The Strangling Of American Hospitals

By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

That is what is happening in many of the smaller Hospitals in the United States these days.  So it is being reported by Dr. Thomas M. Hamilton MD, better known as The Grouch.

We had staff meeting yesterday at the hospital. A topic of discussion was RAC audits and a specific case affecting our hospital.

If you don't know what RAC audits are, do a Google Search on it and read about it for yourself. I betcha most of you have never heard of such a thing.

Anyway, I felt compelled to write my Congresswoman, Marsha Blackburn, and my two Senators, Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander over this issue. I know I'll probably get the standard form reply, but it made me feel better anyway. Here it is:

Dear Senator/Congresswoman:

I feel the need to make you aware of the serious situation created for small hospitals under the RAC (Recovery Audit Contractor) program created by Medicare.

I am a physician at our local hospital. During staff meeting yesterday, we discussed a situation concerning a recent surgical case. A patient had a lesion surgically removed. The doctor’s note read as follows, “an eleven blade scalpel was used to remove the lesion”.

The RAC auditor reviewed this chart and stated that the note should have read, “an eleven blade scalpel was used to EXCISE the lesion”.

Because the word REMOVE was used instead of the word EXCISE, the RAC auditor declared that the hospital should refund Medicare an amount of $11,000. The hospital appealed and pointed out to the auditor that there was essentially no difference in the words EXCISE and REMOVE. To no avail, the auditor stated the hospital owed Medicare $11,000.

Senator/Congresswoman, these RAC audits are an exercise in pure lunacy. I hope you can see the obvious stupidity imposed on hospitals by the intrusion of the United States Government by this example above. I would also hope that you would take steps to relieve us of the burden of these nonsensical RAC audits. If you don’t, many hospitals like ours simply will not survive and will end up closing the doors.

It is my understanding that the bureaucrats involved in the RAC audits are entitled to a third of the funds they recover from hospitals. So out of that $11,000 dollars they are squeezing from our hospital over the definition of a single word, the auditors themselves stand to collect $3666.66 for themselves. Senator/Congresswoman, can you truly believe that hospitals will be treated fairly under such a system? If a private entity conducted itself in a manner similar to the RAC auditors, the people in that entity would be jailed.

Of course if Barack Obama has his way we will end up with single payer health care for all which will no doubt be broke like Social Security and Medicare. More and more hospitals will close. So much for universal health care.

Right now our hospital makes about 46 cents for every dollar billed to Medicare. We make 24 cents for every dollar billed to Tenncare (Tennessee Medicaid). I am told under the proposed Medicare cuts and RAC audits we can see our reimbursement fall to 32 cents for every dollar billed to Medicare. You can see we are slowly but surely being strangled by Uncle Sam. Our doctors, nurses, and other hospital staff work hard to provide health care to some very old and very sick people. We deserve honest payment for our efforts rather than a bunch of shenanigans invented by Medicare designed to avoid payment.

Senator/Congresswoman, I implore you to look into this thing called RAC audits. Talk to your constituents in the health care field. They will tell you the same thing I am telling you. We are being strangled by this government nonsense.

I am looking for a personal and thoughtful reply from you on this matter, not the usual form reply provided by a staffer.

Sincerely,

Thomas M. Hamilton MD.

Finish reading here.

I find it troubling that the "auditor" receives a "reward" of 1/3 of all monies collected, thus discouraging a true audit of books since it is in the auditor's best interest to "find" fault in every search.

Thus the word Excise, meaning to cut out or off, as a tumor. And the word Remove, meaning to take away, withdraw, or eliminate is not considered equal in intent.  This auditor has taken it upon his/herself to become the standard exemplary of the English Language.

This is only one example of what is happening now and will happen when Obamacare is implemented in its full force.

Is it no wonder that thousands of doctors are planning to leave the profession.  Where will the government find their replacements?

Will a doctor trained in one of those nations instill confidence in you?

Pass this along to others, this corruption has to be stopped!

Michele Bachmann Video No Illegitimate Health Care: Bachmann: No Paying Taxes

At a Saturday rally in St. Paul, Minnesota, with 4,000 present, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) was representing the future of the our country, which is you and me, mine and yours. She talks about the taxes in health care, which will be passed without representation if the bill is 'deemed' passed by the Slaughter rule. See the video below. This is a long video - 30 minutes, but if you watch it, you won't need your morning coffee or afternoon nap to revive your  faith in America.

Michele Bachmann

Pullout quote:

They don't scare us. They don't scare us. They're not to take our country!...They think they can force their will on 300 million Americans!

TPMuckracker charges Bachmann with calling for civil disobedience -- "a sitting member of Congress leads citizens in breaking the law." The point is, if health care is passed with the Slaughter Rule, it will be many sitting members of the House breaking the law of legislative process. Health care will not be law via the Slaughter Rule. Americans, Republicans and Democrats, will not allow this Congress to make law by 'deeming' it so.

