We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
The Moonbats want to get rid of "Fighting Sioux." The Indians want it kept. How does "The Fighting Sue" sound instead? Or "The Pacifist Sue"? Beat us, please.
The bill will nationalize the nation’s health care industry, increase costs, ration care, tax cosmetic surgery, cut Medicare, charge a monthly abortion fee, and take away your freedom.
Please take time tomorrow and Saturday to call your US Senator.
According to a recent paper by Drs. June and Dave O'Neill of Baruch College, the City University of New York, two national studies--the National Health Interview Survey and the Current Population Survey--put the number of folks who don't have health insurance because they can't afford it at 21.6 million. That's almost exactly the number that Dr. Reid's big spending plan would leave uninsured.
After spending $848 billion, of course.
Maybe it won't insure anybody, but it will achieve control of us. That's the point.
Next on the Dem agenda: Legalizing illegals. Pete DuPont says Congress is hard of hearing, but they are not. They have a small window of opportunity to ram through their wish list before they are voted out next November. These are not issues that there is a national consensus about. Bad politics, bad news, bad everything.
Seven trees? Isn't the hockey stick graph dead already?
How times have changed. The CA students once protested for free speech. Now they protest about Gimme gimme. What pathetic, whining, entitled children this country has raised. Yes, I worked my way through UMass, and I am the better man for it. The young benefit from challenges. I did.
...the history of humanity is a history of social networking all the same, according to Nicholas A. Christakis and James H. Fowler, authors of Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives. “Our connections affect every aspect of our daily lives,” they write.
Some Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee were taken aback Wednesday by Attorney General Eric Holder's refusal to reveal conflicts of interest involving Justice Department lawyers who, before joining the Obama administration, worked on behalf of Guatanamo detainees.
Sarah seems to be a subject of great fascination. She was charming, smart, and funny on Hannity last night. Yes, her political points were shallow - but more substantial than "hopey-changey," and she has had more experience than he had - both in life and in government.
Here's her book tour schedule. Alas, nothing in New England. She should go to Boston.
The AP supposedly hired 11 fact-checkers to discredit Ms. Palin’s memoir (Did Fox News hire 11 to question the very questionable things found in the two Obama memoirs?)
(I wondered, as did Jammy, whether the AP will assign as many to studying the details of he health care bill: "Considering the AP assigned 11 "fact-checkers" to pore over Sarah Palin's 415-page book, I figure they'll assign a proportional amount to this, right? That would be 55 of them, assuming they're interested.")
If you believe, as I do, that the GOP once again needs to become the “party of ideas” — as it did under Ronald Reagan — then Palin is not the solution to what ails it. At this stage, based on the interviews I have seen with her, she doesn’t seem able to articulate the case for conservatism in a manner that is compelling or even particularly persuasive. She is nothing like, to take three individuals I would hold up as public models, Margaret Thatcher, William Bennett, and Antonin Scalia — people brimming with ideas, knowledgeable and formidable, intellectually well-grounded, and impossible to dismiss.
True, but those folks are not American politicians -
Finally, a word from our commenter MM on our Palin-mania post yesterday:
Sarah is doing a lot of things right. Holding true to her principles in spite of the ugly backbiting of the liberal media, remaining a faithful wife to Todd and a good mother to their children -- these are admirable things. Since I come from 'flyover country' myself, I have learned to discount what the limousine liberals have to say about most things and people. They view the world through a skewed lens of anger and resentment. But I still haven't figured out why they reveal their worst and ugliest selves whenever Sarah Palin is mentioned or comes on the scene. As a New England based commenter said on Neptunus lex the other evening, by all rights, by all they say they believe in, feminists ought to love her. She got her college degree, she married her high school sweetheart, she has five children, and she has been a successful governor of the largest state in the Union, and got a more than 60% approval rating from her constituents..
What's not to like? Of course, she has had more real world experience in managing effectively a large complex enterprise, meeting payrolls, and solving problems by concentrated effort. But what's so bad about that? Ohh, right. I forgot. Our present President hasn't done any of that. No governing ... no meeting payrolls ... no solving difficult diplomatic problems.
I guess you just have to hate a woman [or a man] who can do all of the above, successfully.
Or maybe it's just because she's beautiful. And her husband adores her. And encourages her in her achievements. Yeah ... that's probably it.
‘I love the tea party movement,’ she said. ‘It’s beautiful, it’s healthy. It’s part of that good healthy competition that’s needed in a political party.’ She contrasted the somewhat tumultuous state of the GOP to what’s going on in the Democratic party today. ‘It seems like the Democratic party is filled with more sheep-like individuals, who go along and get along,’ she said.”
The health-care mess grows worse: The Chinese have caught on that Obama wants to borrow more billions for us, who are cash
poor, to create entitlements that they, who are cash rich, would not
create for their own people. The new government suggestion that women
not begin receiving routine mammograms until age 50 comes at a bad
time, given that critics of Obamacare have been arguing that it will
lead to rationing of service.
