Tuesday, 15 December 2009

CONRAD BLACK EXPLAINS COPENHAGEN

Ken Berwitz

Here, from Canada's National Post, is Conrad Black's take on the Copenhagen summit:

Copenhagen is the epitome of modern summitting; a long session, a huge cast earnestly discussing what there is no chance of agreeing, to reach compromises everyone will then ignore, promising to avoid doing what all decry and will continue to do, suspecting that it is not really damaging anyway. It is an immense, almost grotesque, sitcom, played out against the backdrop of the melancholy Danes languidly sipping Tuborg in the Tivoli Gardens and reflecting, perhaps, on Danish lore, from Hamlet to The Silver Skates, to Victor Borge, and not on the farce unfolding around them.

The conference will be an utter fiasco, since there is no real evidence that carbon emissions have anything to do with global warming, which is not, in fact, occurring at all. The mad ambitions to spend trillions of dollars reducing carbon emissions will be scaled back drastically. Fortunately, the Chinese and the Indians can be relied upon to rub the noses of voluminous Western eco-poseurs in their own hyperbole.

There is just a chance that this conference will be such a burlesque that the worlds leaders will slow down, stay home, stop calling pleasure trips to interpreters conventions and elocution competitions summits, and leave such discussions to policy specialists, who wont excite nonsensical expectations or distract the media.

Like so much else, summitry is a concept or brand that has been abused and trivialized, like Cadillac was for many years. If Copenhagen disabuses the worlds publicity-seeking official conferenciers of trying to squeeze any more juice out of the summit lemon, it will be a howling success. Only the countries that mistakenly expect to receive compensation for their impoverished inability to generate carbon emissions, or for the falsely pledged reduction of them, will pay any attention to the pious frauds the posturing busybodies of Copenhagen may claim to agree to implement.

Thank you, Mr. Black.

Zeke ... ... If you agree with this article (and I do), ... ... then answer this question: ... ... are they ALL Crazy ? ... ... ... ... Is DoubleThink really the mindset of more than half of our leaders ? ... ... ... ... How can such utter nonsense be so blandly accepted as bedrock truth ? ... ... However, I do take comfort in the fact that Mr Gore (winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, yanno) has been so involved in the Warmist Movement. Otherwise, that SOB could have been our nation's president. (12/15/09)


GORE JUST BEING GORE

Ken Berwitz

"And a dishonest lightweight bigmouth, who stands to make a major fortune off of it, shall lead them"

Now that's a saying I don't recall.  Unfortunately, however, we seem to be living it.

Excerpted from an article in today's Times of London:

From

December 15, 2009

Inconvenient truth for Al Gore as his North Pole sums don't add up

 

Al Gore's office admitted that the percentage he quoted in his speech was from an old, ballpark figure

There are many kinds of truth. Al Gore was poleaxed by an inconvenient one yesterday.

The former US Vice-President, who became an unlikely figurehead for the green movement after narrating the Oscar-winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth, became entangled in a new climate change spin row.

Mr Gore, speaking at the Copenhagen climate change summit, stated the latest research showed that the Arctic could be completely ice-free in five years.

In his speech, Mr Gore told the conference: These figures are fresh. Some of the models suggest to Dr [Wieslav] Maslowski that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years.

However, the climatologist whose work Mr Gore was relying upon dropped the former Vice-President in the water with an icy blast.

Its unclear to me how this figure was arrived at, Dr Maslowski said. I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.

Mr Gores office later admitted that the 75 per cent figure was one used by Dr Maslowksi as a ballpark figure several years ago in a conversation with Mr Gore.

The embarrassing error cast another shadow over the conference after the controversy over the hacked e-mails from the University of East Anglias Climate Research Unit, which appeared to suggest that scientists had manipulated data to strengthen their argument that human activities were causing global warming.

Perhaps Mr Gore had felt the need to gild the lily to buttress resolve. But his speech was roundly criticised by members of the climate science community. This is an exaggeration that opens the science up to criticism from sceptics, Professor Jim Overland, a leading oceanographer at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said.

You really dont need to exaggerate the changes in the Arctic.

Others said that, even if quoted correctly, Dr Maslowskis six-year projection for near-ice-free conditions is at the extreme end of the scale. Most climate scientists agree that a 20 to 30-year timescale is more likely for the near-disappearance of sea ice.

Maslowskis work is very well respected, but hes a bit out on a limb, said Professor Peter Wadhams, a specialist in ocean physics at the University of Cambridge.

