Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Hey, jerk, you're not Verne -- that would be me!

Filed January 24, 2012

Commenter on WWAY-TV3 news story falsifies identity, signing under name of Verne Strickland, conservative writer who supports GOP conservative Ilario Pantano – not liberal Democrat Mike McIntyre.

VS: It’s not Hallowe’en, but the liberal loonies are already coming out of their lairs and writing under falsified identities using the names of conservative activists. A story posted on the WWAY TV3 Web site reporting on Congressman Mike McIntyre’s campaign fund-raising was followed by this comment from a reader:

Go Mike!

Submitted by Verne Strickland (not verified) on Mon, 01/23/2012 - 2:06pm.

I'm proud to be a McIntyre supporter and to see that people in our area have enough sense to invest in the campaign of a level-headed and moderate representative.

VS: Such falsification of an identity is illegal under the rules of the WWAY-TV public forum – and on most established comment sections on the Internet. Unfortunately, it is easy for dishonest commenters to (anonymously) assume the identity of another person in order to post a misleading comment purported to be the statement of that individual.

In this case, the mischievous commenter chose to use my name under a comment praising liberal Democrat Congressman Mike McIntyre. It wasn’t my statement. I am a conservative blogger and investigative journalist. I support GOP conservative candidate Ilario Pantano.

While this act did me no personal or permanent damage, it does signal that liberal skullduggery is starting early in this 2012 election season. Actually, to be viewed as a threat to the campaign of Mike McIntyre is something I view as a badge of honor. It proves that the views with which I am identified are hitting the liberals where it hurts. I am complimented by that bit of notoriety.

Saturday, January 21, 2012

Conservative congressional candidate Ilario Pantano visits Kinston.

Verne Strickland Blogmaster January 15, 2012

Pantano running for Republican nomination for District 7

January 11, 2012 12:00 AM

David Anderson

Staff Writer

Residents of Lenoir County who are used to having either Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., or Rep. G.K. Butterfield, D-N.C., as their representative in the U.S. House might be seeing a new face in that seat next year, thanks to redistricting maps that put much of the county in a whole other district, District 7.

A Wilmington man who served as a U.S. Marine officer in Iraq is hoping that new face will be his.

“It’s a dramatically different electoral map,” said Ilario Pantano, who is running for the Republican nomination to unseat the current incumbent, Democratic Rep. Mike McIntyre.

McIntyre has represented District 7 since 1997. The district has covered Wilmington and its surrounding counties — up to the outskirts of Fayetteville — during the past decade. Lenoir County was split between District 1, represented by Butterfield, and District 3, represented by Jones.

New maps approved by the state legislature last summer show District 7 spreading to the north, encompassing Johnston County, all of Sampson and Duplin counties and much of Lenoir County.

District 7 now covers nearly all of Lenoir south of U.S. 70, except around La Grange. It also takes up the territory between La Grange and Kinston, and Kinston’s northwestern neighborhoods.

“It’s the new 7th District, where I’m excited to have an opportunity to make a first impression,” Pantano said.

Pantano said he started visiting his new areas and getting involved with local Republican Party chapters as soon as the new map was drawn. He visited Kinston this week for interviews with local media and to speak to voters.

“From Queen Street (in Kinston) to Southport, businesses are shutting down,” he said. “Jobs and the economy are the No.1 concerns on people’s minds everywhere, and I think I offer some insight, having worked in the global markets, as well as a small businessperson.”

Pantano grew up in the Hell’s Kitchen neighborhood of New York City. He joined the Marines after graduating high school, and served during the 1991 Gulf War. He was discharged in 1993 and returned to New York, taking classes at New York University and working with the Wall Street firm of Goldman Sachs, but left in the late 1990s after becoming frustrated with the culture of Wall Street.

He started a media consulting business in New York, and was riding the subway to a business meeting on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001.

The train stopped, and he exited the station to the sight of the World Trade Center burning a mile away.

“It looked like a dandelion,” he said of the shower of paper floating down from the Twin Towers.