Americans who are troubled by the decision to send alleged Sept. 11
mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to New York for trial will feel
better about it when he's put to death, President Barack Obama said
Tuesday.
She's a pheenom. She's a non-elite, non-Hollywood celeb. She is beautiful, fertile, and athletic. Her hard-working, macho hubbie supports whatever she wants to do. The MSM hates her.
She's a yokel with common sense. Like Truman, Lincoln, and Andrew Jackson.
Even if you do not want her to be President, it is difficult not to like her.
...the majority of our representatives may congratulate themselves on reducing the number of uninsured, while quietly understanding this can only be the first step of a multiyear process to more drastically change the organization and funding of health care in America. I have met many people for whom this strategy is conscious and explicit.
We should not be making public policy in such a crucial area by keeping the electorate ignorant of the actual road ahead.
What is the goal of the so-called conservative Democrats? We can infer from Charlie that it is merely to escape the wrath of the voters back home.
Pelosi & Emanuel allow a carefully deduced number of Democratic Members from conservative districts to be untouched because, you see, that serves their ultimate goal — pass a suicidal healthcare bill as they earlier passed a job-killing cap & trade bill out of the House.
A propos our earlier post today about Immune from Logic, here's what they are doing in the UK: Health and safety snoops to enter family homes. Why people would put up with that is beyond me. Oh, I forgot. It's for the Greater Good. Meaning the good of the government.
It makes sense, however, in a sick sort of way: who pays the piper calls the tune. The more government controls the funding of medical care, the sooner they control what we do in our lives. Thus we get to things like this: A cost-benefit analysis of abortion vs. live birth.
Abortions are cheaper, of course. As Chicago Boyz says,
It’s as if we in the U.S. are moving toward a system where just about anything
can be justified because some government official says that it should
be so. It’s all for the greater good, right? What are pesky little
things like individuals and predictable rules in the face of all that
wonderful greater goodness?
In addition to his nonprofit advocacy, Gore is a partner in a venture capital firm that finances "sustainable" and alternative energy businesses, prompting some critics to accuse Gore of promoting environmental policies that will fatten his bank account.
"Cap & Tax — Don't Be Fooled: Al Gore Will Make billions," read a sign carried by Alan Tudor, who drove from Tampa to attend Saturday's protest.
"Gore's Favorite Green Product? Your money in his pocket," said another sign.
On the other hand, it has often been pointed out lately that you catch the most flak when you are over the target. Via Riehl:
Amazingly, but not surprisingly, the AP somehow nabbed a copy of the
book before it was released. They're now erroneously reporting on the
book's contents and are repeating many of the same things they spewed
during the campaign and afterwards. We've heard 11 writers are engaged
in this opposition research, er, "fact checking" research! Imagine that
– 11 AP reporters dedicating time and resources to tearing up the book,
instead of using the time and resources to "fact check" what's going on
with Sheik Mohammed's trial, Pelosi's health care takeover costs, Hasan's associations, etc. Amazing.
That's a question She Who Must Be Obeyed asked me. Well, here's one.
I do not think it's an issue that lots of people are fired up about. The chanting part is amusing. "Communism" - "Now!" Also, "What do we want?" - "Free stuff." "When do we want it?" - "Now!"
"We're not going to solve the economic problems until we get rid of people like Chris Dodd. As long as Dodd is in there writing regulation, the economy is never going to recover, and more and more people are going to lose their jobs"
Whither government in America, ask the people? How much should we allow it to do for us without losing something essential that makes us who we are? Are we really all that different of a people from everyone else on the planet? Is there an identifiable “American character” that sets us apart?
Our ancestors certainly thought so. Alexis de Tocqueville agreed. Indeed, it may be out of fashion to talk about the basis of our Constitution, but if we ever forget the idea that all power flows from the consent of the governed and not the other way around, we are doomed to suffer a significant loss of personal freedom simply because government can do pretty much whatever it chooses to do unless the people withhold their consent. There hasn’t been a lot of that these last 40 years and government’s ravenous appetite to do what all governments, once created, and regardless of who is in charge, seek to do - control - has gotten out of hand.
This despite the best of intentions of government’s major cheerleaders, and their belief that society can be perfected with the application of the principles of social science; seek out root causes of society’s problems and address them.
Over the last year the Congress and Administration have:
- Printed trillions of dollars of new money, raising the risk of future inflation
- Borrowed trillions of dollars, sucking capital out of private lending markets
- Run up deficits that pretty much guarantee future tax increases
- Toyed with health care bills that will substantially increase the cost of labor
- Toyed with climate bills that will substantially increase the cost of fuel and electricity
- Demagogued industries with average to below-average profitability
for making obscene profits that must be reduced (e.g. health insurance
companies who make 3-4% of sales)
- Taken over whole industries (autos, banks) and run them to the
benefit of favored political constituencies, even when it violates the
law (e.g. trashing for secured creditors of auto companies in favor of
the UAW).
