme financial crisis and eliminated the need for further bank infusions.

Still, the deficit amount is a tremendous obstacle for an administration trying to undertake massive policy overhauls in health care and the environment.

“Whether it’s $1.6 trillion or $1.8 trillion, it’s pretty bad,” said Robert Bixby, executive director of the bipartisan fiscal watchdog The Concord Coalition. “I hope no one tries to spin that as good news.”

Excerpt from Fox News Federal Deficit to Hit $1.58 Trillion This Year

A Misguided Boycott Of Whole Foods

2009-08-21T02:36:33Z

Whole Foods is facing a boycott because its CEO John Mackey wrote an Op-ed in the Wall Street Journal opposing government run health care. Mackey’s thoughtful article gave eight ideas for health care reform, and is not anywhere near what most rationale people consider provocative or radical. On the contrary, he is one of few public figures to put together a clear, concise, well-reasoned approach to health care reform. For his trouble he’s being boycotted by those on the far left who can not accept that not everyone shares their point of view. The WSJ article is definitely worth a read for anyone interested in health care reform…

The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare – Eight things we can do to improve health care without adding to the deficit.

The following excerpt Food Fight Over Health Care, from a transcript of On the Record with Greta Vansusteren, also illustrates that Mackey is good person who does right by his employees, and is absurdly being targeted for vocalizing his opinion on health care reform. Hopefully those who see the injustice in this will counter the boycott by stopping by a Whole Foods store and picking up some groceries.

BRIAN SULLIVAN, FOX BUSINESS NETWORK: The irony of this story, Greta, is that if John Mackey, who is the CEO of Whole Food who has been running the company, started the company in Austin Texas about 30 years ago, if he had positioned what he positioned in “The Journal” when we were not considering health care, this would have been considered radical reform.

He said here are eight ideas as a successful CEO that I have, including tort reform, allowing insurers cross state lines, self-directed ideas. And yet he is vilified by some of the more liberal followers out there of the president’s plan.

They are, as you said, waging war against Whole Foods, 18,000 on Facebook in a boycott. There is Web page set up. And they are calling him, get this, Greta, a right-wing zealot.

VAN SUSTEREN: This CEO of Whole Foods, in 2007, he said he had enough money to live comfortably, so in 2007 he cut his salary down to $1 a year, and he donated all of the proceeds from his stock option to charity.

This does not sound like a guy who wants to stick it to the poor when it comes to health care. He had a different idea, and that was what was in the “Wall Street Journal.”

SULLIVAN: He is a self-described libertarian. And I do not know if that was angered some people. Not only was he taking $1, but he pushed this through, Greta, a $100,000 need-based fund for Whole Foods workers.

They offer domestic partners same sex benefits at Whole Foods. Heretofore this has been considered a relatively progressive company. Now he comes out and says the government-run plan is not the way to go. And he is absolutely being slaughtered on the left side of the blogosphere.

You can buy a gift card off their web site. Give it to a food pantry of homeless shelter if you’d like…

http://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/giftcards/order.php

What is the Lesson of Figures Like Kennedy and Reagan?

2009-08-28T20:06:06Z

The tributes to Senator Edward Kennedy pour in as the country starts to realize how many people’s lives the Senator touched. Some of the most moving memories come from people like Senator Orin Hatch, a Republican who collaborated on several bills with Ted Kennedy. Hatch recalls how Kennedy could go to the floor Senate, give a blistering opposition speech, then come over and give him a hug. Senator Kennedy not only was a highly accomplished legislator, he represents a fading tradition in American politics. He’s a person who had the ability to hold a decisive view point yet work with and befriend people that held opposing positions. Senator Kennedy was never mistaken for a conservative, but was willing to work with conservatives to get things done.

Today many politicians seem reluctant to work across party lines, as if it was a sign of weakness. Yet here is an example of a man that accomplished as much as any Senator in recent history, held a self-ascribed liberal point of view, and was beloved by people on both sides of the aisle.

President Reagan had a similar ability. No one mistook President Reagan for a liberal, but he too could make a tough partisan speech then go out for a drink with Speaker Tip O’Niell, a died in the wool liberal. It is a trait that is too rare in politics these days.

