Obama Healthcare Claims Were a Sham

Obama Healthcare Claims Were a Sham
Thursday, 06 May 2010 11:35 AM

By: Ronald Kessler

A year ago, President Obama promised that his healthcare reform “could save the nation more than $2 trillion over the next 10 years and save hardworking families $2,500 in health care costs in the coming years.”

Since that time, Obama has claimed hundreds of times that the legislation would “bend the cost curve.”

All along, Republicans said Obama was making up figures. Now we know who was right.

An analysis by Obama’s own Department of Health and Human Services says that, rather than reducing costs, the healthcare legislation that was passed “will increase national healthcare spending by $311 billion from 2010-2019.”

While healthcare amounts to 17 percent of GDP now, it will cost 21 percent by 2019, the report from Obama’s own administration says. The increased costs will be as much as $500 billion higher if Congress — as expected — overturns planned cuts in Medicare spending.

Moreover, although 34 million people will gain coverage under the law, 23 million will remain uninsured, according to the analysis. People who choose to go without insurance and employers who do not provide required coverage will pay $120 billion in penalties from 2014 to 2019.

Richard S. Foster, the chief actuary of Medicare and Medicaid who prepared the report, says the reason his analysis did not come out before the bill was passed is that he “didn’t have access to the reconciliation legislation itself until it was publicly issued on March 18, which was three days before the House vote took place on March 21. Because of the complexity of the reconciliation changes, it wasn’t possible to estimate the package prior to the vote.”

In other words, the White House, which claims to endorse transparency, had no interest in telling the public the real costs of the bill until after it was passed. Otherwise, it would have made sure that Foster received the appropriate information in time to prepare an analysis.

Back in 2003, when President Bush made a 16-word statement in his State of the Union speech that British intelligence believed Saddam Hussein had been trying to buy uranium from Niger, the media unleashed its full fury on him. Each day brought new page one headlines insinuating that Bush had lied.

In fact, not only did the British intelligence service MI6 believe that Saddam had sought uranium from Niger but also investigations by both a British House of Commons and a Senate intelligence committee later concluded the MI6 report was well-founded.

Now it turns out Obama misled the country about a measure that affects one-fifth of the economy, yet there is no outrage except from Republicans. The news media have treated the story as a non-event.

The New York Times played the story on Foster’s report on page A8. The Washington Post and USA Today did not run a story. With the exception of Fox News, none of the networks touched it.

If Obama were a company that advertised such false claims, the Federal Trade Commission would take action. If Obama were a Republican, the news media would play his deception as a scandal.

But Obama is neither. He is a pitchman who has victimized the American people with his sham reform.


Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com. View his previous reports and get his dispatches sent to you free via e-mail. Go here now.

"LOST" - Across The Sea

May 11 Episode: Across The Sea

I've had difficulty with this episode... torn between liking it and not-so-much. The episode, in of itself, was interesting... getting more background on Jacob and MIB... but I'm not sure I'm liking some of the implications. I'm trying to think things through, but I keep coming back to, "One day you can make up your own game and everyone else will have to follow your rules." If this turns out to be one big game that Jacob made up... then I'm gonna be extremely irritated. It's almost like... Mother liked you best and I got stuck with this stupid job; I'm not gonna be stuck here by myself! Like a petulant child throwing a temper tantrum.

I just cannot accept this and I refuse to believe that's what all this has been about.

Anyhoo... here's my random thinking on the whole smoke-monster thing. MIB is NOT the smoke monster... the smoke monster has been imitating him all those years like he is doing with John Locke now. We now know that Jacob retrieved his brother's body and laid him to rest next to his surrogate mother in the cave (and I so thought that island Adam and Eve was going to be Rose and Bernard left behind in the 70's), just as we know Locke's body was laid to rest by Ilana, Ben, Sun, and Lapidus. The smoke-monster took on some personality and mindset of it's hosts, previously MIB (wanting to get off the island), just like it is doing now with Locke (don't tell me what I can't do).

So the smoke-monster seems to be an entity in of itself, whether it already existed or was formed by the entrance of a life into the water-cave? I'm not sure, but leaning more toward already existed. Was it bad beforehand or was it corrupted by absorbing traces of anger, lying, deceit and murder through it's host?

And what about the destruction of the well and the camp... Mother did that?? Looks more like the work of a smoke-monster!

How many of you think that Claudia's ghostly appearance might actually be a smoke-monster appearance?

Obama Threatens Veto of Obamacare...

I thought this article was very interesting...

Obama Threatens Veto of Obamacare as Cost Estimates Soar Above $1 Trillion
Wednesday, 12 May 2010 12:44 PM

Reacting to the surprise announcement that congressional budget referees now predict healthcare reform could top $1 trillion, the Obama administration threatened Wednesday to veto parts of its own healthcare bill.

The politically explosive revelation, which is likely to give new impetus to the GOP’s repeal movement, came after the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said the law potentially could add at least $115 billion to government healthcare spending over the next 10 years.

This comes after a separate Medicare office report found that the bill would raise spending by about 1 percent during the next decade. Still the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) stood by the administration's original claims that the law would reduce the deficit. Obama tasked Congress with making that happen through tax increases or spending cuts. If that doesn’t happen, the administration is vowing to make program cuts itself.

OMB spokesman Kenneth Baer said Wednesday that the healthcare law "will reduce the deficit by more than $100 billion in the first decade, and that will not change unless Congress acts to change it. If these authorizations are funded, they must be offset somewhere else in the discretionary budget.

“The President has called for a non-security discretionary spending freeze, and he will enforce that with his veto pen."

