Customer care in health care industry-Manisha Singh

Customer care in health care industry-Manisha Singh: “
Hi All,

Attached is the presentation on Changing dynamics in customer care, it also talks about how customer care is different, yet critical in healthcare Industry.

Hope it help to you all.”

Is the Right Wing Pro-“Life”? Not really. More Like Pro-Control.

Is the Right Wing Pro-“Life”? Not really. More Like Pro-Control.: “I have a new hobby! I like to invade pro-“life” pages and irritate the admins and commentators. Technically, this is trolling. The key difference is that I am not opposing their stance on abortion with random insults and stupidity or opposing their stance on abortion at all. Instead, I reveal their utter hypocrisy and, man, does it piss them off!”

Media talkers’ favorite false equivalencies about extreme rhetoric won’t fly on Maher’s show anymore

Media talkers’ favorite false equivalencies about extreme rhetoric won’t fly on Maher’s show anymore: “

Bill Maher lays into conservatives' false equivalencies on nutty, hateful rhetoric

Click here to view this media

Bill Maher has been on something of a jihad against the growth of false equivalencies in the media narrative, and bless him for that. Friday night on HBO’s Real Time, he laid into Irshad Manji and David Frum for playing that game, with an able assist from Michael Eric Dyson.

It started out when Manji tried to claim that vicious demonization is just part of the political game played nowadays:

MANJI: But that’s politics, dude! That’s politics.

DYSON: Yeah, but that’s not politics. Your side is wrong, my side is right is politics. But when you get into demonizing other people and making them monsters, that’s a different kind of thing. And don’t forget —

MANJI: I agree, and I would have said that to Keith Olbermann, by the way, when he had his, you know, ‘Worst Persons of the Day’ or night or whatever it was. I mean, he was just as bad as —

MAHER: That was a joke.

MANJI: Oooh, it’s just — of course it was.

MAHER: Stop it.

MANJI: Demonizing? Caricatures?

MAHER: OK. first of all, ‘Worst Persons’ — I think we know that that’s a joke. That we don’t really think that it’s the worst person in the world. It’s called hyperbole. Satire.

MANJI: But the point is, it’s like sex — everybody does it. Everybody does it. So why the double standard, and, you know, sort of pointing out that one sides does it, but when the other side does it, that just a joke?

DYSON: I don’t think it’s hyperbole on the side of the folk I would say are the right-wingers who I would say are demonizing people. That’s not hyperbole. They actually believe it. With religious fervor, they believe it.

MANJI: My friend, I know so many people on the left who believe their own BS as well. They completely dehumanize people on the right.

MAHER: No one’s even arguing that. That the Democrats or the progressives or the liberals are perfect — they fall way short. But you are professing something that I think is even more dangerous: false equivalency. Glenn Beck and Keith Olbermann are not the same thing.


Good for Maher. We’ve been saying the same thing at this site for a long time.

Then David Frum tried to theorize that the nastiness has just been getting progressively worse since the 1980s — and bases it on the laughable claim that George W. Bush had it worse than Bill Clinton!

FRUM: I’ll concede to you that it’s true, that the kind of vitriol that President Obama encounters is worse than what President Bush encountered. That’s true. It’s also true that what President Bush encountered is worse than what President Clinton encountered. And what President Clinton encountered is worse than what President George H.W. Bush —

MAHER: Bush got worse than Clinton? He got impeached!

FRUM: In terms of the —

MAHER: No seriously.

Evidently, Maher has wiped from his memory cells the wild cottage industry in conspiracy theories that sprang up around Clinton: the he-and-Hillary-killed-Vince Foster theory, the Mena-drug-running-clan theory, the ‘Clinton Body Count’ that was in everyone’s e-mail, the ‘black love child’ theory, and of course the many and voluminous ‘New World Order’ theories in which military transport movements were circulated out of fear of an impending United Nations takeover of America. And those are just a few. More to the point, many of them were circulated and promoted by mainstream conservatives in the mainstream media. They weren’t merely the work of fringe nutcases.

