The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.
Showing posts with label ODS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ODS. Show all posts

Monday, March 10, 2014

Obama Derangement Syndrome As Political Fodder And A Danger To The Nation

Image: Mark Martizne Show

I often refer to Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS). You know the phenomenon, either from observation, as a victim, or as one who contracted the angst filled (psychological) state around November 5th, 2008. 

If you are of the latter grouping, your mental state took a pathological turn for the worse on January 20th, 2009: Inauguration Day. And, the angst has metastasized to your very core. You are not one of the victims as GOP and conservative policy/practice have not led to deprivation via... 
  • denied unemployment benefits 
  • denied opportunity for healthcare
  • denied jobs 
  • suffered reduced SNAP benefits
  • loss a job resultant from anti-public service policy 
  • denied benefits as a veteran or active duty non-commissioned military family
You may be one who anxiously awaits daily broadcast of Fox News Obama hatred and may have devolved, as has so many on the right, to a state of Vladimir Putin worship. You may even find the Conservative Political Action Committee, CPAC, annual event an exercise in healthy politics as opposed to a far right-wing oozfest. An "oozfest" that ended this past week with a keynote speaker who so obviously has limited intellect. So much for the disjointed communication and 'quippishnes' of Sarah Palin.

There are some who speak out against ODS. We recently ran across a couple of anti-ODS people. One was broadcast on CNN and the other may have surprised Fox New producers as he spoke with Chris Wallace earlier today. 

From the March 7 edition of CNN's Crossfire: Paul Regala (stand-in) co-host.
Read more after the break below


Friday, November 29, 2013

Thanksgiving Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS) And False Prophecy!

As an object of Hatred and political expedience!
Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS) and the hated holiday menu!

It must be truly horrid yet lucrative to wake-up each day with the very first thought, "How can we attack Obama today." Horrid for those who are so obsessed with the nation's 44th President they literally hate (while sleeping, awake and even while eating).  Lucrative for people who earn copious amounts reporting on any piece of Obama news they can convert to ODS feed.

Multiple media apparently grabbed the White House "open report" feed and found enough ODS feed to publish tweets, articles and other forms of Derangement. We find it surprising The Hill also took part in the ODS frenzy.

FreakOut Nation
The Wonkette reports, “Or as the Daily Mail headline put it, “NINE different types of pie.” This is of course the worst sort of hypocrisy, since 1) No other president has eaten well while some Americans were unemployed and 2) Michelle promotes healthy eating, but for a holiday dinner they didn’t eat only kale and rice cakes.” 
It’s all true. The White House had the audacity to serve pie. 
The Hill reports, “The selection offers three more pies than last year.” 
A comment on Twitchy reads, “Has the Obama family ever had a meal that WASN’T paid for by somebody else?” (his emphasis & SIC) 
Mental Floss reports, “President Obama may have his own executive chef now, but when his family and personal guests eat what’s coming out of the kitchen, he’ll have to foot the bill himself.”

Mental Floss reports, “President Obama may have his own executive chef now, but when his family and personal guests eat what’s coming out of the kitchen, he’ll have to foot the bill himself.”

Jimmie Musu Garcia @AgnesphAgnes@stevenportnoy Let them eat crow!What a couple of Radicals.Screwing Americans w Fraud & Corruption about "O"Care & Robbing Private Ins plans
@stevenportnoy With Michelle chomping on the giblets & Barrack munching on the parsons nose!It must sound like a lip smacking,sucking orgy
Nine Pies!  Wow!  Nine Pies! "Lip Smacking & Sucking orgy!"


The False Prophet claims to have heard from God!
There is no greater danger than people who claim to have heard directly from God. First, the speaker, or should I say charlatan, plows a mendacious path based in beliefs systems not shared by all. The charlatan plays to the deep beliefs of his or her audience and they know they are lying as surely as any lie alleged to have been spoken by a Disciples of Jesus (for those who believe). 

In the following story (including video) firebrand Rafael Cruz (Ted Cruz's Father) spews the latest in the unending demagoguery and rhetoric. Cruz's rhetoric reminds of typical mega ministers, he also reminds us he has never found a microphone he would not cover with saliva from his hyperbolic oratory.

Be aware of the false prophet!

How many of you bought into this guys bull? Or, how many of you are being into his reinvigorated bull? Note audience reaction at the 3:45 minutes mark.

Rafael Cruz: God told me to wake up the pastors so they will warn the people (via Raw Story )
The father of Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R) says that pastors in the United States who refuse to stand up for Christian values are to blame for the country’s misfortunes. “Political correctness is killing us,” Rafael Cruz said at an event in Texas hosted…


Wednesday, November 6, 2013

CBS Starts Process Of Coming Clean On Lara Logan and Dylan Davies Benghazi Report

After waiting just over one week in anticipation of how CBS would handle its role in the most recent foray into Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS), the network has stepped up. We thought sharing a couple of reader comments from Media Matters's would add flavor to CBS' grievous misguided following Fox News down a path of misinformation.
I expected different from CBS. I guess the Foxification of the other networks continues, CNN is already Fox Lite, and right-wing ditwit Jonathan Karl is White House reporter for ABC. 

