Welcome to those linking over from the recap I put up at PJ Tatler (“Tom, Karl, and Paulson’s (Figurative) ‘Gun to the Head’: The Last Word”).

_________________

Previous items:

• October 14 (BizzyBlog mirror; BizzyBlog tease) — “October 14, 2008: The Day the Economy as We Knew It Died”
• October 14, at Market-Ticker — “Bald LIES From The Right (This Is IMPORTANT)”
• October 17 (BizzyBlog mirror) — “Dour Denninger Dumps on Yours Truly — and Pajamas Media”
• October 18, at Market-Ticker — “Pajamas Media: Entitled To Its Opinion, Not Its Own Facts”

_______________

It seems that objections coming from “Karl” (I’ll stick to using his first name since that’s all he’ll use of mine; maybe he thinks we’re best buds or something; if so, guy, please don’t make it “Facebook Official,” okay?) over at Market-Ticker.org now boil down to these:

1. A picture he shows of two supposedly happy bankers leaving Henry Paulson’s extortion chamber.
2. A really weird and false contention on his part that Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds haven’t, as I stated, been largely repaid.
3. The use of two quotation marks (really).
4. My somewhat different yet not understood (by him) take on the meaning of the events of October 14, 2008, the years of government, financial, and bipartisan political malfeasance which led to them, and factors influencing why the economy isn’t growing acceptably.

Item 4 remains extraneous. Karl has his opinions; I have mine. I think I understand his. He doesn’t really seem to care about mine (except when he erroneously thinks they’re statements of fact which he can then characterize as “utter falsehood”), which at this point is just as well.

The supposedly probative picture of only two of the bankers who participated in the now-infamous October 14, 2008 meeting with Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson doesn’t prove anything, in at least three senses:

• Those who have successfully been shaken down by someone far more powerful than them can’t exactly afford to look like they’re unhappy, even if they really are.
• The original column I wrote in full context was based largely on a CNBC report which made it crystal clear that some (that’s s-o-m-e, Karl, not “all”) bank CEOs objected to being forced to take Godfather Paulson’s offer they, as the New York Times reported, “could not refuse.”
• The Times specifically identified Wells Fargo and Bank of America as registering strong objections. One can argue over whether these two banks’ CEOs were being delusional in believing they didn’t need help, but that doesn’t change the reported fact that they claimed they didn’t need it.

Even if you somehow know beyond doubt that their appearances were sincere (and I don’t see how you can, Karl), the assertion that two bankers’ happiness in front of the cameras proves that all of them were privately happy with what went down is an epic fail in fundamental logic.

As to whether TARP funds have, as I asserted, been largely repaid, they have. The program’s three-year anniversary report tells us that out of $413 billion spent, $124 billion, or 30%, remains outstanding. The other programs and problems Karl cited are clearly matters of extremely deep concern, but they aren’t part of TARP.

The third objection from crack grammarian Karl is the most risible. It concerns the following paragraph from the original column:

The “gun to the head” was obvious: “You really have a nice bank there. But if you walk out without signing this document, right here, right now, we will bring all of the regulatory and law-enforcement powers of the United States government to bear on your institution. Your depositors and shareholders will suffer immensely. Your bank won’t survive. It would really be a shame if that were to happen. But we promise you, it will.”

Note that Karl, in his re-rebuttal excerpt, left out the first seven words. I believe that’s not an accident, as their inclusion blows his breathtakingly ignorant contention out of the water.

You see, Karl, the first seven words of that paragraph — unless you believe that Hank Paulson was holding an actual gun against the CEOs’ heads, which would in turn depend on CNBC’s Charles Gasparino also believing it — made it clear to anyone with an IQ above room temperature that what followed was a succinct if somewhat dramatic interpretation of what I believe, based on the CNBC and Times reports, was the atmosphere in that room. For you to believe that I have misled those who have read the piece into actually believing that Hank Paulson used the exact words between the offensive but probably not grammatically incorrect in context quotation marks, you would also have to believe — this explains why you “cleverly” left the first seven words out of your excerpt — that Hank Paulson had an actual gun in his hand and serially put it up against each CEO’s head as he moved around the room, forcing them to sign their respective one-page “agreements.”

