159 Ways the Senate Bill Is a Government Takeover of Health Care

From the Senate Republican Policy Committee.

Here is a list of new boards, bureaucracies, and programs created in the 2,733 page Senate health care bill, which serves as the framework for President Obama’s health proposal:

1. Grant program for consumer assistance offices (Section 1002, p. 37)
2. Grant program for states to monitor premium increases (Section 1003, p. 42)
3. Committee to review administrative simplification standards (Section 1104, p. 71)
4. Demonstration program for state wellness programs (Section 1201, p. 93)
5. Grant program to establish state Exchanges (Section 1311(a), p. 130)
6. State American Health Benefit Exchanges (Section 1311(b), p. 131)
7. Exchange grants to establish consumer navigator programs (Section 1311(i), p. 150)
8. Grant program for state cooperatives (Section 1322, p. 169)
9. Advisory board for state cooperatives (Section 1322(b)(3), p. 173)
10. Private purchasing council for state cooperatives (Section 1322(d), p. 177)
11. State basic health plan programs (Section 1331, p. 201)
12. State-based reinsurance program (Section 1341, p. 226)
13. Program of risk corridors for individual and small group markets (Section 1342, p. 233)
14. Program to determine eligibility for Exchange participation (Section 1411, p. 267)
15. Program for advance determination of tax credit eligibility (Section 1412, p. 288)
16. Grant program to implement health IT enrollment standards (Section 1561, p. 370)
17. Federal Coordinated Health Care Office for dual eligible beneficiaries (Section 2602, p. 512)
18. Medicaid quality measurement program (Section 2701, p. 518)
19. Medicaid health home program for people with chronic conditions, and grants for planning same (Section 2703, p. 524)
20. Medicaid demonstration project to evaluate bundled payments (Section 2704, p. 532)
21. Medicaid demonstration project for global payment system (Section 2705, p. 536)
22. Medicaid demonstration project for accountable care organizations (Section 2706, p. 538)
23. Medicaid demonstration project for emergency psychiatric care (Section 2707, p. 540)
24. Grant program for delivery of services to individuals with postpartum depression (Section 2952(b), p. 591)
25. State allotments for grants to promote personal responsibility education programs (Section 2953, p. 596)
26. Medicare value-based purchasing program (Section 3001(a), p. 613)
27. Medicare value-based purchasing demonstration program for critical access hospitals (Section 3001(b), p. 637)
28. Medicare value-based purchasing program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 3006(a), p. 666)
29. Medicare value-based purchasing program for home health agencies (Section 3006(b), p. 668)
30. Interagency Working Group on Health Care Quality (Section 3012, p. 688)
31. Grant program to develop health care quality measures (Section 3013, p. 693)
32. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Section 3021, p. 712)
33. Medicare shared savings program (Section 3022, p. 728)
34. Medicare pilot program on payment bundling (Section 3023, p. 739)
35. Independence at home medical practice demonstration program (Section 3024, p. 752)
36. Program for use of patient safety organizations to reduce hospital readmission rates (Section 3025(b), p. 775)
37. Community-based care transitions program (Section 3026, p. 776)
38. Demonstration project for payment of complex diagnostic laboratory tests (Section 3113, p. 800)
39. Medicare hospice concurrent care demonstration project (Section 3140, p. 850)
40. Independent Payment Advisory Board (Section 3403, p. 982)
41. Consumer Advisory Council for Independent Payment Advisory Board (Section 3403, p. 1027)
42. Grant program for technical assistance to providers implementing health quality practices (Section 3501, p. 1043)
43. Grant program to establish interdisciplinary health teams (Section 3502, p. 1048)
44. Grant program to implement medication therapy management (Section 3503, p. 1055)
45. Grant program to support emergency care pilot programs (Section 3504, p. 1061)
46. Grant program to promote universal access to trauma services (Section 3505(b), p. 1081)
47. Grant program to develop and promote shared decision-making aids (Section 3506, p. 1088)
48. Grant program to support implementation of shared decision-making (Section 3506, p. 1091)
49. Grant program to integrate quality improvement in clinical education (Section 3508, p. 1095)
50. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women’s Health (Section 3509(a), p. 1098)
51. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(b), p. 1102)
52. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(e), p. 1105)
53. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(f), p. 1106)
54. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(g), p. 1109)
55. National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council (Section 4001, p. 1114)
56. Advisory Group on Prevention, Health Promotion, and Integrative and Public Health (Section 4001(f), p. 1117)
57. Prevention and Public Health Fund (Section 4002, p. 1121)
58. Community Preventive Services Task Force (Section 4003(b), p. 1126)
59. Grant program to support school-based health centers (Section 4101, p. 1135)
60. Grant program to promote research-based dental caries disease management (Section 4102, p. 1147)
61. Grant program for States to prevent chronic disease in Medicaid beneficiaries (Section 4108, p. 1174)
62. Community transformation grants (Section 4201, p. 1182)
63. Grant program to provide public health interventions (Section 4202, p. 1188)
64. Demonstration program of grants to improve child immunization rates (Section 4204(b), p. 1200)
65. Pilot program for risk-factor assessments provided through community health centers (Section 4206, p. 1215)
66. Grant program to increase epidemiology and laboratory capacity (Section 4304, p. 1233)
67. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (Section 4305, p. 1238)
68. National Health Care Workforce Commission (Section 5101, p. 1256)
69. Grant program to plan health care workforce development activities (Section 5102(c), p. 1275)
70. Grant program to implement health care workforce development activities (Section 5102(d), p. 1279)
71. Pediatric specialty loan repayment program (Section 5203, p. 1295)
72. Public Health Workforce Loan Repayment Program (Section 5204, p. 1300)
73. Allied Health Loan Forgiveness Program (Section 5205, p. 1305)
74. Grant program to provide mid-career training for health professionals (Section 5206, p. 1307)
75. Grant program to fund nurse-managed health clinics (Section 5208, p. 1310)
76. Grant program to support primary care training programs (Section 5301, p. 1315)
77. Grant program to fund training for direct care workers (Section 5302, p. 1322)
78. Grant program to develop dental training programs (Section 5303, p. 1325)
79. Demonstration program to increase access to dental health care in underserved communities (Section 5304, p. 1331)
80. Grant program to promote geriatric education centers (Section 5305, p. 1334)
81. Grant program to promote health professionals entering geriatrics (Section 5305, p. 1339)
82. Grant program to promote training in mental and behavioral health (Section 5306, p. 1344)
83. Grant program to promote nurse retention programs (Section 5309, p. 1354)
84. Student loan forgiveness for nursing school faculty (Section 5311(b), p. 1360)
85. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors and outcomes (Section 5313, p. 1364)
86. Public Health Sciences Track for medical students (Section 5315, p. 1372)
87. Primary Care Extension Program to educate providers (Section 5405, p. 1404)
88. Grant program for demonstration projects to address health workforce shortage needs (Section 5507, p. 1442)
89. Grant program for demonstration projects to develop training programs for home health aides (Section 5507, p. 1447)
90. Grant program to establish new primary care residency programs (Section 5508(a), p. 1458)
91. Program of payments to teaching health centers that sponsor medical residency training (Section 5508(c), p. 1462)
92. Graduate nurse education demonstration program (Section 5509, p. 1472)
93. Grant program to establish demonstration projects for community-based mental health settings (Section 5604, p. 1486)
94. Commission on Key National Indicators (Section 5605, p. 1489)
95. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 6102, p. 1554)
96. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 6103(a)(3), p. 1561)
97. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section 6103(b)(3), p. 1568)
98. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities and nursing facilities (Section 6112, p. 1589)
99. Demonstration projects for nursing facilities involved in the culture change movement (Section 6114, p. 1597)
100. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1619)
101. Standing methodology committee for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1629)
102. Board of Governors for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1638)
103. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund (Section 6301(e), p. 1656)
104. Elder Justice Coordinating Council (Section 6703, p. 1773)
105. Advisory Board on Elder Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation (Section 6703, p. 1776)
106. Grant program to create elder abuse forensic centers (Section 6703, p. 1783)
107. Grant program to promote continuing education for long-term care staffers (Section 6703, p. 1787)
108. Grant program to improve management practices and training (Section 6703, p. 1788)
109. Grant program to subsidize costs of electronic health records (Section 6703, p. 1791)
110. Grant program to promote adult protective services (Section 6703, p. 1796)
111. Grant program to conduct elder abuse detection and prevention (Section 6703, p. 1798)
112. Grant program to support long-term care ombudsmen (Section 6703, p. 1800)
113. National Training Institute for long-term care surveyors (Section 6703, p. 1806)
114. Grant program to fund State surveys of long-term care residences (Section 6703, p. 1809)
115. CLASS Independence Fund (Section 8002, p. 1926)
116. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (Section 8002, p. 1927)
117. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (Section 8002, p. 1931)
118. Personal Care Attendants Workforce Advisory Panel (Section 8002(c), p. 1938)
119. Multi-state health plans offered by Office of Personnel Management (Section 10104(p), p. 2086)
120. Advisory board for multi-state health plans (Section 10104(p), p. 2094)
121. Pregnancy Assistance Fund (Section 10212, p. 2164)
122. Value-based purchasing program for ambulatory surgical centers (Section 10301, p. 2176)
123. Demonstration project for payment adjustments to home health services (Section 10315, p. 2200)
124. Pilot program for care of individuals in environmental emergency declaration areas (Section 10323, p. 2223)
125. Grant program to screen at-risk individuals for environmental health conditions (Section 10323(b), p. 2231)
126. Pilot programs to implement value-based purchasing (Section 10326, p. 2242)
127. Grant program to support community-based collaborative care networks (Section 10333, p. 2265)
128. Centers for Disease Control Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
129. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
130. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
131. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
132. Food and Drug Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
133. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
134. Grant program to promote small business wellness programs (Section 10408, p. 2285)
135. Cures Acceleration Network (Section 10409, p. 2289)
136. Cures Acceleration Network Review Board (Section 10409, p. 2291)
137. Grant program for Cures Acceleration Network (Section 10409, p. 2297)
138. Grant program to promote centers of excellence for depression (Section 10410, p. 2304)
139. Advisory committee for young women’s breast health awareness education campaign (Section 10413, p. 2322)
140. Grant program to provide assistance to provide information to young women with breast cancer (Section 10413, p. 2326)
141. Interagency Access to Health Care in Alaska Task Force (Section 10501, p. 2329)
142. Grant program to train nurse practitioners as primary care providers (Section 10501(e), p. 2332)
143. Grant program for community-based diabetes prevention (Section 10501(g), p. 2337)
144. Grant program for providers who treat a high percentage of medically underserved populations (Section 10501(k), p. 2343)
145. Grant program to recruit students to practice in underserved communities (Section 10501(l), p. 2344)
146. Community Health Center Fund (Section 10503, p. 2355)
147. Demonstration project to provide access to health care for the uninsured at reduced fees (Section 10504, p. 2357)
148. Demonstration program to explore alternatives to tort litigation (Section 10607, p. 2369)
149. Indian Health demonstration program for chronic shortages of health professionals (S. 1790, Section 112, p. 24)*
150. Office of Indian Men’s Health (S. 1790, Section 136, p. 71)*
151. Indian Country modular component facilities demonstration program (S. 1790, Section 146, p. 108)*
152. Indian mobile health stations demonstration program (S. 1790, Section 147, p. 111)*
153. Office of Direct Service Tribes (S. 1790, Section 172, p. 151)*
154. Indian Health Service mental health technician training program (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 173)*
155. Indian Health Service program for treatment of child sexual abuse victims (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 192)*
156. Indian Health Service program for treatment of domestic violence and sexual abuse (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 194)*
157. Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 204)*
158. Indian youth life skills demonstration project (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 220)*
159. Indian Health Service Director of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Treatment (S. 1790, Section 199B, p. 258)*