- Demonstrated a disdain for money-making by imposing populist
compensation limits on executives of out-of-favor companies and
industries.
- Spent money in the stimulus mainly to add government jobs, every
one of which is generally focused on making my life running a business
harder. If you do not understand or believe this, you have not run a
business that employs people.
- Shown a general philosophic hostility towards markets and capitalism
Good grief. Never thought I'd see the day that an American Pres would put on a Mao jacket. It sends a peculiar message. I would wear a tutu before I'd put on one of those - except maybe for Halloween.
(Re the bows, there was a time when gentlemen's bowing to eachother in America was a sign of respect, but it was replaced more than 100 years ago by the more dignified handshake. A bow is basically a symbol of submission.)
If somebody wants to run against the O, it would not be hard to put together a disturbing photo montage of a person who seems to respect any nation more highly than his own.
Neither Russia nor China, nor Iran, nor other hostile countries are comfortable with the dominance of world power held by the United States. They are independently and together working assiduously to neuter the US’ sway in the world. President Obama is helping them.
Russia is reasserting its influence over Eastern Europe, and over Western Europe via controlling its gas supplies.China is vigorously exercising mercantilist capitalism to rapidly build its economy and impoverish the West’s, locking up supplies of vital raw materials resources around the world, while racing ahead to build an ocean navy that includes aircraft carrier extensions of power throughout the globe.Iran is steadfast on attaining nuclear power and weaponry, which can reach Europe and will reach farther.Nuclear knowhow and development aid is shared with and by North Korea and Pakistan, purveyors to other countries.Venezuela, launch pad for subversion in Latin America, is to obtain nuclear assistance from Iran that will increase its sway and threat.Russia and China have used their veto seats on the UN Security Council to hamstring strong measures to slow or stop Iran’s imminent step into the nuclear power ring.
Arab states never really worried about Israel’s nuclear deterrence because Israel may be a convenient whipping boy but is not an aggressive power, so there was no need to build Arab nuclear counters.But, now, Arab states are seeing a need to build their own nuclear deterrence to Iran’s aggressive policies toward them. Nuclear proliferation within unstable nations that themselves may proliferate or where their technologies may fall into the hands of murderous extremists is spreading dangerously and rapidly.The ones to benefit are Russia, China and Iran, as the US’ deterrence is weakened and the US’ political and economic strength directly and relatively reduced.
Investors Daily lays out one scenario, a nuclear attack within the US: “For a superpower to be found so exposed to risk from a small group of fanatics might be too much to bear. And who would fill the vacuum? Which would become the new superpowers? Regimes that have proved unafraid to be ruthless to their own people, never mind their enemies?”
It need not even go that far.The Bush administration was not as stalwart as it could have been in facing these emerging new world orderers, but it tried.The Obama administration, by dangerous contrast, in its dithering, its weakened resolve to confront, its self-abandonment of deterrence and direct counters, is actually encouraging, in result aiding, the hastening of the new hostile, dangerous to the US, world order that will favor international thugs in Beijing, Moscow, Tehran, Pyongyang, Caracas, and a lengthening list of other capitals. Obama’s actions harming allies, while favoring or bowing before enemies, are part of this self-isolation, self-neuterization by the US within the world.
It is an interesting subject for debate whether this Obama self-defeat march comes from ideology or from incompetence or from ignorance, or their relative proportions.The consequences are the same: the neutering of the US, and possibly the day when one or more of our cities, and thus our economy, lays in ruins, topped by our bankruptcy from Obama economic policies and legislation.
Be afraid.Be very afraid.Be aware, and more determined than ever to slow and halt this self-destruction in the elections of 2010 and 2012.Start by demanding that potential Republican challengers are informed and resolute, and don’t ignore the saner Democrats.We’re all in this together.
Editor's comment: As Kudlow says, this is just one part of the administration's larger defeatist, declinist approach to everything: economics, trade, business, the military, international affairs, American values, American world leadership, etc. A deliberate attempt to downsize, if not damage, America. I think the O believes in himself - but not in us.
Hey, Obama has just nationalized nothing more and nothing less than General
Motors. Comrade Obama! Fidel, careful or we are going to end up to his
right,” - Venezuelan “president” Hugo
Chavez
Jesus the Capitalist? I do not think that He spent a lot of time on politics. His agenda had to do with higher matters. I did learn the word eisegesis from the article.
The Audacity of Obama is a
front, and it's starting to crumble. America's endurance is in our
people, the tens of millions who remember our history -- not the phony
history that the vulgar Marxists are now peddling all over the schools.
