Sunday, August 30, 2009
I don't always agree with Torinus, but this time, he hits the proverbial nail. What he fails to mention is why the "right-of-center bombast".
For fifty years, the right has been bullied into submission, largely through Political Correctness. I believe those of us on the right are fed up....to here (see Deekaman running hand across forehead). We're mad as hell and we are not going to take it anymore. That Democrat Ron Kind was not willing to attend is telling. They don't want to hear what we have to say. We are bringing our elected representatives to account and letting them know they work for us.
Ignore us at your peril.
The Angry Mob descended on Miller Park yesterday (Saturday) afternoon. It's very clear they were an uneducated and unruly bunch. You can see from the swastikas how awful and evil they must be. Notice the blonde woman to the right in the foreground horribly treating the black woman next to her.
Sarcasm aside, it was clear that, once again the Left does not understand us and has grossly underestimated the movement. During the tailgate, a plane circled with a banner reading, "Teabaggers (heart) High Healthcare Costs". I talked to many, many people. Each one was very clear. Healthcare costs are too high. The only thing worse would be socialized medicine. Deeawife 3.0 was very social. She spent so much time talking during the game, she had to ask where the Pirates 3-run inning came from (an RBI double and a 2-run homer).
Bottom line: There are a bunch of folks of all persuasions, racial, political, gender....who are all deeply concerned about the direction of this country and the debt being incurred.
Politicians: Ignore us at your peril.
Brewers win, without drama.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
As a nation, we have to decide that, rather than "poaching" manufacturing jobs from each other, the states will start making themselves "manufacturing-friendly".
For many years now, we've been told we do not need manufacturing. Dot-coms, information and finance were going to be the next wave. I have concluded that all these things do nothing but pass funny-money between people. Unless there is something with inherent value being manufactured, sold and bought, no one really gets ahead.
Just my opinion.
Got her facts hosed up here:
First, Limbaugh is not "their philosophical leader". He just has the microphone and says what we believed long before he took to the airwaves. Further, in saying he wants TCO to fail, it's about policies, not race or personality. Can Watson say the same about how the Democrats handled Bush?
Now,Fidel. She makes the statement that Che led the Cuban revolution. True. But to say that after the revolution they went and found someone to lead the new nation out amongst the population is utter BS. Fidel was an associate of Che, not just some guy. And if Cuba is so wonderful, why do people leave at any chance and why are they killed or jailed by their own if they try and fail?
The reason Americans have turned against health-care reform, after electing President Obama in part for promising it, is simple: Despite protestations to the contrary, Americans don't like change.
Yes, yes....of course. We just don't like change. It's so simple. Ol' Mikey's a freakin' genius.
Whatever. While it may be true that Americans (like most humans) don't particularly care for change, that is clearly not what is at issue here. Greater than their dislike of change is their mistrust of government. And unlike Mikey's friends in Congress, many who oppose the House bill have actually read it.
There will always be a Betsy McCaughey sharpening her pencils and cackling as she underlines promising sub-clauses.
No. There will always be people who read, understand, then oppose. Unlike Mikey's cohorts on the Left, most of us on the Right prefer to base our opposition on policy and core beliefs, rather than opposition for oppositions' sake.
This is not "reform". Reform is tweaking a system to make it work better. This is a whjolesale hijacking of a large part of the US economy. No where are the root causes of expensive healthcare discussed, debated and addressed. The Leftist elitists think they know all the answers. I got news for them....nobody likes a know-it-all. And Americans really don't like the feeling that something is being jammed you-know-where.
