John Lott suggests that this shows a need for some sort of intelligence test before voting. But in some respects, these women certainly get it right.
Who am I to question the wisdom of their bottom line assessment?
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Supreme Court Accepts Chicago 2nd Amendment Case
Today the United States Supreme Court accepted jurisdiction to hear the appeal of a case brought against the City of Chicago challenging Chicago's gun ban scheme. McDonald v. Chicago (08-1521). The case is expected to confirm whether the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms binds the states, rather than simply the federal government. Most states have similar rights written into the state's constitution. So, even if the Second Amendment is found not to apply to the states through incorporation by the Fourteenth Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms would be protected in most states anyway.
Form more information, go here.
Here is a copy of the successful petition for certiorari.
Here is Chicago's response brief.
Here is the plaintiffs' reply brief.
Form more information, go here.
Here is a copy of the successful petition for certiorari.
Here is Chicago's response brief.
Here is the plaintiffs' reply brief.
Texting While Driving
Associated Press Report.
A Southern California man accused of killing a pedestrian while driving and text messaging has been ordered to stand trial for gross vehicular manslaughter
This is not a radical charge. Negligent homicide has long been recognized by most states. Usually there degree of negligence must be gross. But it seems to me that texting while driving is so risky, to attention diverting, that a negligent homicide charge is a real possibility.
Response to Thomas Friedman
Thomas Friedman, in his New York Tomes Op-ed today, joins the lefty folks who are complaining about excessive criticism of the President. Among other things, he complains about the right labeling President Obama as a socialist.
Hello. Those are facts, not opinions. Those facts show that Obama's administration has pushed socialist policies. Granted, there is no proposal to take over all means of production and distribution. Yet. It is a creeping socialism. Well, under Obama, it has moved from creeping to walking. And he is walking it toward us.
Socialist. The facts are there, decide for yourself.
In fairness to Mr. Friedman, this was simply a minor issue in his overall piece. He is decrying the opening of the formerly alternative, now primary, media to the diverse and vocal opinions (like this blog) which are intensifying the divisions in this country. Point well taken. We are no longer the willing slaves of the uni-opinioned media. People have outlets for their divers voices. The politicians need to learn to deal with it. It is these diverse voices that will act to block (we sincerely hope) the impositions of bad policies on an unwilling majority (or minority).
Politicians like the President must understand that radical policies (like socialized health care) will divide us and may drive crazies to do crazy things. If it gets bad enough, if the politicians pursue divisive policies enough, they will drive the country to a place no one (I hope) wants to be. The same place the country was against King George. Let us not have to go there. Please.
If you think I exaggerate, read the Declaration of Independence complaint about excessive government.
Of course, under Obama, the federal government owns majority interests in Chrysler and General Motors (means of production) and he has proposed a government run health care system (means of distribution of service).
Socialism: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. Source Dictionary.com
Hello. Those are facts, not opinions. Those facts show that Obama's administration has pushed socialist policies. Granted, there is no proposal to take over all means of production and distribution. Yet. It is a creeping socialism. Well, under Obama, it has moved from creeping to walking. And he is walking it toward us.
Socialist. The facts are there, decide for yourself.
In fairness to Mr. Friedman, this was simply a minor issue in his overall piece. He is decrying the opening of the formerly alternative, now primary, media to the diverse and vocal opinions (like this blog) which are intensifying the divisions in this country. Point well taken. We are no longer the willing slaves of the uni-opinioned media. People have outlets for their divers voices. The politicians need to learn to deal with it. It is these diverse voices that will act to block (we sincerely hope) the impositions of bad policies on an unwilling majority (or minority).
Politicians like the President must understand that radical policies (like socialized health care) will divide us and may drive crazies to do crazy things. If it gets bad enough, if the politicians pursue divisive policies enough, they will drive the country to a place no one (I hope) wants to be. The same place the country was against King George. Let us not have to go there. Please.
If you think I exaggerate, read the Declaration of Independence complaint about excessive government.
ACORN: Crime and Cover-up in Nevada
This on e has been boiling for a while. Remember how the ACORN spokespeople, e.g. Scott Levenson, claimed that the instances of voter registration fraud (about 50 charges, 30 guilty pleas to date) were all rogue employees and ACORN the organization had no role in the fraud? Remember that?
well, here be go in Nevada where ACORN not only have a role in illegal voter registrations, but acted to cover up its crimes. Fox News report here.
Organizations truly do have cultures. In the 1960s, you could tell an IBM guy by the dark suit and black tie. You can tell a military guy by the bearing and pride in our nation. How can you tell an ACORN person? By the acceptance of criminality, I guess. By the defensiveness over the indefensible.
The organization is corrupt. It is too bad. Poor people need charitable assistance with some of the matters that ACORN addressed. I hope some good faith-based charities will step in to fill the void.
On a related front, the New York Times continues to be slow on the story. No report yet of the criminal charges against ACORN itself.
well, here be go in Nevada where ACORN not only have a role in illegal voter registrations, but acted to cover up its crimes. Fox News report here.
Organizations truly do have cultures. In the 1960s, you could tell an IBM guy by the dark suit and black tie. You can tell a military guy by the bearing and pride in our nation. How can you tell an ACORN person? By the acceptance of criminality, I guess. By the defensiveness over the indefensible.
The organization is corrupt. It is too bad. Poor people need charitable assistance with some of the matters that ACORN addressed. I hope some good faith-based charities will step in to fill the void.
On a related front, the New York Times continues to be slow on the story. No report yet of the criminal charges against ACORN itself.
24 Years In Prison for Ponzi Scheme
Norman Hsu, who was convicted in May of making illegal campaign contributions (to Democratic candidates, if it matters), was this week sentenced to 24 years in prison for bilking investors of an estimated $20 million in a Ponzi scheme.
In a related event, no action is being taken against the members of Congress who enacted social security, a much larger Ponzi scheme in which several hundred millions taxpayers of been bilked of trillions of dollars through payroll taxes since the enactment of social security.
On the positive front, social security hasn't completely collapsed. Yet.
In a related event, no action is being taken against the members of Congress who enacted social security, a much larger Ponzi scheme in which several hundred millions taxpayers of been bilked of trillions of dollars through payroll taxes since the enactment of social security.
On the positive front, social security hasn't completely collapsed. Yet.
Polanski: Everyone Wants to F---- Young Girls Updated: NY Times Weighs In
By now everyone knows that scumbag but famous Hollyweird director Roman Polanski is being extradited to the United States to be sentenced for his 1979 conviction of raping and sodomizing a 13 year old girl in 1977. According to an interview he gave in 1979:
My sense is that my brother who runs The Funeral Guy blog and is the doting father of a daughter and runs obituaries of interesting deaths wishes he could be doing Polansky's obituary about now.
Update: For a change, I agree with a New York Times editorial.
For commentary on what sort of mindset Polanski is expressing, go here.
Source here.
“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”
My sense is that my brother who runs The Funeral Guy blog and is the doting father of a daughter and runs obituaries of interesting deaths wishes he could be doing Polansky's obituary about now.
Update: For a change, I agree with a New York Times editorial.
For commentary on what sort of mindset Polanski is expressing, go here.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Buy Health Insurance or Go to Prison
The left gets derisive when conservatives express fear of tyranny by a left wing government. Frankly the notion that you either buy health insurance or go to jail to be, well, tyrannical.
And that is exactly what the current hell care bill proposes.
Patrick Kennedy warns that the hell care debate may turn violent. When the left wing is pushing the insurance or prison option, I don't wonder that they will provoke violence.
And that is exactly what the current hell care bill proposes.
Patrick Kennedy warns that the hell care debate may turn violent. When the left wing is pushing the insurance or prison option, I don't wonder that they will provoke violence.
Monday, September 28, 2009
AR-15 Platform Rifles: That Dog Will Hunt
The anti-gunners call them assault rifles and, noses in the air, claim they are not for hunting. No so, gun-banners:
Note: The Second amendment is NOT about hunting anyway.
Note: The Second amendment is NOT about hunting anyway.
Despicable: Obama's Latest
President Obama has ordered pensions cut off for WWII vets who defended Alaska.
Remember, Japan invaded Alaska about the same time as the Battle of Midway. As I get the story, these veterans served without pay.
It seems to me they would have been better off if we had never made Alaska a state. They could the have come to the continental US and be here as illegal aliens, rather than war veterans. Illegals get benefits, don't they?
h/t The Funeral Guy
Remember, Japan invaded Alaska about the same time as the Battle of Midway. As I get the story, these veterans served without pay.
It seems to me they would have been better off if we had never made Alaska a state. They could the have come to the continental US and be here as illegal aliens, rather than war veterans. Illegals get benefits, don't they?
h/t The Funeral Guy
Ayers as Obama's Ghostwriter
There is nothing unusual or wrong with politicians using ghostwriters to get their books in print. It is offensive if the ghostwriter is not credited.
IN the Case of Barack Obama's Dreams of My Fathers, it is astounding that Obama family biographer, Christian Anderson, who wrote the puff book Barack and Michelle, Portrait of an American Marriage has revealed that Obama used Williams Ayers as his ghostwriter.; Remember William Ayers< "Just a guy in the neighborhood I know" who just happened to have founded the weather underground and who participated in the bombing of buildings.
From the American Thnker:
The clowns at Media Matters noticed. They are trying to spin this as a right-wing hit job by author Christopher Anderson. the trouble is, Anderson is not a right wing pundit and his book is a pro-Obama puff piece.
The funny thing about this is that folks like Chris Matthews touted this book as evidence of Obama's talent and intelligence. I hear from all accounts that William Ayers, although a terrorist, is quite a good writer.
IN the Case of Barack Obama's Dreams of My Fathers, it is astounding that Obama family biographer, Christian Anderson, who wrote the puff book Barack and Michelle, Portrait of an American Marriage has revealed that Obama used Williams Ayers as his ghostwriter.; Remember William Ayers< "Just a guy in the neighborhood I know" who just happened to have founded the weather underground and who participated in the bombing of buildings.
From the American Thnker:
President Obama never had much credibility with me anyhow, but when will the left wing, the so-call mainstream media notice.
Andersen quotes a Hyde Park neighbor, "Everyone knew they were friends and that they worked on various projects together. It was no secret. Why would it be? People liked them both."
