Where Are My Keys?

Sore losers from a Presidential election speak of secession..

It's a familiar tale, the losing Party has disgruntled members that want their State(s) to leave the Union.  Stupid Republicans.  How can they be so moronic in their thinking?  It just goes to show how they shouldn't be taken seriously when it comes to politics, right?

Sore losers threatening to leave the United States. Extremists trafficking in loose talk about secession.

A description of the aftermath of the 2012 election? Yes. But also an accurate depiction of the situation in 2004.

The liberal orthodoxy has been exasperated in recent days to discover that some Americans who are dismayed at the prospect of living four more years under an administration they detest could possibly consider secession as a respectable solution. In response to petitions that appeared on the White House website from citizens in all 50 states asserting the right of their states to secede, progressive supporters of the Obama administration started their own petition to “strip the citizenship of everyone who signed a petition to secede and exile them.”

On MSNBC’s “The Ed Show,” Jim Moore — director of the Progress Texas PAC and author of “Bush’s Brain” — spoke for many liberals outraged that any sane and decent person would contemplate leaving the country over the results of an election. “Texas has more than our blessed boatload of nutjobs who want to leave the nation,” Moore said. “And these are people who also claim to be patriots like Rick Perry. Out of one side of their mouth they say they’re patriots. Out of the other side of their mouth they say they want to leave the United States of America.”

Liberal loudmouth Lawrence O’Donnell was born in Massachusetts and graduated Harvard. He was an aide to the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a New York Democrat. He is also the host of a popular show on MSNBC, “The Last Word.” Back in 2004, he advocated secession — for blue states that voted for John Kerry.

On “The McLaughlin Group” after George W. Bush’s re-election, O’Donnell said, “The big problem the country now has, which is going to produce a serious discussion of secession over the next 20 years, is that the segment of the country that pays for the federal government is now being governed by the people who don’t pay for the federal government.”

“Did you say secession?” fellow guest Tony Blankley asked incredulously. “Are you calling for civil war?” “You can secede without firing a shot,” O’Donnell responded.

I agree that anyone that suggest secession is a viable alternative should be openly laughed at.  Let's just make sure the ridicule isn't confined by ones Party affiliation.  Nutjobs know no Party.

Obamacare-supporting patients asking doctors to break the law..

Here is your new realityin regards to "free" healthcare:

I wish I had the chutzpah of the people who wrote Obamacare. What they did not tell you, and I am, is that it covers absolutely nothing more than the bare minimum.

I have now posted a notice in my office and each exam room stating exactly what Obamacare will cover for those yearly visits. Remember Obama promised this as a free exam — no co-pay, no deductible, no charge. That’s fine and dandy if you are healthy and have no complaints. However, we are obligated by law to code specifically for the reason of the visit. An annual exam is one specific code; you can not mix this with another code, say, for rectal bleeding. This annual visit covers the exam and “discussion about the status of previously diagnosed stable conditions.” That’s the exact wording under that code — insurance will not cover any new ailment under that code.

If you are here for that annual exam, you will not be covered if you want to discuss any new ailment or unstable condition. I cannot bait and switch to another code — that’s illegal. We, the physicians, are audited all the time and can lose our license for insurance fraud.

You, the patient, will then have to make a decision.

Do you want your “free” yearly exam, or do you want to pay for a visit which is coded for a particular, new problem? You can have my “free” exam if you only discuss what Obamacare wants me to discuss.

This happened to me personally, as a patient, when I went for my physical. It is the law. If you are complaining of a new problem, then you have to reschedule, since Obamacare is very clear as to what is covered and what is not. Obamacare — intentionally — makes it as difficult to be seen and taken care of as possible.

Patients can be very tricky. I have had patients make an “annual” exam, only to want to discuss and be treated for another ailment. I can’t do it.

I can hear the complaints from you guys already — I become the bad guy. “Why don’t you just take care of the problem, and not bill out any different code? You’re a rich doctor, and we are entitled to free stuff.”

It doesn’t work that way. First, doctors are not rich and, like most of you, actually work terribly hard for a living. Second, Obamacare is the law — and as I said earlier, we are audited all the time now.

Read the whole thing.  It's too bad people didn't know what they were agreeing to when they supported Obamacare.  It's no wonder that our elected officials wrote the law so that they wouldn't have to use it for their personal coverage.

Related: Get your flu shot, or get a pink slip.

One of Cincinnati’s largest employers fired approximately 150 employees Wednesday for failing to get a required flu shot.

TriHealth offered all of its 10,800 employees free flu shots. Employees had a month to get the flu shot. The deadline was Nov. 16. Employees who did not get the shot were terminated Wednesday, a company spokesperson said.

