UK Defense Minister Criticizes Obama's Dithering

While American and allied NATO troops have continued to die in Afghanistan, President Obama has continued to dither over what his new strategy will be. Despite a panic like rush to pass massive legislation (bailouts, healthcare, cap and trade, etc.), Obama has dragged out making a decision for months. All the while American and other NATO troops are in harms way and are dying.

Now our friends in the United Kingdom are speaking up and letting the world know what they think of Obama's leadership and laying the blame for slipping public support for the war in Afganistan squarely at the feet of Obama and his minions.

Senior British Government sources have become increasingly frustrated with Mr Obama’s “dithering” on Afghanistan, the Daily Telegraph disclosed earlier this month, with several former British defence chiefs echoing the concerns.

But Mr Ainsworth is the first Government minister to express in public what amounts to personal criticism of the US president’s leadership over the conflict which has so far cost 235 British lives. [read more]

Of course, most Americans know that it is Bush's fault that Obama can not make a decision and would rather leave our troops hanging - mainstream media has told us this often enough.

While American troops are dying their Commander-in-Chief finds enough time to travel around the world but not to make a decision that impacts their lives.

President Obama, quit dithering, making excuses and blaming others and stand up and do the right thing. Either commit to providing the military the resources they need to win the war or bring our troops home now.

Forgotten Workers

What is the real unemployment rate? According to the U-6 number, at least 17.5% of workers are either unemployed or underemployed. This is the highest level since the government first starting tracking this statistic in 1994 [read more ...]. The U-6 number is in large part the reason that unemployment benefits are being extended.

A significant portion of the workforce never seems to show up in any of the governments unemployment numbers. This group includes small business owners who's business has failed, independent contractors and self-employed workers. The members of this group share one thing: they do not get unemployment benefits. For that matter, as far as I have been able to determine, there is no government assistance plan available.

It is time that the government start thinking about the welfare of all workers and not just those that receive unemployment benefits. Massive government spending programs drain the available pools of money that could otherwise be used for investment and private business expansion.

A good start would be to cut taxes across the board, encourage rather than penalize those willing to invest in the private sector and radically slash government spending on bailouts and handouts.

A snowball has a better chance in hell then we have of seeing any of these measures enacted. Instead, the accumulation of record levels of government debt and gigantic spending programs will continue to drain away the funds that otherwise could have been used for job creation.

$100 Million Healthcare Bribe

What is the current price for the support of one U.S. Senator for the massive, Senate healthcare bill? It appears that the price is currently pegged at $100 Million dollars.

On page 432 of the Reid bill, there is a section that covers two pages defining which states would qualify for federal Medicaid subsidies in the event of a major natural disaster within the past 7 fiscal years. Boiled down to plain english, this section applies to one state: Louisiana, the home of moderate Democrat Mary Landrieu. Senator Landrieu is considered a key vote if the takeover of healthcare by the federal government is to be passed.

In very plain language, Senator Harry Reid has inserted into his healthcare takeover bill a $100 million bribe if Senator Landrieu votes for passage.

$100 million for a single vote.

In all fairness, what is not known is whether or not Senator Landrieu will accept the bribe. Only time will tell if she has the courage to stand up and vote against a very bad bill or if she decides that supporting her political party is more important than support her country.

Hopefully there are enough voters who's concerns are greater than receiving more federal money who will contact Senator Landrieu and demand that she do the right thing. After all, $100 million is a mighty small price for a lifetime of government controlled healthcare.

For those that actually enjoy reading convoluted writing, the actual text of the section is shown below.

SEC. 2006. SPECIAL ADJUSTMENT TO FMAP DETERMINATION FOR CERTAIN STATES RECOVERING FROM A MAJOR DISASTER.

Section 1905 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d), as amended by sections 2001(a)(3) and
2001(b)(2), is amended— (1) in subsection (b), in the first sentence, by striking ‘‘subsection (y)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsections (y) and (aa)’’; and (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:

‘‘(aa)(1) Notwithstanding subsection (b), beginning January 1, 2011, the Federal medical assistance percentage for a fiscal year for a disaster-recovery FMAP adjustment State shall be equal to the following:
‘(A) In the case of the first fiscal year (or part of a fiscal year) for which this subsection applies to the State, the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the fiscal year without regard to this subsection and subsection (y), increased by 50 percent of the number of percentage points by which the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the fiscal year without regard to this subsection and subsection (y), is less than the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the preceding fiscal year after the application of only subsection (a) of section 5001 of Public Law 111–5 (if applicable to the preceding fiscal year) and without regard to this subsection, subsection (y), and subsections (b) and (c) of section 5001 of Public Law 111–5.

‘‘(B) In the case of the second or any succeeding fiscal year for which this subsection applies to the State, the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the preceding fiscal year under this subsection for the State, increased by 25 percent of the number of percentage points by which the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the fiscal year without regard to this subsection and subsection (y), is less than the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the preceding fiscal year under this subsection.

‘‘(2) In this subsection, the term ‘disaster-recovery FMAP adjustment State’ means a State that is one of
the 50 States or the District of Columbia, for which, at any time during the preceding 7 fiscal years, the President has declared a major disaster under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act and determined as a result of such disaster that every county or parish in the State warrant individual and public assistance or public assistance from the Federal Government under such Act and for which— ‘‘(A) in the case of the first fiscal year (or part of a fiscal year) for which this subsection applies to the State, the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the fiscal year without regard to this subsection and subsection (y), is less than the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the preceding fiscal year after the application of only subsection (a) of section 5001 of Public Law 111–5 (if applicable to the preceding fiscal year) and without regard to this subsection, subsection (y), and subsections (b) and (c) of section 5001 of Public Law 111–5, by at least 3 percentage points; and ‘‘(B) in the case of the second or any succeeding fiscal year for which this subsection applies to the State, the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the fiscal year without regard to this subsection and subsection (y), is less than the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the preceding fiscal year under this subsection by at least 3 percentage points.

‘‘(3) The Federal medical assistance percentage determined for a disaster-recovery FMAP adjustment State under paragraph (1) shall apply for purposes of this title (other than with respect to disproportionate share hospital payments described in section 1923 and payments under this title that are based on the enhanced FMAP described in 2105(b)) and shall not apply with respect to payments under title IV (other than under part E of title IV) or payments under title XXI.’’.

Further information regarding this subject can be found on The Note.