Did the AMA forget its constituents? “Just on the heels of the AMA’s decision to endorse the House Democrats’ health package comes this new analysis from the Lewin Group showing that doctors stand to lose $18,900 per physician in the third year of the proposed law. The losses come mainly as a result of reduced revenues stemming from the bill’s Medicare cuts, and increased expenses stemming from serving the newly insured. This analysis does not, of course, count the increased taxes doctors would disproportionately have to pay based on their higher-than-average incomes.”
Michael Gerson smartly observes: “The White House and congressional leaders are increasingly conveying a desperate message: Pass health reform quickly, before the congressional recess, before the great moment is lost. In other words, before details of the plan are examined too closely, before concerns about spending and the deficit take even broader hold.”
Obama cheers the end of the F-22. Isn’t anyone in favor of “saving or creating” jobs anymore?
Is the FBI getting closer to Rep. John Murtha? TPM thinks so, with the plea of another Murtha-connected figure, this one a former Air Force employee who received kickbacks from a Murtha-approved defense contract.
Sotomayor in her confirmation hearings incorrectly suggested that state law might determine whether a 38-week unborn child could be aborted because of a birth defect. Matthew Franck takes us through the case law, concluding: “Judging from her record on the board of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, she is every inch a pro-choice advocate, and she has been a federal judge for 17 years. She has no excuse not to know what Sen. Coburn was getting at. She has no excuse not knowing that abortion on demand has been the law of the land since January 22, 1973. She has even less excuse covering that up in a nationally broadcast congressional hearing, if she does know it.”
Joseph Abrams reports: “President Obama’s ‘science czar,’ Paul Holdren, once floated the idea of forced abortions, ‘compulsory sterilization,’ and the creation of a ‘Planetary Regime’ that would oversee human population levels and control all natural resources as a means of protecting the planet — controversial ideas his critics say should have been brought up in his Senate confirmation hearings.” Why didn’t this come up at his confirmation hearings? Well, it seems, “The people who are concerned about Holdren, quite frankly we didn’t do enough homework.”
All those afraid during the election of being embarrassed by our VP were right to be worried: See the latest Bidenism.
What Obama’s pro-Chavez policy in Honduras has wrought: “The increasingly defiant de facto leaders in Honduras Tuesday gave 72 hours to staff from Venezuela’s embassy to leave, accusing them of threatening to use force and meddling in internal affairs. Venezuelan diplomats swiftly rejected the expulsion order, saying it was issued by leaders of an illegitimate government that ousted President Manuel Zelaya in a coup late last month. The toughened stance came after negotiations with Zelaya hit deadlock and amid international pressure for his reinstatement.”
The Washington Post editors are stumped: How is the Iran regime going to “engage” Obama when battling to save itself? “While the administration should remain open to constructive proposals by Iran, it should avoid any action that would lend strength to Mr. Khamenei’s regime. And Mr. Obama should continue to make clear that the United States stands with those seeking peaceful and democratic reform. If they do not succeed, neither will any meeting in Geneva.”
The very popular left-leaning Virginia blog Not Larry Sabato is wigged out that Gov. Tim Kaine’s primary donor and prominent businessman isn’t endorsing Democratic gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds: “That’s not just Kaine’s #1 donor — it is also Creigh’s #1 individual donor from the 2005 AG race. What is going on here?” I think what’s going on is that the Democratic Party is reverting to its antibusiness reputation.
In Pennsylvania: “Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter’s 2010 reelection lead over Republican challenger Pat Toomey has shrunk to a tie with 45 percent for Specter and 44 percent for Toomey, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. And voters say 49-40 percent that Sen. Specter does not deserve reelection. President Barack Obama gets a 56-37 percent job approval, compared to 62-31 percent in a May 28 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University. By a bare 50-43 percent majority, voters approve of the President’s handling of the economy.” Maybe switching parties wasn’t such a great move for Specter. Well, if the wind keeps blowing the other way, he could always flip back, right?