ABCs Martha Raddatz says it is a fun night.
Tom Brokaw says it has become a narcissistic event.
White House correspondents, like Cindi Lauper, just want to have fun. That’s all they really want, Some fun, When the working day is done, […] – they want to have fun.
Tom Brokaw says, What kind of image do we present to the rest of the country? Are we doing their business, or are we just a group of narcissists who are mostly interested in elevating our own profiles? And what comes through the screen on C-SPAN that night is the latter and not the former.
Ryan Williams says, Tom is obviously entitled to his opinion…
Brokaw says It’s always a fun gathering, but work could be done.
Gayle King says, …it’s a great time for Hollywood and Washington to sort of come together.
Brokaw says, Somewhere along the line, it [the White House Correspondent Dinner] began to spin out of control.
David Remick says, If one party can corrupt you, he said. You probably shouldn’t be in the game.
Brokaw says, It became more a tabloid kind of dinner.
Kathleen Sebelius disagrees, she says, …there are lots of dinners in Washington, there are lots of events but this is always a best of it, fun weekend because people don’t take themselves very seriously. That’s always a good time.
Brokaw says, I was kind of embarrassed [when I used to go] because there was sophomoric humor, and a lot of people were drinking way too much!
Brokaw says, Lindsay Lohan was the breaking point.
An unnamed editorialist at the Washington Post says Lohan was the breaking point . . . and not Ozzy Osbourne, Paula Jones, Larry Flynt or Donald Trump?]]>
Ignore Us And We Will Ignore You – Why Conservatives Should Breakup With The Main Stream Media
It sounds so simple. So childlike. Yet I would argue that it has been the simplicity of the left’s attacks on conservatives, and the media’s simple plan to avoid the issues that might damage President Obama, that have directly lead to his re-election.
With that being said, I would further argue that it’s time conservatives adopt some of these simple tactics. To leave the door open to all who are willing to accept our basic principles .. but to shun those who have shunned us. To withhold every common courtesy, consideration, and relationship, both business and personal, to organizations and individuals, who vocally or who by their silence, support the growth of the state at the cost of our individual liberties.
To that end I must agree and urge you to join Ann-Marie Murrell in saying goodbye to the Main Steam Media!]]>
By Guest Blogger Beth Pepoy
When I think back to early TV commercials I often remember a certain advertisement that was both annoying and much to my surprise would supply me with a philosophy that I have been applying to look at situations many times in my life.
All-Tempa- Cheer, a detergent from the 70’s, aired a commercial with a mother visiting her son at his first apartment. By the end of grainy 30 second spot I would hear this: “Three temperatures, one detergent, its All-Tempa- Cheer Harold!” I can still hear the shrilling sound of Harold’s mother’s voice running through my head as I stroke each key for this article while suppressing a sudden urge to do laundry.
What I came to discover that if I applied this concept to situations that have (and will) come up from time to time it would equate to something more like this: One situation, three different reactions, that’s life. Not every event demands this type of pondering, but when applied properly it can and will help to determine where I am and how I feel about a situation. Example: If I fall flat on my face; my mother might panic, I will feel like an idiot and my best friend will be laughing her butt off. Get the picture? Since I use this regularly, being a mother, and managing people, it has helped me to put many situations into perspective. I refer to this as The Detergent Theory.
According to Chris Chase at Yahoo Sports; Lolo Jones is another athlete who shouldn’t use Twitter. Reading many of the comments on this article it would appear that most who did comment are on Lolo’s side. While Chris Chase is a strong and entertaining blogger his position was far off the mark. In his version of the Lolo Jones’ tweet he successfully hurdled pass the true intentions of what Miss Jones was trying to convey. He did however, collect over 10,000 comments. In his achievement of garnering vast amounts of attention to his post. In which he drastically includes his own unsuppressed spin that leans more towards the politicization of recent tragic events in America than the actual tweet. He then awarded his readers the conclusion that Miss Jones was indeed the insensitive one. That said let’s look at the replay…..
Here’s the tweet:
Now read the article: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/olympics-fourth-place-medal/lolo-jones-thinks-americans-well-da-gun-shooting-181436042–oly.html
After reading the article and seeing the tweet, it simply appeared a Team USA member was cheering on her fellow countrymen. There is only so much that can be said in 140 characters as Twitter allows, yet it merely sounded as if she was saying ‘Guys we may not have been Gold Medalist today, It’s okay—we’re Americans known to be cowboys, so hey when’s the shooting competition?’ Common knowledge is that Miss Jones is a staunch competitor. She tweeted in a voice that demonstrates her usual bring it on attitude and excitement for competition.