From Bachmann

But mark my words, the American people aren't gonna take this lying down," Bachmann later said. "We aren't gonna play their game, we're not gonna pay their taxes. They want us to pay for this? Because we don't have to. We don't have to. We don't have to follow a bill that isn't law. That's not the American way, and that's not what we're going to do."...

"Because it's one-party rule now in Washington, D.C. Their Chicago tactics, their chicago friends, twisting Democrats' arms, threatening their own team members with ethics charges and a submission. This handful of people thinks they can enforce their will on 300 million americans? They're not gonna do that. This is dictatorial, what they are doing. We are not complelled to follow a non-law just because Obama and Pelosi tells us we have to.

"If they pass the bill legitimately, then yes, we have to follow the law -- until we repeal it. But if they pass it illegitimately, then the bill is illegitimate, and we don't have to lay down for this. It's not difficult to figure out. So if for some reason they're able to get their votes this week and pass this 2,700-page Senate bill -- if they get it, trillions of dollars is what it's gonna cost, when we didn't vote on it, we need to tell them a message: That if they get away with this, they will be able to get away with anything -- with anything. And you can't say you voted on a bill when you didn't because it's fraud. But we are not helpless here. We are not helpless, there things that we can do.

JOHN ADAMS: Be it remembered, however, that liberty must, at all hazards, be supported. We have a right to it because it came to us from our Maker, but if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us at the expense of their ease, their treasure, their blood.

Hot Air has a great quote from Steny Hoyer about "deem and pass," and how it "demeans democracy.

For Fun: Rush Limbaugh Caller: Obama Snookered Us: Man in Obama Audience Did Not Faint - he was Hauled Off?



Michele Bachmann Rallying Speech - Slaughter Rule is Fraud
Linked by DougRoss and Larwyn where you will find the best blog headlines" 

Related and Background:

 Bart Stupak: Pelosi 16 Votes Short - at least: House GOP to Force Vote on Slaughter Rule

Mark Levin on Why the Slaughter Rule is Unconstitutional: Levin Will take Slaughter Rule to Court Pelosi Will Pass Senate Bill in House: Slaughter Rule Ruled Out?

CNN Poll Government Threat: Majority says government a threat to citizens' rights

Have you noticed that polls are a lot more interesting these days? That's because pertinent questions are being asked. A new CNN/Opinion Research poll says a majority of Americans believe our government is a threat to citizens' rights.

Fifty-six percent of people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday say they think the federal government's become so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens. 

Forty-four percent of those polled disagree.

The survey indicates a partisan divide on the question: only 37 percent of Democrats, 63 percent of Independents and nearly 7 in 10 Republicans say the federal government poses a threat to the rights of Americans.

A separate CNN poll released Sunday says Americans overwhelmingly think that the U.S. government is broken.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted February 12-15, with 1,023 adult Americans questioned by telephone. The survey's sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points for the overall survey.

Michael Yon Detained and Handcuffed at Seattle Airport: War Correspondent Michael Yon Arrested

Michael Yon says he was detained and handcuffed at the Seattle-Tacoma Airport by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) because he refused to to answer questions "that had nothing to do with national security." You'll recall the TSA could not find the bomb in the underpants of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Updates as available.

Michael Yon

Via Goomba News, via Hot Air:

Got arrested at the Seattle airport for refusing to say how much money I make. (The uniformed ones say I was not “arrested”, but they definitely handcuffed me.) Their videos and audios should show that I was polite, but simply refused questions that had nothing to do with national security. Port authority police eventually came — they were professionals — and rescued me from the border bullies.

When they handcuffed me, I said that no country has ever treated me so badly. Not China. Not Vietnam. Not Afghanistan. Definitely not Singapore or India or Nepal or Germany, not Brunei, not Indonesia, or Malaysia, or Kuwait or Qatar or United Arab Emirates. No county has treated me with the disrespect can that can be expected from our border bullies.

This exclusive from BigGovernment:

Yon was returning to the United States from Hong Kong to visit family when TSA officials stopped him during a routine security checkpoint.  “Officials asked me what was in my bag—nothing wrong with this question,” Yon said in an interview with BigGovernment.com.  “I told them it was normal stuff, clothes and toothbrushes.”

At this point the TSA officials escorted Yon to a designated screening area where they examined the contents of his bag.  “Then they asked me how much money I make,” Yon said.  Yon suggested to the TSA officials that the question was inappropriate and unrelated to transportation security.  The award-winning blogger noted another TSA officer approached Yon: “he asked who do I work for.”  ”I did not answer the question which clearly was upsetting to the TSA officers.”