Dr Maslowki, who works at the US Naval Postgraduate School in California, said that his latest results give a six-year projection for the melting of 80 per cent of the ice, but he said he expects some ice to remain beyond 2020.

Richard Lindzen, a climate scientist at the Massachusets Institute of Technology who does not believe that global warming is largely caused by man, said: Hes just extrapolated from 2007, when there was a big retreat, and got zero.

That's our Al............

But is he ever selling carbon credits!!!

Zeke ... ... Albert Gore ? ... ... the guy who said the earth's temperature "a couple of miles down" is "millions of degrees" ??? ... ... That Albert Gore ? ... ... [actually, mining operations at that depth have temps of 130-160 F]. ... ... (12/15/09)


THE BUSH EMAILS

Ken Berwitz

This was posted by a justifiably angry Steve Gilbert at www.sweetness-light.com:

AP Runs A Soros Press Release As News

December 15th, 2009

From a (faux) outraged Associated Press:

22 million missing Bush White House e-mails found

By Pete Yost, Associated Press Writer Mon Dec 14

WASHINGTON Computer technicians have found 22 million missing White House e-mails from the administration of President George W. Bush and the Obama administration is searching for dozens more days worth of potentially lost e-mail from the Bush years, according to two groups that filed suit over the failure by the Bush White House to install an electronic record keeping system.

The two private groups Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the National Security Archive said Monday they were settling the lawsuits they filed against the Executive Office of the President in 2007.

It will be years before the public sees any of the recovered e-mails because they will now go through the National Archives process for releasing presidential and agency records. Presidential records of the Bush administration wont be available until 2014 at the earliest.

Former Bush White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said the 22 million e-mails already had been recovered while Bush was still in office and that misleading statements about the former administrations work demonstrate "a continued anti-Bush agenda, nearly a year after a new president was sworn in."

"The liberal groups CREW and National Security Archive litigate for sport, distort the facts and have consistently tried to create a spooky conspiracy out of standard IT issues," Stanzel said in a statement.

The 22 million e-mails "would never have been found but for our lawsuits and pressure from Capitol Hill," said Anne Weismann, chief counsel for CREW. "It was only then that they did this reanalysis and found as a result that there were 22 million e-mails that they were unable to account for before."

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said the Bush administration had been dismissive of congressional requests that the administration recover the e-mails. Leahy said it was "another example of the Bush administrations reflexive resistance to congressional oversight and the publics right to know."

Meredith Fuchs, general counsel to the National Security Archive, said "many poor choices were made during the Bush administration and there was little concern about the availability of e-mail records despite the fact that they were contending with regular subpoenas for records and had a legal obligation to preserve their records."

"We may never discover the full story of what happened here," said Melanie Sloan, CREWs executive director. "It seems like they just didnt want the e-mails preserved."

Sloan said the latest count of misplaced e-mails "gives us confirmation that the Bush administration lied when they said no e-mails were missing."

The two groups say the 22 million White House e-mails were previously mislabeled and effectively lost.

The government now can find and search 22 million more e-mails than it could in late 2005 and the settlement means that the Obama administration will restore 94 calendar days of e-mail from backup tape, said Kristen Lejnieks, an attorney representing the National Security Archive

Sheila Shadmand, another lawyer representing the National Security Archive, said the Obama administration is making a strong effort to clean up "the electronic data mess left behind by the prior administration."

A Microsoft Corp. document on the Bush White Houses e-mail problems states that Microsoft was called in to help find electronic messages in October 2003, more than two years before the problem surfaced publicly

Imagine the kind of outrage we would get if the Bush administration had been caught red-handed like those scientists in the CRU email scandal?

Leahy said it was "another example of the Bush administrations reflexive resistance to congressional oversight and the publics right to know."

But since the CRU crowd want to destroy Western capitalism, folks like Mr. Leahy and the ever alert watchdogs in this article will never utter a peep.

Still ,what a telling article this is from the Associated Press.

Former Bush White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said the 22 million e-mails already had been recovered while Bush was still in office and that misleading statements about the former administrations work demonstrate "a continued anti-Bush agenda, nearly a year after a new president was sworn in."

Note that this is a detail that a casual reader would never gather from simply reading the APs headline and lede paragraph. Which perhaps demonstrates the APs continued anti-Bush agenda.

"The liberal groups CREW and National Security Archive litigate for sport, distort the facts and have consistently tried to create a spooky conspiracy out of standard IT issues," Stanzel said in a statement.