Karl, I think it’s pretty damned obvious who, to use your terminology, is being “dumber than a box of rocks.” As to the use of the quote marks, I’ll turn myself and my PJM editor over to the tender mercies of my grade school English teacher Sister Jude or a nun of PJM’s choosing for a ruling, followed if necessary by a few ruler slaps on our respective wrists. Zheesh.

Thus, as demonstrated on Monday, the original column contains no “utter falsehoods.”

The demand for an unconditional apology to me and Pajamas Media stands. To repeat, Karl, it must go like this: “I was wrong. I am sorry. I will appropriately retract.”

Personally, I don’t give a flying flip whether Karl Denninger renders the required apology. He’s the one hanging out there looking so obviously foolish describing me, in effect all the contributors at Pajamas Media, and the web site’s management, “as the liars they are.” He’s the one with the problem.

(Moved to the top in a salute to the man’s life and accomplishments.)

_____________________________________________

A “1%-er” who made such a difference and won well-deserved and almost universal admiration and respect both in and out of business is no longer with us — and the city he loved so dearly, while celebrating his life and accomplishments, is already feeling the loss (comments are open on this Positivity post):

11:27 PM, Oct. 17, 2011

Carl Henry Lindner: 1919-2011

From humble beginnings running his father’s dairy store in Norwood, Carl Henry Lindner Jr. grew into a billionaire, a friend of U.S. presidents and Greater Cincinnati’s most successful entrepreneur.

For nearly a century until he died late Monday at age 92 , the former Reds owner never shed the fierce competitiveness and loyalty that made him a hometown icon.

His influence ran to every corner of Greater Cincinnati. The high-school dropout bought and sold Kings Island, the Reds, Provident Bank and the Enquirer. His name is on buildings from the University of Cincinnati’s business school to the tennis center at Lunken Playfield.

But it was the banking and insurance business that made him a billionaire. At his death, his American Financial Group Inc. controlled assets of nearly $32 billion and he was routinely listed as one of the richest men in America.

Ever the optimist, Lindner often carried an inch-thick stack of cards with motivational sayings – one was “Only in America! Gee, am I lucky!” – that he handed out to anyone he would meet.

He was a teetotaler, physically unimposing yet with a prominent shock of white hair and a penchant for wearing flashy neckties.

Even to his closest friends and colleagues, he was soft-spoken and rarely confrontational. Yet some business partners complained about unfair treatment and he flashed a harsh temper when confronting reporters who wrote what he perceived as unfriendly stories or criticism of his business dealings.

A devout Baptist and a longtime member of Kenwood Baptist Church, Lindner used his wealth and influence behind the scenes to become Greater Cincinnati’s largest benefactor and economic development force. At the height of his personal giving he contributed millions of dollars a year to charitable causes, and brought thousands of high-paying jobs to downtown Cincinnati. …

Go here for the rest of the story.

Related Links at the Cincinnati Enquirer:

• Timeline: Carl Lindner
• All he wanted was to make Cincinnati proud
• Business career spanned industries
• For decades, Lindner a political heavyweight
• Charitable gifts knew no limit (“In fields as disparate as education, professional sports, health, libraries, cultural arts, museums and basic city infrastructure, nearly every facet of life in Greater Cincinnati has been touched by the benevolence of Lindner and his family”)

UPDATE, 2:45 P.M.: “Lindner ‘a One-Man Chamber of Commerce‘” —

Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory issued a statement early Tuesday.