*Section 10221, page 2173 of H.R. 3590 deems that S. 1790 shall be deemed as passed with certain amendments.

Healthcare Hangover, Part 3

An interesting article in National Journal, the blue-chip insider magazine, on the healthcare bill. Written by Brian Friel, Richard E. Cohen, Alexis Simendinger, Kirk Victor, James A. Barnes, and Peter H. Stone.

The sextet of coauthors pull out some interesting items, including a comment from Service Employees International Union president Andy Stern that the healthcare bill will "lead to the creation of 2.5 to 4 million new health care jobs."

Here at SMS, we have seen various claims that the healthcare reform would create jobs elsewhere in the economy, from the Center for American Progress and elsewhere, but if this NJ item is correct, then Stern sees millions of jobs blossoming out of the healthcare sector itself--and presumably many of them would join SEIU. And all this time, we were told that the goal was bend the curve downward, because we spent too much.

As Sen. Olympia Snowe observed to NJ in the wake of the bill’s passage, “We’re getting, I think, far more expansive policy than the American people are prepared to digest or think is practical in these economic times.”

But let's remember, while half the argument for Obamacare was compassion, the other half was budget-cutting. So which half was right?

Another person quoted in the NJ article, MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, described as an "intellectual architect" of the Obamacare, said in a March 11 speech in Massachusetts, "The only way we're going to stop our country from becoming a latter-day Roman Empire and falling under its own weight is to get control of the growth rate of health care costs." An interesting point, albeit perhaps a bit hyperbolic. But it will be interesting to see what the Obamans do to actually control costs.

Yes, there's a lot of activity, as reported by TalkingPointsMemo's Christina Bellantoni, but it's not so obvious that this scrambling toward implementation is oriented toward reducing costs, now that the bill is passed.

Indeed, as the "doc fix" is once again being fixed, restoring hundreds of billions to doctors, we see that once again, hundreds of billions to the cost of healthcare.

In the biting words of Hot Air blogger Ed Morrissey:

Of course, we knew that before Congress began to debate ObamaCare — and so did the Democrats. The AMA agreed to support their efforts only if Democrats rescinded those cuts. Instead of recalibrating the bill using honest accounting, they claimed deficit reductions that only exist without the doctor fix. For months, Democrats kept the rescission parallel to the overhaul of the health-care system to maintain the illusion of fiscal responsibility.

On April 1st, the illusion ends. When those cuts don’t go into effect, ObamaCare becomes a deficit-expanding program — and that’s assuming that the rest of it works as advertised, a very large assumption that flies in the face of experience from every government entitlement program ever created.

So spending is going up again. Faced with the prospect of cutting, politicians, in both parties, back away. Who wants to cut Medicare? Who wants to cut Medicaid? Who wants to cut back on care to the sick? Nobody. Maybe that means--and this has been the argument here at SMS all along--that people want to spend more on healthcare, not less. And the people are speaking.

Is it possible, after all, that there is no real constituency for controlling costs? Is it possible that all Establishmentarians who write reports on deficit-cutting have no real support in the country? That would seem to be the case.

But if the Establishment is right, and long-term deficits are going to prove ruinous to the country, then we will need to be more creative about controlling costs. As we say here at SMS, a cure is cheaper than care.

UMNO promoting Racism

Muhyiddin had proclaimed "I'm Malay first. How can I say I'm a Malaysian first and Malay second? All the Malays will shun me and it's not proper."
*************************************************************************************
When you have a Deputy Prime Minister a racist what do you expect?

One must understand that Muhyiddin had come from the remote jungle so he does not know that people from the third world even address themselves citizen of their country first before race. No need to compare Australia, Korea, America etc........

Even my children who are considered Malay/Bumiputra have always addressed themselves as Malaysian.

Muhyiddin you have been wrongly brought up. The blame lies with your parents. Lucky for you I am not your mother or wife otherwise I would teach you a lesson or two and give you a tight slap.

No need to be smart to copy

My children alway complain I am a real dummy when it comes to the computer.

But then Najib must be the biggest dummy to have people who only know how to copy and paste the future of this country.