Yon was escorted to a room elsewhere in the airport where he said he remained silent during much of the questioning.   According to Yon, “they handcuffed me for failing to cooperate.  They said I was impeding their ability to do their job.”

There's obviously more to this story, maybe this it:

In January of 2009, Yon’s article “Border Bullies” detailed a Homeland Security officer coercing a friend to give up her e-mail password so that he could read private email correspondences between her and Yon.

Regarding the incident in Seattle, Yon was adamant the TSA agents had overstepped their bounds: “If I am the guy on that passport and I don’t have any contraband in my luggage, it is a matter for the FBI, not the TSA.”

“TSA people are out of control,” he said. “They are not doing their jobs, they are harassing people, creating animosity.  They ask you ‘what time is your connective flight?’ and they bully you until you miss the flight.”

TSA - out-of-control and obviously inept, as supported by the failure to find the bomb in the underpants of Christmas Day bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. What? Maybe Yon doesn't like Seattle's famous coffees?

Greta Van Susteren Olivia Newton John: Government Breast Cancer Guideline Rationing

Greta Van Susteran interviewed singer and actress, Olivia Newton-John, about a new live show she is promoting to recognize women and the role they play in battling cancer as a patient, a caregiver and an advocate. " The theme: a story of survivorship and providership."  Newton-John is a breast cancer survivor, so naturally, the conversation quickly got to the new government breast cancer guidelines, which are the first steps to health care rationing. See videos below.

Breast Cancer graphic courtesy Southern Sass on Crime

One in eight women will be diagnosed with breast cancer. In 2007, $7 billion was spent on treatment, including government and private payments. In President Obama's stimulus bill, he set aside $7 billion to "expand high-speed Internet access across the country." How ludicrous is that? If you cannot understand that your health care is of no consequence to this administration, then you are not doing your homework.

Greta and Olivia discussed disease and what it must be like to be a woman in a Muslim country. She first has to have the permission of her husband to get a mammogram. Then he, or some other approved male must drive her to the testing location. A woman performs the mammogram and looks out through slits for eye holes. If the diagnosis a bad one...it is often hopeless for that woman. The primary male in her life decides if she receives treatment.

Will we allow the the "Task Force" to decide our treatment? The guidelines recommend delaying mammogram screening until age 50 for American women. The recommendation allows ten years for undiagnosed breast cancer to grow.  American women have government making the decisions now, yet every doctor I've seen on television so far, has denounced the study as irresponsible and dangerous. And it is from a "government sponsored expert panel" - the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Interpretation: If you want a mammogram before age 50, you will pay for it, if you can get someone to perform it for you.

We also learned there is no longer a need to do breast self-exams. In fact, the recommendation is "against teaching" the proper exam method, and if you are 75 or older there is no evidence you need mammography.

Rationing has begun. Death panels have convened.

I am a breast cancer survivor. I was diagnosed under 50 years of age. I found the cancer in a self-exam that I was carefully and meticulously taught to perform.

Ironically, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius said in October 2009 that 4,000 cancer deaths can be prevented with early screening, but now, if these guidelines are adopted, those 4,000 will fall the cracks. I can find no statement from Sebelius about the "Task Force" findings.

Are 4,000 women just so much garbage to this elitist government, who will make sure their women are covered?

The "Task Force" assigns their recommendations a letter grade: A through D, with A being the best finding for the highest net benefit. Here is how they explain the grades:

Each recommendation is linked to a letter grade that reflects the magnitude of net benefit and the strength of the evidence supporting the provision of the specific preventive service. The recommendation is graded from "A" (strongly recommended) to "D" (recommended against). When the evidence is insufficient to determine net benefit, the Task Force assigns a grade of "I."

Where is the supporting evidence? There is none. There is only concern that many women being screened do not have breast cancer. There is only concern that women will endure tests to rule out cancer, and those tests cause emotion pain. And the unspoken concern is that government money is going to test those cancer free. The government wants to free up the money.

Delaying mammograms until age 50 received a grade of C. The following is the actual wording of the guideline.

The USPSTF recommends against routinely providing the service. There may be considerations that support providing the service in an individual

The recommendation to no longer teach breast self-exam received a grade of D, which means:

The USPSTF recommends against the service. There is moderate or high certainty that the service has no net benefit or that the harms outweigh the benefits.

How can breast self-exam do harm? There is "moderate or high" certainty that there is no net benefit?" What if you find a lump or tumor? Where does that fall between moderate to high? There is only one reason for this evil, evil guideline, and that is money. Doctors and their staff spend time teaching the proper method for self-exam. The instruction is usually done only one time for each patient. How many appointments can be shaved by 15-30 minutes? What is the bottom line for the Doctor and insurance companies from this savings? What about the cost of more extensive treatment when the cancer is found years later in a more advanced stage? Surely the cost is more than the cost of a one-time instruction on self-exam.