We have often commented on the laughably inaptly named Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which in truth is just another Soros front, staffed by Ms. Sloan, a former Joe Biden and John Conyer flack.

And speaking of Mr. Soros, try to guess who is behind the so-called National Security Archive.

From Discover The Networks:

National Security Archive

Established in 1984 by radical anti-war leftists from the Vietnam War era, the NSA is a favorite resource cited by proponents of "openness" in American foreign policy, who advocate that the United States stop gathering intelligence on its enemies. As a research entity, the NSA is the beneficiary of the painstaking work done by its sister group at GWU, the Center for National Security Studies, which is the creation of Morton Halperin, whose entire public career has been devoted to undermining U.S. intelligence efforts. Halperin is currently the Director of U.S. Advocacy for George Soross Open Society Institute

In 2003, just past the height of the invasion of Iraq, the White House had some problems with its email system. And these Torquemadas are trying to make it into yet another Bush crime against humanity.

And once again we see lickspittle minions of the Associated Press happily carrying the water for their master, Mr. Soros, with a pretend news story which is nothing but a very stale press release from two of his more odious puppets.

This is what passes for journalism nowadays.

 Would the Associated Press, or any other member of our wonderful "neutral" media, ever publish this kind of material if it emanated from a way-far-right source?  Are you kidding, they'd rather have their toes dipped in boiling oil. 

 

But when it comes from the way-far-left George Soros - a convicted inside trader, let's never forget?  No problem at all.

Then they wonder why people call them biased.

Zeke ... ... Could this be an attempt to counter ClimateGate ... the candid UEA CRU emails and program code now available on the web ? -- Bush hid emails, the Warmists hid emails .. so what's the problem? [UEA CRU - Univ of East Anglia (England) Climate Research Unit]. ... ... ... ... Just more mud throwing ... ... ... ... and all that was necessary was to restore White House emails from the Tape Backups. WHY couldn't the CRU restore the missing original temperature date from THEIR Tape Backups ? (12/15/09)


ORAL ROBERT R.I.P.

Ken Berwitz

The original televangelist (so far as I know), Oral Roberts, died today in Newport Beach, California.  He was 91 years of age.

When I was growing up (to the extent that I did), Oral Roberts was a Sunday morning sensation.  I used to love watching him "heal" those sick and disabled people every week.

It didn't take me long to realize that I was watching the religious equivalent of professional wrestling, but it was great fun anyway.

May he rest in peace - after a pretty good tongue-lashing for that "healing" stuff from the being he was invoking when he did it.


JOE LIEBERMAN ATTACKED FOR BEING TOO JEWISH -- AND NOT JEWISH ENOUGH!

Ken Berwitz

Here is the beginning of an article written by Lee Seigel, for www.thedailybeast.com.  You can read it all by clicking here.

Joe, Start Acting Jewish!

by Lee Siegel

 

As Democrats give in to his health-care demands, Lee Siegel says Lieberman's position runs counter to his Jewish faith: he should stop stonewalling and be a mensch.

 

Joe Liebermans vow to vote against any health-care bill that includes the Medicare buy-in reminded me of a story once told me by a Jewish girl I dated in my teens.

 

A kind person, she had volunteered as a candy-striper in a hospital. One day, as she was pushing an elderly Orthodox Jewish man down the hospital corridor, he asked her if she was Jewish. Yes, I am, she said. Stop for a minute, he said. Come around and let me look at you. So she stopped pushing him and carefully locked the wheels. Then she stood in front of him. He took in her cute little candy-stripers uniform and squinted at the top of her head, which happened to be uncovered, and he said, Youre Jewish? Yes, she said sweetly. He emitted a sound of disgust. Youre not Jewish! he said with repugnance, almost spitting the words out.

 

The strongest force driving Liebermans destructive contrariness is a religious fundamentalism that is fatally removed from moral sentiment. His absolute certainty that he is right makes him absolutely blind to what's wrong.