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said the new CBO analysis "provides ample cause for alarm," according to a report on ABC News.

"This comes just weeks after the Obama administration itself released an analysis confirming that the new law actually increases Americans’ healthcare costs," Boehner said. "The American people wanted one thing above all from healthcare reform: lower costs, which Washington Democrats promised, but they did not deliver. These revelations widen the serious credibility gap President Obama is facing."

Meanwhile, Jennifer Hing, spokeswoman for Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee, told Fox News: "If Congress were to approve all of this new discretionary funding authorized in the healthcare bill, almost all of the administration's highly touted savings would be made null and void."

If Congress approves all the additional spending called for in the legislation, it would push the 10-year cost of the overhaul above $1 trillion — an unofficial limit the Obama administration set early on.

The CBO said the added spending includes $10 billion to $20 billion in administrative costs to federal agencies carrying out the law, as well as $34 billion for community health centers and $39 billion for Indian healthcare.

The costs were not reflected in earlier budget office estimates, although Republican lawmakers argued strenuously that they should have been. Part of the reason is technical: the additional spending is not mandatory, leaving Congress with discretion to provide the funds in follow-on legislation — or not.

"Congress does not always act on authorizations that are put into legislation by drafters," Baer explained. "Authorizations for discretionary spending are not expenditures."

Congressional estimators also said they simply had not had enough time to run the numbers. Costs could go even higher, because the legislation authorizes several programs without setting specific funding levels.

The healthcare law provides coverage to some more than 30 million now uninsured, offering tax credits to help buy health insurance through new competitive markets that open for business in 2014. When Congress passed the bill in March, the CBO estimated the coverage expansion would cost $938 billion over 10 years, while reducing the federal deficit by $143 billion.

Media Ignore La Raza Immigration Protester Fomenting Violent Revolution

**NOTE - This man is a high school history teacher!


Media Ignore La Raza Immigration Protester Fomenting Violent Revolution
By Lachlan Markay - Mon, 05/10/2010 - 14:45 ET

Which is more newsworthy: hearsay accounts of racial slurs unsupported by video evidence of the alleged incident, or video of a protester calling for violent revolution against the federal government, the imposition of socialism, and the annexation of the Southwestern states for Mexico?

If you chose the latter, you're probably not a journalist of the self-proclaimed "mainstream" variety. The legacy media has been largely silent on video of Los Angles schoolteacher at a La Raza protest of the recently-passed Arizona immigration law literally calling for the violent overthrow of the United States government.

"There's 40 million potential revolutionaries north of the border, inside the belly of the beast," Los Angeles high school history teacher Ron Gochez told a frenzied crowd, referring to the 40 million Latin Americans in the United States. He went on to claim that teaching or writing a book "is not part of the movement," and that his followers needed to go a step further -- to literal revolution.




video link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGqPo5ofk0s

Does this man represent a fringe element of the pro-illegal immigration protesters? Probably. Has an individual's fringe status ever stopped the media from reporting on the outlandish things a couple Tea Party attendees have said? Of course not. Often those statements are taken as evidence that the movement is nothing more than a bunch of potentially-violent racists clinging to their God and guns.

The clip above shows a man actually advocating violence. There is no ambiguity about it. He obviously has a deep hatred of capitalism -- which can reasonably be described as far more radical than a deep hatred of socialism. And this man is a high school history teacher!

The response from the mainstream press: [crickets].

Where are the journalists that were so worried about political violence stemming from the Tea Party?

Why is Mark Potok of the Souther Poverty Law Center not appearing all over cable television to decry the anti-government violence La Raza is advocating?

Where is Bill Clinton to pontificate on the dangers of heated rhetoric and the potential that it could spill over into actual violence? And where are all the media talking heads that were so eager to parrot the former president's politicized warnings?

The alleged spitting incident on the steps of the Canon House Office Building was enough to whip media liberals into a frenzy. With the N-words supposedly hurled at Rep. John Lewis, it made for a perfect anti-Tea Party media meme, despite the total lack of evidence supporting the claims.

MSNBC's prime time lineup was one four-hour doomsaying sermon on the dangers of "right-wing extremism." But so far that channel is eerily silent on this man's heated calls for a violent uprising.

Pictures of a sign at a Tea Party rally quoting Thomas Jefferson's famous "water the tree of liberty with the blood of patriots and tyrants" statement were paraded around as an undeniable sign that the Tea Party movement was out to overthrow -- violently, if necessary -- the political order.

Leftist accounts of the Tea Party are replete with accusations of racism. But where is the outrage over this La Raza protester's use of the phrase "frail ... white people"?

Even Sarah Palin's use of crosshairs on a map of November's target congressional districts was touted by many media liberals as a sign that conservatives have an inherently violent attitude towards politics. And yet, the same journalists haven't drawn any similar conclusions about the radical pro-illegal immigration movement that, as we've just seen, actually calls for violent revolt.

For those who have been paying attention, this double standard is hardly shocking. But the video of this man literally fomenting revolution and advocating violent imposition of socialism -- and the media's virtual silence -- serve as a powerful reminder of the legacy media's never-ending quest to discredit conservatives.

—Lachlan Markay is an associate with Dialog New Media. Make sure to follow him on Twitter.


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2010/05/10/media-ignore-la-raza-immigration-protester-fomenting-violent-revolut

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer - On A Roll!

First the immigration bill... now this bill! You go, girl!!


