Thursday, July 11, 2013
From the the New York Times – headline: “Rift Among Democrats Stalls Effort to Reverse Rise in College Loan Rates”, speaks to the unimaginable – Democrats are divided regarding reducing student loan interest rates.
The Stafford subsidized student loans are set to increase, the suggestion was to lower the interest rate on these loans prior to fall, when millions of student loan consumers would be faced with the current high interest rate – which, the entire student loan industry takeover, was part of a budget passed by Democrats prior to 2010.
A bi-partisan committee worked out a compromise they felts sure the Democrats and Republicans could get behind – the Republicans basically endorsed Barack Obama’s plan, and the Democrats could not agree – voting no against the bill – the crusty old crazy man from Utah – Harry Reid.
Normally the headlines blare – Republican’s in Disarray or Republican block important – name and entitlement. However, to understand that both parties have their issues, infighting and degrees of stupidity, is the big announcement on this one.
Pony up and pay more, and thank Harry Reid and those stalwarts that refuse to compromise on something that would actually help the economy.
Other bills most likely not to get anywhere:
Immigration – stalled in the House – project pushed until after 2014 elections
The Affordable Health Care Act – now that the employer mandate has been removed, it is only fair, form the Republican House point of view, that the individual mandate also be removed (as that would leave everyone in the nation subject to fines, and having proof of extremely pricey insurance policies. The House can also defund the entire program, starting with the IRS. Although law, it appears to have hit a brick wall. – Repeal and rewrite a reasonable health care bill, including border crossing insurance buys, with possible subsidies, would fit the bill. Take off the penalties, and let a doctor or twenty write the language. Put the consumer back in control of their own health.
Posted by Tina Hemond at 6:19 AM
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Sarah Palin, during a radio interview, was asked if she would run for the Alaskan Senate seat currently held by Democrat, Mark Begich . In response, she replied she’s been asked about running for the seat, however, she was waiting to see if there were other candidates in the race that were not the “same old politicians in the state.”(Washington Post). Understanding that there is a tiny bit of angst by the standard rank and file Republican’s in DC and elsewhere that want to continue the status quo, Sarah Palin is a thorn in their side, along with any other politico that bucks their system.
According to the Anchorage Daily News – there are two GOP candidates, Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell and Joe Miller. Miller won the 2010 GOP primary against Sen. Lisa Murkowski only to lose to her in the general election as she mounted a historic write-in campaign.”. On the one hand, there’s the Tea Party/Independent Joe Miller, and on the other, the Bush Appointee with private sector experience, and apparently little polling has been done, as of yet to indicate the acceptance of either candidate by those actually living in Alaska.
It remains to be seen if Palin would enter a race, however, by the tone of the interview, it appears, at this juncture unlikely. It's just Sarah Palin speaking her mind - which is always refreshing.
Tuesday, July 09, 2013
Massachusetts State Betting on a House of Cards – Casino’s Perfect Schematic to Bail out Cities running on Fumes. Springfield Votes July 16. Opinion
The State of Massachusetts passed a bill in 2011 allowing 3 casino’s and one slot pallor to open in the state, according to 500nations.com, the first casino licenses will be granted in February 2014, with expected completion of the casino’s by “late 2014 – early 2015”. Each of the casino applicants paid a fee of $400,000 to the State to vie for one of the licenses, the municipality then narrowed down the choices between the competing firms, and city or town residents go to the polls this month to vote yes or no on becoming a “host” community.
For the City of Springfield, the message is astoundingly clear, the casino MGM, offers the third largest city in the Commonwealth, a way out – of empty streets, closing businesses, rampant crime and debt. Unlike Detroit, where a casino failed to right the ship, Springfield has a much better management team, which continues to stop the “bleeding”.
What MGM, the corporation chosen by Springfield Mayor, Dominic Sarno, offers the City a heft package of tax revenue, coupled with a restructuring of the area of the city that was struck by a tornado on June 1, 2011, that destroyed the south end of Springfield(MassLive) – MGM is planning on building in that area, with a job creation packaged included.
MGM offers its plans, including community development at its website: mgmspringfield.com. However, not everyone in the community is thrilled to have a casino in the neighborhood – and an attempt by Citizens Against Casino Gaming to roll back the vote set for the city failed. The citizens of Springfield will have their say on the 16th. MGM is backed by south end community business owners, the police unions, and the largest daily papers in Western Mass, gave its editorial blessing this morning. (Mass Live)
The pro’s to having casino’s licensed in the state are obvious – the tax revenue alone in needed by both the Commonwealth and the Host Cities (Springfield), MGM (and assuming other applicants), would take blighted areas and revitalize the landscape, which, for Springfield especially, is welcome. Jobs, which are not exactly plentiful in Massachusetts, would be created to the tune of 3000 construction jobs, and several thousand permanent jobs.
The general objections to hosting any casino are twofold, crime and addiction to gaming. With the aforementioned, Springfield is now, despite the best efforts of the Springfield PD, along with the Massachusetts State Police, and various Federal Agencies, prone to some violence, due to drugs, gangs, and the like. It could get worse, but it is doubtful it will get better, with or without the casino. The casino gives a much needed boost of revenue to the City to allow for hiring additional police and fire, (as well as other staff), while hiring its own security team. As to gaming being an issue, the fact that Massachusetts State Lottery offers games from scratch to keno on a daily basis (including Sunday’s) does not appear to get much backlash, the fact that Connecticut hosts two casinos’ less than a 2 hours drive, with buses leaving senior centers, and other locations several times a day, apparently is also not a problem. There are casino boat trips out of eastern Mass, there are dog tracks, there are a number of options on the table, should one be addicted to gaming – therefore, a resort casino, would fit in nicely.