This is also a trait that is quickly forgotten by many partisans. Reagan has become an icon of the right, but many seem to forget that he didn’t hate those on the left. The Kennedy family is iconic for those on the left, hopefuly it won’t be forgotten that Senator Kennedy similarly didn’t hate those on the right. It is not an inconsequential trait, as these two men were respected and trusted by members of both parties. When Kennedy and Reagan are held up as the ideal for their party they should be remembered for all their traits not just the ones that are convenient for partisan politics.

This iconic status, that certain important public figures take on, ignores an individual’s humanity. These people aren’t saints, they have flaws like all people do. In some ways this makes them even more exceptional, as they have overcome things that often limit other people. The issue isn’t with the short-comings of public figures, it is the flaw in how they are remembered. They are framed as either saint or sinner, depending on ones own personal views, and this does not do any person justice.

The Kennedy’s are an excellent example our idealized yet over simplified public memory. Ted Kennedy, it could be argued, has been the most politically effective Kennedy, but the tragic death of his brothers has turned them into icons reaching an exaulted untouchable status. Like their bother, they were human beings with positive and negative attributes, who accomplished remarkable things yet did not live perfect lives. The reason it is important to remeber that great people have flaws is not to denigrate their memory, but it is important to show what is possible for ‘regular people.’ Also, it is important to understand that their are no infallable ‘perfect people.’ Politicians that are viewed as perfect are either in a system that requires absolute loyalty, or they are being put in a virtually unwinnable situation where the public is almost guaranteed to be disappointed. Much can be learned from prominent public figures, yet the lesson is muted if they are transformed into ‘all good’ or ‘all bad’ caricatures for party politics, or for posterity.

Ted Kennedy Jr.’s Touching Eulogy for His Father

2009-08-29T18:26:11Z

Part 1

Part 2

An Independent Call Now on Amazon.com

2009-07-28T15:17:19Z

My latest book, An Independent Call – From New Hampshire On, is now available at Amazon.com. An Indpendent Call recounts the experience of a wary Independent slowly being won over by the McCain campaign during the primary process, and eventually becoming a campaign volunteer and credentialed blogger. This book relates stories of political craziness from the primaries through the general election, shedding light on the opportunities and experiences provided to those who volunteer. A mix of good humor and political opinion from the middle.

Rockingham NH County Commissioner, Maureen Barrows, recommends An Independent Call stating that it is, “A must read for anyone interested in the day to day life of a volunteer in a political campaign…attention to detail is brilliant.” –Maureen Barrows

-Katherine Morrison

DA Kelly Ayotte Eyes Run at Open NH Senate Seat #tcot #sgp

2009-07-10T13:35:00Z

WMUR reports that Kelly Ayotte polls well against the likely Democratic challenger for the seat Senator Gregg will be vacating in 2010.

Ayotte Performs Well In UNH Survey

A new survey shows that New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly Ayotte may have a good shot at winning a U.S. Senate seat.

Ayotte announced Tuesday that she was resigning as attorney general to explore running for Republican U.S. Sen. Judd Gregg's seat. Gregg has announced he would not seek re-election.

Democrats appear to be clearing the field for U.S. Rep. Paul Hodes to run for the seat, but other contenders in addition to Ayotte have been mentioned on the Republican side. A recent survey by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center indicates that Ayotte might be the Republican Party's best hope to retain the seat.

"Kelly Ayotte is better known and better liked than even a guy like Paul Hodes, who has been in office and is the likely challenger in 2010," said Andy Smith of the UNH Survey Center. "She's also better known and better liked than all the other Republican challengers who have been talked about so far."

Roughly 18 months before the election, 39 percent of voters surveyed said they preferred Ayotte, while 35 percent chose Hodes. But when Hodes was matched hypothetically against other possible GOP contenders, such as Fred Tausch and former U.S. Rep. Charlie Bass, Hodes came out on top

Kelly Ayotte on Facebook:
Friends of Kelly Ayotte

Kelly Ayotte for U.S. Senate

John McCain: We Stand with the Iranians

2009-07-04T15:57:02Z

Iranian Doctors Denounce Terror and Cover Up of Fatalities #IranElection

2009-07-07T04:04:26Z

This is an English translation of a French article published in Le Figaro, July 6, 2009, Iran: doctors denounce terror in hospitals

While passing through Paris, they denounced the climate of terror that exists in hospitals where the injured anti-Ahmadinejad protesters have been transferred.

