Original Post: Examiner
Video
On November 6, 2012, the New Black Panthers (NBP) were photographed outside an Ohio polling place intimidating voters. K. Williams posted a photo via Twitter of the New Black Panthers standing outside an Ohio polling location. These New Black Panthers were out in full force during Election Day across the nation to ensure Barack Obama got his share of popular votes.
One cannot prove if the NBP had an affect on enough voters to make a difference in the outcome of the election, but one thing you can be sure enabling any group to get away with such offenses will only result in more intimidation throughout the legal and political system.
Veterans stood unknown amongst the crowds in known polling areas where voter intimidation took place in the 2008 elections. Some former Army Rangers, Navy Seals, Delta Force, Green Berets and other ex-military volunteered to allow every American their right to vote.
As reported by Philymag.com, U.S. Navy Seal, Ben Brink told Fox News he is reaching out to former special operations veterans to help monitor the polls, especially in known area where there has been voter intimidation. Ben Brink said on the Larry Mendte Show, “The nation saw the video of members of the Black Panthers in Philadelphia intimidating people trying to vote in 2008. We are going to try and make certain that nothing like that happens this year.”
Brink claims to have over a hundred former Army Rangers, Navy Seal, Delta Force, Green Berets and others who have volunteered for duty. The idea of Navy Seals and Black Panthers getting into it at a Philly polling site gives a whole new incentive for casting a ballot. “Our guys aren't easily intimidated,” Brink added.
The intimidating New Black Panthers are a comparison to the Ku Klux Klan of the 60's and American veterans are a comparison to Special Ops of retired military personnel that still stand for freedom. Real winners never have to cheat.
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Friday, November 9, 2012
NHS kills off 130,000 elderly patients every year
Original Post:Daily Mail
By STEVE DOUGHTY
Worrying claim: Professor Patrick Pullicino said doctors had turned the use of a controversial 'death pathway' into the equivalent of euthanasia of the elderly NHS doctors are prematurely ending the lives of thousands of elderly hospital patients because they are difficult to manage or to free up beds, a senior consultant claimed yesterday.
Professor Patrick Pullicino said doctors had turned the use of a controversial ‘death pathway’ into the equivalent of euthanasia of the elderly.
He claimed there was often a lack of clear evidence for initiating the Liverpool Care Pathway, a method of looking after terminally ill patients that is used in hospitals across the country.
It is designed to come into force when doctors believe it is impossible for a patient to recover and death is imminent.
There are around 450,000 deaths in Britain each year of people who are in hospital or under NHS care. Around 29 per cent – 130,000 – are of patients who were on the LCP. Professor Pullicino claimed that far too often elderly patients who could live longer are placed on the LCP and it had now become an ‘assisted death pathway rather than a care pathway’.
He cited ‘pressure on beds and difficulty with nursing confused or difficult-to-manage elderly patients’ as factors.
Professor Pullicino revealed he had personally intervened to take a patient off the LCP who went on to be successfully treated.
He said this showed that claims they had hours or days left are ‘palpably false’. In the example he revealed a 71-year-old who was admitted to hospital suffering from pneumonia and epilepsy was put on the LCP by a covering doctor on a weekend shift.
RIGHTMINDS: Killing patients because they're difficult to manage is wrong, but who would want to go on living as a vegetable?
We DON'T want to strike: On the eve of their walk-out, doctors signal that they're ready to put their patients first
Professor Pullicino said he had returned to work after a weekend to find the patient unresponsive and his family upset because they had not agreed to place him on the LCP.
‘I removed the patient from the LCP despite significant resistance,’ he said. ‘His seizures came under control and four weeks later he was discharged home to his family,’ he said.
Professor Pullicino, a consultant neurologist for East Kent Hospitals and Professor of Clinical Neurosciences at the University of Kent, was speaking to the Royal Society of Medicine in London.
Distressing: The professor has claimed an approved technique of looking after the terminally ill is not being used in all hospitals He said: ‘The lack of evidence for initiating the Liverpool Care Pathway makes it an assisted death pathway rather than a care pathway.
‘Very likely many elderly patients who could live substantially longer are being killed by the LCP.