Employees who were terminated can appeal to be reinstated after receiving the shot.

Take that, Wilbur!

My Devils took care of business in TuScum last night, beating the Wildcats by a touchdown:

Trailing by eight at halftime, Arizona went up 10 in the third quarter after Scott hit Aaron Hill on a 22-yard touchdown and Garic Wharton on a 40-yarder, and John Bonano kicked a 23-yard field goal.

The Wildcats just couldn't hold on.

Arizona gave up the blocked punt in the fourth quarter, and Scott had two of his four turnovers -- an interception and a fumble -- in the final nine minutes to let the game slip away.

Ka'Deem Carey ran for 172 yards and a touchdown, and Scott threw for 230 yards and three touchdowns with three interceptions and the crucial fumble.

"I'm disappointed we lost," Rodriguez said. "I love our kids and I'm really proud of our seniors, but I'm disappointed we lost. The kids are, too, I'm sure. Our guys competed hard."

A heated rivalry to begin with, the Territorial Cup took on added meaning this season with new coaches trying to get a head start on each other.

After an unsuccessful stint at Michigan, Rodriguez brought gas-it-all-the-time offense to the desert, hoping to turn around a program that had fallen off hard the previous couple of seasons.

Even without much depth on his roster, Rodriguez's debut has been a success: seven wins, two over top-25 teams, and bowl eligibility in his first season.

Just 90 minutes up Interstate 10 in Tempe, Graham put his mark on the Sun Devils with his no-nonsense approach and high-octane offense. Arizona State got off to a great start, winning five of its first six games, then rallied from a four-game losing streak to become bowl eligible by beating Washington State last weekend.

For all they accomplished, Friday night's game was the biggest of the season. Bragging rights, an advantage in recruiting, a boost for fans and alumni -- plenty was riding on this game.

"This game was everything," Graham said.

Related articles

Photos: Arizona St. storms back for 41-34 win over Arizona

ASU scores 24 in fourth to rally past Arizona

Cool stuff from my old boss..

Here he is, talking about his latest project:

 

I pre-ordered mine today, and can't wait to begin using it this Spring!

For you Star Wars and fantasy football fans out there..

Nice job by former Bronco Mark Schlereth:

 

Too bad you weren't paying attention, Teachers..

If you had done your homework (no pun intended) prior to casting your vote, maybe you wouldn't be surprised when something like this happens:

Pennsylvania's Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC) is slashing the hours of 400 adjunct instructors, support staff, and part-time instructors to dodge paying for Obamacare.

"It's kind of a double whammy for us because we are facing a legal requirement [under the new law] to get health care and if the college is reducing our hours, we don't have the money to pay for it," said adjunct biology professor Adam Davis.

On Tuesday, CCAC employees were notified that Obamacare defines full-time employees as those working 30 hours or more per week and that on Dec. 31 temporary part-time employees will be cut back to 25 hours. The move will save an estimated $6 million. 

"While it is of course the college’s preference to provide coverage to these positions, there simply are not funds available to do so," said CCAC spokesperson David Hoovler. "Several years of cuts or largely flat funding from our government supporters have led to significant cost reductions by CCAC, leaving little room to trim the college’s budget further."

Showing that the teachers still aren't paying attention to current events, their "solution" may cause them even more grief down the road:

The solution, says United Steelworkers representative Jeff Cech, is that adjunct professors should unionize in an attempt to thwart schools seeking similar cost-savings efforts from avoiding Obamacare. 

"They may be complying with the letter of the law, but the letter of law and the spirit of the law are two different things," said Mr. Cech. "If they are doing it at CCAC, it can't be long before they do it other places."

Right.  The solution is to Unionize.  Ask the 18,000 former Hostess employees how being in a Union saved their jobs.  What Mr. Cech fails to realize is that the symptom here is the underlying costs associated with Obamacare.  Unionizing would merely put a Band-Aid on the problem, while the disease continues to run rampant.

The disease of Obamacare is best explained in this very insightful comment:

These folks will have no problem. They will soon sign up for every government benefit that they are eligible for. Be sorry for the taxpayers who are now going to help support the millions of workers that Obamacare effects. In case you are unaware, that is exactly the point of Obamacare. Bring everyone down to a lower standard of living so they we all need to depend on the government.

Michelle Obama was correct.  Barack has fundamentally changed America.

What an inspirational guy..

Make sure to have a Kleenex handy.

 

 

138 points?

Dude.  Pass it once in a while.

By the end of the night, Taylor was 52-for-108 (27-for-71 from the 3-point line) and he'd established a new collegiate record.

