Presidential Medal of Freedom awarded to 13

May the Almighty continue to bless the works of their hands.

—

Obama honours 13 with Medal of Freedom at White House

29 May 2012 Last updated at 17:36 ET

President Barack Obama has bestowed the nation’s highest civilian honour on political and cultural figures in a ceremony at the White House.

Describing himself as “a big fan”, a star-struck President Obama honours the ‘Tambourine Man’

Musician Bob Dylan, astronaut John Glenn, and Israeli President Shimon Peres were among the Medal of Freedom recipients.

The award is given to people from all walks of life who have made exceptional contributions to society.

It was established by former President John F Kennedy in 1963.

Dylan was born Robert Allen Zimmerman on 24 May 1941 and began his musical career in 1959, playing in Minnesota coffee houses.

He took his stage name from the poet Dylan Thomas and, not coincidentally, paid as much attention to his lyrics as his music.

Much of his best-known work dates from the 1960s, when he became an informal historian of America’s troubles.

Songs such as Blowin’ In The Wind and The Times They Are a-Changin’ became

Who’s a federal budget hawk? Would you guess President Barack Obama?

Wasn’t it on Dragnet, that character Sergeant Joe Friday made famous this line: “Just the facts, Ma’am.”

And then, there’s Reagan, who TRIPLED our national debt, and Bush II whose Iraq War, Wall Street deregulation gave us TARP, and more…
—

Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It’s Barack Obama?

5/24/2012 @ 6:33PM |22,212 views

It’s enough to make even the most ardent Obama cynic scratch his head in confusion.

Amidst all the cries of Barack Obama being the most prolific big government spender the nation has ever suffered, Marketwatch is reporting that our president has actually been tighter with a buck than any United States president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Who knew?

Check out the chart –

Presidential Spending Reagan-Obama

So, how have the Republicans managed to pursuade Americans to buy into the whole “Obama as big spender” narrative?

It might have something to do with the first year of the Obama presidency where the federal budget increased a whopping 17.9% —going from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. I’ll bet you think that this is the result of the Obama sponsored stimulus plan that is so frequently vilified by the conservatives…but you would be wrong.

The first year of any incoming president term is saddled—for better or for worse—with the budget set by the president whom immediately precedes the new occupant of the White House. Indeed, not only was the 2009 budget the property of George W. Bush—and passed by the 2008 Congress—it was in effect four months before Barack Obama took the oath of office.

Accordingly, the first budget that can be blamed on our current president began in

Tim Geithner is out as Secretary of Treasury. Who’s in?

Good bye, and good riddance.

Robert Reich would do a good job, and he’s been tested and served in other areas in the present, and previous administrations.

—

Guessing game begins over next Treasury chief

1:05am EDT

By Glenn Somerville

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner takes a tour of the Marlin Steel Wire Products factory in Baltimore, Maryland, May 17, 2012. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Wanted for the Treasury Department: a new boss who can fix trillion-dollar-plus budget deficits, overhaul the tax system and spur a reluctant Europe into fixing its debt crisis.

It’s a tall order, especially when the new Treasury chief also must deal with a fractious Congress – and all for a salary lower than that paid to many junior Wall Street bankers.

Economists, investors and veterans of past administrations are appraising potential successors to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, either in a new Obama administration, if President Barack Obama is re-elected, or under Mitt Romney.

Geithner has made it clear that he is leaving the post he has held since January 2009 even if Obama, a Democrat, beats Romney, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, in the November 6 election.

Lots of names are making the rounds. Among Democrats, they include finance leaders like Larry Fink of asset management firm BlackRock and politically connected Washington insiders like fiscal expert Erskine Bowles.

If the White House goes to the Republicans,

MDs abandon Family Care, NPs step up to Care

A long-term trend in medicine in the United States has been that medical school students continue to abandon Family Care and Rural Practice.

