NBC’s Chris Mathews Accuses Republicans of Inciting Violence; Says Rush Limbaugh Should be Shot in the Head

[Editor’s Note – this is part one, Part II is HERE – Part III – Part IV , Part V in progress.]

NBC’s Chris Mathews (via NewsBusters):

I have to tell you, Rush Limbaugh is looking more and more like Mr. Big, and at some point somebody’s going to jam a CO2 pellet into his head and he’s going to explode like a giant blimp.  That day may come. Not yet. But we’ll be there to watch. I think he’s Mr. Big, I think Yaphet Kotto.  Are you watching, Rush?

Mathews then turns around and accuses Republicans on inciting violence (Via NewsBusters):

Matthews escalated his usual slandering of the entire Tea Party movement for the offensive or unlawful actions of a few, to actually blaming Republican officeholders for the illegal acts. The concerned MSNBC host also worried: “Is it harder to recruit members to run for Congress now that they’re facing death threats?” [audio available here]

Of course, no one spews more hateful invective than NBC’s Keith Olberman who routinely launches grtesque sexual attacks on conservative women and compares anyone in the GOP to a Nazi.

More hate – NBC’s Keith Olberman on the newly elected Mass. Senator Scott Brown

NBC’s Keith Olberman with guest. Those who oppose Democrat Leadership policies are  “Racist Teabagging Rednecks” who are biologically inferior with “brains impacting on their skulls” as if the Tea Party and the GOP would be all for these policies and 3.8 trillion dollar budgets if it were Joe Biden proposing them:

Washington Posts’s Courtland Milloy (via NewsBusters): “knock every racist and homophobic tooth out of their Cro-Magnon heads.”

James Cameron: Shoot Climate ‘Deniers,’ Glenn Beck a ‘F—— A–hole’ – LINK

ABC’s Cokie Roberts: “Glenn Beck ‘Corrupting’ Democracy, a ‘Traitor’ to American Values” (Via NewsBusters)  [Of course what happens to traitors, they are shot – Editor]: 

Glenn Beck is probably the most popular target for the left’s demands for censorship. Cokie Roberts and her husband Steve picked up that ball and ran with it today in their joint syndicated column. They dubbed Beck “a traitor to the American values he professes so loudly to defend” and claimed he is “corrupting the very essence of democracy.” And all this just by speaking.

 

The elite media wants to play Bart Stupak’s voicemail – heh, listen to Sean Hannity’s –

Remember when the elite media just made up the allegation of “kill him” at the McCain rally? Via the Times Leader:

SCRANTON – The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled “kill him” when presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s name was mentioned during Tuesday’s Sarah Palin rally are unfounded.  

The Scranton Times-Tribune first reported the alleged incident on its Web site Tuesday and then again in its print edition Wednesday. The first story, written by reporter David Singleton, appeared with allegations that while congressional candidate Chris Hackett was addressing the crowd and mentioned Obama’s name a man in the audience shouted “kill him.”

News organizations including ABC, The Associated Press, The Washington Monthly and MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann reported the claim, with most attributing the allegations to the Times-Tribune story.

Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment.

“I was baffled,” he said after reading the report in Wednesday’s Times-Tribune.

He said the agency conducted an investigation Wednesday, after seeing the story, and could not find one person to corroborate the allegation other than Singleton.
Slavoski said more than 20 non-security agents were interviewed Wednesday, from news media to ordinary citizens in attendance at the rally for the Republican vice presidential candidate held at the Riverfront Sports Complex. He said Singleton was the only one to say he heard someone yell “kill him.”

More to come, lots more….

Obama’s Cousin, Dr. Milton Wolf: ObamaCare does harm, rations care.

A not on the elite media, the only one who would publich Dr. Wolf’s editorial was The Washington Times…. This is a big story.

Dr. Milton Wolf:

“Primum nil nocere.” First, do no harm. This guiding principle is a bedrock of medical care. Sadly, those politicians who would rewrite our health care laws do not live in the same universe as do the doctors and health care professionals who must practice it.

Imagine if, like physicians, politicians were personally held to the incredibly high level of scrutiny that includes civil and financial liability for any unintended consequence of their decisions. Imagine if they were forced to spend tens of thousands of dollars each year on malpractice insurance and still faced the threat of multimillion-dollar lawsuits with every single decision they made. If so, a government takeover of health care would be the furthest thing from their minds.