Be a man and get those pests out.
*************************************************************************************

The PM has outlined the main aspects of the NEM. I was waiting to read strategies to unleash the entrepreneurial energies of economic agents besides the same old players. Private sector means what? Does it mean the same old companies, friendly parties or the faceless multitude of ordinary business people? Since 2004 for example, Khazanah has been divesting its holdings in many companies- may we know who and on what criteria? People can say all sorts of things on paper- using highly technical financial jargon which actually means they were hiding something.
What I take as entrepreneurial agents to turn this country into a nation of high-incomers are the large number of businessmen- the SME people, research of which has shown are more productive and generate more income that the big guns. These are the people who have been excluded from participation simply because they only have technical skills but no patronage and no intimate relationship with powerful decision makers. So why do we pander to the wishes of the super leaguers?
I was reading some comments given by ex banker Amir Sham who is head of the NEAC. He was telling that maybe some contracts should be given to a certain group of contractors not including the big leaguers. I would support the idea by pushing it a bit further. Why don't for the next 5 years, we declare that all listed companies engaged in construction are not to participate in government mega contracts? Or the big suppliers are excluded in the next 5 years to participate in big government supply contracts. You have made large profits previously and you can hold on for the next 5 years. This would allow the middle and even top bottom leaguers enough room to prove themselves to become big leaguers. Such an interim policy of 5 years would also re-distribute contract opportunities from the current big leaguers to others.
Amir sham shouldn't say- we leave it to the government to do that. As head of the NEAC- say it and say it loud what needs to be done lah taukay!
Then we wouldn't hear the stomach turning spectacle- Yeoh Teo Lay this and that, GAMUDA this and that, Syed Moktar this and that, Berjaya this and that.
Let's see whether the big leaguers, without the traditional patronage can be creative and venture elsewhere? Can they do that? They must- after all smaller contractors have been excluded from participating in big contracts.
Remove all the classes in contractors. In 5 years time allow every contractor, on a Classless basis to compete on equal footing. I am sure the up and coming and qualified contractors can also do strategic partnership. Many of the smaller bumi contractors for example are highly trained people- engineers and technicians.
I have written a number of articles on what I wanted the NEM to be. At that time, we had no inkling how the NEM will be. I started from some key phrases the PM used. These included competitivess and creativity. I had to re-read what Porter said about competition and competitive advantage. The key word of creativity pushes me to re read Joseph Schumpeter- creative destruction.
As I look into the NEM, I will have to say it's not actually a new construct at all. It's just a grandiloquent way of saying, we will do it differently. The PM said it himself:-
"I pledge this: we will work tirelessly to develop and implement the economic reforms that our nation needs to grow, our businesses need to succeed and, above all, for our people to prosper," he said. "Some people are questioning the need for urgency to break the habits of the past. Do not be fooled. We need a new way of doing things. We must act now to position Malaysia for the future. We need to have a sustained and consistent big push if the reforms set out today are to gain momentum and help us achieve our goals."
I do not doubt the sincerity of this PM to carry out what he has said- a new way of doing things. This would certainly demolish the hopes of those hankering for a return of the inglorious past- where patronage and who you know rule the day. Since 1981, the driving force behind almost all businesses has been the dubious factor- hey do you know this pengarah, this ketua pengarah, this minister and the PM?
It is precisely that weakness that has created and sustained a select group of rent seekers and patronage hunters. Their success depended less on meritorious skills and expertise and more on harnessing the right political networking relationships. Success depends on sharing privileged information which excluded the real entrepreneurs out there.
The new model must strive to be closer to a market driven economy in the sense that it must introduce system that many free marketers believe- placing wealth creating assets closest to actual economic agents. Hence I welcome an assurance that our GLCs right from Khazanah to state owned companies will be divesting their holdings. Allow private sector, entrepreneurs to develop the assets and apply better work ethics and different motivations.
Khazanah for instance will sell 32 percent of its stake in Pos Malaysia but let's do it on open tender basis. But not before Pos Malaysia account for its humongous loss of over RM 500 million. Then not only must it be privatized, we must also make those responsible for the losses accountable. Do not allow those responsible for the losses to come back with a MBO plan or any business plans for that matter.
If it's not tenable to have one Pos Malaysia let's do a Mama Bell and Papa Bell on them- break it down to regional Pos Laju. Let them compete among themselves and see who can offer better services.
Why don't we allow online tendering so that people in Khazanah or decision makers don't come face to face with bidders until they are called in the final round? Hands off and on line tendering will allow the government avoid being accused of cronyism or patronage.
I have long advocated the freeing of the market from the clutches of state owned companies. In the absence of competition for example how do we know whether the SOE's operate on operating efficiencies or are just passive beneficiaries of the nature of the product? For example, in Pahang there are a few SOEs which are given monopolies in developing land for palm oil. I suspect, they enjoy good earnings simply because of the natural price of the product. Palm oil has a good price. All you need to do is to ensure you produce a certain quantity and sell at the good prices.
We really don't know whether this is due to productivity, efficiency, best practices or what? Because as soon as you compare productivity with private companies, then you will realize that SOEs have not been efficiently run. Their comparative productivity is lower than many private owned companies.
As long as you allow SOEs monopolies, you impose the crowding out effect. Genuine investors are sidelined from participating in certain economic segments. SOES get priority in many areas- land allocation and application, financing, guaranteed credit etc.
On these points, I have advocated when I was a state assemblyman, the closure of several GLCs and their subsidiaries. If they are not able to compete with even some upstart companies, while they have been receiving a variety of privileges, they might as well close down. Naturally, those suggestions were not well received by the CEOs of the various SOEs.

The perils of Bolehsia

MARCH 22 - President Obama and Hilary Clinton, his secretary of state, were in the Oval Office discussing steps that needed to be taken to enhance the bilateral ties between the US and Bolehsia.

"Well, what do you think, Mr President?" asked Hilary.

"Well Bolehsia needs our help in trade, investment and technology transfer. Perhaps we should send a special envoy to help facilitate this. The question, Hilary, is who do we send? We have to take into account Bolehsia's special circumstances and its unique value system," said the President.

"Well Mr President as you know, Bolehsia ranks in the bottom quartile in terms of gender equality when compared to the rest of the world although two thirds of its college graduates are female. Also they have strict laws governing sex outside of marriage where Muslim women can be sentenced to syariah caning if caught. So I don't think we can send a woman", said Hilary.

"Hmm, that's a shame," said the President. "That rules out half of the possible potential candidates for the job. So it's a man then. What sort of man should we send to Bolehsia?"

"Well sir, we have to be mindful of their race and religious issues. They have an affirmative action policy that gives preference to the majority race in all aspects of society. So we need a man who understands, and to a certain extent, accepts racism", said Hilary.

"So what are you suggesting, Hilary, someone from the Ku Klux Klan?" said the agitated President.

"Well, sir, that may not be enough. The man should preferably also not be a Christian because Bolehsia has a major issue on the translation of the word God. They have a word for it that only they and other Muslims can use, according to them. Oh and also the guy better not be Jewish, they don't like Jews", said Hilary.

"Well can we send an atheist or an agnostic then?" asked the President.

"That's not clear Mr. President. Bolehsia's constitution allows one to practise one's religion but it does not say that if one can have no religion. In fact in recent court cases, a Muslim cannot effectively renounce his or her religion, though there is no express provision in their constitution to prohibit such a thing. What is clear though, Mr President, is that Bolehsia is homophobic and they have strict laws against sodomy and homosexuality. In fact, they have recently been raiding establishments where this apparently goes on," said Hilary.

"But how do they prove it, Hilary? I mean unless there are video tapes or they send some undercover officers in to participate, where is the evidence to convict these guys?" asked the President.

"Well Mr. President, although Bolehsia is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it has done little to implement it in its constitution. Although the principle 'beyond a reasonable doubt' is supposed to be the standard to convict an accused in Bolehsia, the public persecutors, oh sorry I meant to say prosecutors, will prosecute regardless, especially if it is a high profile case. You see, they believe that the judges will be partial to them irrespective of the actual evidence," said Hilary.

"So it looks like we have to send someone who is male, gender biased, homophobic, a member of the Klan who is not too Christian and who does not believe in human rights. Is that what you are telling me Hilary? With all those prerequisites I would be surprised if our guy had any brains at all!" exclaimed the President.

"Oh don't worry about that Mr President, you see, Bolehsia is a fairly corrupt country. All our guy needs to be good at is greasing palms, which works wonders out there. Anyway we can always find out what they are doing from the internet as they are useless at keeping secrets. Lately they exposed to the world that their aircraft engines went missing and that their new submarine can't dive," said Hilary laughing heartily.

"Also, sir", Hilary added "if our guy happens to be a paedophile, he might get away with it in Bolehsia. Apparently it is possible to legally marry a child below the age of sixteen if you are a Muslim over there".