Cancer at a later stage in women over 50 - probably will not be treated at all.

I know so many women of all ages battling breast cancer. Most had no family history. Most are not overweight. All are, or were, devastated. Some survived. Too many did not.

One Saturday afternoon I looked up at the television and there was Condoleeza Rice at a podium after a Susan G. Komen 'Race for the Cure' event. She said her mother was a breast cancer survivor. She talked about the things her mother accomplished in the 16 years she lived after dealing with the disease. When her mother died of breast cancer at the age of 61, Rice was 30. Without early detection and treatment, she could have lost her mother at as a teenager. See this video below.

I have a few years between me and "the event," of breast cancer. I passed 5 years and then  passed 7 years...and began to breath easier. I was beyond 7 years as I listened to Secretary Rice.

I made an appointment with my doctor, and asked: do people surpass 15 years, 20 years - do they ever die of anything other than breast cancer - how long did your longest survivor live? I'm not sharing his answer here because I know how "numbers" can influence our thinking, but I will tell you this, I plan to be his longest living breast cancer survivor. That's the plan, the hope, the prayer, of every diagnosed woman.

The truth is, you never stop battling breast cancer. Surgeries and treatments and check-ups...it goes on and on, and what a privilege it is to see my doctor and receive a good report. I am grateful for my doctor, grateful for modern medicine, grateful for the time with my husband, especially grateful that I lived to see my son a grown man.

These guidelines are designed to suck-in insurance companies to support Obama's audacious dream of government control of our health and private information. No surprise this comes just as the House health care bill is passed, just as Harry Reid says the Senate plan is about ready to be revealed, just as a report popped up tonight that drug manufacturers have already raised the price of their products in anticipation of what comes next from this government. Insurance will drop coverage of mammograms. To think they will not, is naive.

But...the "Task Force" says this is not about money. It is about concern for the healthy women who are recommended for follow-up tests and biopsies that may yield no negative results...it's about the angst a healthy woman might have:

With these recommendations, the task force has made "a value judgment that's subject to discussion and interpretation," says Len Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society, which is sticking to its recommendation that women begin annual screening mammograms at age 40.

Harms are tricky to measure. It's hard to quantify the psychological impact of additional tests and biopsies, for example. And estimates of overdiagnosis generally range only between 1 percent and 10 percent, according to the review consulted by the USPSTF. (Monetary costs weren't considered by the task force, says USPSTF Vice Chair Diana Petitti.) Lichtenfeld is also concerned about using computer models as the basis for the every-other-year recommendations, since so much is at stake. 

Marisa Weiss, a Philadelphia oncologist and founder of Breastcancer.org, says the task force's conclusions were based on outdated assumptions about treatment and mammography. For example, studies show that digital mammography is more accurate among young women, but the USPSTF discussed only the standard film mammography.

And it figured in certain harms that have been ameliorated over the years with procedures such as core biopsies rather than the more invasive open biopsies, as well as tests that can predict which women are likely to benefit from chemotherapy and which can skip it. She worries these recommendations will result in young women being entirely bypassed, so that women in their 50s will be diagnosed at later stages of cancer and will need more treatment.

 The above quote is from US News and World Report, by Katherine Hobson. I hope you will read the entire article.

This from Susan G. Komen for the Cure:

October 9, 2009:  According to the results of a study presented at the ASCO 2009 Breast Cancer Symposium, nearly three-quarters of breast cancer deaths occur among the minority off women who do not get regular screening mammograms.

Although breast cancer remains the second-leading cause of cancer death in U.S. women, breast cancer mortality rates have been declining for the last 20 years. The decline in mortality is thought to be due to improvements in both treatment and early detection.

Mammography (an X-ray of the breast) is an important part of routine breast cancer screening. The American Cancer Society recommends that women at average risk of breast cancer receive annual mammograms starting at the age of 40. Women at higher risk of breast cancer may need to begin screening at a younger age, and may be screened with breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in addition to mammography.

Studies have indicated that mammography reduces the risk of death from breast cancer. To explore the relationship between mammography and breast cancer mortality in the general population, researchers collected information about 6,997 women diagnosed with breast cancer in Massachusetts between 1990 and 1999 and followed until 2007 (median follow-up period was 12.5 years).

Cady B, Webb M, Webb M, Michaelson J, Smith BI. Death from breast cancer occurs predominantly in women not participating in mammographic screening. Presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2009 Breast Cancer Symposium. Abstract 24.

 I've heard several doctors say this "Task Force" is independent from the government. That is not true. This is not an independent panel. Their website is a .gov url, and the banner, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services banner runs across the top. Sixteen doctors sit on the panel for a period of 4 years. Some are always rotating out at the end of the year. View a list of doctors here.