Arizona gov. signs bill targeting ethnic studies

Jonathan J. Cooper, Associated Press Writer – Wed May 12, 6:23 am ET

PHOENIX – Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has signed a bill targeting a school district's ethnic studies program, hours after a report by United Nations human rights experts condemned the measure.

State schools chief Tom Horne, who has pushed the bill for years, said he believes the Tucson school district's Mexican-American studies program teaches Latino students that they are oppressed by white people.

Public schools should not be encouraging students to resent a particular race, he said.

"It's just like the old South, and it's long past time that we prohibited it," Horne said.

Brewer's signature on the bill Tuesday comes less than a month after she signed the nation's toughest crackdown on illegal immigration — a move that ignited international backlash amid charges the measure would encourage racial profiling of Hispanics. The governor has said profiling will not be tolerated.

The measure signed Tuesday prohibits classes that advocate ethnic solidarity, that are designed primarily for students of a particular race or that promote resentment toward a certain ethnic group.

The Tucson Unified School District program offers specialized courses in African-American, Mexican-American and Native-American studies that focus on history and literature and include information about the influence of a particular ethnic group.

For example, in the Mexican-American Studies program, an American history course explores the role of Hispanics in the Vietnam War, and a literature course emphasizes Latino authors.

Horne, a Republican running for attorney general, said the program promotes "ethnic chauvinism" and racial resentment toward whites while segregating students by race. He's been trying to restrict it ever since he learned that Hispanic civil rights activist Dolores Huerta told students in 2006 that "Republicans hate Latinos."

District officials said the program doesn't promote resentment, and they believe it would comply with the new law.

The measure doesn't prohibit classes that teach about the history of a particular ethnic group, as long as the course is open to all students and doesn't promote ethnic solidarity or resentment.

About 1,500 students at six high schools are enrolled in the Tucson district's program. Elementary and middle school students also are exposed to the ethnic studies curriculum. The district is 56 percent Hispanic, with nearly 31,000 Latino students.

Sean Arce, director of the district's Mexican-American Studies program, said last month that students perform better in school if they see in the curriculum people who look like them.

"It's a highly engaging program that we have, and it's unfortunate that the state Legislature would go so far as to censor these classes," he said.

Six UN human rights experts released a statement earlier Tuesday saying all people have the right to learn about their own cultural and linguistic heritage, they said.

Brewer spokesman Paul Senseman didn't directly address the UN criticism, but said Brewer supports the bill's goal.

"The governor believes ... public school students should be taught to treat and value each other as individuals and not be taught to resent or hate other races or classes of people," Senseman said.

Arce could not immediately be reached after Brewer signed the bill late Tuesday.

"Separation of Church and State" Misunderstanding

Where did “separation of church and state” come from, and what does it mean?

Most people believe this phrase was in the original U.S. Constitution, but it was actually first expressed in a private letter by Thomas Jefferson. Since then, especially in recent times, it has sadly been misused to slowly, but surely, eliminate Christianity from the public sector—and replace it with an anti-God religion.

The often-misused First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . . ”

This was intended to protect the church from the federal government, not government from the church.

Want a more in-depth answer?  See article below...

from Answers Weekly



Separation of Christianity and State

by Ken Ham, President/CEO, AiG–U.S.
May 3, 2010

Almost all Americans have heard the phrase “separation of church and state.” It has been used as something of a club to “beat down” and eliminate Christianity from public places, including symbols (like crosses), disallow Bible reading and prayer in public schools, and stop the teaching of creation in science classes.

Now, where does the phrase “separation of church and state” come from? It is not a part of the original U.S. Constitution of 1787, as most people falsely believe, or in any of its amendments. In reality, the idea of a “wall of separation” between church and state came from a private letter from President Thomas Jefferson, and it has sadly been misused to slowly, but surely, eliminate Christianity from the public sector—and replace it with an anti-God religion.

The Establishment Clause in the First Amendment was intended to protect the church from the (federal) government, not the government from the church. Therefore, no “national” church or religion is allowed to be established by the federal government.

I will highlight key words of the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . .

You can see that the “separation of church and state” phrase is nowhere in the Amendment (or the rest of the Constitution). The 1802 letter from Jefferson was sent to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut in response to the group’s letter to him. Jefferson was trying to assure the Baptists that the federal government would never be permitted to interfere with the church. In fact, in his letter, Jefferson states:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.1

Today, secular scholars have lifted the Danbury letter out of its entire historical context and have turned the so-called “wall” metaphor completely on its head.

“Separation of church and state” is now used to protect the government from the influence of the church—establishing a policy of freedom “from” religion, which in reality has become “separation of Christianity and state.” This would have been an entirely foreign and unintended concept to the Founding Fathers.

This misrepresentation of the Constitution was witnessed once again as I attended a debate in March, in which Rev. Barry Lynn, a liberal minister, lawyer, and the head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, spoke. Not only did he argue for separation, but claimed that government “neutrality” towards Christianity was his group’s aim. Sadly, most Americans (Christians included) have also been duped into believing that the so-called “separation of church and state” requires eliminating the Christian God and creating a neutral situation. But there is no such position as neutrality. Indeed, one is either for Christ or against Him (Matthew 12:30)!

The religion of naturalism (atheism) has been imposed on the public education system, and on the culture as a whole. For instance, science textbooks in the public schools now typically define science as naturalism (atheism):

Science requires repeatable observations and testable hypotheses. These standards restrict science to a search for natural causes for natural phenomena . . . . Supernatural explanations of natural events are simply outside the bounds of science.2

In keeping with this pronouncement, these books teach molecules-to-man evolution, based only on unproven natural processes, as fact! In other words, they have eliminated the supernatural and replaced it with naturalism. In reality, they have eliminated the Christian worldview and replaced it with a secular, atheistic one!

