California incumbent Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer spent some time today with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer straightening out her arithmetic. Boxer is in a toss-up race with GOP challenger and former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina.
“I voted for over $2 trillion of tax cuts, the largest one was in the stimulus bill,” Boxer said. Blitzer, confused, thought she meant $2 trillion in the stimulus, when she meant over her career.
Then Boxer got confused: “No, no, no — $1.2 trillion with the stimulus.”
That confused Blitzer even more, since the entire stimulus was about $800 billion. He asked, “There was $1.2 trillion in tax cuts in the stimulus?”
Boxer replied, “There was a lot. About, well, I will put it this way, over time, that’s what it will be, when you figure all the tax cuts over time. And what we did for the senior citizens, giving them back those refunds. So there was a lot.”
She finally got back on track, adding, correctly this time, “Actually, a third of the stimulus was tax cuts. That I can tell you.”
That’s the “Making Work Pay” cut that President Obama mistakenly thought would bring Republicans along to support the stimulus. Democrats bitterly complained later that the tax cut showed up as a few dollars a week in people’s paychecks that almost no one noticed.
Now, California voters understand why Boxer only agreed to one face to face debate with Carly Fiorina. Boxer really does not have the command of herself necessary to be a Senator.
Sen. Barbara Boxer appeared on Ed Schultz’s MSNBC show earlier, and her performance was a pretty stunning demonstration of how little clue she has about what’s actually in the health care legislation she was on air to promote. A frustrated Boxer appeared on the show to defend the bill against attacks from the liberal Schultz, who began the segment by hammering Democrats for caving into moderates and watering down the government-run plan.
In the clip below, Boxer tried to reassure Schultz by touting all of the government programs that are expanded by the bill. But she stumbled when trying to say how many new Medicaid beneficiaries would be added, said she needed to fact check it, looked off camera as if for guidance, and ended up asserting that the Medicaid expansion alone would cover 30 million more people. Yet anybody with an inkling of understanding of the Senate bill knows that the entire bill only covers 31 million according to the Congressional Budget Office. The expansion of Medicaid and SCHIP accounts for 15 million of that. I may sound like I’m nitpicking, but this is not some obscure provision of the bill or esoteric statistic. The coverage provisions account for the bulk of the overall cost of the legislation. It’s alarming that a sitting Senator would be this utterly clueless on the most sweeping domestic policy initiative since Medicare was created in 1965.
Sarah Palin began a three-day swing through California on Thursday that promises to be equal parts promotional and political in a state that has been slow to embrace her conservative star power.
The former Alaska governor and vice-presidential candidate's appearances conclude Saturday in Orange County at a Republican National Committee rally meant to whip up supporters for the final push toward the November elections.
Last weekend, Palin spoke at a business conference in Bakersfield and at a San Diego event for Combat Veterans For Congress. The trip inspired a post on her Facebook page in which she declared, "This is still Reagan Country!"
I plan to make the Anaheim event
Regarding House races, Jay Cost of the Weekly Standard notes that the Democratic Party has "an inefficiently distributed base of voters." It "consists mostly of union workers, upscale urban liberals, and minority voters, many of whom are clustered in highly Democratic districts." In many other districts, Democratic candidates depend on "independents and soft partisans," the very voters who have defected from the Obama coalition of 2008.
If Democrats lose control of the House by a small number of seats, this might be condign punishment for a practice they favor and that Republicans have cynically encouraged — racial gerrymandering. It concentrates African American voters in majority-minority districts to guarantee the election of minority candidates.
Likely…..Read it all
The Republican rallying cry during this election season has been a promise to "repeal and replace" ObamaCare. The problem is that through at least 2012 President Obama would veto any law repealing his signature health-care legislation. What, then, can Republicans do in the next two years? Look to the states.
After November, more than 30 Republican governors (many newly elected) will have the opportunity to resist the legislation at the state level. They could refuse to implement the health-care exchanges that are the core of ObamaCare. Doing so would force the federal government to step in and run the exchanges for the states—a chore that would slow down federal implementation of ObamaCare but fail to provide any alternative solution to insurance coverage problems.
Read it all
The Meg Whitman Campaign for Governor launched a new television ad, “Cops’ Choice,” that underscores why Whitman has support from nearly 30,000 law enforcement professionals. The 15-second spot describes Jerry Brown’s soft-on-crime record.
Jerry Brown was “SOFT” on crime when he was California Governor in the late 1970’s and early 80’s. Rose Bird, Brown’s appointee for California Supreme Chief Justice was a disaster and was recalled by California voters because of her refusal to enforce the California Death Penalty law among other things.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman has launched a new ad slamming Jerry Brown’s record on crime, including his appointment of Rose Bird as California Supreme Court chief justice. The Bird court overturned 64 death penalty convictions. She and justices Joseph Grodin and Cruz Reynoso were ousted from the court by voters in 1986.
The ad touts law enforcement groups that have endorsed Whitman, countering pro-Brown ads featuring other police and fire groups that have endorsed him.
CVS Pharmacy Inc. has agreed to pay $75-million in fines for allowing repeated purchases of a key ingredient in the making of methamphetamine in at least five states that also led to a spike in Southern California drug trafficking, authorities said Thursday.
The largest U.S. operator of retail pharmacies will pay what federal prosecutors said is the largest civil penalty under the Controlled Substances Act.
The company also will forfeit about $2.6-million in profits earned from the sales of pseudoephedrine, which can often be found in cold medicine and is used to make meth.
Authorities said CVS didn’t provide enough safeguards to monitor how much pseudoephedrine someone was buying, and the company violated federal drug regulations Arizona, Georgia, California, Nevada, and South Carolina and possibly 20 other states.
“This case shows what happens when companies fail to follow their ethical and legal responsibilities,” said U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. “CVS knew it had a duty to prevent methamphetamine trafficking, but it failed to take steps to control the sale of a regulated drug used by methamphetamine cooks as an essential ingredient for their poisonous stew.”
The company was expected to pay the $75-million fine by Friday. The remaining forfeiture is due within 30 days.
I mean isn’t this enough incentive to obey the law?
Methamorphosis as a result of chronic Methamphetamine abuse
Thanks CVS for turning your back on your American customers.
Some executive at CVS should be prosecuted criminally for this gross megligence and maybe this will wise up the industry to obey the law.