"Honest to God, Hilary, I can't think of anyone who can fit all the requirements you have outlined above. I can't even think of someone who can meet a major part of it" said the President.

"George W. Bush," replied Hilary spontaneously. -- Writer and source unknown/

*************************************************************************************
Why pay APCO when UMNO can have BUSH FOR FREE?

http://www.malaysia-today.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30939:baraks-one-israel-and-najibs-one-malaysia&catid=22:the-corridors-of-power&Itemid=100085

The iPad and Healthcare--The Future Must Be Fun and Cool

Everybody knows that the iPad--which will be available to consumers this coming Saturday--is going to be a big deal. But various seers and sages are now starting to think about how it will affect their industry, including the healthcare industry. All of us who have been to the doctor's office and filled out the same information, two or three times, even during the same visit know how great it would be if there was the equivalent of an electronic clipboard, in which all that information would go. Not just for the convenience, but also for the life-saving power of good information. What allergies? What prescriptions? What medical history? One hates to think that lives are being lost because of poor handwriting, or because the wrong box was checked, or because the paper was misfiled, or because a fatigued--or lazy--doctor or nurse didn't go through every last page of a fat file.

And yet a tablet computer, by itself, is not the answer--we've had those for years, and they have had no great impact, on healthcare, or anything else. To be effective, the tablet has to be fully functional, of course, but it also must be cool and fun. And that means, among other factors, that it needs to be connected to the Internet, and not just the Internet, but also the Cloud. The Cloud being the more specific area of interactivity: not just e-mail and Google, but specific information, specific computations, specific feedback.

So it was noteworthy that Marc Benioff, the chairman and CEO of Salesforce.com, writing in TechCrunch, took so much time to sing the praises of the iPad:

The future of our industry now looks totally different than the past. It looks like a sheet of paper, and it’s called the iPad. It’s not about typing or clicking; it’s about touching. It’s not about text, or even animation, it’s about video. It’s not about a local disk, or even a desktop, it’s about the cloud. It’s not about pulling information; it’s about push. It’s not about repurposing old software, it’s about writing everything from scratch (because you want to take advantage of the awesome potential of the new computers and the new cloud—and because you have to reach this pinnacle). Finally, the industry is fun again.

It's important to understand that Benioff is not some fanboy. His company, Salesforce.com is a major player in the fast-growing field of software-as-a-service, which comes, of course, from the Cloud. Here's more of what Benioff has to say about the iPad and healthcare:

What’s most exciting is that this fundamental transformation—cloud + social + iPad—will inspire a new generation of wildly innovative new apps that will change entire industries. Take health. We have all been waiting for the health application that will revolutionize how we share and communicate with our doctors, and help us make better health care decisions. The apps we have seen as first generation EHR/PHR just have not cut it, and now with ObamaCare there is no killer app to accelerate through the new EHR reimbursement program. The shift ignited by the iPad will allow the proliferation of these new missing apps, and automate the industries and professionals left behind by the last generation of technology. Now, no industry will be left behind.

Benioff, of course, would stand to benefit from a transformational iPad, because then his software, which exists in the cloud, will all the more valuable. That is, if everyone is walking around with an iPad, including in doctors' offices and hospitals, then there will be the virtual equivalent of a mainframe up in the cloud somewhere, and Benioff hopes to sell--more accurately, rent--some of that cloud to each iPad user.

Let's hope it works out for him, and all the other entrepreneurs who wish to improve healthcare. They are the ones who will genuinely reform the system. They will make it better and cheaper, both. They will also make it cool, and even fun.

The Healthcare Hangover, Part 2

"Law May Do Little to Help Curb Unnecessary Care"--that's the headline atop Gina Kolata's story in The New York Times today. As Kolata notes, people still want to be treated. (We can leave aside, just this once, the question of who decides what is unnecessary.)

As the Times explains: "It is no surprise that Congress shied away from a serious effort to hold down overuse. The public has made it clear that it does not want to be told what medical care it can and cannot have." And she adds a colorful quote from a well-known expert:

“The minute you attack overutilization you will be called a Nazi before the day is out,” said Uwe E. Reinhardt, a health economist at Princeton.

Ouch! Of course, "Nazi" might be too strong, but "death panelist" will certainly be heard. Continuing, Kolata adds these skeptical grafs on a major article of healthcare reform faith--comparative effectiveness:

Some hold out hope for the comparative effectiveness studies.

But “there is no direct link between the development of that evidence and the use of that evidence,” said Bryan R. Luce, senior vice president for science policy at United Biosource Corp., a Washington consulting firm.

The idea of the comparative effectiveness guidelines is a sort of an “if you build it, they will come” notion, said Dr. J. Sanford Schwartz, a health economist and internist at the University of Pennsylvania. But that is not going to be sufficient, he said. There needs to be a way to effectively link what the guidelines say and how they are put into effect, how they are interpreted, what insurers pay for and what doctors do.

One way to make those links is to do what some other countries do — say that there will be no payments for care that is not deemed the most cost-effective. But politicians shy away from such measures, Dr. Luce said. “That is not likely to happen soon, particularly at a national level,” he said.

It would mean rationing, said Dr. Robert D. Truog a professor of medical ethics, anesthesia, and pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. “That’s the word nobody wants to use. It’s just a firecracker. Nobody wants to touch it.”

So what, exactly did get cut? We know that we will add 31 million people to the insurance rolls, but if the thrust of Kolata's story is accurate, then it sure seems as if the cost-curve was bent upward, not downward. Yes, Peter Orszag made great arguments about controlling costs and all that, but those arguments don't seem to have gone very far beyond the marbled palaces of Washington. It doesn't appear that either doctors or patients have paid much heed. The bogies of demanding patients, defensive-medicine-ing docs, and overall inefficiency still seem to be with us. So we'll be waiting to see if Orszag & Co. now wade into the details of cutting costs, and how Congress, and the American people, react to such wading-into-ing.

But for now, we might ask: Is this why we passed this bill? To spend more? Interesting.

Here at Serious Medicine Strategy, we have long argued that spending is not the problem. Instead, the problem is what we get for the money we spend. The "get" can be improved, of course, but not by talking about cutting costs. The get can only be improved by improving the quality of care, and the quantity of cures. That's how to save money. Nothing else works.

Twist, Not A Twist

Buster's Bartending 101

I have a small gripe. Too many of today's bartenders are ignorant of the classic drinks, especially the Martini. Any fool can pour a beer or make a rum and coke, and many of the younger mixologists do a fine job with fruity shots and concoctions with names like "Skip And Go Naked". But just ask 'em for a dry martini, rocks, with a twist, and there's no telling what you'll be served.

Of course, some allowances must be made. You don't go to a campus bar and order a martini. Nor do you order one at the shot n' a beer joint just around the corner from the steel plant. But at any decent watering hole, and certainly at the bar in a nice restaurant, a proper martini is not an unreasonable expectation. Such expectations are too often unmet.

The classic martini is a strong, gin-based cocktail. You shouldn't have to say "gin martini" -- the gin is automatic, unless you specify vodka. (And those are your only two choices, gin or vodka.) The base spirit is combined with a small amount of dry vermouth. The mix should be around 3 or 4 parts gin to 1 part vermouth. For a dry martini, use less vermouth. For extra-dry, just say the word "vermouth" but leave the bottle on the shelf, untouched.

The classic martini is shaken or stirred over ice then strained and served "up" in a stemmed martini glass. Again, the "up" should be automatic, unless you specify "on the rocks." (The same is true of a Manhattan -- served up unless you say rocks.) A drink on the rocks should be served in a "rocks glass" -- a short tumbler with a flat bottom. And speaking of glasses, putting something in an up martini glass doesn't make it a martini. Chocolate/blueberry/strawberry "martinis" are not martinis at all. When I was a kid, my mom served pudding in martini glasses. A yummy dessert, but sure as hell no martini.