Sadly, because many Christians have falsely believed that there can be a neutral position, and have also been duped regarding the so-called “separation of church and state,” they are not prepared to boldly and unashamedly stand on the Word of God as they confront issues like abortion, “gay” marriage, racism, etc. By shrinking back, believers have allowed the secularists to impose their anti-God atheistic religion on the public schools—and the culture as a whole.

Answers in Genesis has launched its “I am Not Ashamed” campaign to challenge Christians to publicly and unashamedly stand on the Word of God. Only then, from the basis of the Bible’s absolute authority, will Christians be able to effectively combat the immorality that plagues our nation.

For more information on AiG’s “I am Not Ashamed” campaign, see our special insert stapled inside this newsletter or go to our new website of IAmNotAshamed.org.


Footnotes

1. Thomas Jefferson, Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptists, The Library of Congress website.

2. Neil A. Campbell, Brad Williamson, and Robin J. Heyden, Biology: Exploring Life, Florida Teacher’s Edition (Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2006), p. 38.


http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/au/separation-of-christianity-and-state#



Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists

The Final Letter, as Sent

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html
 
 
 
If you're interested...

Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists
The Draft and Recently Discovered Text

http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpost.html


AND...

'A Wall of Separation'
FBI Helps Restore Jefferson's Obliterated Draft

You get the writer's opinion in this article... but some of the facts are very interesting.  For example:

"One of the nation's best known advocates of religious liberty, Leland had accepted an invitation to preach in the House of Representatives on Sunday, Jan. 3, and Jefferson evidently concluded that, if Leland found nothing objectionable about officiating at worship on public property, he could not be criticized for attending a service at which his friend was preaching. Consequently, "contrary to all former practice," Jefferson appeared at church services in the House on Sunday, Jan. 3, two days after recommending in his reply to the Danbury Baptists "a wall of separation between church and state"; during the remainder of his two administrations he attended these services "constantly."

Jefferson's participation in House church services and his granting of permission to various denominations to worship in executive office buildings, where four-hour communion services were held, cannot be discussed here; these activities are fully illustrated in the forthcoming exhibition. What can be said is that going to church solved Jefferson's public relations problems, for he correctly anticipated that his participation in public worship would be reported in newspapers throughout the country. A Philadelphia newspaper, for example, informed its readers on Jan. 23, 1802, that "Mr. Jefferson has been seen at church, and has assisted in singing the hundredth psalm." In presenting Jefferson to the nation as a churchgoer, this publicity offset whatever negative impressions might be created by his refusal to proclaim thanksgiving and fasts and prevented the erosion of his political base in God-fearing areas like New England.

Jefferson's public support for religion appears, however, to have been more than a cynical political gesture. Scholars have recently argued that in the 1790s Jefferson developed a more favorable view of Christianity that led him to endorse the position of his fellow Founders that religion was necessary for the welfare of a republican government, that it was, as Washington proclaimed in his Farewell Address, indispensable for the happiness and prosperity of the people. Jefferson had, in fact, said as much in his First Inaugural Address. His attendance at church services in the House was, then, his way of offering symbolic support for religious faith and for its beneficent role in republican government."


http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danbury.html

"LOST" Fans - Jorge Garcia (Hurley) Interview

Jorge Garcia On the "Tiring ... Wet ... Perilous" 'Lost' Finale & More (VIDEO)

"LOST" Fans - Useless Trivia

I was watching a rerun of "Grey's Anatomy" tonight, s04e05 - Haunt You Every Day, the Halloween episode where the dude takes a chainsaw to his own foot and Meredith took her mom's ashes to the hospital in a baggy... when I saw the kid that needed new ears.  As soon as I saw him I thought... that's David, Jack Shephard's kid!

His name is Dylan Minnette and he's been in alot... or so I found out when I checked on IMDB to verify.

On another note... on a different "Grey's Anatomy" episode, s02e24 - Damage Case, John Cho from "FlashForward" plays an intern from another hospital that fell asleep at the wheel thus causing an accident that killed someone.

Speaking of "FlashForward"... I noticed that Jack Davenport who plays Lloyd Simcoe is the same guy who played Norrington in the "Pirates of the Caribbean" trilogy... and when I rewatched "The Wedding Date" I noticed he was the groom, Ed, marrying Kat's sister.

Missy & The New(t)est Gift

Missy sleeping in her chair.  She is spoiled.

The other day I was working on my computer.  Then, after a quick trip to the bathroom, I come back to both of my cats crouched down below my chair.  Instantly piquing my curiosity... you can tell when your furry friends have got something.  I turned on the overhead light for better inspection.  This is what I found...

I grabbed a papertowel, picked it up, went out the back door, and trotted off to the wooded area out back where I let it go.

When I went back to my computer I discovered something else...

Oh, good Lord!

It's missing tail... and it was moving!  It was twitching and curling.  Pretty freaky!  Especially when I was trying to pick it up.

Come to think of it... I just took the garbage out because something was stinking up the kitchen.  I couldn't remember putting anything in it that would make such an awful smell... until just now!

Later in the evening I was doing laundry.  I was trying to fold this comforter to put away and Missy was trying to crawl on it as I was trying to fold it.  So I laid it down where she promptly settled for a snooze.

Pasta & Italian Sausage w/ Spinach, Onion, Garlic Sauce

I made this tonight for dinner.  I was expecting to use whole wheat pasta, but when I opened the cupboard, I noticed I had some leftover tri-color pasta (plain/tomato/spinach) that was taking up space and decided to rid myself of it instead.