I'd say Mikey isn't just a genius, but a Super-Genius. Kinda like Wile E. Coyote, Super-Genius.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Obama's First Six Months' Accomplishments
1. Offended the Queen of England .
2. Bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia .
3. Praised the Marxist Daniel Ortega.
4. Kissed Socialist Hugo Chavez on the cheek.
5. Endorsed the Socialist Evo Morales of Bolivia .
6. Sided with Hugo Chavez and Communist Fidel Castro against Honduras .
7. Announced we would meet with Iranians with no pre-conditions while they're building their nuclear weapons.
8. Gave away billions to AIG also without pre-conditions.
9. Expanded the bailouts.
10. Insulted everyone who has ever loved a Special Olympian.
11. Doubled our national debt.
12. Announced the termination of our new missile defense system the day after North Korea launched an ICBM.
13. Released information on U.S. intelligence gathering despite urgings of his own CIA director and the prior four CIA directors.
14. Accepted without comment that five of his cabinet members cheated on their taxes and two other nominees withdrew after they couldn't take the heat.
15. Appointed a Homeland Security Chief who identified military veterans and abortion opponents as "dangers to the nation."
16. Ordered that the word "terrorism" no longer be used and instead refers to such acts as "man made disasters."
17. Circled the globe to publicly apologize for America 's world leadership.
18. Told the Mexican president that the violence in their country was because of us.
19. Politicized the census by moving it into the White House from the Department of Commerce.
20. Appointed as Attorney General the man who orchestrated the forced removal and expulsion to Cuba of a 9-year-old whose mother died trying to bring him to freedom in the United States .
21. Salutes as heroes three Navy SEALS who took down three terrorists who threatened one American life and the next day announces members of the Bush administration may stand trial for "torturing" three 9/11 terrorists by pouring water up their noses.
22. Low altitude photo shoot of Air Force One over New York City that frightened thousands of New Yorkers.
23. Sent his National Defense Advisor to Europe to assure them that the US will no longer treat Israel in a special manner and they might be on their own with the Muslims.
24. Praised Jimmy Carter's trip to Gaza where he sided with terrorist Hamas against Israel .
25. Nationalized General Motors and Chrysler while turning shareholder control over to the unions and freezing out retired investors who owned their bonds. Committed unlimited taxpayer billions in the process.
26. Passed a huge energy tax in the House that will make American industry even less competitive while costing homeowners thousands per year.
27. Announced nationalized health care "reform" that will strip seniors of their Medicare, cut pay of physicians, increase taxes yet another $1 trillion, and put everyone on rationed care with government bureaucrats deciding who gets care and who doesn't.
Much for Americans to be proud of.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
The reasoning here is so obvious, I can't imagine why it hasn't been adopted. Yes, I can. In the name of votes, politicians want to maintain a system that doesn't work and build on it.
The author has obviously done his homework. I was going to include quotes and comment, but the article stands on its' own. Long read, but completely worth your time.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Though Obama's natural instinct is toward compromise, now's the time to fight on health-care reform.
Really? Compromise? Eleanor...sweetie....listen up here. Recall this: "I won". Not too compromising there.
The first duty of a political party in retreat is to find something its people can rally around, and saying no to Obamacare is working nicely for the Republicans.
Baby, it's not the Republicans saying, "no". It's the American people. And we aren't saying "no" to Healthcare Reform. We are screaming "NO GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM".
Obama campaigned on his fabled ability to bring people together.
Really, Sunshine? All he's ever been is a "Community Organizer". Community Organizers "bring people together" by bribing them with government largesse.
People don't line up for miles to see him the way they did in the campaign. And judging by the anxiety showing up in the polls, voters don't trust Obama enough on health-care reform to set aside their historic distrust of government.
And rightly so, Honey. This President wants to create the largest intrusion of government into the lives of average citizens in history. World history.
Bottom line, darlin': Your Obamalove is coloring your vision. Your inside-the-beltway mentality has divorced you from what us regular folks think.
You have no clue what you are talking about.
Once again, he hits the proverbial nail. But The Chosen One won't listen. His ego is too big and his agenda too important to him. He might unload Gibbs and Axelrod, but not Rahm, The Enforcer. I also don't believe he can unload the Pelosi, Ried, Frank triumvirate (Manny, Moe and Jack? Moe, Larry and Curley?). But he may be able to influence more moderate Democrats. But that assumes he doesn't want the three as attack dogs.