“Carl Lindner has left a tremendous mark on our region,” Mallory said. “He understood the impact that his money could have on people and causes in our community, and he took his ability to make positive change seriously. But he also did a lot of things that he never even took credit for. His legacy will be felt for a long time. My thoughts and prayers are with his friends and family. Cincinnati mourns a truly great Cincinnatian.”

Ellen van der Horst, president of the Cincinnati USA Regional Chamber, said Lindner “personifies everything that we stand for as a community.”

“He was a real life size hero,” van der Horst said the morning at the chamber’s annual economic forecast breakfast. She said the Chamber annually gives a Carl H Lindner award for Entrepreneurial and Civic Spirit, one if many awards in his honor.

“Cincinnati is a better place Because of Carl,” she said. “He is unequaled and he will be missed.”

Jeff Wyler, owner of the local automotive chain, said he met Lindner nearly 50 years ago.

“He was a legend in Norwood then,” Wyler said. “I have never met anyone who was more gracious and gave so much back to his community. What a great human being.”

“No one else in the community has had nearly the impact Carl has had,” said Tom Williams, chairman of the CEO group the Cincinnati Business Committee and president of North American Properties.

“He brought big companies to town,” Williams said. “It just demonstrated his love and devotion to Cincinnati.”

The bet here is that many if not most of the so-called “Occupy Cincinnati” folks — at least those native to this area — benefitted greatly from 1%-er Carl Lindner. Perhaps someday they’ll come to appreciate it.

At Newsmax:

Cain Soars to 8-Point Lead in Iowa

Herman Cain has surged into an eight-point lead over his nearest Republican rival in first-in-the-nation Iowa, an exclusive Newsmax/InsiderAdvantage poll released on Monday shows.

The former pizza magnate is supported by 26 percent of voters who say they will vote for him in the Hawkeye State GOP caucus, compared to 18 percent who opt for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

The surprising numbers come just two months after the popular Ames Iowa Straw Poll where Cain ranked fifth among the top-tier candidates, taking 1,456 votes to winner Michele Bachmann’s 4,823 votes.

Cain also is running second behind Romney in New Hampshire, according to a separate Newsmax poll in that state.

Combined, the two polls confirm that with the clock ticking on the primary season, Cain is now the clear favorite among conservatives who are determined to defeat Romney for the nomination.

… The polls in Iowa and New Hampshire and two other InsiderAdvantage polls in the other early voting states of South Carolina and Florida were all taken on Sunday evening.

All four show that Cain is the only candidate currently challenging the more moderate Romney.

… Cain’s eight-point lead in Iowa mirrors a similar figure revealed in a survey by the Democratic group Public Policy Polling taken last week. The Newsmax poll puts former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in third with 12 percent, followed by Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann with 11, Texas Rep. Ron Paul with 10 and Texas Gov. Rick Perry with 6.

Meanwhile, Mitt Romney, who supposedly was conceding Iowa, is, as reported five days ago, “working Iowa quietly for (a) caucus surprise” — and he can’t even break 20%.

If he keeps on “Leaving the Campaign Trail” like this, someone will have to call him back in the summer of 2012 so he can accept the GOP’s nomination — despite his “obvious” lack of effort (/sarc).

Related: Here’s an emailed suggestion for a Herman Cain campaign slogan: “Hop on Cloud 9-9-9; Cain for President.”

Works for me. And supply-side godfather Arthur Laffer. And Stephen Moore (“rocket fuel for the economy”). I do have a problem with whether the sales tax element can be kept under control in future years, but I’d rather deal with that problem than the awful tax system we currently have.

Rules are here. Possible comment fodder will follow later. Other topics are also fair game.

___________________________________

At Investor’s Business Daily (“The President’s Strange Bedfellows”) — “Barack Obama … has now aligned himself with a radical fringe seeking to destabilize the U.S. financial system.”

When you’ve lost Letterman …: A joke on his late-night show (HT Instapundit) — “Obama’s dog Bo has turned three. Do you know the difference between Obama’s dog and the U.S. economy? Obama fixed Bo.”