It's pasta and Italian sausage with a sauce/not sauce of EVOO, spinach, garlic & onion.  **I say sauce/not sauce because it's not something you want to ladle on... just enough to toss and coat the pasta.**

I cooked some Italian sausage earlier, and had it resting. I also had the pasta boiling. 

Then I put some olive oil down in a small saute pan (this time I used Red Pepper flavored EVOO), added diced onions, frozen chopped spinach, fresh chopped garlic, and a couple of shakes of rosemary, basil, crushed red pepper flakes, garlic salt and pepper.  When it was ready, I took half the saute mixture and put it in my Magic Bullet with a splash or two of fresh olive oil and puréed it.  Added that back into the pan.  I wanted to maintain some chunkiness to the sauce with the the onions and spinach.

I sliced one of the sausages in half lengthwise and cut it up into bite-sized pieces.  Put that back into the pan I had cooked it in, added a few spoons of the sauce, then threw in a couple spoons of pasta.  Mixed thoroughly, plated, and added a couple shakes of shredded parmesan cheese.  Waa-laa!  Dinner is served.

Deee-licious!

...and you know the leftovers are going to be just as good!

"LOST" - Everybody Loves Hugo

Apr. 13 Episode: Everybody Loves Hugo

At Libby's gravesite, Hurley is wearing a brown t-shirt... swoosh to the flash-sideways, he's still wearing brown, but now it's a casual dress shirt. Just thought it was interesting...

Back to the island and in the middle of a disagreement with Ilana... BOOM!.. she blows up. Poor Hurley... second time he's been traumatized by someone blowing up while they're off on a tangent. And what the heck do you think is in that bag he picked up out of Ilana's stuff?

The last time we say this bag, Ilana was putting Jacob's ashes into it.

 

Then we saw Miles getting Jacob's story like he was reading a bag of tea leaves.

Is that what Hurley saw when he opened it, Jacob's ashes... or was there other stuff too?  Why the heck would Hugo keep a bag of dust?  He didn't know it was Jacob's ashes... he was at the Temple.  So, again, what's the deal with Ilana's bag?

Then there's Desmond! This calm, collected Desmond is a little unsettling, albeit in an interesting 'I wanna know what he knows' way. In previous episodes, Desmond always reminded me of one of those small yappy dogs that shake all the time. Always chaotic and "I don't know what's going on, I'm just trying to get through it and survive'. Now it's like he's driven with some sort of specific purpose and I want to know what he's thinking! What's his game plan? He went with Sayid... and now John, way too easily.

When Hurley blew up the "Black Rock"... whoa, dude! Miles: "Warning might have been nice there, Hugo." Hurley's response... "I did say run." LMAO!! Note: Hugo says, "Dead people are more reliable than live people." Tell that to John Locke! The dead people that were talking to him were manipulating liars.

The appearance of the "wild-child"... this time a dark-haired boy carrying a staff... wearing the same outfit the blonde boy was wearing. The way he smiled at Desmond...? Like he was pleased... about what? That Desmond was here and things were going according to plan, or maybe just pleased that John was so irritated with his presence? John was none to pleased to see this kid, it really seemed to irk him; unlike the blond boy, whom didn't smile, but turned and ran with John right behind him.

Random thinking... 2 boys, one blond, one dark. ???
Jacob - MIB
Jack - Sawyer
Aaron - Charlie Hume

My mind keeps wanting to go back to Aaron and what his significance was. Early on it was stressed that it was important that only Claire raise him...

Claire's First Visit W/Psychic (video)

Claire's Second Visit W/Psychic (video)

Claire's Third Visit W/Psychic (video)

Lost - s01e10 - Raised By Another:  In her "dream" John said, "he (the baby) was your responsibility, but you gave him away, Claire. Everyone pays the price now." He looked up and one eye was a black stone, the other a white stone.

Claire's Dream (video)

What's up with that??  What happened to all that?  What about Aaron and his role in all this?

I've been reading and listening to other people's (blogs/podcasts) and some seem to question what Alpert asked Hugo to ask Jacob about the island. What is the island? They're like... oooo, what does that mean? Uh, the island is the cork! Remember the metaphor Jacob gave Richard in Ab Aeterno.  Richard was testing Hurley... he didn't believe Jacob was there talking to Hurley... so, prove it, Hurley; what did Jacob say the island is?

I gasped when MIB/NotLocke pushed Desmond down the well... I wasn't surprised that he'd do something like that, just didn't expect it.

Notice that Desmond said he had a son, Charlie. Charlie doesn't exist in this time 'whatever'. Then when Desmond ran John Locke down... hoo-wee! Did not expect that. Thought he wanted to talk with Locke. My mind is spinning over this one.

Eclair Cake

Eclair Cake

1 Lb. (box) Graham Crackers
2 - 4 Oz. (instant) French Vanilla Pudding
3½ C. Milk
9 Oz. Cool Whip

Butter bottom of 9"x13"x2" baking pan. Line pan bottom with graham crackers. Mix pudding and milk until thickened, fold cool whip into mixture. Pour 1/2 of mixture over cracker layer, smooth, then add second layer of graham crackers, then pour remaining pudding and smooth, cover with third layer of crackers. Refrigerate for 2 hours. Frost.