Kathleen Sebelius, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, released a statement in October 2009 about the need for health insurance reform and breast cancer. I find no statement on the findings of the "Task Force." She advocated for just the opposite of what this  "Task Force" is trying to do:

This year alone, an estimated 192,370 American women will be diagnosed with breast cancer and 40,170 will die from the disease, making it the second leading cause of cancer deaths in women.

America, you must understand that this is just the beginning. Your health care will soon be under government control. Here is something coming out of the Presiden't office that should shock you: President Obama's Chief of Staff, and close, close friend, Rahm Emanuel's brother,  Ezekiel Emanuel tells us how the government can cut costs:

Dr. Emanuel is a health policy adivser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. He has the President's ear:

Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, "as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others" (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008).

The only way to come close to paying for the health care plan proposed, is to cut medical care to others. If you think cuts in medicare will pay for your insurance, think about the women not yet 50 - far too young for medicare. Everyone has a daughter, a mother, a niece, a wife, a grandmother, an aunt...Rationing has already started. Death panels have convened. The first video below is Condoleeze Rice and the second, Greta and Olivia.


 Condoleeze Rice - Vreast Cancer (video)

Greta Van Susteran and Olivia Newton-John (video)

Gerald Walpin Cleared: IG Walpin Cleared Wants Job Back: AmeriCorps Investigator Cleared

Inspector General (IG) Gerald Walpin has been cleared of any reason for termination by the Obama White House. He wants his job back. Important update just hours after posting this news. See below.

This report confirms that Walpin has been cleared of acting U.S. Attorney Larry Brown's claims that he overstepped his authority in an investigation of  Sacramento, California mayor, Kevin Johnson.

IG Walpin did his job and investigated Americorp and Sacramento, California Mayor, Kevin Johnson, and the report wasn't pretty. The White House couldn't handle that, so they fired him on June 11, 2009.

The investigation involved $75 million in misused funds at AmeriCorps and a scandal involving NBA basketball star, Kevin Johnson.

Walpin has since sued his previous employer, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) - but the White House did the firing. Walpin's case is still making its way through the courts.

This is a very complicated case, and a very important one. Congress mandated the methods by which a White House can terminate an Inspector General - and keep in mind that Inspector Generals do not work for the White House. Nevertheless, the White House fired Gerald Walpin but did not follow the congressional mandates of how such a firing must be done. In fact, the White House literally blew-off objections by Senator Charles Grassley, simply saying that President Obama no longer had "confidence" in Walpin.

Today, the Sacramento Bee reports that Gerald Walpin has been cleared of the complaint leveled by an acting U.S. Attorney, Lawrence G. Brown. Brown is no longer an "acting" U.S. Attorney. The office declined to comment.

I have a lot of reporting on Gerald Walpin and what happened to him. It includes the full AmeriCorp investigation and the part Kevin Johnson may have played in Obama's decision to "relieve" Walpin of his position of Inspector General.

By the way...the White House Chief Counsel, Greg Craig - the man who called Walpin and gave him one hour to resign, is leaving the White House and guess who is rumored to perhaps take his place? Robert "Bob" Bauer - the husband of Anita Dunn. Anita Dunn made the news recently by suggesting that the White House does not consider FOX News a news source. Soon after, a video emerged with Dunn saying that Mao Tse Tung was one of two philosophers" that she often turns to (the second is Mother Teresa).

So Walpin has been cleared, as many of us suspected he would be. He wants his job back. The next step should be that Walpin continues to keep a sharp eye on AmeriCorp for us. Many thanks to reader SacTownSue for the heads up on this news out of her local paper.

Update 11-10-09:

According to Politico, the White House is not buying the findings of the committee investigating Gerald Walpin. The unnamed White House source said "...we continue to believe it [Walpin's firing] was fully merited."

From Grassley: (read the entire article here)

After getting both points of view, including Mr. Walpin’s, the integrity committee found that the acting U.S. attorney’s complaint had no merit and that there was no need for a full investigation," Grassley said in a statement e-mailed to POLITICO. "Since the White House cited the complaint in its case for firing Mr. Walpin, it’s disturbing that the White House failed to wait for the outcome of the review before firing the inspector general. The process set up for situations like this allows both sides of the story to be heard, and it should have been given a chance to work.”

This is one more example of Obama overstepping Congress.

*****

As I further investigate this latest development in Mr. Walpin's favor, here is in-depth information as background:

Who is Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson - Walpin-Johnson Investigation

Schwarzenegger Involvement: Kevin Johnson Investigation by Gerald Walpin

U.S. Attorney Larry Brown and CnCS Displeasure with Walpin's Investigation

Gerald Walpin Firing Update: AmeriCorp $75 Million Misused: Michelle Obama Hires?

