December 1, 2009, 6:47 pm
Live Blogging Obama’s Afghan Speech
By JEFF ZELENY
Ruth Fremson/
The New York Times West Point cadets waited for President Obama to speak on Tuesday.
Setting the Scene | 7:11 p.m. Sheryl Gay Stolberg, who is on site at West Point, reports:
Many speeches have been delivered at the military academy, but never before have cadets heard orders directly from a commander-in-chief who could send them into a war zone.
There is a sense of anticipation in the air. A West Point official brought a handful of carefully selected cadets – seniors with impressive resumes – to speak to reporters.
Alexandra Rosenberg, 22, of Manhattan, is a Rhodes and Truman Scholar with plans of becoming a doctor. Eric Bernau, 21, of Rochester Minn., is the cadet public affairs officer, who spent a semester studying in China. And Tyler Gordy, 26, came to West Point after serving as an infantryman and getting wounded in Iraq. He is First Captain, supervising 4,000 cadets.
The New York Times One cadet was reading “The Kite Runner,” a novel set in Afghanistan, while he waited for the president to speak.
The three will be among those seated behind the secretary of state and secretary of defense for Mr. Obama’s speech, which Mr. Bernau described as “the most momentous day in our four years of the academy.”
“I mean, he’s the commander in chief, he’s our boss,” Mr. Bernau said. “It’s kind of like a shareholders meeting where you hear the strategy of the company.”
These cadets will graduate as second lieutenants and platoon leaders.
While Ms. Rosenberg will go to Oxford in the fall, the other two fully expect to be deployed, and have chosen the infantry as where they want to serve.
“This doesn’t make me nervous, it doesn’t scare me or anything,” Mr. Gordy said. “I have known this for five years now. What it does is give me a sense of direction.”
Speech Preparations | 6:47 p.m. President Obama’s address to the nation from the United States Military Academy at West Point will begin at 8 p.m. He left the White House after a daylong series of calls to foreign leaders, followed by a late-afternoon briefing to Congressional leaders.
By now, broad outlines of the speech are known: 30,000 more American troops will be sent to Afghanistan; the goal for beginning to withdraw the first wave of forces will be July 2011; the strategy is aimed at preventing Al Qaeda from returning to Afghanistan, where the Sept. 11 attacks were planned.
It is the president’s burden, of course, to explain why he believes the war in Afghanistan should be escalated.(...)"
I am so completely disgusted with some of the American People, the republican congress and senate, it took eight long years of Bush/Cheny and the republican rich insurance companys, Wallstreet to bring this great country to it's knees.
After stops in Japan, Singapore and China, and a final stop in South Korea today, President Obama is nearing the end of his first official trip to Asia.
Yesterday, President Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao announced a far-reaching package of measures to strengthen cooperation between the United States and China on clean energy. The White House blog posted a good round up of the six new clean energy measures:
The U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center will facilitate joint research and development of clean energy technologies by teams of scientists and engineers from the United States and China, as well as serve as a clearinghouse to help researchers in each country. The U.S.-China Electric Vehicles Initiative will include joint standards development, demonstration projects in more than a dozen cities, technical roadmapping and public education projects, all aimed at eventual deployment of electric vehicles to reduce oil dependence.The U.S. China Energy Efficiency Action Plan will allow the two countries to work together to improve the energy efficiency of buildings, industrial facilities, and consumer appliances, culminating with an annual U.S.-China Energy Efficiency Forum, rotating between the two countries.The U.S. China Renewable Energy Partnership will facilitate development of roadmaps for wide-spread renewable energy deployment. A new Advanced Grid Working Group made up of American and Chinese developers and strategists will help plan for grid modernization in both countries, and a new U.S.-China Renewable Energy Forum will be held annually, rotating between the two countries.A 21st Century Coal Initiative, for which the two Presidents pledged to promote cooperation on cleaner uses of coal, will include large-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) demonstration projects. A Shale Gas Initiative, will allow the U.S. and China to use experience gained in the United States to assess China’s shale gas potential, promote environmentally-sustainable development of shale gas resources, conduct joint technical studies to accelerate development of shale gas resources in China, and promote shale gas investment in China through the U.S.-China Oil and Gas Industry Forum, study tours, and workshops.The U.S. China Energy Cooperation Program will leverage private sector resources for project development work in China across a broad array of clean energy projects, to the benefit of both nations.