Andersen continues, "In the end, Ayers's contribution to Barack's Dreams From My Father would be significant--so much so that the book's language, oddly specific references, literary devices, and themes would bear a jarring similarity to Ayers's own writing."
The clowns at Media Matters noticed. They are trying to spin this as a right-wing hit job by author Christopher Anderson. the trouble is, Anderson is not a right wing pundit and his book is a pro-Obama puff piece.
The funny thing about this is that folks like Chris Matthews touted this book as evidence of Obama's talent and intelligence. I hear from all accounts that William Ayers, although a terrorist, is quite a good writer.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Stimulus? $529 Million to ... Finland!
Why is the Obama administration spending $529 million US tax dollars in Finland? To help his buddy Al Gore, I guess.
This is outrageous.
This is outrageous.
List of Obama Atrocities
The Obama Administration may be the best and the worst we have ever had, yes, worse than Jimmy Carter. The best is how the Obama administration has motivated people to speak out against its big government antics. The administration is so bad, it is bringing out the good in opposition to it.
The atrocities? Well, Neal Boortz has a comprehensive list here. I think he left some stuff out.
The atrocities? Well, Neal Boortz has a comprehensive list here. I think he left some stuff out.
ACORN v O'Keefe et al
There is an excellent legal analysis of the liekliehood of success of the ACORN suit on the legal issues at Copyrights and Campaigns blog.
One of the commenters points out the case of Lachman v. Sperry-Sun Surveying Company, 450 F. 2d 850, in which a surveyor was checking an oil and gas well under a contract with the the leaseholder that prohibited the surveyor from disclosing the results of any work. The Surveyor discovered that the well was not vertical and the bottom of the well encroached the neighbor's property. The surveyor told the neighbor about the encroachment. The leaseholder sued the surveyor for breaching the nondisclosure obligation of the surveyor's contract. The court found that the public policy of the state would not permit a contract to be enforced that permitted a crime to go undetected.
I think the Baltimore Circuit Court should find a public policy exception implicit in the statute the forbids surreptitious recording, if the enforcement of the statue would have permitted a crime to go undetected. Of course, the court could also find that there was no expectation of privacy in an office with an open door where children could be plainly heard in the background.
One of the commenters points out the case of Lachman v. Sperry-Sun Surveying Company, 450 F. 2d 850, in which a surveyor was checking an oil and gas well under a contract with the the leaseholder that prohibited the surveyor from disclosing the results of any work. The Surveyor discovered that the well was not vertical and the bottom of the well encroached the neighbor's property. The surveyor told the neighbor about the encroachment. The leaseholder sued the surveyor for breaching the nondisclosure obligation of the surveyor's contract. The court found that the public policy of the state would not permit a contract to be enforced that permitted a crime to go undetected.
I think the Baltimore Circuit Court should find a public policy exception implicit in the statute the forbids surreptitious recording, if the enforcement of the statue would have permitted a crime to go undetected. Of course, the court could also find that there was no expectation of privacy in an office with an open door where children could be plainly heard in the background.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
ACORN: The Cornered Rat Sues Videographer
What do miscreants do when confronted with their own wrongdoing? Punish those who expose it!
Acorn has sued the videographers that exposed Acorn employees who advised them to file fraudulent taxes and advised them on how to get a brothel, featuring 13 year old illegal immigrant girls, up and running as a successful small business. Those poor Acorn employees. They have suffered emotional distress from having their criminal advice exposed to public view. And Acorn fired them. So Acorn is paying for their lawyers to sue.
Associations of Community Organizations for Reform Now, Inc. et al. v. James E. O'Keefe III, et al., Baltimore City Circuit Court. Here is a pdf of the complaint. No word yet on the defense fund.
Acorn has sued the videographers that exposed Acorn employees who advised them to file fraudulent taxes and advised them on how to get a brothel, featuring 13 year old illegal immigrant girls, up and running as a successful small business. Those poor Acorn employees. They have suffered emotional distress from having their criminal advice exposed to public view. And Acorn fired them. So Acorn is paying for their lawyers to sue.
Associations of Community Organizations for Reform Now, Inc. et al. v. James E. O'Keefe III, et al., Baltimore City Circuit Court. Here is a pdf of the complaint. No word yet on the defense fund.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Monday, September 21, 2009
National Endowment for the Arts Promotes Pro-Obama Art
The next breaking scandal from the bottomless pit of government corruption (Obama administration, this time).
The National Endowment for the Arts caught on recordings promoting artists to help the Obama administration agenda.
Whose money are they using? Why yours, of course.
Stay tuned. BigGovernment.com is the push behind this scandal.
The National Endowment for the Arts caught on recordings promoting artists to help the Obama administration agenda.
Whose money are they using? Why yours, of course.
Stay tuned. BigGovernment.com is the push behind this scandal.
More ACORN Scandal: Helping Illegals Get Loans for Homes
ACORN helping illegal aliens buy homes? Who'd a thunk it?
Obama Lifts Terrorist's Prison Restrictions
The Obama administration is making life easier for convicted terrorist Richard Reid, according to the Boston Herald:
Security experts say that our collective safety needs terrorist conspirators cut off from one another, even in prison.
Airplane shoe bomber Richard C. Reid no longer faces severe limits on his prison activities or communications after the Obama administration quietly ended years of hard-nosed curbs against the British-born al-Qaeda terrorist.
This summer the Justice Department halted six years of measures that kept Reid from associating or praying with fellow jailed Muslim terrorists, and limited his access to the news media and pen pals.
The Only Way to Cut Government Waste
There is one and only one way to cut waste and corruption in government. Put less money in the hands of government. Less money = less waste. Less money = less corruption. It is so simple.
President Obmam's claim is laughable that he will pay for more government health care programs by cutting waste. More money in government hands inevitably means more waste, not less.
Obviously, I am not the only one who thinks so:
President Obmam's claim is laughable that he will pay for more government health care programs by cutting waste. More money in government hands inevitably means more waste, not less.
Obviously, I am not the only one who thinks so:
Flying Imams -- US Airways Dismissed; Suit Continues Against Law Enforcement
The press has been remarkably silent these past three years on the subsequent events in the famous flying imams suit. You may remember that on November 20, 2006, six imams, fresh form a Muslim conference, were removed from a U.S. airways flight from Minneapolis to Phoenix after a passenger complained that the imams were acting suspiciously.
The imams were detained for six hours and flew home on another airline after U.S. Airways refused to carry them. There is a dispute about the activities deemed suspicious. The imams claims it was simply because they were praying. In fact, the activities included loud cursing about the United States' war against Saddam, requests for seat-belt extenders that appeared to a passenger to be unwarranted; seating that appeared to to the passenger to be strategic (i.e., which could facilitate a hijacking).
With help of CAIR (the unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case), the imams sued the airline, the police, and the passengers. After an outraged Congress passed a bill granting passengers "qualified immunity," the imams dropped the passengers from the suit.
After three years, the various defendants filed motions for summary judgment to ask the court to dismiss the suit. On July 24, 2009, the United States District Judge issued her ruling ("Memorandum Opinion and Order") which is available here.
There are essentially two major rulings:
1. The court dismissed all claims against U.S. Airways.
2. The court refused to dismiss the claims for unlawful arrest under state and federal law against the various law enforcement officers (except state law claims against an FBI agent). The court said that the qualified immunity passed by Congress did not protect law enforcement officers.
Although the legal effect of the ruling is to send the case to trial against the law enforcement officers only, the judge in her analysis suggests that the facts as presented in the motions essentially mean the law enforcement officers will be liable for the unlawful arrest and detention of the imams.
Bottom line: No liability for removal from the aircraft; no liability for investigatory stop, but there is liability for arrest without probable cause and six hours detention. That is how I understand the decision.
This decision will put great pressure on the insurers of the law enforcement officers to settle the case if they can. What is six hours of detention and the embarrassment of being arrested worth? What is the added publicity worth to the imams? What would a Minneapolis jury be likely to award for six hours detention?
I suspect the imams will get more in settlement at this point than they would by going to trial. Look for a settlement, probably on confidential terms.
The imams were detained for six hours and flew home on another airline after U.S. Airways refused to carry them. There is a dispute about the activities deemed suspicious. The imams claims it was simply because they were praying. In fact, the activities included loud cursing about the United States' war against Saddam, requests for seat-belt extenders that appeared to a passenger to be unwarranted; seating that appeared to to the passenger to be strategic (i.e., which could facilitate a hijacking).
With help of CAIR (the unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case), the imams sued the airline, the police, and the passengers. After an outraged Congress passed a bill granting passengers "qualified immunity," the imams dropped the passengers from the suit.
After three years, the various defendants filed motions for summary judgment to ask the court to dismiss the suit. On July 24, 2009, the United States District Judge issued her ruling ("Memorandum Opinion and Order") which is available here.
There are essentially two major rulings:
1. The court dismissed all claims against U.S. Airways.
2. The court refused to dismiss the claims for unlawful arrest under state and federal law against the various law enforcement officers (except state law claims against an FBI agent). The court said that the qualified immunity passed by Congress did not protect law enforcement officers.
Although the legal effect of the ruling is to send the case to trial against the law enforcement officers only, the judge in her analysis suggests that the facts as presented in the motions essentially mean the law enforcement officers will be liable for the unlawful arrest and detention of the imams.
Bottom line: No liability for removal from the aircraft; no liability for investigatory stop, but there is liability for arrest without probable cause and six hours detention. That is how I understand the decision.
This decision will put great pressure on the insurers of the law enforcement officers to settle the case if they can. What is six hours of detention and the embarrassment of being arrested worth? What is the added publicity worth to the imams? What would a Minneapolis jury be likely to award for six hours detention?
I suspect the imams will get more in settlement at this point than they would by going to trial. Look for a settlement, probably on confidential terms.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Bertha Lewis: Rudeness Personified
ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis was interviewed by Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday today. Also interviewed was Congressman Issa, an ACORN critic. Congressman Issa was unfailingly courteous and polite. Bertha Lewis was, well, rude. She would not answer simple questions, but instead presented filibustery non-answers. Twice Congressman Issa politely addressed questions directly to her. She refused even to look in his direction.
Make your own judgment:
ACORN is a strange organization. One thing is clear: it works unabashedly for Democratic candidates. Bertha Lewis made some reference to firewalls between organizations. No politically oriented organization should be getting federal money. Money given for program X frees up other money that can be used for political purposes. No firewall can protect against that sort of budget shifting.