In contrast, Bush had to put up with relatively little conspiracism during his tenure — the main example being the 9/11 Truthers, who started out as and have largely remained a symbiotic far-left/far-right conspiracy fringe, with the far right (think Alex Jones) playing by far the dominant role in recent years. But these theories largely remained on the fringe — and the overwhelming majority of the people who opposed him did not believe them, either. Those people opposed him because they had real-world, rational issues with Bush: his conduct of the wars, his handling of the economy, his very real abuses of the Constitution.

Contrast that, if you will, with the people who hated Bill Clinton and now hate Barack Obama — because, as Maher points out, they believed them at base to be illegitimate:

FRUM: I don’t mean what is said on television, and the talkers and the ranters. But what I worry about is the normalization of paranoid theories in our politics. And that is worse in every cycle. It’s true it’s worse now than it was then.

MAHER: I fundamentally disagree with that. When Democrats get elected, Clinton and Obama the last two — there was a view on a lot of people on the right that the election is just illegitimate from the get-go. And that whatever we do to remove this person, whether birth certificate bullshit, or finding him with Monica Lewinsky or Whitewater, is justified, because we know what’s right for this country, and therefore any way we can get him out is the right thing. And I do not think that happens on the other side.

The illegitimacy is the key to the puzzle: Because these people are right-wing authoritarians, they are systemically inclined to follow authority, and so literally cannot handle the prospect of a person they see as left wing in such a position. This leads inevitably to a worldview that the left-wing politician in question is a mere interloper, a pretender to authority who must be resisted, not obeyed, and it becomes vital to build a case against their legitimacy. At that point, logic, reason, and factuality become secondary if not entirely disposable altogether — what matters is proving illegitimacy. So building such a case inevitably entails embracing falsehoods and conspiracy theories — and these become untouchable truths, the fundaments of their realities, and no amount of reason can dent them.

It is, in other words, a recipe for mass insanity.

Frum and Manji aren’t the only people in denial about this. There are all kinds of well-meaning conservatives who want to rescue their movement from the insane Tea Partying populists who have taken over the Right since Obama’s election, including David Brooks, who in attacking the Limbaughs and the Becks nonetheless insisted that ‘everybody does it’: ‘The White House understands, you’ve got 10 percent of the country over here on the wacky right, 10 percent on the wacky left, that’s not what they can pay attention to. And they’re not going to pay attention to it.’

As we noted at the time:

Brooks’ percentages are off — it’s more like about 5 percent on the left and 30 percent on the right side, and this latter fact is actually what he identifies as the problem; the right has been so overwhelmed by its wingnutty elements that they have largely taken over the GOP at this juncture in time. And there’s no prospect of the David Brookses ever getting it back — in no small part because they refuse to acknowledge the magnitude of what they’re up against.

Mind you, this is also a major theme of our book, Over the Cliff: How Obama’s Election Drove the American Right Insane:


As observed in the last chapter, describing the descent of conservatism into madness:

It’s particularly ominous for the state of our national discourse. As we have seen through the long and sordid history of right-wing populism in this country—particularly the way it has relied on scapegoating, smears, conspiracy theories, falsehoods, and unhinging rhetoric, all of which inevitably unleash violent, extremist rage—the foundations of democracy suffer at the hands of these movements.

As Democratic representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon observed to PolitiFact in the aftermath of Palin’s “death panels” lie: “It’s a sobering prospect that political discourse is going to resemble hand-to-hand combat for the foreseeable future.”

Blumenauer added that such a prospect bodes ill for involving average citizens in the democratic process: “I think they’re losing their appetite to wade through the vitriol, and I’m in the same boat. We are moving to a point where we drive normal people away, and everybody else gets their news and increasingly opinion prescreened, going for days never hearing an opposing viewpoint. That gives me pause.”

I also tackled the issues of false equivalencies in The Eliminationists: How Hate Talk Radicalized the American Right:

Ironically, Malkin has also been a leader in the contingent of the conservative movement that insists that it is liberals, not conservatives, who have been “unhinged” in their rhetoric and driving the national discourse over a cliff. This retort is standard to any mention of the Right’s proclivity for eliminationist rhetoric. Malkin, in fact, wrote an entire book to support this thesis.

The increasingly nasty tone of liberal rhetoric in recent years, especially on an interpersonal level, is also important to note. Some of the examples Malkin cites are ugly, indeed, as are some of the examples of bile directed toward George W. Bush in recent years.