Frosting:
6 Tbsp. Powdered Cocoa
2 Tsp. Light Karo Syrup
2 Tbsp. Soft Margarine
3 Tbsp. Milk
2 Tbsp. Oil
2 Tsp. Vanilla
1½ C. Powdered Sugar

Mix well, spread over top layer of graham crackers. Refrigerate finished product for 24 hours.

"LOST" - Rose & Bernard

Note: I have brought this up, a few times... What happened to Rose & Bernard when the bomb went off? Did they get left back in 1977?? And that I think the cave "Adam & Eve" is Rose & Bernard.

Well check this out! I came across this and thought WOW!!

When Sawyer, Kate, and Alex were rescuing Karl from the brainwashing room there was some speech you couldn't make out through the noise. I came across a video of that being played backwards and the voice says:

"Only fools are enslaved by time and space."

Someone states in a comment that it is an anagram for, "Bones of Nadlers may lay lost deep in cave."

Rose & Bernard's last name is Nadler.



Here is the link to the brainwashing room video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZmAz86uHq4

"LOST" - Happily Ever After & My Ramblings

Apr. 6 Episode: Happily Ever After


OH MY... OH MY GOSH!!! My mind is racing over so much information.
Someone's blog had mentioned that the island time and the flash-sideways were bleeding more and more into each other every episode. I wasn't really buying it... until last week when Sun looked into the mirror. I mentioned it in my last "LOST" post, her look was just... odd.

 

Well now I'm a believer. And I'm also wow'd by the fact that I had just re-watched s3e8: Flashes Before Your Eyes and how the interaction of Desmond with Charles Widmore and Eloise Hawking jumped out at me in a way they didn't the first time.
I was not surprised when Desmond walked into Charles Widmore's office as his right-hand man... kind of got the feeling when he was in the limo. Exactly what I would expect from "LOST".

The MacCutcheon scotch keeps showing up... when Desmond meets with Widmore in his office in the flash-sideways.

In Season 3, Episode 8: Flashes Before Your Eyes...

 

...on the island when Hurley and Charlie got Desmond drunk to find out his secret.

Also in his flashback when Widmore told Desmond, "Because you, Hume, will never be a great man."

Also at the bar after breaking up with Penny.



 



Oh, and check out the art piece on the wall in Widmore's office... it's like a child's rendition of the Dharma barracks... a cabin, the fence, the jungle surrounding, the monster behind the fence, namaste written backwards across the top almost like we're see the backside of the painting, and a man hanging down from the top.

 

Oh, huh... upon closer inspection it's a polar bear, not a monster... and the upside down man is an upside down statue, I believe.

 There's other paintings of similar style... would like to see a close-up of those.

 

Also noticed how Desmond seems to move between the chairs and the artwork moves from one wall to another.  At first Desmond is in the chair on the right and the bar is on the wall to his right.  Then he looks to his right and the paintings that were to his left are now on the wall to his right, you also see he is now sitting in the left chair.  Notice the picture behind his head is really dark... look at the next pic and now it's an entirely different picture and the bar is now beside him on his right.  Does this mean something or is this just bad staging that no one picked up on in editing.

On a side note - Why didn't it ring any bells with Charlie when he was on the island and they found the hatch... if this weird conversation with Desmond about hatches, a computer and a button on an island had happened (after the meeting with Widmore), you'd think he'd have a nagging déjà vu kind of thing that would have evoked that memory.

The event hardly seems forgetful.

I wonder, did Desmond and Penny name their son Charlie after Charlie Pace or Penny's father, Charles? I choose to believe it was after Desmond's friend, Charlie Pace, who, in a sense, brought them back together.


Back to this episode... when Desmond and Charlie crashed into the water and Charlie put his hand up...

...and Desmond had the 'memory of Charlie with "NOT PENNY'S BOAT" on his hand.

Whoa! It's all coming to a head... the original timeline and this flash-sideways 'timeline' ARE bleeding into each other! Then when he started having flashes of Penny and his son... I got goose bumps and teared up a little. For me, Desmond and Penny's love seemed so strong... I knew she'd find him someday, and when she finally did in s04e13 - There's No Place Like Home (P2)... oh my, that was one of my favorite scenes. When he realized it was her... and then she realized she had finally found him. The "is this really real" moment. To the reunion kiss.

Right up there with the s04e05 - The Constant... when Desmond was on the boat and made the call to Penny.

Now check out Widmore's office in the flash-sideways...

 

Basically the same picture... one framed in white, the other in black.  Mmmm-hmm!


So... Eloise Hawking is now Mrs. Widmore... and Daniel Faraday is now Daniel Widmore... and Penny Widmore is now Penny Milton. Eloise tells Desmond, "Someone has clearly affected the way you see things. This is a serious problem. It is, in fact, a violation." A violation?? Of what?

Something bothers me about this conversation... Something about Eloise has been constant throughout the entire show... no matter what timeline (past, present, or future?) with the exception of the beginning when she was on the island as a young woman (in 1954 when she was Ellie)... she seems to be the only person that knows or seems to have a complete knowledge of what IS going on/what IS to happen. That brings me to Daniel's journal? Does she have it and has had it since she shot him in 1977?

She knew the path leading Desmond to the island, she knew that Daniel was meant to be or needed to be a scientist instead of a musician, that all the women in his life would be terribly hurt, she sent him to the island knowing that she will eventually shoot and kill him, she gave him that journal at his graduation with the message inside, "No matter what, remember, I will always love you. Mother". In s05e14 - The Variable, when Eloise met Penny in the hospital after Desmond was shot, Eloise told her, "For the first time, in a long time, I don't know what's going to happen next."