He added: “That day I came home, and I made the decision I was going back in the Marines.”

Pantano became a Marine infantry officer; by April of 2004, he was a second lieutenant leading troops in the deadly Sunni Triangle area of Iraq.

On the evening of April 15, Pantano and some of his men had detained two Iraqi men suspected of being insurgents.

He had the men search their car and told two of his Marines to stand guard. As their backs were turned, Pantano claimed the men — who were unarmed — came towards him in a threatening manner.

He shot and killed both of them, unloading two magazines of his M-16 rifle into their bodies.

“The bullets go right through the men into the car, into the trees. Into Iraq,” Pantano wrote in his 2006 memoir, “Warlord”.

Pantano found himself accused of premeditated murder, but in 2005, he was cleared of the charges.

He and his wife and their two children currently reside in Wilmington. He ran for the House in 2010, but lost to McIntyre by a slim margin.

He is currently running for the nomination against former state Sen. David Rouzer of Johnston County.

Pantano said the United States risks being in “second place” behind China by 2020, and the country must make difficult choices in the years ahead to get back on track.

“We need more broccoli, and less candy,” he said. “The easy choices have been made; now we have to do the hard things to get our country back on track.”

David Anderson can be reached at 252-559-1077 or danderson@freedomenc.com.

Sunday, January 8, 2012

DOCTORS GOING BROKE

By Parija Kavilanz @CNNMoney January 6, 2012: 9:39 AM ET

This quiet reality, which is spreading nationwide, is claiming a wide range of casualties, including family physicians, cardiologists and oncologists.
Industry watchers say the trend is worrisome. Half of all doctors in the nation operate a private practice. So if a cash crunch forces the death of an independent practice, it robs a community of a vital health care resource.
"A lot of independent practices are starting to see serious financial issues," said Marc Lion, CEO of Lion & Company CPAs, LLC, which advises independent doctor practices about their finances.
Doctors list shrinking insurance reimbursements, changing regulations, rising business and drug costs among the factors preventing them from keeping their practices afloat. But some experts counter that doctors' lack of business acumen is also to blame.
Loans to make payroll: Dr. William Pentz, 47, a cardiologist with a Philadelphia private practice, and his partners had to tap into their personal assets to make payroll for employees last year. "And we still barely made payroll last paycheck," he said. "Many of us are also skimping on our own pay."
Pentz said recent steep 35% to 40% cuts in Medicare reimbursements for key cardiovascular services, such as stress tests and echocardiograms, have taken a substantial toll on revenue. "Our total revenue was down about 9% last year compared to 2010," he said.

12 entrepreneurs reinventing health care

"These cuts have destabilized private cardiology practices," he said. "A third of our patients are on Medicare. So these Medicare cuts are by far the biggest factor. Private insurers follow Medicare rates. So those reimbursements are going down as well."
Pentz is thinking about an out. "If this continues, I might seriously consider leaving medicine," he said. "I can't keep working this way."
Also on his mind, the impending 27.4% Medicare pay cut for doctors. "If that goes through, it will put us under," he said.
Federal law requires that Medicare reimbursement rates be adjusted annually based on a formula tied to the health of the economy. That law says rates should be cut every year to keep Medicare financially sound.
Although Congress has blocked those cuts from happening 13 times over the past decade, most recently on Dec. 23 with a two-month temporary "patch," this dilemma continues to haunt doctors every year.
Beau Donegan, senior executive with a hospital cancer center in Newport Beach, Calif., is well aware of physicians' financial woes.
"Many are too proud to admit that they are on the verge of bankruptcy," she said. "These physicians see no way out of the downward spiral of reimbursement, escalating costs of treating patients and insurance companies deciding when and how much they will pay them."
Donegan knows an oncologist "with a stellar reputation in the community" who hasn't taken a salary from his private practice in over a year. He owes drug companies $1.6 million, which he wasn't reimbursed for.
Dr. Neil Barth is that oncologist. He has been in the top 10% of oncologists in his region, according to U.S. News Top Doctors' ranking. Still, he is contemplating personal bankruptcy.
That move could shutter his 31-year-old clinical practice and force 6,000 cancer patients to look for a new doctor.
Changes in drug reimbursements have hurt him badly. Until the mid-2000's, drugs sales were big profit generators for oncologists.
In oncology, doctors were allowed to profit from drug sales. So doctors would buy expensive cancer drugs at bulk prices from drugmakers and then sell them at much higher prices to their patients.
"I grew up in that system. I was spending $1.5 million a month on buying treatment drugs," he said. In 2005, Medicare revised the reimbursement guidelines for cancer drugs, which effectively made reimbursements for many expensive cancer drugs fall to less than the actual cost of the drugs.