Did she really deserve to be told she is insensitive and to keep her enthusiasm to herself? Or was she just being a sports minded fan that really enjoys these precision types of competitions? In truth Miss Jones an Alumni of LSU here in Baton Rouge, has spent time going on hunting expeditions that would amplify her interest in the these events.
And what about the next day when American Kimberly Rhode won the Skeet Shooting competition not by just the slightest of margins but by hitting 99 out 100 clay pigeons, setting an Olympic record?
A day before Ms. Rhode’s competition, a quote found in a prediction article called Tenth of All Medals Will Be Gone by Monday— written for the Wall Street Journal by Matthew Futterman (for the full article click here) allows us to briefly see why there was more than average interest in shooting events:
“And Kimberly Rhode just might win the women’s skeet shooting event.
As Rhode’s shooting teammate Corey Cogdell has pointed out, ‘Americans live in one of the few industrialized countries where guns are legal. They should medal in shooting, where the recipe for success also includes intense discipline and practice’.”
Then there are the two (Greek Triple Jumper Paraskevi Papachristou, and Swiss Soccer Player Michel Morganella) Olympians, who were removed from competition play for having used Twitter for making egregiously racist comments. Miss Jones’ tweet was not racist nor aimed at another country’s team. She simply asked a question with hopes of gold medals being awarded to her Team USA members (at the time of this writing Chris Chase had yet blogged on these events).
Americans have had a cowboy persona for years. We revel in it and never more so than around Olympic time. It can be said it is partially due to the fact that in 1932 the Olympic Games were held in Los Angeles, only a stone’s throw away from Hollywood the home of the Westerns. Furthermore, with limited resources to protect the first ever Olympic Village comprised of 550 portable cottages. A large fence was constructed to keep on-lookers out and for little pay those patrolling the perimeter were Cowboys with full attire of lassos, chaps, ten gallon hats, revolvers and rifles, hence ever cementing the image of Americans to the rest of the world.
Mr. Chase’s conclusion was that Miss Jones should have never made a comment at all and implying that she was less intelligent in her vigor for a sport that American should be strong at; in other words athletes should be seen and not heard. The absurd part is that it’s okay for Mr. Chase to opine on her tweet in a similar public forum, but can deny Miss Jones, her right to tweet and apologize as she sees fit. Maybe Mr. Chase should brush up on his 1st & 2nd Amendments.
However, this can also be chalked up to the Detergent Theory; One situation; a simple tweet. Three reactions; 1) Mr. Chase’s blog calling on her to not use Twitter and that she is insensitive. 2) Her response defining what she meant. 3) The opinion, (myself included) as to how it was seen by others.
However, the court of public opinion has define it, the tweet has been deleted and I am stuck with Harold’s mother’s nasally voice rattling around in my head, squawking like a lost bird “Three reactions, one situation, that’s life Harold!” Yet, one question remains– how many times does one of those three reactions have to be about suppressing the right to speak freely because of a media spin? It has gone beyond tiresome and contrite, hasn’t it?
My advice to Lolo; Be the Olympic Motto: Swifter, Higher, Stronger, and Tweet on! If you need me, I’ll be in the laundry room with Harold’s Mom, I suddenly feel inspired.
Update: Kim Rhode is the first 5-time Gold Medalist in this event. Vincent Hancock, also of Team USA, received his second Gold Medal hitting 148 out 150 also an Olympic record, thus becoming the first man to win back to back Gold Medals in this event.
About the author: Beth Pepoy has written several published articles for Yahoo Voices and for Yahoo News. She has been featured on the website PolitiJim’s Rants for Reasonable People, and has been published on several on line newspapers including Redeye Daily. This is Beth’s second guest blog on Media Absurdity.
She currently blogs on her own site: http://runinmystocking.wordpress.com
Beth resides in Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Follow Beth on twitter: http://twitter.com/bpepoy or @bpepoy]]>
Newsweek continues its highly biased political agenda. As you may recall last May Newsweek declared “President Obama is The First Gay President” after Obama announced his support for Gay Marriage. With one little photo shop gay halo, Newsweek managed to offend just about everyone in the US except perhaps the 1% US gay community.*
Now Newsweek asks the question of Obama’s Presidential opponent, Is he [Romney] too insecure to be president? Again Newsweek proves it is not news. It’s politics of the worst kind, a one sided propaganda machine.
