Obama And Romney Lawyers Protest Debate Moderator Candy Crowley Expressed Intention To Violate Contract « Pat Dollard

Obama And Romney Lawyers Protest Debate Moderator Candy Crowley Expressed Intention To Violate Contract « Pat Dollard:

'via Blog this'

Candy Crowley believes that the debate is about her; I'd be willing to bet that she also thinks it is her job to rescue her candidate (President Obama) from himself. After all, the poor guy is going to be absent a TelePrompTer.

The President has demonstrated that he suffers from a fatal dose of ego; that is, hubris, the stuff of Greek tragedies. The mighty fall prey to themselves through hubris...
And the President has taken a few days off his campaigning to study debating - but if a man is not teachable, a man cannot be taught. To be teachable, one has to recognize that they do not themselves, have all the information.

THAT, my dear friends, is going to be a challenge for this guy.

Imagine being the Obama debate coaching team! What a f-g nightmare!

Everyone knows working with entitlement junkies is a disaster. I cannot think of anyone who seems to be more entitled except maybe, Lindsay Lohan.

Anyhow, I am keeping my eyes on the moderator. Looks like both these guys are afraid she is going to color out of the lines!

UPDATE: Crowley did rescue Obama. Lead-in on Libya and cutting off Romney; giving him more time; insulting Romney's intelligence

What is in a debate?

Under normal circumstances few Americans watch the presidential circus. They just vote - or mostly, they do NOT vote. Few are involved, passionate or even interested enough to show up at the polls. But the first presidential debate drew over 67 million viewers and the Vice Presidential debate drew over 51 million. Why?

Hope or/and Change

Because this election year we are looking at a clear distinction in governing styles between Romney/Ryan and Obama/Biden. And because the electorate is about as unhappy and unconvinced as it can be that governance is anything more than spending our tax dollars on getting more votes with callous disregard for the consequences to hard-working Americans.

People were looking for Hope - the one thing they thought that Obama represented four years ago. That being said, he still has that icon around his neck, and for many, it will continue to ring. But for the disillusioned, the under or unemployed, those who have lost their homes or are in foreclosure, people who have seen their net worth drop by a quarter - many think this is the "new norm." Some - among the undecided, uninvolved and undeclared - are looking for a reason to hope. They watch the debates with an eye to the future, what's in it for me? or what's in it for my children? Do we see a road ahead with failed schools, poorly performing educators, bigger classrooms, shrunken Universities? Do we continue to see lawmakers vote state workers and themselves higher pay and benefits? Do we see more corporate handouts that fund unions and bosses, banks and Wall Street, with funds that end up in the pockets of CEOs and Union Leaders and leave the worker's in the hole? Do we continue to struggle in the maize of insurance companies, a situation that has gone from the best in the world to the most broken, with more people uninsured and health care more out reach than ever? What about the failed foreign policy that berates our ally Israel and elevates Muslims, who so viciously attacked us on 9/11 here and now, abroad? What of the endless lies and cover-ups - is the truth ever going to come?

And worse, what about this uncivil partisanship that rips the country apart, making whole areas of industry, states and cities where people cannot even state their political preference without facing political blacklisting? What happened to an open mind, civil discourse and compromise?

These Debates

What we hear in the press is that Romney won Round One. He was strong, persistent and totally unfazed by the President. His interruptions were polite but still, interruptions.

Biden came back and used that tactic with a vengeance! He never let Ryan get a full thought out and he had the help of the moderator, who also ripped on Ryan. Ryan did extremely well for two-on-one! BUT - he lost.

Both said a lot of things that the fact-checkers are not buying. Do Americans care? Not really. Only us political junkies rip apart the details of budget, medicare or Benghazi.

What matters most is how people PERCEIVE things - and how did they perceive the debate? Women who are not "true believers" (meaning, affiliated with a political party) by and large turned it off. Yelling and interrupting and rolling eyes and inappropriate laughter do NOT play well with people. It looks like bullying - because it is. Old Joe was establishing his Old Joe-ness credentials. He did well and he established that he is an old, mad, entrenched politician who thinks he DESERVES to be Vice President - and that this business of getting ELECTED- is just a waste of his time!

So, why did they watch in such large numbers?

I do not believe that it is because Americans are happy with the current administration and the direction that the country is going in. They are not. They are trying to find some minuscule reason to vote for either one or the other candidate in the hope that somehow, something will change.

What did this accomplish?

I do not think that many people were swayed either one way or the other, but it won't take a lot. I believe that Scott Rasmussen is correct. The famous pollster says that it is a "begrudging" switch, from one to the other in a close race - that made this so-called 'surge' for Mitt Romney.

The fact that I support Mitt Romney and that I have worked hard this year in many capacities does not make him the winner just coz they said it was so, so many times. Mitt Romney does NOT have a secure lead, and the race is still breathtakingly close.