The corollary trend among Advance Practice Nurses & Nurse Practitioners – many whom must also pass National Board Certifications in their area of practice – has been to fill the void formed in the delivery of healthcare by physician abandonment. Typically, the argument given for such abandonment is pecuniary. That is, by the time the medical student graduates from medical school & residency to assume full and independent practice, their debt load is not merely burdensome or impractical, but almost wholly impossible to repay.

More recently, however, medical schools and public health authorities have acknowledged the error of allowing that deterioration and abandonment to occur, and have begun to promote Primary & Family Care among medical schools and their students. Such strategies include not merely the promotion of community and the advantages of rural independent practice, but include full-ride scholarships while in medical school.

—

Nurse practitioners look to fill gap with expected spike in demand for health services

By Sarah Kliff, Published: May 12

President Obama’s health-care law is expected to expand health insurance to 32 million Americans over the next decade. Health policy experts anticipate that

Sure, money is power. But, is it also liberty and freedom? Or, is it a tool?

As Bob Dylan sang some years ago, “The times, they are a-changin’.” Our laws should reflect those changes while adhering to the values ensconced in our Constitution. In essence, the argument is about freedom – freedom from the large corporations that supply “content” via the Internet. As well, openness and honesty – popularly termed as transparency – should be the hallmark of all dealings, by government and enterprise.

In short, what we’re encountering in this age, in this era, is an almost unprecedented and wholesale onslaught of money and the power that comes with it. It is, in essence, a corrupting influence. It is, in essence, a type of bribery – and bribery is itself, a form of theft. Bribery is a form of theft because it takes away, removes, or forbids resources from going where they ought, or rightfully should. In this case, it robs freedom from the people. Not only does it usurp their decision-making capacity, it is a blatant announcement and condemnation of freedom, because it says that the rich, the wealthy have freedom, while the poor and disenfranchised have none.

If – as the Supreme Court has declared – money is the equivalent of free speech, and neither cannot, nor should not be limited, what freedom does the poor man have? Again, if money is equated with free speech (that is, our First Amendment rights), the poor man has none. And that, my dear readers, is but one reason why such a ruling is not only ANTI-Constitutional, but is antithesis of freedom.

Making a further case, our nation’s specie – that is, the currency and coinage – is the property of the United States government. It is NOT private property. Money is a thing used to represent something else. So again, I ask rhetorically… in such instances, and in this case, what does it represent?
—

Google Says “It’s Our Web”–and they bought it fair and square

April 23, 2012 Chris Castle

Who can forget then-candidate Ronald Reagan’s classic line at the 1980 New Hampshire candidate’s debate:  “I’m paying for this microphone!”  And Google probably is wishing that whichever Ivy League idiot thought of rebranding their anti-SOPA campaign site with the double entendre “It’s Our Web” had not been quite so…uh..transparent…about it all.

President Obama had dinner with technology moguls February 17, 2011 in California’s “Silicon Valley” at the home of John Doerr, venture capitalist and partner at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, in Woodside, California. Flanking the president are (L) the late Steve Jobs, Founder/CEO of Apple Computer, and (R) Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of FaceBook. Also present are:Cisco CEO John Chambers, Google CEO Eric Schmidt, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, Twitter CEO Dick Costolo and Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz. Art Levinson, chairman and former CEO of Genentech, is on the Apple board of directors, and was also present. White House press secretary Jay Carney said after the dinner President Obama exchanged ideas with the business leaders “so we can work as partners to promote growth and create good jobs in the United States,” and discussed research and development spending proposals with the CEOs. (Official White House photo by Pete Souza)

Because it certainly is “their web” and they bought it fair and square according to

POTUS slow jams the news on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon

Sure… it’s cute, it’s cool.

Best part?

It’s TRUE!

Thomas Jefferson on “the Buffett Rule”

How much is enough?

How many houses does a man need to live in?

How many cars does a man need?

In response to the question “Can you ever have enough money?,” billionaire entrepreneur Sir Richard Branson replied, “You only need one breakfast, one lunch, one dinner, and therefore the money aspect is not actually that important.”

