There is a reason Rush Limbaugh is so rich

He knows the liberal mind and calls them out every time:

From Jonah Goldberg:

If you read the newspapers or watch the news, you will encounter a long list of accomplishments by the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. One thing you’re less likely to hear, however, is that in his death, Kennedy proved Rush Limbaugh right.

In March, the talk-show host and bête noir of progressives everywhere said that the health-care bill wending its way through Congress would eventually be dubbed the “Ted Kennedy Memorial Health-Care Bill.” At the time, the official position of the Democratic party was outrage and disgust.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee initiated a petition drive demanding that the Republican party formally denounce Limbaugh for his “reprehensible” and “truly outrageous” comments.

Fast-forward to a few hours after the announcement of Kennedy’s death. Suddenly, naming the bill after Kennedy would be a moving tribute.

ABC News reports that “the idea of naming the legislation for Kennedy has been quietly circulating for months” but was kicked into overdrive by Sen. Robert Byrd, the Democratic party’s eldest statesman. Intriguingly, this suggests that either Democrats already had the idea when Limbaugh floated it, which would mean their protests were just so much opportunistic and cynical posturing, or they actually got the idea from Limbaugh himself, which would be too ironic for a Tom Wolfe novel.

But that Kennedy’s death should be marked by cynicism, opportunism, and irony is not shocking, given that these qualities are now the hallmarks of the party he largely defined.

Don't Lie....

This is why most Americans aren't buying what the administration is saying about health care reform:

Two weeks ago, White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod said in a now legendary "viral" email that, "It's a myth that health insurance reform would be financed by cutting Medicare benefits." This was sent out the day before Mr. Obama told a Montana town hall that he'd pay for health-care reform by "eliminating . . . about $177 billion over 10 years" for "what's called Medicare Advantage." And it was two days before Mr. Obama told a Colorado town hall he'd cover "two-thirds" of the "roughly $900 billion" of his plan's cost by "eliminating waste," again citing Medicare Advantage.

Did they just think no one would notice that they are lying?

People noticed:

Adding to the Democrats' woes are polls that show weak support for ObamaCare among Independents and Democrats. In the new ABC/Washington Post poll, only 45% approved of Mr. Obama's plan and 50% opposed it—with 40% "strongly" opposed.

Despite Mr. Obama's barnstorming tour, last week's Fox/Opinion Dynamics poll said "the health care reform legislation being considered right now" is opposed by 21% of Democrats, 50% of Independents, and 81% of Republicans. Only 37% of Democrats and 15% of Independents think their families would be better off if it passed.



Read the whole thing.

The Sad Life Of Joan Kennedy

I really wouldn't wish being a Kennedy on my worst enemy.

"Cash For Criminals"

Good grief:

The federal government sent about 3,900 economic stimulus payments of $250 each this spring to people who were in no position to use the money to help stimulate the economy: prison inmates.

The checks were part of the massive economic recovery package approved by Congress and President Barack Obama in February. About 52 million Social Security recipients, railroad retirees and those receiving Supplemental Security Income were eligible for the one-time checks.

Prison inmates are generally ineligible for federal benefits. However, 2,200 of the inmates who received checks got to keep them because, under the law, they were eligible, said Mark Lassiter, a spokesman for the Social Security Administration. They were eligible because they weren't incarcerated in any of the three months before the recovery package was enacted.

"The law specified that any beneficiary eligible for a Social Security benefit during one of those months was eligible for the recovery payment," Lassiter said.

The other 1,700 checks? That was a mistake.

Checks were sent to those inmates because government records didn't accurately show they were in prison, Lassiter said. He said most of those checks were returned by the prisons.

The Boston Herald first reported that the checks were sent to inmates.

The inspector general for the Social Security Administration is performing an audit to make sure no checks went to ineligible recipients, spokesman George E. Penn said.

The audit, which had already been planned, will examine whether checks incorrectly went to inmates, dead people, fugitive felons or people living outside the U.S., Penn said.

Here in Texas,more than 200 Texas state inmates were sent federal economic stimulus checks even though most were ineligible to receive them according to the Houston Chronicle.

What more can I say? This is what government does. It's inefficient and irresponsible. The idea that we could possibly hand over our health care to it is chilling. It will NEVER save money. It will NEVER reduce costs. Fraud will always be rampant. The less government in our lives, the better. That should be our mantra.

via JammieWearingFool

The Hypocrisy of the Anti-war Movement

I have to give credit to Cindy Sheehan. She practices what she preaches. She is heading up peace vigils at Martha's Vineyard this week where Pres. Obama is vacationing.

The left seems uninterested in the war now that a Democrat is President, even though141,000 American soldiers are still serving in Iraqi and 114 have lost their lives this year. 172 have lost their lives in Afghanistan this year. But the anti-war left is suddenly silent. Only Sheehan stands alone as not being a hypocrite.

Counter-Punch quotes Rush, and sums it up how the media is ignoring Sheehan when they once couldn't get enough of her:

"When she’s out there revving up people against George W. Bush, it’s, let’s cover her 24/7, let’s make sure we have our cameras out there outside Bush’s ranch when she’s there, whatever she’s saying, whatever she’s doing, if she goes down and meets with Hugo Chavez, our cameras will be there. They could not get enough of her. Now that she’s headed to Martha’s Vineyard, the State-Controlled Media, Charlie Gibson, State-Controlled Anchor, ABC: ‘Enough already.’ Cindy, leave it alone, get out, we’re not interested, we’re not going to cover you going to Martha’s Vineyard because our guy is president now and you’re just a hassle. You’re just a problem. To these people, they never had any true, genuine emotional interest in her. She was just a pawn. She was just a woman to be used and then thrown overboard once they’re through with her and they’re through with her. They don’t want any part of Cindy Sheehan protesting against any war when Obama happens to be president."

Sheehan has this to say about Pres.Obama:

Mr. Obama “doesn’t represent real change,” Sheehan charged, noting that July was the worst month yet for casualties of US soldiers in Afghanistan. The “only change I have seen in foreign policy is, unfortunately, things are getting worse” in Afghanistan and Iraq, Sheehan said on MSNBC.

So hats off to Sheehan for the consistency of her convictions. I may not agree with her, but I do admire people who practice what they preach.

The Culture of Death in Houston

My man Claver is still fighting the good fight. Go show him some support at RagingElephants.org
via LST

Sanford Stays

I was hoping that Sanford's press conference would be about resigning, but no such luck.

Good grief. This guy needs to go and go now.

There are real journalists out there....

... and they are found on CNBC

Posted by BigDog

In a previous thread I posted about Whole Foods CEO John Mackey's suggestions for improving health care in the US. Mackey's 8 suggestions - as mild and sensible as they were - outraged liberals who called for a boycott of Whole Foods. Clearly this boycott is failing.

CNBC just this afternoon interviewed one of those people calling for Mackey's ouster. Unlike most modern journalists, these CNBC journalists were polite, objective and skeptical. The first two minutes were background, then it goes on to the interview.


CNBC Interview


This man, Bill Patterson, has nothing. He can't even support his assertations and by the end of the interview, he is shaking.

In reference to my earlier post by Bill Whittle about the Tyranny of Political Correctness: Mackey doesn't fit the narrative. As the CEO of Whole Foods, he is supposed to believe the liberal canon, but since he doesn't, he must be destroyed. So Mackey is attacked by Believers of the narrative. They don't offer an alternative, the only thing that matters is that Mackey is destroyed and removed from his post as CEO despite soaring profit and increased sales.

Edward Kennedy R.I.P

When a public figure like Kennedy dies, it is best to go by the old saying, if you don't have anything nice to say, say nothing at all.

So I will say nothing at all.

But if you are looking for the best overall look back at his life, one that looks at the good and the bad, go here.