Glen Beck - Gerald Walpin Video: IG Gerals Walping on Glen Beck 

Kevin Johnson - St. Hope Scandal: Rick Maya Resigns, Gerald Walpin Investigates

White House Charges Walpin Confused, Disoriented, Disruptive

Gerald Walpin Fired by President Obama: Inspector general Walpin Fired

Bill Clinton President for Life: Bill Clinton Term Limits a Good Thing

Lesson for America: term limits for Congress. Now! Bill Clinton admitted he would have preferred leaving the White House in a coffin.

The former President says he loves his current life and will leave the "politics to my wife...." We see the power grow in mammoth leaps in Washington, D.C. We must have term limits in Congress.

"It's good that we have a (term) limit. Otherwise I would have stayed until I was carried away in a coffin. Or defeated in an election," Clinton said at a conference in Istanbul. "I loved doing the job."

All we need is another narcisstic president with his own "national civilian security force," as well funded as our military, and a power-mongering, lying, devious Speaker of the House and a weasel guiding the Senate, with massive funds going to ACORN's voter fraud unit - and we have a fight on our hands.

Gregg Jarrett Rob Andrews smack-down: Gregg Jarrett Marsha Blackburn: Jarrett Explaining Constitution

While most of the talk about this video around the web is about Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ)  challenging host FOXNews' Gregg Jarrett on being Fair and Balanced, the issue is really Andrew's astounding lack of knowledge about the U.S. Constitution. Both  Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and Jarrett correct him. Andrews evokes "Federal police power."

 Gregg Jarrett - Marsha Blackburn - Rob Andrews: Explaining the Constitution (video)

Water, Water Everywhere and Obama Controls it All?

I was doing a post on the plight of Israel in 1967 when surrounding Arab countries were attempting to divert Israel's irrigation water. That water was a key player in the start of the 1967 War. No country can survive healthily without crop water. Along comes an email with a link to American Daughter's post on the Obama administration's move to control ALL American water. That's ALL American water.

Water - Your Pond?

WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES- The term ‘waters of the United States’ means all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds, and all impoundments of the foregoing, to the fullest extent that these waters, or activities affecting these waters, are subject to the legislative power of Congress under the Constitution.

Senate Bill 787 is known as the Clean Water Restoration Act. OpenCongress.org says it seeks to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to clarify the jurisdiction of the United States over the waters of the United States - which is a change from jurisdiction over only the "navigable waters" of the United States. GovTrack has introductory statement about s.787 from Senator Feingold, who says that this bill exempts agriculture. Senator Wyden (D-OR) says he is "no supporter of Federal water grabs." Well, that got my attention...I mean he put it right out there. He says he would not have co-sponsored this bill if he thought it would affect Oregon farmers. Both Feingold and Wyden say that the intent of the legislation is to restore the Clean Water Act "to what it had been before these Supreme Court decisions." So what about "those" Supreme Court decisions? There's this from Wyden:

Some people do not like the pre-2001 Clean Water Act regulatory system. Some believe that the Supreme Court did the right thing by removing many wetlands and intermittent streams and lakes from the protections of the Clean Water Act.

By now, you know that California farmers in the Central Valley are losing their farmland and their livelihood due to a two-inch minnow, the Delta Smelt. The government has taken the water from the farmers and given it to the minnow. What do you do when the gov'mt owns your pond - the pond your cattle drinks from and cools-off in, or the water in the fish-hatchery you own, or.... Senate Bill s.787 is not about the Delta Smelt, but the Delta Smelt is just one current and critical bit of evidence that proves what the government can do to us, if we allow it. Yes, you can put this off on the environmental "greenies" but, the governing body is "the government." As usual, we do not know the intent behind the bill, but changing the designation of the original waters as set out in the original Clean Water Act of numerous years ago, from "navigable waters," to "water of the United States," which includes ALL waters, is a bit of a jump, and I just wonder why the government feels it necessary to control ALL of America's waters. Before you go to American Daughter to read about Senate Bill s.787, innocuously named the Clean Water Restoration Act, watch this important video about a government-made drought. Hat tip to Allan Erickson.

By Any Other Name...

Cross posted by Findalis of Monkey in the Middle Funny how after the election in November all the dirt that is on and surrounds President-Elect Barack Obama is coming to the surface. I guess that he didn't hide it deep enough. During the election we heard about Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko and ACORN. Now it is the on-going saga of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. The governor has been indicted on conspiracy to commit mail fraud and wire fraud, as well as soliciting bribes. He is accused of trying to sell the vacant Senate seat of Barack Obama to the highest bidder. He has been a subject of a Federal investigation for years, including being subject to a wire tap of his phone. And the tapes show a link to the incoming President.

