The release of the House GOP budget by Rep. Paul Ryan has sparked a
resurgence of false and misleading claims about the Affordable Care Act,
which the budget seeks to largely repeal. On the Sunday talk shows,
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the head of the Democratic National
Committee, and Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin, each
distorted the facts regarding revenues raised in the health care law.
And Ryan wrongly said the law would take money away from Medicare and
ration benefits for seniors.
Johnson said there’s “$1 trillion in middle-income tax increases …
in Obamacare.” But the new revenue generated by the Affordable Care Act
falls mostly on high-income taxpayers, employers who fail to provide
health care to their employees, and health care companies, such as drug
manufacturers, medical device manufacturers and insurance providers.
Wasserman Schultz said “there are not $1 trillion in taxes in
Obamacare,” calling Johnson’s claim “completely untrue.” That’s wrong.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says repealing the law will
“reduce revenues by $1 trillion between 2013 and 2022,” meaning it will
cost taxpayers that much if the law remains on the books.
Ryan said the law’s reductions in the growth of Medicare spending
amounted to “money that was taken from Medicare.” But the Treasury has
to give Medicare the money credited to its trust fund — the money can’t
be taken away.
Ryan also repeated a popular talking point when he said that a
15-member “rationing” board would “determine what kind of benefits
people get.” But the board, tasked with recommending ways to slow the
growth of Medicare spending, can’t restrict benefits, according to the
Affordable Care Act.
(from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nero_d%27Avola)
Nero d'Avola (Italian pronunciation: [ˈnero ˈdavola]; "Black of Avola" in Italian) is "the most important red wine grape in Sicily and is one of Italy's most important indigenous varieties. It is named after Avola in the far south of Sicily and its wines are compared to New World Shirazes, with sweet tannins and plum or peppery flavours. It also contributes to Marsala blends.
(from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebbiolo)
Ampelographers believe that Nebbiolo is indigenous to the Piedmont region though some DNA evidence suggest that it may have originated in Lombardy. In the 1st century AD, Pliny the Elder noted the exceptional quality of the wine produced in Pollenzo region located northwest of what is now the Barolo DOCG zone. While Pliny does not explicitly name the grape responsible for these Pollenzo wines, his description of the wine bears similarities to later descriptions of Nebbiolo-based wines, making this potentially the first notation of wine made from Nebbiolo in the Piedmont region. The first explicit mention of Nebbiolo dates to 1268 where a wine known as "nibiol" was growing in Rivoli near Turin. This was followed by a 1303 account of a producer in the Roero district described as having a barrel of "nebiolo" (sic). In the 1304 treatise Liber Ruralium Commodorum, the Italian jurist Pietro Crescenzi described wine made from "nubiola" (sic) as being of excellent quality. In the 15th century, statutes in the region of La Morra (in what is now the Barolo zone) demonstrated the high esteem that the Nebbiolo vine had in the area. According to these laws, the penalties for cutting down a Nebbiolo vine ranged from a heavy fine to having the right hand cut off or hanging for repeat offenders.
(from 'In God's Name' by David Yallop)
". . . Albino Luciani then gave an extraordinary demonstration of his own abhorrence of a wealthy, materialistic Church. He exhorted and authorised all of his parish priests and rectors of sanctuaries to sell their gold, necklaces, and precious objects. The proceeds were to go to the Don Orione centre for handicapped people. He advised his readers that he intended to sell the bejewelled (sic) cross and gold chain which had belonged to Pius XII and which Pope John had given to Luciani when he had made him a bishop.
'It is very little in terms of the money it will produce but it is perhaps something if it helps people to understand that the true treasures of the Church are, as St Lorenzo said, the poor, the weak who must be helped not with occasional charity but in such a way that they can be raised a little at a time to that standard of life and that level of culture to which they have a right. . .'"
Ronald Reagan became the governor of California at 61, and later also became US President.
Sam Snead won the Par 3 Tournament in 1974 when he was 61.
Gandhi was 61 when he and his followers marched 240 miles in 24 days to make their own salt from the sea in defiance of British colonial laws and taxes.
Benjamin Franklin at age 70 played an instrumental role in drafting and signing the Declaration of Independence and at age 81 signed the Constitution of the United States of America.
Frank McCourt, the author who wrote the bestseller "Angela's Ashes" first began to write in his sixties.
Winston Churchill, with his fondness for cigars and Scotch, was active and productive until his death at age ninety.