However, most of the examples Malkin and her fellow conservatives point to involve anger directed at a specific person—most typically, George Bush or Dick Cheney—and often for reasons related to the loss of American and civilian lives in Iraq. Few of them are eliminationist—that is, most do not call for the suppression and eradication of an entire class or bloc of people. Rather, the hatred is focused on a handful of individuals.

In contrast, right-wing rhetoric has been explicitly eliminationist, calling for the infliction of harm on entire blocs of American citizens: liberals, gays and lesbians, Latinos, blacks, Jews, feminists, or whatever target group is the victim du jour of right-wing ire. This vile form of “anti-discourse” has been coming from the most prominent figures of movement conservatism: its most popular pundits and its leading politicians. And the sheer volume and intensity of the rhetoric dwarf whatever ugliness is coming from the liberal side of the debate.

Fox Theme O’ The Week: Torture Worked So Well We Should Keep Doing It!

Fox Theme O’ The Week: Torture Worked So Well We Should Keep Doing It!: “

Fox Theme O' The Week: Torture Worked So Well We Should Keep Doing It!

Click here to view this media

Kirk Lippold is running against Sharron Angle for Heller’s Congressional seat in Nevada. If his remarks on Fox & Friends Sunday are any indication, he’s at least as nuts as she is. He appeared to make a case for why torture should be used, why keeping Guantanamo open is a good thing, and in the process, embodied everything see as evil about the Bush administration.

As the former commander of the USS Cole, I’m certain he has resentment and anger about being attacked by Bin Laden. I understand that. But the answer to resentment and anger is NOT losing our humanity, at least not in my opinion.

HOST: This is your first political race, and you actually helped the Bush administration create the detainee policies that are in place still today. We know that Guantanamo Bay is still open. Do you believe that politics is at play here?

LIPPOLD: Absolutely. When you look at what the president has done and the policies he’s put in place especially with his attorney general, he has not made use of all the tools that are available to him. His quest — misguided quest — to try and shut Guantanamo Bay is the clearest example.

The American people have spent almost three hundred million dollars to put that facility down there as an intelligence collection and analysis center. He wants to close it because of the opinions of others.

The reality of it is you look at the intelligence that started us down the path that eventually led to the capture and killing of Osama Bin Laden. It started at Guantanamo Bay, there were other threads that were built from Guantanamo Bay over the years and to not use that as a resource does put our nation at risk.

Lie #1: Waterboarding was done at Guantanamo.

Truth: As far as I know, the waterboarding was done at black sites by the CIA and other actors in order to maintain plausible deniability, not at Guantanamo, nor did taxpayers understand that Guantanamo was anything other than a detention center to hold detainees who were considered a threat to national security.

Lie #2: Waterboarding yielded information that led to Bin Laden. I swear, we’ve beaten this horse to death, but just look at all the different posts here on C&L about how much it did NOT yield that information. If there is still any doubt left, have a look at the voluminous evidence Marcy Wheeler has compiled on the topic, starting with this post.

Nevertheless, Candidate Lippold wastes no time condemning and bear-hugging torture in the same breath.

HOST: Well, the president was met with reality at Guantanamo Bay. It’s clearly still open, it looks like it’s going to be open for it looks like at least the next couple of years. Give us a sense of how stopping the enhanced interrogation techniques have hurt, have jeopardized our country in the past couple of years.

LIPPOLD: Well, first and foremost, I do not support torture, but I think the president needs to give himself and others the flexibility that should there be a time and a place where enhanced interrogation may be necessary to be used in the war on terror, he needs to be able to provide that authorization. To not do that does endanger us because while in fact enhanced interrogation techniques may have worked to get us those threads they should only be used in the most extreme of circumstances.

But to unilaterally say we will never use them is not a responsible action.

HOST: President Barack Obama has said he is against these enhanced interrogation techniques and yet CIA director Leon Panetta did not deny that waterboarding or these techniques may have been used to help bring Usama Bin Laden to justice. Do you think it’s an important part of what leads to a domino effect, leading from one piece of information to another?

