Monday, September 21, 2009

Administration's Honduras Position is Bogus Says Independent CRS

Mary O’Grady: Hillary’s Honduras Obsession - WSJ.com: "Now a report filed at the Library of Congress by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) provides what the administration has not offered, a serious legal review of the facts. 'Available sources indicate that the judicial and legislative branches applied constitutional and statutory law in the case against President Zalaya in a manner that was judged by the Honduran authorities from both branches of the government to be in accordance with the Honduran legal system,' writes CRS senior foreign law specialist Norma C. Gutierrez in her report."

The shocking fact is that while thugs like Achmadinijead and Chavez are welcome at the UN, the leftists of the Obama administration are preventing the legitimate interim president of Honduras from entering the US. This report should remove all pretense of legitimacy from this shocking policy.



Powerful Parable

PatriotPost.US: "Many years ago, as a small child, I was told one of those old-fashioned fables for children. It was about a dog with a bone in his mouth, who was walking on a log across a stream.

The dog looked down into the water and saw his reflection. He thought it was another dog with a bone in his mouth-- and it seemed to him that the other dog's bone was bigger than his. He decided that he was going to take the other dog's bone away and opened his mouth to attack. The result was that his own bone fell into the water and was lost...

..the passing years and decades have made me ralize how important that story was, because it was not really about dogs but about people.

Today we are living in a time when the President of the United States is telling us that he is going to help us take that other dog's bone away-- and the end result is likely to be very much like what it was in that children's fable.

Whether we are supposed to take that bone away from the doctors, the hospitals, the pharmaceutical companies or the insurance companies, the net result is likely to be the same-- most of us will end up with worse medical care than we have available today. We will have opened our mouth and dropped a very big bone into the water."


Thomas Sowell is a great thinker and renowned economist. He could throw around the economic and health care jargon with the best of them. But with this simple fable, he has made one of the most compelling arguments I have read for opposing ObamaCare. I recommend reading the whole column.

Hat tip to Horendo for bringing this one to my attention.









Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Where's the Fact Check Czar When You Need Him?

President Obama is Wrong About Insurance Costs - WSJ.com: "Speaking of health-care distortions, as President Obama likes to do, consider his assertion to Congress that 'buying insurance on your own costs you three times as much as the coverage you get from your employer.' He liked that one so much that he repeated it over the weekend in Minneapolis, this time as a swipe at 'the marketplace.'

The media's 'fact-check' brigade hasn't noticed, but this is simply false. The Congressional Budget Office expects premiums for employer-sponsored coverage to cost about $5,000 for singles and $13,000 for families this year on average. 'Premiums for policies purchased in the individual market,' adds CBO, 'are much lower about one-third lower for single coverage and half that level for family policies.'"


The President continues to cite bogus "facts and figures" to support his health care. This one is so obvious. Of course individual coverage is cheaper, because INDIVIDUALS are scrutinizing the costs and the benefits, because it is THEIR money. We need to harness the power of millions of American consumers, scrutinizing their health care costs, to bring down the cost of health care. This is the essence of every conservative proposal for health care insurance reform. Virtually every leftist proposal undermines the power of the consumer to bring control to health care costs. That's why no matter how any of the leftist health bills are scored today, all of them promise runaway health care spending for the future.



Monday, September 14, 2009

The President Should Appoint Another CZAR - the Fact Check Czar

Scott Harrington: Fact-Checking the President on Health Insurance - WSJ.com: "To highlight abusive practices, Mr. Obama referred to an Illinois man who 'lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found he hadn't reported gallstones that he didn't even know about.' The president continued: 'They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it.'

Although the president has used this example previously, his conclusion is contradicted by the transcript of a June 16 hearing on industry practices before the Subcommittee of Oversight and Investigation of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. The deceased's sister testified that the insurer reinstated her brother's coverage following intervention by the Illinois Attorney General's Office. She testified that her brother received a prescribed stem-cell transplant within the desired three- to four-week 'window of opportunity' from 'one of the most renowned doctors in the whole world on the specific routine,' that the procedure 'was extremely successful,' and that 'it extended his life nearly three and a half years.'"