Favre’s night ended with a jarring hit by Chiefs linebacker Corey Mays(notes), who buried his head in the 39-year-old’s chest as he drove him into the turf to force an errant throw. Favre got up and walked off fine, his purple No. 4 jersey — such a strange sight, for sure—pulled down and exposing his left shoulder pad.
Here's to many more guys like Corey Mays.
Friday, August 21, 2009
"It's entirely possible to have a period as long as a decade or two of cooling superimposed on the long-term warming trend," said David Easterling, chief of scientific services at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C.
"These short term fluctuations are statistically insignificant (and) entirely due to natural internal variability," Easterling said in an essay published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters in April. "It's easy to 'cherry pick' a period to reinforce a point of view."
Is it not as easy to do the same with (alleged) AGW? Taking 100 years of questionable data, of which only 50 can be argued to be "good" (i.e. worldwide), coupled with questionable statistical techniques and equally questionable data sources in a planet reputed to be billions of years old seems to me to be "cherry picking" as well.
(John) Christy (director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville) added, however: "Our ignorance of the climate system is still enormous, and our policy makers need to know that . . . We really don't know much about what causes multi-year changes like this."
But I'm guessing that if you are reading this, you want to know. Go do your own research. You will see most of the (alleged) AGW believers are using fear, while most of the skeptics use fact.
But hey...you decide.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Feldstein makes really excellent points here. But the one that struck me was this:
One reason the Obama administration is prepared to use rationing to limit health care is to rein in the government's exploding health-care budget. Government now pays for nearly half of all health care in the U.S., primarily through the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
Is half the population covered by Medicare or Medicaid? Turns out that about 15% of the population is covered by Medicare and 13% by Medicaid. I don't know if there is any overlap. I'd venture the higher cost is due to end-of-life costs associated with Medicare. If true, doesn't it stand to reason that, in order to control costs, one must go after the "low-hanging fruit"? Seems to me that would be end-of-life costs. How to do it? Rationing.
But actually, it turns out I'm wrong. Medicare spending is about $300 Billion, while Medicaid is about $320 billion. Now, the Medicare numbers are for 2004 and Medicaid for 2007 (don't know why).
So let's assume that the costs are (roughly) the same. It's still 28% of the population (covered by the government) consuming 50% of all healthcare dollars?
And some want the government to run the whole thing?
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Monday, August 17, 2009
Yet despite potential flash points with nations such as Russia (over Georgia) or China (over Taiwan), it would be lunacy to engage in combat with either because of the risk of escalation to a nuclear conflict. Abolishing nuclear weapons would obviously not make conflict with those states a good idea, but it would dramatically increase American freedom of action in a crisis. That should make hawks, with their strong faith in the efficacy of American military power, very happy. Indeed, if anyone opposes disarmament, it should be our rivals.
America still has freedom of action, with or without nuclear weapons. The reason for not going into combat against Russia over Georgia is that there is no national interest. I guarantee is a move was made against Poland, the US would respond with military action (under most Presidents - this one, I'm not so sure. He may not have the stomach for it). If China attacks Taiwan, the US would take military action. A carrier battle group is always close enough to defend Taiwan (though I'm not convinced they can't defend themselves).
Nuclear weapons do deter states from attacking us with nuclear weapons -- and few would suggest that we unilaterally give up our arsenal while others retain theirs. But, oddly, it is here that conservatives seem to doubt the utility of nuclear weapons more than their counterparts on the left. Whereas many liberals and realists believe that Iran could be deterred if it built the bomb, conservatives are far less sanguine, insisting that a nuclear Tehran is an unacceptable threat. They too understand that the U.S. arsenal is no guarantor of security, and that even a handful of nuclear weapons in enemy hands threatens to neuter our conventional advantage.