Political Correctness is not "Free"

Posted by BigDog

I wish I could embed these vids. Bill Whittle is on fire... in an understated, intellectual sort of way.

The Tyranny of Political Correctness

13 min, video

Fighting back without violence...

From GatewayPundit:

The Tea Party Express (website: www.TeaPartyExpress.org) is proud to announce that Mr. Kenneth Gladney will be joining the nationwide Tea Party tour hosting 35 rallies across the country, set to launch this Friday, August 28.

You might remember Gladney. He was the young black conservative that was beaten by SEIU thugs after a Russ Carnahan town hall meeting in St. Louis earlier this month.

Kenneth Gladney didn’t expect to be the victim of an angry mob when he went to a town hall meeting hosted by Rep. Russ Carnahan (D-Missouri). While selling "Don't Tread on Me" flags outside the town hall forum, he was physically and verbally attacked by members of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), who knocked Gladney to the ground and proceeded to punch and kick him.
.......................

“Kenneth Gladney was attacked for doing nothing more than exercising his right to free speech and engage in commerce. These are fundamental American rights that all of us should cherish and protect,” said Deborah Johns, Vice Chairman of the Our Country Deserves Better Committee which is organizing the “Tea Party Express.” Ms. Johns is also a Marine Mom, whose son, William, is currently serving in the United States Marines including multiple tours of duty in the War on Terror.

“My son has served multiple tours of duty overseas in the War on Terror. He has risked his life so that all Americans may retain the rights our Founding Fathers intended for them. However, some of President Obama’s supporters - who once argued that dissent is patriotic – now show zero tolerance for anyone not advocating complete support for the President’s big-government agenda,” said Ms. Johns.

“If President Obama’s supporters think they can use violence to silence the backlash against his policies of tax-spend-bailout, they are sadly mistaken. We are all Kenneth Gladney, and we at the Tea Party Express will stand with him and his right to speak his mind without fear of violence or intimidation,” said Johns.

Lieberman says it best....

From NBC's Kelly O'Donnell

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, today expressed his strong disappointment in the U.S. Attorney General's decision to name a prosecutor to investigate CIA interrogations:

I respectfully regret this decision by Attorney General Holder and fear our country will come to regret it too because an open ended criminal investigation of past CIA activity, which has already been condemned and prohibited, will have a chilling effect on the men and women agents of our intelligence community whose uninhibited bravery and skill we depend on every day to protect our homeland from the next terrorist attack. Career prosecutors in the Department of Justice have previously reviewed allegations of abuse and concluded that prosecution was not warranted, with the exception of one CIA contractor who has already been convicted. President Obama has established clear guidelines to ensure that past abuses are not repeated and has stated his desire to look forward rather than backward.

We cannot take for granted the fact that our homeland has not been attacked since September 11, 2001. That has occurred only because of the constant vigilance and unflinching efforts by those brave individuals in our military, civilian homeland security and counterterrorism agencies, and the intelligence community. These public servants must of course live within the law but they must also be free to do their dangerous and critical jobs without worrying that years from now a future Attorney General will authorize a criminal investigation of them for behavior that a previous Attorney General concluded was authorized and legal.

Update: Former Vice President Dick Cheney's statement following the release of CIA interrogation documents:

The documents released Monday clearly demonstrate that the individuals subjected to Enhanced Interrogation Techniques provided the bulk of intelligence we gained about al Qaeda. This intelligence saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks. These detainees also, according to the documents, played a role in nearly every capture of al Qaeda members and associates since 2002. The activities of the CIA in carrying out the policies of the Bush Administration were directly responsible for defeating all efforts by al Qaeda to launch further mass casualty attacks against the United States. The people involved deserve our gratitude. They do not deserve to be the targets of political investigations or prosecutions. President Obama’s decision to allow the Justice Department to investigate and possibly prosecute CIA personnel, and his decision to remove authority for interrogation from the CIA to the White House, serves as a reminder, if any were needed, of why so many Americans have doubts about this Administration’s ability to be responsible for our nation’s security.

via NRO

Michelle Obama Was Right

You have heard of the "mobs" showing up at the Townhalls, right? You can meet some of the mob here. Where did they come from? What is motivating these people?

In February Michelle Obama spoke at UCLA, and you may remember that this part of her speech got a lot of play:

"Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed."

More prophetic words were never spoken. Obama did exactly that for millions of us. He woke us up and pulled us out of our "comfort zones." But not in the way Michelle or Pres. Obama ever expected or imagined.

The thing about conservatives, especially non political conservatives, is that they don't take to "protesting." They see it as silly for the most part. That's why what you have been seeing at the Townhalls has been so unprecedented.

We conservatives tend to be very busy. We work hard to pay our bills and taxes. We go to school. We raise our kids, and we spend our weekends watching our kids play sports, and going to church. We don't have time to "protest." Most of us don't even have time to pay much attention to politics, other than what we catch on the nightly news. We vote and we give to campaigns we agree with, and we have always felt that that was enough.

Until President Obama.

It all happened so fast. Bailouts and quadrupling the deficit. Government takeover of banks, then GM, and now health care?

The sleeping giant of hard workers across America got up from their computers, their sports games, their work, and their homes and that FINALLY came out of their "isolation." They moved out of their "comfort zones." They engaged, and they promised themselves they would never be so unaware of who we were really electing ever again.

Michelle Obama went on to say:

You have to stay at the seat at the table of democracy with a man like Barack Obama not just on Tuesday but in a year from now, in four years from now, in eights years from now, you will have to be engaged."

And so we became engaged. We showed up at Tea Party Protests across the nation. We showed up at Townhalls. We let Congress know that we are NOW paying attention. We now understand that Obama is not the moderate that he claimed to be while campaigning. We now understand that he is far left and wants to direct our country that way.

We are not the the young "anarchists" that barely work, and wait for text messages to tell them where their next protest is, and then show up not even knowing what they are protesting against. We aren't paid ACORN workers that show up on buses to register fake voters.

We are mothers, doctors, construction workers, and teachers. We are Americans from every socioeconomic background, who are seeing our liberty being stripped away. Who see a government long out of control, but now in such a downward spiral that we fear we can't reverse it.

We see precious freedoms being taken away. We see a government we can't trust wanting to direct the most intimate part of our lives.

Blue dog Democrats, libertarians, moderate Republicans, and conservatives put away their "divisions" on immigration, drug legalization, abortion, and a host of other issues, and we came together to fight "soft tyranny." We came together to fight government determined to expand and to regulate every aspect of our economic and corporate life. We came together to fight a government determined to control our very health.

Don't worry Michelle, we won't go back to our "lives as usual." We are now informed and involved.

And we have your husband to thank for that. You were right after all.

Wealth is not unlimited

Posted by BigDog

Millions face shrinking Social Security payments

Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

The trustees who oversee Social Security are projecting there won't be a cost of living adjustment (COLA) for the next two years. That hasn't happened since automatic increases were adopted in 1975.

By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly.

This is real trouble for Obama and the Democrats. They are squandering billions on his union friends and ACORN, but where are they to come up with money for Social Security? Democrats have opposed reform for SS for decades. Granted the Republicans didn't push as hard as they ought.

Remember that Bush tried to reform Social Security years ago. As much as I disagreed with Bush on fiscal issues, he was a foresighted and responsible President in many ways. I supported Bush when he suggested Social Security reforms and was disappointed when he gave up.

Our Efficient Government at Work

Like most of you, I have a "setback" control on my thermostat at home that automatically adjusts the temperature when no one is home and at night. Its a great energy saving device.

Remember when Obama was lecturing us that we can't keep our thermostats at
“72 degrees at all times?”

It turns out that our own government, you know the one who is constantly trying to tell us how to live our lives, can't manage this simple device.

But the hilarious (pathetic?) side of the story is that the Department that I am specifically referring to is...you guessed it....The Department of Energy.