‘Patients are frequently put on the pathway without a proper analysis of their condition.
‘Predicting death in a time frame of three to four days, or even at any other specific time, is not possible scientifically.
This determination in the LCP leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy. The personal views of the physician or other medical team members of perceived quality of life or low likelihood of a good outcome are probably central in putting a patient on the LCP.’ He added: ‘If we accept the Liverpool Care Pathway we accept that euthanasia is part of the standard way of dying as it is now associated with 29 per cent of NHS deaths.’ The LCP was developed in the North West during the 1990s and recommended to hospitals by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in 2004.
Medical criticisms of the Liverpool Care Pathway were voiced nearly three years ago. Experts including Peter Millard, emeritus professor of geriatrics at the University of London, and Dr Peter Hargreaves, palliative care consultant at St Luke’s cancer centre in Guildford, Surrey, warned of ‘backdoor euthanasia’ and the risk that economic factors were being brought into the treatment of vulnerable patients. In the example of the 71-year-old, Professor Pullicino revealed he had given the patient another 14 months of life by demanding the man be removed from the LCP. Professor Pullicino said the patient was an Italian who spoke poor English, but was living with a ‘supportive wife and daughter’. He had a history of cerebral haemorrhage and subsequent seizures.
Professor Pullicino said: ‘I found him deeply unresponsive on a Monday morning and was told he had been put on the LCP. He was on morphine via a syringe driver.’ He added: ‘I removed the patient from the LCP despite significant resistance.’ The patient’s extra 14 months of life came at considerable cost to the NHS and the taxpayer, Professor Pullicino indicated.
He said he needed extensive support with wheelchair, ramps and nursing. After 14 months the patient was admitted to a different hospital with pneumonia and put on the LCP. The man died five hours later.
A Department of Health spokesman said: ‘The Liverpool Care Pathway is not euthanasia and we do not recognise these figures. The pathway is recommended by NICE and has overwhelming support from clinicians – at home and abroad – including the Royal College of Physicians.
‘A patient’s condition is monitored at least every four hours and, if a patient improves, they are taken off the Liverpool Care Pathway and given whatever treatments best suit their new needs.’
By STEVE DOUGHTY
Worrying claim: Professor Patrick Pullicino said doctors had turned the use of a controversial 'death pathway' into the equivalent of euthanasia of the elderly NHS doctors are prematurely ending the lives of thousands of elderly hospital patients because they are difficult to manage or to free up beds, a senior consultant claimed yesterday.
Professor Patrick Pullicino said doctors had turned the use of a controversial ‘death pathway’ into the equivalent of euthanasia of the elderly.
He claimed there was often a lack of clear evidence for initiating the Liverpool Care Pathway, a method of looking after terminally ill patients that is used in hospitals across the country.
It is designed to come into force when doctors believe it is impossible for a patient to recover and death is imminent.
There are around 450,000 deaths in Britain each year of people who are in hospital or under NHS care. Around 29 per cent – 130,000 – are of patients who were on the LCP. Professor Pullicino claimed that far too often elderly patients who could live longer are placed on the LCP and it had now become an ‘assisted death pathway rather than a care pathway’.
He cited ‘pressure on beds and difficulty with nursing confused or difficult-to-manage elderly patients’ as factors.
Professor Pullicino revealed he had personally intervened to take a patient off the LCP who went on to be successfully treated.
He said this showed that claims they had hours or days left are ‘palpably false’. In the example he revealed a 71-year-old who was admitted to hospital suffering from pneumonia and epilepsy was put on the LCP by a covering doctor on a weekend shift.
RIGHTMINDS: Killing patients because they're difficult to manage is wrong, but who would want to go on living as a vegetable?
We DON'T want to strike: On the eve of their walk-out, doctors signal that they're ready to put their patients first
Professor Pullicino said he had returned to work after a weekend to find the patient unresponsive and his family upset because they had not agreed to place him on the LCP.
‘I removed the patient from the LCP despite significant resistance,’ he said. ‘His seizures came under control and four weeks later he was discharged home to his family,’ he said.