 

Sure, Liebermans heart has its other reasons. Most obviously there are his intimate ties to the insurance industry, based in his home state of Connecticut. Liebermans defenders like to say that he has only received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the insurance companies over the last few years. What they dont say is that he has received more than twice as much from the real-estate industry. Since companies often have both real-estate and insurance divisions, it must be hard to distinguish what is coming from where. Make no mistake about it, Joe Lieberman is the insurance industrys white knight. He has to be extra nice to them especially now, when Democratic opposition to any future political bids will be fiercer than ever. Hell need a fortune to fight it. And watch as Lieberman makes stronger and stronger public statements in support of the war in Afghanistan and as he escalates his verbal attacks on Iran. Lieberman has to keep the Israel lobby money pouring in, too

This has to be one of the most ridiculous screeds I've seen since I started blogging - and that, friend, is saying something:

Aside from the thoroughly insulting, despicable way he addresses Lieberman's religious faith, Seigel simultaneously demands that Joe Lieberman "start acting Jewish", and brays that he is a slave to "religious fundamentalism" (i.e. he's too Jewish). 

And that's before we get to the fact that Lieberman has not said he wouldn't support any health care bill that has a Medicare buy-in.  He is refusing to support the version of a buy-in that has been concocted by Harry Reid and his merry cohorts.

From Manu Raju at www.politico.com (bold print is mine):

Sen. Joe Lieberman told Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Sunday that he couldnt support a new Medicare proposal floated as a compromise to the public option, a development that complicates the bills path towards passage before the end of the year.

 

In a meeting in Reids office just off the Senate floor, aides said the Connecticut independent reiterated his concerns with the public insurance option and told the Nevada Democrat that he couldnt support a new plan to allow people as young as 55 to buy into Medicare.

 

On Friday, Sen. Lieberman told Sen. Reid that he had problems with the Medicare buy-in proposal, said Marshall Wittmann, a spokesman for Lieberman. Sen. Lieberman affirmed that position with Sen. Reid today.

Is that clear enough? 

Despite the fact that what they are saying about Lieberman is not true, he is being mercilessly attacked by the seigels - and olbermanns and other hard-leftists - of the world these days.  The real reason is because he will not march in lock step with their agenda (which Lieberman did always do even when he ran and won as a Democrat). 

Last night, olbermann was in mid-season form, venom-wise.  While insulting Lieberman personally (for a change) olbermann put up two clips to "prove" he had changed his position on the Medicare buy-in.   The problem?  In the "for" clip Lieberman spoke about "my proposal".  In the "against" clip, Lieberman referenced the way it was written by Reid & Co.  That, obviously, is 100% consistent with the www.politico.com excerpt I pasted above.

In other words, Lieberman is not against the buy-in concept; he is against what Reid turned it into.

But lie on, guys.  Who's going to call you on it?  Mainstream media?  (I'm laughing too)


WHO'S WATCHING THE WHITE HOUSE?

Ken Berwitz

Remember those gate crashers who wound up at the White House reception?  You figure there must have been hell to pay over that, so everything is now tight as a drum, right?

Well, before you answer you better read this:

Unwitting tourists attend White House breakfast

By BEN EVANS, Associated Press Writer Ben Evans, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 37 mins ago

WASHINGTON The White House is once again explaining how uninvited guests wound up shaking hands with President Barack Obama.

 

This time, a Georgia couple hoping to tour the White House ended up at an invitation-only Veterans Day breakfast.

 

White House officials say the couple mistakenly showed up a day early and were allowed into the breakfast because there were no public tours available. They say the couple, Harvey and Paula Darden of Hogansville, Ga., were properly screened for security.

 

Harvey Darden, however, said there appeared to be a mix-up. No one told them about the breakfast, he said, and the Dardens thought they were starting their tour until they were ushered into the East Room and offered a buffet.

For about three seconds there is an inclination to laugh.  But then you remember that this is where the President and his family live - not to mention the large number of lawmakers, appointed officials, foreign leaders as well as many, many White House employees who might be there at any given time. 

For God sake, will someone implement serious security there? 


ABOUT THOSE 100,000's OF DEATHS DUE TO LACK OF INSURANCE.....

Ken Berwitz

From Neal Boortz:

Have you noticed that, as we get toward the make-or-break part of the health care debate a claim of "hundreds of thousands" dying due to lack of insurance is being tossed around a lot? 

You might be interested to know where it came from, so I thought I'd let Neal Boortz tell you:

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."

Frederic Bastiat

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

FIGURES LIE AND LIARS FIGURE

By

Neal Boortz

@ December 15, 2009 8:40 AM Permalink | Comments (47) | TrackBacks (0)

Just this past week The Community Organizer told Republicans that they needed to stop frightening the American people. Yeah .. it's those evil Republicans who are trying to scare people. But wait! Who was it attacking Joe Lieberman yesterday? Lieberman, you see, will not support a health care bill with an early buy-in for Medicare or the government option. The early Medicare buy-in is, of course, the ultimate government option. So ... the reaction of the left? Yesterday Ezra Klein in the Washington Post said that Joe Lieberman was willing to cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people to settle an old political score. Yup .. Joe Lieberman is a killer.