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Congressional Committee asks Perdue to explain release of embargoed data

By RICK HENDERSON/MANAGING EDITOR

Carolina Journal January 3, 2012

RALEIGH — The U. S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce
has requested that Gov. Bev Perdue provide information spelling out how
she was able in August to release North Carolina employment data that was
supposed to be protected by an embargo.

In a letter sent to Perdue Dec. 21, Committee Chairman Rep. John Kline,
R-Minn., cited a Carolina Journal Online story published Dec. 19 reporting
that Perdue, in a speech, publicly discussed information from the state’s
monthly employment report before its scheduled release.

The letter also stated that emails between the state’s Employment Security
Commission (now the Division of Employment Security) and Perdue’s office
showed information was shared that may not have been authorized by the
cooperative agreement between the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics and
each state that is meant to protect the unauthorized release of protected
employment data.

A CJ Online story published Monday reported BLS had concluded that
Perdue’s August remarks before the Rotary Club of Asheville violated the
cooperative agreement with BLS. At the time, state ESC Labor Market
Information Division director Betty McGrath reported the violation to the
BLS regional office in Atlanta, and BLS Regional Director Janet Rankin
followed up with interviews of ESC officials. Rankin would not say if any
further action was taken.

The committee gave Perdue until Wednesday to produce copies of the
state’s cooperative agreement with BLS; CJ requested that and other
related information last week and was told the request was being
reviewed by DES lawyers.

In addition, Kline’s letter asks the governor to produce a series of
documents and communications, including those:

• “related to the protocols your office and [the N.C. Employment
Security Commission] have put in place to protect against the
unauthorized dissemination” of employment data;

• “relating to the potential unauthorized released of BLS data;”

• between the governor’s office and ESC relating to unemployment
data, and;

• between ESC and the U.S. Department of Labor related to
unemployment data.

Read the letter here (PDF download).

U.S. Rep. Virginia Foxx, a Republican who represents North Carolina’s
5th Congressional District, is a member of the committee.

Attempts to get comment from the committee, Foxx, and Perdue
have not been successful.

Rick Henderson is managing editor of Carolina Journal. Executive
Editor Don Carrington also contributed reporting for this story.

Are you old? Under Obamacare you're not likely to get much older!

Article provided by Andrew Koeppel, convervative Wilmington activist, January 3, 2012 -- and it doesn’t apply to Congress!

I PRAY THAT OBUMMA CARE WILL BE REPEALED AND WE WILL HAVE A NEW PRESIDENT!!!!! WHEN YOU READ THIS IT WILL MAKE YOU MAD!!

LOOK AT WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO US!!! EVERYONE IN CONGRESS WHO VOTED FOR THIS BILL SHOULD BE KICKED OUT IN THE STREET - OR WORSE!!

THIS ARTICLE NEEDS TO BE READ BY ANYONE WHO HAS TO RESIDE IN THE USA FROM NOW ON. IT IS REALLY UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!

This is the law that was passed. God have mercy on us

YOU ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS...

At age 76 when you most need it, you are not eligible for cancer treatment
What Nancy Pelosi didn't want us to know until after the healthcare bill was passed. Remember she said, "pass it and then read it!!." Here it is!
______________________________
Obama Care Highlighted by Page Number

THE CARE BILL HB 3200

JUDGE KITHIL IS THE 2ND OFFICIAL WHO HAS OUTLINED THESE PARTS OF THE CARE BILL.