The conservative media are beginning to seize the national narrative
again. All we need to do is to tell the truth over and over, every
single chance we get.
Andy McCarthy via Michelle on the notion of giving Khalid Sheik Mohammed a civilian trial:
We are now going to have a trial that never had to happen for
defendants who have no defense. And when defendants have no defense for
their own actions, there is only one thing for their lawyers to do: put
the government on trial in hopes of getting the jury (and the media)
spun up over government errors, abuses and incompetence. That is what
is going to happen in the trial of KSM et al. It will be a soapbox for
al-Qaeda’s case against America. Since that will be their “defense,”
the defendants will demand every bit of information they can get about
interrogations, renditions, secret prisons, undercover operations
targeting Muslims and mosques, etc., and — depending on what judge
catches the case — they are likely to be given a lot of it. The
administration will be able to claim that the judge, not the
administration, is responsible for the exposure of our defense secrets.
And the circus will be played out for all to see — in the middle of the
war. It will provide endless fodder for the transnational Left to press
its case that actions taken in America’s defense are violations of
international law that must be addressed by foreign courts. And the
intelligence bounty will make our enemies more efficient at killing us.
China's empty city
(of the day). YouTube. At about 1:20 you will see that a city built
for one million residents remains empty, a' la Austro-Chinese business
cycle theory. "Ordos was a government idea, an infrastructure project
taken to its limits, the motivation was likely gdp..." -- can you
get better than that? After the first minute or so the video
is stunning.
From The American, seven interesting, inexpensive market-based sorts of medical services that are in operation today. Some good tips in there, including the $4 prescriptions.
Prayer is ruining me for blogging. Anchoress. Prayer, as I have come to understand it, is a conversation with God. That is indeed more precious than writing.
Supporters of Obamacare have their next
target for obloquy and shame. It’s the United States Senate, an
institution whose villainy will almost match that of the insurers and
Fox News if the health-care bill sinks there.
The
anti-senatorial campaign is already revving up. Liberal columnist
Harold Meyerson stamped his feet in frustration yesterday in the Washington Post at the cussed balkiness of the Senate: “Dithering Heights.” “Proceeds glacially and produces next to nothing.”
This amounts to raging at the Senate for its very nature and purpose. It’s supposed
to be slow-paced and unproductive. Everyone has their moments of
frustration at the Senate (I’ve had plenty) because it is designed to
be frustrating, especially when a majority in the House is electric
with ideological excitement. Conservatives spent most of 1995 hurling
epithets at the Senate.
So it’s not surprising that the Left
is upset at it at a time when “Iron Nancy” is using her solid majority
to muscle massive pieces of legislation through the House by a handful
of votes. Why can’t the Senate do the same, goes the
cry, entirely missing the point. It’s not just that the Senate is built
differently from the House: It won’t truly be fulfilling its role in
our constitutional scheme if doesn’t deep-six Obamacare.
This morning I told a friend I often watch idiotic escapist movies.Those who make the better ones need to be creative wonders.A look behind the scenes at one of the more successful reveals that he needs also to be an idiot.
My local newspaper carries a wire service profile of the director of the upcoming $200-million special effects movie “2012.”This director, Roland Emmerich, from Germany, “has earned the unofficial title of ‘Master of Disaster’” for his prior hits, “Independence Day” (1996), “Godzilla” (1998), and “The Day After Tomorrow.” (2004)They were, indeed, fairly good idiotic escapist movies, to me.
His soon to be released topper will have “a collapse of the Earth’s crust, giant floods and hellish rains of fire (yet not enough to kill the main character, played by John Cusak).”
Wow!Can hardly wait.New York destroyed again.Been there, done that, you say.
Emmerich does more, but notice what he doesn’t do: "In fact, the man who rose to fame as a cinematic escapist is an activist in real life.In Germany, he’s a strong supporter of the environmentalist Green Party.He campaigns for gay rights, and he doesn’t hide his contempt for organized religion.”OK, he does fit in with Hollywood.
As the profile continues: “In 2012, the pope is buried under debris when St. Peter’s dome comes tumbling down, and peace-loving Tibetan monks are not spared by the great floods.No Islamic site is seen perishing, though. ‘We didn’t destroy Mecca because we didn’t want to have to deal with a fatwa,’ Emmerich says.”OK, he does fit in with the PCers who made the Ft.Hood massacre possible and the media community apologists for poor, misunderstood, stressed Hasan. Can’t wait for that Hollywood film version, huh?What courage it takes to trash Western civilization, and make the world safe for its destroyers!
Emmerich puts the idiot cherry on his half-baked cake of a mind with this one, why he “couldn’t make a patriotic feel-good movie like ‘Independence Day’ anymore: ‘These days I have a much more pessimistic outlook for our civilization, despite the good America can do for the world under Barack Obama.”OK, we’re waiting for his film about how Obama’s abandonment of oppressed peoples in Tibet, in Iran, in Honduras, in the growing list to include Afghanistan and maybe Iraq, will cheer shmuck Emmerich up. (Couldn’t resist the alliteration.)