ACORN may do some good work for the poor. Fine. Let it do so in peace (after rooting out the criminal behavior), but don't make me pay for it through my tax dollars if there is any chance that my tax dollars will help ACORN find the funds for its political activities..
Make your own judgment:
ACORN is a strange organization. One thing is clear: it works unabashedly for Democratic candidates. Bertha Lewis made some reference to firewalls between organizations. No politically oriented organization should be getting federal money. Money given for program X frees up other money that can be used for political purposes. No firewall can protect against that sort of budget shifting.
ACORN may do some good work for the poor. Fine. Let it do so in peace (after rooting out the criminal behavior), but don't make me pay for it through my tax dollars if there is any chance that my tax dollars will help ACORN find the funds for its political activities..
Friday, September 18, 2009
Rep. Jerrold Nadler: Nut of the Day
Get this. U.S. Representative Jerrold Nadler actually issued a press release saying that defunding ACORN violates its constitutional rights.
Really?
So now, according to Representative Nadler, ACORN supposedly has a constitutional right to keep receiving your tax dollars to ... do what? Help elect Democrats? Help pimps and prostitutes start brothels?
Seriously, no nonprofit organization has a constitutional right to get taxpayer dollars to continue its work, whatever it is. No matter hos legitimate or worthy.
The press release is simply stupid. What it really means is the Nadler wants ACORN's help in the next election. You watch.
Really?
So now, according to Representative Nadler, ACORN supposedly has a constitutional right to keep receiving your tax dollars to ... do what? Help elect Democrats? Help pimps and prostitutes start brothels?
Seriously, no nonprofit organization has a constitutional right to get taxpayer dollars to continue its work, whatever it is. No matter hos legitimate or worthy.
The press release is simply stupid. What it really means is the Nadler wants ACORN's help in the next election. You watch.
Global Warming Alert: The BBC Reports
After ten straight years of global cooling, the BBC now reports ... that cooling will likely continue.
Read it all.
The global warming narrative - that mankind's addiction to burning fossil fuels is rapidly changing the climate - may be about to go seriously off message.
Far from suggesting the planet will get warmer, one of the world's leading climate modellers says the latest data indicates we could be in for a significant period of steady temperatures and possibly even a little global cooling.
U.S. Gov't: We Don't Need No Stinking Recycling Through Garage Sales
Fox News is now reporting on a story I told you about on August 21, 2009 "Have a Yard Sale, Go to Federal Prison":
So much for recycling through selling your old stuff, so someone new could use it. You didn't need the money anyway.
Americans who slap $1 pricetags on their used possessions at garage sales or bazaar events risk being slapped with fines of up to $15 million, thanks to a new government campaign.
The "Resale Round-up," launched by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, enforces new limits on lead in children's products and makes it illegal to sell any items that don't meet those limits or have been recalled for any other reason.
The strict standards were set in the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act after a series of high-profile recalls of Chinese-made toys.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Breaking: House Passes Measure to Cut Off All Acorn Funding
Appended to a sweeping student loan bill, there House passed a measure that according to the Wall Street Journal would cut off all Federal funding for Acorn.
h/t Michelle Malkin (who has the actual vote). And don't forget biggovernment.com who has been all over this story.
Of course, nothing is final until passed by the Senate and signed by the President.
The House attached a measure to the student-loan bill ending all federal government funding of the community organizing group Acorn -- the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. The group has long been in the cross hairs of Republicans, but more recently has been accused of widespread fraud and other illegal activities.
h/t Michelle Malkin (who has the actual vote). And don't forget biggovernment.com who has been all over this story.
UK Justice: Protect the Criminal
Another reason to stay in America.
Read more: Give thanks if you don't live in the U.K. or other gun-unfriendly nation.
A millionaire businessman is facing jail for attacking a career criminal who had held his family hostage at knifepoint.
Munir Hussain, 52, was told he would be killed when three raiders invaded his home.
He and his wife, their teenage daughter and two sons were ordered to lie on the floor of the living room with their hands behind their back
But the Hussains' teenage son managed to escape through a window and when the men realised that, two of them fled.
Hussain then threw a coffee table at the third man, 56-year-old Walid Salem, hitting him in the face. His older son Awais, 20, joined the fight and although Salem tried to escape he was bundled into a nearby garden.
Neighbours in High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, then saw several men beating him with weapons including a cricket bat and a metal pole. He was left with injuries including a fractured skull and bruising on the brain.
Hussain denied attacking Salem, claiming it was a group of local youths. But a jury at Reading Crown Court found him guilty of inflicting grievous bodily harm with intent.
Pray with Adults: Go to Jail
The ACLU is trying to put two Florida school employees in jail -- for praying with other adults. This astounding story comes from the Washington Times. Read it all.
Health Care Delivery Innovation
Yes, there is innovation in health care delivery systems for self-insured employers. Here are excerpts from an article from ZDnet:
The author of the article is unhappy with the innovative delivery system, because it would cost American jobs. Of course. The export of medical procedures is driven by excessive American government regulation, foiled by American ingenuity. Regulation is the bad guy here, not the innovator.
Steven Lash, CEO of Satori Medical World, has a patent on how to do this [provide low-cost, high quality self-insured health care]. (Satori is a term used by Japanese Buddhists for a sudden flash of individual enlightenment.)
Here is how it works.
Lash has spent the last year building a network of hospitals around the world that offer first-rate care, based on international standards, at prices a fraction of what you would pay in the U.S., plus experience dealing with English-speaking patients.
“We are sending people to Mexico, to Monterrey. We hope to add Mexico City. At the first of the year they will be going to Panama and Costa Rica. Then we have the Philippines, India, Thailand, Turkey and Singapore.”
Lash has also spent time calling on these self-insured companies, persuading them to his idea, trying to get a chance. “We would become embedded as a health care option for their clients. They would have a choice of going to five network options and we’d be the sixth. We don’t replace the benefit. We become an option.”
To make sure this works, Lash will also choose patients carefully. If you have co-morbidities, stay. If your case is just emerging, stay. The benefit will be offered to those who need a defined procedure only.
The savings here can be huge. The patent covers what happens to them.
“We have a business method patent whereby the employee gets to share in the savings through a deposit in a Health Reimbursement Account (HRA).
“If the savings are $40,000, the employer shares $8-10,000 with the employee and makes a deposit in their HRA. This money can then be used to do co-pays, deductibles and for further premiums.”
HRAs are defined by the Treasury Department, and are different from Health Savings Accounts in that they are “100% employer funded, and non-portable. It rolls over. There’s no limit on what you can put in. And it can pay for first dollar coverage.”
There are incentives here for both sides. The self-insurer pockets big savings, plus they build loyalty because the employee isn’t going to leave with a big HRA balance. The employee, meanwhile, may save enough to pay for the next year’s premiums, or the birth of their next child.
Yes, you’re exporting the practice of medicine overseas, but that’s the market. Those with real insurance won’t see this for years because such things need to go through state regulatory processes.
ACORN - Taxpayers Paying for Liberal Activism. Updated. Further Update: LA Subpoenas Issued
ACORN is a blatantly partisan group that says it is non-partisan. But everyone knows it is partisan. The defensive statements of Bertha Lewis essentially acknowledge that ACORN is a partisan being attacked by the other side. There is hardly even a pretense of non-partisanship.
So, given that, why is ACORN the recipient of massive amounts of government money? It is simply wrong to use taxpayer dollars to fund partisan organizations in any small part, even if they may do some useful community work.
A church may run a food kitchen, but that does not authorize the government to fund the church activities.
I suspect the answer may lay in the many layered organization of ACORN. It is said to have hundreds of related organizations. None of the media reports have really delved into the relationships with any clarity, except the relationship with SEIU. I suspect the web of organizations to a bit too complex. Why are there so many? Are there several separately incorporated in each state? Will anyone with the time unravel this mystery? Is it worth doing?
With the calls for investigations, someone will have to unravel the tangle. It will be a tedious job. I hope there are some out there in the media with the skills to reveal the mysteries in an understandable way.
Only then will we get a glimpse of the many ways ACORN is abusing taxpayer money for liberal advocacy.
Update: A similar article on BigGovernment.com In related news, Big Government is reporting that the Attorney General of Louisiana last month issued subpoenas for corporate records of ACORN, apparently related to the alleged cover up of embezzlement by Dale Rathke, the ACORN founder Wade Rathke's brother. A copy of the first page of the subpoena can be seen. If the subpoena was issued last month, I suspect the response date has passed, unless it was extended.
So, given that, why is ACORN the recipient of massive amounts of government money? It is simply wrong to use taxpayer dollars to fund partisan organizations in any small part, even if they may do some useful community work.
A church may run a food kitchen, but that does not authorize the government to fund the church activities.
I suspect the answer may lay in the many layered organization of ACORN. It is said to have hundreds of related organizations. None of the media reports have really delved into the relationships with any clarity, except the relationship with SEIU. I suspect the web of organizations to a bit too complex. Why are there so many? Are there several separately incorporated in each state? Will anyone with the time unravel this mystery? Is it worth doing?
With the calls for investigations, someone will have to unravel the tangle. It will be a tedious job. I hope there are some out there in the media with the skills to reveal the mysteries in an understandable way.
Only then will we get a glimpse of the many ways ACORN is abusing taxpayer money for liberal advocacy.
Update: A similar article on BigGovernment.com In related news, Big Government is reporting that the Attorney General of Louisiana last month issued subpoenas for corporate records of ACORN, apparently related to the alleged cover up of embezzlement by Dale Rathke, the ACORN founder Wade Rathke's brother. A copy of the first page of the subpoena can be seen. If the subpoena was issued last month, I suspect the response date has passed, unless it was extended.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
LA Times Editorial on ACORN
I recommend the LA Times editorial on ACORN. I do not agree with it completely. It is a shame that the increasingly irrelevant media have failed to accomplish with all their resources what two budding young journalists have done with $1300 (according the James O'Keefe, the photographer).
I especially enjoyed reading the comments.
I especially enjoyed reading the comments.
High Unemployment - Government Ineptitutde
Assuming that the government thinks it need to do things to address high unemployment, reason and rationality would suggest that the government should encourage employers and potential employers to hire people.
Seems pretty obvious. So simple, even government should think of it.