Before his squad took the floor Tuesday night, Taylor met with a few teammates for a pregame devotional. It was the first time that Taylor, a sophomore at the Division III school, had ever read Bible verses with other players prior to tipoff.

They focused on Matthew 25, a chapter that features a parable about the value of talents.

"I gotta thank the man upstairs," Taylor said. "I was able to multiply my talents tonight."

Taylor wasn't the only star of the game. Faith Baptist Bible's David Larson scored 70 points (34-for-44). But the two didn't discuss their parallel shooting success during the game, Taylor said.

The guy that dropped 70, I don't have as much of a problem with that.  Dude only missed 10 of his 44 shots from the field, most of which I have to assume were dunks (34 baskets x 2 points = 68 points).  Taylor launched 71 three-point attempts.  How/why a coach allowed that many treys from one guy doesn't make any sense.

I also took a peek at the stats from the game, and Taylor had 0 assists.  Zero in 36 minutes. The kid on the other team that dropped 70 at least had one assist.

Looking at his stats for the season, we can see dude is a "chucker".  Prior to last nights 38% shooting, he tossed up a 20% performance, and a 15.8% game.

Now this guy will make the Morning TV circuit, talking about how he was "in the zone" (while shooting 38%, mind you), and how it was a surreal experience, and he had no idea he had that many points, and he will "forget" to mention that only one other player on his team scored in double figures.  The anchors will laugh and ask him if he thinks he can break his record the next time he laces them up, and we will all ignore that his team won by 75 points.  ESPN will have a camera on his next game, and send the wrong message that sports have become focused on individual "achievements" such as this, and ignore the true beauty of a basketball Team, acting as One, moving the ball up the court for the best possible shot at a basket.

Pity.

Most transparent ever?

Hardly.

Among the administration's many violations of public trust to recently become public is the Environmental Protection Agency's apparent attempt to keep some of its correspondence hidden from the light of day through the use of aliases.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, for instance, has reportedly used the name "Richard Windsor" to cover her tracks in private emails.

Federal law prohibits the government from using private emails for official communications unless they are appropriately stored and can be tracked. Because things look suspicious at the EPA, the House Science Committee is investigating the possibility that the agency has conducted business it doesn't want the public to see.

On Friday, the committee delivered letters to the EPA and "various agency inspectors general" seeking to find out if "senior personnel have been conducting official business through secretive means such as aliases and private email accounts."

The letters, sent by committee Republican members, express concern that "senior Obama Administration appointees" might be violating the Federal Records Act, Freedom of Information Act, the Presidential Records Act, and "other statutes designed to facilitate transparency and oversight."

...

CEI filed three freedom of information requests in May, seeking information about "certain correspondence on the secondary email account assigned to" Jackson. So far, the government, acting as if it's an authority unto itself, has not cooperated with CEI's reasonable and legal request for the Jackson emails.

What could possibly be in these emails that the Obama administration wants to keep covered up?

Maybe the correspondence is related to the 7,300 internal emails that CEI sued the Treasury Department last week to produce.

The emails CEI seeks are related to a carbon tax that the Obama administration and congressional Democrats are expected to propose before the end of the year. They seem to want to keep their plans quiet as long as possible so the public won't know what they're up to.

Whatcha hiding, Mr. President?

Remember when the Left was screeching about FISA?

Sure, you remember.  That was back in the good old days, when Bush was using the Constitution as toilet paper and whatnot.

Democrat Senator Pat Leahy even compared Bush asking for immunity for the wireless carriers as children playing with matches:

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., today compared White House officials to "little children playing with matches" over their refusal to compromise over wiretapping legislation.

He also accused Republicans of using the debate over revisions to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to attack Democrats on national security issues, even though Democrats support most of the substantive changes to the current law.
Leahy warned that the White House should know that the consequences of playing with fire "can be very severe."

The real stumbling block continues to be the Bush administration's insistence that the phone companies that participated in a secret wiretapping program receive legal immunity, something House Democrats have consistently rejected.
"The President once again is misusing his bully pulpit," Leahy said at this morning's Senate Judiciary Committee meeting. "Once again his purpose is not to help the Congress and the country reach consensus on a sensible law, but to tell Congress to set aside its legislative process and to merely take the administration's dictation."

What a difference a few years, and a different Party in the White House makes.

Today, Pat Leahy wants to be able to read anyone's emails, without warrants:

Leahy's rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies -- including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission -- to access Americans' e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge.

It's an abrupt departure from Leahy's earlier approach, which required police to obtain a search warrant backed by probable cause before they could read the contents of e-mail or other communications. The Vermont Democrat boasted last year that his bill "provides enhanced privacy protections for American consumers by... requiring that the government obtain a search warrant."

What changed, Mr. Senator?