Maggie's Farm

The Hill, chronicler of doings in the US Capital, left a word out of its report that the “Senate bill to repeal health reform lacks backing from GOP leaders”, the missing word being “yet.”

The report makes clear that the GOP leadership “support repealing the Democrats' health care law and then replacing it with alternatives that lower costs while improving access.”

However, the political question is when to do that, and the reality question is whether it can be done.

Politically, it would probably be useless now. But, all GOPers should anyway sign on to the proposed legislation now to repeal ObamaCare.  It’s already clear that the repeal legislation is going no where under current Democrat majorities in the Congress. To allow the liberal media and politicians to use some GOP leaders’ hesitation in order to denigrate and divide Republicans is as unfavorable to the GOP 2010 chances as being forthright may also turn off a few waverers. But, those wavering who might be influenced are from those usually voting Democrat anyway, and many are likely to return to old habits anyway in the 2010 elections. The polled majority still favor repeal now, 60-36%. So, all GOPers should endorse repeal legislation, now.

Last February, my op-ed in the San Diego Union-Tribune, “No GOP Ideas?: Try These 10” summarized a 2-week earlier blog post of mine, “Republican Health Care Plan? 10-Steps, Post-2010.”  The op-ed emphasized that the 10 could and should be dealt with each as separate legislation, with no harm to the others, instead of in a multi-thousand page omnibus bill that no one understands and that contains much dangerous as the Democrats rammed through Congress.

The blog post, also, pointed out that for 2010 electoral purposes and for reality of getting passed,

Congressional Democrats and the liberal media would use a Republican alternative as an opportunity to shred Republicans as uncaring or not doing enough to meet their visions, and delusions, that there is a magic bullet that solves all real and purported problems.

However, after 2010, there is still a problem, as I wrote:

Washington is still Washington, regardless of party, and lobbies would again kick into high gear to tilt to their own narrow advantage Republican proposals.  Enough Republicans, like Democrat politicians, would be swayed, and Republicans as a whole would be tarred and Republicans’ most energetic base be turned off by smarmy politics as usual in Washington.

That’s why I proposed the 10 discrete improvements, after the 2010 elections, that could be acceptable across the political spectrum, except by those die-hard for universal medical care or  die-hard for no-government-in-healthcare.  You can see the 10 at either of the links above, to the op-ed in condensed form, or more broadly in the blog post.

So, GOP leadership is being political and cagey.  Only Obama and Congressional Democrats are hoisted by their own petard, and I say let them swing.

FYI, last year there was a Republican counter-proposal to ObamaCare, scored by the CBO, that actually reduced federal deficits and average medical premiums. That’s $2.5-trillion not spent by the Democrats to put us all and future generations in smothering debt, and preserve the high quality and access to medical care that over 80% enjoy. The major difference from ObamaCare: the CBO said it would increase coverage for about 3 million Americans, versus for 26 million supposedly with improved coverage under ObamaCare. There may be more we may choose to do, affordably, some of which is in the 10 I propose, but there is clearly no excuse for reducing the quality and access to care of the other 80+%, and of succeeding generations’ medical and fiscal health.

Thanks Anchoress.

Typical: "Nudge on Arms Further Divides the U.S. and Israel".

I never held a firearm before the Marine Corps, and chose not to since Vietnam. I spoke with a Marine Sergeant yesterday, he on the way to Afghanistan, his third tour there and Iraq. He hadn't held one either before the Marine Corps loaned him a rifle, trained him to use it, and he has to protect his country and family back in Ohio. He doesn't know whether he will choose to own one after he returns, serves another 10-years, and retires from the Corps.

The point is that those of us who treasure the 2nd Amendment to our Bill of Rights are not rampant Rambos, but understand that any key right denied is a shot at all our others.

Last week's US Supreme Court defense of the 2nd Amendment wasn't just about our right to own firearms. As InstaPundit Glenn Reynolds puts it:

So in little more than 15 years, we've seen an amazing turnaround on an issue where the "establishment" side had broad support from politicians (in both parties, really) and almost universal support from the media. Gun control now is nearly dead as an issue, and the "establishment" view that the Second Amendment didn't protect any sort of individual right, but merely a right of states to have national guards, did not get the support of a single Supreme Court justice.