Professor Pullicino, a consultant neurologist for East Kent Hospitals and Professor of Clinical Neurosciences at the University of Kent, was speaking to the Royal Society of Medicine in London.
Distressing: The professor has claimed an approved technique of looking after the terminally ill is not being used in all hospitals He said: ‘The lack of evidence for initiating the Liverpool Care Pathway makes it an assisted death pathway rather than a care pathway.
‘Very likely many elderly patients who could live substantially longer are being killed by the LCP.
‘Patients are frequently put on the pathway without a proper analysis of their condition.
‘Predicting death in a time frame of three to four days, or even at any other specific time, is not possible scientifically.
This determination in the LCP leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy. The personal views of the physician or other medical team members of perceived quality of life or low likelihood of a good outcome are probably central in putting a patient on the LCP.’ He added: ‘If we accept the Liverpool Care Pathway we accept that euthanasia is part of the standard way of dying as it is now associated with 29 per cent of NHS deaths.’ The LCP was developed in the North West during the 1990s and recommended to hospitals by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in 2004.
Medical criticisms of the Liverpool Care Pathway were voiced nearly three years ago. Experts including Peter Millard, emeritus professor of geriatrics at the University of London, and Dr Peter Hargreaves, palliative care consultant at St Luke’s cancer centre in Guildford, Surrey, warned of ‘backdoor euthanasia’ and the risk that economic factors were being brought into the treatment of vulnerable patients. In the example of the 71-year-old, Professor Pullicino revealed he had given the patient another 14 months of life by demanding the man be removed from the LCP. Professor Pullicino said the patient was an Italian who spoke poor English, but was living with a ‘supportive wife and daughter’. He had a history of cerebral haemorrhage and subsequent seizures.
Professor Pullicino said: ‘I found him deeply unresponsive on a Monday morning and was told he had been put on the LCP. He was on morphine via a syringe driver.’ He added: ‘I removed the patient from the LCP despite significant resistance.’ The patient’s extra 14 months of life came at considerable cost to the NHS and the taxpayer, Professor Pullicino indicated.
He said he needed extensive support with wheelchair, ramps and nursing. After 14 months the patient was admitted to a different hospital with pneumonia and put on the LCP. The man died five hours later.
A Department of Health spokesman said: ‘The Liverpool Care Pathway is not euthanasia and we do not recognise these figures. The pathway is recommended by NICE and has overwhelming support from clinicians – at home and abroad – including the Royal College of Physicians.
‘A patient’s condition is monitored at least every four hours and, if a patient improves, they are taken off the Liverpool Care Pathway and given whatever treatments best suit their new needs.’
Monday, October 29, 2012
Our pick for president: Romney
Original Post: Orlando Sentinel
Two days after his lackluster first debate performance, President Barack Obama's re-election hopes got a timely boost. The government's monthly jobless report for September showed the nation's unemployment rate fell below 8 percent for the first time since he took office.
If that were the only metric that mattered, the president might credibly argue that the U.S. economy was finally on the right track. Unfortunately for him, and for the American people, he can't.
Economic growth, three years into the recovery, is anemic. Family incomes are down, poverty is up. Obama's Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, highlighted these and other hard truths in this week's second debate.
Even the September jobless numbers deserve an asterisk, because more than 4 million Americans have given up looking for work since January 2009.
And while the nation's economy is still sputtering nearly four years after Obama took office, the federal government is more than $5 trillion deeper in debt. It just racked up its fourth straight 13-figure shortfall.
We have little confidence that Obama would be more successful managing the economy and the budget in the next four years. For that reason, though we endorsed him in 2008, we are recommending Romney in this race.
Obama's defenders would argue that he inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression, and would have made more progress if not for obstruction from Republicans in Congress. But Democrats held strong majorities in the House and Senate during his first two years.
Other presidents have succeeded even with the other party controlling Capitol Hill. Democrat Bill Clinton presided over an economic boom and balanced the budget working with Republicans. Leaders find a way.
With Obama in charge, the federal government came perilously close to a default last year. Now it's lurching toward another crisis with the impending arrival of massive tax hikes and spending cuts on Jan. 1.