The U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center will facilitate joint research and development of clean energy technologies by teams of scientists and engineers from the United States and China, as well as serve as a clearinghouse to help researchers in each country.
The U.S.-China Electric Vehicles Initiative will include joint standards development, demonstration projects in more than a dozen cities, technical roadmapping and public education projects, all aimed at eventual deployment of electric vehicles to reduce oil dependence.
The U.S. China Energy Efficiency Action Plan will allow the two countries to work together to improve the energy efficiency of buildings, industrial facilities, and consumer appliances, culminating with an annual U.S.-China Energy Efficiency Forum, rotating between the two countries.
The U.S. China Renewable Energy Partnership will facilitate development of roadmaps for wide-spread renewable energy deployment. A new Advanced Grid Working Group made up of American and Chinese developers and strategists will help plan for grid modernization in both countries, and a new U.S.-China Renewable Energy Forum will be held annually, rotating between the two countries.
A 21st Century Coal Initiative, for which the two Presidents pledged to promote cooperation on cleaner uses of coal, will include large-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) demonstration projects.
A Shale Gas Initiative, will allow the U.S. and China to use experience gained in the United States to assess China’s shale gas potential, promote environmentally-sustainable development of shale gas resources, conduct joint technical studies to accelerate development of shale gas resources in China, and promote shale gas investment in China through the U.S.-China Oil and Gas Industry Forum, study tours, and workshops.
The U.S. China Energy Cooperation Program will leverage private sector resources for project development work in China across a broad array of clean energy projects, to the benefit of both nations.
In reacting to the news this morning that he had won the Nobel Peace Prize, the President struck a note of humility and recognized that the award was a nod to a vision of what is to come:
I am both surprised and deeply humbled by the decision of the Nobel Committee. Let me be clear: I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nationsTo be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.But I also know that this prize reflects the kind of world that those men and women, and all Americans, want to build -- a world that gives life to the promise of our founding documents. And I know that throughout history, the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes. And that is why I will accept this award as a call to action -- a call for all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21st century.
1) The Congressional Budget Office dealt Blue Dogs a blow Thursday by notifying House Democrats that tethering a public option to Medicare reimbursement rates would save the government $110 billion more than a public option in which the government has to negotiate rates with doctors and other health care providers.
The initial projections showed the difference between the two was $65 billion. But this shows it would cost the government a lot more money to heed moderate demands. House Democrats need to trim as much as $200 billion from a bill that most estimates peg at $1.1 trillion in order to meet President Obama's $900 billion target.
An actual robust public option saves money, and it's what the majority of constituents in districts like Rep. Mike Ross's district supports. Will Rep. Mike Ross actually listen to what the CBO says, or act like Senator Kent Conrad in dismissing the CBO's projections about the public option?
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR (AP) – 1 day ago
WASHINGTON — One of the most widely accepted arguments against a government medical plan for the middle class is that it would quash competition — just what private insurers seem to be doing themselves in many parts of the U.S.
Several studies show that in lots of places, one or two companies dominate the market. Critics say monopolistic conditions drive up premiums paid by employers and individuals.
For Democrats, the answer is a public plan that would compete with private insurers. Republicans see that as a government power grab. President Barack Obama looks to be trapped in the middle of an argument that could sink his effort to overhaul the health care system.
Even lawmakers opposed to a government plan have problems with the growing clout of the big private companies. "There is a serious problem with the lack of competition among insurers," said Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, one of the highest-cost states. "The impact on the consumer is significant."
Wellpoint Inc. accounted for 71 percent of the Maine market, while runner-up Aetna had a 12 percent share, according to a 2008 report by the American Medical Association.
Proponents of a government plan say it could restore a competitive balance and lead to lower costs. For one thing, it wouldn't have to turn a profit.
A study by the Urban Institute public policy center estimated that a public plan could save taxpayers from $224 billion to $400 billion over 10 years by lowering the cost of proposed subsidies for the uninsured, while preserving private coverage for most people.