Given that there are two debates still to go - I believe that they may indeed, this time, sway voters. Like the famous Nixon/Kennedy debate in 1960, this may be the most important thing.

The Libya Factor

The death of our Ambassador and three other Americans in the terrorist attack on the Embassy in Benghazi is really getting headway. Will it make a difference? Its possible. During the Nixon/McGovern campaign, Nixon won EVEN THOUGH WATERGATE WAS HAPPENING!
It was still small, but as a kid in High School growing up - I was using the issue of the missing minutes in the tape in speech tournaments the year before the November election. I worked for McGovern; I went door-to-door canvassing for him. People slammed the door in my 14-year-old face stating that Nixon was not guilty. He resigned a year later after being reelected in a landslide.

Maybe there are no parallels because we have the New Media vs. Old Media. Unfortunately, I think the New Media is not trusted by the majority and unless it is endorsed by the MSM, no one is listening.

And worse, there has to be tweeted, 5-second soundbyte to reach people. No one READS the paper, except old guys (like me); and most of us do not wait to watch the evening news.

October Surprises

In a tight race like this, October surprises are common things. I'm sure the Administration and its surrogate Super Pacs are doing their damnedest to find something that will stick to Romney-Ryan. And I know the same is true of the GOP ticket. I remember when Bruce Herschensohn ran against California State Senator Barbara Boxer, a woman who should never be allowed to speak or hold public office - The race was so close - and an operative accused Herschensohn of frequenting strip clubs. He lost. That's all it took. And of course, GOP candidates are held to higher standards. Who cares if someone goes to a strip club? The inflamed electorate, after the press gets to them. The candidate had made one visit on a double date with his girlfriend because the other couple had insisted. The other couple was working for Boxer... And they took pictures.

This election is going to be fraught with overtones of election fraud in every area, be it 'same-day registration," online registration, voter ID requirements - Its going to be horrendous. I have joined the Election Integrity Project to poll watch and to do the hard work of validating ballots after the election. I know I will be slammed by the press for it, but I don't care. This is the most precious privilege of a Democratic society, and I aim to protect it.

Contrary to the media-induced fog, the truth is that most fraud occurs in Democratic-controlled districts, and represents entrenched political interests, be it he Rainbow Coalition, ACORN or La Raza. Anyone who has read Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals understands how this is done and why there is such a full-court press against anyone who is a whistleblower. Think "Lance Armstrong doping scandal," and you will see what we are up against. Entrenched political machines and entrenched politicians that "own" whole districts...

Conclusions

What will happen? Don't get complacent. Keep moving it forward, because this is a nail biter. Which

Think the fourth quarter of a tight football game. USC vs. Notre Dame. Its 21-21 and Notre Dame has the ball. They fumble. USC gets it on the 40 yard line. Are they gonna run it or kick it? They run it. Third down. One yard to go, they fumble. Here we are.

US Ambassador to Libya killed - live - Telegraph

US Ambassador to Libya killed - live - Telegraph

In this article there is a timeline for the attack and the subsequent failure of both the administration and the Romney detail to adequately respond to a situation that is no longer smoldering. It has been smoldering far too long. It is now fully ablaze.

As the days stretch forward during an election that is heated and as close as it can get - it remains to be seen what the current administration can do to stop another debacle, such as that seen during the Carter administration.

Carter had only one country to deal with - Iran - and he did so poorly, leading to fall of the Shah, the rise of Khomeini, the exodus of Iranian Jews, the rise of Islamic extremism and the deaths of thousands. To this day Iran lives under the religious control of Islamists, leading the rest of the Middle East to the same.

What has happened in Libya, Egypt Tunisia, Yemen and countries across the Middle East is no less than terrifying. As an American, a Catholic, a woman, and a person of Jewish extraction, I am fearful.

It should be noted that this is from a UK journal, that the reporting is decidedly Pro-Obama; the most common position of the British press.

I wait to see what will happen with baited breath. I fear not strength, but weakness.

For More Information
The other side of the argument
And this Eyewitness account

Why Are People Mean?

Meanness is abundant.

It lives in the car at the intersection, the checkout line at the grocery, the cop on the beat.
It lives under burkhas and in churches, in alleyways and mansions.

But meanness is a peculiarly human institution. Dogs are not mean, unless they are mistreated by humans. The animal world is not unkind to itself. They do not take potshots at other individuals just for fun. They don't have egos. They don't hold grudges. They don't kill for sport.

Fidel Lopez endured unbearable cruelty at the hands of his attackers at the flashpoint at Florence and Normandy during the LA Riots of 1992. He has lived a subdued life, without bitterness; but his life was irrevocably altered, from promising, to difficult. He has suffered the after-affects and his family have born the years of desperation and recuperation that resulted from their losses.