I kid you not. Tucked away in the Sunday Houston Chronicle on page A26, at the bottom corner, is the story of how an audit showed that the Dept. of energy failed to use that energy saving device in it's federal buildings (35 of them to be exact), wasting more than $11.5 million in energy costs. This is enough energy to power more than 9,800 homes each year.

The irony of this should highlight the inefficiency of our government and remind us of why there should be limited government.

Drill There, Drill Now

Just unbelievable. The WSJ reports on the Obama administration lending billions of dollars to Brazil for offshore drilling.

The Bush Administration's five-year plan (2007-2012) to open the outer continental shelf to oil exploration included new lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico. But in 2007 environmentalists went to court to block drilling in Alaska and in April a federal court ruled in their favor.

So do environmentalists only care about the environment of the United States?

As Charles Krauthammer on Fox News pointed out:

"...if you're subsidizing or underwriting drilling offshore in Brazil, then you're completely undermining the reason to prohibit drilling offshore in the U.S.

The reason Obama opposes it and the reason the liberals oppose it is because of the environment. But by not drilling here, we simply have the drilling end up elsewhere, and it doesn't reduce pollution on the planet. It simply exports it into poorer countries where the safeguards are much less, for example, in Nigeria, where there are oil spills and siphoning and explosions all the time.

So the net effect on the planet of drilling elsewhere instead of here is that there is more pollution and despoiling of the environment, and it reduces American jobs. It makes no sense at all.

It seems that nothing liberals do makes any sense at all.

Just Sweet Video

This is Democrat Rep. Brian Baird, who was one of the first to accuse town hall protesters of "brown shirt tactics" and compared them to a "lynch mob." He later apologized, but it is sweet to see this Marine verbally smack him down.


via HotAir

Things that should surprise no one

Posted by BigDog

McCain is voting with Republicans... now that it doesn't matter and Democrats don't need him.


The ACLU spied on CIA officers and took pictures of them at their homes, then showed these pictures to incarcerated terrorist planners. Yes, this really happened, and the ACLU is desperately covering their rears. If you don't understand what this means, imagine the ACLU spying on Federal prosecutors/judges/witnesses and showing what they learned to Mob bosses and drug cartel kingpins.


Obama - who criticizes others for using race, religion and lies - uses race, religion and lies more than others.

What Now?

Posted by BigDog

Victor Davis Hanson is one of the authors and scholars I respect the most. In his latest column he takes apart Obama's major weaknesses and gives him sage advice on how to change course. Well and good, but I am interested in his advice for Republicans:

And the Republicans?

1) Mea Culpa. At some point the opposition will have to offer counterproposals that are the opposite of the financial recklessness of 2001-06. On health care reform, they could offer tax incentives for private health care accounts, craft subsidies for the poor to purchase private catastrophic plans, and insist on tort reform. It won’t do any good to blast Obama for bankrupting the treasury if conservatives still vote in multi-billion-dollar agriculture subsidies, expand earmarks, and dream up new programs like No Child Left Behind and Prescription Drug expanded benefits. The Republicans gain from the Obama meltdown, but will be embarrassed when voters turn and ask , “And you? What have you got for us that is any better?” and they have no detailed reply.

2) Clean House. If opponents are to emphasize the Democratic sleaze—Rangel, Dodd, Murtha, the Obama Cabinet tax-cheaters, Axelrod, etc—then they must pledge no more Tom Delays, Duke Cunningham’s, Mark Foleys, and Jack Abramoffs. Parts of the success of the old Contract with America were provisions about congressional behavior.

3) Something Different This Time. Conservatives must appreciate that Obamism transcends the usual liberal challenge posed by past Democrats. For a variety of reasons, the liberal agenda this time is much more far-reaching and systematic. Obama proposes not just to grow government and absorb much more of the nation’s GDP into the state, but to create a lasting legacy of statism.

Emphasis mine. Politically, I think the Democrats will be in big trouble in 2010. But Republicans need to recognize that they are the minority because Republicans screwed up badly when they had the majority. They need a whole new class of Republicans candidates (like the Dems found Bluedogs to run against Republicans in 2006) and leaders who can articulate a viable message that is an alternative to the Democrats. I fear our political class is simply not up to the task. Democrats are criminal and ideological Leftists bent on destruction, and Republicans are shiftless and want to be liked by the Beltway denizens.

Take Me Down to the Market

Posted by BigDog

Ironically, I would never have read the article by John Mackey about health care in the WSJ if it were not for the liberal outrage and boycott of Whole Foods. For the record, leftists are free to boycott Whole Foods, just as Mackey is entitled to his opinion. I don't shop at Whole Foods although I am told their steaks are really good.

Mackey's list of reforms is similar in some ways to mine in a previous post. Portability, being able to purchase across state lines, tort reform. He has a couple ideas that I am adding to my own list: Repealing gov't mandates on what is covered and voluntary tax deductable donations to help those who can't afford coveage.

What really strikes me is this one:

"Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair."

I was very impressed when I read this because Mackey makes it clear that Whole Foods has a good medical plan itself. Such a plan is a competitive advantage and by advocating equalizing tax laws, he is nullifying his own advantage for the sake of principle and fairness.

Shameful

via Freedom's lighthouse:

Here is video of a confrontation between LaRaza members and anti-ObamaCare protesters outside Democrat Rep. Gene Green's Town Hall Meeting in the Houston, Texas area on August 18, 2009.

The video shows some of the Town Hall Meeting inside in the first couple of minutes, but then moves outside where a young LaRaza member wrapped in what appears to be a Mexican flag begins swearing at anti-ObamaCare protesters. It eventually escalates to where he begins pushing and shoving at them and is arrested by the police and carried away.

This is completely horrifying to me on about 10 different levels.

First and foremost, I don't believe that those men represent the feelings of the Hispanic community in Houston. They clearly care more about their home country, Mexico, than they do America. I don't believe most Hispanics feel that way.

Secondly I am appalled at the lack of manners and simple decent human behavior. We can disagree without nasty slurs and nasty language.

Third, no one wins in arguments like these. Does the anti illegal immigration protesters imagine that this will endear them to the LEGAL immigrants in this country? We need to think about HOW we say things and the manner in which we protest. That's what I don't like about much of the anti illegal immigrant rhetoric. It's usually done in such a way that alienates the entire Hispanic community, and that is just foolish. We need to be reaching out to the Hispanic community, not alienating them in any way.

Our stance against illegal immigration should focus on how it hurts the LEGAL Hispanic community, and how it takes jobs away from them, while forcing illegals from Mexico to live a life of fear. We should focus on the fact that millions of illegal Hispanic immigrants are used and abused by employers. We should focus on how much illegals suffer here. It is best for EVERYONE to have a better, safe, legal way for immigrants to come here. Personally and among other things, I'm for a guest worker program much like Canada has. Immigrants can come here to work temporarily, they aren't taken advantage of, and everyone wins.

In the video above, no one wins.

Extreme positions have gotten us NO WHERE. It's time to address this issue in a more responsible way.

While we are on the subject....

Posted by BigDog

What can be done to improve the lives and longevity of all Americans? For the most part, I think the solutions involve LESS gov't involvement and interference in our lives. Lets make a list...

Irradiate food. Irradiating food would significantly reduce food poisoning. While some ignorant people oppose irradiation for superstitious reasons, there is no rational reason to not allow more of it. Food borne illnesses cause 76 million illnesses a year, with 325,000 people seeking medical treatment and 5000 people die. Those numbers would plummet if we irradiated most or all of our food.

Omaha Steaks (yum!) irradiates their food. Good stuff.


Get rid of CAFE standards. CAFE standards mandate that car companies have an average fuel consumption set and determined by the gov't. This means smaller, less safe cars. Thousands of Americans have died because of CAFE. Shouldn't individuals choose their own level of risk vs fuel economy instead of having it imposed on them?


