Obamacare Glitch Gives Millions More Health Insurance

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's healthcare law would let several million middle-class people get nearly free insurance meant for the poor, a twist government number crunchers say they discovered only after the complex bill was signed.

The change would affect early retirees: A married couple could have an annual income of about $64,000 and still get Medicaid, said officials who make long-range cost estimates for the Health and Human Services department.

Up to 3 million people could qualify for Medicaid in 2014 as a result of the anomaly. That's because, in a major change from today, most of their Social Security benefits would no longer be counted as income for determining eligibility.

Medicare chief actuary Richard Foster says the situation keeps him up at night.

Quote:
Hello Friends,

For those of you that follow this thread and posts I've made elsewhere you know that I've been writing about B Hussein's Islamic agenda. By now it should be quite obvious to all but those blind to his overall policies that include the destruction of America will also fail to see what is staring them in the face.

I'm not going to belabor the point of his throwing Israel under the bus in favor of the Palestinians and the outright political and major financial support for the PA who still stand by their PLO/Fatah (they are the ruling party in the PA) charter calling for the annihilation of Israel. They also financially support the Hamas a terrorist organization that's umbillically connected to the Muslim Brotherhood and whose charter is even worse then PLO/Fatah. This is is so obvious that it needs no further comments in this article.

This time let's take a look at what he's doing in the United States and the rest of the Western world to promote and empower Islam and the Muslims. We know he's surrounding himself with Muslims who are connected to the Muslim Brotherhood and support terror in addition to his progressive left radical advisers and czars who support Islam and Muslims.

In the below article by Daniel Greenfield you'll find that not only is he undermining the USA but Europe as well with their attempts to correct their past mistakes of multiculturism and political correctness. He's doing this in a blatant way and they are not happy with him and his policies. It's a very interesting and informative read and you'd do well to take note of the message in the article cos it shows what is happening and what the end result will be.

Appeasing the Islamic monster is a show of weakness and not calling terrorism and those countries supporting terrorism out and dealing with them out of strength is the worst sign of weakness and they'll take advantage of it and they are. The mistakes that B Hussein made in Egypt gave birth to another Iran as will the attacks on Libya and the non intervention in Syria. The Iranian's are openly stating their agenda now and that too was ignored by B Hussein. All he has to say is "respect them" and the question is respect WHAT??

Shalom,

Peter

The "Muslims First" Foreign Policy

In France, American embassies and consulates have been directed to "empower" Muslim and push for the passage of "social reforms" that will benefit them. In the UK, American diplomats were directed to again "empower" Muslims and made outreach to them a top priority. In Israel, the US consulate in Jerusalem caters only to Muslims and does its best to pretend that Jews and Israel don't even exist. And when Obama visited Greece, what else did he do but push the political and religious authorities to open more mosques and Islamic schools. America's own interests and our obligations to our allies have been put aside to focus on a single goal of overriding importance. Pandering to the Muslim world. It's as if we have no other foreign policy goal anymore beyond keeping Muslims happy.

The United States has its first Special Representative to Muslim Communities in the person of Farah Pandith. We also have Rashad Hussain, a Special Envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference. (No relation to Barack Hussein Obama. The name Hussain is common among Muslims as a tribute to Mohammed's grandson, Hussain ibn Ali, the 'Martyr Of Martyrs' in Islam.) Hussain (Rashad, not Barack) had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, which helped create both Al Qaeda and Hamas, and defended Islamic Jihad leader Sami Al-Arian. Farah Pandith is a Kashmiri Muslim who began her career as Barbara Bush's secretary. But just creating two new Muslim posts in the diplomatic sector isn't enough.

NASA Administrator Bolden told Al Jazeera that the agency's new priority is outreach to Muslims. After gutting NASA and killing its space program, the agency focused on its new top priority by appointing Waleed Abdalati, as its new Chief Scientist. Waleed Abdalati is a twofer, as a Muslim and a Global Warming researcher. So the Obama Administration gets to kill off the space program and replace it with Global Warming junk science headed by a Muslim. It's what the devil would call synergy.