But how can government do that? For starters, why not stop punishing employers for employing people. When an employer hire someone, the employer steps into a complex morass of higher taxes and arcane regulations. The new employer can't simply write a check to the new hire. They have to pay premiums for various programs (unemployment, workers compensation). They have to withhold a variety of taxes, federal state and local. Scarier, they have personal liability on all these taxes, despite corporate entities as the employers.
On top of all that, employers have to have sophisticate lawyers and human resources people to navigate through anti-discrimination laws, retirement plans and medical plans. The anti-discrimination laws are not mere common sense. You can't ask an applicant if they are married, for example. You can't ask an applicant if they are black, unless it is for the purpose of providing a preference, but you must ask if the are black after hire, so you can be prepared to report to some oversight agency in the event of a problem.
Anti-discrimination laws frighten small employers into not hiring minorities. If they hire minorities, the small employer may be face with huge lawyers fees if they ever have to lay off or fire the minority if they have to defend themselves from the discrimination claim. These claims are encouraged, because the claimant has nothing to lose. It costs them no legal fees to make a claim lacking merit. Ohio like other states does not exempt employers based upon small size.
What is the reword for employers to take these risks and to bear the government burdens? employer hope to make a profit. so the employer must take on the certainty of government burdens on the hope and prayer of a profit.
The answer: government needs to recognize and lessen the burdens on employers. Encourage employers to take the business risks.
Counter-intuitively perhaps, state governments can encourage minority employment by adopting exemptions in their civil rights laws for small employers, as the Equal Employment Opportunity Act does. In my observation, small employers want to do the right thing. Small employers want to provide opportunities to qualified minorities. Take away the burdens, and more minorities will find employment with small employers.
But don't hold your breath. Every new government idea seems to impose a new mandate on employers, as if employer resources were limitless.
The bottom line is that once again, government is more of the problem and refuses to become part of the solution. Rather than low cost solution, expect government to throw more money at the problem without any real understanding of employer incentives.
Seems pretty obvious. So simple, even government should think of it.
But how can government do that? For starters, why not stop punishing employers for employing people. When an employer hire someone, the employer steps into a complex morass of higher taxes and arcane regulations. The new employer can't simply write a check to the new hire. They have to pay premiums for various programs (unemployment, workers compensation). They have to withhold a variety of taxes, federal state and local. Scarier, they have personal liability on all these taxes, despite corporate entities as the employers.
On top of all that, employers have to have sophisticate lawyers and human resources people to navigate through anti-discrimination laws, retirement plans and medical plans. The anti-discrimination laws are not mere common sense. You can't ask an applicant if they are married, for example. You can't ask an applicant if they are black, unless it is for the purpose of providing a preference, but you must ask if the are black after hire, so you can be prepared to report to some oversight agency in the event of a problem.
Anti-discrimination laws frighten small employers into not hiring minorities. If they hire minorities, the small employer may be face with huge lawyers fees if they ever have to lay off or fire the minority if they have to defend themselves from the discrimination claim. These claims are encouraged, because the claimant has nothing to lose. It costs them no legal fees to make a claim lacking merit. Ohio like other states does not exempt employers based upon small size.
What is the reword for employers to take these risks and to bear the government burdens? employer hope to make a profit. so the employer must take on the certainty of government burdens on the hope and prayer of a profit.
The answer: government needs to recognize and lessen the burdens on employers. Encourage employers to take the business risks.
Counter-intuitively perhaps, state governments can encourage minority employment by adopting exemptions in their civil rights laws for small employers, as the Equal Employment Opportunity Act does. In my observation, small employers want to do the right thing. Small employers want to provide opportunities to qualified minorities. Take away the burdens, and more minorities will find employment with small employers.
But don't hold your breath. Every new government idea seems to impose a new mandate on employers, as if employer resources were limitless.
The bottom line is that once again, government is more of the problem and refuses to become part of the solution. Rather than low cost solution, expect government to throw more money at the problem without any real understanding of employer incentives.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Of Czars and Commissars
What about all these czars who are not confirmed by the Senate? Here is the legal requirement in the United States Constitution:
So, these czars (commissars, really) have no legal standing as "public ministers" or " other officers" without the Senate's advice and consent. What standing and authority do these commissars have, then? Can any action they take be challenged in a taxpayer's suit? I wish I knew.
Section 2. Powers and Duties of the President
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session. [Emphasis added.]
Monday, September 14, 2009
Gay Man Sues Bible Publisher for Mental Anguish
A gay man has brought suit against Bible publisher Tyndale House claiming that certain passages of the bible cause him mental anguish. This is of course outrageous and frivolous. This guy has previously sued two large bible publishers and lost on the grounds of the statute of limitations. But, this is the kind of persecution Christians can expect from the acceptance of homosexuality as simply another alternative lifestyle. Story here.
ACORN News Continues
There are calls for the Justice Department to investigate ACORN. Would you trust Eric Holder to head such any investigation? It was Holder's Justice Department who voluntarily dropped civil suits for injunction against Black militants who intimidated voters in Philadelphia. Sadly, I don't trust the attorney General of the United States to conduct an investigation of a politically connected organization like ACORN.
I have referred to ACORN as a criminal enterprise. Nevada may make that official. In Nevada, ACORN as an organization along with top individuals is under indictment for election registration crimes. Don't expect a conviction soon, though. The case is on hold while the ACLU files suit to challenge the constitutionality of the law under which ACORN was charged, all per the Las Vegas Sun.
On another front, Senator Mike Johanns today will offer an amendment to block Federal funding of ACORN. It's about time. Don't expect the radical left wing in Congress to go along.
I have referred to ACORN as a criminal enterprise. Nevada may make that official. In Nevada, ACORN as an organization along with top individuals is under indictment for election registration crimes. Don't expect a conviction soon, though. The case is on hold while the ACLU files suit to challenge the constitutionality of the law under which ACORN was charged, all per the Las Vegas Sun.
On another front, Senator Mike Johanns today will offer an amendment to block Federal funding of ACORN. It's about time. Don't expect the radical left wing in Congress to go along.
ACORN Threatens Fox News. Update: Video added.
ACORN conspires with pimps and prostitutes to establish brothels in major cities. biggovernment.com has the unedited videos of these investigations clearly showing ACORN employees conspiring in the establishment of brothels featuring 15 year old illegal alien girls.
Acorn responds (this is abbreviated, the full response is on ACORN's web site here):
It gets interesting. ACRON fired the workers and the public statement admits, "I will not defend the actions of the workers depicted in the video, who have since been terminated." But the lawyers say,
The raw videos (and they are mounting up: Baltimore, Washington, New York and who knows how many more)are available to all to see on biggovernment.com.
As for the treat of action because Maryland law mostly prohibits surrepticious taping of people, that simply deflects the real issue. Assuming the surrpeticious taping was wrong (and I think the courts should engraft a public policy exception to the prohibition), that does not justify the ACORN workers who aided and abetting the house of underage prostitution that would employ illegal aliens.
ACORN must fall because of its own wrongdoing, rather than villifying those who seek to end the wrongdoing.
By the way, it seems to me that the quoted statement admits ACORN's partisan nature. It is evil and wrong to fund a partisan organization (left or right)with taxpayer dollars ($8.5 billion in this year's budget passed by Congress).
Update:
My brother The Funeral Guy opines that the ACORN folk, if they pursue a suit against Fox News, must be clinically insane. I am inclined to agree, but I don't think it will happen as more videos come to light. It simply digs deeper holes for the acorn's burial -- so to speak.
Acorn responds (this is abbreviated, the full response is on ACORN's web site here):
Statement from Bertha Lewis, Chief Organizer, ACORN Regarding Recent News ReportsACORN's lawyers have sent threatening letters to Fox News here and here.
September 12, 2009
The relentless attacks on ACORN's members, its staff and the policies and positions we promote are unprecedented. An international entertainment conglomerate, disguising itself as a "news" agency (Fox), has expended millions, if not tens of millions of dollars, in their attempt to destroy the largest community organization of Black, Latino, poor and working families in the country. It is not coincidence that the most recent attacks have been launched just when health care reform is gaining traction. It is clear they've had these tapes for months.
We are their Willy Horton for 2009. We are the boogeyman for the right-wing and its echo chambers. If ACORN did not exist, the right-wing would have needed to create us in order to achieve their agenda, their missions, their ideal, retrograde America. This recent scam, which was attempted in San Diego, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Philadelphia to name a few places, had failed for months before the results we've all recently seen. I am appalled and angry; I cannot and I will not defend the actions of the workers depicted in the video, who have since been terminated. But it is clear that the videos are doctored, edited, and in no way the result of the fabricated story being portrayed by conservative activist "filmmaker" O'Keefe and his partner in crime. And, in fact, a crime it was - our lawyers believe a felony - and we will be taking legal action against Fox and their co-conspirators.
It gets interesting. ACRON fired the workers and the public statement admits, "I will not defend the actions of the workers depicted in the video, who have since been terminated." But the lawyers say,
Wow. Which is it? Is ACORN saying it unjustly fired innocent workers who were falsely depicted in a doctored video? No, ACORN knows the video isn't doctored. ACORN is too compassionate and caring to fire people falsely accused of something, aren't they?
The staffer involved claims that the questions she was asked were not the questions asked by the voiceover online. In fact, she denies ever giving tax advice to people identifying themselves as a pimp and a prostitute.
The raw videos (and they are mounting up: Baltimore, Washington, New York and who knows how many more)are available to all to see on biggovernment.com.
As for the treat of action because Maryland law mostly prohibits surrepticious taping of people, that simply deflects the real issue. Assuming the surrpeticious taping was wrong (and I think the courts should engraft a public policy exception to the prohibition), that does not justify the ACORN workers who aided and abetting the house of underage prostitution that would employ illegal aliens.
ACORN must fall because of its own wrongdoing, rather than villifying those who seek to end the wrongdoing.
By the way, it seems to me that the quoted statement admits ACORN's partisan nature. It is evil and wrong to fund a partisan organization (left or right)with taxpayer dollars ($8.5 billion in this year's budget passed by Congress).
Update:
My brother The Funeral Guy opines that the ACORN folk, if they pursue a suit against Fox News, must be clinically insane. I am inclined to agree, but I don't think it will happen as more videos come to light. It simply digs deeper holes for the acorn's burial -- so to speak.