The next president is likely to be dealing with a Congress where at least one, if not both, chambers are controlled by Republicans. It verges on magical thinking to expect Obama to get different results in the next four years.
Two years ago, a bipartisan panel the president appointed recommended a 10-year, $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan. Rather than embrace it and sell it to the American people, Obama took his own, less ambitious plan to Congress, where it was largely ignored by both parties.
Now the president and his supporters are attacking Romney because his long-term budget blueprint calls for money-saving reforms to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, three of the biggest drivers of deficit spending. Obama would be more credible in critiquing the proposal if he had a serious alternative for bringing entitlement spending under control. He doesn't.
Romney is not our ideal candidate for president. We've been turned off by his appeals to social conservatives and immigration extremists. Like most presidential hopefuls, including Obama four years ago, Romney faces a steep learning curve on foreign policy.
But the core of Romney's campaign platform, his five-point plan, at least shows he understands that reviving the economy and repairing the government's balance sheet are imperative — now, not four years in the future.
Romney has a strong record of leadership to run on. He built a successful business. He rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics from scandal and mismanagement. As governor of Massachusetts, he worked with a Democrat-dominated legislature to close a $3billion budget deficit without borrowing or raising taxes, and pass the health plan that became a national model.
This is Romney's time to lead, again. If he doesn't produce results — even with a hostile Senate — we'll be ready in 2016 to get behind someone else who will.
We reject the innuendo that some critics have heaped on the president. We don't think he's a business-hating socialist. We don't think he's intent on weakening the American military. We don't think he's unpatriotic. And, no, we don't think he was born outside the United States.
But after reflecting on his four years in the White House, we also don't think that he's the best qualified candidate in this race.
We endorse Mitt Romney for president.
Two days after his lackluster first debate performance, President Barack Obama's re-election hopes got a timely boost. The government's monthly jobless report for September showed the nation's unemployment rate fell below 8 percent for the first time since he took office.
If that were the only metric that mattered, the president might credibly argue that the U.S. economy was finally on the right track. Unfortunately for him, and for the American people, he can't.
Economic growth, three years into the recovery, is anemic. Family incomes are down, poverty is up. Obama's Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, highlighted these and other hard truths in this week's second debate.
Even the September jobless numbers deserve an asterisk, because more than 4 million Americans have given up looking for work since January 2009.
And while the nation's economy is still sputtering nearly four years after Obama took office, the federal government is more than $5 trillion deeper in debt. It just racked up its fourth straight 13-figure shortfall.
We have little confidence that Obama would be more successful managing the economy and the budget in the next four years. For that reason, though we endorsed him in 2008, we are recommending Romney in this race.
Obama's defenders would argue that he inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression, and would have made more progress if not for obstruction from Republicans in Congress. But Democrats held strong majorities in the House and Senate during his first two years.
Other presidents have succeeded even with the other party controlling Capitol Hill. Democrat Bill Clinton presided over an economic boom and balanced the budget working with Republicans. Leaders find a way.
With Obama in charge, the federal government came perilously close to a default last year. Now it's lurching toward another crisis with the impending arrival of massive tax hikes and spending cuts on Jan. 1.
The next president is likely to be dealing with a Congress where at least one, if not both, chambers are controlled by Republicans. It verges on magical thinking to expect Obama to get different results in the next four years.
Two years ago, a bipartisan panel the president appointed recommended a 10-year, $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan. Rather than embrace it and sell it to the American people, Obama took his own, less ambitious plan to Congress, where it was largely ignored by both parties.
Now the president and his supporters are attacking Romney because his long-term budget blueprint calls for money-saving reforms to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, three of the biggest drivers of deficit spending. Obama would be more credible in critiquing the proposal if he had a serious alternative for bringing entitlement spending under control. He doesn't.
Romney is not our ideal candidate for president. We've been turned off by his appeals to social conservatives and immigration extremists. Like most presidential hopefuls, including Obama four years ago, Romney faces a steep learning curve on foreign policy.
But the core of Romney's campaign platform, his five-point plan, at least shows he understands that reviving the economy and repairing the government's balance sheet are imperative — now, not four years in the future.