Obamacare proponents would have us believe that we will add 30 million patients to the system without adding providers, we will see no decline in the quality of care for the millions of Americans currently happy with the system, and – if you act now! – we will save money in the process. But why stop there? Why not promise it will no longer rain on weekends and every day will be a great hair day?

America has the finest health care delivery system in the world. Let’s not forget that and put it at risk in the name of reform. Desperate souls across the globe flock to our shores and cross our borders every day to seek our care. Why? Our system provides cures while the government-run systems from which they flee do not. Compare Europe’s common cancer mortality rates to America’s: breast cancer – 52 percent higher in Germany and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom; prostate cancer – a staggering 604 percent higher in the United Kingdom and 457 percent higher in Norway; colon cancer – 40 percent higher in the United Kingdom.

Look closer at the United Kingdom. Britain’s higher cancer mortality rate results in 25,000 more cancer deaths per year compared to a similar population size in the United States. But because the U.S. population is roughly five times larger than the United Kingdom’s, that would translate into 125,000 unnecessary American cancer deaths every year. This is more than all the mothers and fathers, aunts and uncles, cousins and children in Topeka, Kan. And keep in mind, these numbers are for cancer alone. America also has better survival rates for other major killers, such as heart attacks and strokes. Whatever we do, let us not surrender the great gains we have made. First, do no harm. Lives are at stake.

Obamacare: Fixing price at any cost

The justification for Obamacare has been to control costs, but the problem is there is little in Obamacare that will do that. Instead, there are provisions that will ration care and artificially set price. This is a confusion of costs and price.

As one example, consider the implications of Obamacare’s financial penalty aimed at your doctor if he seeks the expert care he has determined you need. If your doctor is in the top 10 percent of primary care physicians who refer patients to specialists most frequently – no matter how valid the reasons – he will face a 5 percent penalty on all their Medicare reimbursements for the entire year. This scheme is specifically designed to deny you the chance to see a specialist. Each year, the insidious nature of that arbitrary 10 percent rule will make things even worse as 100 percent of doctors try to stay off that list. Many doctors will try to avoid the sickest patients, and others will simply refuse to accept Medicare. Already, 42 percent of doctors have chosen that route, and it will get worse. Your mother’s shiny government-issued Medicare health card is meaningless without doctors who will accept it.

Obamacare will further diminish access to health care by lowering reimbursements for medical care without regard to the costs of that care. Price controls have failed spectacularly wherever they’ve been tried. They have turned neighborhoods into slums and have caused supply chains to dry up when producers can no longer profit from providing their goods. Remember the Carter-era gas lines? Medical care is not immune from this economic reality. We cannot hope that our best and brightest will pursue a career in medicine, setting aside years of their lives – for me, 13 years of school and training – to enter a field that might not even pay for the student loans it took to get there.

Giving power back to people

I believe there is a better way. The problems in the American health care system are not caused by a shortage of government intrusion. They will not be solved by more government intrusion. In fact, our current problems were precisely, though unintentionally, created by government.

World War II-era wage-control measures – a form of price controls – ushered in a perverted system in which we turn to our employers for insurance and the government penalizes us if we choose to purchase insurance for ourselves. You are not given the opportunity to be a wise consumer of health care and compare prices as well as quality in any meaningful way. Worse still, your insurance company is not answerable to you because you are not its customer. It is answerable to your employer, whose interests differ from your own.

Insurance companies have been vilified for following the perverse rules that government has created for them. But it gets worse. The government, always knowing best, deploys insurance commissioners across the land to dictate what the insurance companies must provide, whether you want it or not, and each time, your premiums increase. Obamacare will make all of this worse, not better.

One of America’s founding principles is our trust in the people and their economic freedom to rule their own lives. We should decouple health insurance from employers and empower patients to be consumers once again. Allow them to determine the insurance plan that best meets their families’ needs and which company will provide it. This will unleash a wave of competition that will drive costs down in a way that price controls never have. Eliminate the artificial state boundary rules that protect insurance companies from true competition and watch as voters demand that their state insurance commissioners get the heck out of the way. Innovative companies will drive down costs similar to how Geico and Progressive have worked for automobile insurance. And it won’t cost taxpayers a trillion dollars in the process.