Sherrod Brown Part of the Problem
I am sharing with you my letter to Sherrod Brown sent this morning:
Via Fax (614) 469-2171
Hon. Sherrod Brown
United States Senate
455 Russell Senate Building
Washington DC 20510
Dear Hon. Sen. Brown,
So far 50 ACORN employees have been charged with voter registration fraud, 30 of whom have pleaded guilty. Last week and this, undercover videos show Acorn employees in different cities encouraging tax fraud and conspiring to place brothels – featuring 15 year old girls who are also illegal immigrants – into neighborhoods.
ACORN is either incompetently managed of corporately corrupt.
This year, Congress voted to fund ACORN (and its affiliates, I guess) to the tune of $8.5 billion. You voted for it.
You have never called for any sort of investigation of this outfit. Funding this sort of organization with taxpayer money is a travesty and corrupt waste of taxpayer dollars.
Instead, you sent me a letter telling me you are working hard to take away our health care freedom in this country. With you voting for $8.5 billion going to a corrupt organization like ACORN, how can you possibly content that government will root out waste and corruption in health care system? Do you think the public is that stupid?
The way I see it, YOU are part of the problem in Washington.
________
If you are an Ohioan, please send your own letter. Be polite, but firm. No coarse language. Let him know that he is letting us down. Let's say good bye to this guy in 2012.
Via Fax (614) 469-2171
Hon. Sherrod Brown
United States Senate
455 Russell Senate Building
Washington DC 20510
Dear Hon. Sen. Brown,
So far 50 ACORN employees have been charged with voter registration fraud, 30 of whom have pleaded guilty. Last week and this, undercover videos show Acorn employees in different cities encouraging tax fraud and conspiring to place brothels – featuring 15 year old girls who are also illegal immigrants – into neighborhoods.
ACORN is either incompetently managed of corporately corrupt.
This year, Congress voted to fund ACORN (and its affiliates, I guess) to the tune of $8.5 billion. You voted for it.
You have never called for any sort of investigation of this outfit. Funding this sort of organization with taxpayer money is a travesty and corrupt waste of taxpayer dollars.
Instead, you sent me a letter telling me you are working hard to take away our health care freedom in this country. With you voting for $8.5 billion going to a corrupt organization like ACORN, how can you possibly content that government will root out waste and corruption in health care system? Do you think the public is that stupid?
The way I see it, YOU are part of the problem in Washington.
________
If you are an Ohioan, please send your own letter. Be polite, but firm. No coarse language. Let him know that he is letting us down. Let's say good bye to this guy in 2012.
"You Lie" -- True of False? Update: More Falsehoods
The Clinton Administration's special counsel to the president Lanny Davis has an op-ed in the Washington Times about Joe Wilson's cry of "You lie," during President Obama's speech last Wednesday. Mr. Davis makes the point that an untrue statement is a lie only if it was knowingly false, and therefore President Obama did not lie about coverage for illegal aliens in Obamacare.
I suggest that Mr. Davis fell one step short in his analysis. A statement is a lie not only if the speaker of the untruth knows it to be untrue, but also if the statement was made with reckless disregard for the truth. When you make solemn representations to Congress and the country (even if not under oath) you cannot wilfully put blinders on. You must exercise care to make your statements truthful.
Mr. Davis ends with the excellent point that liberals accused President Bush of lying about WMDs in Iraq despite his sincere belief. The difference between the two situations is that President Push made his statements based upon intelligence reports that there were WMDs in Iraq. That is no reckless disregard for truth. President Obama was wilfully wearing blinders about the truth. The proof is in the aftermath.
Because of Representative Wilson's outburst and accusation, House Democrats are being forced to do what they previously refused to do: put enforcement teeth into the bill to prevent illegal immigrants from getting government subsidized insurance. In his speech even President Obama admitted that illegals would still get free care simply by showing up at emergency rooms as they do now. Isn't that the equivalent of insuring illegal aliens at taxpayer expense? President Obama said, "The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally." Technically true, but deliberately misleading. If something is deliberately misleading, isn't that a form of a lie?
Update: Getting away from the value-driven word "lies," here is a Wall Street Journal article that reveals more untruthful statements by President Obama in his speech.
I suggest that Mr. Davis fell one step short in his analysis. A statement is a lie not only if the speaker of the untruth knows it to be untrue, but also if the statement was made with reckless disregard for the truth. When you make solemn representations to Congress and the country (even if not under oath) you cannot wilfully put blinders on. You must exercise care to make your statements truthful.
Mr. Davis ends with the excellent point that liberals accused President Bush of lying about WMDs in Iraq despite his sincere belief. The difference between the two situations is that President Push made his statements based upon intelligence reports that there were WMDs in Iraq. That is no reckless disregard for truth. President Obama was wilfully wearing blinders about the truth. The proof is in the aftermath.
Because of Representative Wilson's outburst and accusation, House Democrats are being forced to do what they previously refused to do: put enforcement teeth into the bill to prevent illegal immigrants from getting government subsidized insurance. In his speech even President Obama admitted that illegals would still get free care simply by showing up at emergency rooms as they do now. Isn't that the equivalent of insuring illegal aliens at taxpayer expense? President Obama said, "The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally." Technically true, but deliberately misleading. If something is deliberately misleading, isn't that a form of a lie?
Update: Getting away from the value-driven word "lies," here is a Wall Street Journal article that reveals more untruthful statements by President Obama in his speech.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
More on the Obama Health Care Speech
In my post on the Obama health care speech, I concentrated on the lies, misdirections and misrepresentations. I agree with the additional crticisms discussed by Dallas Jenkins on Big Hollywood. I urge everyone to read it.
Hypocrite in Chief
President Obama in his health care speech: "Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics."
President Obama yesterday warned that nearly half of all Americans younger than 65 could lose their health coverage in the next decade according to the Columbus Dispatch.
Scare tactics anyone?
President Obama yesterday warned that nearly half of all Americans younger than 65 could lose their health coverage in the next decade according to the Columbus Dispatch.
Scare tactics anyone?
Friday, September 11, 2009
Quote of the Day
From Michelle Malkin:
But it was Obama who said himself in the speech: “If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out.”
That’s what Joe Wilson was doing, wasn’t it?
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Liar!
During President Obama's speech last night, one Republican simply could not contain himself. He called it as he saw it: "You lie!"
Did the President lie? Well he clearly said things that ranged from gross distortions to simply untrue. For the statements to be lies, well, it seems to me that he had to either know they were untrue or he should have known from the available information that they were untrue.
Yes, the president lied. I will show some of the lies here from the text of the prepared speech as published today.
This isn't a lie; it is just a gross exaggeration. Government involvement in health care is "central" to our future? Really? Isn't being the "land of the free" central? Wasn't the freedom to for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness really the central tenets of our country and should be central to our future? Even if government control of health care were important, it is certainly and most decidedly not central to our future.
Did the President lie? Well he clearly said things that ranged from gross distortions to simply untrue. For the statements to be lies, well, it seems to me that he had to either know they were untrue or he should have known from the available information that they were untrue.
Yes, the president lied. I will show some of the lies here from the text of the prepared speech as published today.
But we did not come here just to clean up crises. We came to build a future. So tonight, I return to speak to all of you about an issue that is central to that future ? and that is the issue of health care.
This isn't a lie; it is just a gross exaggeration. Government involvement in health care is "central" to our future? Really? Isn't being the "land of the free" central? Wasn't the freedom to for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness really the central tenets of our country and should be central to our future? Even if government control of health care were important, it is certainly and most decidedly not central to our future.
One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn't reported gallstones that he didn't even know about. They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it. Another woman from Texas was about to get a double mastectomy when her insurance company canceled her policy because she forgot to declare a case of acne. By the time she had her insurance reinstated, her breast cancer more than doubled in size. That is heart-breaking, it is wrong, and no one should be treated that way in the United States of America.Even if these are the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth (although wholly unverifiable), the notion that bureaucrats making the decision will somehow be more fair is laughable.
We spend one-and-a-half times more per person on health care than any other country?.Figures don't lie, but liars figure. This figure is doubtful, but note it is not how much is spent per person actually treated. Actually this figure is an indictment of the rest of the world for failing to treat people to the full extent they need it.
Finally, our health care system is placing an unsustainable burden on taxpayers.But increasing government payments for health care won't further burden taxpayers? Really?
These are the facts. Nobody disputes them.This is clearly a lie. Mr. Obama would have to be blind, deaf and dumb not to hear the disputes.
Since health care represents one-sixth of our economy, I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn't, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch. And that is precisely what those of you in Congress have tried to do over the past several months.The last part is a lie. Congress has indeed been trying to build a new system from scratch. Where has Obama been hiding?
Our overall efforts have been supported by an unprecedented coalition of doctors and nurses; hospitals, seniors' groups and even drug companies ? many of whom opposed reform in the past. And there is agreement in this chamber on about eighty percent of what needs to be done, putting us closer to the goal of reform than we have ever been.This agreement "in this chamber" on 80% is a lie. What he means is that the Democrats have agreed on 80%.
Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics.And what exactly were those stories above about the mastectomy and the gallstone? Scare tactics. Exactly. Hypocrite.
First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.Technically true in the legislation won't say that you have to change, but it is a lie in that the changes will inevitably lead to those changes by employers.
Some of people's concerns have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost.Lie. Assuming the things he claim are bogus really are (they aren't) they have been spread by Americans genuinely concern about the health care issues. This lie is unworthy of the man who purports to be the president of all of us.
The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens. Such a charge would be laughable if it weren't so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple.Obama lies. No one has suggested that the government intends to "kill off" senior citizens. In any government run health care system will necessarily be rationing by government decision. Obama appointees have recommended favoring the young in rationing systems. Government rationing may not be expressly in the bill, but that is exactly what will happen with any government run system. It has to.
There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false ? the reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally. And one more misunderstandingLie. Yes, the bill says that, but the Democrats blocked any effort to enact an enforcement mechanism. So, the bill will say no to illegal aliens, but they will get it anyway on taxpayer dollars.
I want to clear up that under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.That may be his proposal, but certain Democrats are demanding funding for abortions. As long as publicly funded health care is on the table, funding for abortions is likely to come, if not now, then later. (Note, this is not a problem in Medicare for obvious reasons.)
But an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange.If this made economic sense, we would have those now. This statement came at the end of a description of problems where some states have very few approved insurance companies. There is simple solution to the described problem, which is repeal the Federal law that caused the problem. Repeal Federal prohibitions on insuring across state lines? The President is being disingenuous.
