Another Obama Friday news dump. They are calling it an “unpaid, advisory position” which can only mean one thing – they know they are up the creek and are choosing their words very carefully. And who better than Bill “It depends what the definition of is, is” Clinton to bite his lip for the cameras and deny any wrongdoing.
President Obama’s chief of staff used former President Bill Clinton as an intermediary to see if Representative Joe Sestak would drop out of a Senate primary if given a prominent, but unpaid, advisory position, people briefed on the matter said Friday.
Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, asked Mr. Clinton to explore the possibilities last summer, according to the briefed individuals, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the politically charged situation. Mr. Sestak said no and went on to win last week’s Pennsylvania Democratic primary against Senator Arlen Specter.
The White House did not offer Mr. Sestak a full-time paid position because Mr. Emanuel wanted him to stay in the House rather than risk losing his seat. Among the positions explored by the White House was an appointment to the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, which provides independent oversight and advice the president. But White House officials discovered it would not work because Mr. Sestak could not serve on the board while still serving in Congress.
Mr. Sestak first mentioned publicly in February that he had been offered a job but provided no details, and the White House for three months has refused to discuss it, generating intense criticism from Republicans who accused it of trying to bribe a congressman and deep consternation among Democrats who called on the administration to answer questions.
Mr. Obama promised on Thursday to release an account of the matter, which White House lawyers have been drafting in recent days in consultation with Mr. Sestak’s brother, Richard, who runs his campaign. The White House plans to release its statement later on Friday. Until now, the White House has said publicly only that whatever conversations took place with Mr. Sestak were not inappropriate.
I did not offer that job to that man, Mr. Sestak…..
CNN: “Hundreds of people, at least dozens of people – we haven’t gotten a count of how many people turned out there. We heard Sarah Palin talk about everything about the campaign, to unseat Sen. Reid to what she calls ObamaCare, on the heels of that health care vote and even talking about her definition of her love of America.”
So much for the bump in popularity that the Democrats and the MSM were insisting would happen once ObamaCare became law.
In the days since President Obama signed the farthest-reaching piece of social welfare legislation in four decades, overall public opinion has changed little, with continuing broad public skepticism about the effects of the new law and more than a quarter of Americans seeing neither side as making a good-faith effort to cooperate on the issue.
Overall, 46 percent of those polled said they support the changes in the new law; 50 percent oppose them. That is virtually identical to the pre-vote split on the proposals and similar to the divide that has existed since last summer, when the country became sharply polarized over the president’s most ambitious domestic initiative.
More people see the changes as making things worse, rather than better, for the country’s health-care system, for the quality of their care and, among the insured, for their coverage. Majorities in the new poll also see the changes as resulting in higher costs for themselves and for the country.
Most respondents said reform will require everyone to make changes, whether they want to or not; only about a third said they believe the Democrats’ contention that people who have coverage will be able to keep it without alterations. And nearly two-thirds see the changes as increasing the federal budget deficit, with few thinking the deficit will shrink as a result. The Congressional Budget Office said the measure will reduce the deficit.
About half of all poll respondents said the plan creates “too much government involvement” in the health-care system, a concern that is especially pronounced among Republicans.
John Kerry (D-Cambodia) has the vapors over the MSM/Democrat’s cries of right-wing inspired violence and hate speech over ObamaCare.
U.S. Sen. John F. Kerry pledged yesterday to work with Republican U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, despite their differences on the landmark health-care overhaul, and blasted angry, threat-hurling opponents of the trillion-dollar package.
“The kind of inflammatory, inciteful and hateful language that has been used . . . does great damage to our country,” Kerry said, referring to threats and racial epithets reportedly directed at Washington lawmakers in the wake of the bill’s passage.
“It has no place in our democratic process. It’s inappropriate,” he added.
Whaaaaa whaaaaaa. Democratic process? Pu-leeze. One word: reconciliation.
We all know what’s going on here. He and the other stooges he stood with during this whine fest know the American people hated the bill before it passed and hate it even more now that the truth about its devastating impact is slowly trickling out. So they are attempting to demonize the opposition to distract from the ugly truth. Desperate much?
The Obama administration is scrambling to fix a potential problem with a much-touted benefit of its new health care law, a gap in coverage improvements for children in poor health, officials said Tuesday.
Under the new law, insurance companies still would be able to refuse new coverage to children because of a pre-existing medical problem, said Karen Lightfoot, spokeswoman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee, one of the main congressional panels that wrote the bill President Barack Obama signed into law Tuesday.
However, if a child is accepted for coverage, or is already covered, the insurer cannot exclude payment for treating a particular illness, as sometimes happens now. For example, if a child has asthma, the insurance company cannot write a policy that excludes that condition from coverage. The new safeguard will be in place later this year.
In recent speeches, Obama has given the impression that the immediate benefit for kids is much more robust.
Full protection for children would not come until 2014, said Kate Cyrul, a spokeswoman for the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, another panel that authored the legislation. That’s the same year when insurance companies could no longer deny coverage to any person on account of health problems.
Obama’s public statements conveyed the impression that the new protections for kids were sweeping and straightforward.
That’s a nice way of saying he lied. In other words, his lips were moving.
What these despicable fools don’t seem to realize is that there will come a day in the not too distant future where they will be the party out of power and their sickening behavoir will come back to bite them in their shady asses. I, for one, am counting the minutes until we have our day of reckoning.