Rev. Bennie Newton, saved his life. Holding a Bible aloft, he warned rioters: "Kill him, and you have to kill me too."

Another story that caught my attention today, the same day, was a brief about a woman who was starved, beaten and tortured in Afghanistan AT THE AGE OF 15 - so that her in-laws could force their new daughter-in-law into prostitution. The girl had her nails pulled out, among other things, before she was finally rescued.

Afghan child bride Sahar Gul, 15; mutilated for refusing prostitution and rescued from a toilet-prison.

And lastly, there is the story about Junior Seau, a man who is close to my heart because at one time, my deceased husband helped finance his football scholarship at USC... Seau is remembered as kind, generous and warm-hearted to a fault. What happened to him?

Cruelty exists and is tolerated, even encouraged by governments.

For the last seven months, at the end of each day, and first thing in the morning, I pray to be kind today. It is the hardest thing I have ever done, and the best.

May we all be kind to one another today.

Thoughts On Taxes, Health Care and the Politics of Dependence

First, the Presidential Election.
How in the world can there be a virtual tie in this race?
The country is in the can. No one is hiring. People are becoming wards of the state, claiming unemployment insurance, disability, food stamps, section 8 housing - in droves. Our national debt exceeds our current GDP! How can that happen? Welfare spending is up 41% under Obama!
Where is America? Who are we? Are we dependents for life? Are we a people who give up hope and turn in our independence for a shekel? When did that happen?
How do we get past this and create jobs? Do we continue to expand the government? Is the government the only acceptable employer anymore? I think that is BS!

The president gave a speech yesterday in which he said congress should only extend the Bush-era tax cuts to those who earned under $250,000. Excuse me, but aren't those so-called "wealthy" the people who will hire Americans and put them back to work? We need to lower taxes, provide incentives for hiring and free up businesses from all this tax and regulation so we can get people back to work!
Lose the taxes, baby!
Give incentives!
Freedom from all these burdens would ease businesses back into business!
What is wrong with this picture? If I could afford more gas, I would drive more, but taxes are too high.
And if employers are penalized for hiring - ie, have to pay taxes and fees; if they are penalized for being successful in business and therefore earning more, and forced to pay higher taxes; if employees cost more to hire, ie. healthcare and payroll taxes, regulations and entitlements, liability and other compliance issues - why would anyone who is in business to make money hire?
And let me add this:
There is no reason to hire someone who is over 45. Why should they? That person will cost between two and three times more in health care benefits. Their experience is usually not that valuable when compared to the benefit of hiring a young whipper-snapper with social media skills and techno-savvy, au-courent with trending culture - who can do the job, albeit from another perspective that is perhaps, more aligned with the modern young consumer.

Health Care:
How many times have I heard someone tell me they are going for their colonoscopy at the end of the year because they have met their deductible and it is "paid for"?
The price of healthcare goes up when people don't look at the bill and have to pay it themselves out of their own pockets. With medical insurance, a third party pays for it. If it came out of your own pocket, you would be looking for a better deal. You would be searching for quality, cost, service. 
Now - we are all screwed. There is no incentive to provide any of those things. 
What is more, doctors who will have to contract with the self-limiting insurance companies, and deal with non-physician bean-counters who will determine treatment based on cost - will be leaving the business in droves, reported the Doctor Patient Medical Association.

"Nine out of 10 doctors say medicine is on the worng track, most think about quitting and find it hard to practice ethical medicine. They say government's to blame for the mess, but are quick to add neither Congress nor the President - can be trusted to fix things."

These physicians are thinking of quitting. ONLY 5% are happy about Obamacare. 

"The survey includes 699 doctors, 23% Primary Care Providers, 10% General Surgery, 11% Hospital-based specialists and 56% Office-based specialists in active practice across 45 states."

This is real.

What throws me through a loop is this: when did "health care" become synonymous with "health insurance?"

Health insurance is a product that was designed to pool resources against the possibility of a health care crisis. 

It is not meant to be a pool of money out of which consumers and physicians select the benefits they will take advantage of.

In the former case, health care is determined by the doctor in accordance with the needs of the patient.

In the latter, health care is determined by the services that are covered under a specific health care policy. If what you need is not covered, too bad. You don't get it. 

On the other hand, even if you don't need it, what the hell, its covered! So a smart physician or physician's medical group, will own the facility that you will be sent to for lab work, MRI, CT scan, physical therapy, prosthetics, after care, etc. That way, its kept all in the family. So what if you really don't need that physical therapy? It's covered by your insurance! So what if you need another 6 months of physical therapy after your surgery? You are only covered for ten sessions. Too bad.

And what about your 90-year old mother?

She is a poor return on the investment. Give her pain meds to shut her up and be done with it. Forget the fact that she is mentally alert, capable, fun, a part of your life, your children's life, a brilliant artist and scholar who contributed so much to society -

She is still a bad return on the investment. Her insurance, Medicare, doesn't cover that procedure. Too bad.