In this case, betting on a house of cards is a fairly good bet, with the payoff being increased security, education, revival of a blighted area, and a resort destination that would attract visitors from New York State, Vermont, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Maine. While at the casino, those visitors will be able to avail themselves of local entertainment, shopping, and restaurants. The argument that casino’s as self-contained, and do not contribute to the local economy works when a casino is located in a rural area, hwoever, in the middle of a City, the options are greater, and the ease of access is increased.
Once in a blue moon, the Massachusetts State House, get’s one right.
City of Springfield FY 2013 Adopted Budget
State of Massachusetts Fiscal Year Budget 2013
New taxes on tap, $500 Million to cover some of the debt for the Commonwealth
Monday, July 08, 2013
Wisconsin Latest to Fuel Abortion Debate – Gov. Scott Walker Signs Bill Requiring Ultra Sounds – and MD’s to supply Proof of Privileges at Hospitals - Media calls "Extreme" Measures
The above photo from Jillstanek.com, shows the abortion provider, Herman Gosnell's, procedure table
From USNews at NBCnew.com: Wisconsin Governor, Scott Walker has signed a new bill into law, one which requires women seeking an abortion to have an ultra-sound first, as well as insure abortion providers in the State of Wisconsin have privileges to admit at Hospitals within a 30 mile radius of their clinic. The abortion lobby (or the left in general) is screaming “Restrictions!” – Or to put it bluntly a women’s right to be unaware of any problems arising from a pregnancy, even if said pregnancy is one the women wishes to terminate. Also, women should not be concerned that their provider of services – which can be life threatening, are provided by an individual who is not allowed to step foot in a hospital.
So much for looking out for women from the left – to play devil’s advocate here – and understanding that abortion providers are a billion dollar tax payer funded industry, in most cases (except for the Herman Gosnell type clinics, who are privately run, and may receive limited federal funding).(Life News)
That said, should any of those clinics be actually brought up to health standard, some on the left are suggesting that would be a disservice to women as they might close! The bills are being herald as “restrictive” by most of the media. One has to ask the question – when it comes to women’s health, where are the restrictions? – It appears only to be enhancements that have been put into place – unless, of course, a woman has an ultrasound, sees a baby or hears a baby’s heart beat, and decides not to have the abortion (that restriction there is the loss of income to said abortion provider). Additionally, if any were to choose a provider of health care, abortion or otherwise, one would hope that provider had admitting privileges to an actual hospital – in the event something went horribly wrong – which can be the case in the average abortion. There are risks in any surgery, most go off with a hitch, but if something did occur, would it to be in the women’s best interests to have a hospital handy?
Although one might be pro-life, by choice, it does not take away from the fact that these “restrictions” go a long way towards helping, rather than hurting women. Therefore, regardless of which side of the issue one decides to stand, or how one wishes to parse words, these two above referenced provisions make sense form a women’s health standpoint. The ultrasound can be used to detect everything from a normal heartbeat, to abnormalities in the fetus or the uterus, to cancer – of course, if the provider doesn’t not permission to send a patient to a local hospital, then one might question that particular providers ability to perform not only a simple test, but a minor to major surgery. That is what abortion is, a surgery, and to cheer on women having these “procedures” done is “clinics “which can be liked to badly kept car-washes, speaks volumes about how little those individuals actually care about women’s health.
One would have thought these types of procedures, would be on a par with any other out-patient, or same day surgical procedure –with all the care and concern that goes with – apparently not if one is in the camp of the abortion lobby (NARAL or Planned Parenthood both come to mind).
As more states go to the "extreme’s" that Wisconsin just did, say limiting abortions to a certain amount of weeks, in order to prevent a women from aborting a baby that can live quite easily outside the womb, and having the doctor (if they are really doctors) stick an ice pick in the baby’s head to complete the “Procedure” (See Gosnell Trial, where that is considered the standard in the industry (Defense). One would think that the deeper psychological harm might not come from the women hearing to seeing a child prior to deciding whether or not to end that child’s life, rather from knowing that child was being brutally murdered upon delivery. (Of course, that might not be exactly told to the woman, having the procedures). What should take place, in addition to safeguards in place for all women, is education of women as to the actual procedures which take place during and after an abortion at all weeks that should be part and parcel of a jr. high school or high school’s health curriculum – but they rather hand out condoms – how overwhelming unhelpful on so many levels! – Yet applauded as forward thinking, those that pretend to represent women in all stages of their lives and to have their “back” so to speak, should something pop up – in reality are looking out for themselves and the woman, are nothing more than the “masses”, faceless names who have insurance that will cover “procedures” and some will die, most will live, and some will suffer the rest of their lives, regardless of how palatable the abortion industry makes these procedures appear.
Pictured below, the results of the standard late term abortion - as described by Gosenll's defense team. (Image: expose the media dot com)