Despite all this, the insurance companies and their allies don't like this idea. They argue that these private companies can't fairly compete with the government. And they'd be right if taxpayers were subsidizing this public insurance option. But they won't be. I have insisted that like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects.Again, if a non-taxpayer funder nonprofit this made so much sense, we don't need more Federal legislation to cause it to happen.
Here's what you need to know. First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits ? either now or in the future. PeriodNo one in his right mind believes this statement.
Second, we've estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system ? a system that is currently full of waste and abuse.No one in his right mind thinks that government is good at rooting out waste and abuse. If anything, the opposite is true. A promise to fund anything based upon rooting out waste and abuse is pure fantasyland thinking. I won't bother the cute the other fantasy statement about cutting out fraud and abuse. The truth is that the more government money there is in a program, the more certain people are working hard to get their hands on it and the more bureaucrats will find ways to waste it. It is an unfortunate fact of government.
Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow.Everyone knows that by enacting the legislation as proposed, the deficit will grow. Having a big spending Congress, no matter who controls it, will cause the deficit to grow. It is completely dishonest to claim that the health care measures are a deficit reduction program. Only a complete liar would say that.
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
One Dem Sees Reality in Town Halls
The Washington Post reports that finally one Democrat gets it about public oposition to health care:
Will the Democrats bend to the will of the people? Or will they behave like elitists, telling everyone else what the Democrats deem to be good for them -- and enacting it into law.
Stay tuned.
Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.), the Blue Dog congressman who battled with Democratic Party leaders for much of July before reaching an agreement on health-care reform legislation, said Tuesday that he could no longer back the government-insurance option included in the bill he voted for before the congressional recess.No insurance company, no massive conspiracy is good enough to organize and motivate the sorts of outrage that ordinary Americans expressed in the town halls -- despite Democratic attempts to supress them. The anger was and is real.
"I have been skeptical about the public health insurance option from the beginning and used August to get feedback from you, my constituents," he wrote in a statement his office released publicly. "An overwhelming number of you oppose a government-run health insurance option, and it is your feedback that has led me to oppose the public option as well."
Will the Democrats bend to the will of the people? Or will they behave like elitists, telling everyone else what the Democrats deem to be good for them -- and enacting it into law.
Stay tuned.
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
Obama a Phony and Hypocrite; Biden a Moron
Don Imus is no conservative. Here are his comments on President Obama and Joe Biden:
Joe Biden a moron? Who knew?
Joe Biden a moron? Who knew?
Arrogant Congresspersons Return to Washington
The Republican National Committee welcomes Congress back to D.C. after an August full of town halls with happy constituents -- not.
What a study in arrogance! I wish we could impeach them all.
What a study in arrogance! I wish we could impeach them all.
Obama's Economics Are Hurting All Americans
Another Nobel Laureate economist disagrees with the Obama administraiton's handling of the economy in the current economic crisis. James Buchanan notes that Obama's policies may drag the United States from being a first world country to a third world country, as happened to Chile because of Juan Peron. Read it all.
It has been free market capitalism, which so effectively spurs innovation, that propelled the United States to prominence in the 19th century. The Obamatons' efforts to destroy the free market economy through excessive government in the name of "social justice" ultimately hurts us all.
If we have learned one thing about government regulation, it does only one thing really efficiently. And that is: stifle innovation.
I didn't vote for him.
It has been free market capitalism, which so effectively spurs innovation, that propelled the United States to prominence in the 19th century. The Obamatons' efforts to destroy the free market economy through excessive government in the name of "social justice" ultimately hurts us all.
If we have learned one thing about government regulation, it does only one thing really efficiently. And that is: stifle innovation.
I didn't vote for him.
Baron Hill (D-IN) Town Hall
Another town hall meeting, but this guy wants no video record, because someone might watch him on youtube.com -- as if that were a reason.
Transparency. Hope and Change.
Transparency. Hope and Change.
Hebert Gets It Right for the Wrong Reasons
Bob Hebert's column in the New York Times demands a response, so here it is:
Here is a novel idea. Instead of taxing employer for having employees, thus discouraging their hiring, why not give tax breaks for employing people? Instead of subjecting employers to Draconian penalties for firing the inefficient (via the civil rights act and the like), why not give employers a reprieve? The Civil Rights Act creates greater unemployment among minorities, because it scares employers out of hiring minorities, in my opinion. They would never admit it, though, for fear of getting sued.
Maybe the economic stress has been too much. Looking back at the past few months, it’s fair to wonder if the country isn’t going through a nervous breakdown.I am no friend of birthers and deathers, but actually the political debate has been poisoned by those who denigrate ordinary Americans who showed up at town halls to question Obamacare and who participate in tea parties protesting excessive government and spending. Can you say Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid?
The political debate has been poisoned by birthers, deathers and wackos who smile proudly while carrying signs comparing the president to the Nazis.
People who don’t even know that Medicare is a government program have been trying to instruct us on the best ways to reform health care.This statement is right out of the Democratic party's talking points on Obamacare. It carries the implicit and false assumption that folks who oppose Obamacare are OK with Medicare. Mr. Hebert never questions this false assumption.
The administration’s most popular anti-recession initiative was a startlingly creative economic breakthrough known as the cash-for-clunkers program.Creative, yes. Good idea, no. Cash for clunkers seemed a good idea to those who fail to understand free market economics (that is, economics as it actually works as opposed to Marxism which is economics as certain people think it should be, but isn't.)
Over the weekend (presumably while the president was sleeping, because this occurred in the wee hours of the morning), White House officials whispered the official announcement that Van Jones would no longer be working in the administration.Mr. Hebert apparently gets his facts from the New York Times which utterly failed to report the controversy. Mr. Hebert either ignores or is ignorant of Mr. Jones's self-avowed Communism, his statements about using the green jobs as a stepping stone to doing away with capitalism, his statements that whites are systematically poisoning non-whites and that American companies are dumping toxins on illegal immigrants working in the fields. All beliefs wacky enough to justify dumping him.
The White House wishes it had never heard of Mr. Jones, who was hired to be its point person on green jobs. It turns out that Mr. Jones had used a nasty anatomical slur to refer to Republicans and once signed a petition suggesting that George W. Bush had advance knowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks.
There is no end to the craziness. The entire Republican Party has decided that it is in favor of absolutely nothing.I am no fan of the Republican party these days, but but when too much bad stuff is being shoved down your throat and you have no voting power, the best you can do is oppose the bad stuff.
The president’s stimulus package? No way. Health care reform? Forget about it.Please forget about it. It is a VERY BAD idea, as I have consistently chronicled.
There is not a thing you can come up with that the G.O.P. is for. Sunshine in the morning? Harry Reid could’t persuade a single Senate Republican to vote yes.Incredible? Only to someone who only gets his news from the Times and liberal press.
Incredibly, the party’s poll numbers are going up.
We need therapy. President Obama is planning to address the nation’s public school students today, urging them to work hard and stay in school. The folks who bray at the moon are outraged. Some of the caterwauling on the right has likened Mr. Obama to Chairman Mao (and, yes, Hitler), and a fair number of parents have bought into the imbecilic notion that this is an effort at socialist or Communist indoctrination.I think the President should be capable of talking to our children, but opposition to it is symptomatic of the deep distrust of him now rising in America. Also, please note that when George H.W. Bush spoke to schoolchildren, the Democratic Congress held hearings over the "issue." This sort of concern is nothing new.
As one father from Texas put it: “I don’t want our schools turned over to some socialist movement.”
The wackiness is increasing, not diminishing, and it has a great potential for destruction. There is a real need for people who know better to speak out in a concerted effort to curb the appeal of the apostles of the absurd.Clearly we will disagree about who should be speaking out.
But there is another type of disturbing behavior, coming from our political leaders and the public at large, that is also symptomatic of a society at loose ends. We seem unable to face up to many of the hard truths confronting the U.S. as we approach the end of the first decade of the 21st century.Here Mr. Hebert makes one-half of a good point. Why is Obamamcare the first priority when we are in an economic crisis -- and we could not possibly pay for Obamacare anyway. Mr. Hebert, as so many who have not studied economics and economic history, goes off the mark with what needs to be done about unemployment.
The Obama administration’s biggest domestic priority is health care reform. But the biggest issue confronting ordinary Americans right now — the biggest by far — is the devastatingly weak employment environment. Politicians talk about it, but aggressive job-creation efforts are not part of the policy mix.
Nearly 15 million Americans are unemployed, according to official statistics. The real numbers are far worse. The unemployment rate for black Americans is a back-breaking 15.1 percent.
Five million people have been unemployed for more than six months, and the consensus is that even when the recession ends, the employment landscape will remain dismal. A full recovery in employment will take years. With jobless recoveries becoming the norm, there is a real question as to whether the U.S. economy is capable of providing sufficient employment for all who want and need to work.
This is an overwhelming crisis that is not being met with anything like the urgency required.
Here is a novel idea. Instead of taxing employer for having employees, thus discouraging their hiring, why not give tax breaks for employing people? Instead of subjecting employers to Draconian penalties for firing the inefficient (via the civil rights act and the like), why not give employers a reprieve? The Civil Rights Act creates greater unemployment among minorities, because it scares employers out of hiring minorities, in my opinion. They would never admit it, though, for fear of getting sued.
We’ve also been unable or unwilling to face the hard truths about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the terrible toll they are taking on our young fighting men and women. Most of us don’t want to know. Moreover, we’ve put the costs of these wars on a credit card, without so much as a second thought about what that does to our long-term budget deficits or how it undermines much-needed initiatives here at home.This assumes that we have not need to stop Muslim terrorist group from trying to kill us.
There are many other issues that we remain in deep denial about. It’s not just the bad economy that has thrown state and local budgets into turmoil from coast to coast. It’s our refusal to provide the tax revenues needed to pay for essential public services. Exhibit A is California, which is now a basket case.California is a basket case for many reasons, not the least of which is that it funds too many non-essential government services that have made people dependent upon them.
The serious wackos, the obsessive-compulsive absurdists, may be beyond therapy.He refers here to readers of the New York Times I presume?
But the rest of us could use some serious adult counseling. We’ve forgotten many of the fundamentals: how to live within our means, the benefits of shared sacrifice, the responsibilities that go with citizenship, the importance of a well-rounded education and tolerance.It is weird. As you can tell I agree with almost nothing else in his opinion piece, but I agree with this. Serious wackos like Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Cass Sustein, Mark Lloyd, Mary Jo Kilroy, and Sherrod Brown all need serious therapy.
