Kevin Collins’ “Coach Is Right” is now on WesternJournalism.com. All the same great, news-breaking, liberal-busting content is here on Western Journalism just like it was back on CoachisRight.com.
Throw-away track phones bought at a nearby dollar store. Private investigator hired to trail working mom. Massive document shredding days. Bashing of hard drives. Office Chaos. Wow. Is this the latest fiction novel on a crime themed best seller list?
No. These are actual references in US House of Representatives hearings on the massive Social Security Disability Fraud Scandal. Honest and dedicated federal employees, sickened and disgusted over the theft of money and services of US taxpayer dollars filed a whistleblower lawsuit to blow the lid off of a scandal that looks to bankrupt a federal agency founded for the sole purpose of giving truly disabled Americans the benefits they need.
A Social Security Disability Office on the border of Kentucky and Huntington, W. Virginia, is at the center of federal investigations into the activities of SSD supervisors who turned over huge numbers of cases in order to boost their own bonuses. They set up shop with one attorney, an administrative law judge and several obliging doctors for several years.
“I’m flabbergasted,” said Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), himself a physician, as he grilled witnesses for hours about the massive loss of taxpayer dollars. “You abrogated your job as chief judge,” Senator Coburn told Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Charlie Andrus. The alleged misdeeds of Judge David B. Daugherty were heard without his direct testimony because he fled the hearing room before proceedings began. And the attorney in question, Eric Conn, took the fifth on the advice of his own attorney.
Most pitiful to watch was the testimony of four female witnesses who told the Governmental Affairs Committee about numerous incidences of retaliation by SSD managers, supervisors, and even Judge Andrus himself who admitted playing a role in video taping Senior Clerk Sarah Carver, one of the principles in the whistleblower lawsuit. Still employed, Carver, along with master docket clerk Jennifer Griffith, blew wide open the skulduggery that transferred about 2.5 billion taxpayer dollars into the benefit entitlements of disability claimants who were merely numbers on “DB’s Monthly Lists.” Carver said, “You could see massive numbers of favorable decisions going out. . .massive amounts of numbers.” She explained how the Conn-Daugherty scheme worked. The administrative law judge selected, or forum shopped cases by accessing computer selection lists he logged into from Master Docket clerk Griffith’s only web file. Each month, Attorney Conn’s office manager Jamie Slone, under the alleged direction of the attorney, made sure the ALJ received these lists for processing by this same judge who, according to testimony, spent as little as 10 minutes per claimant on pre-completed forms!
Attorney Conn became the nation’s third highest paid disability lawyer and Daugherty approved an astounding 99.5% of cases, granting benefits to practically everyone who applied. The national average for claimant approval is about 50%. And what’s even worse is the cover up and complicity of the federal Social Security supervisors who allowed this travesty to continue for years! Senator Coburn pointed out that this fund is scheduled to go bankrupt in 18 months, so honest American citizens who sincerely are disabled on the job won’t be receiving compensation!
What with the IRS scandal, the Bales disappearance for about two years from the EPA, this Social Security Disability fraud, and now the loss of countless millions of taxpayer dollars thanks to Obamacare, no one is being held accountable. In fact, the EPA head even held a party for one supervisor who let that department’s dishonest use of services go on and on.
Is there anyone in the Obama administration’s senior tier who will fire anyone?
Photo Credit: Standard Compliant
During the so-called Arab Spring, Barack Obama supported Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood’s choice to become Egypt’s president. The fact that he didn’t really win the election made no difference. Morsi immediately attempted to turn the formerly pro-American nation into a Sharia-compliant wasteland. His power play moves to subjugate the military and courts, to rewrite the Constitution, and make himself the supreme leader of Egypt did not sit well with the Egyptian people.
Morsi did very little to improve the lives of the people of Egypt; but hey, Obama liked the guy. A typical case of a leftist Democrat supporting a tyrant. On June 28, the Egyptian people rose up to remove Morsi from power. The would-be tyrant had to face the reality that the Egyptian people just weren’t enamored with him! It was at this point that the true saviors of the Egyptian people–the Egyptian Military–drove the Muslim Brotherhood and their military arm, al Qaeda, from power. But unlike a coup-d’état, the military did not take over the government.