BTW, I’d love to give you, dear reader, the url to see this profile in idiocy for yourself.But, due to the past triumphs of idiocy in media my local newspaper’s falling circulation cannot afford to pay extra anymore for the wire service reports in its dead-tree edition to also appear at its website, and the MCT wire service website – unlike AP's, even – doesn’t even steer the reader to a newspaper that does.
The key aspects of this psychobabble include an overemphasis on "self-esteem" at the expense of self-control and personal responsibility; an attitude that practically worships "feelings" at the expense of reason and truth; a fundamental misunderstanding about stress and the role of stress in life (i.e., that "all stress is bad", for example; and failing to appreciate that stress, when it is acknowledged and dealt with in healthy ways can enhance maturity and psychological health); and finally the glorification of victimhood and the celebration of unhealthy narcissism and the narcissists who exhibit it.
Yesterday 4 Deputy US Marshals were detailed to serve an arrest warrant
on Philip Gordon 63 of Carroll County in west Georgia. Mr Gordon
refused to allow the Marshals entrance to his gated property whereupon
the gate was breached using necessary force. During the process Mr
Gordon’s 2 Labrador retrievers charged the federal agents and were
dispatched. Mr Gordon refused to submit to arrest and brandished an
assault rifle accusing the Marshals of trespassing before retreating
into his home. The Marshals summoned backup from the local Carroll
County Sheriff’s office and two of the 6 responding deputies refused to
cooperate in serving the lawful warrant. They were immediately relieved
of duty. Additional backup of federal agents in the Atlanta field
offices of the FBI and BATFE surrounded the Gordon residence. Repeated
demands for Gordon to surrender went unheeded and chemical agents were
introduced into the structure. An hour later an unconscious Gordon was
taken into custody and booked into the Fulton county jail on the
warrant charging refusal to pay the $15,000.00 penalty for failure to
maintain a government approved medical insurance policy. -- Francis W. Porretto Leonidas - Eternity Road
AP called it a "funk." The Pew Research Center describes the mood of the nation as "glum" in its new survey (2,000 Americans, 10/28-11/8, +/- 3%), which offers a significant warning for incumbents in both parties in the 2010 midterms.
...it REALLY REALLY REALLY grates to hear, again, especially on such an occasion, the following rhetorical trope:
"In an age of selfishness, they embody responsibility. In an era of division, they call upon us to come together. In a time of cynicism, they remind us of who we are as Americans."
What era does Obama live in? The America I know, that we all know, in 2009, is not an America that is suffering from an age of selfishness, an era of division, a time of cynicism. Mr. Obama can speak for himself. This is not a land nor an epoch of selfishness and cynicism, and the divisiveness is not extraordinary or even terribly bad -- and it often comes from Obama himself. But somebody should look the president in the eye and say "WHo are you calling selfish and cynical, Kemosabe?" I look around me and see idealism, love of country, generosity. I see the incredible outpouring of church groups and other citizens in aiding the victims of Katrina. I see people volunteering hither and yon for all sorts of good causes. And yes, I even see TEA partiers who are out there of their own free will, at their own expense, trying to defend the freedoms they love for the sake of their children, for the sake of posterity.
As for the actual content of the House healthcare bill, horrors! Where to begin? That there are serious deficiencies and injustices in the U.S. healthcare system has been obvious for decades. To bring the poor and vulnerable into the fold has been a high ideal and an urgent goal for most Democrats. But this rigid, intrusive and grotesquely expensive bill is a nightmare. Holy Hygeia, why can't my fellow Democrats see that the creation of another huge, inefficient federal bureaucracy would slow and disrupt the delivery of basic healthcare and subject us all to a labyrinthine mass of incompetent, unaccountable petty dictators? Massively expanding the number of healthcare consumers without making due provision for the production of more healthcare providers means that we're hurtling toward a staggering logjam of de facto rationing. Steel yourself for the deafening screams from the careerist professional class of limousine liberals when they get stranded for hours in the jammed, jostling anterooms of doctors' offices. They'll probably try to hire Caribbean nannies as ringers to do the waiting for them.
Mad or bad? An excerpt from a good piece at Luskin:
When a group of 19 terrorists flew two planes
into the World Trade Center...The New York Times reported that they
were all psychologically unstable and had difficult times in forming
stable relationships with women. “The fact that they were Arabs and
Muslims or their political views had nothing to do with the motives for
this tragic act,” it explained. The newspaper urged that the main
lesson coming out of the attack was the need to fight against
Islamophobia and Arabophobia as well as for the United States to make
more concessions in the Middle East and to impeach President George W.
Bush.