Speed up drug approval. The FDA is a necessary agency, but even they admit that if aspirin were invented now, they wouldn't approve it. The drug approval process is excessively cumbersome, expensive and takes far too long. People die waiting for drugs that could have saved them.


What other sensible steps that don't involve creating new government agencies do you suggest?

How to actually improve Health Care in the US

Posted by BigDog

Largely, the US medical system is second to none in terms of service, responsiveness, ease of access, and advanced medical technique. There are some issues particularly in very rural areas that lack enough doctors. However, the main problem is cost - rising costs, who pays for it and how.

So what do we do about it?

1 - Tort reform. Two factors are in play here. First is the cost of 'defensive medicine' - the practice of ordering a lot of expensive tests and treatments just to avoid any possible lawsuit. This adds up to hundreds of billions of dollars a year. Second the cost of outrageous lawsuit awards directly drives up medical costs by making liability insurance expensive - not to mention opportunity costs associated with the suits themselves. We all pay because some lawyer got rich.

The example to follow here is... Texas! Texas capped non-economic damages and put a time limit on when one could file suit. The results are spectacular! Not only has liability insurance dropped by double digits, but the result is that more doctors are moving to Texas and into underserved rural areas.

This is a great example of consequence. The consequences of unjust tort law doesn't just effect lawyers and insurance companies, there is a chain reaction of poorer services, higher costs and inconvenience for everyone. We all suffer so guys like John Edwards can get rich.

2 - Allow insurance policies to be accessed and sold across state lines. This means that someone in New Jersey can buy a policy in Pennsylvania or elsewhere subject to the oversight of the state in which it is sold. This reform would simplify and modernize our insurance markets. If another state has a better insurance policy, why shouldn't you be able to buy it?

Each of these reforms would save the American people hundreds of billions of dollars a year and would cost nothing to implement.


Other useful reforms that don't cost much if anything:

Make insurance policies personal property. This goes along with insurance policy portability. The insurance policy is owned by the individual who takes it with him/her when he moves or changes jobs.

Freeing up occupational licensing. There are a lot of petty rules which govern who can do what with a medical license. While some regulation is needed, the rules are increasingly byzantine. Many simple procedures can be done by nurses, nurse-practitioners and other medical professionals without bringing in more expensive professionals.

Make medical providers to post their prices. Every other business has open, transparent pricing. When you walk into a restaurant there is a menu. Prices of groceries is on the shelf or on the item. Auto mechanics give you an estimate before they start work. My veterinary surgeon gave me a high and low end cost estimate BEFORE she did surgery on my dog - and she signed it. But if you go to a hospital, they hand you a bill afterward. This is wrong. They don't want you to know that they charge one thing to one person and another to the next. In part this is because Medicare and insurance companies won't pay the full amount - in medicare's case only a fraction. Up front pricing would help, allowing consumers to compare prices for services.

Get rid of the Medicare, Medicaid and VA bureaucracies, instead simply buy a private policy for those groups. I have mentioned this in a previous thread. The idea is that instead of a gov't run 'insurance' system, the gov't simply takes the money it spends and buys a private insurance policy for people over 65 or the poor. End of gov't involvement. It would be better to give them a voucher to go buy their own policy or even pay for the one they had when they were working, see above. In the case of VA hospitals, instead of running hospitals, the gov't would buy their former servicemen a policy or give them a voucher for same. Note that I am NOT saying 'get rid of medicare, which of course would be the first claim by critics.

Sarbanes-Oxley is killing so many businesses including insurance and medical services companies. Getting rid of Sarbanes Oxley would have a general effect in improving the business climate, which in turn would help the health care industry.

ObamaCare, the NHS and Socialism, oh my!

Posted by BigDog

Britain Dragged into ObamaCare Fight: NHS Under Fire

There’s a great deal of misinformation on both sides of the Atlantic. Anyone watching the TV news in Britain would think that opposition to ObamaCare was limited to a few swastika-waving crazies, led by Sarah Palin and funded by sinister “special interests.” There is little mention of “Blue Dog” Democrats, tort reform, Obama’s deal with the drug companies, or the fact that most Americans are happy with their health care. And the figure of “47 million uninsured” is trotted out daily, when the actual number of U.S. citizens who are long-term uninsured and who are genuinely unable to get coverage is probably closer to eight million.

That last really needs to made clear to more people. Its one of those facts that makes clear who in the debate are deceptive or ignorant. That is a lot of people, come to think of it.

The simple fact is that while neither system is as terrible as their detractors claim, both have undeniable flaws. And while we can trade facts, figures, and anecdotes all day, a couple of things are clear. The first is that the poor enjoy a generally better standard of care in the UK than in the U.S. The second is that Americans with decent insurance enjoy a better standard of care than most Brits — survival rates for all the major cancers are considerably better than in the UK, and screening and treatment for heart disease and other chronic conditions is more widely available.

Well, that is diplomatic.

Most of my information on the British medical system comes from British sources. To be fair, its hard to judge things from afar, but I am certain I don't want anything to do with either the Canadian or British or for that matter Japanese, European, or any other system. The problem in the US is not the medical care itself, but the methods we use to pay for it all.


Aside note: I have heard Daniel Hannan speak on a few occasions. He is articulate, well-informed and incisive. If only we had men of his caliber in the US congress. Its amusing that he would be on vacation - that is 'on holiday' for our British friends - when this 'row' kicked up.

Tens of thousands quit AARP

The wisdom of the elderly:

"CBS News has learned that up to 60,000 people have cancelled their AARP membership since July 1 angered over the group's position on health care. ... Many are switching to the American Seniors Association, a group that calls itself the conservative alternative."
..............

....former AARP member Elaine Guardani voicing her suspicions: "I feel that they’re supporting it through the back door and telling their members that they’re not through the front door."

Exactly.

Get this. THIS is how AARP reacts: "AARP says for a group with 40 million members that adds hundreds of thousands each month, losing 60 thousand is just a drop in the bucket."

I say we show them a flood in the bucket. Please pass this on and encourage any and all seniors you know to cancel their AARP membership and join the American Seniors Association.

Eating Their Own

Th Progressive Change Campaign is running this ad in Washington D.C. and Nebraska for the health care reform bill.

Why is this interesting?

The Senator they attack in this ad, Sen. Nelson, is a DEMOCRAT.

Eating their own. It's fun to watch.

Robert Novak R.I.P.

Robert Novak, nationally syndicated conservative columnist for 45 years, died today after a battle with cancer. Melissa and I were lucky enough to meet him and John Fund of the WSJ, last year at a blogger's conference (he was obviously thrilled to meet us...;-). Seriously, he was very nice and it was a thrill for me to meet him. More about him here.

The Power of Symbols

Bill Whittle is at his best explaining in concise terms the power and danger of iconography.

Posted by BigDog

Note

Blogging will probably be light for me this week (BigDog may still post though) because my baby girl is coming home tomorrow from interning in D.C.! My wonderful mother and father in law are coming for the week as well, and then we are moving her back to college. I will be busy, but I'll try to post!

Palin Power

You gotta love how so many pundits tried to write off Palin for resigning as Governor. How could she possible be any influence with out the Governorship? The left keeps trying to dismiss her as a lightweight (of course that is the polite of putting it, and they are never polite), but who is the one who single-handedly, and with a facebook note at that, got everyone to calling the end of life counseling sessions in the health care bill, "death panels."

What happened then? Soon after the left hysterically wailed that there were no "death panels" in the bill, The Senate committee dropped the end-of-life provision from bill. Michael Steele didn't get them to do that. Rush Limbaugh didn't get them to do that. Even our own maverick, John McCain had no influence there. It was our own....Barracuda. She didn't need pundits. She didn't need a campaign. She didn't even need a political position. She just needed the passion to speak the truth. In Palin's resignation speech she said "My choice is to take a stand and effect change." And that is exactly what she is doing, and she obviously doesn't need a Governorship or a Senate seat to do it.