This column is well worth reading. The President, while essentially calling his opponents liars, is going around repeatedly citing bogus statistics and examples to support his health plan. This cites two anecdotes the President uses, as well as his attack on Alabama insurers, which range from highly suspect to completely wrong. You'd think with so many new positions created in the White House, they could find someone to check their facts.


Friday, September 11, 2009

The Joe Wilson Affair - A "Teachable Moment" Squandered

The mainstream media coverage of Congressman Joe Wilson's audacious "speak truth to power" moment in the joint session of Congress on Wednesday predictable avoids the real issues at hand:

1) Mr. Wilson is right - the President's speech was a litany of falsehoods and half-truths.
2) Mr. Wilson was only screaming from the frustration of being subjected to yet another high profile speech that served up all the same, discredited Democrat talking points, instead of the President answering the concerns of tens of millions of Americans about this plan - which was how the speech was billed by administration
3) How else are Republicans to be given a chance to debate this plan - they have been virtually shut out from any meaningful debate in Congress over where we should take our health care system in the future. Would you have ever heard about Joe Wilson's point of view if he hadn't shouted out of turn in the House chamber the other night?

Mr. Wilson should have offered a conditional apology: "I will apologize for my outburst when the President offers some concrete evidence in any of the pending legislation for his claim that these health care benefits will not be extended to illegal aliens." If you don't know the background, Mr. Wilson was a supporter of two amendments offered up in the House that would have required the Democrats to do just that, and both were soundly defeated. For some reason, the Democrats, who have generated thousands of pages of law on this topic, are unwilling to commit to paper the rules and procedures designed to ensure illegal aliens do not abuse our health care system.


Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Tell Your Government Health Care Buddies To Watch This Video

John Stossel does a terrific job of exposing the failings of government-run health care. Click the link above and enjoy...

Friday, September 4, 2009

The Ghost of Health Care Future

'Cruel and neglectful' care of one million NHS patients exposed - Telegraph: "One million NHS patients have been the victims of appalling care in hospitals across Britain, according to a major report released today."

What we have to look forward to when our health care is run by NICE guys in the government. Read the story.



They Don't Have DEATH PANELS in Britain Either...

Sentenced to death on the NHS - Telegraph: "In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.

Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.

But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.

As a result the scheme is causing a “national crisis” in patient care, the letter states."


The fact that the words "death panels" don't appear in the legislation doesn't mean that's not where we are heading.


Stop Bullying Honduras

Stop Bullying Honduras by The Editors on National Review Online: "As for the Obama administration, its mistreatment of the interim Honduran government is an ongoing travesty. In removing Zelaya from office, Honduran officials took a legal, constitutionally authorized stand against Chávez-style authoritarianism. They deserve praise, not punishment."


The leftists in the Obama administration are turning up the heat on Honduras to return their Chavez wanna-be deposed President to power. I suggest you let your Congressional delegation know that you are embarassed to find the US on the side of a political thug and against the constitutionally legitimate government of Honduras.



Did You Feel John Murtha's Hand Reaching Into Your Pocket?

Tyler Grimm: John Murtha’s Airport and Other Wasteful Earmarks - WSJ.com: "In 20 years, Mr. Murtha has successfully doled out more than $150 million of federal payments to what is now being called the airport for no one...

There are a total of 18 flights per week, all of which go to Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C...

The airport has an $8.5 million, taxpayer-funded radar system that has never been used. The runway was paved with reinforced concrete at a cost of more than $17 million. The latest investment was $800,000 from the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to repave half of the secondary runway. (Never mind that the first one is hardly ever in use.)"
Whether you felt it or not, John Murtha reached into your wallet and removed $1 from you and every taxpaying American for his empty airport in Johnstown. Now, if John Murtha's airport were the only pork barrel project in DC I'd say, "so what?" But this is just one of many of Murtha's projects, and he is but one of the herds of swine that feed at the federal trough. I don't know about you, but this makes my blood boil. Thank goodness Barack Obama is putting an end to all this.