Back in Washington, the Jarrett Administration (which Obama just happens to work for) decided that the ouster of Morsi and the crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood was indeed a coup-d’état. The Regime therefore demanded that Morsi be returned to power, or military aid to Egypt would be terminated. Naturally, Obama managed to make himself highly unpopular with the Egyptian people and single-handedly destroyed the long-term, positive relationship America had with the Arab Republic. Under orders from Valerie Jarrett, Barack cut off military and civilian aid while the Egyptian nation was fighting remnants of the Brotherhood and al Qaeda. This week, Secretary of State John Kerry was dispatched to Egypt for the purpose of convincing Egyptian leaders that Obama didn’t REALLY support the Muslim Brotherhood during Morsi’s reign of terror. It was just a simple misunderstanding.
Not one to miss a golden opportunity, Russian President Vladimir Putin is visiting Egypt, hoping to replace the United States as the main supplier of arms to the Egyptian military. Once in Cairo, “he is expected to announce a major arms sales package as part of efforts to build closer military relations.” Obama sided with the wrong people and lost another ally in the war against terrorism. Several American defense contractors will have to lay off workers because Obama chased off another customer. Between the NSA scandal and siding with known terrorist organizations, Obama has lost all creditably on the world stage. His chickens have come home to roost.
Okay, let’s get this right out: I don’t believe New Jersey Democrat Barbara Buono was a serious candidate. I believe she took one for her team. I believe she was a kamikaze who was supposed to get destroyed by Chris Christie, as she did, 60/40.
I believe the New Jersey Democrats took a look at the landscape in the Garden State and decided that even if they brought Franklin Roosevelt back to life and ran him against Christie, even he would lose. Once they came to that realization, they also recognized that it made little difference whether they lost to him by 4 points or 40 points – a loss is a loss. Or is it? The next thought they had was: “What if we get a clown candidate who doesn’t have a chance against Christie? What value could we draw from approaching this election as a purposeful dive?”
The answer became clearer and clearer thanks to silly talk of Christie being “The Man” for the Republicans to back in 2016. This brought us the hapless fool, Barbara Buono, a doctrinaire Marxist’s dream candidate.
This also brought us heretofore unheard-of radio ads run by New Jersey’s hardcore Democrats saying they were proud to have “worked with Governor Christie” “Proud to reach across the aisle to be bipartisan.” Bipartisan? Democrats proud to be “bipartisan?” NEVER ever are Democrats bipartisan unless it is to fool stupid Republicans or the precious Independent voters.
So Christie won by 22 points; now what? Well, the media already has him as THEIR 2016 top pick for the Republican nomination. Just as the New York Times picked John McCain and Mitt Romney, they intend to make sure Chris Christie is the GOPe candidate next time around.
How toxic is this for conservatives? Anybody who knows even a little about New Jersey politics knows that Christie would lose New Jersey as a presidential candidate by the same 22 points he won re-election with.
Don’t think so? You want proof? He “brought” just two Republican Assembly challengers to victory and not a single GOP senate challenger to the winner’s circle.
In 1985, when Tom Kean Sr. won a REAL landslide (71/24), he brought 14 Republican State Senate challengers with him. He too had a hapless opponent, but at least the guy was trying to win.
The New York Times will do its first Sunday Magazine puff piece on Christie next January; bank on it.
Don’t worry. This is not another piece about Obamacare. Instead, we’ll go back to basics and see if health insurance can ever satisfy the demands of the payers, the providers, and the patients. It’s not as if people haven’t been working on this for awhile. The notion of health insurance stems from the so-called “friendly societies” and dates back to the very dawn of the Industrial Revolution.
Arguably, those associations can trace their own origins back to the burial societies of ancient Greek and Roman artisans. In the Middle Ages, they morphed into the trade guilds of Europe and expanded their mutual assistance programs to cover the financial burdens of illness.
But the founder of modern health insurance is Otto von Bismarck, chancellor of Germany, who in 1883 passed the Reichsversicherungsverordnung (Reich Insurance Act). As such, it became mandatory for certain segments of the workforce to pay premiums in support of sickness funds. This effort, and the rest of its early social welfare programs, was a means for the government to counteract the appeal of Communism, especially to those on the lower economic strata.
However, it would take another German chancellor–better known than von Bismarck–to inflate this concept into universal government-controlled health care. His name was Adolf Hitler. It must be noted that Hitler was quick to see the potential in such control, and it is a sad fact that the mass extermination methods of the Nazis were first perfected in government hospitals.