Just a facebook page.

You just have to love that.

If the provision didn't really call for so called, "death panels," then why drop them from the bill? If they were so innocent, why not fight for them to stay in there?

The truth is that is exactly what it was, despite being "de-bunked" by so called news organizations.

Many of you have already read about Obama's own look at his grandmother's situation where he wonders if it is wise to give hip replacements to someone who is terminally ill. This is where Obama points out that "the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health- care bill out here.”

So, to reduce costs we must stop paying for pesky hip replacements when one is old and/or ill. How to do that? First make it "voluntary", then pay Doctors to "nudge" the elderly into the "right" decisions. Soon they will see it's better to just hobble on over to the local hospice and save us all a bunch of money.

Which I'm sure sounds fine to any liberal out there.....until it's his mother. Then those "consultants and experts" that decide that the pacemaker is too expensive for an 85 yr old that doesn't really have that many more years anyway, will seem a bit like...oh, what's the words I'm looking for....oh yes...."death panels."

Just admit the mistake and move on....

Instead the White House is just hoping no one notices:

Almost two weeks after the White House launched its Snitch Central in order to get reports on political dissent over ObamaCare, it appears that the Obama administration and its chief propagandist have quietly thrown in the towel. Matt Drudge reported this morning that all e-mails to flag@whitehouse.gov have begun bouncing back as undeliverable.

Don't Believe It

Posted by BigDog


"ObamaCare" has apparently suffered two setbacks. First was the - promised - removal of the 'end of life provisions from the Senate version, the so-called Death Panels. The White House is now 'signaling' that that the "Public Option" - the imposition of government run insurance that lays the foundation of 'single payer' - is 'not essential'.

Don't believe it.

These are tactical withdrawals. There are bills in both the House and Senate, removing a provision from one doesn't mean removing it from the other. In addition, they can always put it back in quietly or just call it something else.

The people pressing these proposals which amount to government control of our medical system are radical ideologues who are the latest in a long line of leftists who have been pressing for government control of medical care for more than a century. Obama is fundamentally dishonest, and he and his people are schooled in the arts of deception and misdirection.

Key Points in Health Care

Listening to Democrats on the Sunday talk shows it seems clear that they are actually backing away from the "public option." A Democrat in the Senate said that there never was the votes and there aren't the votes now. I cannot tell you how relieved that makes me. It was literally like a big rock lifted from my heart. If this reform goes through without the public option, then it will truly be the people's voices were heard. It will be amazing that the Democrats have all the power and this historical well liked President, and yet the people's desires will have WON. And this will have happened over the demonizing by Democrat leaders of the American people who dared to protest. Harry Reid recently called us "evilmongers." Pelosi said we carried "swastikas." It's beyond surreal that they thought insulting the American people was going to work. And it didn't.

Keith Hennessey,former Assistant to the U.S. President for Economic Policy and Director of the U.S. National Economic Council, has put together a memorandum that looks at what Obama said at this heath care townhall and debates some points that Obama made at the townhall. I thought it would be informative to go over some key points.

I'm going to try to whittle down some of it for you.

1) THE PRESIDENT: Under the reform we're proposing, if you like your doctor, you can keep you doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.

And yet here is what the CBO said about the House Bill:

CBO: In addition, CBO and the JCT staff estimate that nearly 6 million other people who would be covered by an employment-based plan under current law would not have such coverage under the proposal. That figure includes part-time employees, who coudl receive subsidies via an exchange even though they have an employer's offer of coverage, and about 3 million people who would not have an employer's offer of coverage under the proposal. Firms that would chose not to offer coverage as a resul of the proposal would tend to be smaller employers and those that predominantly employ lower-wage workers-people who would be eligible for subsidies thought exchanges also would not have coverage available though their employers. Whether those changes in coverage would represent the dropping of existing coverage of a lack of offers of new coverage is difficult to determine. (page 5)

So basically Obama is overpromising, and it's simply not true that everyone can keep the health care they like.

2) THE PRESIDENT: You will not be waiting in lines. This is not about putting the government in charge of your health insurance.

Keith Hennessey: And yet section 3103 of the Senate HELP Committee bill would give the Secretary of Health and Human Services authority to appoint a Medical Advisory Council that would determine what items and services are "essential" for a "qualified health plan," and by implication, which benefits are not essential. The House bill is parallel but less specific, creating an "independent public/private advisory committee." in which the members are chosen by the government.

So in reality government officials ( or people appointed by them) will determine benefit packages, co-payments and deductibles, premiums, plan expenses, and profits.

If that's not putting the government in charge of your health insurance, I don't know what is.

And pray tell how the President knows there will be no waiting lines?? With 47 million more people suddenly insured, you don't think the lines will be long?

THE PRESIDENT: And finally--this is important--we will require insurance companies to cover routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies...(later) And I would like to see a mental health component as part of a package that people are covered under, under our plan.

So the government will REQUIRE that all insurance companies cover these things and we are still suppose to believe that the government is not in charge of our health insurance? A little honesty here would be nice.

THE PRESIDENT: ...because there's no reason we shouldn't be catching disease like breast cancer and prostate cancer on the front end. That makes sense, it saves lives; it also saves money-and we need to save money in this health care system.

CBO: Although different types of preventive care have different effects on spending, the evidence suggests that for most preventive services, expanded utilization leads to higher, and not lower, medical speading overall.

In other words, it's fine and good to say we need to catch cancer and other diseases early on, but it's simply not true to claim it will save money. It will not. It will increase the medical spending. Mainly because expanding preventive care for everyone, will cost much more than the few it catches early to save more expensive care.

CBO: Judging the overall effect on medical spending requires analysts to calculate not just the savings from the relatively few individuals who would avoid more expensive treatment later, but also the costs for the many who would make greater use of preventive care.

This is probably the President's biggest falsehood:

THE PRESIDENT: And we will do this without adding to our deficit over the next decade, largely by cutting out the waste and insurance company giveaways in Medicare that aren't making our seniors healthier. (later) First of all, I said I won't sign a bill that adds to the deficit or the national debt. Okay? So this will have to be paid for.

*CBO says the House bill would increase federal deficits by $239 billion over the next ten years.

*CBO says the House bill would increase the deficit in 2019 by 65 billion, meaning the bill fails the President's "10th year test."

*CBO says the House bill would result in increasing deficits beyond 2019, because the ndew spending would grow faster than 8% a year, while offsets would grow only about 5% per years.

*THe House bill would not just slow Medicare growth, but would also raise taxes on high income individuals and small business owners.

THE PRESIDENT: We have AARP on board because they know this is a good deal for our seniors.

Simply untrue. The AARP has not endorsed any bill.

THE PRESIDENT: And so I do think it's important for particularly seniors who currently receive Medicare to understand that if we're able to get something right like Medicare, then there should be a little more confidence that maybe the government can have a role-not the dominiat role, but a role-in making sure the people are treated fairly when it comes to insurance.

Keith: But Medicare is fiscally unsustainable. The President already said that in an earlier discussion. So Medicare is not a successful model for a new system, because we can't afford it.

THE PRESIDENT: I don't have to explain to you that nearly 46 million American don't have health insurance coverage today. In the wealthiest nation on Earth, 46 million of our fellow citizesn have not coverage. They are just vulnerable. If something happens, they go bankrupt, or they don't get the care theyneed.

The Truth about those 45.6 million people:

*6.4 million are enrolled in Medicaid or SCHIP and just gve the Census taker the wrong answer. This is called the Medicaid undercount.
*Another 4.3 million are eligible for Medicaid or SCHIP and have not enrolled. If they need care, the hospital generally enrolls them.
*Another 9.3 million are non-citizens.
*Another 10.1 million have income more than three times the poverty line. They chose not buy insurance
*Leaving about 15.6 million remaining uninsured of whom about 5 million are childless adults.