Is any of this working? Does the Muslim world love us now? No they don't. And France, the UK, Israel and Greece like us less for tampering with their internal affairs at Muslim instigation. All the outreach in the world can't help, because it's not outreach, it's pandering. Not only is it condescending, but it sends a message of weakness and desperation. When we pressure our allies on behalf of Muslims, we're sending them a signal that our first priority is fulfilling the marching orders we received from the Muslim world. And this not only fragments our traditional alliances, but it encourages Muslim regimes to support further acts of terrorism to improve their position.
.
Since 9/11 we have sunk billions of dollars into the Muslim world. Usually we had to defeat a country in a war before we began rebuilding them, but now we rush to throw money at hellholes like Pakistan and Indonesia where human rights is a punchline and the mass murder of non-Muslims is an ongoing event.

Taking a look at the fortunes we have plowed into Taliban's godfathers in Pakistan, the round the clock duty that American soldiers perform securing and rebuilding Afghanistan and Iraq, the death grip that Bin Laden's own adoptive Saudi royal family has on our foreign policy, our bankrolling of the Palestinian Authority, not to mention the money that we paid and are still paying to Baathist and Taliban terrorists in exchange for not attacking us-- and even the least terrorist prone country in the Muslim world can't help but think that it could do better for itself by bombing us, than by trying to be our friend.

This frantic flurry of outreach reveals that we consider Islam to be the primary threat to global stability and a major national security threat. The positive image reveals the negative. We're so obsessed with pandering to Muslims because we're afraid of them. The Muslim world knows it, and gloats, when it isn't busy acting offended. The American public knows it too, even behind the camouflage tarp of learning about other cultures, that we're trying to defuse the violence. But trying to defuse violence through appeasement is not a good strategy unless you're willing to go all the way to Dhimmitown.

By enslaving our foreign policy to Islamic interests, we're already much of the way there. Chief Justice Stephen Breyer has adopted a new Constitutional understanding of free speech, in which you're free to say what you want as long as it doesn't run the risk of getting Muslims violently angry. In Europe you can be arrested for yodeling even in the shadow of the Alps-- if it offends a Muslim. A 21st century revival of The Sound of Music might now feature the Von Trapp family escaping into the mountains only to end up under arrest because some immigrant from Algeria, Morocco or Turkey was offended because the sound of "The Lonely Goatherd" resembled his own prayers to Allah a little too much.

What does this have to do with foreign policy? Everything. If we treat the Muslims of the world as a collective group always balanced on the edge of exploding, then there is no more difference between foreign and domestic policy when it comes to Muslims. Accordingly every Western country with a Muslim minority must pursue only Muslim approved policies at home and abroad. If Thailand, Israel or India begin fighting Muslim terrorism-- they must join in on the Muslim side. If France passes a Burqa ban, then the United States must begin lobbying to overturn it. If Danish cartoons in a local newspaper offend Muslims, then the Prime Minister of Denmark must be compelled to apologize for his country's free speech before being allowed to become NATO's Secretary General.

The combination of Muslim terrorism and immigration eradicates all differences between foreign and domestic policies. There is only one policy. A Muslim policy. And the bottom line of the Muslim policy is that Muslims get what they want. At any cost. Any price. Freedom, morality, loyalty, national values and human rights are dispensable now. Appeasing Muslims is not.

Appeasing Muslims had tied the free world in an infernal knot. Each country pressures its own citizens and other countries to do whatever Muslims want. This would be unjustifiable even if it worked, but the damnedest thing of all, is that it doesn't actually discourage Muslim violence. It actually encourages it. And why not? If countries pandered to murderers, rapists and robbers instead of putting them in prison-- would there be less murders, rapes and robberies. Or would there be more?