A few years earlier, in Dallas, what would eventually be known as the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association began in the wake of the October 1929 stock market crash. Justin Ford Kimball, who had set up a sick benefit system for Dallas teachers, was recruited to deal with Baylor University Hospital’s falling admissions and problems in getting paid by its patients.
Kimball’s non-profit low cost prepaid plan concept was an immediate success, and for-profit insurance carriers would enter the fray during World War II. Given the wartime labor shortage, health plans were a valuable incentive that beleaguered employers could offer. Medicare, introduced in 1965, put the Feds into health care in a big way; and it was only a matter of time before its rubrics would spill over into private insurance.
Meanwhile, the Baby Boomers entered the job market; and competition in the private health insurance space exploded. For sure, that is what led to the amazing transition of health insurance covering catastrophic needs to its covering of nearly everything–at a price, of course. In fact, there is no other form of insurance that remotely fits this paradigm. Today’s health insurance is much more like a platinum-level extended warranty program, even if it is called “insurance.”
In a pathetically ironic twist, the one similarity that health insurance does have with other forms of insurance is that claims processing must be based on easy-to-understand cookbook formulations. This massively favors procedural medicine and acute care over cognitive medicine, and drug dispensing over lifestyle modification. In other words, there is a lot more money in disease than in health.
While longevity might increase under such a structure, health and wellness will probably not. Thus, the current system is bound to create an ever-increasing population of older, sicker individuals. This is not exactly an actuarial model for success. Given limited resources, choices must be made on both the distribution of health care and the reimbursement to the providers, whether it is a fully socialized system or a fully private one.
In a socialized system, such choices will be based on the “welfare of society.” In a commercial system, such choices will be based on marketability and return on investment. Either way, the rights of the individual disappear, along with the long diminished doctor-patient relationship. Moreover, since the entire enterprise is based on third-party payers, the true value of the covered products and services is grotesquely distorted.
So, let’s summarize what we have here: A system based on the shakiest of actuarial foundations, in which hard choices will have to be made that can only destroy individual rights, operating in a platform whereby the core component values are unknown. What could possibly go wrong?
In July, we reported that the Affordable Care Act saw to it that the nation’s best, doctor-owned hospitals would be forced to close. And now it appears that the favor is being returned as most of the nation’s top commercial hospitals will either refuse to accept ObamaCare patients, or “…accept insurance from just one or two companies operating under Obamacare.”
It seems Kathleen Sebelius’ Health and Human Services Department went too strong in demanding that insurance companies participating in ObamaCare cap their premiums. After all, prospective insureds must be able to afford premiums on the policies Obamacare is forcing them to buy.
Well, that has not come to pass, as the many stories of “sticker shock” have made clear. And in its attempts to intimidate insurance providers into quoting lower prices, the HHS has succeeded only in causing them to create policies that will pay “…top-tier doctors and hospitals far less cash for services rendered.” In short, something has to give if the Aetnas and Cignas are to remain profitable while cutting premiums on the many cadillac policies demanded by ObamaCare. And that something will be the fee for services paid to doctors and hospitals.
But not to worry. For should Democrats have their way, hospitals may be forced into treating ALL patients, regardless of their insurance coverage.
Kathleen Murray, a Democrat running for the Virginia House of Delegates, believes that doctors should be FORCED to treat Medicare and Medicaid patients. “Forced by Government Decree” that is, even if the pittance paid by the federal government does not cover the cost of the doctor’s time and services. And if doctors are to be made slaves to the State, will hospitals or clinics be far behind?
Thank you, Mr. Obama, for a Marxist plan guaranteed to force doctors into retirement (if it is permitted) as the demands of an ever-increasing number of patients are ignored.
Could it be that this was the principle purpose of the ObamaCare scheme all along? That is, cause such panic on the part of Americans that they will accept ANY “cure” offered by Big Brother (single payer, for instance)?!!
Photo Credit: Mr. Ducke (Creative Commons)
In a recent wishful thinking propaganda piece, the New York Times hit some themes that we’ve seen before, but broke some new ground with quotes from a Republican pollster and a “friendly” Democrat pollster.
After pounding away with the usual tired lies about how racist whites are, it quoted a useful idiot Republican pollster named Fred Steeper, saying, “The Republican Party needs to throw in the towel on the immigration issue.” How much wrong can you pack into one stupid head?