In the original timeline, Eloise is helping to get the Oceanic 6, plus Ben, plus, Desmond, plus John Locke's body back to the island.  In this flash-sideways she's trying to stop Desmond from seeking out the what?... the truth?... reality?... it's as if she wants this timeline to become the reality.  Then again, in this reality, her son is alive and healthy and she is married to Widmore.  She seems to have a lot of wealth and power.  She obviously doesn't want to give up all that she's gained.

Is it a good thing or a bad thing that Desmond went with Sayid? And in the flash-sideways, he's going to start 'waking up' everyone on his flight... "I just need to show them something." I take that as how Charlie had to show HIM something!  Things are gonna get interesting!

Black conservatives ripped for supporting Tea Party movement

Black conservatives ripped for supporting Tea Party movement
Associated Press - 4/7/2010 6:15:00 AM

ALBANY, NY - They've been called Oreos, traitors and Uncle Toms, and are used to having to defend their values. Now black conservatives are really taking heat for their involvement in the mostly white Tea Party movement -- and for having the audacity to oppose the policies of the nation's first black president.

"I've been told I hate myself. I've been called an Uncle Tom. I've been told I'm a spook at the door," said Timothy F. Johnson, chairman of the Frederick Douglass Foundation, a group of black conservatives who support free market principles and limited government.

"Black Republicans find themselves always having to prove who they are. Because the assumption is the Republican Party is for whites and the Democratic Party is for blacks," he said.

Johnson and other black conservatives say they were drawn to the Tea Party movement because of what they consider its commonsense fiscal values of controlled spending, less taxes and smaller government. The fact that they're black — or that most tea partyers are white — should have nothing to do with it, they say.

"You have to be honest and true to yourself. What am I supposed to do, vote Democratic just to be popular? Just to fit in?" asked Clifton Bazar, a 45-year-old New Jersey freelance photographer and conservative blogger.

Opponents have branded the Tea Party as a group of racists hiding behind economic concerns — and reports, as yet unproven, that some tea partyers were lobbing racist slurs at black congressmen during last month's heated healthcare vote give them ammunition.

But these black conservatives don't consider racism representative of the movement as a whole — or race a reason to support it.

Angela McGlowan, a black congressional candidate from Mississippi, said her Tea Party involvement is "not about a black or white issue."

"It's not even about Republican or Democrat. from my standpoint," she told The Associated Press. "All of us are taxed too much."

Still, she's in the minority. As a nascent grassroots movement with no registration or formal structure, there are no racial demographics available for the Tea Party movement; it's believed to include only a small number of blacks and Hispanics.

Some black conservatives credit President Barack Obama's election — and their distaste for his policies — with inspiring them and motivating dozens of black Republicans to plan political runs in November.

For black candidates like McGlowan, Tea Party events are a way to reach out to voters of all races with her conservative message. "I'm so proud to be a part of this movement! I want to tell you that a lot of people underestimate you guys," the former national political commentator for Fox News told the cheering crowd at a Tea Party rally in Nashville, Tenn., in February.

Tea Party voters represent a new model for these black conservatives — away from the black, liberal Democratic base located primarily in cities, and toward a black and white conservative base that extends into the suburbs.

Black voters have overwhelmingly backed Democratic candidates, support that has only grown in recent years. In 2004, presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry won 88 percent of the black vote; four years later, 95 percent of black voters cast ballots for Obama.

Black conservatives don't want to have to apologize for their divergent views. "I've gotten the statement, 'How can you not support the brother?'" said David Webb, an organizer of New York City's Tea Party 365, Inc. movement and a conservative radio personality.

Since Obama's election, Webb said some black conservatives have even resorted to hiding their political views. "I know of people who would play the (liberal) role publicly, but have their private opinions," he said. "They don't agree with the policy but they have to work, live and exist in the community ... Why can't we speak openly and honestly if we disagree?"

Racism and ObamaCare

Racism and ObamaCare
Star Parker - Syndicated Columnist - 4/5/2010 9:25:00 AM

Like chewing gum stuck to the heel of your shoe, racism seems to be stuck forever to American public discourse. No matter what we do or what happens, somebody will find a racial motive.

Democrats have passed government healthcare with no Republican votes. Their leadership threatened and bribed their own members to eek out a majority. They resorted to an arcane procedure that maybe 100 people in the whole country can explain in order to pass a massive bill that polls show a majority of Americans don't want.

The federal government, for the first time ever, will force every American to buy, with a big chunk of their income, a product designed by government bureaucrats, with an army of IRS agents snooping on each of us to make sure we did it.

And how are many liberals explaining why so many Americans are ticked off?

It's because our president is black. It's about racism.

Even me. I'm steamed. And even though I happen to be black – I've even spoken at some Tea Party rallies – I still must be a racist.

Obama's approval rating has dropped from 70 percent when he was elected to 50 percent today. His disapproval has skyrocketed from 10 percent when he was elected to 42 percent today.

Per the Washington Post, in January 2009 58 percent of Americans said that the Obama presidency helped race relations. By January 2010, this was down to 40 percent.

Has this wave of disillusionment with Obama been driven by a sudden realization that the man Americans elected president is black?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's approval has dropped from 41 percent in January 2009 to 36 percent today and her disapproval has risen from 42 percent to 54 percent. Is she black?

Were the raucous townhalls last summer – which gave birth to the Tea Party movement – where irate constituents gave their representatives a piece of their mind about ObamaCare, racially motivated?

Care to understand what all this is really about?

Consider a powerful observation about a former time by one of America's great historians, Jacques Barzun. Barzun was a professor and dean at Columbia University and a Presidential Medal of Freedom winner.

