Much discussion of the House Democrats' health care bill has focused on its inclusion of the "public option," which most observers see as a Trojan Horse intended to serve, ultimately, as the vehicle for socialized medicine as private insurers are driven from the market--a process that Barry has said may take ten to twenty years.
What strikes me as I read the House bill, however, is how closely it approximates socialized medicine even without the public option. The bill is classic national socialist legislation, in that it takes ostensibly private entities, the health insurance companies, and perverts them into instruments of the state, run top-down and barred from competing among themselves.
Continued in the comments section
Friday, October 30, 2009
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Rahm's lies about Afghanistan debunked
Kristofer Harrison served as the Chief of Staff to the Counselor of the Secretary of State during the Bush administration. Here is what he had to say:
"I was involved in the the Bush administration's 2008 Afghanistan review and it was every bit as in depth and serious as the one several years earlier for Iraq. It involved many of the same people who helped conduct Gen. McChrystal's recent review and included Democrats, Republicans, our British allies, Afghans, etc. The strategy put forward was sound and competent, and carbon-copy similar to the one that President Obama announced in March. "
"It is also true that team Obama was briefed on this review before assuming office. In fact, we began briefing both campaigns even before the election. I don't remember the dates, but well before the election we began bringing together the national security teams from both campaigns for in-depth briefing sessions under the auspices of the Aspen Institute. These were long events where Bush administration cabinet-level officials spent days -- yes, days -- briefing the two candidates' advisers. After the election we began spending hours with the transition team on the details of the plan and the situation on the ground."
"It is also true that Obama's transition team asked us to hold the Afghanistan review findings, a request to which President Bush acquiesced because (as it was relayed to me) he did not want to box the new president into a narrow set of options. In March, when Obama announced his new Afghanistan strategy, I did not notice a single change from the new plan that we had given him...only Obama did not resource it with enough troops. "
The Chicago mob's behavior over Afghanistan is just pathetic. Here they were given an immense amount of material, a complete strategic review and plan with the author's heading left blank. President Bush felt it was his duty to do so. And all Barry and his minions can do is smear President Bush, even after he filled his own name into the author's column. This has to be the biggest group of whining complainers that have ever been associated with the White House.
Barry seems not to understand that it is not President Bush who is suffering here. Rather, it is our under-resourced soldiers in Afghanistan who are suffering. Barry has had his hands on this plan for a full year now, and he's done virtually nothing except play politics. He needs to give our soldiers the resources to succeed, and then help create the political atmosphere so that they have time to succeed. It seems he has the intestinal fortitude to do neither. He is again demonstrated that he is not qualified for the job that he is in. The more delay the more he plays into the hands of the Taliban by demonstrating how weak and incapable of making a decision he really is.
"I was involved in the the Bush administration's 2008 Afghanistan review and it was every bit as in depth and serious as the one several years earlier for Iraq. It involved many of the same people who helped conduct Gen. McChrystal's recent review and included Democrats, Republicans, our British allies, Afghans, etc. The strategy put forward was sound and competent, and carbon-copy similar to the one that President Obama announced in March. "
"It is also true that team Obama was briefed on this review before assuming office. In fact, we began briefing both campaigns even before the election. I don't remember the dates, but well before the election we began bringing together the national security teams from both campaigns for in-depth briefing sessions under the auspices of the Aspen Institute. These were long events where Bush administration cabinet-level officials spent days -- yes, days -- briefing the two candidates' advisers. After the election we began spending hours with the transition team on the details of the plan and the situation on the ground."
"It is also true that Obama's transition team asked us to hold the Afghanistan review findings, a request to which President Bush acquiesced because (as it was relayed to me) he did not want to box the new president into a narrow set of options. In March, when Obama announced his new Afghanistan strategy, I did not notice a single change from the new plan that we had given him...only Obama did not resource it with enough troops. "
The Chicago mob's behavior over Afghanistan is just pathetic. Here they were given an immense amount of material, a complete strategic review and plan with the author's heading left blank. President Bush felt it was his duty to do so. And all Barry and his minions can do is smear President Bush, even after he filled his own name into the author's column. This has to be the biggest group of whining complainers that have ever been associated with the White House.
Barry seems not to understand that it is not President Bush who is suffering here. Rather, it is our under-resourced soldiers in Afghanistan who are suffering. Barry has had his hands on this plan for a full year now, and he's done virtually nothing except play politics. He needs to give our soldiers the resources to succeed, and then help create the political atmosphere so that they have time to succeed. It seems he has the intestinal fortitude to do neither. He is again demonstrated that he is not qualified for the job that he is in. The more delay the more he plays into the hands of the Taliban by demonstrating how weak and incapable of making a decision he really is.
The certain destruction of GM
Do we need another example of how bad things get when this administration and this congress gets involved in running part of the economy?
This from Dr. David Cole as reported by a senior Chrysler executive http://www.themedc.org/Boards-Committees/Executive-Committee/Detail.aspx?ContentId=14c66f7c-6a3c-48ae-be66-7b7331367229
Monday morning I attended a breakfast meeting where the speaker/guest was David E. Cole, Chairman, Center for Automotive Research (CAR and Professor at the Univ. of Michigan . You have all likely heard CAR quoted, or referred to in the auto industry news lately.
Mr. Cole, who is an engineer by training, told many stories of the difficulty of working with the folks that the Obama administration has sent to save the auto industry. There have been many meetings where a 30+ year experience automotive expert has to listen to a newcomer to the industry, someone with zero manufacturing experience, zero auto industry experience, zero business experience, zero finance experience, and zero engineering experience, tell them how to run their business.
Mr. Cole’s favorite story is as follows:
There was a team of Obama people speaking to Mr. Cole (Engineer, automotive experience 40+ years, Chairman of CAR). They were explaining to Mr. Cole that the auto companies needed to make a car that was electric and liquid natural gas (LNG) with enough combined fuel to go 500 miles so we wouldn’t “need” so many gas stations (A whole other topic). They were quoting BTU’s of LNG and battery life that they had looked up on some website.
Mr. Cole explained that to do this you would need a trunk FULL of batteries and a LNG tank at big as a car to make that happen and that there were problems related to the laws of physics that prevented them from…
The Obama person interrupted and said (and I am quoting here) “These laws of physics? Who’s rules are those, we need to change that. (Some of the others wrote down the law name so they could look it up) We have the congress and the administration. We can repeal that law, amend it, or use an executive order to get rid of that problem. That’s why we are here, to fix these sort of issues”.
Today's WSJ had a story about how congressman are now butting in on cost saving decisions being made by GM management in an effort to keep GM from closing facilities that employ people in their State or district. GM is doomed when they have to answer to Congress and this administration and the union trained Car Czar that Barry put in place.
Wait until they start dictating to the medical industry like they are in the financial services industry and the automotive industry. We are in for some rude days ahead.
This from Dr. David Cole as reported by a senior Chrysler executive http://www.themedc.org/Boards-Committees/Executive-Committee/Detail.aspx?ContentId=14c66f7c-6a3c-48ae-be66-7b7331367229
Monday morning I attended a breakfast meeting where the speaker/guest was David E. Cole, Chairman, Center for Automotive Research (CAR and Professor at the Univ. of Michigan . You have all likely heard CAR quoted, or referred to in the auto industry news lately.
Mr. Cole, who is an engineer by training, told many stories of the difficulty of working with the folks that the Obama administration has sent to save the auto industry. There have been many meetings where a 30+ year experience automotive expert has to listen to a newcomer to the industry, someone with zero manufacturing experience, zero auto industry experience, zero business experience, zero finance experience, and zero engineering experience, tell them how to run their business.