Not the point of deterring a nuclear Iran. Iran is not a threat. Iran's proxies are. Iran has no problem turning over a "suitcase nuke" to a terrorist organization for detonation in Tel Aviv, Paris, London, New York.
Unilaterally giving up our arsenal is exactly what the leftist peaceniks want. It's been that way since the 1960's. The belief is that if we give up ours, everyone else will play nice, too. No, they won't. There are bad governments and people who wish us harm.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker of the House and is given a place of honor and virtue by the MSM.
Barney Frank is a hateful partisan and a crook and is given a place of honor and virtue by the MSM.
Some people venting their frustration with their elected officials and we're crazy?
Rick Perlstein can kiss my ass.
The BBC also quoted liberal Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin's explanation: "They want to get a little clip on YouTube of an effort to disrupt a town meeting and to send the congressman running for his car. This is an organized effort . . . you can trace it back to the health insurance industry."
Yes. I get regular calls from the Health Insurance Industry. They tell me what to write here. Oh, wait. That's Union thugs getting their call from Democrats to come out and crack some heads.
The lockstep strangeness of the mad lies on the protesters' signs -- too uniform to be spontaneous. They are both. If you don't understand that any moment of genuine political change always produces both, you can't understand America, where the crazy tree blooms in every moment of liberal ascendancy, and where elites exploit the crazy for their own narrow interests.
Perlstein doesn't understand this at all. We are all Howard Beele; "Mad as Hell".
Perhaps some discussion of the Leftist crazies is in order? I mean, Democrats didn't get crazy over Reagan? Of Bush? Or the 1994 clobbering they took at the hands of Republicans? Or every time there is a new nuclear power plant considered? Or a war? No, they never get crazy.
Again. Perlstein can kiss my ass. Get out of the Beltway and talk to real people.
The Beer: The Cherry Wheat is bottled and aging. I've tasted it and find it to be completely satisfactory. I have passed a bottle to a potential "Beer for Deer" participant. He should be tasting this weekend.
The Bicycle: I'm offically on "Injured Reserve", meaning my season is over. My trusty steed will need to rest up for next season. The elbows and hip are just too bad. I'll make an appointment with the doc tomorrow.
The VRWC: Apparently the protests have had an effect.
"Insurance companies will no longer be able to ... place an arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive or charge outrageous out-of-pocket expenses on top of your premiums," Obama told the crowd of roughly 1,500 people.
First, any "cap" is not arbitrary. And the policy holder is (or should be) aware of what the cap is. He is setting up insurance to go bankrupt instead of individuals. If there is no cap, the cost of the insurance necessarily must increase.
...promising reforms that would prevent firms from... charging "outrageous" fees.
Why? And what qualifies as "outrageous"? And who does this? All of them? Some? Tell me. Give me something. Throw me a bone. I keep hearing anecdotal "evidence", but never anything hard. "Outrageous fees" should make an insurer non-competitive. But if we don't know which ones do, How can we make an informed decision? It's hard to see the statement as anything but "truth challenged".
"I hear a lot of people say, 'How can we afford this right now? We've got to reduce our deficit,'" he said, taking boos from some audience members when he said he inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit from the previous administration of Republican George W. Bush.
"If you are a deficit hawk and you are tired of this crazy spending in Washington, and you want to finally make sure that we are looking out for the next generation, then you more than anybody should want to reform the healthcare system," he said.
Here we go again. Mr. President, explain how an inherited $1.3 trillion deficit is bad, but 4 times that is not? Further, explain to me in detail, how a private insurance system is bankrupting the nation, but a federal bureaucracy will not?
Representatives should take a cue from Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) who faced voters at North Division High School last week in a meeting that was heated at times but mostly orderly.
When you bus in your thug supporters, I doubt anyone is willing to speak in opposition. "Chilling Effect", anyone?