Emanuel talked directly to gov: source

President-elect Barack Obama's incoming chief of staff Rahm Emanuel had a deeper involvement in pressing for a U.S. Senate seat appointment than previously reported, the Sun-Times has learned. Emanuel had direct discussions about the seat with Gov. Blagojevich, who is is accused of trying to auction it to the highest bidder. Emanuel talked with the governor in the days following the Nov. 4 election and pressed early on for the appointment of Valerie Jarrett to the post, sources with knowledge of the conversations told the Sun-Times. There was no indication from sources that Emanuel brokered a deal, however. A source with the Obama camp strongly denied Emanuel spoke with the governor directly about the seat, saying Emanuel only spoke with Blagojevich once recently to say he was taking the chief of staff post. But sources with knowledge of the investigation said Blagojevich told his aides about the calls with Emanuel and sometimes gave them directions afterward. Sources said that early on, Emanuel pushed for the appointment of Jarrett to the governor and his staff and asked that it be done by a certain date. At least some of the conversations between Emanuel and Blagojevich were likely caught on tape, sources said. Full Story

The duties of a Chief of Staff is to run interference for your boss. The Chief of Staff does nothing without the President's knowledge and okay. It has now come out that Emanuel has been talking to Blagojevich and that a few of the conversations were taped. I am reminded of Watergate and what brought Nixon down. That started with a 3rd rate burglary, a cover-up by White House staff, and the eventual resignation of President Nixon. This could go the same way. A discredited governor (Blago), a crooked neighbor (Rezko), a candidate for the Senate seat (Jackson Jr.) and a Chief of Staff (Emanuel) all singing a pretty song to the Feds for an deal to keep them out of prison. Which will lead to a sitting President fulfilling his office behind bars in a Federal Penitentiary.

Now that would be a first!

A Chicagoan's Perspective on Obama, Rezko and Corruption

This corner lot formerly owned by Antoin "Tony" Rezko's wife, Rita, is next door to the home (right) of U.S. Sen. Barack Obama in Chicago's Kenwood neighborhood. (Tribune photo by Milbert O. Brown / March 6, 2008)

Rezko, Obama, and Chicago Corruption by Abraham H. Miller July 5, 2008

Abraham H. Miller is an emeritus professor of political science. He grew up in Chicago's notorious 24th Ward, and he is author of a recent work of Chicago-based fiction, 'Vorshavsky: A Chicago Story.'

If Tony Rezko were young, blonde and disappeared on a Caribbean Island, Greta Van Sustern would have been all over the Rezko trial. And that very particular Chicago definition of 'clout' would have been ingrained in everyone's lexicon.

But Tony (Antoin) Rezko is simply another middle-aged, bald, Chicago developer who was involved in an influence peddling and kick-back scheme that was connected to a number of politicians, a couple of pension funds, an Iraqi businessman (prepared to upfront millions for bail) and, oh yes, Senator Barack Obama. A jury hit Tony with a conviction on sixteen felony counts out of twenty four in the indictment.

Corruption, at least corruption old-fashioned Chicago style, is par for the city's political culture. Unlike corruption in other cities, Chicago corruption usually trickled down to the little guy. The myth is that everyone benefited. Of course, some people benefited a lot more than others.

And Chicago corruption was always underscored by a nice dose of reality. When one prominent politician was asked about directing the city's insurance business to his relatives, he gave a resoundingly uncomplicated answer: Why would anyone bother to go into politics, if he couldn't throw a little business to his loved ones.

We Chicagoans can resonate to the crisp truthfulness of the response.

Unlike academia where the corruption is so intense, the stakes are so small, and the justifications truly Kafkaesque, the guy on the right side of the take in Chicago could, well, like Tony Rezko, buy a great mansion in fashionable Wilmette, or like Barack Obama get a real discount on a mansion in trendy and liberal Hyde Park-Kenwood.

No further rationale would be required.

Since 1972, on average two Chicago politicians per year have been convicted of felonies. In 1991, when not one Chicago Alderman was convicted or even indicted, the Sun-Times ran that deviant event as a front-page story.

Michelle Obama spent just three years at the Chicago Law Firm of Sidley Austin, far less than a typical associate on the career path to be partner. In a move incongruous with the alleged iconic credentials that are a mainstay of the Michelle hagiography, she took a job with the Democratic machine.

Probably some people think you leave a high- powered, prestigious law firm like Sidley Austin to take a job with the Chicago machine to save the world. But no one who knows how Chicago works is going to buy that!

Michelle was subsequently hired by the University of Chicago, ultimately ending up as the University of Chicago Hospital's Vice President for External Affairs. Barack was chair of the Illinois Senate's powerful Health and Human Services Committee, the position tied by some to the Rezko scandal.

If you don't get the picture, you are definitely not from Chicago.