Mr. Cole’s favorite story is as follows:
There was a team of Obama people speaking to Mr. Cole (Engineer, automotive experience 40+ years, Chairman of CAR). They were explaining to Mr. Cole that the auto companies needed to make a car that was electric and liquid natural gas (LNG) with enough combined fuel to go 500 miles so we wouldn’t “need” so many gas stations (A whole other topic). They were quoting BTU’s of LNG and battery life that they had looked up on some website.
Mr. Cole explained that to do this you would need a trunk FULL of batteries and a LNG tank at big as a car to make that happen and that there were problems related to the laws of physics that prevented them from…
The Obama person interrupted and said (and I am quoting here) “These laws of physics? Who’s rules are those, we need to change that. (Some of the others wrote down the law name so they could look it up) We have the congress and the administration. We can repeal that law, amend it, or use an executive order to get rid of that problem. That’s why we are here, to fix these sort of issues”.
Today's WSJ had a story about how congressman are now butting in on cost saving decisions being made by GM management in an effort to keep GM from closing facilities that employ people in their State or district. GM is doomed when they have to answer to Congress and this administration and the union trained Car Czar that Barry put in place.
Wait until they start dictating to the medical industry like they are in the financial services industry and the automotive industry. We are in for some rude days ahead.
The insanity of the liberals
Albert Einstein once said “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.
So now we have the left wing socialists racking up one entitlement program after another with a deficit of almost 1.5 trillion dollars and no end in site.
They are telling us that Obama Care will not add to the deficit and then they try to placate Doctors on the medicare reductions by attempting an end run and passing a side bill that was over 400 billion and hoping that the public would not notice.
These guys are the scum of the earth and will destroy this nation's future if this continues.
There is no way that Obama Care is going to be deficit neutral. The insanity is believeing that the government can do anything for less money than what the private economy can do it for. Please name one government run program besides the prescription medicine program started under our last President that has come anywhere near the amount that we were first told.
So now we want the government to run anonther sixth of the economy? What is wrong with liberals? Can't they face the facts?
Are they going to run health care like the Postal Service? How about Amtrack? Medicare? Medicade? I think the government should first show us how they can control the fraud so rampant in Medicare before they take on the entire health care industry. How stupid can people be that they believe this liar in chief and his henchmen when they tell us how good this will be for the economy and the taxpayers?
So now we have the left wing socialists racking up one entitlement program after another with a deficit of almost 1.5 trillion dollars and no end in site.
They are telling us that Obama Care will not add to the deficit and then they try to placate Doctors on the medicare reductions by attempting an end run and passing a side bill that was over 400 billion and hoping that the public would not notice.
These guys are the scum of the earth and will destroy this nation's future if this continues.
There is no way that Obama Care is going to be deficit neutral. The insanity is believeing that the government can do anything for less money than what the private economy can do it for. Please name one government run program besides the prescription medicine program started under our last President that has come anywhere near the amount that we were first told.
So now we want the government to run anonther sixth of the economy? What is wrong with liberals? Can't they face the facts?
Are they going to run health care like the Postal Service? How about Amtrack? Medicare? Medicade? I think the government should first show us how they can control the fraud so rampant in Medicare before they take on the entire health care industry. How stupid can people be that they believe this liar in chief and his henchmen when they tell us how good this will be for the economy and the taxpayers?
The arrogance of Michelle Obama
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12652
Total Personal Staff members for other first ladies paid by taxpayers:
Mamie Eisenhower : 1 paid for personally out of President's salary
Jackie Kennedy: 1
Roseline Carter: 1
Barbara Bush: 1
Hilary Clinton: 3
Laura Bush: 1
Michele Obama: 26
At a cost to the tax payers of $1,591,200 in annual salaries.
Note: This does not include makeup artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles, 49, and"First Hairstylist" Johnny Wright, 31, both of whom traveled aboardAir Force One to Europe .
What a joke. As these elitists bury this nation deeper and deeper in unprecedented debt levels the cost of running this White House during terrible economic times is an insult to every tax payer in this nation. I wonder if this story will ever see the light of day in the main stream liberal media.
Total Personal Staff members for other first ladies paid by taxpayers:
Mamie Eisenhower : 1 paid for personally out of President's salary
Jackie Kennedy: 1
Roseline Carter: 1
Barbara Bush: 1
Hilary Clinton: 3
Laura Bush: 1
Michele Obama: 26
At a cost to the tax payers of $1,591,200 in annual salaries.
Note: This does not include makeup artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles, 49, and"First Hairstylist" Johnny Wright, 31, both of whom traveled aboardAir Force One to Europe .
What a joke. As these elitists bury this nation deeper and deeper in unprecedented debt levels the cost of running this White House during terrible economic times is an insult to every tax payer in this nation. I wonder if this story will ever see the light of day in the main stream liberal media.
From "The Nation"
Wanting some semblance of balance, I thought, hey let's go to a "liberal" site and see what is up.
What is up are thin, un researched articles which mostly accuse the right of the same things the right is accusing the left.
However, the right does not need to have fund raisers to keep their business afloat as does "The Nation". How such a small rag ever received such a prominent place on "This Week" is beyond me.
The left's assumption, more government is always better except when the military is involved.
I still cannot grasp how they think transferring a large part of the economy to the government and adding lots of "non-paying" folks to the program is going to save money. Guess they like lines.
What is up are thin, un researched articles which mostly accuse the right of the same things the right is accusing the left.
However, the right does not need to have fund raisers to keep their business afloat as does "The Nation". How such a small rag ever received such a prominent place on "This Week" is beyond me.
The left's assumption, more government is always better except when the military is involved.
I still cannot grasp how they think transferring a large part of the economy to the government and adding lots of "non-paying" folks to the program is going to save money. Guess they like lines.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Public Option?
The United States is at one end of the spectrum in terms of government control of medical care. Some fault medical care in the United States for an average American life expectancy that is exceeded in a number of other countries.
However, medical care is not the same as health care. Many things that shorten human life — including homicide, drug overdoses and obesity — are more a result of individual choices rather than the state of medical care. Things which tend to be worse in the United States than in some other Western countries.
The United States usually ranks higher than countries with government-run medical systems on such things as waiting times to see primary care physicians, waiting times to see specialists or have surgery, and cancer survival rates. 23% of the patients having elective surgery in 2001 in Australia waited more than 4 months for that surgery. So did 38% of the patients in Britain. In the United States, only 5% of patients had to wait that long.
Waiting lists for elective surgery generally tend to be found in countries which combine public health insurance, with zero or low patient cost sharing and constraints on surgical capacity. Public health insurance and zero cost sharing remove the financial barriers to access to surgery.
Constraints on capacity prevent supply from matching demand. Under such circumstances, non-price rationing, in the form of waiting times for elective surgery, takes over from price rationing as a means of equilibrating demand and supply.
Elective surgery, incidentally, was not limited to cosmetic procedures but included coronary artery bypass surgery.
Moreover, although a four-month waiting period was used as a benchmark for collecting statistics, in Britain 3,592 patients waited more than six months for a colonoscopy and 55,376 waited more than six months for an audiology diagnosis, according to a report in the British Medical Journal in 2007.
In Canada, according to a provincial government website, 90% of Ontario patients needing hip replacements waited 336 days. In Britain, the wait is a year.