Judge Kithil of Marble Falls, TX - highlighted the most egregious pages of HB3200

Please read this........ Especially the reference to pages 58 & 59 !!!!!!

JUDGE KITHIL wrote:

** Page 50/section 152: The bill will provide insurance to all non-U.S. Residents, even if they are here illegally.

** Page 58 and 59: The government will have real-time access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts.

** Page 65/section 164: The plan will be subsidized (by the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - ACORN).
** Page 203/line 14-15: The tax imposed under this section will not be treated as a tax. (How could anybody in their right mind come up with that?)

** Page 241 and 253: Doctors will all be paid the same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees.

** Page 272. Section 1145: Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age.

** Page 317 and 321: The government will impose a prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an exception.

** Page 425, line 4-12: The government mandates advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years. (Death counseling..)

** Page 429, line 13-25: The government will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order.
HAD ENOUGH???? Judge Kithil then goes on to identify:

"Finally, it is specifically stated that this bill will not apply to members of Congress. Members of Congress are already exempt from the Social Security system, and have a well-funded private plan that covers their retirement needs. If they were on our Social Security plan, I believe they would find a very quick 'fix' to make the plan financially sound for their future."

- Honorable David Kithil of Marble Falls, Texas
All of the above should give you the ammo you need to support your opposition to Obamacare. Please send this information on to all of your email contacts.

Sunday, January 1, 2012

Star-News finally publishes story exonerating Ilario Pantano of bogus murder charge in Iraq. Better late than never?

Verne Strickland Blogmaster / January 1, 2012

The re-release of Ilario Pantano's book includes a proclamation of his innocence by Dr. William Rodriguez III, the recently retired former chief deputy medical examiner for special investigations at the Office of the Armed Forces Medical Examiner in Washington, D.C. Associated Press file photo

By Patrick Gannon
Patrick.Gannon@StarNewsOnline.com

Published: Sunday, January 1, 2012 at 4:43 p.m.

Last Modified: Sunday, January 1, 2012 at 4:43 p.m.

Ilario Pantano's well-documented shooting of two Iraqis in 2004 became ammunition for political foes during his recent election bids and put questions in the minds of voters.

But now, as the Republican Wilmington resident again seeks a seat in Congress in 2012, Pantano says the recent words of the military medical examiner who inspected the remains of the two men after they were exhumed in 2005 should put those questions to rest.

"In my mind, it really closes the book," Pantano said.

Pantano recently re-released his book detailing the killings and the Article 32 hearing – the military equivalent to a grand jury proceeding – that followed.

"Warlord: Broken by War, Saved by Grace" also includes an April 2011 letter to Pantano from Dr. William Rodriguez III, the recently retired former chief deputy medical examiner for special investigations at the Office of the Armed Forces Medical Examiner in Washington, D.C.

In the letter, Rodriguez expresses frustration that premeditated murder charges would be brought against Pantano without first examining the remains of the dead Iraqis. Without that evidence, Rodriguez writes, Pantano's prosecution hinged on the testimony of one member of the platoon that Pantano led.

Rodriguez also expressed concern that the military rushed to prosecute Pantano, then 33, as the shootings closely followed the incident at Abu Ghraib prison, a black eye for the military.

When the bodies were exhumed about a year after the shootings, with Pantano's case still open, Rodriguez conducted the examination.

What he saw, he said in a phone interview with the StarNews, made it "very clear" that the men were not shot from behind, as some had suggested.

"I said to all assembled, ‘Here is solid scientific evidence that these two Iraqis were shot from the front and not in their backs,'" he wrote in the letter. "Lt. Pantano is innocent."

Rodriguez said the positions of bone fragments fractured by bullets were a clear indication that the shots came from the front. Also, he said, copper oxidation stains on the front side of the skeletons also suggested the bullets entered from the front. Bullets, Rodriguez said, are encased in copper jackets that peel away and break up in the body. Over time, the copper oxidizes and leaves stains, he said.