The first step, of course, is to recognize that we have a problem.I am glad Mr. Hebert recognizes he has a problem, but he is obviously clueless about what it is. Maybe therapy would help.
A Lament on Politicians
The health care debate increases the sense of frustration among Americans. As a college gratuate with a degreee in economics, I suppose I view the world more in economic terms that others.
Mary Jo Kilroy is a politician and sees things in political terms . In the previous post, she reasons (from false facts, I believe) that because the polls show Americans want free health care, politicians should give it to them. Mary Jo, if a majority of Americans wanted a villa in Majorca, would it be Congress's duty to give it to them?
As someone at least somewhat trained in economics, it seems clear that most of what the politicians spout about their universal health care plans is nonsense. The claims that a government option will "promote competition" is laughable.
John R. Lott, Professor of Economics, describes some elements of a proposed Congressional "reform" of health care insurance here. Government mandates are a little like trying to legislate the weather. There are forces, real market forces that exist even if supposedly legislated out of existence -- as the Soviets tried to do -- that will govern behavior notwithstanding legislation. This phenomenon is sometimes called the law of unintended consequences.
Like Cash for Clunkers. Congress did not think that one through. The bad part of the results: used cars taken out of the market hurting those who cannot afford new cars, used parts dealers (e.g., salvage yards) losing supply again hurting the poor, poor program administration resulting in arcane rules and slow pay for new car dealers, and on and on.
The point is that any legislation that messes with the markets will accomplish things, mostly bad, that the drafters never foresaw, along with many bad things that the critics do foresee.
Perhaps if politicians had mandatory training in economics, they would begin to understand that everything cannot be successfully regulated. Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman's book Capitalism and Freedom should be required reading for everyone in Congress. Alas, I think most of them are reading Karl Marx's fully discredited Das Kapital.
Mary Jo Kilroy is a politician and sees things in political terms . In the previous post, she reasons (from false facts, I believe) that because the polls show Americans want free health care, politicians should give it to them. Mary Jo, if a majority of Americans wanted a villa in Majorca, would it be Congress's duty to give it to them?
As someone at least somewhat trained in economics, it seems clear that most of what the politicians spout about their universal health care plans is nonsense. The claims that a government option will "promote competition" is laughable.
John R. Lott, Professor of Economics, describes some elements of a proposed Congressional "reform" of health care insurance here. Government mandates are a little like trying to legislate the weather. There are forces, real market forces that exist even if supposedly legislated out of existence -- as the Soviets tried to do -- that will govern behavior notwithstanding legislation. This phenomenon is sometimes called the law of unintended consequences.
Like Cash for Clunkers. Congress did not think that one through. The bad part of the results: used cars taken out of the market hurting those who cannot afford new cars, used parts dealers (e.g., salvage yards) losing supply again hurting the poor, poor program administration resulting in arcane rules and slow pay for new car dealers, and on and on.
The point is that any legislation that messes with the markets will accomplish things, mostly bad, that the drafters never foresaw, along with many bad things that the critics do foresee.
Perhaps if politicians had mandatory training in economics, they would begin to understand that everything cannot be successfully regulated. Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman's book Capitalism and Freedom should be required reading for everyone in Congress. Alas, I think most of them are reading Karl Marx's fully discredited Das Kapital.
Mary Jo Kilroy Embarrasses Ohio Two Days in a Row
It doesn't just make You Tube this time, but by her own actions, distinguishes herself as a nasty woman on a nationally popular blog, Hotair.com
I can't do better than simply showing how pleasant the woman is when a constituent asks reasonable questions about Obamacare.
I can't do better than simply showing how pleasant the woman is when a constituent asks reasonable questions about Obamacare.
Monday, September 07, 2009
Obama Knew About Lockerbie Bomber Release
I tend to believe the Brits on this one:
Downing Street has hit back at Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for attacking the decision to release the Lockerbie bomber.Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211495/No-10-turns-Obama-Clinton-criticising-decision-release-Lockerbie-bomber.html#ixzz0QRV0alRv
President Obama and the US Secretary of State fuelled a fierce American backlash against Britain, claiming Abdelbaset Al Megrahi should have been forced to serve out his jail sentence in Scotland – but a senior Whitehall aide said their reaction was ‘disingenuous’.
British officials claim Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton were kept informed at all stages of discussions concerning Megrahi’s return.
The officials say the Americans spoke out because they were taken aback by the row over Megrahi’s release, not because they did not know it was about to happen.
‘The US was kept fully in touch about everything that was going on with regard to Britain’s discussions with Libya in recent years and about Megrahi,’ said the Whitehall aide.
Crackheads for Jones?
No, it is Nancy Pelosi. And the Mayor of San Francisco.
I think members of Congress should be subject to mandatory random drug testing.
I think members of Congress should be subject to mandatory random drug testing.
Mary Jo Kilroy Embarrasses Ohio -- Again
This time, Mary Jo Kilroy embarrasses Ohio by being unable to articulate how the country will pay for universal health care. Of course she is joined by Columbus Mayor Michael Coleman (who is obviously clueless on that issue, speaking in slogans, not reason), and Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher who repeats the canard about savings from wellness. Of course every study on savings from wellness show that is completely untrue. Wellness extends life and actually increases the total health care expense of citizens.
I am embarrassed to admit that Mary Jo Kilroy is the elected Representative from my district.
I am embarrassed to admit that Mary Jo Kilroy is the elected Representative from my district.
Sunday, September 06, 2009
Van Jones Resigns -- Updated
Van Jones resigned after a "vicious smear campaign" (as he calls it) which consisted of video replays of Van Jones's own words in speeches and interviews.
MSM irresponsibly ignored the controversy from the start and continues to ignore the solution.
One pundit expressed the hope that Van Jones would remain in the administration, because he would exemplify how bad things are on a continuous basis -- and give the pundit plenty of fodder for punditry.
Update: To Mr. Jones: a "smear campaign" involves the spreading of lies about the subject of the campaign. It is not a "smear" to replay your own words over and over again. As for your apology, did you really think it would be sufficient to apologize for offending anyone? What about disavowing Communism and Marxism, rather than embracing the made up word "eco-capitalism" as a stepping stone to Marxism? How about disavowing your statements that white are delivbereately poisoning non-whites in our country? How about disavowing your statement that we in the US are dumping toxins on illegal immigrants working in the fields? The campaign for your ouster was justified based upon the truths about you from your own lips.
Good riddance. One down.
MSM irresponsibly ignored the controversy from the start and continues to ignore the solution.
One pundit expressed the hope that Van Jones would remain in the administration, because he would exemplify how bad things are on a continuous basis -- and give the pundit plenty of fodder for punditry.
Update: To Mr. Jones: a "smear campaign" involves the spreading of lies about the subject of the campaign. It is not a "smear" to replay your own words over and over again. As for your apology, did you really think it would be sufficient to apologize for offending anyone? What about disavowing Communism and Marxism, rather than embracing the made up word "eco-capitalism" as a stepping stone to Marxism? How about disavowing your statements that white are delivbereately poisoning non-whites in our country? How about disavowing your statement that we in the US are dumping toxins on illegal immigrants working in the fields? The campaign for your ouster was justified based upon the truths about you from your own lips.
Good riddance. One down.
Saturday, September 05, 2009
More Town Hall Gold
It just keeps on going at those town halls. When will they learn that Obamacare is wildly unpopular?
What a doofus that Warner guy is. He thinks that if the Government is unconstitutionally running Medicare and Medicaid, it is OK to expand the unconstitutional activity. Is that what passes for logic in Congress?
Taxation as plunder. I love it. She is absolutely correct, of course.
Not about health care, but great nevertheless:
The continued public pressure is good. Thank you, America.
What a doofus that Warner guy is. He thinks that if the Government is unconstitutionally running Medicare and Medicaid, it is OK to expand the unconstitutional activity. Is that what passes for logic in Congress?
Taxation as plunder. I love it. She is absolutely correct, of course.
Not about health care, but great nevertheless:
The continued public pressure is good. Thank you, America.
SEIU Thugs Not Volunteers
Here is proof that the SEIU thugs who beat a town hall protester in a Missouri town hall were paid union thugs. One of the thugs has filed for workers compensation for an injury he received while doing the beating.
I imagine that the Obamacare protester's face hurt the SEIU thug's hand.
I imagine that the Obamacare protester's face hurt the SEIU thug's hand.
Another Home Invasion Thwarted by Armed Homeowner
Here is a story from Austin, Texas about a homeowner that shoots and kills two teenagers who had broken into his home and who pointed a gun at him. There plenty of these stories and one hopes that word will get around to the potential criminals that home invasions are unsafe for the invaders (as well as the homeowners). However, this is what struck me in the story:
He said officials obtained a search warrant to collect evidence from the Chestnut Street residence, which is standard procedure, and that officials took four guns from the home.It is perfectly appropriate and normal for the police to investigate a shooting even if it first appears an obvious case of self-defense. I have no quarrel with that. But it seems wrong to me for the police to take away the means of self-defense in case the little thugs' friend want to come around for a little revenge.
Friday, September 04, 2009
Van Jones, Under the Bus?
Is White House press spokesman Robert Gibbs signalling that Van Jones is on his way out? I certainly hope so.
Thursday, September 03, 2009
Van Jones -- Truther
It is unbelievable. The White House hired a Truther has on of its "Czars" (Commissars, actually). Van Jones.
It is no wonder that the President's popularity is plummeting and that so-called "passion index" is a negative 11.
The passion index is the percentage of people who strongly approve less the percentage who strongly disapprove. Negative 11 is astoundingly bad for Obama.
Fire. Jones. Now.
It is no wonder that the President's popularity is plummeting and that so-called "passion index" is a negative 11.
The passion index is the percentage of people who strongly approve less the percentage who strongly disapprove. Negative 11 is astoundingly bad for Obama.
Fire. Jones. Now.
Wednesday, September 02, 2009
Can He Be Trusted With Our Children?
Under normal circumstances, I would applaud any President giving a talk directly to students. I would trust almost any President to say the rights things, geared to children, without some awful attempt at indoctrination.
I wish I trusted President Obama to make such a speech. He is certainly capable to doing a great job.