However, medical care is not the same as health care. Many things that shorten human life — including homicide, drug overdoses and obesity — are more a result of individual choices rather than the state of medical care. Things which tend to be worse in the United States than in some other Western countries.
The United States usually ranks higher than countries with government-run medical systems on such things as waiting times to see primary care physicians, waiting times to see specialists or have surgery, and cancer survival rates. 23% of the patients having elective surgery in 2001 in Australia waited more than 4 months for that surgery. So did 38% of the patients in Britain. In the United States, only 5% of patients had to wait that long.
Waiting lists for elective surgery generally tend to be found in countries which combine public health insurance, with zero or low patient cost sharing and constraints on surgical capacity. Public health insurance and zero cost sharing remove the financial barriers to access to surgery.
Constraints on capacity prevent supply from matching demand. Under such circumstances, non-price rationing, in the form of waiting times for elective surgery, takes over from price rationing as a means of equilibrating demand and supply.
Elective surgery, incidentally, was not limited to cosmetic procedures but included coronary artery bypass surgery.
Moreover, although a four-month waiting period was used as a benchmark for collecting statistics, in Britain 3,592 patients waited more than six months for a colonoscopy and 55,376 waited more than six months for an audiology diagnosis, according to a report in the British Medical Journal in 2007.
In Canada, according to a provincial government website, 90% of Ontario patients needing hip replacements waited 336 days. In Britain, the wait is a year.
At a certain point, a president must own a presidency. For George W. Bush that point came eight months in, when 9/11 happened. From that point on, the presidency—all his decisions, all the credit and blame for them—was his. The American people didn't hold him responsible for what led up to 9/11, but they held him responsible for everything after it. This is part of the reason the image of him standing on the rubble of the twin towers, bullhorn in hand, on Sept. 14, 2001, became an iconic one. It said: I'm owning it.
President Obama, in office a month longer than Bush was when 9/11 hit, now owns his presidency. Does he know it? He too stands on rubble, figuratively speaking—a collapsed economy, high and growing unemployment, two wars. Everyone knows what he's standing on. You can almost see the smoke rising around him. He's got a bullhorn in his hand every day.
It's his now. He gets the credit and the blame. How do we know this? The American people are telling him. You can see it in the polls. That's what his falling poll numbers are about. "It's been almost a year, you own this. Fix it!
The president doesn't seem to like this moment. Who would? He and his men and women have returned to referring to what they "inherited." And what they inherited was, truly, terrible: again, a severe economic crisis and two wars. But their recent return to this theme is unbecoming. Worse, it is politically unpersuasive. It sounds defensive, like a dodge.
President Obama, in office a month longer than Bush was when 9/11 hit, now owns his presidency. Does he know it? He too stands on rubble, figuratively speaking—a collapsed economy, high and growing unemployment, two wars. Everyone knows what he's standing on. You can almost see the smoke rising around him. He's got a bullhorn in his hand every day.
It's his now. He gets the credit and the blame. How do we know this? The American people are telling him. You can see it in the polls. That's what his falling poll numbers are about. "It's been almost a year, you own this. Fix it!
The president doesn't seem to like this moment. Who would? He and his men and women have returned to referring to what they "inherited." And what they inherited was, truly, terrible: again, a severe economic crisis and two wars. But their recent return to this theme is unbecoming. Worse, it is politically unpersuasive. It sounds defensive, like a dodge.
Members of the Obama administration have taken turns deploring the billions of dollars in year-end bonuses the finance industry is getting ready to hand out. Never mentioned is what they think firms should do with the money. Give it back to their customers? Spend it on office decorations?
Firms can't just wish away revenue sitting on their books. That's an accounting crime. More to the point, aren't surging banker bonuses amid a general downturn the proximate and necessary outcome of Washington's recovery Heimlich, which involves doling out free money to banks and artificially goosing asset prices?
Er, wasn't this the plan?
Firms can't just wish away revenue sitting on their books. That's an accounting crime. More to the point, aren't surging banker bonuses amid a general downturn the proximate and necessary outcome of Washington's recovery Heimlich, which involves doling out free money to banks and artificially goosing asset prices?
Er, wasn't this the plan?
NYC
Does this bother anyone else?
Fair? Sustainable? Smart?
New York: 44,000 out of 8 million residents pay 50% of all taxes; 1 of 7 leaving NY.
Fair? Sustainable? Smart?
New York: 44,000 out of 8 million residents pay 50% of all taxes; 1 of 7 leaving NY.
Monday, October 26, 2009
BS
So brother Rich(ie) sends me a book. It talks about economic policy. The first several pages wax and wanes about manipulating the economy, never once mentioning....spending. The book rants about how if we could just figure out if the economy was deflating or inflating the government could manipulate things...just right.
Not once in the first several pages was spending discussed and subsequently mostly as a footnote.
My dear soul mate, Mark, how a human mind can honestly believe that a government can properly and favorably manipulate a complex economy is beyond me.
We, my liberal friends, are going broke. We do not need health care reform, we need entitlement reform and we need to start by not adding any more (health care, immigrant care, welfare expansion).
And we need less taxes! More money just staying in the private sector, creating jobs. Not "directed" tax cuts, made up by some silly fool in Washington.
The "O" was handed a tough situation but he is using it as an excuse to create socialism not repair the economy.
What is wrong with people keeping their own money ?
More to come.
Not once in the first several pages was spending discussed and subsequently mostly as a footnote.
My dear soul mate, Mark, how a human mind can honestly believe that a government can properly and favorably manipulate a complex economy is beyond me.
We, my liberal friends, are going broke. We do not need health care reform, we need entitlement reform and we need to start by not adding any more (health care, immigrant care, welfare expansion).
And we need less taxes! More money just staying in the private sector, creating jobs. Not "directed" tax cuts, made up by some silly fool in Washington.
The "O" was handed a tough situation but he is using it as an excuse to create socialism not repair the economy.
What is wrong with people keeping their own money ?
More to come.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Stimulus’ big boost to the economy? It already happened.
So much for Keynesian economics pulling us out of this economic distress we are in of high unemployment and ever increasing government debt.
White House economist Christina Romer said Thursday that the stimulus package's impact on the economy will weaken from here on.
White House economist Christina Romer said Thursday that the stimulus package's impact on the economy will weaken from here on.
“Most analysts predict that the fiscal stimulus will have its greatest impact on growth in the second and third quarters of 2009,” Christina Romer, who chairs the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, said in testimony prepared for Congress. “By mid-2010, fiscal stimulus will likely be contributing little to growth.”
This view is shared by many economists, as Ms. Romer noted. But her assessment comes at a difficult time for both policymakers and for Americans in general.
Despite the massive $787 billion price tag, polls show that many Americans are skeptical about whether the stimulus is accomplishing much. Since the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), the nation’s jobless rate has climbed higher than the White House and others had predicted.
Barry is out their claiming that without the stimulus plan we would have lost another million jobs. Biden claims that has succeeded beyond his wildest dreams. Summers states that it was a big success. There is no way they can prove these claims. They are just more claims and falsehoods that this administration continues to spew for public consumption. They are starting to lose all credibility. Even if they did save a million jobs it cost us billions of dollars for each one that was saved. All the money is going to union contractors and laborers not to the actual people who build companies and create jobs. You cannot save the day by rebuilding some roads and bridges.
The economy is going to show a slight improvement when the next GDP results are released but again like the momentary improvement in unemployment this to will be momentary because a lot of the improvement is built on programs like "cash for clunkers' and other short term fixes that do not create long term growth.