LIPPOLD: It could have very well. I’m not sure of the exact specifics. I frankly believe that the only reason the administration right now is even telling us they used enhanced interrogation techniques is a political calculation going into the 2012 elections because they want to say ‘Look, even though we got vital information as a result of those enhanced interrogation techniques we don’t use them any more. And look at what the great intelligence is that we have.

I think it’s a political calculation that we’re being told about this and has nothing to do with the reality of fighting the war. And we need to preserve every option available to us in order to keep this nation safe.

What bothers me about this segment (even though it’s likely that only about 3 people saw it), is how glibly a candidate for the United States Congress just lies about the facts in order to make a case for something that is evil. It’s not just immoral. It’s evil. That is all. Evil.

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs? Liars, Liars, Liars! Republicans Focus On Abortion

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs? Liars, Liars, Liars! Republicans Focus On Abortion: “

Republicans are, of course, too busy pandering to their extremist fundamentalist base to actually do anything to help the millions of Americans who are still unemployed:

Energized by Republican gains in the last election and still stinging from the passage of President Obama’s healthcare overhaul, conservative lawmakers in statehouses around the country have put forward a torrent of measures aimed at restricting abortion.

The measures now under consideration in dozens of states reflect advances in technology and a political cycle that has reempowered a reliably antiabortion bloc — conservative Republicans — on the state and federal levels.

Some proposed laws, drawing upon improvements in medical imaging, seek to shorten the window during which women may have an abortion, though states may not impose restrictions in the first trimester.

Others focus on eliminating federal dollars for abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood. Even though it is illegal to use public funds for most abortions, some conservatives argue that any money given to an organization that provides abortions is subsidizing them, even if the public funds are spent on other services.

In the first three months of 2011, legislators in 49 states introduced 916 measures related to reproductive issues, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a New York nonprofit research organization that supports abortion rights but is viewed by both sides of the debate as providing reliable statistics on the issue.

More than half of the measures — 56% — seek to restrict abortion access. In 2010, Guttmacher said, only 38% of bills concerned with reproductive health sought to restrict abortion. (The others concern issues such as sex education, infant abandonment, stillbirth certificates and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases. Few initiatives are aimed at expanding access to reproductive health services, the institute said.) Fifteen of the bills introduced this year have been enacted into law, and more than 120 others have been approved by at least one legislative chamber.

Don’t call them ‘pro life’ because they’re not. They don’t care about war, capital punishment, health care and aid to poor families that help them feed themselves. Nope, none of that stuff. All they care about are little tiny fetuses and the fairy tales in their own minds.



Updated Guidance on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

September 24, 2010 (PDF 331 KB)

Memorandum on Holding Recipients Accountable for Reporting Compliance under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

May 4, 2010 (PDF 90 KB)

Updated Guidance on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

March 22, 2010 (PDF 396 KB)

Updated Guidance on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

December 18, 2009 (PDF 188 KB)

Improving Compliance in Recovery Act Recipient Reporting

November 30, 2009 (PDF 36 KB)

Memorandum on Improving Recovery Act Recipient Reporting

September 11, 2009 (PDF 53 KB)

Memorandum on the Reports on Use of Recovery Act Funds

June 22, 2009 (PDF 550 KB)


Recipients of Recovery funds are subject to all anti-discrimination laws. Read more about anti-discrimination laws at the Department of Justice’s webpage on implementing the Act.

Read the Attorney General’s Memo on Enforcement of Nondiscrimination in ARRA Programs.


Report at

User Guides

Service/Help Desk





Sen. Barrasso [WY] A bill to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to enter into cooperative agreements with State foresters authorizing State foresters to provide certain forest, rangeland, and watershed restoration and protection services. Dec 31, 1969

Refered to Committee


Rep. Scott [SC] Providing for a conditional adjournment of the House of Representatives and a conditional recess or adjournment of the Senate. Apr 14, 2011

Agreed to in Senate


Sen. Tester [MT] A resolution designating July 8, 2011, as ‘Collector Car Appreciation Day’ and recognizing that the collection and restoration of historic and classic cars is an important part of preserving the technological achievements and cultural heritage of the United States. Apr 14, 2011

Agreed to in Senate


Sen. Webb [VA] A resolution designating April 23, 2011, as ‘National Adopt A Library Day’. Apr 14, 2011