The House bill would extend coverage through Medicare for optional "advanced care planning" with a doctor every five years. Such discussions likely would include "advanced directives," or instructions that people can put in writing for what kind of care they want if they should become incapacitated.
Let's stipulate that the case is as stated above. Let's stipulate that this administration and this Congress will not require "advance care planning". What about the next? Or the next? Or the next? continue to place power in the hands of government and eventually it will be used for nefarious purposes. It has never failed.
But by no credible definition of the word can it be called socialistic - no more than Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security can be called socialistic.
Um...MJS? Hello? Medicare, Medicaid an Social Security are socialistic. By their very definition, they take from each according to their means to give to those according to their need.
Opponents point to efforts to use comparative effectiveness research as evidence people won't be able to get the care they need. But the idea of such research is simply to determine what works best and then give doctors and hospitals that information. The idea is to direct precious dollars to treatments that work and away from those that are not as effective.
I go back to the idea of power in the hands of government. Maybe they won't ration under this administration and Congress...or the next. But at some point, healthcare must be rationed. The bill does nothing to address any underlying causes of healthcare costs. Many see this as Free Healthcare. As a result, it will be overused and abused.
My last comment to the MJS editorial board: Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are going broke. Everyone agrees. What makes anyone think a Federal healthcare plan will be any different?
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Just wanted to check that out.
Friday, August 14, 2009
Monday, August 10, 2009
Americans have been waiting for nearly a century for quality, affordable health care.
If it were true that Americans wanted what Pelosi and Hoyer are selling, it would have been a done deal. The idea of a "Right to Healthcare" is populist crap. Designed only to get votes. As we have seen in numerous examples, somebody pays. Either someones' ability to bill for services suffers, the taxpayer suffers or someone doesn't get services. And why should a taxpayer be required to pay for anothers' healthcare? And what part of the Constitution even allows it?
The failure of past attempts is a reminder that health insurance reform is a defining moment in our nation's history — it is well worth the time it takes to get it right.
Then why the rush? Why is it necessary to throw a bill together and jam it through Congress in a matter of weeks?
These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task for decades.
Apparently only un-American if their side is drown out. How many Conservatives have tried to speak and been shouted down over the last 40 years. Everything from deaththreats to pie-in-the-face tactics have been used. I know something more un-American, too. Sending Union thugs out to intimidate and harass protesters doesn't sound too "American". How long have we been told that "dissent is patriotic"? Apparently not if you want to dissent from Queen Nancy.
In the end, there is no debate. To debate the stimulus or cap and trade or healthcare is to expose them for what they are. Democrats want to shove their Socialistic wet dreams up our collective @$$ whether we like it or not.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
I don't think anyone questions the need for a change in healthcare in the US. But less than half of us believe the plan coming out of Washington will work. It's long on government and short on specifics. That allows the mind to fill in the details. Then send out a bunch of elected representatives who are supposed to know what's going on, but don't. Now the White House is sending out Union thugs to beat up guys in wheelchairs. None of this is conducive to convincing a bunch of people who already skeptical of Big Government. The frustration is no surprise.
My advice to the President - take it or leave it; it's free:
Go on TV. Prime Time. Tell Congress to back up. Tell Congress that maybe there should be more deliberation. The people are concerned and want more scrutiny. Blah, blah, blah.
Do it, Mr. President.
As for the rumors out there about how health care will be drastically changed for the worse, you can rest assured: Health care reform will not limit choices, take away treatment options, ration care, eliminate private insurance, or tell you how or when to die. These things are not going to happen.
The word he needs to add is "now". "These things are not going to happen now". The problem with government-run anything is that it is government-run. There is no alternative to the government system. No competition, no recourse. No ability to pay out-of-pocket when the system says, "no".
John Rauser see things differently. I particularly like his "Annual Risk Adjustments". It appears much like the Workers' Compensation system, where employers are given an adjustment based on their previous 3 years of compensation experience.
I'm also very much in favor of Reform No. 3, as I have advocated in previous postings. It only makes sense to know what we are paying for.