The classic martini may be garnished with a twist of lemon, or a green olive, or with nothing at all. (Some like a cocktail onion, which technically turns the drink into a Gibson.) A twist is a bit of the lemon peel or rind (and peel only, no fruit attached), rubbed on the rim of the glass then dropped into the drink. A martini is never served with a lemon wedge or lemon slice -- we're drinking booze, not iced tea. Neither should it come with any form of lime, orange, pineapple, or cherry. "Martini with a twist" means lemon, period. Similarly, the olive must be a green olive stuffed with pimento, although some prefer the olive stuffed with almond, anchovy, or bleu cheese. But it is never a black olive, or a coffee bean, or a jelly bean.

As a long-time member of the drinking class, Buster has ordered his share of martinis while out and about, and many have been iffy. Frequently, it's too weak/has too much vermouth, not enough gin. And there are a whole lot of bartenders who have no idea what a twist is, nor how to make one. On one memorable occasion I was presented with a weak 50/50 martini, with olive, dirty, on the rocks in an up glass with a wedge of lime, already squeezed for my convenience. That shit would gag a maggot!

Eventually, I hit upon a different strategy. I no longer order a "martini." I now order "gin on the rocks." Even the 21-year-old rookie bartender can't fuck that one up!

Saying What Needs To Be Said

by Bill Maher
Posted 3/29/10
on the Huffington Post

New Rule: You can't use the statement "there will be no cooperation for the rest of the year" as a threat if there was no cooperation in the first half of the year. Here's a word the president should take out of his teleprompter: bipartisanship. People only care about that in theory, not in practice. The best thing that's happened this year is when President Obama finally realized this and said, "Kiss my black ass, we're going it alone, George W. Bush style."

Two months ago, conservative Fred Barnes wrote, "The health care bill is dead with not the slightest prospect of resurrection." Well, if it's dead, you just got your ass kicked by a zombie named Nancy Pelosi. Seriously, the last time a Democrat showed balls like that John Edwards' girlfriend was filming it. Make all the botox jokes and she-shops-too-much jokes you want, but this is the biggest political victory a woman has ever achieved in America. Yes, Nancy Pelosi likes nice clothes. So does Sarah Palin. The difference is Nancy Pelosi pays for hers.

But even before the Democrats got to take a single victory lap they were already being warned not to get used to the feeling, and not to get drunk with power. I disagree. All you Democrats: do a shot, and then do another. Get drunk on this feeling of not backing down and doing what you came to Washington to do.

Democrats should not listen to the people who are now saying they shouldn't attempt anything else big for a while because health care was such a bruising battle. Wrong -- because I learned something watching the lying bullies of the Right lose this one: when they're losing, they squeal like a pig. They kept saying things like, the bill was being "shoved down our throats" or the Democrats were "ramming it through." The bill was so big they couldn't take it all at once!

And I realized listening to this rhetoric that it reminded me of something: Tiger Woods' text messages to his mistress that were made public last week, where he said, and I quote, "I want to treat you rough, throw you around, spank and slap you and make you sore. I want to hold you down and choke you while I fuck that ass that I own. Then I'm going to tell you to shut the fuck up while I slap your face and pull your hair for making noise." Unquote.

And this, I believe, perfectly represents the attitude Democrats should now have in their dealings with the Republican Party: "Shut the fuck up while I slap your face for making noise -- now pass a cap-and-trade law, you stupid bitch, and repeat after me: 'global warming is real!'"

The Democrats need to push the rest of their agenda while their boot is on the neck of the greedy, poisonous old reptile. Who cares if a cap-and-trade bill isn't popular, neither was health care. Your poll numbers may have descended a bit, but so did your testicles.

So don't stop: we need to regulate the banks, we need to overhaul immigration, we need to end corporate welfare including at the Pentagon, we need to bring troops home from... everywhere, we need to end the drug war, and we need to put terrorists and other human rights violators on trial in civilian courts, starting with Dick Cheney.

Democrats in America were put on earth to do one thing: drag the ignorant hillbilly half of this country into the next century, which in their case is the 19th -- and by passing health care, the Democrats saved their brand. A few months ago, Sarah Palin mockingly asked them, "How's that hopey-changey thing working out for ya?" Great, actually. Thanks for asking. And how's that whole Hooked on Phonics thing working out for you?

Same same

This article from People's Parliament.

Sorry to be writing to you so soon after the last, but I read on Malaysianinsider that at the racist Perkasa congress over the weekend, you had called for a review of something or the other so as to be able to reply to allegations that the Malays have stolen the country’s wealth and denied the rights of non-Malays, and felt that I could not let you get away with these mischievous, dishonest observations without responding to the same.

You see, I do not think anyone has said that the Malays have stolen the country’s wealth or denied the rights of the non-Malays.

What many have said, myself included, is that you and your privileged cronies, inside and outside of government, have robbed the people of this nation, Malays included.

And, inspired no doubt by you, many in the civil service also got in on the action.

I’m going to keep this short, so I’ll just cite one instance. I’ll leave commentators to add to the list, if they care to.

One evening in the early 90’s, when Putrajaya and KLIA was being conceived by your government, I got a call from a friend who excitedly asked me to meet him to look at a ‘cannot go wrong’, ’sure make money’ investment opportunity.

I met him at a pub in PJ.

He opened up maps of Sepang and Dengkil, said he had connections with people who had connections in the highest offices of government, identified the areas on the maps that were being earmarked for the construction of Putrajaya and KLIA and the housing and commercial areas that would sprout up thereabouts, and then said that the owners of these property were unaware of these intended developments. If we bought now, the price would be dirt cheap.

When sold later, or if acquired for purposes of the intended development, the returns, either from the re-sale or government acquisition, would be considerably higher.

Big profits to be made.

At the loss of those who had held those properties for a long time, some passed down from generation to generation.

And who were unaware of the intended development.

These were Malays.

Who were screwing them?
*************************************************************************************

My story is almost similar to the above.

The only different is my information and opportunity were direct from the horses's mouth. That right Mahathir and my old man. I did not take up the offer not because I was a fool but I have my children's karma to consider.

But Mahathir's dancing partner cum part time lover and her family members became instant millionaire overnight with their purchase of lands in Sepang and Dengkil.

To further your interest the RM52 billion bumi shares LGE is talking about. My old man sold RM20 billion share and carried the cash in his own private jet out from Malaysia.

One should also fire the gun at Mahathir and sons who also cashed out their billion shares. Mahathir cannot deny that his children did not receive billion of shares when he was the Prime Minister. Mahathir's children would not be millionaires today (not billionaires because they are stupid) if not for free shares, land and projects given on golden plate. It is well known in the business community that even with 200 companies in their names, every single one of the companies did not make money. Instead it was the free shares and lands that got them standing today. So it would be good if Mahathir can just shut up and not continue to lie.

Call it NEM or NEP, Najib cannot offend the elite members otherwise people like Mahathir, Ibrahim Ali will C4 him and Rosmah. Believe me people like Mahathir etc have alway consider their needs greater than ours and are gluttons. The very good example of Malay plus Mamak Muslim who are willing to swear like Najib (malay plus bugis muslim) on the Quran. (I swear I do not know the Mongolian Girl but cross his finger not daring to mention Altantuya's name) Mahathir will swear - I have no knowledge that the children (instead of my children) receive billions of shares.

It is such pity that people like Mahathir think they can continue to fool us.

Talking about swearing on the Quran, I know many so-called extreme Muslim who can fuck and swear on the Quran like having nasi lemak and teh tarik for breakfast.

The Healthcare Hangover and the Reality of Universal Coverage

So the healthcare party is over--now we have to read the fine print. With the political equivalent of a hangover. Yes, the last year has been wild and raucous, but we ain't seen nothin' yet. We’re going to need a lot of coffee to get through the policy wrangles ahead--or maybe another drink. But in the meantime, we are going to continue stumbling our way toward some sort of universal coverage.

The New York Times headlines, “Coverage Now for Sick Children? Check Fine Print.” As reporter Robert Pear notes, President Obama expressed great confidence that his healthcare bill would force the coverage of pre-existing conditions. On March 19, Obama said, “Starting this year, insurance companies will be banned forever from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions.”

That was the promise. But the reality seems to be different. Pear quotes insurance lawyer William G. Schiffbauer: “The fine print differs from the larger political message. If a company sells insurance, it will have to cover pre-existing conditions for children covered by the policy. But it does not have to sell to somebody with a pre-existing condition. And the insurer could increase premiums to cover the additional cost.” Oops.

