Easycure’s Sidebar

(I am not Judge Ito) 

These Guys Want To Run Health Care?

Shocker! The White House cannot certify the numbers of jobs in the data posted on the recovery.gov website.

Earl Devaney, the chairman of the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, responded to questions posed by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., late yesterday to say the board can’t vouch for the numbers submitted by recipients of stimulus funding.

“Your letter specifically asks if I am able to certify that the number of jobs reported as created/saved on Recovery.gov is accurate and auditable. No, I am not able to make this certification,” Devaney wrote, in a letter provided to ABC News.

As a citizen, I urge you to watch what Congress and the White House are doing closely. They are not trying to help anyone; they are just trying to get our money.

The Post Office $3.8 billion losses, Medicare $60 billion fraud losses, Social Security, IRS, TSA. What does the government do right that doesn’t cost 100 times more than it should?

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments [0]

Beat the Caption

(This is just for fun, no prizes!)

“Even the inventor of the internet has to take his pants down to sit on the pot.”

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments [1]

Charity Tournament to benefit Bad Beat on Cancer

I hate cancer, so I am reposting this from the TPT.

On November 15th, the Twitter Poker Tour will be conducting its Second Charity Tournament to benefit Bad Beat on Cancer. The tournament will again be hosted online at Full Tilt Poker. This time around the tournament will again headline Full Tilt Poker Professional Andy Bloch, and for the first time, Full Tilt Poker Co-Creator and Bad Beat on Cancer Co-Founder, Phil Gordon. Many other Professional poker players and celebrities are expected to also join the event.

The tournament will feature a $5 buy in plus a $5 donation that goes directly to the charity. Please help the Twitter Poker Tour in its fight against cancer.

Tournament Details

Place: Full Tilt Poker
Date: November 15th, 2009
Time: 6:15PM EST
Cost: $10 ($5 entry plus $5 donation to BBoC)
Tourney ID#: 113220604
Tourney PW: TPTFORBBOC

About Bad Beat on Cancer

During the 2003 World Series of Poker (WSOP), poker professionals Phil Gordon and Rafe Furst started a drive to help fund cancer prevention research and education – by playing poker.

They asked their friends to pledge just one percent of their winnings at the WSOP Championship Event to the Prevent Cancer Foundation as a tax-deductible donation, resulting in enough money to fund a research grant for an entire year.

Since its inception six years ago, Bad Beat on Cancer (BBoC) has raise over $2 million for cancer prevention research and has grown to include other major poker tournaments, leagues, and home games. The initiative has inspired amateurs and pros alike to pledge one percent of their winnings for life, including stars Phil Hellmuth, Jr., Andy Bloch, Annie Duke, Phil Ivey, Howard Lederer, Chris Ferguson, Paul Wasicka, and Dennis Phillips, to name just a few. (Click For a full list of participants)

For more information on the Prevent Cancer Cause, you can visit them at http://www.preventcancer.org/ .

Thanks for reading.

EZ

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments [1]

He Was a Longshot!

http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14588615&fsrc=nwl

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments [0]

What's Wrong With This Picture?

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments [0]

Poor Chicago!

These people have no idea that the IOC SAVED them millions of dollars. Did you know that it took Montreal 30 years to pay off their debt from hosting the Olympics? That was 1976 people and “only” $1.5 million. (Only to have chunks of Olympic Stadium break off – remember that?)

Oh, and before you say that I’m “not patriotic”, I’ll let Greg Gutfeld speak for me:

Apparently laughing at all this is somehow anti-American, because Obama is our President, and he was doing this for all of us.

You know… kind of like when Bush was trying win a war in Iraq – and all those left wingers stood behind him.

And that’s my first point: The right has every right to gloat over Obama’s humiliation, because, thankfully, NO ONE DIED. Unlike, say during the Iraq war, where, whenever there was a roadside bombing, the progressives did their own special victory dance – using the consequences of war to gloat over an embattled president and an unpopular country. I didn’t hear much of the smarmy press calling them out.