Which is it Wimp or Bully?
This time Newsweak is in conflict with most of the left who refer to Romney as a bully. Romney has been portrayed as a “bully” for allegedly cutting the hair of a boy in grade school, and Obama adviser Robert Gibbs just called Romney to a “prep school bully” this past Sunday.
Yet DNC Chairwoman, Debbie Sasserman-Schultz agrees she had this to say regarding Romney, “The Whimp:”
“Well, I think Mitt Romney has demonstrated repeatedly he has a penchant for– for secrecy, doesn’t seem to have any interest in actually showing the American people his– his finances, decision– important decisions about his investments, refuses to come clean on ….” Credit: The Blaze
How does Mitt Romney feel? Romney says that he isn’t sweating the upcoming Newsweek magazine cover. He says the media tried a similar criticism of President George H.W. Bush. Romney says Bush “was a pretty great president” who was not a wimp. In fact a 1987 Newsweek profile featured a profile of then-Vice President Bush with the title — “Fighting the ‘WimpFactor.’
How does left wing bias work for Newsweek? If you consider print distribution, not so good. Last week, Newsweek announced that it due to poor readership it can no longer afford to produce the printed version of its rag-o-zine. The owners of Newsweek says in order to reduce costs, the magazine will shift to online only in September. It has been widely reported by real news sources that Newsweek has been losing money the past decade and is completely BROKE.
Additional Left Wing Newsweek Bias:
Another example of Newsweek bias, Michelle Backman is framed as a ‘right-wing’ crazy in their August 2011 photo.
Lets not forget the wonderful Palin covers:
By Guest Blogger Beth Pepoy
Back in high school I remember watching how quickly my peers elevated each other to popularity only to take it away the next day because that one individual failed to go along with the group. The cycle would repeat itself regularly. Daunting and contrite these certain individuals that formed this unique bond of endless unity often enjoyed casting stones at those whom differ from them, and laughed at their own malicious fodder.
On rare occasion that lone individual would do something that the whole school was talking about and would find themselves thrust into a prime seat at the lunch table. Somehow over the weekend that somebody would be thrown off the island and once again exiled from the great lunch table of the chosen.
On June 27, 2012 Chris Matthews was exercising his right (sorry I mean left) to call Chief Justice Roberts; Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, whom in March 1857 delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court to rule against the plaintiff Dred Scott and concluded he was never free but still indeed a slave (click here, for an over view on Dred Scott vs. Sanford) (Click here for the actual text of the case).
The comparison would be baffling if you never watched Matthews or MSNBC, or irrelevant if you had forgotten the Dred Scott Decision all together. Perhaps, this why Matthews and those alike continue to run their opinions as if they are actually fact based instead of their version of it and continue to lose viewers.
To see the supercilious absurdity in action watch this:
Not only does Matthews go beyond the media bias for all things left of center he also fails to realize that Chief Justice Taney was a democrat.
But wait there’s more!!
On June 28, 2012 Matthews declares Chief Justice Roberts a hero! What? Huh? Why? Simple; Chief Justice Roberts appeared to rule in favor of Obamacare, thus garnering a seat at Matthew’s lunch table. Don’t believe me? Just click the link below and watch for yourself.
While the opinions may vary on the Chief Justice’s decision to vote with the more liberal justices and alienating the conservatives. There may in all probability more to the actual story then what Matthews defines as heroic, I encourage anyone to read varying viewpoints and not let media bias determine it for you (click here and click here for examples).
In one day according to the ever refutable Matthews–Chief Justice Roberts has gone from zero to hero in 24 hours. Regardless of the ruling Matthews’s display of willful contempt one day to the hailing of the Chief Justice the next was yet another blatant display of media bias.
What will happen when the Chief Justice no longer appears to sides with the liberals of the Supreme Court Justices? How will Matthews and others of his bias react then? As rhetorical as these questions are, one would venture to ask just one more.
When will Matthews’ get thrown off the island and be replaced at the lunch table?
About the author: Beth Pepoy has written several published articles for Yahoo Voices and for Yahoo News. She has been featured on the website PolitiJim’s Rants for Reasonable People, and has been published on several on line newspapers including Redeye Daily.