But she can have all the pain meds she wants!

One provision of the new PPACA is reporting and measuring. Anyone who has been involved with the health care system in a critical way, when someone had a catastrophic illness, knows that this "measuring" is arbitrary, inhumane and horrendous.

These metrics are standards that set precedents for levels of care. For example, is the patient ambulatory? continent? able to administer their own medications? cognizant of the date and time?

These metrics determine a patient's coverage; as they are met, treatment is revised. From the outside looking in, it may sound like a good idea. But when you are in it, with a patient in critical need of care, it is highly insufficient. 

When the patient is deemed to have met certain standards according to the authority, usually not a physician, they can get kicked out of a facility and returned to the home to be cared for by family members. These are usually people in the home who must work and maintain a household without help for their loved one. They change diapers, help the patient to the bathroom, feed and care for a loved one who is in need of in-patient care that is not covered by their policy. 

In one example, what if a person is suffering from a brain injury, something that is more and more common as the veterans return. Their behavior may be unpredictable; they may have holes in their cognition that are hard to recognize until faced with a specific situation; continued therapy may afford these patients greater resolution of their problems, but it is not available to them.

That the patient would indeed, benefit from continued treatment on a staid course - has no bearing on the decision by the insurance company. 

In our current system, this is indeed the case. It is a problem that will only become worse. 

May I also say this: 

An article today in the Wall Street Journal, The Crushing Cost of Health Care reports once again, that the bulk of medical costs go to a very small percentage of ill patients.

A goodly percentage of health care costs are wracked up by lifestyle choices - including overeating, drug and alcohol use, risky sports and jobs, sitting on the couch watching tv and eating chips and dip while you smoke and drink beer -

Should someone who is conscientious about the maintenance of their health have to go into a pool with people who risk their health on lifestyle choices? Shouldn't we be allowed or afforded the opportunity to opt out and pay for our own health care out of pocket if we want to? Could people be afforded the opportunity to join a collective for catastrophic care only - such as broken bones and ER visits, and catastrophic illnesses? 

Living a healthy lifestyle, exercising and eating well, refraining from habits that are known to cause illness - should allow a person to opt out. This bill provides no incentive for taking responsibility for oneself. It favors the person who opts to take a pill to diet, to control cholesterol, to fight depression, to control heart disease - and taxes the person who uses health providers sparingly because that person prefers to take responsibility for their well-being. It also removes the freedom of the health care savings plans that afford the opportunity for people to spend their dollars where they think the money is best spent, on alternative medicine, such as acupuncture or massage, on therapy or a gym. Instead, it encourages the "take a pill" mentality. Take a pain pill, take an anti-depressant, take a diet pill - 

We saw this coming when we fought off Hillarycare in the Clinton administration. There is a historic link between Big Pharma and the Democratic party that continues in the Obama administration. See this article in the HuffPost. And look at how drug costs have skyrocketed!

I don't know if any political party is interested in the actual welfare of the public. No one seems to care about getting America back to work. No one seems to care about this ridiculous approach to "health care" that is really a big pay off to the insurance companies and a huge tax increase on the American public that will force every American to be dependent upon a third party payer for their most basic health needs, no matter what. 

For me, give me Liberty or Give Me Death!

"If I wanted America to FAIL I would prey on the goodness and decency of ordinary Americans. . .  If I wanted America to fail, I suppose I wouldn't change a thing."

L'Affaire Risky

Just look at this beautiful woman!

So. You are a Secret Service detail for the President of the United States, arguably the most important and influential and powerful man on earth. And you want a little nookie. There you are in Cartagena, Colombia and the pre-work is done; all you have left is time on your hands and you can't really leave the area to sightsee or shop. You're holed up in a hotel with American military personell and those guys have discovered that prostitution is legal in Colombia. What is a boy gonna do??

So, maybe it was a security breach... According to Isikoff's article (linked above):

"U.S. officials have described the agents' conduct as a potential security breach especially because all the agents involved had access to the president's day-by-day, minute-by-minute schedule. But one official familiar with the security arrangements said that there were no specific security threats during the president's trip. Although agents upon arrival were briefed about current activities by leftist FARC guerrillas and local drug cartels, they were told neither had made any specific threats to the president."

Bad Boys!

There they were, hanging at the Pley Club, waiting for the boss to show and watching the military guys going at it, hey - 

Must have been fun! What pisses me off - is the stoopido move of being too cheap to pay the girl what she asked for! Two guys is a lot of work! They actually took advantage of her services and tried to split it like a friggin meal at a restaurant! You know she had to work twice as hard! What were they thinking?







SHAME on the Secret Service! Don't they have any manners? These guys had no integrity. They got what they deserved!