For their part, Democrats are mad: “The ink has not yet dried on the health care reform bill,” snaps Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, “and already some deplorable health insurance companies are trying to duck away from covering children with pre-existing conditions. This is outrageous.

But one must wonder: If Schiffbauer and the insurance companies are correct in their assessment--that “the fine print differs from the larger political message,” as the Times’ Pear, who has been following healthcare for decades, seems to accept as true--then that difference must have been obvious ten days ago, been obvious a week ago, or a month ago, or a year ago.

This loophole, if that’s the right word, is supposed to close in January 2014. As the Times puts it, “Insurers say, until 2014, the law does not require them to write insurance at all for the child or the family. In the language of insurance, the law does not include a ‘guaranteed issue’ requirement before then.” And that grace period, which could mean, of course, that everyone concerned has nearly four years to figure out some new loopholes.

But for the time being, we might ask: We the Democrats simply careless in the way that they wrote the bill they just passed? Or, perhaps more cynically, we might wonder: Did they deliberately leave the loopholes, to ease the bill’s passage? And now, faced with those loopholes, what are Democrats going to do for the next four years? Are they going to simply fulminate against the insurance companies (perhaps while collecting campaign contributions) or are they going to seek to rewrite the Obamacare legislation? If they do seek a rewrite, there will, of course, be a fight.

And then, of course, will come the question: Can the health insurance industry exist if the government mandates that everyone be covered for everything? There are some on the left who don't want the industry to exist, of course, because they want the government to run the whole of healthcare--it's called "single payer." But there are plenty of others who don't want the government to have that power--the Tea Partiers, and many others who are simply fearful of too much power in Washington. And so the political and economic battle is joined, now, and for many years to come.

Meanwhile, the heart-tugging stories continue to appear, and what we see is that neither the left nor the right seems interested in cutting back on the sort of heroic medicine that saves lives.

Over the weekend, ABC News headlined, “Family Learns Pre-Existing Conditions Apply at Birth/Newborn Was Denied Health Insurance Coverage Days After Life-Saving Surgery.” As ABC’s Lauren Cox and Lara Salahi report:

Houston Tracy, a 12-day-old boy, has already survived a rare birth defect, a feeding tube and open heart surgery. Now his family is waiting to see how the battle with an insurance company will fare. Last week, Houston's parents found out that the term “pre-existing condition” can apply the moment someone is born.

It seems that little Houston was born with “d-transposition of the great arteries,” meaning the primary aorta and pulmonary arteries are transposed where they should meet the heart. Houston was born on Monday, March 15, within days, doctors at Cook Children’s Medical Center had operated, saving his life. “In Houston's case he would not have survived had he not gotten the care,” Dr. Steve Muyskens, the pediatric cardiologist who treated Houston told ABC. “Most children with this [would] have a demise within days to months in life.”

We might pause, of course, to admire the Serious Medicine that went into saving this little boy’s life--his arteries fixed, Houston can look forward to a normal childhood. That's what matters most. For Houston's parents, the surgery is primary, the insurance is secondary.

And of course, in this generous country, people are always going to find ways to save the life of a newborn, if at all possible. (That's a picture of the baby above, who doesn't want to help?)

But now the plot thickens. As ABC also reports, just days after Houston’s operation, the Tracy family formally heard their son was denied health insurance by Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas. ABC adds, “The provision in the health insurance reform act that prohibits health insurance companies from denying coverage to children with a pre-existing condition will only take effect six months after the bill was signed into law.” But wait a second--the Times said not until January 2014. As noted, this stuff is complicated.

Yet interestingly, ABC tells us, the Tracy family did get insurance:

Doug Tracy said his family has found an alternative route to get his child coverage through the Texas Health Insurance Risk Pool, and the policy will only cost $277 a month -- $10 more than the premium on the policy he tried to take out for his son. However, he said he's confused since he will still have to apply through Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas if he goes through the Texas Health Insurance Risk Pool.

So we might wonder--what sort of shell game is going on here? The Tracy family can’t get private insurance, so they get public insurance, administered, it seems, by a private company. Indeed, it's interesting that such a program as the Texas Health Insurance Risk Pool exists in the home state of Gov, Rick Perry and so many Tea-Partying opponents of Obamacare. Yes, they opposed Obamacare, but do they also oppose the system that brought the Tracy family its health coverage?

Maybe this is the way it has to be. For their part, Democrats wanted a bill, even if it didn't so what they said it would do, at least not yet. And for their part, Republicans oppose Obamacare, even if they seem to quietly support programs that do much the same thing.

The really important thing, as we have seen, is that Houston Tracy got his operation; his little life has been saved. Now the adults will have to figure out the financing mechanism.


But what seems clear is this: We are going to end up covering everyone, out of one “pot” or another. The only question is how.

MCA diu lei

Congratulation Soi Lek and Liow. This song is dedicated to you and your cohorts knowingly sacrificed the MCA PARTY for selfish reasons.

Today Tiong, Ling and Mahathir can sleep peacefully knowing that PKFZ is been put to rest. So much for transparency, Najib.

How many millions for your retirement Soi Lek? Enough to buy gold plated coffin or not?

Repeal vs. Reform: A New Poll in The Washington Post Shows the Majority--and the Intensity--Against Obamacare. Cue Up The Blogosphere!

A Washington Post poll published Sunday morning shows the country still sharply split on Obamacare, with the edge in numbers and intensity going to opponents. Forty-six percent of Americans support the bill, 50 percent oppose. Yet remarkably, a quarter of all those asked said that they had taken the step of contacting an elected official to express an opinion on the bill. So there's plenty of intensity.

And among opponents of the bill, 86 percent support efforts to cancel Obamacare, by either legislation or litigation. Eighty-six percent of the 50 percent who oppose the bill is 43 percent of the country as a whole.

And if, as I suspect, the flaws in Obamacare will look even more egregious in the light of information-age scrutiny from critics, then those opposition numbers are likely to rise. That is, if critics, poring through the 2800 pages of legislation, and the 15,000 pages of regulation to come, find obnoxious or dubious provisions--and they will, of course--then those will be highlighted in ways that they could not have been highlighted in the past. It could be Cornhusker Kickback times 10. Or 100.

One such take, for example, comes from a publication, Seeking Alpha, that I am sure didn't exist during the Clintoncare debate, to say nothing of Medicare. Blogger Andy Sutton writes of "Healthcare's Imminent Double Dip." In 1600 words, he cites job- and growth-killing specifics in the bill, and then concludes:

With all the debt being accumulated, the money being pulled from the real economy in favor of the centrally planned utopia sought by so many on Capitol Hill, and the pressures brought to bear on businesses by this ‘reform’, it is hard to contemplate a set of circumstances under which we avoid another steep contraction in the real economy. It will be interesting to see how long it takes to go from recovery to contraction. My guess is about as long as it takes for a Baskin Robbins double dip to melt.

Most likely, Suttons' voice would not have been heard in the past, but now, thanks to the Internet, it will. And if he is right in his doomy projections, Obamacare will be in deep trouble. Obama, too. And America.

UPDATE: The Washington Examiner's Byron York adds this on the unintended consequences--or were they the intended consequences?--of Obamacare:

On Thursday and Friday, the companies -- so far, they include AT&T, Verizon, Caterpillar, Deere, Valero Energy, AK Steel and 3M -- said a tax provision in the new health care law will make it far more expensive to provide prescription drug coverage to their retired employees. Now, both retirees and current employees of those companies are wondering whether the new law could mean reduced or canceled benefits for them in the future.

But that's not all:

Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, has summoned some of the nation's top executives to Capitol Hill to defend their assessment that the new national health care reform law will cost their companies hundreds of millions of dollars in health insurance expenses. Waxman is also demanding that the executives give lawmakers internal company documents related to health care finances -- a move one committee Republicans describes as "an attempt to intimidate and silence opponents of the Democrats' flawed health care reform legislation."

So is that the new pattern? Companies complain, and they risk getting worked over by Washington?

SECOND UPDATE: Hot Air's Ed Morrissey argues, persuasively,that the poll oversampled Democrats, thus making the numbers mor pro-Obamacare.

Perkasa Lok Cat Percentage

KUALA LUMPUR, March 27 — Perkasa chief Datuk Ibrahim Ali today claimed Bumiputeras should rightly own 67 per cent of the nation’s economic wealth, as it was the majority group in Malaysia.