In spite of solid statistical evidence that had Mitt Romney won even 70% of the Hispanic vote he would still have lost, both Steeper and the Times parrot the same Democrat/GOPe/Chamber of Commerce line about not alienating Hispanics. This is, of course, followed by the charge that white racism is at the bottom of the “problem” for Republicans running for president in the future – and naturally, the Democrats and the media want to help the GOP out of its problem presumably to bring about “fair fight elections” in the future.
To support this ludicrous assertion, the Times tells us that, “By 2008, Mr. Obama sought to dial back talk of race in his campaign to become America’s first black president.” Willful blindness and lies like this are why we can never trust or really negotiate with liberals. They remind us that talking to these people should always only be a stalling tactic designed to buy time to find a way to kick them in the teeth.
Stanley Greenberg, a Democrat pollster, is also quoted telling us that in his survey of Republican voter sentiments, despite an almost complete absence of “explicitly racial talk,” he KNOWS it is there.
Reporting as if it is unfounded, Greenberg reports that Republicans are anxious about “[Democrat] big government [programs] meant to create rights and dependency and electoral support from mostly minorities who will reward the Democratic Party with their votes.” Wow, that’s deep, Stan.
Greenberg’s position begs attention to his own recently released Democracy Corps findings showing that House Democrat incumbents are in trouble heading into 2014, a warning echoing what he said in 2009 prior to the Democrats’ landslide loss in 2010.
Clearly, listening to people like Steeper, Greenberg, the GOPe, and the New York Times is a losing strategy for Republicans who actually want to win next year.
Rush insists that the “problems” with Obamacare are, if not exactly planned, welcomed by Barack Obama as a way to collapse our entire medical health insurance system. His reasoning holds that Obama believes the details surrounding this disaster are unimportant as long as they lead to Americans getting on their knees to beg him to “fix” his problem. The theory holds that when we crawl to our King, tears in our eyes, frightened half out of our minds, we won’t care what he does so long as it “makes the pain go away.”
In the general state of malaise we live in these days, it’s easy to agree with this. After all, we know that Obama hates America and would do anything to destroy our nation. Nevertheless, hating America and having the means to destroy America are two different things.
If Obamacare had the support of Americans from the beginning – say, even 53/47 in favor instead of today’s 55/45 against — this theory might stand up. This would indicate that there is a thirst for socialized medicine that could serve as a launching point for any retooled version of Obamacare the King could serve up; but this is clearly not the case.
The 53% are being proven correct every day. At this point, even some of Obama’s most ardent supporters are backtracking. The ranks of those opposed to this monster are growing while support is waning.
Having seen firsthand what Obamacare really is, it’s very difficult to envision Americans crawling to Obama, begging him for a “new and better” government-run healthcare plan.
Another take on Obamacare is that we should aim to repeal it because it can never be de-funded. Sounds nice; but we have already tried and failed numerous times. The only way Obamacare will be repealed is by the Democrats; conservatives just don’t have enough power to get this done. Therefore, using scarce resources to only try to repeal this law doesn’t seem to be the best way to go. The alternative to repeal is de-fund, but that approach is panned as impossible since Obama will merely raise taxes if need be to fund it.
This would be reasonable, except that we already have Social Security, Medicare, Food Stamps, and dozens of other programs that have to be funded; and the real unemployment rate (U6) is over 13%. Moreover, the government has just announced taking in $2.7 Trillion, and even that is not enough. Where would this new tax money come from?
What’s the answer? Keep up the pressure, and keep praying for God’s help.
Saudi sheikh has issued a fatwa against anyone wanting to travel to Mars.
The Mars One Foundation, a private, nonprofit organisation seeking to establish a permanent, occupied settlement on Mars by 2023 has apparently not found favor with higher ups in the Religion of Peace. In fact Sheikh Ali al Hemki has issued a fatwa against the organization and its plan, claiming the proposed mission “does not conform to ‘responsible Muslim’ practices.”
With the exception of beheading infidels, abusing females and killing anyone who disagrees with them, does anything conform to “responsible Muslim practices?” More importantly, are there any such things as “responsible” Muslim practices?
“These experiments will lead to the destruction of those who try,” and so should be done with animals, not people,” said al Hemki. Perhaps someone should tell the Sheikh that with the exception of opposable thumbs, Muslims are not all that different from…well, you get the idea.