Lying about the insurance industry
Health insurance profit margins typically run about 6 percent, give or take a point or two. That's anemic compared with other forms of insurance and a broad array of industries, even some beleaguered ones.
Profits barely exceeded 2 percent of revenues in the latest annual measure. This partly explains why the credit ratings of some of the largest insurers were downgraded to negative from stable heading into this year, as investors were warned of a stagnant if not shrinking market for private plans.
When has it become wrong to eke out a tiny profit? This administration and their radical left followers will tell any lie, make up any fact and demonize and try to destroy anyone or anything that disagrees with their vision of this country.
Bratislava, Slovakia - NATO defense ministers Friday gave "broad support" to the counterinsurgency strategy proposed by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top US commander in Afghanistan, but sidestepped the difficult question of how many forces would be required to implement that plan.
The top UN special envoy for Afghanistan also backed McChrystal's strategy at the NATO meeting.
"We have come to a point where I believe McChrystal is right," said Kai Eide here Friday, adding bluntly, "If we continue the way we've done so far, both with regard to the military effort, the civilian effort, and the behavior of the Afghan government, this project will not work."
The top UN special envoy for Afghanistan also backed McChrystal's strategy at the NATO meeting.
"We have come to a point where I believe McChrystal is right," said Kai Eide here Friday, adding bluntly, "If we continue the way we've done so far, both with regard to the military effort, the civilian effort, and the behavior of the Afghan government, this project will not work."
Cooking the books.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada lashed out at Republicans as having suddenly "gotten religion" and wanting to control spending. He's right to point out the Grand Old Party's failure to control spending when they had the levers of power, though their spending spree pales in comparison to the current Democratic splurge. Republicans had to return to their green eye-shade roots at some point, and sooner is better than later.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Racisim? By who?
All the man did was respond to an offer to purchase part of a football team, which last time I checked was private enterprise and a private manner.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
So Terry thinks this is "moderate" stuff. Terry is on a roll. Bomb, bomb Iran and all.
Congratulations President Obama on the Nobel Peace Prize -- Now Please Earn it!
Dear President Obama,
How outstanding that you've been recognized today as a man of peace. Your swift, early pronouncements -- you will close Guantanamo (didn't), you will bring the troops home from Iraq(didn't), you want a nuclear weapon-free world(not, won't, heaven help us if he does), you admitted to the Iranians that we overthrew their democratically-elected president in 1953 (1953!, we should apologize for...everything!), you made that great speech to the Islamic world in Cairo, you've eliminated that useless term "The War on Terror," you've put an end to torture (um...no, a policy that was ended, remains ended, he has opened a wound) -- these have all made us and the rest of the world feel a bit more safe considering the disaster of the past eight years. In eight months you have done an about face and taken this country in a much more sane direction.
But...
The irony that you have been awarded this prize on the 2nd day of the ninth year of our War in Afghanistan (and the 14 day of your administration) is not lost on anyone. You are truly at a crossroads now. You can listen to the generals and expand the war (and win)(only to result in a far-too-predictable defeat) or you can declare Bush's Wars over, and bring all the troops home. Now. That's what a true man of peace would do.
There is nothing wrong with you doing what the last guy failed to do -- capture the man or men responsible for the mass murder of 3,000 people on 9/11. BUT YOU CANNOT DO THAT WITH TANKS AND TROOPS. You are pursuing a criminal (his words), not an army. You do not use a stick of dynamite to get rid of a mouse.
The Taliban is another matter. That is a problem for the people of Afghanistan to resolve -- just as we did in 1776, the French did in 1789, the Cubans did in 1959, the Nicaraguans did in 1979 and the people of East Berlin did in 1989. One thing is certain through all revolutions by people who wish to be free -- they ultimately have to bring about that freedom themselves. Others can be supportive, but freedom can not be delivered from the front seat of someone else's Humvee.
You have to end our involvement in Afghanistan now. If you don't, you'll have no choice but to return the prize to Oslo.
Yours,
Michael Moore
Dear President Obama,
How outstanding that you've been recognized today as a man of peace. Your swift, early pronouncements -- you will close Guantanamo (didn't), you will bring the troops home from Iraq(didn't), you want a nuclear weapon-free world(not, won't, heaven help us if he does), you admitted to the Iranians that we overthrew their democratically-elected president in 1953 (1953!, we should apologize for...everything!), you made that great speech to the Islamic world in Cairo, you've eliminated that useless term "The War on Terror," you've put an end to torture (um...no, a policy that was ended, remains ended, he has opened a wound) -- these have all made us and the rest of the world feel a bit more safe considering the disaster of the past eight years. In eight months you have done an about face and taken this country in a much more sane direction.
But...
The irony that you have been awarded this prize on the 2nd day of the ninth year of our War in Afghanistan (and the 14 day of your administration) is not lost on anyone. You are truly at a crossroads now. You can listen to the generals and expand the war (and win)(only to result in a far-too-predictable defeat) or you can declare Bush's Wars over, and bring all the troops home. Now. That's what a true man of peace would do.
There is nothing wrong with you doing what the last guy failed to do -- capture the man or men responsible for the mass murder of 3,000 people on 9/11. BUT YOU CANNOT DO THAT WITH TANKS AND TROOPS. You are pursuing a criminal (his words), not an army. You do not use a stick of dynamite to get rid of a mouse.
The Taliban is another matter. That is a problem for the people of Afghanistan to resolve -- just as we did in 1776, the French did in 1789, the Cubans did in 1959, the Nicaraguans did in 1979 and the people of East Berlin did in 1989. One thing is certain through all revolutions by people who wish to be free -- they ultimately have to bring about that freedom themselves. Others can be supportive, but freedom can not be delivered from the front seat of someone else's Humvee.
You have to end our involvement in Afghanistan now. If you don't, you'll have no choice but to return the prize to Oslo.
Yours,
Michael Moore
Friday, October 16, 2009
A new book that we should all run out and buy
The book is Architects of Ruin by Peter Schweizer. Go to this website to listen to him being interviewed a must listen. http://am1280thepatriot.townhall.com/
Go to the Northern Alliance Radio Network on the right hand side of the page and click on the Radio Clip the fourth one down titled "The First Team Hour 2". Well researched and definitely makes common sense.
Go to the Northern Alliance Radio Network on the right hand side of the page and click on the Radio Clip the fourth one down titled "The First Team Hour 2". Well researched and definitely makes common sense.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
ASKING YOUR DECISION NOW
Will we never undertand we can no more pacify this country than Alexander the Great, the Mongols, the British or the Russians could? Is it really in the United States' national interest to secure Afghanistan? Does anyone seriously think American voters have the patience and persistence to sacrifice their soldiers and treasure for countless years to come? Never mind the shameless corruption of the government we are supporting there, we need to cut our losses now and make an honorable withdrawal before it looks even worse later. That is my position along with really exploring the option of using nuclear, if that is what it takes to get Osama Bin Laden.
Since most of you are waiting to pounce on Obama what ever decision he makes. Why don't we ask you now, you are Obama, more troops, how many more, or get out now. iIknow it is easy to criticize after: so Baxter, Jim, Richie, Hags, and Riegal, lets see you make the decision now. You are President for a day>
Since most of you are waiting to pounce on Obama what ever decision he makes. Why don't we ask you now, you are Obama, more troops, how many more, or get out now. iIknow it is easy to criticize after: so Baxter, Jim, Richie, Hags, and Riegal, lets see you make the decision now. You are President for a day>
Why Should Afghanistan Exist?