He also insisted the government must include affirmative action in the New Economic Model (NEM), adding that Bumiputeras’ economic equity must reach 30 per cent before the country reaches its goal as a developed nation in 2020.

“Malaysia comprises 55 per cent Malays and 12 per cent of other Bumiputeras, which [is] total [of] 67 per cent Bumiputeras. Therefore, the nation’s wealth must be 67 per cent for Bumiputeras but we get 30 per cent only,” the Malay rights movement president said at the inaugural Perkasa congress here today.

“Therefore it must be explained that in a democracy, the majority is regarded as the national agenda. The country’s economy must be divided in accordance with the distribution of the population,” added the independent Pasir Mas MP.

Ibrahim stressed that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak must defend the rights of the Malay community even as he tries to reform the country’s economy, if he expects to gain their backing.

“If the New Economic Model is based on Articles 152 and 153 of the nation’s constitution, then I am confident that Perkasa and Malay Consultative Council (MPM) will give their full support to Datuk Seri Najib Razak as the prime minister of Malaysia and president of Umno.

“Umno is a Malay party and champions the Malay community. Umno must be strong in defending the interests and demands of the Malays, if they want to remain relevant as Malay party and get strong support from the Malays,” said the Perkasa founder.

He warned the country’s leaders to be sensitive of issues affecting Islam, Malays and Bumiputeras.

“Any decision on policies affecting Islam, Malays and Bumiputera must be carefully considered. The heart and soul of the Muslim community must not be wounded. There can be no political security without the political power of the majority from the Muslim community,” he added.

Perkasa has been campaigning that NEM should not sideline the Malays and remains in line with Article 153 and the 10 parts contained within, the first of which makes it incumbent for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak.

Perkasa, which set up the MPM, expressed concern that the NEM would erase affirmative action policies and increase the monopoly of the country’s economy by the Chinese community.

Perkasa economic bureau director Dr Zubir Harun has said the movement feared that the NEM would have a Chinese agenda, and warned that the Chinese community would use the next general election to take over the country.

Najib, who is also finance minister, will receive the comprehensive NEM report from the National Economic Advisory Council (NEAC) at the Invest Malaysia forum next Tuesday.

He has said the NEM will be announced in two stages to include public feedback, before being included in the 10th Malaysia Plan being tabled this June.
*************************************************************************************
Ibrahim Ali, what do you mean by 55% Malays and 12% Bumiputra? Now you are dividing and confusing yourself more. Where do you stand mamak, indonesian or thai since you are neither Malay or Bumiputra?

Knowing your background LOK CAT must be some past sweet memories you cannot let go.

Repeal vs. Reform, Update

The intellectual momentum within the conservative/libertarian movement is for repeal of Obamacare. The political reality, over the next three years, or more, might be different.

Yuval Levin, a thoughtful and prolific thinktanker at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, makes a forceful case for repeal; he has written cover story of the April 5 issue of The Weekly Standard, entitled, simply, "Repeal: The Overthrow of Obamacare." No doubt Levin is correct when he suggests that Obamacare will raise prices and degrade coverage and treatment.

But a dilemma is seen early on in the piece. Levin sets up a dichotomy between liberals, who favor government-mandated universalism, and conservatives, who favor a free market. As we shall see, conservative thinking is a bit more complicated than that. But let's let Levin make his case:

Liberals argue that the efficiency we lack would be achieved by putting as much as possible of the health care sector into one big “system” in which the various irregularities could be evened and managed out of existence by the orderly arrangement of rules and incentives. The problem now, they say, is that health care is too chaotic and answers only to the needs of the insurance companies. If it were made more orderly, and answered to the needs of the public as a whole, costs could be controlled more effectively.

So liberals heart "one big system." But then Levin sets up the conservative view, describing it as the hope that healthcare would be the sum total of private-sector choices, choices to be clarified by more transparent pricing. That's the ideal, anyway, according to Levin:

Conservatives argue that the efficiency we lack would be achieved by allowing price signals to shape the behavior of both providers and consumers, creating more savings than we could hope to produce on purpose, and allowing competition and informed consumer choices to exercise a downward pressure on prices. The problem now, they say, is that third-party insurance (in which employers buy coverage or the government provides it, and consumers almost never pay doctors directly) makes health care too opaque, hiding the cost of everything from everyone and so making real pricing and therefore real economic efficiency impossible. If it were made more transparent and answered to the wishes of consumers, prices could be controlled more effectively.

And so, Levin concludes, "Liberals and conservatives want to pursue health care reform in roughly opposite directions." Yes, there's plenty of division between liberals and conservatives, tut there's more to what conservatives, and their business allies, think. Many free-marketeers also favor universalism, aka "one big system," and they think, correctly, that government action can help establish universalism; indeed, government action should establish univeralism.

That's why many--although by no means all--conservatives and liberarians have supported the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution, so the individual states could trade freely with each other. Such a focus on universality has also spearheaded the efforts, over the centuries, to harmonize and rationalize railroad gauges, commercial law, weights and measures, time zones, and production standards. And that's why, today, most libertarian theorists have joined with the business community--at least the big business community, the businesses that are most heard in Washington DC--to support free trade and free trade treaties and umbrella groups, such as NAFTA, CAFTA, and the World Trade Organization. Libertarians embrace the theory, while big business, and many small businesses, may or may not embrace the theory, but they definitely embrace the idea of big market. For the past 60 years most big businesses, for example, have supported European integration, including the European Union.

In other words, many on the business-oriented right embrace "one big system," because it's good for business, by creating a large and predictable common market, even if critics say that such integration comes at the expense of national sovereignty.

And back in the US the same phenomenon could happen on healthcare. Levin and many others want repeal of Obamacare, but the US Chamber of Commerce doesn't, or at least won't work for it, according to USCC president Tom Donohue. Plenty of businesses, and others who count themselves on the side of large-scale harmonization and rationalization, might well decide that they like the new system, or will find themselves in the "reform" camp, but not the "repeal" camp.

Zero Explanation

Najib's words at an interview 12th March 2010

What do you make of the talk about Malay rights? Driven by NGOs, certain political people are speaking out and making a big splash by saying they’ve got to defend the constitutional rights of Malays and putting pressure on you.

I’m not too alarmed about it. I expected it. We had this rise of Hindu rights through Hindraf and so forth. It was only a question of time before you could see a reaction from Malays. And true enough, it came in the form of Perkasa and the NGOs. But these people realise that the only political vehicle that can achieve the aims of their struggle will still be UMNO. They’re not against UMNO. But they want to remind UMNO, “Don’t forget the Malay rights, the Malay interests.” What I’m telling them is “No, I’m not forgetting the Malay rights, the Malay interests, but I want the Malays to work with the other races too.” I don’t see it as a zero-sum game and I want everyone to be together on the same page and work towards 1Malaysia.
*************************************************************************************

I grew up in a mixed community. My siblings are all married to different races and religions. We have always consisted ourselves a family.

So I do not understand why Najib has to promote his stupid 1Malaysia to unite the people of all races but on the other hand divide the people of different races by supporting Perkasa in full force. Were not the Hindraf leaders put behind locks under ISA to brain wash and disband them.

Najib what are you trying to prove with this 1Malaysia that you are flip flopping like the wind. Are you suffering from wanting to fuck but cannot fuck syndrome.

1Malaysia cannot be just uniting people of all races only. It must unite people of all religion and political parties too. Equal opportunity in all sector of developing this country. Opportunity for equal funds to do business, education, in government department especially in the Finance, Defence and Foreign and Local Trade Ministry. Equal opportunity for other races for APs for cars and food. Why are the elite Malays still given generous no collateral loans with low interest no need to pay back scheme? How long more are the Naza group going to continue to receive generous allowance by the billions yearly? Why is the IGP post given to Malays Only. Why are you not getting rid of all the sultans and just install only one KING? The Royalty are getting out of hands.

Najib who voted for you as Prime Minister of this country? You are a burden to us.

The Limbaugh Watch

One day and counting. You might recall that Rush Limbaugh recently promised that, should the health care bill pass, he would leave the country. Well, it passed and he's still here. He's not only a fat toad, he's also a big, fat liar! Not exactly a surprise, is it?