They have seen too much. For fear of reprisals, they kept silent. But passing through France for a few days, they want to break the wall of fear, at any price. “In Tehran, we are the powerless witnesses of real crimes against humanity,” says one of two Iranian doctors, met this weekend in Paris, and who prefers to remain anonymous for security reasons. “Since the beginning of the anti-Ahmadinejad protests, he said, militiamen and security agents in civilian clothing have established a policy of terror in the hospitals. They are conducting a hunt without mercy against the injured. “It all started on Saturday 13 June – the first day of protest against the election results. They began to ask for a list of admitted wounded from the hospitals that were located close to the events,” says the doctor. Objective barely veiled: “identify the protesters injured, and then take them to court, accusing them of disturbing public order,” he says.

Over 92 dead
According to several testimonies that circulate among the medical staff, Rasoul Akram Hospital, not far from Tehran University, received 38 corps, including 28 wounded and 10 dead from the “Black Monday” (June 15). “We found that the bullets had passed through the torsos diagonally, which means they were fired from above – i.e. a roof,” says the second doctor.

According to an official report, at least 17 people have been killed since the beginning of the conflict. However, a list quietly made by the nursing staff from different hospitals showed that to date more than 92 people died in Tehran and its suburbs. A woman eight months pregnant is one of the victims. Shot and killed, near the presidential palace, she was then transported to the hospital. Other disturbing stories are beginning to emerge in broad daylight, as one of the six corpses of young men found last week in Shahriar, on the outskirts of the capital. “They all died from wounds in the neck. Their skulls had been smashed and their brains had been opened, presumably to retrieve the bullet to erase the trace of the crime,” says the second doctor informed of this terrible massacre by a trusted colleague.

To cover this kind of attack, the doctors have been asked to certify that the persons whose bodies have been transferred to their hospitals died during surgery. “In several hospitals – including Rasoul Akram and Imam Khomeini – we have organized a sit-in protest. But state television said it was a strike for better wages. That’s terribly shocking,” says the second doctor. One of his friends, doctor on call for emergencies Erfan Hospital, has been “punished” for having stood up to the militia. “After missing for thirty-six hours, he was found half-conscious and disfigured on the sidewalk of the hospital,” he says.

Funerals under surveillance
Faced with the resistance of a part of the medical profession, the bodies of protesters were quickly taken away. “We think they were transferred to the military hospital Baqiatollah or in a place unknown to the general public,” says the doctor. Then, under the pretext of “organ donation”, the bodies were stripped of all traces of the bullets. “Parents are forced to accept if they want to retrieve the body for burial,” he said.

In the main cemetery Behesht-e Zahra, burials take place under surveillance. “It is prohibited to indicate the reason of death on the gravestone,” says a witness contacted by telephone in Tehran.

ABC Reports Iran’s Election Protests Continue But Move To A Second Phase #IranElection

2009-07-08T20:27:48Z

ABC is reporting that protests in Iran, while smaller, are continuing despite brutal crackdowns. Methods of protest have changed to reduce some of the risk of personal harm, but none-the-less persist despite the government’s oppression and appear to be causing stress and turmoil within the government structures.

Iran Protests Continue Despite Crackdown

The government is lashing out, in what some see as a sign of political panic.

Despite the tough government crackdown, Iran’s opposition appears to be operating on the premise that the time is now to reform Iran’s theocratic system. Its nominal leadership – Mir Hossein Mousavi, former president Mohamed Khatami, and reformist cleric Mehdi Karroubi – met this week in a broadened push for greater democracy and continued resistance against the Ahmadinejad’s government.

Demonstrations continued through Wednesday, though more localized and limited than the early days of June’s mass rallies.

In Tehran’s Grand Bazaar there are some signs of a three-day strike called in protest of the government, timed with the religious holiday of Etekaf. For years Iran’s government encouraged the three-day observance for the birth of Imam Ali. This year the holiday is being used for political cover so that people can go on strike without punishment.