Agreed to in Senate


Sen. Gillibrand [NY] A resolution calling on the United Nations to rescind the Goldstone report, and for other purposes. Apr 14, 2011

Agreed to in Senate


Sen. Murkowski [AK] A resolution designating April 15 through 17, 2011, as ‘Global Youth Service Days’. Apr 14, 2011

Agreed to in Senate


Sen. Collins [ME] A resolution designating April 2011 as ‘National Child Abuse Prevention Month’. Apr 14, 2011

Agreed to in Senate


Rep. Rogers [KY] Making appropriations for the Department of Defense and the other departments and agencies of the Government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes. Apr 15, 2011

Enacted into Public Law

Show More Bills

The End of the Rebellion

The End of the Rebellion: “

After journeying around 10 miles, the group, around 60 to 100 strong, rested, and the militia found them. A firefight ensued, and some of the rebels escaped. The militia rounded up the escapees, decapitating them and setting their heads on posts as a lesson to other slaves. The tally of the dead was 21 whites and 44 slaves killed. South Carolinians spared the lives of slaves who they believed were forced to participate against their will by the original band of rebels.


The rebelling slaves were headed for Florida. Great Britain and Spain were at war (the War of Jenkin’s Ear), and Spain, hoping to cause problems for Britain, promised freedom and land to any British colonial slaves who made their way to Florida. The slaves themselves were from an area of Africa, either Angola or the Kongo, that was Catholic and Portuguese-speaking. The offer from Catholic Spain might have been more attractive to the escaping slaves as a result.

Reports in local newspapers of impending legislation may have also prompted the rebellion. South Carolinians were contemplating passing the Security Act, which would have required all white men to take their firearms with them to church on Sunday, presumably in case unrest among a group of slaves broke out. Sunday had been traditionally a day when the slave owners set aside their weapons for church attendance and allowed their slaves to work for themselves.

American History Timeline American Involvement in Wars from Colonial Times to the Present

American History Timeline American Involvement in Wars from Colonial Times to the Present: “

War in Which American Colonists or United States Citizens Officially Participated Major Combatants

July 4, 1675 –August 12, 1676

King Philip’s War New England Colonies vs. Wampanoag, Narragansett, and Nipmuck Indians 1689-1697

King William’s War The English Colonies vs. France 1702-1713

Queen Anne’s War War of Spanish Succession) The English Colonies vs. France 1744-1748

King George’s War (War of Austrian Succession) The French Colonies vs. Great Britain 1756-1763

French and Indian War(Seven Years War) The French Colonies vs. Great Britain 1759-1761

Cherokee War English Colonists vs. Cherokee Indians 1775-1783 American Revolution English Colonists vs. Great Britain 1798-1800

Franco-American Naval War United States vs. France 1801-1805; 1815 Barbary Wars United States vs. Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli 1812-1815 War of 1812

United States vs. Great Britain 1813-1814

Creek War United States vs. Creek Indians 1836

War of Texas Independence Texas vs. Mexico 1846-1848

Mexican-American War United States vs. Mexico 1861-1865

U.S. Civil War Union vs. Confederacy 1898 Spanish-American War United States vs. Spain

1914-1918 World War I

Triple Alliance: Germany, Italy, and Austria-Hungary vs. Triple Entente: Britain, France, and Russia. The United States joined on the side of the Triple Entente in 1917.

1939-1945 World War II Axis Powers: Germany, Italy, Japan vs. Major Allied Powers: United States, Great Britain, France, and Russia 1950-1953

Korean War United States (as part of the United Nations) and South Korea vs. North Korea and Communist China 1960-1975

Vietnam War United States and South Vietnam vs. North Vietnam 1961

Bay of Pigs Invasion United States vs. Cuba 1983 Grenada United States Intervention 1989

US Invasion of Panama

United States vs. Panama 1990-1991

Persian Gulf War

United States and Coalition Forces vs. Iraq 1995-1996

Intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina United States as part of NATO acted peacekeepers in former Yugoslavia 2001

Invasion of Afghanistan

United States and Coalition Forces vs. the Taliban regime in Afghanistan to fight terrorism. 2003

Invasion of Iraq

United States and Coalition Forces vs. Iraq