I have always been a fan of political geography and it is actually a rather consequential topic. The imperial powers made a real mess of things over the past two hundred years. It is time for the UN and the US to think outside the box and peacefully correct some of the historic errors made while crafting borders. A good place to start would be Afghanistan.
I look at these things with a Wilsonian view. I think that borders should be crafted around the people rather than deeded real estate. Changing international borders should not be frequent, however, there should be a process to utilize through the UN when it is appropriate.
There is no "Afghan" ethnic group. It is a nation of Pashtuns, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras, Turkmen and others. They speak different languages and are primarily loyal to their tribe, not their "nation". The country could be rationally carved up by ethnic groups and joined with Turkmenistan, Takijistan, Uzbekistan and Pakistan (Pashtuns). There would be a small, rump Afghan state remaining with 6mm or so population (currently 32mm) that ought to be rejoined with Iran once a worthy Persian regime emerges. Afghanistan was part of Iran until the British broke it off in the nineteenth century.
All of the countries I listed are stable, save for Pakistan. No - they are not Democratic or western, but we would not need to maintain troops there to protect the local population. They have all cooperated with our Afghan war efforts. We can work with the Pakistanis and assist from outside with respect to Al-Quieda and the Taliban. We already have bases in several of the "stans" I listed.
We could possibly use the chip of new territory to encourage the Iranians on the nuclear issue and Pakistan regarding Jammu and Kashmir. Why not? What is the downside? Why prop up a country without a national identity when we can solve a major geopolitical problem and unify Afghan citizens with their cross border kin?
I look at these things with a Wilsonian view. I think that borders should be crafted around the people rather than deeded real estate. Changing international borders should not be frequent, however, there should be a process to utilize through the UN when it is appropriate.
There is no "Afghan" ethnic group. It is a nation of Pashtuns, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras, Turkmen and others. They speak different languages and are primarily loyal to their tribe, not their "nation". The country could be rationally carved up by ethnic groups and joined with Turkmenistan, Takijistan, Uzbekistan and Pakistan (Pashtuns). There would be a small, rump Afghan state remaining with 6mm or so population (currently 32mm) that ought to be rejoined with Iran once a worthy Persian regime emerges. Afghanistan was part of Iran until the British broke it off in the nineteenth century.
All of the countries I listed are stable, save for Pakistan. No - they are not Democratic or western, but we would not need to maintain troops there to protect the local population. They have all cooperated with our Afghan war efforts. We can work with the Pakistanis and assist from outside with respect to Al-Quieda and the Taliban. We already have bases in several of the "stans" I listed.
We could possibly use the chip of new territory to encourage the Iranians on the nuclear issue and Pakistan regarding Jammu and Kashmir. Why not? What is the downside? Why prop up a country without a national identity when we can solve a major geopolitical problem and unify Afghan citizens with their cross border kin?
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
THE BIG LIE TORT REFORM
According to the actuarial consulting firm Towers Perrin, medical malpractice tort costs were $30.4 billion in 2007, the last year for which data are available.
We have a more than a $2 trillion health care system. That puts litigation costs and malpractice insurance at 1 to 1.5 percent of total medical costs. That’s a rounding error.
Liability isn’t even the tail on the cost dog. It’s the hair on the end of the tail.
We have a more than a $2 trillion health care system. That puts litigation costs and malpractice insurance at 1 to 1.5 percent of total medical costs. That’s a rounding error.
Liability isn’t even the tail on the cost dog. It’s the hair on the end of the tail.
The cost of health care reform
Well the Senate Finance Commitee voted to approve the Baucus bill. Price Waterhouse Coopers produced an unbiased report of the impact the Senate Finance Committee's health care "reform" bill will have on health insurance premiums. PWC concluded that the cost of health insurance for the average family will rise by $4,000 by 2019, as compared with doing nothing. Read it here: http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_pwc2.html
The logic of the PWC report is clearly correct. Lets focus on just one feature of the Baucus plan that the PWC report addresses: the "weak mandate" to buy insurance, coupled with a strong requirement on the insurance industry that it insure everyone, regardless of pre-existing conditions or state of health. This combination will devastate the individual insurance market.
"The modeling results summarized in the table below show the impact of the guarantee issue requirement coupled with a low, weak or no individual coverage requirement. In states that allow underwriting of individuals (45 states plus the District of Columbia), premiums could increase by approximately 41% to 59% on average by 2016, depending on the strength of the individual coverage requirement. These increases would take several years to be fully realized, but would begin to rise as unhealthy or sick individuals began to purchase coverage, while younger, healthier individuals decided it was less expensive for them to forgo coverage without consequence or consideration of the impact of the overall pool."
PWC is stating the issue politely, to say the least. What is meant by a "weak mandate" is that, in the current version of the Baucus bill, there is no requirement to buy health insurance at all until after 2013, and by 2017 the penalty for failing to buy health insurance still amounts to only about 15% of the cost of the insurance. Now, think about it: if you know that you don't have to buy health insurance when you are young and healthy, but if you should get sick, or just get older, you can apply for health insurance at any time and it will be illegal for the insurance company to turn you down, what would you do? Obviously, you would defer buying insurance unless and until you get sick. This means that the pool of those who are insured will be lower quality, and the cost therefore higher for everyone who buys insurance. It is as though you could wait until you die, and then your heirs can buy life insurance on you.
The Democrats are being totally dishonest with the American people. The logic is so clear that all of the whining about the report by Democrats and the AARP (clearly a Democrat aligned group) shows the outright dishonesty that they are operating under. If health care reform is so important than why does the bill wait until 2013 to go into effect yet starts socking the American people with costs right after it is finally passed? Of course more accounting dishonesty to show that the net effect of the reform is deficit neutral when in reality it is not even close.
It actually would be very easy to make health insurance cheaper. All we have to do is allow insurance companies to compete nationally instead of state-by-state and eliminate all mandates that limit consumer choice. It has been estimated that these simple reforms--which are not part of any of the Democrats' "reform" bills, for obvious reasons--would reduce health care costs by one-quarter to one-third. Instead of such common-sense reforms, the Dems are proposing Rube Goldberg measures that will make health care more expensive. Instead of eliminating mandates, their measures, including the Baucus bill, increase them--in effect making cheaper health insurance illegal. The Democratic bills also do not have any tort reform measures in them. Clearly everyone knows that if some of the defensive medicine that is practiced today could be eliminated that there would be additional savings of an estimated 100 billion dollars.
This isn't reform, it is stupidity.
The logic of the PWC report is clearly correct. Lets focus on just one feature of the Baucus plan that the PWC report addresses: the "weak mandate" to buy insurance, coupled with a strong requirement on the insurance industry that it insure everyone, regardless of pre-existing conditions or state of health. This combination will devastate the individual insurance market.
"The modeling results summarized in the table below show the impact of the guarantee issue requirement coupled with a low, weak or no individual coverage requirement. In states that allow underwriting of individuals (45 states plus the District of Columbia), premiums could increase by approximately 41% to 59% on average by 2016, depending on the strength of the individual coverage requirement. These increases would take several years to be fully realized, but would begin to rise as unhealthy or sick individuals began to purchase coverage, while younger, healthier individuals decided it was less expensive for them to forgo coverage without consequence or consideration of the impact of the overall pool."