She currently blogs on her own site: http://runinmystocking.wordpress.com
Beth resides in Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Follow Beth on twitter: http://twitter.com/bpepoy or @bpepoy
References: Dred Scott Decision: Original Works by Joe Ryan @ AmericanCivilWar.com
Mrctv.org articles by Scott Whitlock
Slate.com article by Tom Scocca
Forbes.com article by guest blog Veta T. Richardson
Graphic: Newsweek’s Gay Halo Obama
Newsweek declares, “President Obama is The First Gay President” after Obama announced his support for Gay Marriage. Romney declared that he believes marriage is between one man and one woman.
With one little photo shop gay halo, Newsweek has managed to offend just about everyone in the US except perhaps the 1% US gay community.* Perhaps Newsweek’s Gay Halo Obama has offended some of the gay community too. Not only is Obama our Savior, but as Newsweek graphically displays, he is also our Gay Savior. Salvation comes in the form of a recently declared gay president.
Newsweek, I have a news alert for you, Obama is neither our savior nor is he gay.
The absurdity is that Newsweek puts the Gay Halo Obama, a heterosexual, father of 2 young girls on it’s cover. The message it sends conflicts with all major religions in the United States. By embracing one community he is offending the larger religious community. I agree with Mitt, “People of different faiths, like yours and mine, sometimes wonder where we can meet in common purpose, when there are so many differences in creed and theology.”
Why would Obama do this? Sure he is trying to appeal to liberals, but he already has that group on board. No help there. As for the black community, he may have hurt himself since many blacks are religious. So why would Obama take such a gamble this time when he was successful at not being gay last election? Well Andrew Sullivan sums it up rather nicely here:
‘He had to discover his black identity and then reconcile it with his white family, just as gays discover their homosexual identity and then have to reconcile it with their heterosexual family,’ The Daily Beast blogger, Andrew Sullivan wrote, describing the similarities between Mr Obama and the gay community.
Photo: Little guy Daily Beast blogger Andrew Sullivan with his husband.
What about the other 99% of us? What do we have to reconcile with our God (or no God) and our Enlightened leader god?
Newsweek is not news. It’s politics of the worst kind, a one sided propaganda machine. Fact is, the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties can be afforded to gay couples in many states.
This is a state decision not a federal one. And the financially troubled Newsweek is only trying to help Obama distract voters from the true problems in America, namely the economy. In acuality the financially troubled liberal Newsweek rag hurt the financially troubled presidency with it’s absurdly outrageous Gay Halo Obama cover. And all I can say is …. Thanks Newsweek!
* The 2000 U.S. Census Bureau found that homosexual couples constitute less than 1% of American households.]]>
Ever wonder what schools can and can’t do to a student after school hours? Well, if you attend Indiana’s Garrett High School, they can expel you. According to a recent story, Garrett High senior Austin Carroll was recently expelled from school after he posted a rather profane tweet on his personal Twitter account.
Did the tweet target the school? No. Another student or teacher at the school? No. Was it threatening? No. Was it violent? Nope. Was it possibly stupid and unnecessary? Probably, but that still doesn’t justify the punishment. Austin’s exact tweet was as follows: “F*** is one of those F****** words you can F****** put anywhere in a F****** sentence and it still F******* makes sense.” If you can’t fill in the blanks then stop reading this immediately.
What we have here is a high school senior attempting to be funny on a site where, I’m assuming, many of his peers would be able to see the message. For this message and this message alone, Austin was removed from Garrett High School a mere three months before his senior graduation.
Many of you are probably trying to justify this in your heads. The only thing you can probably think of is whether or not Austin sent this tweet during school hours or from a school computer. And the answer to that is also no. According to Austin, he sent the tweet from his personal computer at around 2:30 in the morning.
Austin stated in an interview, “If my account is on my own personal account, I don’t think the school or anybody should be looking at it. Because it’s my own personal stuff and it’s none of their business.” But how did the school find out about the tweet? Is Austin followed by his teachers or did a brown-nosing student report him?
According to the school’s principal, regardless of whether the tweet was sent from home or, indeed, whether a school computer was used, the school may track students’ tweets. Austin may have simply logged onto the school’s internet connection the next day, hopped on Twitter and had all of his tweets tracked by the school’s system.
Regardless, there seems to be more than enough evidence that proves Austin sent the tweet in the early hours of the morning, even though the school is reportedly maintaining that the tweet was sent with its IP address. It honestly doesn’t matter where the tweet was sent from. Does something like this justify complete expulsion from school? I say nay, nay.