Other forms of protest designed to evade the government crackdown involve green graffiti on neighborhood walls, often “V” signs for “victory,” and writing opposition slogans on paper money that circulates through the country. “This is a second protest level. They want to try to keep the momentum going. Every opportunity that they get they want to show that the struggle continues,” said Shahriar Shahabi, an Iranian analyst in Dubai who says protests continued in Shiraz, Mashad, and other cities. He says that if successful, Mousavi’s plan to create a new political party would be a pivotal boost to opposition efforts.

Nightly rooftop chants of Allahu Akbar, held between 9 and 11 p.m. around the country, have continued since the June 12 election. Security forces have raided homes and attacked rooftop protesters, ending in at least two reported shooting deaths. This week, with severe sandstorms clouding the air of Tehran, protesters took advantage of the low visibility. “It is going crazy here…it is very very loud, and there is a lot of emotion,” Ehsan, 34, wrote in an email to ABC News during Tuesday night’s protest.

Video of Voter Fraud in the Iranian Election #IranElection

2009-06-21T13:38:36Z

Note that there is no independent verification of this video, but it certainly does raise serious questions, particularly since there are reports that more than 100% of voters reported in some precincts…

Iranian People Fight Back Against Police #IranElection

2009-06-20T17:53:22Z

Shooting of Iranian Students Caught on Camera #IranElection

2009-06-20T14:57:24Z

Concern About Khamenei’s Statements #IranElection

2009-06-20T00:16:15Z

Concerning statements came from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei today. Even though the government of Iran promised to look into last week’s the election results, Khamenei stated that cheating was not possible and that if protesters, “don’t stop this, then they will bear the responsibility and the consequences of this chaos.” This is very concerning as large protest is scheduled for tomorrow. World leaders such as President Obama and France’s President Sarkozy have been statement that express concerns that this implies a violent crackdown on peaceful protests, which obviously would be unacceptable.

The White House acknowledged the unusual nature of

The White House acknowledged the unusual nature of Khamenei’s speech today at Friday prayer at Tehran University, in which he asserted that the election was fair and accurate and ominously warned protestors to stop.

Supporters of the primary challenger, former Iranian prime minister Mir Hossein Mousavi, plan a protest tomorrow.

“Struggling in the street after an election is not the right thing to do,” Khamenei said. “But also, it challenges the principle of democracy and election. I ask everyone to stop this. This way is wrong. If they don’t stop this, then they will bear the responsibility and the consequences of this chaos.”

“The people have chosen whom they wanted,” said the Supreme Leader. “The legal mechanisms in our country do not allow cheating. How can one cheat with a margin of 11 million votes?”

Western officials today expressed concern about Iran’s actions.

“I hope that the leaders will not go beyond the point of no return,” French President Nicolas Sarkozy told reporters in Brussels. “When we see results that are so incoherent, a Europe that keeps its mouth shut would not correspond to the values we consider to be European.”

Khamanei condemned such comments as meddling, in particular singling out the fact that Iranian Ambassador to the United Kingdom was called into the British Foreign Office.

’s speech today at Friday prayer at Tehran University, in which he asserted that the election was fair and accurate and ominously warned protestors to stop.

Supporters of the primary challenger, former Iranian prime minister Mir Hossein Mousavi, plan a protest tomorrow.

“Struggling in the street after an election is not the right thing to do,” Khamenei said. “But also, it challenges the principle of democracy and election. I ask everyone to stop this. This way is wrong. If they don’t stop this, then they will bear the responsibility and the consequences of this chaos.”

“The people have chosen whom they wanted,” said the Supreme Leader. “The legal mechanisms in our country do not allow cheating. How can one cheat with a margin of 11 million votes?”

Western officials today expressed concern about Iran’s actions.

“I hope that the leaders will not go beyond the point of no return,” French President Nicolas Sarkozy told reporters in Brussels. “When we see results that are so incoherent, a Europe that keeps its mouth shut would not correspond to the values we consider to be European.”

Khamanei condemned such comments as meddling, in particular singling out the fact that Iranian Ambassador to the United Kingdom was called into the British Foreign Office.

Officials: Khamanei Speech Will Not Change White House Stance

Some Comic Relief From Jib Jab

2009-06-22T14:37:35Z