—

by Alan Grayson on Friday, April 20, 2012 at 1:44pm ·

I don’t know what Founding Father and President Thomas Jefferson would have thought about TV, cars, spaceships, cellphones, skyscrapers, computers or nuclear weapons. But I do know what Jefferson would have thought about the Buffett Rule. He would have liked it.

The Buffett Rule is the Obama Administration’s proposal to adopt a 30% minimum tax rate on personal income above $1 million a year. It would promote one of the central tenets of progressivism: that the burden of taxes should fall on the rich, not the poor.

In 1811, two years after Jefferson left the Presidency, Jefferson wrote a letter to General Thaddeus Kosciuszko, a hero of the American Revolution. Jefferson said that he supported taxes (then tariffs, since there was no income tax yet) falling entirely on the wealthy. As Jefferson explained: “The farmer will see

Healthcare Insurance policy holders to get rebate in FL

Thanks to “ObamaCare,” which requires health insurance companies to spend 80% of health insurance premiums on actual healthcare, instead of CEO compensation, stockholder payout, advertising, overhead, and other non-healthcare delivery, Floridians will be receiving a rebate from the money they were overcharged.

Thanks, President Obama!

—

Florida health insurers to rebate estimated $113 M

Consumers with individual policies may get $143 to $949 each

April 13, 2012|By Bob LaMendola, Sun Sentinel

Floridians who buy health insurance without the help of an employer can expect estimated rebates of $143 to $949 in August because of the federal health care overhaul.

About 157,000 individuals and families qualify. In addition, an estimated $65 million in health insurance rebates are in line to be split among workers covered at 352,000 small businesses, the Sun Sentinel found by analyzing reports filed this month by 15 of the largest insurers in Florida.

Don’t expect cash back if you get health coverage from an employer of more than 50 workers. Few of their insurers will owe rebates, and many companies are self-insured and not affected by the health law, insurance experts said.

“This is important for consumers,” said Richard Polangin, health care policy coordinator with the advocacy organization Florida Public Interest Research Group. “They already pay extremely high prices for health insurance.”

Individuals don’t need to do a thing to obtain their money. Insurers must notify them by Aug. 1 if they are due a refund and pay that month.

The rebates

News: Mitt Romney to attempt to buy November General Election

Among political observers of all stripe, there is broad consensus that the ruling handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, will continue to negatively affect the political process.

Some years ago I held that the only way to completely eliminate the corrupting influence of money in our political process was to allow donations – even in unlimited amounts as Super PACs do – and to place all funds in one pool, and divide the funds equally among all candidates. By so doing, candidates and incumbents would not have to be concerned with raising money for election campaigns. In essence, what we have now is a perpetual campaigning process in which elected officials continuously attend functions where money is raised, and in some cases transferred personally. Many of them have publicly expressed great distress at the time it takes away from their ability to govern and to perform the duties and responsibilities for which they were elected.

In essence, what we would have is a public/private partnership pool, which could have the best of both worlds.

Candidates could

Social Darwinism, “Starving the Monster,” and the Myth of Smaller Government

For years, I have called them “Governmental Deconstructionists,” and I stand by my words.

I refer to Radical Republicans, whom may also be known as TEA Party members.

I have said that they are so far to the Right, they’re bumping on the Left side of the Left.

They’re extremists, and they don’t give a damn about you, nor – dare I say – about this nation.

Consider that they say ludicrous things such as they want to “make government smaller,” and have “less regulation.”

Such remarks are blatantly stupid on their face.

Here’s why.

There was only ONE TIME in our nation’s history when we had fewer laws and regulation, and when the government was much, much smaller.

That was when it was founded, back in the late 1700′s.

Since then, we’ve only grown larger in land size, have become more populous, have increased technology, have become the world’s largest economy and a driving force in the global economy, and show little signs of decline. We remain, without a doubt, the most powerful nation in the world – bar none.

Though we have weathered a Civil War, Great Depression and are emerging from a