Garrett High School is no longer commenting on the incident per advice from its attorney, and students have gotten behind Austin. Some students even threatened to protest, so much so that the police were called to address the potential issue. What say you? Does Austin deserved to be expelled for his, albeit, dumb tweet?
Source: Yahoo! – High school expels student for tweeting f-word
“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon,” Obama said in his first comments about the shooting, acknowledging the racial element in the case. Now we’ve got the President influencing public opinion, before the facts are in.
“More than 25,000 were expected to attend an afternoon rally in Sanford, Fla. for Martin, including the Rev. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and other civil rights leaders.” The media is responsible for all of this. They didn’t have the facts but that didn’t stop them from speculating. They encouraged the lynch mob mentality and the hate. The President again steps in without having all the facts and inflames the situation. Why aren’t Jackson and Sharpton in Kansas City where 2 black 16 year old guys followed a 13 year old white boy home 2 weeks ago, poured gasoline on him and set him on fire?
The New Black Panthers have stated on public television they are offering a $10,000 reward for the capture of George Zimmerman. Isn’t that illegal? Where are the CNN news reports on that?
Speaking of CNN, according to a CNN poll released Monday, 73 percent of Americans think police should arrest Zimmerman.
When will the headline read.”Zimmerman shoots teen thug in self defense“? Never… why? Because that’s not news. And it certainly doesn’t help Obama with his latest obvious attempt to divide the nation.
There is no justice in this country when it comes to the media. You are convicted by public opinion often with the media creating a story without all the facts.
I heard a demonstrator say that this event was “fueled by capitalism and justified by racism.” Trayvon is just a propaganda opportunity.
Has anyone every heard of a “White Hispanic” before until this story? Did you ever notice how they try to bring out the “White” side of a bi-racial person when he is accused of wrongdoing? Did you notice that the MSM never call the President bi-racial? Obama was raised by the “White” side of his family, yet he is our first ‘black president.’
Funny how some of the Trayvon protesters are walking around with shirts that say “Kill the Cracker.” Funny how nobody finds that offensive in the media.
What I find almost unbelievable is that the black community across this nation has already judged and convicted Zimmerman. At the same time the black community accepts black on black murder every day.
Trayvon’s mom, Sybrina Fulton is seeking to make money off her son’s death. She has applied for trademarks for the phrases “I Am Trayvon” and “Justice for Trayvon,” according to filings made last week with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. In both instances, Fulton, 46, is seeking the trademarks for use on “Digital materials, namely, CDs and DVDs featuring Trayvon Martin,” and other products. In the words of Rahm Emanuel, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” I think Sybrina got the message.
The original report made it sound like Zimmerman immediately pulled a gun on Martin, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. If the gun didn’t come into play until after Zimmerman had been knocked to the ground with one punch and then had his head bashed in, then it’s a completely different story.
The MSM is committing criminal acts in this country. This is a dangerous kind of race-baiting propaganda. Looking at the Facebook photo of this thug….No wonder they’ve been showing his grade school photo all these days. They purposely spun this. Trevon was 6’2″ and over 200 pounds.
What is at the heart of this story is “irresponsible journalism”. Again the Media has proved once again that they are judge, jury and executioner in a public forum. They’ve whipped the public into a frenzy and the truth is now shrouded with half-truths and inuendo.
What ever happened to just reporting the facts?]]>
I don’t know if you have noticed or not, but gas prices are on the rise yet again. There was a time, not more than a few months ago, when gas was getting as low as $2.98 a gallon. Now those times have changed with prices back up to nearly $4 in most areas and even higher in others. Lots of citizens are fuming over the rates and they want answers.
Many people are blaming Obama for the prices. They’re not so much accusing him of raising them but of not doing anything to decrease them. According to a recent poll conducted by CBS and the New York Times, 54% of respondents believe that Obama can do a lot to control gas prices. What’s more is that nearly two-thirds of the respondents to an ABC and Washington Post poll disapprove of Obama’s handling of the situation.
The people have good reason to blame the Obama administration as well, due to the fact that Obama criticized former President George W. Bush over the exact same issue when he campaigned in 2008. According to a statement from Obama to a crowd in Ohio, “You’re paying nearly $3.70 a gallon for gas – 2 1/2 times what it cost when President Bush took office.” Obviously not much has changed, has it?
However, most analysts don’t blame Obama for the increase in gas prices but instead say that rising tension with Iran is the primary factor. The rising tension is making traders nervous about a possible conflict in a crucial oil-producing region. If conflict does break out in Iran then a significant source of the world’s oil would be cut off.