The only way we can justify our craven appeasement is through the belief in the discredited Blowback Theory of Muslim violence. The Blowback Theory holds that Muslim violence is only retaliatory. That every time Muslims kill people, it's only because they're retaliating for a wrong done to them. Whether that wrong be a Predator drone taking out a terrorist (who was only retaliating for being yodeled at), drawing a cartoon of an illiterate 7th century pedophile worshiped by a billion people with deficient morals, or some battle fought 600 years ago. Whatever it may be-- the Blowback Theory holds that Muslims are always in the right to kill us. And we're always in the wrong to defend ourselves against being killed.

The corollary to the Blowback Theory is the Infinite Muslim Terrorists Theory. The Infinite Muslim Terrorists Theory holds that every Muslim grievance creates new terrorists. Like an angel getting its wings every time a bell rings, the Infinite Muslim Terrorists Theory warns us that every time we offend Muslims, it bring forth new terrorists. And shooting them does no good. Because shooting terrorists only offends Muslims even more. And that generates still more terrorists. Kill a terrorist and four more take his place. And if the process keeps going, there will eventually be more Muslim terrorists in the world than there are Muslims, causing the entire world to implode into the event horizon of a singularity.

The paradox of the Infinite Muslim Terrorists Theory is that it insists that the vast majority of Muslims is peaceful, and yet threatens that every single one of those peaceful people can be converted into homicidal maniacs if we're not careful. And when combined with Blowback Theory, it puts the blame for the instant terrorist conversion on us. Like Gremlins that we're afraid of feeding after midnight, we take care to step lightly around Muslims, for fear that they will suddenly turn into monsters bent on killing us. Such thinking might be considered bigoted, but with Blowback Theory we know that if they do turn into homicidal monsters, it will be entirely 100 percent our fault.

Project this mode of conduct on a global scale, and this is what our foreign policy looks like. All our envoys to Islam. Our Muslims First foreign policy. Our retrofitting of policymaking at every level to accommodate the whims of the prophet's beard. And for all the cringing and crawling, appeasing and advocating, the violence continues to grow. Because you can end violence by taking a firm stand, not by falling to your knees.

If God brings you to it,
He will bring you through it.
Happy moments, praise God.
Difficult moments, seek God.
Quiet moments, worship God.
Painful moments, trust God.
Every moment, thank God.

"The Simple truth is that we've lost control of our own borders, and no nation can do that and survive. -Ronald Reagan

"Measure not men by Sundays, without regarding what they do all the week after." *- Thomas Fuller *

* "When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hang on." - Thomas Jefferson *

Remember be good to yourself and take one day at a time * "God is our refuge and our strength, a very present help in trouble." *- Pslams 16:1 *

Sunday, June 26, 2011

A closer look at the false rumor about Delta Air Lines and Saudi Arabia.

It appears that false rumors, no matter how vicious, are virtually impossible to stop once they start. Last week a Washington attorney named Jeffrey Lovitky who works for the American Center for Law and Justice and Rabbi Abraham Cooper from the Simon Wiesenthal Center set off a firestorm among the conservative blogs after they made some startling, but baseless, claims that Delta Air Lines had entered into a partnership with Saudi Arabian Airlines and that all Delta flights flying to cities in Saudi Arabia would begin to deny passage to Jews. On June 22, the highly regarded conservative web site WorldNet Daily ran this story:

Delta adopts Saudi 'no-Jew' fly policy
By Bob Unruh

Delta Air Lines' plan to add Saudi Arabian Airlines to its SkyTeam Alliance of partnering companies would require the American carrier to ban Jews and holders of Israeli passports from boarding flights from New York or Washington bound for Jeddah, prompting outraged accusations of illegal religious discrimination.

The issue, which has caught the attention of the American Center for Law and Justice already, was raised when Washington attorney Jeffrey Lovitky was perusing airline procedures for travel.

"As we learn more about the issue and facts, we are determined to ensure that American citizens do not face discrimination by airlines like Delta that are passenger code-sharing with Saudi Arabian Airlines," said Colby M. May, director and senior counsel of the ACLJ.