But, after his actions of the last few months, becoming if anything a more divisive president than George Bush or Richard Nixon, I have no trust in the man. Most people I know, much less the talented and Harvard educated, would have the common sense not to appoint self-avowed Communists, Marxists and general wackjobs to high office. And don't forget the tax cheat as Secretary of the Treasury.
As is being reported,
I want to trust our President with as simple a task as speaking to children. I am sorry. I do not. And neither do all those who plan to keep their kids out of school that day. Forget me. hat does that say about confidence in our president?
I wish I trusted President Obama to make such a speech. He is certainly capable to doing a great job.
But, after his actions of the last few months, becoming if anything a more divisive president than George Bush or Richard Nixon, I have no trust in the man. Most people I know, much less the talented and Harvard educated, would have the common sense not to appoint self-avowed Communists, Marxists and general wackjobs to high office. And don't forget the tax cheat as Secretary of the Treasury.
As is being reported,
But already, some conservatives are crying foul. The chairman of the Florida Republican Party is condemning Obama's speech as an attempt to "indoctrinate America's children to his socialist agenda."Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/26711.html#ixzz0Q0ZxJvSP
I want to trust our President with as simple a task as speaking to children. I am sorry. I do not. And neither do all those who plan to keep their kids out of school that day. Forget me. hat does that say about confidence in our president?
Report: U.K. Health Service Prematurely Pulling the Plugs
I routinely advise clients of the dangers of so-called living wills that the hospitals seem to push. Under a living will, if you are in a terminally unconscious as determined by a doctor, you give the hospital permission to pull the plug. No requirement to get the consent of your next of kin. Just the doctor makes that decision.
Now we have a report in the U.K. Telegraph that the U.K. National Health Service hospitals are using similar authority to hurry along those with terminal illnesses.
Welcome to the world of Obamacare. Hope and change.
Now we have a report in the U.K. Telegraph that the U.K. National Health Service hospitals are using similar authority to hurry along those with terminal illnesses.
Welcome to the world of Obamacare. Hope and change.
Obama to Lecture "SCHOOCHILDREN"
Many of us complain that the United States Department of Education actually educates zero children. Maybe we should be grateful. From Ed.gov:
Leave the spelling part of education to the professionals on the ground, please.
Not corrected last I checked at ed.gov
(I make plenty of typo mistakes on this blog. But I don't pretend to be an educator of children, either.)
PRESIDENT OBAMA DELIVERS NATIONAL ADDRESS TO AMERICA’S SCHOOCHILDRENSchoochildren?
Leave the spelling part of education to the professionals on the ground, please.
Not corrected last I checked at ed.gov
(I make plenty of typo mistakes on this blog. But I don't pretend to be an educator of children, either.)
Public Punishing GM, Chrysler?
If you were in the market for a new car, would you avoid GM and Chrysler? If so, would you avoid them because of:
A. I resent the bailout.You may be in the majority. See article here.
B. They are majority Government & union owned, so I don't trust them in the future (warranty issues, repair issues, parts availability etc).
D. I resent what they did to their shareholders, bondholders and employees in the bailout.
E. More than one of the above.
Middle America Speaks Out on Health Care
The folks in the White House and in the liberal media (and the line is blurred between them) run around with all like-minded folks in their daily lives. They really can't conceive that middle America is strongly opposed to Obamamcare, to taking tax dollars to fund a massive take-over of the health care system, to take on budget crushing medical obligations for all (which we know, despite contrary language in the current bill) will include illegal immigrants and the killing of the unborn.
The point, though is that the liberal elites deeply fail to comprehend that the rest of America does not share their desires for a universal health care system. They fail to comprehend how deeply middle America feels about the travesty of government funded universal health care. Here is an excellent video of ordinary Americans speaking out at yet another rally:
The point, though is that the liberal elites deeply fail to comprehend that the rest of America does not share their desires for a universal health care system. They fail to comprehend how deeply middle America feels about the travesty of government funded universal health care. Here is an excellent video of ordinary Americans speaking out at yet another rally:
Radicals Advising the White House
Are you as confused as I am about all this talk about Czars in our government? Is that really their official titles?
It turns out that, no, "Czar" is no one's official title. But each of these appointments is for a position that seems to wield particular power. Some of them are actually statutorily created and even require the advice and consent of the Senate for appointment. But in most cases, the official title is something like "Special Advisor to the President" and thus escapes the checks and balances of Senate confirmation. Sure the Democrats control the Senate, but evil in appointees backgrounds tends to get revealed in public hearings.
So the Obama administration (as, I suppose administrations before it) is trying to circumvent public scrutiny by special titles for people with powers in position not authorized -- or at least created -- by statute.
How is the attempt to avoid scrutiny working? In the case of the more outrageous appointments, not very well. Of course, what does the administration expect when it appoints people like:
-- Van Jones -- Outspoken, highly visible, self-described Communist who is the special advisor on creating green jobs.
-- Cass Sustein -- Director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs who actually was confirmed with the advice and consent of the Senate. He is a Harvard law professor that thinks your dog and even your tree should have the legal right to go into court to sue you. Really.
-- Mark Lloyd -- FCC diversity advisor who is an outspoken fan of Marxism and the Marxist dictator Hugo Chavez.
-- John Holdren -- special science advisor who co-authored a book years ago promoting euthanasia for population control and who refuses to disavow that wacky notion and others. Another far lefty for the administration.
For a complete list of the various "czars," go here.
The White House is getting a bit snarky about calling them Czars. The White House is perfectly right on this. Czars were the imperial leaders of Russia and there was only one at a time. A better and more descriptive title for the Obama administration would be "Commissars." I support the White House in making this correction.
In the meantime, whatever you call them, the White House is bringing itself into disrepute by appointing and supporting these radicals. As if the health care debacle weren't bad enough.
For ongoing coverage of this travesty, watch the Glenn Beck Show on Fox News at 5 pm Eastern time Monday through Friday.
It turns out that, no, "Czar" is no one's official title. But each of these appointments is for a position that seems to wield particular power. Some of them are actually statutorily created and even require the advice and consent of the Senate for appointment. But in most cases, the official title is something like "Special Advisor to the President" and thus escapes the checks and balances of Senate confirmation. Sure the Democrats control the Senate, but evil in appointees backgrounds tends to get revealed in public hearings.
So the Obama administration (as, I suppose administrations before it) is trying to circumvent public scrutiny by special titles for people with powers in position not authorized -- or at least created -- by statute.
How is the attempt to avoid scrutiny working? In the case of the more outrageous appointments, not very well. Of course, what does the administration expect when it appoints people like:
-- Van Jones -- Outspoken, highly visible, self-described Communist who is the special advisor on creating green jobs.
-- Cass Sustein -- Director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs who actually was confirmed with the advice and consent of the Senate. He is a Harvard law professor that thinks your dog and even your tree should have the legal right to go into court to sue you. Really.
-- Mark Lloyd -- FCC diversity advisor who is an outspoken fan of Marxism and the Marxist dictator Hugo Chavez.
-- John Holdren -- special science advisor who co-authored a book years ago promoting euthanasia for population control and who refuses to disavow that wacky notion and others. Another far lefty for the administration.
For a complete list of the various "czars," go here.
The White House is getting a bit snarky about calling them Czars. The White House is perfectly right on this. Czars were the imperial leaders of Russia and there was only one at a time. A better and more descriptive title for the Obama administration would be "Commissars." I support the White House in making this correction.
In the meantime, whatever you call them, the White House is bringing itself into disrepute by appointing and supporting these radicals. As if the health care debacle weren't bad enough.
For ongoing coverage of this travesty, watch the Glenn Beck Show on Fox News at 5 pm Eastern time Monday through Friday.
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
Baffling Tax Breaks for British Distiller
Why is the Obama administration subsidizing a British distiller with tax breaks to move its distillery from one U.S. possession to another -- not even to an actual state? Read about it here.
The Racist Effect of Gun Control
From the Austin Gun Examiner:
Read it all.
Federal Bureau of Investigation statistics show that in states with more gun control, Blacks are hindered from defending their lives, while Whites are not.In states without "right to carry," whites fare better in justifiable homicides (e.g., primarily self defense) than do non-whites. But in right-to-carry states, black are more likely found to have killed justifiably.
After extracting civilian justifiable homicide data from the FBI Supplement Homicide reports for 2000-2007, there are clear inequities between Blacks and Whites in states which restrict the right of self-defense by not granting concealed carry permits to law-abiding citizens. Conversely, in right-to-carry (RTC) states -– where law-abiding civilians carry concealed handguns in public -- Blacks experienced above-average rates of justifiable homicide.
Read it all.
Planned Town Hall Disruptions by the Left
If you weren't already persuaded about the complete dishonesty and moral bankruptcy of the hell care reform proponents, here is a video of a Health Care for America Now (HCAN) organizer instructing people how to disrupt a town hall meeting when interested ordinary citizens ask difficult questions of their elected representatives.
We don't need to stinking free speech, so we will drown you out!!
Ed Morrissey at Hotair.com had these comments:
The left does not want a debate. The lefties believe they are anointed to impose their values on everyone else. You don't need no stinking opinions of your own, man.
We don't need to stinking free speech, so we will drown you out!!
Ed Morrissey at Hotair.com had these comments:
In a way, this is a microcosm of the debate over health care. The opponents of ObamaCare want to read through the bill and hold elected officials accountable for its contents. Advocates just want to shout mindless slogans in the hope that everyone will give up and go home. Hey, how’s that working out for you so far?Mind you, this is planned disruption, planned discourtesy. This is very different form the spontaneous audience reaction we have seen in the various town hall videos posted here and elsewhere.
That also applies to Barack Obama and the leadership in Congress. After dropping a thousand-page bill in the House, Obama wanted it passed within days instead of having Representatives and Senators read the bill and debate its wisdom, supposedly because an emergency made actual debate impossible. The emergency? Congress couldn’t wait to leave the Beltway and meet their constituents (ha!) and Obama was hiding the real deficit numbers that showed his administration screwed up their projections in February.
The left does not want a debate. The lefties believe they are anointed to impose their values on everyone else. You don't need no stinking opinions of your own, man.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Entertaining. Sophomoric, maybe. But it is satirical commentary by two Washington Post political commentators, Dana Milbank and Chris Cill...
-
What is the truth behind the shooting of Erik Scott at a Costco in Las Vegas on July 10, 2010?. So far, the best that can be said is that w...