"Right now, there's no incentive for insurers or big hospital groups to negotiate with each other, because they can pass higher payments on through premiums," said economist Linda Blumberg, co-author of the report.
"A public plan would have the leverage to set lower payment rates and get providers to participate at those rates."
"The private plans would come back to the providers and say, 'If you don't negotiate with me, you're going to be left with only the public plan.'" Blumberg continued. "Suddenly, you have a very strong economic incentive for them to negotiate."
Insurers contend their industry is extremely competitive, and a public plan is unnecessary. About 1,300 carriers operate across the country, although many only have a small share of the market in their states.
"You can have a very competitive market and still have companies with a high market share," said Alissa Fox, a top Washington lobbyist for the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association. Fox points to the federal employee health program, which also covers members of Congress. It offers a total of more than 260 options and 10 nationwide plans. Despite all the choices, about 60 percent of federal workers pick a Blue Cross plan. "Insurers need to be of a significant size to best serve their customers and make sure that people get the best value," Fox said.
Nonetheless, lawmakers are concerned. Big insurers are getting bigger. Small businesses in particular have fewer and fewer options for getting coverage.
Congressional investigators this year looked at insurers catering to small employers around the country. The Government Accountability Office found that the median _or midpoint — market share of largest carrier increased to 47 percent in 2008 from 33 percent in 2002.
There's widespread recognition among lawmakers that a health care overhaul should foster more competition among insurers. The debate is over how far to go.
The basic framework lawmakers are looking at would encourage competition, even without a government plan. It calls for setting up a big insurance purchasing pool called an exchange. It would be open, at least initially, to individuals and small businesses. The government would offer subsidies to make premiums more affordable.
Consumers would find it much easier to shop for a plan through the exchange. For one thing, they would be able to readily compare benefits and premiums in different plans. Also, participating insurers would have to take all applicants and not charge higher premiums to those in poor health.
Offering the option of a public plan would supercharge the competition, supporters say.
Blumberg envisions a plan that pays medical providers more than Medicare, but less than private insurance. Her study estimated it could grow to 47 million members, leaving 161 million with private insurance. Even so, that would make the new public plan one of the largest insurers in the country, rivaling Medicare, Medicaid and big private companies such as Wellpoint and UnitedHealthcare.
It's a scenario that gives pause even to traditional adversaries of the insurance companies.
"The fear and concern is that the public plan could become the market-dominant plan," said Dr. James Rohack, president of the American Medical Association. "When you've got the federal government involved, it can infuse money into a plan to keep it solvent even if the premiums are lower than its actual costs."
Snowe, among the few Republican senators still trying to come up with a bipartisan compromise, wants to hold back on creating a public plan for now and give insurers one last chance to show if they can keep costs in check.
That's doesn't go far enough for liberals, who are loath to give the insurance industry tens of millions of new customers supported by taxpayer subsidies.
"It would give the industry a windfall without any countervailing force to require them to lower their costs," said Richard Kirsch, national campaign manager for the advocacy group Health Care for America Now. "The insurance companies could continue to jack up premiums while getting a whole new market."
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press.
ref (1) http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/09/24/cbo-tells-blue-dogs-that-the-public-option-will-save/
ref( 2) http://www.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/3148749.aspx
I cannot rest for the cry of these great agonies. ~ E.A.P.
Caring is the Key to Life - Healthcare for All ... Rob [bob-pol]
This week Congress started the 'marking up' session on the Health Care and Insurance Reform. It is crucial we keep the pressure on them pass the bill.
The Daily Kos has an excellent article about the amendments we should push to support, and those we should push against.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/9/21/10112/5602
Please take the time to write your politicians and the ones listed demanding they support the Health Care and Insurance Reform.
Hi FriendThere is a new group that just started on Facebook that I thought Organizing for America members may be interested in joining. Please see United Against Racism -
http://apps.facebook.com/causes/354956/80588439?m=9dc74a6eUnited Against Racism
posted by David Apperson
While reflecting on the tragic events of September 11, 2001, I couldn't help but miss the "We're All Americans" spirit. There's a noticeable void, where once was a sense of unity and pride. Hence, I have made a a cognizant decision to rethink my support for various organizations, causes and charities.