In a country with 305 million people and only a little over 15 million truly uninsured, I think we can find a way to insure them and require the others to insure themselves without radically changing our healthcare system.

Will Obama lose American's Trust?

I have always loved Peggy Noonan. I love the way she writes. Needless to say I was a bit saddened and appalled by her being swooned by Pres. Obama. But she writes it as she sees it, and at the time she saw him as uniter, a different kind of politician. She saw him as one who would rise above petty politics and govern fairly.

She, like the rest of us, have learned that he is nothing of that. She has an excellent piece at the WJS on what Americans are feeling on this healthcare bill, and the impression Obama is giving of himself in defending it. We all know that Obama has the votes to cram this bill down our throats, whether we want it or not. Reasonable Democrats may resist, but they may not. So in this one sentence, Peggy illustrates perfectly what happens if this passes:

If he wins it, will be a victory not worth having. It will have cost too much. It has lessened the thing an admired president must have from the people, and that is trust.

And there it is. Whether this bill passes or not, politically, Republicans have won. If it doesn't, then we saved our country from this debacle. If it does, then Obama loses the people's trust, and the next three years will be very difficult. We will probably win back the House and Senate in 2010 and Obama will unlikely win re-election.

Obama has no one to blame but himself for the corner he is backed into now. He allowed the likes of Pelosi to craft a boondoggle bill that far overreached the concerns that many have on health care. Instead of listening to the people, he dismissed them. He ignored those at the townhalls. He allowed those on his side to demonize, not the Republicans, but the American people.

And they won't forget that.

Obama never saw it coming. Palin Power!

I see Palin's plan. Be the thorn in Obama's side.

This thorn is going to hurt.

You go girl!

God bless the sane Democrats

It's entirely possible that blue dog Democrats will save us from this horror of a health care bill. And that's not all they may save us from:

Aug. 14 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Senate should abandon efforts to pass legislation curbing greenhouse-gas emissions this year and concentrate on a narrower bill to require use of renewable energy, four Democratic lawmakers say.

“The problem of doing both of them together is that it becomes too big of a lift,” Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas said in an interview last week. “I see the cap-and-trade being a real problem.”

The resistance by Lincoln and her Senate colleagues undercuts President Barack Obama’s effort to win passage of legislation that would cap carbon dioxide emissions and establish a market for trading pollution allowances, said Peter Molinaro, the head of government affairs for Midland, Michigan- based Dow Chemical Co., which supports the measure.

Score One Fo Palin!

Wow. Right out of the gate in her new role and she SCORES!

The Senate Finance Committee will drop a controversial provision on consultations for end-of-life care from its proposed healthcare bill, its top Republican member said Thursday.

The committee, which has worked on putting together a bipartisan healthcare reform bill, will drop the controversial provision after it was derided by conservatives as "death panels" to encourage euthanasia.

Underestimating her is the left's first mistake.

Big Pharma, Big Lies

Obama is having a bad week. Support for health care reform support has fallen dramatically, and he was caught telling a few lies at his health care townhall, not the least of which was saying that the AARP had endorsed his bill (Gibbs said he "mis-spoke).

Like I said earlier, I think I need only to quote Democrats from now on on health care because so many seem to be getting it. But to imagine that the Huffington Post, of all places, would break this story, is, well...it's just amazing:

A memo obtained by the Huffington Post confirms that the White House and the pharmaceutical lobby secretly agreed to precisely the sort of wide-ranging deal that both parties have been denying over the past week.

The memo, which according to a knowledgeable health care lobbyist was prepared by a person directly involved in the negotiations, lists exactly what the White House gave up, and what it got in return.

It says the White House agreed to oppose any congressional efforts to use the government's leverage to bargain for lower drug prices or import drugs from Canada -- and also agreed not to pursue Medicare rebates or shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Medicare Part D, which would cost Big Pharma billions in reduced reimbursements.

In exchange, the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) agreed to cut $80 billion in projected costs to taxpayers and senior citizens over ten years. Or, as the memo says: "Commitment of up to $80 billion, but not more than $80 billion."

Representatives from both the White House and PhRMA, shown the outline, adamantly denied that it reflected reality. PhRMA senior vice president Ken Johnson said that the outline "is simply not accurate." "This memo isn't accurate and does not reflect the agreement with the drug companies," said White House spokesman Reid Cherlin.

And like Ace points out, Big Pharma also agreed to spend $150 million on pro health care reform ads this month. We aren't sure if this is even legal, but we do know that the Obama administration has been lying about this. This was a secret memo, secret transactions, secret deals with Big Pharma. What happened to "transparency?" Please. That was a lie too.

The worst thing to me? Pres. Obama going on and on, claiming he can find additional "savings" in drug spending, when in fact he has already promised a deal with the drug companies to not get a penny more in savings from them.

Does Obama just think that people will shrug off these lies? This is one of the reasons support for health care reform is diminishing. People don't believe you when it's clear that you have been lying to them.

The crazy that is our government right now

I've never seen the left or the msm quite so unhinged as they are now, simply because American citizens have chosen to show up at townhalls and voice their concerns.

First Pelosi said that people at the townhalls were toting Swastikas. The media showed a collage of pics with this big photo of Obama with a Hitler mustache. Turns out that picture came from the Lyndon LaRouche people. If you aren't familiar with LaRouche, he's been bringing the crazy for years now. SNL did skits about him in the mid-80's called "Lyndon LaRouche Theatre." It's also interesting that when the left had huge paper mache heads of Bush as Hitler, the media forgot to be outraged.


Then some guy brings a gun strapped to his hip outside Obama's townhall and the leftwing media goes nuts. Turns out he's a libertarian and the open carry law is one that the citizens of his state like to show off. He is also the one who mangled the quote by Thomas Jefferson about the tree of liberty being watered by the blood of patriots. Suddenly he's our poster boy and the entire opposition movement to the healthcare bill is defined by this guy. At least according to the leftwing looney tunes on the net and MSNBC.

Now the DHS, in order to once again paint all of us as scary and threatening, issued another report about "rightwing extremism," using kook sites that in no way represent the right wing.

The fact that this govt agency is being used in such a political manner is appalling, and over at NRO, they explain it pretty well:

"Under Napolitano's watch, government officials who were supposed to be gathering real intelligence on domestic terror threats were instead surfing the web and reading whacky websites, all to create the public perception of 'rightwing extremism,'" [ALG chairman Bill] Wilson said.

The DHS report warned of allegedly impending domestic terrorist acts by gun owners, pro-life activists, people concerned about states rights, and returning U.S. military veterans. Wilson said the department prepared the report "without any intelligence sources, crime data, or actual evidence of planned attacks or any groups known to be planning attacks, or any groups with histories of perpetrating attacks that are currently conducting any types of operational recruitment, meeting, or planning attacks."

You can read a complete list of the web sites used by DHS here. Prominent among those is the site of the Southern Poverty Law Center, a far-left non-profit based in Mongtomery, Alabama, that for years has seen all kinds of Nazis and KKKers behind every bush in America, but especially those located south of Mason-Dixon Line....

It's one thing for the left to distort, lie, and spin things against us on the right (we expect that), but quite another for our own government to be conspiring against us. First it's flag.gov website where citizens are asked to tattle on other citizens, and now this.

It almost seems that every day I am confronted with a government that sees someone like me, a college educated wife/mom of four children, taxpayer, never broken the law, volunteer and activist and writer, as someone to watch.

It's beyond surreal.

Palin fires back at Obama...

Barracuda!

It's on. And she has footnotes.

Democrats, this is all on you....