It certainly won't with me, not that it counts for a lot with the CBS brass. 60 Minutes used to be the crown jewel of television reporting, now they bring on some loser who falsified his story and then give the clown a book deal under a CBS subsidiary. Lara Logan then quips, oopsie! that was an "err" not to report that we are basically paying the guy for the story - a story that has been proven to be a lie.

How the mighty have fallen. Sad.
Doesn't CBS know the "Gather em, Record em, and Broadcast em" path is the exclusive domain of Fox News? Some Media Matters readers are calling Fox led ODS: Foxification.  We think it very apropos. Networks are vying for ratings via 'red meat' stories which resemble the Fox News Model current event/propaganda information model.

Does the addition of Lara Logan to the 60 Minutes Team mean it has (in some way) lowered its journalistic standards? Since, we know on-air personalities have producers and broadcast writers, where are the 60 Minutes team members who seek to verify and re-verify stories. Yes, the Dylan Davies episode reminds of Ruppert Murdoch new operations.

Here is a snippet of the previously referenced Media Matters piece.
The controversy stems from the October 27 edition of CBS' 60 Minutes, in which Davies, who used the alias Morgan Jones, claimed to be an "eyewitness" of the September 2012 attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya. He claimed that during the attack he entered the compound, confronted an attacker, and later went to a Benghazi hospital where he claimed to have seen Ambassador Chris Stevens' body -- a story that, according to The Washington Post, did not match the account in an incident report he gave in which he said he "could not get anywhere near" the compound the night of the attack.
After the revelations from the Post, Media Matters chairman David Brock called on CBS to retract its report. Many veteran journalists and media ethicists criticized 60 Minutes' reporting. Facts also emerged about the connection between CBS and Davies' repeated attempts to "profit off his brush with disaster," according to Foreign Policy magazine: 
Jones has other ways of cashing in as well. This week, his book titled The Embassy House was published by Threshold Editions, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, which is a part of CBS Corporation, which owns 60 Minutes -- a fact not disclosed in the 60 Minutes story. His book is also going to make it on the silver screen. In October, Thunder Road acquired The Embassy House for a feature on the Benghazi attack produced by Basil Iwanyk and executive produced by Taylor Sheridan. 
Despite admitting error in failing to inform viewers on the financial conflict, CBS still "aggressively defended the report's accuracy," including Davies' account of the attacks, according to the Times. What's more, Logan, who interviewed Davies for 60 Minutes, blamed "intense political warfare" for the criticism of her report and claimed that, despite the fact that he admitted he lied in at least one of his accounts of the attacks, Davies "never had two stories. He only had one story." Logan failed to specifically address any of the problems with the report.
Read much more, here.

Comments posed above are "point-on." As a nation we are possibly seeing the impact of high ratings (Fox News evening shows) as a 360 degree symbiotic relation with people who love "red meat." People who respond to surveys that included a question about armed revolution (Sean Hannitys website) despite the fact the question may have embodied a form of sedition. Viewers who apparently welcome O'Reilly's and Hannity's crass shouting at guest and unprofessional name calling. Without a doubt, Fox appeals to "non information" ODS people, who feed off stories that are are either, fabricated, twisted for impact, or misleading. Should we expect long-standing credible media to join the quest for viewers (revenues) to the point of rushing to broadcast at the expense of journalistic commonly accepted standards? If we accept such, recent examples from ABC (1, 2), CBS, NBC and associated affiliates we must also accept the networks are turning their corporate mission\s and focus to revenue driven propaganda. 

Thursday, October 31, 2013

The Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) And Insurance Company Letters


Any rational American has to know Big Insurance was not enamored with the prospect of healthcare reform (Affordable Care Act - ACA).  Despite an appearance of acquiescence in working within the parameters of the ACA, the brilliant capitalist at Big Insurance have found a crack in reform. Low cost and 'lite' coverage post enactment of the ACA are subject to cancellation; they fall shy of mandatory levels of coverage.  Well, that is no problem for Big Insurance. ACA requirements actually force carriers to cancel policies if outside coverage parameters of the ACA; and you know the rest. The insurer cancels the 'lite' policy and offers a higher cost ACA compliant policy. Certainly nothing illegal, but advantageous to the maximum.  Also quite probably a dynamic that should have been anticipated by the administration and addressed as a development consideration. If the problem was beyond the scope of a fix before  implementation, issue communication and suggestion of a fix should have been available to major stakeholders like the Head of HHS and the president. A fix that goes beyond lower income federal government subsidies to offset expense to the insured. There really is no answer for people who wish to incur exorbitant medical expenses on the back side of low cost, high risk policies that only cover medical basics. But, now we are hindsight speculating, right?

All said problems exist in ACA enrollment. Some problems are being exacerbated for political reasons. Others are reacting and responding to the wishes and funding of uber wealthy plutocrats. Many complaints are legitimate complaints with legitimate answers. Answer that are easily addressed with it of research people will not accomplish research. Thus, media fills the void in 3 to 5 minute segments.   