Read more here:

This was followed on Friday when Rabbi Abraham Cooper, who heads the Simon Wiesenthal Center, posted an Opinion on the Fox News web site purporting to be an open letter to Delta CEO Richard Anderson under the headline:

Is Delta Airlines Letting Itself Be Hijacked By Religious Bigots?

Pardon me for communicating with you this way, but you fobbed off inquiries by others to your Customer Care e-mail department. Since I represent 400,000 constituent families of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, I thought it would be more appropriate to communicate this way and let the rest of the American people in on an outrageous situation.

What would happen if a leading U.S. carrier voluntarily allows itself to be hijacked by bigots in order to open a new market? For example, what if it entered into an agreement with a foreign airline that would see to it that no blacks or Catholics or gays boarded code-shared flights destined to reach the partner’s home nation?

I think you know the answer.

Yet, that is what Delta Airlines appears to have done when your company announced plans to add Saudi Arabian Airlines to your SkyTeam Alliance. You see, under their rules, they require that Delta ban Jews and holders of Israeli passports from boarding flights from New York or Washington bound for Jeddah.

Read more here:

The rumor about the alliance between Delta Air Lines and Saudi Arabian Airlines originated with a press release that announced that the official airline of the fundamentalist Islamic government of Saudi Arabia was joining the 14 member airlines Skyteam alliance based in Amsterdam. What no one seemed to realize was the alliance between these companies was merely an Interline agreement which allows passengers to book tickets on multiple carriers, similar to the standard interline agreements American Airlines, US Airways and Alaska Airlines have with Saudi Arabian Airlines. Delta even issued a clarifying press statement to stop the rumors. No one took notice of the statement or the part that said that Delta Air Lines does NOT FLY to any city in Saudi Arabia and DOES NOT codeshare with any other airline that does. (A codeshare is when one airline buys a block of seats on another airline and places its flight designator, or "code," onto a flight operated by a different airline. The arrangement allows airlines to sell tickets on each other's flights.)

“Delta Air Lines does not discriminate nor do we condone discrimination against any of our customers in regards to age, race, nationality, religion, or gender,” Delta said in a statement Friday. “Delta does not operate service to Saudi Arabia and does not codeshare with any airline on flights to that country. Delta does not intend to codeshare or share reciprocal benefits, such as frequent flier benefits, with Saudi Arabian Airlines, which we have confirmed with SkyTeam, an Amsterdam-based 14-member global airline alliance.

“Delta’s only agreement with Saudi Arabian Airlines is a standard industry interline agreement, which allows passengers to book tickets on multiple carriers, similar to the standard interline agreements American Airlines, US Airways and Alaska Airlines have with Saudi Arabian Airlines,” the statement said. “All of the three global airline alliances – Star, which includes United Airlines; oneworld, which includes American Airlines, and SkyTeam, which includes Delta – have members that fly to Saudi Arabia and are subject to that country’s rules governing entry.”

Then the web site Atlas Shrugs, run by the ever-vigilant anti-Islamist pro-Israel author Pamela Geller, jumped into the controversy by publishing a story story on Friday, June 24th, that consisted of some screen captures from Delta's web site that advised travelers about the strict Islamic religious laws in Saudi Arabia suggesting that Delta condoned these laws. These travelers advisories are posted on other airline web sites and originate from the web site of the U.S. State Dept.

“Delta Sharia Airlines”

“While Delta Airlines obfuscates and dances around the truth (they have really perfected the art of taqiyya), their website tells the story. Go to the Delta Airlines website and look at the information listed there. Delta doesn’t just work with Saudi Airlines; they post their info on the Delta website.

Not only are Jews not welcome, but women are told to cover their arms and to wear heavy clothing, among other sharia compliant rules. Further, Muslim women are restricted from travel without a husband or immediate member of the family.”

Read more here:

Then yet another web site called Jihad Watch posted two stories about Delta Air Lines with even greater inflammatory headlines.