Romney has a strong record of leadership to run on. He built a successful business. He rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics from scandal and mismanagement. As governor of Massachusetts, he worked with a Democrat-dominated legislature to close a $3billion budget deficit without borrowing or raising taxes, and pass the health plan that became a national model.
This is Romney's time to lead, again. If he doesn't produce results — even with a hostile Senate — we'll be ready in 2016 to get behind someone else who will.
We reject the innuendo that some critics have heaped on the president. We don't think he's a business-hating socialist. We don't think he's intent on weakening the American military. We don't think he's unpatriotic. And, no, we don't think he was born outside the United States.
But after reflecting on his four years in the White House, we also don't think that he's the best qualified candidate in this race.
We endorse Mitt Romney for president.
Sunday, October 28, 2012
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Voting Machines Force Voters to Vote for Obama
Guilford Co. voters say ballot cast for Romney came up Obama on machine
Original Post:Fox 8
by Scott Gustin, Brandon Jones and Charlie Glancy
GREENSBORO, N.C. –The presidential election is just around the corner and voting issues have already become a problem in Guilford County.
On Monday, several voters complained that their electronic ballot machine cast the wrong vote. All the complaints were made by people who voted at the Bur-Mil Park polling location.
One of the voters, Sher Coromalis, says she cast her ballot for Governor Mitt Romney, but every time she entered her vote the machine defaulted to President Obama. “I was so upset that this could happen,” said Coromalis.
Guilford County Board of Elections Director George Gilbert says the problem arises every election. It can be resolved after the machine is re-calibrated by poll workers. “It’s not a conspiracy it’s just a machine that needs to be corrected,” Gilbert said. After the third try, Coromalis says she was able to get her vote counted for Gov. Romney but was still annoyed.
“I should have just mailed it in,” Coromalis said. Marie Haydock, who also voted at the Bur-Mil Park polling location, had the same problem.
“The frustration is… every vote counts,” said Haydock. Elections officials say the machines have been fixed as of Tuesday, and no problems have been reported since.
Early voting ends November 3.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Obama condemns violence tied to anti-Muslim film
Apparently I have to post this because the President and Crowley have forgotten that it has happened. It has already gone down the Memory Hole.
Original Post:Yahoo
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — President Barack Obama is condemning an anti-Muslim film and the violence in the Middle East that has followed its release, saying there is "no speech that justifies mindless violence."
Obama says in a speech Tuesday before the U.N. General Assembly that "there are no words that excuse the killing of innocent" and "no video that justifies an attack on an embassy."
Obama says the video "is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well." The president was speaking in the aftermath of violent protests in the Middle East and North Africa connected to the release of an anti-Muslim video produced in the United States.
Four Americans were killed in Libya, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, along with more than 50 others in the violence.
During the Presidential debate tonight, Obama claims that he was standing in the Rose Garden on 9/11/12 and blamed the Libyan attack on terrorists. Mitt Romney called him on his lie and Obama turned to back him up. SHE AGREED WITH OBAMA!
She went along with the story that Obama called it a terrorist attack from day 1 and did not, in fact blame it on the video. That was less than a month ago. We have stories, we have video. It happened. I felt so bad for Mitt Romney standing there incredulously. It was a fact that the President said what he said and everyone knows it. Everyone, except apparently, Barack Obama and Candy Crowley. The thing is, I don't even think Obama thinks he was lying. I'll bet he's convinced himself that it's the truth. "It's not a lie if you believe it."
Information cannot stay buried. Candy goes on CNN later and recants her idiotic position and lets the world know that Romney was right, Obama lied and she's a fool. Maybe she should have stuck to the moderators traditional position of moderator and not Obama flunky.
Original Post:Yahoo
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — President Barack Obama is condemning an anti-Muslim film and the violence in the Middle East that has followed its release, saying there is "no speech that justifies mindless violence."
Obama says in a speech Tuesday before the U.N. General Assembly that "there are no words that excuse the killing of innocent" and "no video that justifies an attack on an embassy."
Obama says the video "is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well." The president was speaking in the aftermath of violent protests in the Middle East and North Africa connected to the release of an anti-Muslim video produced in the United States.