I think from now on I will only quote Democrats on health care reform and Obama, since so many seem to be getting it:

Camille Paglia:

But who would have thought that the sober, deliberative Barack Obama would have nothing to propose but vague and slippery promises -- or that he would so easily cede the leadership clout of the executive branch to a chaotic, rapacious, solipsistic Congress? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom I used to admire for her smooth aplomb under pressure, has clearly gone off the deep end with her bizarre rants about legitimate town-hall protests by American citizens. She is doing grievous damage to the party and should immediately step down.
...................

There is plenty of blame to go around. Obama's aggressive endorsement of a healthcare plan that does not even exist yet, except in five competing, fluctuating drafts, makes Washington seem like Cloud Cuckoo Land. The president is promoting the most colossal, brazen bait-and-switch operation since the Bush administration snookered the country into invading Iraq with apocalyptic visions of mushroom clouds over American cities.

You can keep your doctor; you can keep your insurance, if you're happy with it, Obama keeps assuring us in soothing, lullaby tones. Oh, really? And what if my doctor is not the one appointed by the new government medical boards for ruling on my access to tests and specialists? And what if my insurance company goes belly up because of undercutting by its government-bankrolled competitor? Face it: Virtually all nationalized health systems, neither nourished nor updated by profit-driven private investment, eventually lead to rationing.

I just don't get it. Why the insane rush to pass a bill, any bill, in three weeks? And why such an abject failure by the Obama administration to present the issues to the public in a rational, detailed, informational way? The U.S. is gigantic; many of our states are bigger than whole European nations. The bureaucracy required to institute and manage a nationalized health system here would be Byzantine beyond belief and would vampirically absorb whatever savings Obama thinks could be made. And the transition period would be a nightmare of red tape and mammoth screw-ups, which we can ill afford with a faltering economy.

As with the massive boondoggle of the stimulus package, which Obama foolishly let Congress turn into a pork rut, too much has been attempted all at once; focused, targeted initiatives would, instead, have won wide public support. How is it possible that Democrats, through their own clumsiness and arrogance, have sabotaged healthcare reform yet again? Blaming obstructionist Republicans is nonsensical because Democrats control all three branches of government. It isn't conservative rumors or lies that are stopping healthcare legislation; it's the justifiable alarm of an electorate that has been cut out of the loop and is watching its representatives construct a tangled labyrinth for others but not for themselves. No, the airheads of Congress will keep their own plush healthcare plan -- it's the rest of us guinea pigs who will be thrown to the wolves.

On a side note: Esquire, who endorsed Obama and gushed about him endlessly, seems to be catching on the real Obama.

The Theatre That Is Obama

So far in all the townhalls, I have yet to see any Democrat prove that anyone asking questions was planted there by "Republican operatives."

But it only took Michelle Malkin less than a day to identify all the plants (and there were MANY) in Obama's townhall on healthcare.

The audacity (pun intended).

It's the Economy Stupid....

Ok, let's take a break from the health care debate. The townhalls seem to working. Gallup: Public support for health care legislation drops from 56% to 35% over past four weeks. I'll take a little comfort in that. Especially since there is no comfort to take in the job numbers. If only we were expending the energy from the healthcare debate, on getting Americans back to work.

You know it's bad when Bob Herbert at the NYT even sees it:

You can put whatever kind of gloss you want on last week’s jobs numbers, but the truth is that while they may have been a bit better than most economists were expecting, they were still bad, bad, bad.

................

The country has lost a crippling 6.7 million jobs since the Great Recession began in December 2007. No one is predicting a recovery in the foreseeable future powerful enough to replace the millions of jobs that have vanished in this historic downturn.

Analysts at the Economic Policy Institute noted that the economy has fewer jobs now than it had in 2000, “even though the labor force has grown by around 12 million workers since then.”

Two issues that absolutely undermine any rosy assessment of last week’s employment report are the swelling ranks of the long-term unemployed and the crushing levels of joblessness among young Americans. More than five million workers — about a third of the unemployed — have been jobless for more than six months. That’s the highest number recorded since accurate records have been kept.

The Obama administration tried to find some silver lining in the jobless rate ticking down 0.1 percent last month, but as Hebert points out, it wasn't because more people found jobs, but because 450,000 people withdrew from the labor market. They stopped looking, so they weren’t counted as unemployed. This isn't something to celebrate.

It's ironic that so many in the black community looked to Obama to finally make things better in the country for them. Since Obama took office more black men are losing jobs than at any time since World War II. While unemployment in general is at 9.4%, for black men age 20 and up the unemployment rate was was 14.5% in June.

Pres. Obama imagines that having some beerfest with his Harvard professor friend and the cop that arrested him, will somehow help with racial issues. Prof. Gates represented the average black man about as much Paris Hilton represents the average nun. It was ridiculous.

There is a real need here in the black community, and it has nothing to do with cops and class. It has to do with jobs.

Everyone is hurting and I just can't believe we are wasting our time and energy on issues that can be dealt with at a later time. We can still talk health care reform next year. We can talk immigration reform next year. We can talk energy and cap and trade next year. They will all still be there. But NOW is the time to focus on jobs, and our government is doing everything but that.

It's bad folks, and if the Obama administration could take a breath and stop trying to create their little liberal utopia in the first year, they might realize that it's important to actually govern and get this economy moving.

A Bold Face Lie

Today in Pres. Obama's townhall, he completely lied. Here is his quote:

"I have not said that I was a single-payer supporter."

You have probably seen the video where he says he indeed supports a single-payer plan.

In this video linked above at a 2003 union conference he clearly says, and I quote EXACTLY, that "I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan."

From that speech:

"I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its gross national product on health care, cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that's what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. That's what I’d like to see."

It's one thing to say that he has changed his mind or that his belief has grown or become different. But that isn't what he says. He says "I have not said I was a single-payer supporter."

A bold face lie.

Does Obama just hope that most Americans will believe him and not see this video tape?

Why in the world would he lie?

I think this shows a gross arrogance on his part. That he can say what he wishes now, and not be held accountable for what he has said in the past.

via RedState

Even those on the left are beginning to see the Big Brother in this health care reform

Democrat leaders went ballistic over Sarah Palin's remark about "death panels" regarding the end of life measures in the health reform bill. But many reasonable people on the left are beginning to realize that she was right on the money:

This is the Big Brother nightmare of oppressive government that the shrewd propagandists on the right are always blathering on about. Except that this time, they could not be more right.

As HotAir points out:

The shading in of human particulars is what makes this so unsettling. A doctor guided by a panel of experts who have decided that some treatments are futile will, in subtle ways, advance that point of view. Cass Sunstein calls this "nudging," which he characterizes as using various types of reinforcement techniques to "nudge" people's behavior in one direction or another. An elderly or sick person would be especially vulnerable to the sophisticated nudging of an authority figure like a doctor.

Bad enough for such people who are lucky enough to be supported by family and friends. But what about the dying person who is all alone in the world and who has only the "consultant" to turn to and rely on? The heartlessness of such a scene is chilling.

Even I wondered why so many seniors were showing up at the townhalls from the beginning. They already knew what we are just beginning to learn. In this health care bill, it is the elderly that will pay the highest cost. And I'm not talking about taxes.

Media Caught in Bold Faced Lie About Obama/Hitler Poster

This was twittered last night, and as I was watching it I suddenly realized that my daughter was in it! She is interning in D.C. this summer. You have to look quick to see her, but she is at 1.44 and 2.32 in the video. She is the reporter with long dark hair holding the microphone.

Pretty cool, huh?

I'll be writing more about her internship later!

Keep Getting Angry!

I am a totally peaceful person. I don't lose my temper. I don't yell. I rarely argue, even with my teenagers. But if something were happening in my family that threatened it in some way, you can be assured I would yell my bloody head off.