PWC is stating the issue politely, to say the least. What is meant by a "weak mandate" is that, in the current version of the Baucus bill, there is no requirement to buy health insurance at all until after 2013, and by 2017 the penalty for failing to buy health insurance still amounts to only about 15% of the cost of the insurance. Now, think about it: if you know that you don't have to buy health insurance when you are young and healthy, but if you should get sick, or just get older, you can apply for health insurance at any time and it will be illegal for the insurance company to turn you down, what would you do? Obviously, you would defer buying insurance unless and until you get sick. This means that the pool of those who are insured will be lower quality, and the cost therefore higher for everyone who buys insurance. It is as though you could wait until you die, and then your heirs can buy life insurance on you.
The Democrats are being totally dishonest with the American people. The logic is so clear that all of the whining about the report by Democrats and the AARP (clearly a Democrat aligned group) shows the outright dishonesty that they are operating under. If health care reform is so important than why does the bill wait until 2013 to go into effect yet starts socking the American people with costs right after it is finally passed? Of course more accounting dishonesty to show that the net effect of the reform is deficit neutral when in reality it is not even close.
It actually would be very easy to make health insurance cheaper. All we have to do is allow insurance companies to compete nationally instead of state-by-state and eliminate all mandates that limit consumer choice. It has been estimated that these simple reforms--which are not part of any of the Democrats' "reform" bills, for obvious reasons--would reduce health care costs by one-quarter to one-third. Instead of such common-sense reforms, the Dems are proposing Rube Goldberg measures that will make health care more expensive. Instead of eliminating mandates, their measures, including the Baucus bill, increase them--in effect making cheaper health insurance illegal. The Democratic bills also do not have any tort reform measures in them. Clearly everyone knows that if some of the defensive medicine that is practiced today could be eliminated that there would be additional savings of an estimated 100 billion dollars.
This isn't reform, it is stupidity.
Monday, October 12, 2009
RUSS LIMBAUGH AND THE NFL
I guess Rush's stand against socialism was all BS.
Rush now wants to buy an NFL team.
A league that reeks of socialism.
Where the league rules state Green Bay gets as much money as the New York Giants.
Explain Rush Mr. Capitalism
Rush now wants to buy an NFL team.
A league that reeks of socialism.
Where the league rules state Green Bay gets as much money as the New York Giants.
Explain Rush Mr. Capitalism
http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/index.asp
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/12/opinion/12krugman.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper
The first a thoughtful article about the trouble we are about to slam into, head first.
The second, more dribble from the Liberal excuser. (Continuing to attack the prosperity of this country, now by proposing hyper-inflation which will devalue those with more than those without-making financial, economic, business planning simple...don't.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/12/opinion/12krugman.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper
The first a thoughtful article about the trouble we are about to slam into, head first.
The second, more dribble from the Liberal excuser. (Continuing to attack the prosperity of this country, now by proposing hyper-inflation which will devalue those with more than those without-making financial, economic, business planning simple...don't.)
THE DOMINOE THEORY 2009
Beware of cascading dominoes whether in Southeast Asia or anywhere else.
The domino theory held that if Vietnam, was split into north and south, and was united under communism, then other Asian countries, including Thailand, the Philippines, perhaps even India, would inevitably fall to communism as well, just like so many dominoes toppling.
Instead, it was communism that fell.
If Afghanistan falls to the Taliban, Pakistan will surely follow, opening a nuclear Pandora's Box to anti-American terrorists in which, in our fevered imaginations, smoking guns will once again become mushroom clouds.
Get out of Afghanistan now is my answer, it is a country of rocks, tribes, and has never been civilized. Protect our borders, our ports, and only use our precious troops when you are only prepared to use our entire arsenal to protect them.
Simply put do not send my child to fight a war that you will not use everything we have to protect him. If we can't use nuclear weapons then maybe we should think that war is not worth it.
The domino theory held that if Vietnam, was split into north and south, and was united under communism, then other Asian countries, including Thailand, the Philippines, perhaps even India, would inevitably fall to communism as well, just like so many dominoes toppling.
Instead, it was communism that fell.
If Afghanistan falls to the Taliban, Pakistan will surely follow, opening a nuclear Pandora's Box to anti-American terrorists in which, in our fevered imaginations, smoking guns will once again become mushroom clouds.
Get out of Afghanistan now is my answer, it is a country of rocks, tribes, and has never been civilized. Protect our borders, our ports, and only use our precious troops when you are only prepared to use our entire arsenal to protect them.
Simply put do not send my child to fight a war that you will not use everything we have to protect him. If we can't use nuclear weapons then maybe we should think that war is not worth it.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Detroit... on the mend ! Here is some social justice for you Terry.
Transcript from a WJR interview.
ROGULSKI: Why are you here?
WOMAN #1: To get some money.
ROGULSKI: What kind of money?
WOMAN #1: Obama money.
ROGULSKI: Where's it coming from?
WOMAN #1: Obama.
ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get it?
WOMAN #1: I don't know, his stash. I don't know. (laughter) I don't know where he got it from, but he givin' it to us, to help us.
WOMAN #2: And we love him.
WOMAN #1: We love him. That's why we voted for him!
WOMEN: (chanting) Obama! Obama! Obama! (laughing)
RUSH: Now, yes, I think it's fine to laugh. I think it's frankly fine to laugh. (laughing) It's freaking sad. Obama giving us money from his stash, that's why we love him, Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm. Here's the report from yesterday, just to refresh your memory.
ROGULSKI: Did you get an application to fill out yet?
WOMAN: I sure did. And I filled it out, and I am waiting to see what the results are going to be.
ROGULSKI: Will you know today how much money you're getting?
WOMAN: No, I won't, but I'm waiting for a phone call.
ROGULSKI: Where's the money coming from?
WOMAN: I believe it's coming from the City of Detroit or the state.
ROGULSKI: Where did they get it from?
WOMAN: Some funds that was forgiven (sic) by Obama.
ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get the funds?
WOMAN: Obama getting the funds from... Ummm, I have no idea, to tell you the truth. He's the president.
ROGULSKI: In downtown Detroit, Ken Rogulski, WJR News.
ROGULSKI: Why are you here?
WOMAN #1: To get some money.
ROGULSKI: What kind of money?
WOMAN #1: Obama money.
ROGULSKI: Where's it coming from?
WOMAN #1: Obama.
ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get it?
WOMAN #1: I don't know, his stash. I don't know. (laughter) I don't know where he got it from, but he givin' it to us, to help us.
WOMAN #2: And we love him.
WOMAN #1: We love him. That's why we voted for him!
WOMEN: (chanting) Obama! Obama! Obama! (laughing)
RUSH: Now, yes, I think it's fine to laugh. I think it's frankly fine to laugh. (laughing) It's freaking sad. Obama giving us money from his stash, that's why we love him, Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm. Here's the report from yesterday, just to refresh your memory.
ROGULSKI: Did you get an application to fill out yet?
WOMAN: I sure did. And I filled it out, and I am waiting to see what the results are going to be.
ROGULSKI: Will you know today how much money you're getting?
WOMAN: No, I won't, but I'm waiting for a phone call.
ROGULSKI: Where's the money coming from?
WOMAN: I believe it's coming from the City of Detroit or the state.
ROGULSKI: Where did they get it from?
WOMAN: Some funds that was forgiven (sic) by Obama.
ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get the funds?
WOMAN: Obama getting the funds from... Ummm, I have no idea, to tell you the truth. He's the president.
ROGULSKI: In downtown Detroit, Ken Rogulski, WJR News.
Those who bother to read the article will soon realize what any fool can see ...the Federal Government is heading down the same path as the states.
It will not be long until the bell tolls for America.
We cannot soak the rich to prosperity, we need to get our fiscal house in order, and SPEND LESS MONEY!