Utterly clueless at Mashable Entertainment, concerning the Herman Cain Godfather’s Pizza video from 1991 — Zachary Sniderman asks his readers, “Is this a career-crushing mistake or quirky aside?” Oh, and this: “Cain’s probably going to get some backlash for the video even as he leads the GOP race in most polls.” Huh?

At USA Today (“Budget cuts claim hundreds of thousands of county, city jobs”): Not that there aren’t any layoffs occurring, but note that the item cites no Ohio locales.

… and has a sense of humor and great stage presence.

Herman Cain, at the 1991 Omaha Press Club show (hang on for the background singers):

Okay, that was the single (that’s old fogey for “the short version”).

A link to the album version (that means it’s longer — about 7-1/2 minutes) is here, complete with the “Godfather’s Girls,” Cain’s schmaltzy intro, and “All I Am Saying Is Give Pizza a Chance.” You MUST see it.

UPDATE: Here’s a 5-minute version with Cain’s vocals —

The heck with campaigning and political persuasion. Just show people this video, and the rest of the field is, uh, toast. Garlic toast.

This afternoon, Associated Press Religion Writer Rachel Zoll devoted over 1,600 words to “dominionism,” spending much of it attempting to cast Rick Perry as their guy, even though, as she admitted, “Perry has never said anything that would directly link him to dominionism.” Oh, but he’s sorta said some things that might hint at such sympathies, and he’s been on stage with people who are supposedly “dominionists.” Zoll even cited MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow as a supposedly authoritative source.

Don’t even ask if there’s any mention of Barack Obama and Jeremiah “God D**n America” Wright. You know better. Here are several paragraphs from Zoll’s barrel of blather:

(more…)

The financial commentator refers to my PJM article as “bald lies from the right.”

___________________________

Special Note: I am grateful to Pajamas Media for giving me an opportunity to respond so quickly to Karl Denninger’s hit piece at Market-Ticker.org, and for allowing me to post the column here at BizzyBlog without the usual blackout.

___________________________

Even when they sharply criticize yours truly, I have tried in recent years to avoid getting unduly exercised over individual posts at other sites. They have their views, I have mine. It’s a (mostly) free country (for now).

Unfortunately, I must carve out an exception to that stance because the individual objecting to my most recent PJM column (“October 14, 2008: The Day the Economy as We Knew It Died”; BizzyBlog mirror): a) has accused me of “bald lies” while failing to successfully identify one; b) did so without having the integrity or basic decency to name me; c) criticized a column which deliberately focused on a narrow two-week time frame as “a particularly odious and sickening piece of crap” without the faintest understanding of my full take on the government-led, bank-assisted, political corruption-driven financial crisis we face and the several decades of history which led to it (completely irrelevant to this column, which will exclusively address the absence of “utter falsehood”); and d) deliberately made it about more than my work by indicating that “these people (in context: ‘at Pajamas Media’) need to be exposed as the liars they are.”

The critique in question, “Bald LIES From The Right (This Is IMPORTANT),” was published Friday evening at Market-Ticker.org by Karl Denninger, who is also a frequent contributor at the leading and highly regarded financial website Seeking Alpha. Denninger has a hard-earned reputation as a no-holds-barred commentator. Though I disagree with him strongly on occasion (e.g., his extraordinarily uncharitable “nothing of societal value” attack on the accomplishments of Steve Jobs and Apple), I also frequently agree with him. His Saturday afternoon item on GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain’s “999 Plan” is just one such instance. His attack on my column and PJM is obviously not.

I will show that, unless the sources I referenced totally made up their stories out of thin air, no sentence Denninger specifically criticized could possibly be construed to contain, in his words, “utter falsehood.”