Photo Credit: Standard Compliant
A covert game of hide and steal among the United Nations Agenda 21 Project, the U.S federal government, and Indian tribes will result in irreversible consequences that will let the feds control all national water rights. According to a press release by small ranchers and property owners in Montana, “Circuit Court Judge Cameron Wogan in Klamath Falls, Oregon, refused ranchers’ requests for a temporary restraining order to allow their cattle and horses access to drinking water.” Their main water tributaries were shut off in June of this year after tribal demands on rivers and streams feeding Klamath Lake turned 100,000 head of cattle into herds of animals dying from thirst. By calling the U.S. Indian Tribes sovereign people, just like France, China, or Germany, the feds seek to take over complete control of America’s water. “Families are being forced into bankruptcy as their sole source of income is being taken away while legal battles slowly grind on with delays and hearings with time-wasting lawyers,” continues an urgent appeal for help.
By continuing to harangue average citizens with guilt over the treatment of Native Americans, the federal government along with the UN one world power momentum are dividing the cattlemen, killing their animals, seizing and spoiling private property and in essence threatening all of us by taking over water rights for everyone. The tribes “with their $12 million a year kickback from the feds in addition to their casino earnings” are dragging out this Klamath water war in a five county region out West.
Rural Cleansing was first identified in a WSJ article by Kimberly Stassel when Klamath Basin water shut-offs occurred in 2001. Farms in the lower Klamath basin were all part of “The Project” which the federal government set up to give by lottery land to returning WW I and WWII veterans with “a 1905 water right supply, regardless of what year the acreage was put into production.” But now, by political and legal maneuverings, closed and/or secret meetings and a divide and conquer mentality, these very ranchers are facing destitution and rape of their privately held lands! Yes, this is happening here in the good old U.S. of A. And what is worse, if legal precedent can by established by this huge UN-US takeover of the Sprague, Williamson, and Wood Rivers, ALL rivers in America could become part of a One World owned and managed water supply. “No river in the country is safe,” warns the ranchers’ news release. “Once precedence is established here, it makes it easy to attack other rivers elsewhere.” If the feds control our water, they control our food supply. We’ll have to fill up our own daily water allowances at the village wells or tanker trucks to take back to our cluster homes designated for us in UN designed ipodment living quarters.
One rancher put this outrage in real perspective when he said, “Many of my friends up here have mortgaged the ranch, mortgaged their lives, and those of their children and grandchildren to fight this insane taking. . .what are you willing to do. . .Open another beer in your recliner and watch the drama?” Folks, this is serious business because if the federal government controls our health care, our water, our food, we are serfs, not free Americans. Do something now. Call your representative and Senators, no matter where you live, and demand that this takeover be stopped NOW! Call 1-877-762-8762
Photo Credit: Standard Compliant
Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper admitted to the House Select Committee on Intelligence that Mr. Obama and senior White House officials “were well aware of U.S. surveillance activities targeting leaders of friendly foreign nations.” Despite the best efforts of professional Democrat liars (aka consultants), Mr. Obama unquestionably knew about the intelligence communities’ targeting of foreign leaders. In fact, he pointed out that “neither the CIA nor the National Security Agency can tap into a given leader’s private communications without White House oversight.”
Not only was Obama regularly briefed on the programs; so was Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Though perhaps not privy to the details of the operations, both were fully aware of the intelligence reports gleaned from the tapping thanks to daily intelligence briefings.
Democrats at large and their propagandists in the mainstream media were genuflecting to protect the liar-in-chief as they claimed that the Intelligence community never briefed Mr. Obama or his staff about the operations. Members of the intelligence community are outraged that Obama and his talking heads tried to throw them under the bus. (2) Unlike true Alinskyite believers, longtime spies don’t appreciate being sacrificed for political cover.
Dianne Feinstein’s Senate intelligence committee voted this week to permit the NSA program (PRISM) to collect records of the phone calls of American citizens. Naturally, this is something else the White House knew nothing about. The Agency was allowed to collect data in accordance with the Patriot Act. The original purpose of the Act was to provide the NSA with sufficient authority to find terrorists and their handlers on American soil. However, the scope of the law was expanded to allow the collection of information on all Americans. Dianne Feinstein’s proposal would restrict the ways in which the Agency might share data with other federal agencies. At no time did Mr. Obama or DiFi prohibit the NSA from snooping on friendly foreign leaders.