The left is getting desperate. This "hundreds of thousands of people" dying shows just how desperate. How did the statists come up with that number? Glad you asked. I just happen to have the answer. Well .. .Michelle Malkin actually did the work here, I'm just going to summarize it for you:

  1. A health survey is conducted between 1988 and 1994. A questionnaire is given to 9000 people. They are asked if they were insured and then asked to rate the state of their own health.
  2. The Centers for Disease Control tracks the deaths of any of these 9000 people through the year 2000.
  3. Along come two Doctors names Himmelstein and Woolhandler. These two are strong proponents of a single-payer government health insurance program. Himmelstein is the co-founder of a group called "Physicians for a National Health Program." Woolhandler is also a co-founder. The group is dedicated to "implementing a single-payer national health program.
  4. Himmelstein and Woolhandler decide to take the data from the CDC study and use it to write a study for the American Journal of Public Health. That study was published last December.
  5. When writing their article for the AJPH Himmelstein and Woolhandler decide that every single person in the study group that initially reported that they did not have health insurance did, in fact, die because they weren't insured.
  6. No verification was ever made that the study who said they weren't insured were not, in fact, insured.
  7. No attempt was made to discover whether or not these people actually got health insurance before they died.
  8. No attempt was made to determine whether or not the deaths of these people could be attributed to a lack of treatment due to their uninsured status.
  9. To make this simple ... Himmelstein and Woolhandler just assumed that if one of these people reported between 1988 and 1994 that they were uninsured, and if they then died by the end of 2000, the only reason they could have died was because they were uninsured.

This, my friends, is the "science" that these power-mad Democrats use to justify their desperate attempts to take over our health care system. The real problem here is that there is no way in hell the ObamaMedia is going to tell their readers what the health care takeover proponents are doing. You won't see this explanation in the pages of the Washington Post or the New York Times. You won't see this shoddy research exposed on any of the broadcast news networks. What you did see was Michelle Malkin discussing this on the hated Fox News Channel.

And you wonder why the looters and moochers hate Fox?

These people are lying frauds.  And they are counting on two things: 

1) media complicity (which they largely are getting - no surprise there) and...

2) ...you being a complete idiot who does not question ridiculous claims like this, but just accept them. 

Sad to say, some people are exactly what these people want.  Please, please make sure you're not one of them.


HARRY AND THE HEALTH CARE DEBACLE

Ken Berwitz

The emails we get from the Democratic machine keep telling us that Republicans are villains who are depriving us of the health care legislation we so desperately need and want.

Reality, however, is about 180 different, as shown by Rich Lowry of National Review, via today's New York Post.  The (wholly justified) attack on majority leader Harry Reid is Lowry's.  The bold print is mine:

The liberals' weaselly panic

Last Updated: 5:36 AM, December 15, 2009

Posted: 1:39 AM, December 15, 2009

Rich Lowry

 

Harry Reid can rightly claim to be making history.

 

If he passes health-care re form, he'll depend on a series of historic "firsts." It'd be the first time Congress had passed a major new entitlement program without bipartisan support; it'd be the first time it passed such a program without popular support; and the first time it passed such a program without knowing or particularly caring what's in it.

 

John McCain complained last week that he had no idea what constituted the highly touted backroom deal that Reid sent to the Congressional Budget Office for evaluation. The No. 2 Senate Democrat, Dick Durbin, reassured McCain that he didn't know, either. This is bipartisanship Harry Reid-style -- nontransparency for everyone.

 

Reid reportedly proposed giving the uninsured aged 55-65 entree into Medicare, a departure from the program's long-standing limit to retirees age 65 and older. This is a radical change that didn't have a full and frank airing among senators, let alone a committee hearing. Reid wanted the provisions of the deal kept secret because -- as recounted by Joe Lieberman -- he thought they'd be "mauled" if made public. Who needs openness and legislative details when you're remaking one-sixth of the economy?

 

This isn't the behavior of a self-confident majority secure in the knowledge that history is on its side. In fact, it's panicked, weaselly and willfully careless. The historian Richard Hofstadter wrote of the "paranoid style" in American politics. Obama Democrats have perfected the "impatient style." Reid's latest exertions fit the pattern of a headlong rush to a slapdash social democracy, justified by whatever arguments happen to be at hand and effected by whatever means necessary.