The first three of four paragraphs Denninger excerpted followed my quote of part of the text of a CNBC exchange (video here) between Dylan Ratigan and Charles Gasparino. Twice, Gasparino described the October 14, 2008 meeting between Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and the CEOs of the nation’s largest banks, during which the CEOs “agreed” to direct government “investment” (i.e., partial ownership and de facto control) as done with a “gun to the head.” Here’s what I wrote:

The “gun to the head” was obvious: “You really have a nice bank there. But if you walk out without signing this document, right here, right now, we will bring all of the regulatory and law-enforcement powers of the United States government to bear on your institution. Your depositors and shareholders will suffer immensely. Your bank won’t survive. It would really be a shame if that were to happen. But we promise you, it will.”

What I wrote is my interpretation of what happened in that room, based on what CNBC, the New York Times, to a lesser extent the Associated Press (which watered it down to, “Paulson basically told the bank CEOs that they had to accept the government stock purchases for the good of the U.S. economy”), and precious few others reported. The Times even described Godfather Paulson’s “proposal” as “an offer the banks could not refuse.” My interpretation based on what is known sure as hell isn’t “utter falsehood.”

Next, I wrote the following about a provision in the TARP legislation that became law eleven days earlier which permitted the Treasury Secretary to buy “any other financial instrument” in achieving the law’s goals:

Hank Paulson’s defenders will probably claim that provision (B) above gave him authorization to do what he did, and that the preferred shares the banks were forced to issue count as “financial instruments.” The problem with that “logic” is that these weren’t “purchases.” They were extorted ownership interests — and in case you’re wondering, there is no authorization to extort anywhere in the legislation.

Again, if there’s evidence that all the banks willingly jumped up and said okey-dokey without coercion, I’d like to see it. Otherwise, what I wrote is an opinion based on the clearly understood difference between a willing seller-willing buyer transaction and one based on implicit and explicit threats. It sure as hell isn’t “utter falsehood.”

The next paragraph is clearly an expressed opinion. As much as Karl may not like it, I’m entitled to it, and it sure as hell has no “utter falsehood” component:

The economy as we knew it died that day — and virtually no one objected. As Michelle Malkin wrote: “If you don’t feel like throwing up today, you’re not paying attention.”

I wrote that paragraph because in my view (which Michelle at least generally shared) what happened three years ago on October 14 represented a pivotal turning point for the worse in our economic history:

• It was as far as I know the first instance, and certainly the first on such a large scale, where the government deliberately and under threat of force took effective ownership and control of an entire industry sector, not just its failures.
• It directly defied the clearly understood intent (and, I would argue, the hardwired provisions) of the TARP law passed only eleven days earlier.
• It was greeted with near silence by the political class, the press which knew how different Paulson’s actions were from the law’s intent, and the public at large.

The fact that the large majority of TARP funding has been repaid hardly represents an exoneration of what Paulson did. His action — again, I must emphasize, “with President George W. Bush’s shameful capitalism-betraying acquiescence” — gave cover to all manner of subsequent longer-lasting government moves towards tyranny (“arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority”), including but by no means limited to the use of TARP funds to bail out General Motors and Chrysler (which Congress, at least publicly, never originally intended), while arbitrarily and extralegally divvying up the spoils; the government’s outright takeover of student loans; the Dodd-Frank legislation, which, as I wrote in the run-up to its passage, is a massive power grab giving the government nearly unquestioned power to shut down any financial institution any time it likes; and pervasive regulatory overreach like we haven’t seen since the economically depressed 1930s.

The final paragraph with which Denninger takes issue is also the column’s finale:

Even beyond what we can see with regulations gone wild, failed stimulus, and outright corruption, our government’s authoritarian overhang and its destructive psychological effect on business and investor behavior largely explain why the economy won’t acceptably grow.

Denninger wrathfully writes: “If you believe one word of that paragraph you’re dumber than a box of rocks.”