"Delta Airlines adds Saudi airline to partner companies, will uphold "No Jew" policy on flights to kingdom”

Delta scrambles for damage control in wake of taking on Saudi airline's "No Jew" policy

and quoted a comment by Rabbi Jason Miller in the liberal blog The Huffington Post that had a most inflammatory title: ""Delta Adopts Saudi Arabian Airlines' No Jew Policy,"".

Pamela Gellers's compatriot Robert Spencer runs the anti-Islamic web site called Jihad Watch. I have the utmost regard for both of these people due to the extensive coverage they provide to the spread of Islamic terrorism in America and the world. But it pains me to have to admit that while they permit opinions that disagree with them on their web sites, neither has seen fit to admit they fell for the false rumor against Delta Air Lines.

Over the weekend I posted several comments to the Jihad Watch blog along with supporting facts about the false rumor and one reader went to the trouble to write an email to Delta for a clarification. The reader posted Delta's reply:

Delta does not plan to codeshare or share Frequent Flier benefits with Saudi Arabian Airlines. Delta’s only agreement with Saudi Arabian Airlines is a standard industry interline agreement, which allows passengers to book tickets on multiple carriers, similar to the standard interline agreements that all U.S. legacy carriers have with Saudi Arabian Airlines. All of the three global airline alliances – Star, which includes United Airlines; oneworld, which includes American Airlines, and SkyTeam, which includes Delta – have members that fly to Saudi Arabia and are subject to that country’s rules governing entry.

It is important to note that visa requirements to enter any country are dictated by that nation’s government, not the airlines, and they apply to anyone entering the country regardless of whether it’s by plane, bus or train. We, like all international airlines, are required to comply with all applicable laws governing entry into every country we serve.

I even went to Delta's web site and downloaded the following map of their routes to the Middle East and you will note that none of their flights go to Saudi Arabia. In fact, Saudi Arabia isn't even mentioned. Delta has only one flight to any Muslim country and that is Dubai. Anyone can easily confirm that Delta doesn't fly to Saudi Arabia by calling their reservations office at 1-800-221-1212 and ask them. Apparently, non of these bloggers bothered to do so. Click the map for a larger view.

Finally, one major news outlet, The Associated Press, reported a story that clarified the issue. The story was carried by Yahoo News, Canada.

Delta doesn't fly to Saudi Arabia, but the Internet does; some upset over Saudi visa policies
By Joshua Freed, The Associated Press | The Canadian Press – Fri, 24 Jun, 2011

Delta Air Lines found itself with a public-relations headache after the online world lit up with talk that the airline wouldn't fly Jews to Saudi Arabia.

That's not true. Saudi Arabia decides who gets in the country and who doesn't, not the airlines. Delta doesn't even fly there. Still, by Friday, a U.S. senator wanted an investigation, Delta was professing its tolerance, and some Twitter users called for went so far as to mention a boycott.

“Saudi Arabia decides who gets in the country and who doesn't, not the airlines. Delta doesn't even fly there. Because Saudi Arabian Airlines is becoming a member of SkyTeam, Delta was singled out in reports that ran Thursday and were passed around social media. U.S. carriers already partner with other airlines that fly to Saudi Arabia, including Air France and the German airline Lufthansa.”

Now it seems that many conservative bloggers, many of whom I have respected, have succumbed to the same dilemma liberals have, they cannot admit when they made a mistake.

You should all be suspicious about the source of rumors and what may be behind them and what hidden agenda the perpetrators have. Delta is a mostly non-union company and has had numerous efforts by organized labor fail to get the workers to join them. Unions are mostly pro-Democrat and it would be well to their advantage to kill two birds with one stone if they could get a bunch of conservative bloggers to make fools of themselves spreading a false rumor. And what better way to serve Democrat's purpose than to destroy the credibility of the conservative bloggers with the 2012 elections looming in the near future.

Think about it.
http://oldironsides-thesilentmajority.blogspot.com/2011/06/closer-look-at-false-rumor-about-delta.html?spref=fb

Flotilla Choir presents: We Con the World