(from The Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan)
'This miry Slough is such a place as cannot be mended; it is the descent whither the scum and filth that attends conviction for sin doth continually run, and therefore is it called the Slough of Despond: for still as the sinner is awakened about his lost condition, there ariseth in his soul many fears, and doubts, and discouraging apprehensions, which all of them get together, and settle in this place; and this is the reason of the badness of this ground.'
Slough of Despond
by John P. Graboski
Performed by Oho June 1, 2013
at Jango's Block Party in Brooklyn
I have a day-to-day calendar called "S is for Stupid" by Leland Gregory which displays one factual and truly stupid fact for each day of the year. Very amusing. Sometimes controversial. ALWAYS stupid.
While driving home from an Oho rehearsal the other night, I spotted something that could very well qualify for the cover of the day-to-day calendar "S is for Stupid". At least it appeared stupid to me in its imprecision as well as its chauvinism. I really don't know what the man was trying to tell me. I also do not believe he is a member of the Green or the Justice political parties.
I don't recall the exact punctuation, but the message, appearing on the spare-tire cover mounted at the rear of an SUV stated:
"Women, Guns, Freedom - America"
I believe I will be writing to Leland Gregory very soon.
(taken from http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/snopescom/ by Viveca Novak on Friday, April 10, 2009)
A widely circulated e-mail contains a number of false claims about the urban legend-busting Snopes.com and its proprietors, Barbara and David Mikkelson, who started the site in 1995 and still run it. They’re accused of hiding their identities, doing shoddy research, producing articles with a liberal bent and discrediting an anti-Obama State Farm agent out of partisanship.
One issue prompting the tirade was a sign Gregg posted last summer outside his office in Mandeville, La. It said, "A taxpayer voting for Barack Obama is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders." Snopes.com wrote it up in an article headlined "Chicken Hawked." The e-mail writer says that "they claimed the corporate office of State Farm pressured Gregg into taking down the sign, when in fact nothing of the sort ‘ever’ took place." But that’s exactly what did happen, according a company representative.
In her article, Barbara Mikkelson didn’t actually use the word "pressured" as the e-mail claims. What she said was: "A State Farm representative said that Bud Gregg’s office sign bore these messages until 3 July 2008 and that the company had requested the sign be removed as soon as they became aware of it because the sign was inconsistent with State Farm’s policy of not endorsing candidates or taking sides in political campaigns."
And State Farm spokeswoman Molly Quirk-Kirby confirmed in a letter to us the same thing she had told Snopes.com earlier: "Management requested the sign be removed as soon as its presence became known. It was taken down on July 3, 2008. Mr. Gregg’s sign was not endorsed by, nor consistent with State Farm’s corporate practices. The company does not endorse candidates, nor take sides in political campaigns." The e-mail’s author says the Mikkelsons didn’t call Gregg, and David says that’s true. He says he sent the insurance agent an e-mail, but did not receive a response.
The e-mail goes on: "Then it has been learned the Mikkelson’s are very Democratic (party) and extremely liberal," adding: "There has been much criticism lately over the internet with people pointing out the Mikkelson’s liberalism revealing itself in their website findings." The author cites no evidence and no sources for either of these propositions.
We asked David. He told us that Barbara is a Canadian citizen, and as such isn’t allowed to vote here or contribute money to U.S. candidates. As for him, "My sole involvement in politics is on Election Day to go out and vote. I’ve never joined a party, worked for a campaign or donated money to a candidate. . . You’d be hard-pressed to find two more apolitical people," David Mikkelson said. . ."
The e-mail also accuses the Mikkelsons of "hiding" their identities. "Only recently did Wikipedia get to the bottom of it," the message claims. That’s nonsense. It may well be that the author of this e-mail was ignorant of the Mikkelsons until recently, but it’s never been a secret who is behind Snopes.com. We even dug up a reference to David Mikkelson from 1995, a year when the Internet was in its infancy. A collection of short items under the headline "A Special Report: The Virtual Valley" in the Los Angeles Times included a photo of him.
The e-mail’s last paragraph advises that everyone who goes to Snopes.com for "the bottom line facts" should "proceed with caution." We think that’s terrific advice, not just in connection with material on Snopes but for practically anything a reader finds online — including articles on FactCheck.org. The very reason we list our sources (as does Snopes.com) and provide links is so that readers can check things out for themselves. . .
The mistakes (in the email) could have been avoided if the authors had contacted the couple. "None of them did," Mikkelson said.