Increased prices may also stem from the fact that Japan has been using increasingly more amounts of the “black gold” since shutting down nearly all of the country’s nuclear power plants after the Fukushima disaster last year. In addition to that, conflicts in countries like Sudan, Yemen, Syria and Libya have halted oil production from those countries.
Republicans believe that more domestic drilling the United States would help decrease prices. Gingrich says, if elected, that he has a plan to reduce gas prices to as low as $2.50 a gallon. However, citizens want immediate results and any plan to reduce gas prices, whether from domestic drilling or forcing automakers to make more fuel-efficient vehicles, would take years to go into effect.
The Democrats have a different theory in that greedy Wall Street speculators are driving up prices in order to make some quick profits. The Dems also believe that the Obama administration could help lower gas prices by cracking down on this, though even if it were true, most experts believe that global oil markets are too big for any regulators to police.
The absolute last option would be for Obama to dip into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. This was done back in 1991 during the first Iraq war, right after Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and then again last year by Obama himself during Libya’s civil war. However, this would only be a temporary relief.
This definitely looks very bad for Obama and his administration, especially considering the fact that in both the CBS and New York Times poll and the ABC and Washington Post poll Obama saw drastic decreases in his overall approval rating. The silver lining is, for Obama at least, that oil/gas prices on their own don’t do much in determining a presidential election, according to the New York Times’ stat specialist Nate Silver.
However, rising gas prices would definitely hurt our economic recovery by giving Americans less money in their pockets. As a result, consumer spending would decrease and the economy would get worse, something everybody, Democrats and Republicans alike, would most definitely blame Obama for.
Source: Yahoo! – High gas prices: How much can Obama (or Gingrich) do?
“President” Obama is trying very hard to cut our nation’s defense spending. Obama thinks that we are spending way too much money (which, honestly, we are) but is cutting our defense really the best place to start? What’s even worse is that in trying to cut spending, the Obama Administration is also planning on cutting health benefits for active duty and retired military personnel and their families while the benefits given to unionized civilian defense workers won’t be touched.
Congressional aids believe that this move is an attempt by Obama to force these military personnel into Obamacare. According to Bill Gertz of The Washington Free Beacon, “The proposed increase in health care payments by service members, which must be approved by Congress, is part of the Pentagon’s $487 billion cut in spending. It seeks to save $1.8 billion from the Tricare medical system in the fiscal 2013 budget, and $12.9 billion by 2017.”
What this basically means is that military personnel would see their Tricare premiums increase anywhere from 30% to 78% in the first year alone. After that, their premiums could increase exponentially, “ranging from 94% to 345%, more than three times the current level. According to congressional assessments, a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048,” Gertz added.
In addition to higher premiums, active duty personnel would also see an increase in the price of pharmaceuticals with the incentive to use cheaper, generic drugs disappearing. Health benefits have also been a big reason many people sign up for the military. If you take that away then it could greatly decrease recruitment and retention.
Human Events’ John Hayward also added, “Veterans will also be hit with a new annual fee for a program called Tricare for Life, on top of the monthly premiums they already pay, while some benefits will become “means-tested” in the manner of a social program – treating them like welfare instead of benefits for military service. Naturally, this is all timed to begin next year and ‘avoid upsetting military voters in a presidential election year.'”
Aside from that, there are other concerns that this will provide a double standard between uniformed military personnel and civilian defense workers who belong to public sectors. Representative Howard McKeon (R-CA), Chair of the House Armed Services Committee, is standing by the troops on this issue.
According to McKeon, “We shouldn’t ask our military to pay our bills when we aren’t willing to impose a similar hardship on the rest of the population. We can’t keep asking those who have given so much to give that much more.” Nearly 5 million members of the 32 military service and veterans groups will join McKeon as they call the plan a “breach of faith.”
All this “hope” and “change” from Obama didn’t mean that he was going to change our country for the better and give the American people hope; it was I “hope” the American people don’t notice when I “change” the country from Democracy to Socialism. If he gets re-elected in 2012, I may seriously consider moving out of the country.
Source: Examiner.com – Obama to cut medical benefits for active, retired military, not union workers
Human Events – Obama cuts military health care benefits, leaves unionized civilians untouched
The Washington Free Beacon – Trashing Tricare: Obama to Cut Healthcare Benefits for Active Duty and Retired US Military