Will government health care provide free therapy for all radical Muslims? Perhaps they all have a "self-esteem" problem? Or PTSD from Western oppression? Perhaps they might like an appointment with Dr. Bliss.
And who has "stable relationships with women," anyway? "Can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em."
They might use the Commerce Clause (nowadays it seems to cover almost anything the government wants to do), but I think the idea of forcing everybody to buy something is not a government power.
...at the end of the day, we're the ones who reward them. Unless and until we seek out candidates who share Coolidge's modesty, we'll have no one to blame but ourselves.
Why the O doesn't focus on the economy, at Pajamas. One quote:
Obama persuaded many small business people to pull in their horns and make plans to keep a low profile (including laying people off) in order to avoid the wealth confiscation of the populist, socialist, economic storm they saw coming with his election.
92% of docs want tort reform. People have no idea what it costs for docs to protect themselves from their few litigious patients and the legal piranhas.
Mr. Cassidy is more honest than the politicians whose dishonesty he supports. "The U.S. government is making a costly and open-ended commitment," he writes. "Let's not pretend that it isn't a big deal, or that it will be self-financing, or that it will work out exactly as planned. It won't. What is really unfolding, I suspect, is the scenario that many conservatives feared. The Obama Administration . . . is creating a new entitlement program, which, once established, will be virtually impossible to rescind."
Why are they doing it? Because, according to Mr. Cassidy, ObamaCare serves the twin goals of "making the United States a more equitable country" and furthering the Democrats' "political calculus." In other words, the purpose is to further redistribute income by putting health care further under government control, and in the process making the middle class more dependent on government. As the party of government, Democrats will benefit over the long run.
This explains why Nancy Pelosi is willing to risk the seats of so many Blue Dog Democrats by forcing such an unpopular bill through Congress on a narrow, partisan vote: You have to break a few eggs to make a permanent welfare state.
If "health care" were about health care, the devil would be in the details. But it's not about health or costs or coverage; it's about getting over the river and burning the bridge. It doesn't matter what form of governmentalized health care gets passed as long as it passes. Once it’s in place, it will be "reformed", endlessly, but it will never be undone.
The history of Social Security and Medicare and damn near every government program follows the same pattern: start small and expand later. When Social Security was started in the mid-1930's, the program collected 1% from your income along with 1% from your employer; these contributions went to fund a program to prevent poverty in old age. Now Social Security collects 6.2% of your income (12.4% for the self-employed) to fund a much healthier and wealthier senior population compared to their Depression-era counterparts.
Anybody who can handle 48 hours on, 24 hours off as an intern in a big city hospital for a year does not "crack under stress." On my busiest night, I by myself admitted 24 patients to the hospital from the ER. Only one died in the process that busy night, as I recall. An athletic 45 year-old diabetic dad with an MI. Some died shortly afterwards, though.
The worst night that I remember in the ER was a Saturday afternoon when two large families in small cars had a head-on in a parking lot. We had to separate the hopeless parents and kids from the others, fast. There were only two of us on duty. I think two or three kids and one parent survived.
Taking care of people with PTSD - if it even really exists as a "disease" - ain't nothin compared to that kind of work.
And that kind of medical work ain't nothin compared to combat.
I was offline reading a good book (as crazy as that sounds) when news of the Fort Hood tragedy broke. Luckily, hours later, my introduction to the story was a post on Hot Air, which had already discerned from the British press (since the American press was studiously avoiding the subject) that the perpetrator was Muslim.
My first reaction to a Muslim shooting up the place was, "Here we go again!"
(I was ever the cynical one.)
My second reaction was, "Stand by for all the 'Muslims fear reprisals' articles in the MSM."
(Practical, too.)
But my third reaction was, "Hey, wait a sec..."
Spot the incorrect word:
Ft. Hood Motive: Terrorism or Mental Illness? — ABC News
YOU DECIDE: An Act of Terror, or a Horrific Crime? — Fox News
Probe so far shows Fort Hood attack wasn't part of a broader terrorist plot — CNN News
A senior administration official told NBC News that the shootings could have been a criminal matter rather than a terrorism-related attack. — MSNBC News
It is not clear whether terrorism laws would apply or not. Evidence would have to show that the act was inspired by a terrorist group or influenced or directed by terrorists or terrorist ideology. — CBS News
Domestic terrorism: New trouble at home — USA Today
If reports about him are true, Maj. Hasan clearly was a terrorist. — Washington Times
Did Hasan commit his act of terror alone? — Ed Morrissey, Hot Air blog
But there are very, very strong warning signs here that Dr. Hasan had become an Islamist extremist and, therefore, that this was a terrorist act. — Senator Joe Lieberman
In fact, this was not a terrorist attack. By definition, terrorism targets noncombatants. When an irregular force like al Qaeda attacks a military target, such as the bombing of the USS Cole, that is more accurately termed guerrilla warfare.