I have sent notice, to many charities, of my decision to discontinue any further support. If people elect to act like "animals", then that's exactly how I'll view and treat them. After some forty years of monthly support for such organizations as the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, the American Red Cross, the Muscular Dystrophy Association, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and various local churches and charities, (just to mention a few that I've been extremely loyal to) each has been notified of my decision and all automatic monthly contributions have been discontinued immediately.
When we can once again come together as "Americans", as a respectful society, then and only then will I reconsider my position.
Regretfully,
Peter
Our gracious leader is truly a Man of Peace who turns the other cheek, or he would have a few reasons to get angry.
A few examples over the past year -
Rob [bob-pol] racggg@gmail.com
This is a website that I have been following for a while and today was very impressed by the illustration of this very talented individual who continues, day in and day out to express his views in a very interesting and amusing at times way. If you have not seen his web site, you must. Go into the link below and see the illustration. I copied and pasted the text below. All women should see this! Thank you Mario Piperni!
http://twurl.nl/2pqhnp
A new low for the party of shame.
It turns out that in eight states, plus the District of Columbia, getting beaten up by your spouse is a pre-existing condition.Under the cold logic of the insurance industry, it makes perfect sense: If you are in a marriage with someone who has beaten you in the past, you’re more likely to get beaten again than the average person and are therefore more expensive to insure.In human terms, it’s a second punishment for a victim of domestic violence.
It turns out that in eight states, plus the District of Columbia, getting beaten up by your spouse is a pre-existing condition.
Under the cold logic of the insurance industry, it makes perfect sense: If you are in a marriage with someone who has beaten you in the past, you’re more likely to get beaten again than the average person and are therefore more expensive to insure.
In human terms, it’s a second punishment for a victim of domestic violence.
Ugly enough…but it gets worse.
In 2006, Democrats tried to end the practice. An amendment introduced by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), now a member of leadership, split the Health Education Labor & Pensions Committee 10-10. The tie meant that the measure failed.All ten no votes were Republicans
In 2006, Democrats tried to end the practice. An amendment introduced by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), now a member of leadership, split the Health Education Labor & Pensions Committee 10-10. The tie meant that the measure failed.
There’s been plenty of opportunities to feel disgust for republicans but today they take me to a new place. Their actions are inexcusable and is another vivid reminder of who they are and what they represent. For all their talk of patriotism and love of country, they once again reveal themselves to be the ugliest part of America. Their callous and cold view of their fellow citizens, devoid of compassion, appears to have no bounds. For Republicans, taking care of the insurance industry takes precedence over the needs of battered women.
If it gets more disgusting than that, I don’t know how.
___
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/3489/towersa.jpg
SACRED LAND AND SACRED SOULS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snFyt4Kdhl4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdSJFHnbls0
GOD BLESS AMERICA'S BELOVED AND THEIR FAMILIES
You may want to sit down to read this one ....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-dorlester/guaranteed-health-care-in_b_280528.html
A health care plan to expand the insurance industry and hurt the sick and the poor. It sure does look like special interests are going to win. I am not sure that it has been everybody sitting at the table transparently. It does not even seem like the American people really had representatives just our corporations. I guess it is a good thing corporations are imortal and really don't need health care.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29988909/sick_and_wrong/7
It looks like we are going to have a health care bill everyone will hate other than the health insurance industry and pharmacuetical countries.
Some small, random things:
As Medicaid, Medicare, VA health care, and CHIP are already in place, why are Republicans opposing a type of government program that has already been otherwise implemented in multiple areas? What are they achieving by opposing the public option? They achieve nothing. They are spinning their wheels. Not news, but I'm still mystified by it. Also still waiting for conservatives to produce some viable alternatives. >:-/
I still think it would really help forge bipartisan support to include medical malpractice reform, let alone the cost-reduction benefits.
Also, I see no reason not to split up the bill into more politically managable/palatable chunks to ensure meaningful reform actually occurs.
Last, I'm a fan of progressive consumption tax. They also have 401(k) funds that adjust themselves as one ages and comes closer to retirement age. Can this concept be applied to health care coverage??
Thoughts??