Are we not just borrowing from Peter (the Federal Government) to pay Paul (State Government) transfering no real money, just debt?
And sooner than later, the Federal debt is going to come due.
We cannot soak the rich to prosperity, we need to get our fiscal house in order, and SPEND LESS MONEY!
Are we not just borrowing from Peter (the Federal Government) to pay Paul (State Government) transfering no real money, just debt?
And sooner than later, the Federal debt is going to come due.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
I remember a post a while back by Rich about not being able to reason with Conservatives
Well Rich lets talk about the beliefs of your mates on the left.
The Democratic party is made up of people who believe O.J. was innocent. That the US Government planned and executed the 9/11 attacks. That US astronauts never landed on the moon. That the human race has a bigger impact on the Earth's climate than the Sun. That animals deserve more respect than Humans. That US policies are the cause of all of the unrest in the world. That you can improve the crumbling education system in the inner cities of the US by ignoring the root causes but instead just keep piling more and more money on top of what has already been wasted. That Acorn is a good organization that deserves more taxpayer money. That there is no evil in the world and everyone can be reasoned with by just negotiating and not having to resort to any military options. That it is not racism when well in excess of 90% of a race votes for the candidate with the same color skin. That abortion is not killing a human being. That you can solve an economic crisis by spending trillions of dollars believing that for every dollar that is spent on one-off highway repairs that several dollars will come back to the US Treasury. That charging people money for not having health insurance is not a tax. That it is a smart thing to force financial institutions to loan money to those who cannot pay it back even after this behavior was the prime reason we had a mortgage meltdown in the first place. That it is OK to rape a teenage girl by drugging her as long as you are a famous Hollywood producer. That Barry would make a great President just because he was editor of the Harvard Law Review even though he produced no scholarly articles. That Labor Unions should be in control of the companies that they work for. I could go on all day with this list of insane beliefs of the left in this country.
Now these are the types of people who are Czars in the Barry administration.
God help us!
The Democratic party is made up of people who believe O.J. was innocent. That the US Government planned and executed the 9/11 attacks. That US astronauts never landed on the moon. That the human race has a bigger impact on the Earth's climate than the Sun. That animals deserve more respect than Humans. That US policies are the cause of all of the unrest in the world. That you can improve the crumbling education system in the inner cities of the US by ignoring the root causes but instead just keep piling more and more money on top of what has already been wasted. That Acorn is a good organization that deserves more taxpayer money. That there is no evil in the world and everyone can be reasoned with by just negotiating and not having to resort to any military options. That it is not racism when well in excess of 90% of a race votes for the candidate with the same color skin. That abortion is not killing a human being. That you can solve an economic crisis by spending trillions of dollars believing that for every dollar that is spent on one-off highway repairs that several dollars will come back to the US Treasury. That charging people money for not having health insurance is not a tax. That it is a smart thing to force financial institutions to loan money to those who cannot pay it back even after this behavior was the prime reason we had a mortgage meltdown in the first place. That it is OK to rape a teenage girl by drugging her as long as you are a famous Hollywood producer. That Barry would make a great President just because he was editor of the Harvard Law Review even though he produced no scholarly articles. That Labor Unions should be in control of the companies that they work for. I could go on all day with this list of insane beliefs of the left in this country.
Now these are the types of people who are Czars in the Barry administration.
God help us!
Those that cannot learn from past mistakes are idiots
http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/03/community-reinvestment-act-mortgages-housing-opinions-contributors-peter-schweizer.html
One would think that at least two lessons would have been learned from the financial crisis: stop pushing loans to people who cannot or will not pay them back and stop offering loans with "flexible underwriting criteria." Not so. The Barry administration and some of the idiotic Democrats in Congress are pushing their most audacious plan yet expanding the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) which helped spark the crisis in the first place.
Read the above article and be amazed at how stupid some of these Democrats are. Barry is the leader of the pack. This country cannot afford to bail out billions of bad mortgages again. When will Democrats learn?
One would think that at least two lessons would have been learned from the financial crisis: stop pushing loans to people who cannot or will not pay them back and stop offering loans with "flexible underwriting criteria." Not so. The Barry administration and some of the idiotic Democrats in Congress are pushing their most audacious plan yet expanding the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) which helped spark the crisis in the first place.
Read the above article and be amazed at how stupid some of these Democrats are. Barry is the leader of the pack. This country cannot afford to bail out billions of bad mortgages again. When will Democrats learn?
Boy I'm glad that is over.
Did you think I was speaking of the stock market?
No, I'm referring to our country's flirtation with liberalism.
Mr. smooth talker somehow got past his lack of experience and associations ("America's chickens are coming home to roost") to get a lot of folks to vote for him. These are people who would never have voted for such a obvious liberal agenda except they were exasperated by the economic meltdown and dissatisfied with the Republican candidate(s).
But now folks are seeing liberalism in all its glory, with income redistribution and socialized medicine and fighting back.
The lefts abnormal, rabid disdain of the "tea baggers" and health care takeover protestors is whistling past the grave yard.
America is coming back to its senses, realizing that free market Capitalism is the only way to lasting prosperity.
The 2010 elections look dark for the left but hark, an angel... they are now proposing tax cuts (unclear if they are the make up "government directed stimulative" or true broad based cuts) but now even the lefties in this administration realize that a command and control economy is a road to ruin. The laws of economics and human behavior cannot be repealed. Told you so.
Crazy Rich, perhaps tax cuts and a little fiscal discipline can keep us from economic "Californication". Although I know you said the real problem was that the tax payers were being selfish (not wanting to pay for ALL social programs, ideas, whims of the left and illegal immigrants to boot). Tisk, tisk
No, I'm referring to our country's flirtation with liberalism.
Mr. smooth talker somehow got past his lack of experience and associations ("America's chickens are coming home to roost") to get a lot of folks to vote for him. These are people who would never have voted for such a obvious liberal agenda except they were exasperated by the economic meltdown and dissatisfied with the Republican candidate(s).
But now folks are seeing liberalism in all its glory, with income redistribution and socialized medicine and fighting back.
The lefts abnormal, rabid disdain of the "tea baggers" and health care takeover protestors is whistling past the grave yard.
America is coming back to its senses, realizing that free market Capitalism is the only way to lasting prosperity.
The 2010 elections look dark for the left but hark, an angel... they are now proposing tax cuts (unclear if they are the make up "government directed stimulative" or true broad based cuts) but now even the lefties in this administration realize that a command and control economy is a road to ruin. The laws of economics and human behavior cannot be repealed. Told you so.
Crazy Rich, perhaps tax cuts and a little fiscal discipline can keep us from economic "Californication". Although I know you said the real problem was that the tax payers were being selfish (not wanting to pay for ALL social programs, ideas, whims of the left and illegal immigrants to boot). Tisk, tisk
Sunday, October 4, 2009
The American Right Wing 2009
Obama Risks a Domestic Military 'Intervention'
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:35 AM
By: John L. Perry
There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America's military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the "Obama problem." Don't dismiss it as unrealistic.
America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn't mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:
Officers swear to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to "obey the orders of the president of the United States."
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:35 AM
By: John L. Perry
There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America's military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the "Obama problem." Don't dismiss it as unrealistic.
America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn't mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:
Officers swear to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to "obey the orders of the president of the United States."
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Friday, October 2, 2009
How to look unpresidential
Barry is setting a new standard for looking unpresidential. First he goes on every news channel except Fox to try and sell health care reform. Next he appears on Letterman to do the same. Now he jets off to Copenhagen in an effort to win the Olympics for Chicago while Iran is about to get nuclear weapons and the War in Afghanistan is falling off the tracks.