Relying on media is particularly problematic.  Ratings drive media as surely as low prices drives Wal Mart. We reap the benefit of Wal Mart's low prices, but hidden behind those prices are unfair and unbalanced work environments.   Additionally, we are in some cases buying products made in foreign factories thus depriving our selves of jobs and healthy communities. Media for the most part is comparable.

When seeking ratings, the network actually seeks faces to view advertisements reflected via media research companies.  Attracting faces to news is most often accomplished only via news that excites, agitates, muck-rakes  or reveals titillating information.  News related to the ACA is coming to us in some cases without media probing their emotional (supposed) victims. Emotion is an effective way to attract viewers; so is misleading or incomplete broadcast information. Media seeks ratings and ratings come best with "muck."  We all know of one network with a primarily mission of delivering and feeding Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS) to its viewers. CBS and NBC have broadcast "victim" segments that were (we assume) unintentionally misleading. We cannot write similarly about the such broadcast from Fox News.

Last night Chris Hayes, ALL IN, MSNBC ran a segment that embodies the minimum coverage dynamic as well as any I have witnessed. If you take a few minutes to view the segment, you will come away better informed of the, "my insurance cancel me and now I have to pay more" problem. And, yes there are quite a few other ACA issues that need focused intervention and fixes.

The segment was not a short segment. We offer a link to the LA Times piece written by the ALL IN guest. But, as we always often communicate on the TPI: " High information people find a way to take the time and expend the effort, thus nourishing the mind." 

The segment does not address possible recommendations to fix the problem. A fix is not a focus of the media.  However, the segment does a great job of showing how media misinforms and does so in a manner that a basic journalism student would find unacceptable.  A dynamic that causes our concern about intent and motive.

There is no TPI attempt to rationalize problems with the ACA.  A healthcare system that provides service potential for all is common among industrialized nations.  It is important to recognize there are reasons for some glitches, just as there are inexcusable flops (to date) with enrollment tools that involve use of the ACA website.

As a minimum poor project/contractor management was a problem inside HHS and from the White House. We are certain President Obama, in hindsight, feels he should have micromanaged the implementation of the ACA on a more hands-on basis. But, for a President of the United States how realistic is micromanaging of such a huge undertaking.

Misleading the public does little to help solve problems associated with law that will benefit millions.

Thursday, October 10, 2013


I am a huge proponent of the Affordable Care Act (ACA.....AKA Obamacare).  In fact, my thoughts on healthcare reform was universal, one payer, program from the federal government.  Universal Care did not come out of negotiations and congressional deliberations.  It seems things really do happen for the best.

The Obamacare software and server infrastructure for states that refused to setup ACA exchanges are experiencing major problems with enrollment. There is a lesson in the enrollment glitches and it points directly to the federal government, the Obama Administration, and the manner in which the feds go abut conducting certain business.

Huffington Post has just punished a piece about ACA problems as directly attributable to government tendencies to employ contracting firms and sub-contractors companies to accomplish critical 'business of the state (the nation)".

Obamacare Website Glitches Reveal Larger Government Problem

The Huffington Post  |  Posted: 
The website glitches plaguing the high-profile roll out of President Obama’s health care reform law aren’t just an Obamacare problem, they’re a government problem. 
The federal government spends more than $80 billion per year on information technology, but the resulting websites often take years to build and are glitchy once they launch, according to experts cited by the Washington Post. That’s because instead of hiring savvy Silicon Valley programmers -- like those who worked on websites for Obama’s campaigns -- to build the systems, the government tends to contract with firms that are better at securing contracts than they are at developing web sites. 
Last week when the government launched, the site where Americans can buy health coverage through the exchanges set up under Obamacare, few were able to get past error screens and long wait times. While White House officials stated a big reason for the glitches was overwhelming trafficIT experts told Reuters that the problems were more likely the result of a problem in the system’s design.
Read more 

There is really no need to have been under-prepared for the surge in interest in the ACA. The open enrollment date was announced over two years ago. What is it about federal governance regardless of party, that leads to our consistent experience at looking back and say, "We did not know. We will do better. Let's fix this."  

For those who will immediately move to Obama Derangement  Syndrome, history will reveal similar miscalculation and like cases involiving lack of strategic planning.  We may have find the Feds skimped on infrastructure for the ACA to mitigate flak from the Right.  We are a bit put-off the US government has turned so often to troublesome relationship with contractors.

Haven't we learned for the likes of spies like Edward Snowden? Didn't we see enough of contractor arrangement via the US/Halliburton "no-bid" contracts. How many times have we witnessed a federal official standing in front of a microphone with words of "looking back  and not being prepared. 

There is something behind the old axiom, "you get what you pay for." Use of contractors in our society has turned into gold mine for foreign workers and entrepreneurs with a revolving visa status that facilitates work in the US.  Why not spend money where it is critical?  Health care reform is one such area!

Can the nation get back to real employees in the future? These hired guns do not have full commitment and they may not possess technical competency. We appear to be wasting huge sums on employment and staffing critical jobs with contractors.