This is what you are seeing at the townhalls. The left would LIKE for us to be "civil," so the media will stop covering the townhalls. But these people are scared and angry, and justifiably so.

Andy McCarthy at NRO says it best:

Re: Krauthammer's Take [Andy McCarthy]


With due mountains of respect to Dr. K, his suggested approach of "quietly and civilly raising questions," politely pointing out that the numbers don't add up, etc., is exactly how we have come to be stuck with the stimulus, the bailouts, and obscene trillions in budget deficits.

This is not a nice, ivory tower, Oxford debate. This is gut-check time about whether we are going to maintain the bedrock American relationship between the citizen and the state. We are in the battle against ruthless, radical ideologues who have the media and the daunting numbers on their side. On our side, we have the further burden of wavering moderates and in-Washington-too-long types who define success as making a deal — any deal — that they think they can sell as a bipartisan compromise that staved off something extreme (but what in reality would be a sell-out that is 3/4 extreme, with Obama simply coming back in 2010 or 2011 to get the remaining 1/4 ... plus).

If our side's approach lacks passion: (a) the brass-knuckled Rahmbo/Pelosi/Reid leadership will easily succeed in showing the potential Democrat convincables (without whom we cannot win) that they better stay on the team if they know what's good for them, and (b) the GOP moderates and old Washington hands will interpret civility as a greenlight to do the dealing they're dying to do.

I am not, and would not, endorse criminal mob behavior. But exhibitions of anger and spirit when one is justifiably angry and spirited are entirely appropriate. Making clear to a pol who is trying to insult your intelligence that you don't appreciate it is entirely appropriate.

I just don't get the detachment from the real world here. We're not talking trivia here. We're talking about what kind of country we're going to be from here on out. That's something worth getting whipped up about. If we're not whipped up, we lose. If we are whipped up and the Democrats try to use that fact as an excuse to ram this through, then they were going to ram it through anyway.

We are a heavy underdog. To prevail, the needle we have to thread is to convince enough Dems and RINOs that there will be electoral hell to pay if this monstrosity is enacted. That requires an authentic demonstration of fervor. It's unfortunate that some people will go overboard — as happens in any human endeavor — but that's no reason to treat this as if it were an academic exercise. If that's the approach, the game — like the country as we know it — is lost.


This isn't a game. This isn't just an "issue." This is truly about losing what America is all about. It is truly about losing control of our very health and our future. So I encourage any and all passion.

The future depends on it.

Rationing Care - the Government Option

Posted by BigDog


Falling out of Love with Barak Obama

...President Obama's appointee, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who, according to a New York Post op ed article by Betsy McCauley, former Lt. Governor of the State of New York, stated, "Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, 'as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others' (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008)." He also stated, "...communitarianism' should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those 'who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens...An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.' (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96). "

Rationing.

The government deciding who lives and who dies.

Its funny when Leftists try to refute criticism of the health care bill by quoting Obama. The bill itself is evidence as is the long publicly held beliefs of his administration's officials, advisers and associates. Saying 'that's not true because Obama says its not true' doesn't cut the mustard.

The Real Hillary

Remember when Hillary was first elected Senator and she dropped the pretty hairdo and makeup? People reacted and she got back on board. It's the same with her personality. She adopted this softer side when campaigning for President. But here the real Hillary, Hillary the feminist, peeks out from behind the mask.

Not a pretty sight, is it?

Compare and Contrast

When the right protests....

When the left protests....

Submitted without comment.

This is why people are scared.....

This man is not a Republican. He says he has voted both ways. Does anyone doubt his sincerity? These are the people protesting. Democrats have a right to oppose us, but stop accusing us of being part of some lobbyist funded protest.

via GatewayPundit

Snake Oil

The reason that this health care reform argument has become so chaotic, and the reason why so many people are angry, is because Obama has not been honest.

RealClearPolitics has an excellent article describing how past healthcare measures have always expanded benefits, while cost spiral out of control. This will be what will happen here, but on a much larger scale:

No president has spoken more forcefully about the need to control costs. Failure, he's argued, would expand federal budget deficits, raise out-of-pocket health costs and squeeze take-home pay (more compensation would go to insurance). All true. But Obama's program would do little to reduce costs and would increase spending by expanding subsidized insurance. The House legislation would cut the uninsured by 37 million by 2018, estimates the Congressional Budget Office. The uninsured get care now; with insurance they'd get more.

"You'd be adding a third medical entitlement on top of Medicare and Medicaid," says James Capretta, a top official at the Office of Management and Budget from 2001 to 2004.

What needs to be done first is to establish cost control.

Congress wouldn't create new benefits until it had disciplined the old.

How is it possible that we are talking about such a radical overhaul in health care when we are looking at Medicaid going broke in 2017? It's like we are ignoring this big elephant in the room. Is it any wonder that so many are having to yell to get people's attention? I've said it before and it bears repeating. In 1965 when Medicaid was established the government said that by 1990 it would cost 9 billion. The actual cost? 66 billion and about to go broke. Now the government is telling us that this health care reform will cost 1 trillion over ten years (which is completely mind boggling). Does ANYONE really believe that that will be the cost of this?

Congress has a nasty habit of passing bills and worrying about the actual costs later.

In addition I found this interesting article by Robert Reich (secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton). Reich loves Obama and loves the idea of universal healthcare, but......

But I'm appalled by the deal the White House has made with the pharmaceutical industry's lobbying arm to buy their support.

Last week, after being reported in the Los Angeles Times, the White House confirmed it has promised Big Pharma that any healthcare legislation will bar the government from using its huge purchasing power to negotiate lower drug prices. That's basically the same deal George W. Bush struck in getting the Medicare drug benefit, and it's proven a bonanza for the drug industry. A continuation will be an even larger bonanza, given all the boomers who will be enrolling in Medicare over the next decade. And it will be a gold mine if the deal extends to Medicaid, which will be expanded under most versions of the healthcare bills now emerging from Congress, and to any public option that might be included. (We don't know how far the deal extends beyond Medicare because its details haven't been made public.)

Let me remind you: Any bonanza for the drug industry means higher healthcare costs for the rest of us, which is one reason why critics of the emerging healthcare plans, including the Congressional Budget Office, are so worried about their failure to adequately stem future healthcare costs.

I find it amusing that so many on the left imagine that it is the right being funded by insurance companies and lobbyists. Why do you think those same people stood by Obama when he got the health care debate started? He made a deal with them. He knew he needed big pharma on his side to pass this boondoggle, and as you can see, they will make out like bandits. Does this make you feel like the American people's best interests are being considered?

Keep all this in mind when you see the onslaught of pro government run healthcare ads soon. It wil big pharma urging you to be on the side of Obamacare. After all, it's in THEIR best interest. Reich's continues:

Big Pharma isn't just supporting universal healthcare. It's also spending lots of money on TV and radio advertising in support. Sunday's New York Times reports that Big Pharma has budgeted $150 million for TV ads promoting universal health insurance, starting this August (that's more money than John McCain spent on TV advertising in last year's presidential campaign), after having already spent a bundle through advocacy groups like Healthy Economies Now and Families USA.

Are we getting this? This isn't some rightwinger telling you these things. This is a former Clinton cabinet secretary who loves Obama.

The truth that so many of you who supported Obama will have to face sooner or later, is that you were sold a bill of goods. He is the finest of snake oil salesmen. And we all know that the snakeoil never works and it never makes us feel better.

Wake up people. The future of your health depends on it.

Listen and Learn

via HotAir.

The caller has a perfect summary who these protesters are. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Call Your Representative

Here is a list of of Representatives in the house. Find yours and call them and tell them to not vote for this health care bill when they come back from vacation.

Nothing could be more important than this. Call now, call later, call often this month.

What the townhalls are proving is that these are not just Republicans showing up to protest.

Keep at it folks, spread the word.