Rock on this, Karl: It sure as hell isn’t an “utter falsehood” — and for heaven’s sake, please note that in my view the government influences cited “largely explain” why the economy won’t grow — not by any stretch exclusively, or even nearly exclusively. Plenty of individuals, businesses, government institutions, politicians, and government officials — including Hank Paulson, both before and during his Treasury tenure — are deserving of properly allocated blame for the conditions which led to our currently stuck in neutral (at best) economy. The column was about how the legislated TARP was not the Paulson-executed TARP, and how the Paulson-executed TARP was a tragic, possibly point-of-no-return authoritarian first.

Thus, the column contains no “utter falsehoods.” I try my damnedest not to write ‘em, and I can attest from experience that the editors at PJM try their damnedest to prevent ‘em from getting published.

Karl Denninger owes us — myself and Pajamas Media — nothing short of an unconditional apology. The proper words are: “I was wrong. I am sorry. I will appropriately retract.” Period. From my standpoint, there’s no chance of any kind of dialog about the rest of the content at your post — which might otherwise be quite worthy of discussion — until I get one.

UPDATE, 4 p.m.: BizzyBlog gets results? The Lowe’s story is currently #10 on the AP’s Business home page (saved here).
____________________________________

It’s a good thing I heard this on the radio at about 11:00 a.m., because I might otherwise have missed it. With yours truly’s opinion along for the ride, I’ll let readers judge whether the news of the Lowe’s home improvement chain announcing that it will close 20 stores and cut its new store opening plans by one-half to two-thirds deserved to be in the top ten business stories at the Associated Press as of 12:52 p.m.

Here are the ten which made the cut in order of appearance on the wire service’s Business home page (saved here for future reference, fair use, and discussion purposes; original link not made because of frequent changes):

(more…)

At Rasmussen:

Whether Herman Cain’s surge in the polls is temporary or has staying power, he’s enjoying a big enough bounce to take a very slight lead over President Obama in a hypothetical 2012 matchup. At the moment, the Georgia businessman is the only Republican with a lead of any kind over Obama, although former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has held a similar advantage several times and is currently trailing the president by just two points.

… The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters shows Cain attracting 43% support, while Obama earns 41%. Given such a matchup, eight percent (8%) prefer some other candidate, and another eight percent (8%) are undecided.

Romney “inevitable“? Not so much.

Related: Cain, from his “Meet the Press and Get Hounded by David Gregory” interview yesterday, is unequivocally pro-life:

Cain said he does not agree with abortion “under any circumstances.” In cases of rape and incest, “there are other options,” he said.

Cain implied that an abortion might be appropriate in an emergency, when the procedure would save the life of the mother. “The family is going to have to make that decision,” he said.

Cain clearly is referring to actually saving the mother’s life (i.e., she will die if she gives birth), and is NOT referring to the “life and health” exception — specifically, “when a woman’s physical or mental health was gravely threatened by continuation of a pregnancy” — which gravely deceived Governor Ronald Reagan and led to de facto abortion on demand in California in the late 1960s.

Rules are here. Possible comment fodder is below. Other topics are also fair game.

___________________________________

From the Mitt Romney “No Conservative Principle Left Unbetrayed” file, in an Investor’s Business Daily editorial: “On Jan. 1, 2006, Massachusetts became the first state to regulate CO2 emissions from power plants, … A Dec. 7, 2005 memo from the governor’s office announcing the new policy listed among the ‘environmental and policy experts’ providing input to the policy one “John Holdren, professor of environmental policy at Harvard University.’ This is the same person who wrote that a ‘massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States.’” More on Romney/Holdren is at Moonbattery (who got the ball rolling) and Hot Air. Original research on the frankly frightening Holdren was done two years ago by Zombie (“John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar, says: Forced abortions and mass sterilization needed to save the planet”). As IBD writes: “Holdren’s bizarre views are best suited for an adviser to someone like, say, Pol Pot.”