This free-market approach has worked for everything from high-definition TVs to breakfast cereals, but will it work for medicine? It already is. Take Lasik eye surgery, for example. Because patients are allowed to be informed consumers and can shop anywhere, doctors work hard for their business. Services, availability and expertise have all increased, and costs have decreased. Should consumers demand it, insurance companies – now answerable to you rather than your employer – would cover it.

Between Barack and a hard place

I have personally trained and practiced in both the government-run and free-market segments of American medicine. The difference is vast. Patients see this for themselves, and this may be why, according to a recent CNN poll, they oppose Obamacare nearly 3 to 1. I am with them. It is difficult for me to speak publicly against the president on his central issue, but too much is at stake.

I wish my cousin Barack the greatest of success in office. But I feel duty-bound to rise in opposition to Obamacare. I must take a stand for my patients, my profession and, ultimately, my country. The problems caused by government will not be solved by growing government. Now that this new era of big-government takeovers has spread to our health care system, it’s not just our freedoms or our wallets that are at stake. It’s our lives.

Dueling Obama Video: Both for and against single payer government take over of health care.

Go to 3:55 in to the video. So which one is the lie?

Interview with a True American Hero

       This week’s article will be a little different than most. Recently I had an opportunity to sit down with one of our country’s finest, a serviceman in the military. There is no better way to get an understanding of what is happening in Iraq than to speak directly with the soldiers. Due to restrictions set in place by the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) I am not able to release the identity of the interviewee. I am able to tell you that he has served during the last couple of years, and has recently returned from a surge deployment in the Middle East, arguably the most controversial part of the war.

Q:  Why did you choose to enlist in the military?
A:  Simple, college.

Q:  What do you think is the biggest threat to the United States today?

A:  The biggest threat is not war with another country, because of our ability to resolve things politically, and both countries fearing war. It is genuinely terrorism; the small single cell groups, working independently, getting through our boarders and making their moves. That’s what terrifies me. 

Q:  I am going to read two comments spoken earlier this year to you, one from Sen. John McCain and one from Sen. Harry Reid. Which statement is more accurate in your opinion and why?“For the first time since 2003, we have the right strategy. In Petraeus, we have a military professional who literally wrote the book on fighting this kind of war. And we will have the right mix and number of forces.” – John McCain“I believe … that this war is lost, and this surge is not
accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq”- Harry Reid

A:  I would side with John McCain, and I know my fellow servicemen would do the same. Just because it’s a frustrating war doesn’t make it a lost war. I don’t want to do surge deployments any more than the next guy, but if I start believing that we aren’t accomplishing anything, that kind of morale hit to the serviceman would be terrible. Q:  Do you think it was the right or wrong thing to go into Iraq?A:  Right, but poorly planned and that is acting as a direct affect as to why I just returned from a surge deployment.
 

Q:  In your opinion, do the majority of soldiers want to end this war by
winning or by retreating?
A:  Winning, soldiers and sailors are some of the proudest Americans I will ever see and retreating would be demoralizing even if it is better for our well being.

Q:  Do you believe the coverage of the war has been fair to the military? 

A:  Hardly, because it changes so much depending on what source your going with. One day you might see something that leads you to believe that the war is won then the next you see 10 soldiers killed in battle.
 

Q:  What is your opinion of Blackwater USA?

A:  I think it’s a fine idea and I think the majority of my serviceman would agree. 

Q:  How do our troops react to the in-fighting between Bush and the Congress?

A:  The armed forces as a majority support our President, and from there they believe in the fight they are fighting. If Congress tries to cut the legs out from under us who do you think we would side with? 

Q:  What has been the most rewarding part of your experience?

A:  The most rewarding part of any experiences I have had, has been how much I have seen the world, how much my perspective has changed since I joined the military, and how much I have grown-up and matured. 

Q:  What is one of the ways your perspective has changed?

A:  How much I care about America, and how much I admire our country, compared to some of the other countries I have seen.
 

Q:  How can Americans best support the troops?

A:  I have received nothing but love and support from my friends, family and complete strangers, that’s not too much to ask for but it makes all the difference in the world to a soldier or sailor when they are away from home. 

Marcus Vigil