"We make a great mistake in calling the American War of Independence, the 'American Revolution,'" he wrote. "In 1776 the Americans rebelled against recent rules and impositions. What they wanted was not a new type of government, but the old type they enjoyed. They were used to many freedoms, which they claimed as the immemorial rights of Englishmen. Once they defeated the English armies and expelled the Loyalists, they went back to their former ways, which they modestly enlarged, and codified in the Bill of Rights."

In a similar fashion today, Americans are rebelling as the freedom we have enjoyed, freedom which defines life in this country, is being taken away and new "rules and impositions" are being imposed.

It's not about theory or some abstract ideology. The intense feelings flow from losing what you have and what you know is vital.

What is new today is we can no longer continue the illusion of having our cake and eating it. We can no longer afford to be both a big government entitlement state and a free, creative, and prosperous nation. It's the prosperity created by our freedom that has financed the entitlements. But now the entitlements are overtaking and strangling our freedom.

So now is a time of choosing. We're either going to remain the land of the free or transform into the land of the bureaucrat.

The antipathy of activists toward Mr. Obama is not about how he looks but what he has done. That he has chosen and imposed on us the path of bureaucracy.

"LOST" - Another Look At Past Episodes

After watching some past episodes, a few things jumped out at me that didn't really stand out so much at the time... but after last week's episode, they strike a whole new chord.

Season 3, Episode 8: Flashes Before Your Eyes

After Desmond blows the hatch and temporarily goes back in time...

Charles Widmore says to Desmond, when he asks for Penny's hand, "You will never be a great man."

Eloise Hawking was in the store showing Desmond the ring, but she wouldn't let him buy it. According to her, he wasn't supposed to, Desmond David Hume. Then she proceeded to tell him his life story leading to the island. She tells him, "Pushing that button is the only truly great thing you'll ever do."


Season 3, Episode 9: Stranger In A Strange Land

In Jack's flashback there's this Asian chick, and her gift is to see who people are and mark them. She tells Jack, "You are a leader, a great man."

Isabelle (an Other) tells him his mark (tattoos) read: He walks amongst us, but he is not one of us. Jack tells Isabelle, "That's what they say, it's not what they mean."

Easter BBQ

For some reason it was decided that we would have the family Easter dinner on Saturday instead of Sunday... okay, I'm flexible. That's why I was doing the lawn on Easter Sunday.

I only took a couple of pictures... I did get some video, but the software to convert it doesn't work on my new computer.  I've been saving the files to my computer until I can afford to buy something.

 

Mom's Visit

Mom came for a visit today... I believe this is the first visit when she has come without a reason, a "just stopping by" visit...  we had a nice lengthy visit.

Yesterday I spent the day mowing and weed-eating the yard.  It was soooo HOT!  I drank a whole pitcher of ice tea and a bottle of gatorade... without having to stop for a bathroom break... I sweated it all out.  I was so tired by the end of the day, I barely had enough energy to take my clothes off and get into the shower.  And, oh man... I was feeling it today!  I was gimpin' around all day.  It hurt to get up, it hurt to walk, and it hurt to sit down.  *LOL*

Saturday night Missy was on the deck chasing bugs... which she would bring in.  She brought a june bug in and then her and Simon chased it around the kitchen floor like an air hockey puck.

"LOST" - The Package

Mar. 30 Episode: The Package

Behind the "magical mystery" door on the sub was Desmond... whew! Good to see #108 wasn't Charles Widmore!

So, in the Alternate Timeline, Jin and Sun are not married... but, by the end of the show we find out she is pregnant. Very interesting.

When MIB/NotLocke approached Sun at the garden and reached out his hand to her, instead of accepting it and letting MIB/NotLocke take her to Jin, Sun ran. **Lesson learned: This is why we watch where we are running!** So, Sun is either:

1. a candidate and that's why MIB/NotLocke couldn't hurt or take her, he needed her to come willingly.
2. he just didn't want to scare her because he needs her to keep Jin in his camp.

Why didn't MIB/NotLocke pick her up and take her to Jin?

1. She's a candidate?
2. He can't touch her?

I'm wondering, and I'll have to go back to previous episodes to investigate, has MIB/NotLocke touched any of the candidates? He held his hand out to Kate... we didn't get to see if she took it. IS that why he told Claire that Kate is not a candidate, that her name had been crossed out? Because Kate did take his hand, thus joining his team? Like when vampires can't come in unless invited... if you take MIB/NotLocke's outstretched hand, you're considered recruited.

And what was Sun looking at in the mirror of her hotel room? It was just odd. Like she was noticing something different.

Jin seems very important to MIB/NotLocke. Is it because he is a candidate or he just needs Jin to get Sun? He says he doesn't know which one is the candidate, but I think he's lying.

I believe they are both candidates. When Jacob went to see them at their wedding, it looked like he may have touched them both... although you don't actually see his hand touching Sun, but her hair bounces as if something moved her arm. But he made mention of their love, "It is a very special thing. Never take it for granted.". I feel almost certain they are both candidates... together. One hinges on the other. Maybe the Beatles were right... All We really do Need Is Love!

When Jack reached out his hand to Sun... I felt right then... Jack must be the one! Sun accepted his hand, thus considered recruited into Jacob's camp.

I really hate seeing Locke as the bad guy... I know it's not technically Locke, but still!

I do feel better about Ben's change/redemption... he told on MIB *snicker* to Ilana and Jack, about where to find him... on Hydra Island.

The Real Reason for Easter - Revelation Song