Rodriguez said he read Pantano's book and has spoken with him since he sent the letter. He said Pantano's life might be much different if the bodies had been examined before the military brought charges against him.

"I feel that he is a true patriot, a caring individual and a good man," Rodriguez said.

But whether the new developments in the years-old case will improve his election chances in 2012 remain to be seen. Pantano is expected to face state Sen. David Rouzer of Johnston County in the 2012 GOP primary for the 7th Congressional District seat. The winner likely would challenge U.S. Rep. Mike McIntyre, D-Lumberton, in November. Pantano lost an election bid against McIntyre in 2010.

Articles about Rodriguez's letter have been published recently in The Washington Times and other publications outside of North Carolina.

UPDATE FROM VERNE STRICKLAND JAN. 1, 2012

Articles about Rodriguez's letter have been published recently in The Washington Times and other print media outside of North Carolina. Why not in the Star-News? Patrick Gannon knew about the forensics report exonerating Pantano. But Gannon put the Times article on ice. Later, a scorching letter to the editor complained that the Star-News was sitting on a story showing Pantano was innocent by scientific evidence. That letter to the editor was also held back. Today (Jan. 1, 2012) Pat Gannon and the Star-News let the truth out. Was this letter to the editor buried to spare the Star-News from embarrassment? And did it force the paper to finally do its duty? USA DOT COM will publish the Letter to the Editor about this media ethics issue.

What he saw, he said in a phone interview with the StarNews, made it "very clear" that the men were not shot from behind, as some had suggested.

"I said to all assembled, ‘Here is solid scientific evidence that these two Iraqis were shot from the front and not in their backs,'" he wrote in the letter. "Lt. Pantano is innocent."

"I feel that he is a true patriot, a caring individual and a good man," Rodriguez said.

Articles about Rodriguez's letter have been published recently in The Washington Times and other publications outside of North Carolina.

"Clearly, the Pantano campaign thought this was an issue in the 2010 campaign, and this could be an attempt to put it behind him before the campaign kicks into high gear," said Jonathan Kappler, research director for the N.C. FreeEnterprise Foundation and a close follower of N.C. politics.

Rouzer, Pantano's opponent in the May primary, declined to comment on the Iraq incident or the recent development.

"My campaign is going to focus on the issues and what we need to do to move the country forward and my conservative record in the state legislature," he said.

For his part, Pantano said he believes he was exonerated six years ago, when the Marine Corps decided not to pursue murder charges against him. But, he wrote in his book, the Rodriguez letter "clears the air around any mystery that lingers among conspiracy theorists."

He said it shows that he's not a "cold-blooded murderer" and that he didn't execute the two men.

The letter, Pantano said, also shows that there was an urgency to prosecute him, not find the truth.

"Not only was I not protected by the military, I was made an example of," he continues. "I have known this all along, but until I received this letter, there was no proof."

In 2005, a Marine Corps official decided to dismiss the murder charges after a hearing in Jacksonville, in part because of the autopsy evidence.

On April 15, 2004, Pantano led his platoon to search a house. There, two Iraqi men were stopped as they left the area in a white sedan. After ordering the men to search their own car, Pantano shot and killed them, firing as many as 50 shots. The Iraqis had made a threatening move, he said, and the rules of engagement dictated that he had a right to defend himself.

Pantano admitted placing a sign on the car with the slogan, "No Better Friend No Worse Enemy." A Marine Corps official deemed that ill-advised.

Pantano said he didn't believe the letter would have a strong impact his 2012 election bid.

"I think my election chances are very good without this information," he said.

He added that he believed the "whisper campaigns" would continue about Iraq.

"For years, I have been living with and struggling with the fact that you can't put my name into Google without charges of murder coming up," Pantano said.

Speaking of the Internet age, he added, "An allegation today, even if it's a false allegation, never goes away."

Patrick Gannon: (919) 854-6115

On Twitter: @StarNewsPat