Four Americans were killed in Libya, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, along with more than 50 others in the violence.
During the Presidential debate tonight, Obama claims that he was standing in the Rose Garden on 9/11/12 and blamed the Libyan attack on terrorists. Mitt Romney called him on his lie and Obama turned to back him up. SHE AGREED WITH OBAMA!
She went along with the story that Obama called it a terrorist attack from day 1 and did not, in fact blame it on the video. That was less than a month ago. We have stories, we have video. It happened. I felt so bad for Mitt Romney standing there incredulously. It was a fact that the President said what he said and everyone knows it. Everyone, except apparently, Barack Obama and Candy Crowley. The thing is, I don't even think Obama thinks he was lying. I'll bet he's convinced himself that it's the truth. "It's not a lie if you believe it."
Information cannot stay buried. Candy goes on CNN later and recants her idiotic position and lets the world know that Romney was right, Obama lied and she's a fool. Maybe she should have stuck to the moderators traditional position of moderator and not Obama flunky.
Monday, October 15, 2012
SOLAR PANELS THAT BURST INTO FLAMES
Original Post:Human Events
By: Audrey Hudson
A congressional oversight panel wants to know when the Obama administration became aware of significant technological issues at a renewable energy company it helped fund, including the propensity of its solar panels to burst into flames when exposed to the sun.
Abound Solar Manufacturing was awarded a $400 million line-of-credit in taxpayer-backed loans from the Energy Department (DOE), and is the third company funded by President Barack Obama’s stimulus plan to go bankrupt, along with Solyndra and Beacon Power.
Republican Reps. Fred Upton of Michigan, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, along with Cliff Stearns of Florida and Cory Gardner of Colorado, sent a letter to Energy Secretary Steven Chu on Wednesday instructing the agency to turn over certain information on the loan.
“While documents prepared at the time DOE awarded a conditional commitment to Abound do not mention any technological problems, an engineering report submitted to DOE just two months before DOE closed Abound’s $400 million loan guarantee indicates that Abound’s panels were already experiencing significant efficiency and technological difficulties,” the lawmaker said.
Abound spent $70 million of the loan it received in 2011 before going bankrupt in July. Company officials blamed the failure on China for dumping solar panels subsidized by the Communist regime on the U.S. at prices below market value.
Upton’s committee led the congressional investigation into whether the Obama White House pressured the Energy Department to lend another solar panel company, Solyndra, $535 million in guaranteed loans. Solyndra filed for bankruptcy last year.
The committee is asking the Energy Department to turn over all engineering reports, tests and technical assessments it was provided by Abound, as well as all documents relating to the performance of its products by Oct. 24.
By: Audrey Hudson
A congressional oversight panel wants to know when the Obama administration became aware of significant technological issues at a renewable energy company it helped fund, including the propensity of its solar panels to burst into flames when exposed to the sun.
Abound Solar Manufacturing was awarded a $400 million line-of-credit in taxpayer-backed loans from the Energy Department (DOE), and is the third company funded by President Barack Obama’s stimulus plan to go bankrupt, along with Solyndra and Beacon Power.
Republican Reps. Fred Upton of Michigan, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, along with Cliff Stearns of Florida and Cory Gardner of Colorado, sent a letter to Energy Secretary Steven Chu on Wednesday instructing the agency to turn over certain information on the loan.
“While documents prepared at the time DOE awarded a conditional commitment to Abound do not mention any technological problems, an engineering report submitted to DOE just two months before DOE closed Abound’s $400 million loan guarantee indicates that Abound’s panels were already experiencing significant efficiency and technological difficulties,” the lawmaker said.
Abound spent $70 million of the loan it received in 2011 before going bankrupt in July. Company officials blamed the failure on China for dumping solar panels subsidized by the Communist regime on the U.S. at prices below market value.
Upton’s committee led the congressional investigation into whether the Obama White House pressured the Energy Department to lend another solar panel company, Solyndra, $535 million in guaranteed loans. Solyndra filed for bankruptcy last year.
The committee is asking the Energy Department to turn over all engineering reports, tests and technical assessments it was provided by Abound, as well as all documents relating to the performance of its products by Oct. 24.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)