So, if I take pleasure in watching Obama’s big fail, it’s only because it proved a point I made before he was elected: that being likeable, in and of itself, does nothing for America.

Sorry all you crooked friends of Obama, you blew it again. (Google ACORN.)

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments [0]

Dave Ramsey's Thoughts on Cash for Clunkers

I love Dave Ramsey…and I completely agree with what he says here.

Here is the whole thing in case you don’t want to click the link.

With all the buzz about Cash for Clunkers, it’s easy to think that it was a great way for people to get a better set of wheels. But was it really? No way! Cash for Clunkers was simply a way for broke people to buy cars that they really couldn't afford. It was a bad idea on multiple levels. But before digging into that, let’s take a little history lesson.

About a decade ago, a fair housing program was started, called a sub-prime lending market. The idea behind it was that everyone “needed” to own a home—including broke people. The government decided to start a program to reinvest in communities, which allowed pretty much anyone to borrow money to buy a house. Lending companies charged high interest rates, causing already struggling families to go even further into debt.

Basically, this was a program designed to encourage broke people to buy houses. Most people didn’t even know it existed until it unraveled and became the number-one cause of our recent recession. The government took those stupid loans back and securitized them, which created the financial mess last fall. Helping broke people buy houses didn’t turn out to be a great government program. Guess what? Helping broke people buy brand-new cars—and now home appliances—will turn out just as bad.

The Cash for Clunkers program was designed exactly for people who should not take advantage of the program. You trade your $2,000 clunker in for a brand-new, shiny $20,000 car, and the only way you can afford it is with a high-interest payment. That just means you really couldn’t afford it to begin with. Doesn’t this sound like the sub-prime mortgage problem all over again?

When you drive that new car off the lot, you’re immediately going to lose $4,500. The worst car accidents happen on the showroom floor. New cars go down in value like a rock. The government thinks it’s going to save the American auto industry by putting broke people into cars they can’t pay for. It’s going to come back to bite them—and the rest of us—in the form of taxes galore.

Another bad thing about this program is that we, the taxpayers, are paying for the new cars! It’s morally wrong of the government to take money away from us—against our will—in the form of taxes and give that money to someone else to buy a stupid car they can’t afford in the first place! This is theft, plain and simple.

Cash for Clunkers is a program that redistributes wealth in the name of the environment, and it’s going to be a curse on the car dealer and the manufacturer that carries the paper. It’s going to hurt the broke person who bought a car he couldn’t afford. And it’s already a problem for our country, because it’s adding dollars to the national debt.

There’s always a twist with government programs like this. They try to think of creative ways to help people, but the situation usually ends up worse than it did before they “helped.” In the end, I should decide what to do with my own money. If I want to buy you a car, I will! And if you can’t buy a car without actually paying for the whole thing, then you’re better off keeping your “clunker.”

So good riddance to a really bad program that has done more damage than good.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments [1]

Dissent is the Highest Form of Patriotism?

(Unless Obama is in the White House)

On the white house blog:

Opponents of health insurance reform may find the truth a little inconvenient, but as our second president famously said, "facts are stubborn things."

To try and discredit dissent of their idea of “health care reform” (which few want) they used a quote used in the defense of soldiers who fired on civilians:

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. John Adams, 'Argument in Defense of the Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials,' December 1770

I do think that the smartest minds in the country are far, far, away from Washington DC. Certainly, the White House is currently chock full of dimwits.

Credit to @jaketapper for the first tweet I saw.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments [0]

Some Are Born to Help; Others Are Born to Pose

That’s Ace’s headline, thanks man.

The photo shows it all: A good-for-nothing President dreams of unicorns and rainbows while a supposedly racist cop helps Gates down the stairs.

Thanks to Slublog and Ace.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments [0]

A Poll of Likely Voters

This is what happens when you are doing a bad job.

It’s almost a guarantee that somebody is going to blame the previous administration in the comments.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments [1]