In 2007 the not-for-profit University of Chicago hospital turned out a profit of 143 million, and is up 118 million for 2008. The hospital is scheduled to receive a 30 million infusion from Medicaid, and will be turning some of its Medicaid patients to another hospital to free up space for its private insurance paying patients. According to the (London ) Daily Mail (online), in 2006 the hospital turned away an indigent man, who died.

When Michelle exhorts young people to turn down the profit system and do something meaningful with their lives, apparently this is not the example she means to convey.

Now you might ask what does a community relations director at a university do? That's really a naive question. The question is who does the community relation's director know?

The answer became apparent when Barack was elected to the U.S. Senate and Michelle's salary more than doubled.

Barack and Michelle were a power couple hooked into the Democratic machine. Tony Rezko cultivated them, the Chicago Way. When the Obamas bought their mansion in trendy Hyde Park-Kenwood, Mrs. Rezko bought the lot next door for asking price in a coordinated deal from the same seller. The Obamas got their house at a discount. Mrs. Rezko paid full price. Later, Mrs. Rezko sold part of the lot to the Obamas to expand their back yard.

What Rezko wanted from Obama became apparent later.

To understand the genius of Rezko, you need to understand that for generations, corruption in Chicago was partisan specific. As my mother used to say when she split her ticket, 'You need some Republicans. Then the machine can't steal as much.'

But then came the Chicago Combine: bipartisan corruption you could believe in. Rezko established a typical Chicago 'pay for play' scheme, but one that crossed party lines. You want to build a hospital, you had to pay Rezko, who paid the appropriate people who could help you play. The problem that Rezko faced was the hospital board had fifteen members and that is a lot of people to bribe and a lot of loose ends. But then Rezko had a friend who chaired the Illinois Senate's Health and Human Services Committee.

Enter State Senator Barack Obama, who is credited as the moving force behind a piece of bipartisan legislation (Il. Senate Bill 1332) that reduced the hospital board to nine people, to be appointed by Governor Rod Blagojevich (know as Governor 'Blago') with advice and consent of the Illinois Senate.

Blago immediately appointed three physicians, Rezko cronies with similar Middle Eastern backgrounds, all of whom were coincidentally big contributors to Barack Obama. As they say downtown, Barack knows how to walk the Chicago Way. Rezko became the guy you saw if you wanted to build a health care facility. He controlled the board's votes.

The three appointed physicians have been convicted in the Federal probe and are rumored to be about ready to sing. Rumor also has it that Patricia Blagojevich, the governor's wife, is next in line for an indictment. The Chicago press is now 24/7 on active 'Patti Watch.' For his part, Rezko just sent a 'I will not rat out my pals letter,' to United States District Judge Amy St. Eve. Veteran observers of the Chicago crime scene note that the guys who don't sing, don't write letters. They just clam up. You write a letter because you want the other guys to be reminded to take care of your wife and kids'college is expensive. So, what else does Rezko expect, a presidential pardon, ala Bill Clinton and Carlos Vignali, the dope dealer Clinton's brother-in-law, Hugh Rodham, represented? So, here's the deal. If you don't want a president making it in the alcove near the Oval Office, don't elect a guy with a history as a rake and a swordsman. If you don't want a president who can't negotiate with the majority of his own party, don't elect a backwoods, Southern governor with a Jesus complex. If you don't want a president who orders the break in of the opposition, don't elect a guy whose career was saturated by paranoia. And if you want to make sure that the White House is not going to be tainted by corruption, don't elect a president who grew up in the Chicago political system and whose wife thinks that the country owes her some palliative to eliminate her sense of personal shame. Because unlike the stock market, when it comes to human behavior, past performance really is indicative of future results. End Abraham H. Miller article ______________________________________________________________________ Chicago Suntimes, January 26, 2008

Obama has never agreed to an interview about Rezko, but after Clinton injected the name into the campaign on Monday, on Wednesday, ABC's "Good Morning America's" Diane Sawyer asked Obama about Rezko. Obama made it seem like he hardly knew Rezko -- who was a friend, a client and a fund-raiser -- and was clueless about Rezko's potential criminal legal problems that had been reported by the Chicago press.

Chicago Tribune, David Jackson, March 15, 2008

...in a 90-minute interview with Tribune reporters and editors, Obama disclosed that Rezko had raised more for Obama's earlier political campaigns than previously known, gathering as much as $250,000 for the first three offices he sought.

LA Times Top of the Ticket

A federal jury in Chicago today convicted developer Antoin "Tony" Rezko of corruption charges for trading on his clout as a top adviser and fundraiser to Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Rezko's guilty verdict on 16 of 24 corruption counts could have broad repercussions for Blagojevich, who made Rezko a central player in his kitchen cabinet. It could also prove a political liability for U.S. Sen. Barack Obama.

Read more of Mr. Miller's work: American Thinker The Feminists and the Jews The Conservative Voice John McCain and the American Electorate