Now his administration is attacking Fox News. Boy the left can always dish out vicious attacks based on lies but when they get criticized with facts like Van Jones and the Acorn debacle all of a sudden they attack the only news station that appears to be doing their job now. It must be awfully tough to be so arrogant that when someone actually points out mistakes you have made you attack them instead of correcting the errors.
Now we have the saga of another of his czars Kevin Jennings the Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools at the U.S. Department of Education. Why, exactly, would a President put someone who admires those who advocate homosexual relationships between middle-aged men and high school or junior high school aged boys in charge of "safety" in American public schools? Who would do that? It's not as though Kevin Jennings' benign view of such exploitation is a secret; on the contrary, this is his career, his claim to fame, his qualification for federal employment. One can only ask: is the Barry administration completely insane?
Now his administration is attacking Fox News. Boy the left can always dish out vicious attacks based on lies but when they get criticized with facts like Van Jones and the Acorn debacle all of a sudden they attack the only news station that appears to be doing their job now. It must be awfully tough to be so arrogant that when someone actually points out mistakes you have made you attack them instead of correcting the errors.
Now we have the saga of another of his czars Kevin Jennings the Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools at the U.S. Department of Education. Why, exactly, would a President put someone who admires those who advocate homosexual relationships between middle-aged men and high school or junior high school aged boys in charge of "safety" in American public schools? Who would do that? It's not as though Kevin Jennings' benign view of such exploitation is a secret; on the contrary, this is his career, his claim to fame, his qualification for federal employment. One can only ask: is the Barry administration completely insane?
More on the success of the stimulus bill
http://michaelscomments.wordpress.com/2009/10/02/september-unemployment-the-job-loss-accelerates/
Unemployment rose to 9.8% in September. Innocent Bystanders, see above link, has been tracking the unemployment rate against the Barry administration's projections. In order to persuade Congress to pass the "stimulus" bill, the administration predicted what unemployment would be with and without the alleged impact of the stimulus. The reality has turned out to be far worse; I think it is safe to say that the stimulus bill has been a failure contrary to the dumbest Vice President in histories claims.
If the Barry administration is this far off in their predictions on the stimulus bill than how can any sane, rational, human being actually believe the health care reform numbers being thrown about. What do you think will happen to the cost of insurance once insurance companies are forced to insure people with preexisting conditions? Barry is trying hard in his fantasy world to break this country economically. He must be stopped before it is too late.
Unemployment rose to 9.8% in September. Innocent Bystanders, see above link, has been tracking the unemployment rate against the Barry administration's projections. In order to persuade Congress to pass the "stimulus" bill, the administration predicted what unemployment would be with and without the alleged impact of the stimulus. The reality has turned out to be far worse; I think it is safe to say that the stimulus bill has been a failure contrary to the dumbest Vice President in histories claims.
If the Barry administration is this far off in their predictions on the stimulus bill than how can any sane, rational, human being actually believe the health care reform numbers being thrown about. What do you think will happen to the cost of insurance once insurance companies are forced to insure people with preexisting conditions? Barry is trying hard in his fantasy world to break this country economically. He must be stopped before it is too late.
Which guy is totally clueless and which one is just a plain liar?
"The stimulus bill has succeeded beyond my wildest dreams"
Vice President Joe Biden
"I was unaware that Acorn was getting large amounts of Federal money"
President Obama
Vice President Joe Biden
"I was unaware that Acorn was getting large amounts of Federal money"
President Obama
The weak Commander In Chief
I am sure all of you remember the rhetoric from the Democratic party about the wars. If we were in control we would move everything out of Iraq and put everything into the just war, the one in Afghanistan. We would certainly catch Usama Bin Laden unlike the Bush Administration.
So let me ask you lefties out there now is this guy going to blow the War in Afghanistan? Is he going to make it another Vietnam by letting the radical left wing dictate how we fight the war instead of listening to his Generals like President Bush listened? Barry is on the verge of taking a War that we were winning and instead create the biggest terrorist recruiting tool the world has yet seen. If we lose this war the rest of the world will see how weak this President is. What most lefties can not get through their drug addled brains is that there are evil people in this world and they see weakness as opportunity and only respect strength in a negotiation.
If we lose in Afghganistan every soldier who had died there will have died in vain. Barry is more concerned in trying and failing to bring the Olympics to Chicago so that his inner circle can make a financial killing than he is in communicationg with the General in Charge of the war effort. As President Bush allegedly stated "this Cat just doesn't get it".
Remember how the left kept arguing that Gitmo was this huge terrorist recruiting tool without ever offering any evidence as to the accuracy of their statements? Now Barry is again showing is ineptitude by not being able to close down Gitmo by the time listed in one of his first executive orders. I wonder how many thousands of terrorists will join Al Queda because of this?
This President is clearly demonstrating that he is not ready for prime time. We need to impeach him before the damage to this country becomes too great. If we lose in Afghanistan we will allow the Taliban and Al Queda to establish a nation that made the old Afghanistan look like Disneyland.
So let me ask you lefties out there now is this guy going to blow the War in Afghanistan? Is he going to make it another Vietnam by letting the radical left wing dictate how we fight the war instead of listening to his Generals like President Bush listened? Barry is on the verge of taking a War that we were winning and instead create the biggest terrorist recruiting tool the world has yet seen. If we lose this war the rest of the world will see how weak this President is. What most lefties can not get through their drug addled brains is that there are evil people in this world and they see weakness as opportunity and only respect strength in a negotiation.
If we lose in Afghganistan every soldier who had died there will have died in vain. Barry is more concerned in trying and failing to bring the Olympics to Chicago so that his inner circle can make a financial killing than he is in communicationg with the General in Charge of the war effort. As President Bush allegedly stated "this Cat just doesn't get it".
Remember how the left kept arguing that Gitmo was this huge terrorist recruiting tool without ever offering any evidence as to the accuracy of their statements? Now Barry is again showing is ineptitude by not being able to close down Gitmo by the time listed in one of his first executive orders. I wonder how many thousands of terrorists will join Al Queda because of this?
This President is clearly demonstrating that he is not ready for prime time. We need to impeach him before the damage to this country becomes too great. If we lose in Afghanistan we will allow the Taliban and Al Queda to establish a nation that made the old Afghanistan look like Disneyland.
Obama fails miserably with the IOC
I imagine all of those individuals out there that believed that Barry is the second coming of the promised one instead of the second coming of Jimmy Carter must be in mourning today.
Chicago finished dead last. Good thing that we spent all that money flying Barry and Michelle over there on separate jets.
Hopefully he will finally wake up and smell the coffee and realize that he is not as great as his insiders have been telling him.
The IOC certainly was impressed by him. Where did Chicago finish? Dead last.
Chicago finished dead last. Good thing that we spent all that money flying Barry and Michelle over there on separate jets.
Hopefully he will finally wake up and smell the coffee and realize that he is not as great as his insiders have been telling him.
The IOC certainly was impressed by him. Where did Chicago finish? Dead last.
The stock market has it wrong
There is a much greater risk that the doomsday of our debt will crash down upon us (in the setting of no economic growth) than there is that global warming, I mean, climate change, will ever appear (so damn inconvenient that there has been no temp change in the last 10 year and the ice is not melting).
The "O" administration has bet the farm on economic growth and either its economic policies must change or we are in big trouble.
The "O" administration has bet the farm on economic growth and either its economic policies must change or we are in big trouble.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)