The real question here is not whether the attack was terrorism but whether it was an act of war as opposed to personal aggression. ABC News reports that "U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago" that the suspect "was attempting to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda," which if true certainly bolsters the case for the affirmative.
When a soldier attacks members of his own force in an act of war, it seems to us the most apt term is treason.
Agreed. It didn't take long before it occurred to me that, by definition, "terrorism" means killing civilians, not soldiers. Thanks to James for stating it perfectly.
And, by way of Instapundit, a couple of sharp quotes on the subject:
In regards to the liberal MSM's worry about the 'Muslim backlash', here's Michael Nehring writing on Facebook:
"What says more about America – that we always, ALWAYS manage to refrain from an anti-Muslim backlash, or that progressives are always, ALWAYS, convinced that one is on the way?"
And in regards to the American press doing its usual dance around the matter of the perpetrator's Muslim faith and its bearing on the event (as highly evidenced in a number of the above headlines and quotes), here's David Warren:
"For a person with old-fashioned values, and an old-fashioned sense of English word meanings, the reports of the Fort Hood massacre were almost as provoking as what happened there. In the larger view of things, they may be more consequential."
The officials said the communications did not alter the prevailing theory that Major Hasan acted by himself, lashing out as a result of combination of factors, including his outspoken opposition to American policy in Iraq and Afghanistan and his deepening religious fervor as a Muslim.
“Simon & Schuster, believes that Beck has become the only author in history to ever have #1 New York Times bestsellers debut on these four different lists: hardcover fiction (The Christmas Sweater), hardcover nonfiction (Arguing with Idiots and An Inconvenient Book), nonfiction paperback (Glenn Beck’s Common Sense), and now with The Christmas Sweater: A Picture Book, children’s picture books.”
If you don't like what we're offering, we'll give you more of it. Far more Americans oppose Obamacare than support it. Yet Democratic representative Gerald Connolly of Virginia said he "concluded" from last week's election that "we've got to pass health care . . . [and] give Democrats something to be excited about." It's "a matter of tangibles being delivered," said Democratic representative Jan Schakowsky of Illinois.
"Tangibles." That captures it, doesn't it? Freedom is not a "tangible," is it?
Some insurance plans cover abortions? News to me. That's strange. Abortion is a totally elective procedure. Doc, I have a little growth in my uterus. What do "rights" have to do with freebies? I have the right to own guns, but not for the gummint to buy them for me.
Wrong side of what? The march to feudalism? Via NYT:
“This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,” he added. “And me, personally, I don’t want to be on the wrong side of history.”
How is that Social Security working out? And never mind that private insurance is readily available. Tom Sowell asks:
What is so wrong with the current medical system in the United States that we are being urged to rush headlong into a new government system that we are not even supposed to understand, because this legislation is to be rushed through Congress before even the Senators and Representatives have a chance to read it?
Related: The fall of the wall didn't kill the Left. Big Government
The contortions people are going through to avoid the obvious reality that Major Hasan was a one-man Jihad are remarkable. Scott at Powerline identified his disorder: PISS. Why do Moslems get a pass on violence? Wizbang: Hasan worshipped with 9-11 hijackers. At Moonbattery, Moslems defend the Major. The world has gone mad.
Mr. Lieberman said that if news reports were true that Mr. Hasan had
turned to Islamic extremism, "the murder of these 13 people was a
terrorist act and, in fact, it was the most-destructive terrorist act
to be committed on American soil since 9/11."
Obama believes in “the fierce urgency of now”, and fierce it is. That’s where all the poor befuddled sober centrists who can’t understand why the Democrats keep passing incoherent 1,200-page bills every week are missing the point. If “health care” were about health care, the devil would be in the details. But it’s not about health or costs or coverage; it’s about getting over the river and burning the bridge. It doesn’t matter what form of governmentalized health care gets passed as long as it passes. Once it’s in place, it will be “reformed”, endlessly, but it will never be undone.
I posted on the AMA's initial support of the Dem bill in the House, last week. I cannot imagine how a doc could support that thing if they care about their patients, their practices, and the huge advances American medicine has produced for the world over the past two generations. Not to mention the freedom factor which, for me, is right up there with high quality medicine in importance. Come to think of it, I hold freedom higher.
As I read it, the Dem's bill is a five-ten year plan to get the entire population on the government plan, which combines aspects of HMOs and of Medicaid - and to make docs essentially government agents. Treatments will need to be government-approved, and the whole thing will be cost-driven. (If you thought dealing with your HMO was bad, try dealing with 111 government agencies.) Furthermore, it contains the seeds (mainly punitive taxes) of destruction of medical innovation. Betsy McCaughey has some of the insidious details.
Support for Pelosi's reform bill is by no means unanimous in the medical community. On Friday, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) announced their opposition to the House bill.