Andrew Klavan at PJM on Romney: “While he may win the Republican presidential nomination by default — and while he may indeed win the presidency due to desperation — it is clear from every word he says that he understands neither the peril nor the needs of the present moment. Even his supporters seem to realize that he’s not really what is called for.”

The Associated Press celebrates as “Occupy Wall Street reaches 1-month birthday,” without having the integrity to tell its readers that it was originally christened “Day of Rage.” Doing so would be might inconvenient, especially since “Obama extends support for protesters.” Related: “Obama-Endorsed Group Sings “F*** the USA.”” Also: “‘Hang and Shoot’ Bush Administration.”

In an item at Pajamas Media which is generally about the shaky financial situation at Tesla Motors, there’s this nugget which largely answers the question, “Who put the ‘loan’ in many of the government’s loan-guarantees?”: “The loans actually are paid by the Federal Financing Bank, a bank supervised by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. Geithner has doubled the size of the bank and redirected its loans from government projects like rural electrification to private sector projects like Tesla. Geithner has total control over the size and disbursements of the bank. He has no oversight.”

Meant to get to this a while ago: Now that Lizzie Warren has walked away from the chance to become the nation’s first unaccountable to anyone “consumer czar” under the must-be-repealed Dodd-Frank law to run for Senator in Massachusetts, President Obama wants to install Ohio’s own former attorney general Rich Cordray. Cordray was okay on gun rights (at least in theory), but mostly awful. The “consumer czar” position and the related agency that person would head should not exist. But Buckeye State Senator Rob Portman, an alleged Republican, appears ready to green-light Cordray. Those of us who know Portman’s record fully understand that he won’t fight for anything difficult. After all, he told the Cleveland Plain Dealer in 2008: “‘I probably am a little risk-averse compared to some members [of Congress],’ he concedes, ‘but I think a lot of that is a deliberate decision on my part that some things are worth it for my career and some things aren’t.’”

Ann Althouse: “Herman Cain nailed ‘Meet the Press.’”

At the Wall Street Journal (“Obamacare Starts to Unravel; The real story behind the Class program failure, and what to do now”) — “In a 48-page report that HHS submitted to Congress Friday, the department concedes that it is literally impossible to create any kind of long-term care program under the law’s statutory text in which revenues match expenditures. Such a plan would cost as much as $3,000 per month, which no one would ever buy.” In other words, if it’s not heavily taxpayer-subsidized, it won’t work. Fun fact: “CLASS started out as a bipartisan proposal, co-sponsored (with the late Ted Kennedy) by former Ohio Republican Sen. Mike DeWine.”

From Mark Leach at Life News:

10/13/11 10:33 AM

New research on Down syndrome presents an overwhelmingly positive picture of how Down syndrome can affect individuals and families. These findings need to be shared as they will affect decisions made to accept prenatal testing and following a prenatal diagnosis.

October is National Down Syndrome Awareness Month. Fittingly, the American Journal of Medical Genetics recently published groundbreaking research that challenges conventional wisdom about raising a child with Down syndrome (DS). Responding to these studies, noted bioethicist Art Caplan predicted that, nevertheless, they will not “make a bit of difference to parents deciding to end pregnancies once [DS] is discovered in the fetus.” Actual experience contradicts Caplan’s pessimism.

The new research reports the findings of three surveys in which thousands of parents and hundreds of siblings and individuals with DS themselves, were questioned about what it is like to be affected in one way or another by DS. Ninety-nine percent of parents said they loved their child with DS and 97 percent were proud of them; only 4 percent regretted having their child. While 4 percent of siblings would “trade their sibling” with DS, 96 percent indicated that they had affection toward their sibling with DS, with 94 percent of older siblings expressing feelings of pride. Finally, although 4 percent of individuals with DS expressed sadness about their lives, 99 percent said they were happy with their lives and 97 percent liked who they are.
(more…)

Nicely done:

“If you really care about improving peoples’ lives, then you really care about economic freedom.”