Afghanistan Isn't Obama's War

Dan Senor and Peter Wehner: Afghanistan Is Not ‘Obama’s War’ - WSJ.com: "We do believe, however, that Republicans should resist the reflex that all opposition parties have, which is to oppose the stands of a president of the other party because he is a member of the other party. In this instance, President Obama has acted in a way that advances America's national security interests and its deepest values. Republicans should say so. As things become even more difficult in Central Asia, it's important to keep bad political patterns we have seen before from re-emerging."


I agree. My inclinination to agree with George Will's recent column is not about wanting to hand the President a political defeat. I don't care whose war it is. And Afghanistan is an easy one politically, since everyone professed support for it. So we don't need to engage in finger-pointing. My opinion is based more upon the fact that the scope and duration of effort required to prevail in Afghanistan appears to be much greater than what was/is required in Iraq. I find it exceedingly hard to imagine that the candidate who got his opening by harnessing the anti-war left is going to emerge as the leader who convinces the American public to hang in there for a long, bloody, expensive war in Afghanistan. I find it hard to believe that the candidate that never acknowledges the cost of his policies is going to be willing to set proper expectations for the effort in Afghanistan. If President Obama leads his team to develop a clear and consistent strategy for victory, and he lays out on the table for the American people what it is going to take to win, then I'll consider that I was mistaken, and that we should support the President's desire to fight on in Afghanistan.



Revenge of the Doctors - Nationalized Legal Care

Richard B. Rafal: A Doctor’s Plan for Legal Industry Reform - WSJ.com: "• Legal 'death panels.' Over 75? You will not be entitled to legal care for any matter. Why waste money on those who are only going to die soon? We can decrease utilization, save money and unclog the courts simultaneously. Grandma, you're on your own.

• Ration legal care. One may need to wait months to consult an attorney. Despite a perceived legal need, physician review panels or government bureaucrats may deem advice unnecessary. Possibly one may not get representation before court dates or deadlines. But that' s tough: What do you want for 'free'?

• Physician controlled legal review. This is potentially the most exciting reform, with doctors leading committees for determining the necessity of all legal procedures and the fairness of attorney fees. What a wonderful way for doctors to get even with the sharks attempting to eviscerate the practice of medicine."


Here's one sector of the economy I'd like to see big government "reform." It couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of guys.



Tuesday, September 1, 2009

I'm Afraid He's Right

IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- Knowing When To Cut Forces In Afghanistan: "instead, forces should be substantially reduced to serve a comprehensively revised policy: America should do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, airstrikes and small, potent special forces units, concentrating on the porous 1,500-mile border with Pakistan, a nation that actually matters."


I'd be very skeptical of the Afghanistan effort at this point if we had a hawk in the White House. How long could he keep an impatient American electorate behind the effort? But with a leftist President, beholden to MoveOn.org, I really worry that, as George Will argues, the will to see this thing through is clearly not going to be there long term. And it's obvious our vaunted allies are not committed for the long haul. Let's face reality now, and come up with an alternative plan to maximize the disprution of Al Qaeda operations in the region and minimizes Al Qaeda and Taliban interference in Pakistan.



Obama Curbs Federal Pay Increases - WSJ.com

Obama Curbs Federal Pay Increases - WSJ.com: "White House officials say the declaration was routine. Ever since Congress passed the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act in 1990, presidents have been invoking the emergency clause to hold down pay increases due under the formula that mandates wages comparable to local pay levels.

That has created a yawning gulf. If Mr. Obama did nothing, the comparability formula would dictate a 16.5% pay increase, on top of the 2.4% cost of living increase.

That would be a $22.6 billion hit to the ailing federal budget in 2010. Cost of living adjustments alone were to boost pay by 2.4% for most federal employees."


Who in the private sector is getting a 2.4% COLA on their pay in 2009, much less a 16.5% "comparaility raise?" I'll tell you how to make sure public sector pay is in line with the private sector. Stop giving them raises. When they start leaving in droves (which will happen right after hell freezes over), then start giving them "comparability" raises and COLAs. We need to get public employees payrolls under control. This is ridiculous. And don't get me started on pensions and benefits.