“Overall," CNS President Dr. Gerald E. Rodts stated, in announcing the organization's opposition, "we believe this legislation will ultimately limit patient choice by putting the government between the doctor and the patient, which will interfere with vital patient care decisions. As it stands, this House bill could amount to a complete government takeover of healthcare.”
That's true. It will. The bill is cleverly back-loaded so that some of the positive things (like coverage of preexisting conditions) go into effect immediately, but the things people will hate go into effect after the next pres election. The Lefty Dems have always been long-distance runners on the road to Socialism and government control and planning. ("The deep swimmers of the Left," as I recall, was David Horowitz's term for it. I suspect that is what Obama and his team are.)
The hubris is astonishing. They want all of us working on their plantation - and they seem to believe that they are smarter than we, the people. Which they are definitely not.
As I have been saying, government is the most worrisome, powerful and dangerous special interest group in the country. In the end, all that we Conservatives have to offer voters is liberty. Many voters prefer their bowl of lentils (photo). It is a shame.
Update: AMA wimps out. Those docs sold their souls - and their patients' well-being - in exchange for protection of their paltry Medicare reimbursements. Pathetic.
There is a nagging fear among those who closely watch not only the economy but government policy that these nascent (recovery) economic forces might be murdered in their crib by the current administration.
Small-business men I met with this week tell me they are in a state of paralysis as they watch the debate over the health care "reform" bill wending its way through Congress. Lurking in its 1,502 pages (the Senate version) are provisions that will markedly raise their costs, and their personal taxes. So even as business gets better, they won't take on more staff because they can't figure out what it will cost them to do so.
Then there is the turmoil over all aspects of the financial services industries. The bonus brawl is the most widely publicized, with bankers somehow stunned that the public should resent their record takings after being bailed out by the government and, in cases such as Goldman Sachs, continuing to benefit from government guarantees of their debt.
More important, indecision on how to reform the financial sector continues to weigh on growth, as banks develop ever more stringent restrictions on credit availability while they wait to see who wins the battle between the Obama White House, which wants to give more power to the Fed, and the Congress, which wants to give the Treasury Department authority to close down any financial institution it deems unfit.
This is no small matter, as the at-least partly nonpolitical Fed is less likely than the completely political Treasury to move against an institution for purely partisan political reasons.
That is what I am hearing too. The government, in their infinite wisdom, is at war against economic growth. Ignorance, indifference, or by intent? They seem to focus on growth of the federal government, and little else.
I think I need a Bloody Bull with double vodka before I go out riding with She Who Must Be Obeyed now, to calm my nerves. The Lefties are finally getting to me.
Rahmed/rammed through. House narrowly and unilaterally passes government take-over of American medicine. If the Senate passes anything similar to this, our medical care will be in the hands of Washington politicians and the 111 bureaucracies the plan calls for. Damn scary - and so unnecessary.
In my view, it's like a move backwards to the 1930s. It's a throwback to the old, bloated, freedom-limiting social welfare statism that European nations are struggling to free themselves from today.
A NARROW SLIVER:
“One would think such an historic and noble action, as the Democrats
have styled it, would enjoy robust support from the full spectrum of
the House Democratic caucus. But in this case, only those who occupy
safe seats (or think they do) can be corralled. If Pelosi gets her 218
votes, it will be unprecedented. It is fair to say that never will a
piece of legislation this sweeping (and damaging) have been passed over
the opposition of so much of the electorate and on the votes of such a
narrow ideological slice of the governing class.”
Even Canadians must be worried today: they rely on America for their needed medical care.
The Dems who voted Nay did so with Pelosi permission once the votes were secured - to try to save their seats. Clever Dems. The bill contains payoffs, exemptions, and hand-outs to every Dem interest group that can be imagined, the least of which is that Federal employees including the politicians are exempt from the plan. Plus, of course, no malpractice reform.
The social psychology 
Sarah seems to be a subject of great fascination. She was charming, smart, and funny on Hannity last night. Yes, her political points were shallow - but more substantial than "hopey-changey," and she has had more experience than he had - both in life and in government.
Hard words from VDH: 
She's a pheenom. She's a non-elite, non-Hollywood celeb. She is beautiful, fertile, and athletic. Her hard-working, macho hubbie supports whatever she wants to do. The MSM hates her. 
Non-elites: 
Global warming: 
Photos from 
The contortions people are going through to avoid the obvious reality that Major Hasan was a one-man Jihad are remarkable. Scott at Powerline identified his disorder: 
I posted on the AMA's initial support of the Dem bill in the House, last week. I cannot imagine how a doc could support that thing if they care about their patients, their practices, and the huge advances American medicine has produced for the world over the past two generations. Not to mention the freedom factor which, for me, is right up there with high quality medicine in importance. Come to think of it, I hold freedom higher.