3
POPSWho Does Our Government Work For?
The table would not clip, go to source to see it and learn more. Among the 61 recipients of these joint contributions are 11 senators who sit on the 23-member Senate Finance Committee. Four other Democratic senators on the Finance committee also received such contributions: Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) and Deborah Stabenow (D-Mich.). - averaging about $19,800 in contributions per person from these clients and their external lobbyists during the two-and-a-half year period studied. On the other side of the aisle, 60 percent(!!) of the Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee were found to have accepted campaign contributions from these major health-related organizations and their outside lobbyists. Republican lawmakers received an average of $67,700 per person from these clients and their external lobbyists Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) received the most in such contributions, with $130,620. Who are they working for?? Not you
3
POPSThere is A Blizzard in Hell Tonight! Dems Vote To Ban ACORN Funds!
Gregg did not surprise me. Hutchinson thinks she can be governor of Texas with missing such a big vote? Old unreliable McCain is sitting this vote out too. Michelle Malkin details McCain’s ACORN coziness Vitter is in LA and that is ACORN country so no surprise here either. I lope Louisiana doesn’t lift a finger to send Vitter back to the Senate! From Michelle Malkin's blog: 5:42pm Eastern. Roll call vote still underway. Several Democrats have voted AYE, including Cardin, Carper, Inouye, Johnson (SD), Murray, Tester, Warner, Bingaman, Begich, Nelson (NE), Webb, Landrieu, Bayh, Conrad, Rockefeller, Dodd, Pryor, Hagan, Kohl, Feingold, Boxer, Nelson (FL), Brown, Harkin, Lincoln, Wyden, Baucus, Klobuchar, Kaufman, Shaheen, Lautenberg (switched from no to yes), Menendez, Stabenow, Leiberman, Levin, McCaskill, Reid, Feinstein, Udall, Bennet (CO) Merkley, Cantwell, Dorgan, Schumer… I am shocked by some of the hardcore lefties here.
2
POPSMy Response to Sen. D. Stabenow (D-MI)
For the most part, my insurance coverage is catastrophic only. My portion of the premiums if I were to cover eligible members of my family would cost nearly 1/4 of my bi-weekly take home pay. Obviously, if a mortgage is only supposed to by 1/3 of your monthly salary, then insurance premiums are nearly the price of a good-sized house. Adding to the 'ranks of the uninsured' is the fact of a 14.2% unemployment rate - of which my husband is one. He doesn't qualify for unemployment insurance so he isn't even counted. So, why are my premiums so high? First, because malpractice insurance for my physicians is totally out of control due to frivolous law suits, huge legal fees and the costs associated with trying even a small case. The judge, clerks, bailiffs, secretaries, etc...all have to be paid - by me, the taxpayer. Because of the need to cover themselves, doctors are forced to order complicated, often if not always expensive and sometimes unnecessary tests and procedures. Ev
0
POPSToledo Blade Resorts To Cry Baby Censorship As It Ignores Its Own Bias
The Toledo Bladeless Blunder shows us how the moronically biased mainstream media can be by providing us with an inexplicably self-contradictory editorial. The scatterbrained thought processes that led to this embarrassing abomination are illuminating because they provide proof to the assertion, which I have made myself, that there will be attacks against conservative talk radio, despite President Obama's statement that he does not support a return to the so-called Fairness Doctrine. (Remember his promise, err, lie, about campaign funding?) Actually, the president is disingenuous because he knows the attack will be subtle, and my point is proven by the dim-witted Toledo Bladeless Blunder editorial board brain trust that has been sipping the liberal mainstream tonic a bit too much. The editorial's first three graphs prove my point. What star-crossed geniuses they have at The Toledo Bladeless Blunder, which lacks intellectual honesty and clarity concerning talk-radio's his