Health Care Bill Passes!! Hooray! TEA Baggers & Republicans Pour On The Charm

It was, as Joe Biden famously put it, "a big fuckin' deal." You bet your hair plugs it was, Joe! Legislation to reform health care coverage has passed and will be enacted into law. It is history in our time and a proud moment.

The bill is far from perfect and does far less than it should have, but it still does a hell of a lot and is an undeniably large step in the right direction. Barack Obama has succeeded where so many before him had failed. Great job, Cuz! When the time is right, we can get back to work on a public option and some genuine cost controls for both insurers and providers. But the first step can be the hardest, and that step has been taken.

The Democrats took the step alone. Not a single Republican voted for it (and we should remember that). The R's continue to show unified support for a policy of 47 million uninsured Americans, coverage and claims denied for pre-existing conditions, insurance rescinded in the event of serious illness, bankruptcies caused by medical costs, unconscionable profits and executive pay in the health industry, and the entire god-awful greed-driven status quo! They believe they can make political hay with this abhorrent position. Mitch McConnell says the R's mantra for the mid-term elections will be "Replace & Repeal." John Boehner said passage of the bill was "Armageddon" and got so worked up he turned blue in the face (no easy task for an orange person!).

And the R's good buddies the TEA Baggers put on their usual show of good manners and civility. They took to the streets, the phones, and halls of government with their signature tactics -- vandalism, homophobic epithets, racial slurs, and death threats. Lovely! Sarah Palin, tone-deaf as always, put a map of the U.S. on her website showing supposedly "vulnerable" Democrats in the crosshairs of a rifle scope. Stay classy, Sarah!

Buster suspects he has at least a couple of occasional readers who consider themselves Republicans. What do you make of all this noise and fury? Do you like it? Do you believe it's persuasive? Are you proud? What I hear from a lot of R's I know is, "No, no, I don't approve of that sort of behavior. That's not me. That's not my Republican Party." Douchebag Boehner mumbled a half-hearted denouncement of the TEA tactics, but you could see he had his fingers crossed. Whiny little asshole Eric Cantor wanted us to know that he too had received a nasty phone message.

Sorry, but it won't wash. It's way too late for the R's to distance themselves from the monster they created. Hey boys, you wanted blind, unreasoning anger? Well, you got it. Newt Gingrich pointed the way 16 years ago, and ever since -- on talk radio, on Fox TV, in a few newspapers, and on the web -- you've been encouraging your base of bigoted, Bible-totin', mean stupid cocksuckers. And here they are. This is what you wanted and what you made. You are responsible for it, and you own it! All this ugliness is indeed your Republican Party. Good luck trying to turn it into a pretty picture.

And good luck as well trying to sue the federal government. The new law will require everyone to carry health insurance by 2014. Suddenly, a number of states with Republican governors and attorneys general filed suit, claiming the requirement is an unconstitutional violation of states' rights. While the Constitution does protect states' rights, there's also this little thing in Article 6 known as the supremacy clause, which says: "The U.S. Constitution shall be the supreme Law of the Land, laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." There has never been a successful legal challenge to the supremacy clause, and there won't be one now. These lawsuits are DOA, although Beck and Limbaugh will probably scream about them for years.

Polls are GIGO

Opinion polls are like buttholes -- everybody's got one, but I don't want to see yours. These days, it seems that opinion polling is virtually constant, updated minute by minute on every conceivable issue. With every new hot-topic-of-the-moment poll, any real statistical validity becomes less and less likely. You can design a poll to give you any result you desire. Some polls ask stupid questions. Others seek out stupid people. Then there's the double whammy, the poll which is determined to ask stupid questions of stupid people. The results are meaningless. It's Garbage In, Garbage Out.

Lately, there have been opinion polls telling us that the "majority" is "opposed" to health care reform. This bit of truthiness has been widely reported. Less widely reported is the fact that the vast majority of those opposed admit they have no idea what's contained in the legislation. Furthermore, an equally large majority are actually in favor of the various components of the plan once they learn more about it. So is the majority really opposed to health care reform? No, the majority are uninformed reactionary cranks too fuckin' dumb to know what's good for 'em!

Buster reminds you that public opinion polls are only as good as their design, and often that design sucks. Pollsters had Dewey defeating Truman, and they've been wrong many times since. Two suggestions for all of us:

1. Ignore most opinion polls. People say all sorts of goofy shit.
2. Never underestimate the stupidity of your fellow Americans.

Copy the Red Shirts

How many of us are brave enough to follow the example of the red shirts protesters in Thailand to kick out UMNO and the elites?

Any news of that AP glutton queen Rafidah? With so much of sin money in hand she should be paying for her karma too.

Blinded by money

I don't know about you but with all kind of stories coming out from these so-called independent MPs makes one think how shallow, arrogant and selfish these men are. By nature Malay Muslim are supposed to be timid, generous and forgiving. Ah but these Malays cum Muslim are anything but just the opposite. These bastards are all brought up and are well taught by an Indian Muslim by the name Mahathir. That right the old heck who was once our Prime Minister. Mahathir used money as bait to get things done his way. Money, money everything boils down to money. Rosmah is similar to Mahathir when it comes to using money to get things done.

These independent MPs are so used to money that after emptying out the PKR ATM, they are now cashing it out at UMNO ATM. But UMNO are a lucky lot with the new discovery of a large black oil field. So now there is plenty to go round to shop till they drop. But then this latest discovery will also be UMNO's curse. With Altantuya's blood in Najib and Rosmah's hands the prediction of RAHMAN will definitely come true.

To the so-called Malay cum Muslim making noises YOU BRING SHAME TO US MUSLIM FOLKS. You laugh at MCA crisis but look at yourself you fools.
*************************************************************************************

Have you watch newly released documentary movie, Nostradamus 2012 or heard about the book , "The Prophecies, by M. Michel Nostradamus"?

For those whose who don't , here are few brief info on it. The book contain prophecies on many things that has happened and going to happen. For example, it has been used to correctly predict the 9/11 attack (Al Qaeda attack on US' World Trade Center). Some says it has predicted World War 1 and the Gulf War. Although, this these are predicted well before the incidents, the prophecies are not scientifically supported. That is why it the book cannot be relied by authorities.

Recently my friend informed me about one prophecies about Malaysia's prime minister list. He said it is from the same person who predicted the 9/11 attack. According to him, Malaysia's last prime minister will be Najib bin Abdul Razak. His basis was the name of malaysia's first prime minister, RAHMAN. Each letter of the name RAHMAN represents the capital of name of Malaysia's prime minister so far. Details are as following:

R : Rahman (1st PM)
A : Abdul Razak (2nd PM)
H : Hussein Onn (3rd PM)
M : Mahathir (4th PM)
A : Abdullah Badawi (5th PM)
N : Najib (soon to be 6th PM)

Do you this think arrangement of names is truly a sign from the prophecies or just a coincidence? I was shocked for a minute upon realising it!

According to to him also, Malaysia will be 'destroyed' after the 6th prime minister. This is the part that really got me chilled to the bone. Thinking about that, if Barisan Nasional ( ruling party under all the 6 prime minister ) is going to loose in the next general election(2013), there might be a big havoc created leading to fight all over Malaysia, worse than May 16 1969 incident- Racial Clash. This of course will 'destroy' our country. Besides that, there might be a great natural disaster which will 'destroy' Malaysia. This assumption runs parallel to the prediction from Nostradamus which says that the world will end in 2012 (watch the documentary movie, Nostradamus 2012). In this case, not only Malaysia but the whole world will be destroyed! According to the documentary, it is a massive cosmic collision that will cause the natural disaster in 2012.
Note : All these happens when Najib is still in his term as prime minister (expected).

For your information, the issue of world ending in 2012 is hotly debated among western academicians. However, they are not made public to ensure not to create public unrest, just like how the UFO cases are being covered by US government. For now, the World War 3 and execution of current pope has been predicted.
Michel de Nostredame ( Nostradamus )
All these might be too much for most of us...But may be the truth, ANOTHER coincidence or false prediction. For further reading on Nostradamus, please visit :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nostradamus
http://www.sacred-texts.com/nos/index.htm
http://www.nostradamusonline.com/