So what's the lesson for today? It's that activism matters.

Now the issue on which activists differ from the establishment is the size of government. Politicians (in both parties, really) are pretty happy with big government. In this, they have the near-universal support of the media (now using covert e-mail lists to agree on how to slant their stories).

But if people care about shrinking government as much as gun rights activists care about protecting the Second Amendment, then this situation, too, can see a turnaround.

For the sake of the country, it had better.

Ripped off from The Other McCain.

Party Hearty!

Most Americans, and many abroad, can’t help but choke up as they see our flag floating by in a patriotic parade. But, the 4^th of July isn’t Flag Day, June 14. How many hung out their flag then?

Most Americans, and many abroad, are thankful for the men and women of the United States who stand and fight to keep millions from slavery to thugs. But, the 4^th isn’t just about them. How many Americans at home give their all to support our troops and commitments?

Most Americans, and many abroad, appreciate the freedom and opportunities found by coming to our shores. But the 4^th isn’t Immigration Day. How many appreciate the work, the fortitude, the risk needed to be independent?

Most Americans, and many abroad, say they’d fight for freedom. But, the 4^th isn’t about physically fighting. How many stand up in public, regardless the consequences, and in their spoken and published names demand respect for our rights?

Most Americans, and many abroad, take the 4^th as just another holiday. But, the 4^th is about not taking a holiday from the responsibilities of a free people. How many rededicate themselves to being and helping others be free?

In 1776, most in America were not supporters of the Revolution that dramatically changed and improved the lot of future generations here and abroad. Even among the supporters, most were sunshine patriots and few Winter Soldiers.

To the few stalwarts we and the world owe more than can ever be adequately given, and indeed few were or are given what they deserve. But, the stalwart don’t seek material rewards or comforts. How many are so at peace with themselves by just being there in full devotion and exposure to stand up?

Most Americans, and many abroad, know all this. But, too few live it, every day, in every way. How much more secure and peaceful and at ease would all be if more did?

We aren’t free and independent because we remember, respect or celebrate it. We are only free when we practice it at every opportunity and calling and contribute to others’ realization of it.

The first battle isn't on some distant shore or with our neighbor. The first essential fight is with our own rationalizations of retreat from being an American, the exceptional.

If there's a tear to be shed, it's for ourselves when we haven't been an American. If there's a tear worth shedding, it's in gratitude to ourselves that we have and have taken the opportunity to be an American.

The stirring words and actions of past times are inspirational. The words and actions of today are the reality of whether we actually are inspired.

Fox reports, " 'Girls Gone Wild' Creator Joe Francis Engaged to CBS Entertainment Reporter Christina McLarty -- niece of Mack McLarty, former White House chief of staff to Bill Clinton -- while vacationing in St. Tropez. But it will not be a traditional wedding."

We look forward to seeing if the bride's dress meets the "Girls Gone Wild" standard:

The New York Times' report on a study by some Harvard students tortures the facts and the reader with root omissions.

I posted a Comment to the NYTs report, as follows (cut-and-pasted from the "preview" that awaits the NYTs to decide whether to publish it or not):

I just read the Harvard students' report. It is carefully done. BUT, it rests upon several false assertions, not enumerated in the study: First, it fails to mention that the term \"waterboarding\" originated in 2004. Second, it asserts that the history of the technique of interrogation is coterminus with \"torture\" outlawed by preceding laws, conventions and directives. The former applications of let's call it water torture were more severe in duration, application and laxer in supervision and frequency. And, one must remember that the US used it in only three cases upon trained high-value resistors to interrogation who, then, revealed valuable, life-saving intelligence, to no lasting ill-effects upon their health. Even President Obama's executive order banning \"waterboarding\" implicitly excludes our civilian CIA when necessary and authorized. The named major newspapers often, usually indeed, made the same sensationalist errors as the Harvard students, but insofar as they explained the technique or added correct adjectives and adverbs should not be faulted. -- The author of this article about the Harvard students' study, BTW, doesn't provide either a link to the study, for readers to examine it, nor does he even attempt to provide needed context, instead writing his and the students' assertions as legitimate in itself.

If you want to weigh in, go to the Comment link above or to the NYTs report link. Of course, be succinct, informed, and direct to matters of fact.