 

Reid acts like a hunted man for good reason. The RealClearPolitics average has 53.5 percent opposed to the Democrats' health-care plan and 37.7 favoring it. A CNN poll last week found the public against it by nearly 2-1. The numbers have gotten worse as the Senate has debated the measure in all its varied splendor -- the tax hikes, the Medicare cuts, the abortion funding. Reid is like the tormented narrator of Poe's "The Pit and the Pendulum":  With the clock's every tick, a vast blade promising doom swings nearer.

 

It's astonishing that with 60 votes in the Senate and an 81-vote majority in the House, Democrats have still managed to push the health bill to the point of failure. When significant headwinds developed in August, the prudent play was obvious -- scale the bill back, pick off a few Republicans and settle for 3/4 or less of a loaf. They couldn't bring themselves to do it, preferring to work with duct tape and baling wire to try to hold together an unwieldy bill that isn't paid for and doesn't reduce costs as advertised.

 

Reid's struggle getting to 60 makes some liberals fear that America has become "ungovernable." In other words, it isn't putty in their grasping little hands. Unfortunately for them, the Founders created a balky system resistant to precipitate change. It is designed to frustrate ideologically drunken (and perhaps temporary) majorities insistent on passing sweeping, unpopular legislation. Reid's difficulty is exactly the way James Madison would have wanted it.

f the health-care bill is necessary and wise, it will withstand a temporary defeat. Democrats could campaign on it around the country next year. They could rebuild public support, turning around the polls. They could enhance their majority in the House and the Senate, bringing more Democrats to Washington determined to pass it. That's how you usually pass historic legislation in a system naturally inclined to the status quo.

 

But Reid knows long-term persuasion isn't an option. As his approval rating sags below 40 percent back in Nevada, even he might not be returning to Washington after 2010. Every day, every hour matters in the now-or-never calculus of Democrats who already feel their moment slipping agonizingly away.

Does that square with the Democratic party line?  Not hardly.

 

The path to health care legislation has been unsettlingly similar to that of  "stimulus package" which was going to cap unemployment at 8% (it is currently 10.2%, even as Obama & Co. lie to our faces about all the jobs it has created). 

 

The idea is to write an impossibly long and complex bill, then demand that it be passed immediately - no time to actually read, digest or think about it - because if it is not passed, to quote the phantom, a disaster beyond your imagination will occur.

 

More and more people are realizing that the "stimulus package" they were scared into is a failure bordering on catastrophe - which in no small part explains why President Obama's approval ratings are down the crapper (7 major polls have him below 50% now).  And the more they realize how badly they were had with "stimulus", the more they look at ObamaCare with a jaundiced eye.

 

Good.  They should.  Spare us this legislative atrocity. 

 

And, as an extra bonus, let Harry Reid go down with it.  Think of it as political urban renewal.


A TASTE OF GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE

Ken Berwitz

From Michelle Malkin, without comment (unneeded):

Terrific: Government recalls 800,000 doses of kids swine flu vaccine

By Michelle Malkin    December 15, 2009 12:01 PM

Hey, stop worrying about a massive government takeover of health care.

Youre in good hands:

 

Health officials are recalling hundreds of thousands of doses of swine flu vaccine after tests indicated they may not be potent enough to protect against the virus.

 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notified doctors about the recall Tuesday. The recall involves about 800,000 doses made by Sanofi Pasteur. The doses are pre-filled syringes intended for young children, ages 6 months to almost three years.

 

Health officials say its not clear how many doses have already been given, but they dont think children need to be re-vaccinated. The lots passed potency tests when they were first shipped, but tests indicate the potency waned after.

 


Buy Our Book Here!


Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan

hopelesslypartisan.com, is a web site which is dedicated to honest, blunt, debate on the issues of our time.


About Us



Privacy Notice: In conjunction with the ads on this site, third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your browser, or using web beacons to collect information.


At “Hopelessly Partisan” we discuss all issues, big and small. In here, nothing is sacred and nothing is out of bounds.

So settle back, preferably after laughing your way through a copy of “The Hopelessly Partisan Guide To American Politics”, and let the battle begin. In this blog, your opinion counts every bit as much as anyone else's, maybe even more.

And to show that my willingness to provide all sides of the issues is sincere, here are links to a variety of web sites, from the left, the middle (more or less) and the right. Read them and either smile in agreement or gnash your teeth in anger!!