I'm not wild about mandated coverage (Reform No. 5). Let people choose, but make them accountable for that choice. Choose to not take your employers healthcare plan? Expect to pay the entire cost out-of-pocket. And don't whine about it. Choose to not offer healthcare to employees? Don't expect the best and brightest.
I recognize the need to reform healthcare. The best fix is the one that has the least government.
Friday, August 7, 2009
And Krugman...geez. What do I say?
Some commentators have tried to play down the mob aspect of these scenes, likening the campaign against health reform to the campaign against Social Security privatization back in 2005. But there’s no comparison. I’ve gone through many news reports from 2005, and while anti-privatization activists were sometimes raucous and rude, I can’t find any examples of congressmen shouted down, congressmen hanged in effigy, congressmen surrounded and followed by taunting crowds.And I can’t find any counterpart to the death threats at least one congressman has received.
Really? Death threats? Hanged in effigy? OK. Here are some anecdotal stories offered with no evidence other than say-so. On the other hand, how many death threats did Bush receive? How many times hanged in effigy? I lost count. Does Krugman forget about the Leftist protestors in masks going about smashing store windows?
Leftists pay their protestors. Look in any college newspaper and you will find ads for professional protesters. The TEA Party attendees, those who protest at town hall meetings? Regular folks. Regular folks who are afraid of their government and the overreach of this administration.
Goodman and Krugman don't understand this because they are statists. The love the idea of a benevolent tyrrany. They don't understand that they could be on the receiving end of that tyrrany someday. After all, benevolent or not, it's still tyranny.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Sebilius doesn't get it...at all.
We have a huge, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to improve the lives of all Americans, insured and uninsured alike.
She is telling us we can trade a bureaucrat at an insurance company for a bureaucrat in the government. We can trade the ability to pay out-of-pocket for a procedure denied by that insurance company for "end of life counseling". We can have "security" for higher taxes. I mean, who wouldn't trade liberty, the ability to make one's own decisions for "security".
The entire Left Wing can't understand why we wouldn't trade our souls for a benevolent tyranny.
A benevolent tyranny is still tyranny.
Monday, August 3, 2009
The average American is very concerned about the overreach of Big Government. No, this isn't Rush Limbaugh, FoxNews or the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. It's not extremism on the Right.
Perhaps this has something to do with how few positive things Republicans have to say.
As opposed to all the positive things Democrats had to say during the Bush administration? I know E.J. will disagee with me, but Democrats resisted Bush to resist Bush. This is a case of Republicans resisting Big Government. I seem to recall Democrats resisting many things by claiming they didn't want government in such-and-such part of the publics' life (like the bedroom, or private cell phone conversations). But they support government intervention in an individuals' healthcare? What is a "right" to healthcare if the government is able to take it away?
Regarding "end-of-life care", E.J. says:
It simply provides Medicare funding so seniors with life-threatening diseases can consult their doctors on advanced care and be given "an explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title."
But the concern is well-founded. This is a party full of people who believe in euthanasia and assisted suicide. Why should we not be concerned about political pressure? I'm sure if a healthcare program were being pushed by a Republican, the Left would be (rightly) concerned about an abortion ban.
And race-baiting? Who is the guy who spent 20 years in a race-baiting church and whose wife, in spite of the advantages she had and the 6-figure salary claimed she had not been proud of her country? Please. And let's not forget the Seargant and the Professor, shall we?
Last, none of this is extremism. It's the Republican Party returning to its' Reagan roots. If they can articulate a Reaganesque message of small government and low taxes and job creation in the provate sector, they can win...handily.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Saturday, August 1, 2009
I did not know her well, but I recall her as a nice girl. She lived not-too-far from my neighborhood (nothing is all that far in Oconomowoc). My childhood friend had a serious crush on her. It got us both into one of those things you can recall later as "a funny story".
I hope this new connection brings an end to this story.