A Doctor’s View of Obama’s Healthcare Plans - WSJ.com

A Doctor’s View of Obama’s Healthcare Plans - WSJ.com: "Prevention of a disease, we all assume, should save us money, right? An ounce of prevention . . . ? Alas, If only such aphorisms were true we’d hand out apples each day and our problems would be over...

It is true that if the prevention strategies we are talking about are behavioral things—eat better, lose weight, exercise more, smoke less, wear a seat belt—then they cost very little and they do save money by keeping people healthy.

But if your preventive strategy is medical, if it involves us, if it consists of screening, finding medical conditions early, shaking the bushes for high cholesterols, or abnormal EKGs, markers for prostate cancer such as PSA, then more often than not you don’t save anything and you might generate more medical costs. Prevention is a good thing to do, but why equate it with saving money when it won’t?"

The author is Abraham Verghese is Professor and Senior Associate Chair for the Theory and Practice of Medicine at Stanford University.

Not sure what Dr Verghese's position is on nationalized health care - but what he is clear about is that it is not going to save money in any way EXCEPT by rationing health care. Once again - who do you want rationing health care, faceless bureaucrats in Washington, or you and your family? If we fix many of the government policies that currently distort the choices being made (procedure-driven Medicare reimbursement methodology, too-low deductibles, subsidization of employer-provided healthcare vs individual-provided, lack of competition in insurance market, plaintiff-slanted tort system, etc) we can make huge strides in improving what is already the best health care system in the world. And we won't have to give up control over the most personal decisions in our lives to get there.

Be the Party of No

George F. Will - A Regrettable 'Fix' on Health Care - washingtonpost.com: "As market enthusiasts, conservatives should stop warning that the president's reforms will result in health-care 'rationing.' Every product, from a jelly doughnut to a jumbo jet, is rationed -- by price or by politics. The conservative's task is to explain why price is preferable. The answer is that prices produce a rational allocation of scarce resources.

Regarding reform, conservatives are accused of being a party of 'no.' Fine. That is an indispensable word in politics because most new ideas are false and mischievous."

The GOP should EMPHATICALLY be the party of "no." It will serve both the nation and the party well.

Steyn on Sanford

Mark Steyn: Jacko, Sanford and weirdness | governor, state, bubble, sanford, one - Opinion - OCRegister.com: "As my National Review colleague Kathryn Jean Lopez observed, a sex scandal a week from the Republicans will guarantee us government health care by the fall – in the same way that the British Tories' boundlessly versatile sexual predilections helped deliver the Blair landslide of 1997. And once government health care's in place the game's over: Socialized medicine redefines the relationship between the citizen and the state in all the wrong ways, and, if you cross that bridge, it's all but impossible to go back. So, if ever there were a season for GOP philanderers not to unpeel their bananas, this summer is it."

Sadly, hilariously true.

We Have A Month or Two To Get the Truth Out

Despite living under "the most transparent administration in history," the truth about the global warming hoax is being suppressed. The only way the Dems can pass this is if the truth is concealed, as the EPA has tried to do:

IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- Carbongate: "the institute's Richard Morrison said 'internal EPA e-mail messages, released by CEI earlier in the week, indicate that the report was kept under wraps and its author silenced because of pressure to support the administration's agenda of regulating carbon dioxide.'

Reading the report, available on the CEI Web site, we find this 'endangerment analysis' contains such interesting items as: 'Given the downward trend in temperatures since 1998 (which some think will continue until at least 2030), there is no particular reason to rush into decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data.'"

We have until the Senate vote, probably in September to get the truth out. It's not going to come from the mainstream media, but through the grass roots efforts of each of us to inform our fellow citizens.

Obama to Your Mama - Take A Chill Pill

Obama's Health Future - WSJ.com: "'Look, the first thing for all of us to understand that is we actually have some -- some choices to make about how we want to deal with our own end-of-life care,' Mr. Obama replied. After discussing ways 'we as a culture and as a society [can start] to make better decisions within our own families and for ourselves,' he continued that in general 'at least we can let doctors know and your mom know that, you know what? Maybe this isn't going to help. Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller.'"

Of course, tough choices do need to be made at end-of-life - but the issue is WHO makes them? Do you want the President and his army of faceless bureaucrats to decide when doctors should throw in the towel on your mom?

The Candidate Who Wasn't Going to Raise Your Taxes Pushes for the Largest Tax Increase In American History

IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- Waxman-Markey: Man-Made Disaster: "It is the largest tax increase in American history — a tax on all Americans — even the 95% that President Obama pledged would never see a tax increase."...
And what would we get for all this pain? According to an analysis by Chip Knappenberger, administrator of the World Climate Report, the reduction of U.S. CO2 emissions to 83% below 2005 levels by 2050 — the goal of the Waxman-Markey bill — would reduce global temperature in 2050 by a mere 0.05 degree Celsius.

The cap and tax plan is all pain and no gain.

Haste Makes Waste

IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- Why The Rush?: "A pattern is emerging for this new presidency. The more radical and far-reaching the plan, the less time the public gets to debate it. Is this due to ambition or fear of push-back?"...

Obama may act supremely confident, but his haste here suggests insecurity. He acts as if he believes his political capital is dwindling so fast that it will be gone by the end of this year.

A stronger leader would take his time. He would not fear being called a wimp for appointing blue-ribbon commissions, because such drawn-out deliberation is actually what the country needs. Health care and finance both need work. But the first step is to understand the problems and think through the possible solutions.

Obama needs to cram this socialist agenda down our throats before the American people catch on. We need to slow him down at every opportunity. The more people know these plans the less they like them. America is not ready for nationalized health care or a centrally-planned economy. Obama knows that - which is why he's in a hurry.

Obama Misses the Point With Iran Response - washingtonpost.com

Charles Krauthammer - Obama Misses the Point With Iran Response - washingtonpost.com: "All hangs in the balance. The Khamenei regime is deciding whether to do a Tiananmen. And what side is the Obama administration taking? None. Except for the desire that this 'vigorous debate' (press secretary Robert Gibbs's disgraceful euphemism) over election 'irregularities' not stand in the way of U.S.-Iranian engagement on nuclear weapons...

And where is our president? Afraid of 'meddling.' Afraid to take sides between the head-breaking, women-shackling exporters of terror -- and the people in the street yearning to breathe free. This from a president who fancies himself the restorer of America's moral standing in the world."

I can't add anything. As always, I recommend you read Charles Krauthammer's column.

Inconvenient FACTS

OCRegister.com: "Then there was this report that followed not long after from Dr. Nils-Axel Moerner, author of 520 peer-reviewed papers on sea level during his 35-year career, which has been devoted entirely to studying the issue. Dr. Moerner concludes sea levels will rise in the 21st century by about 8 inches.

What’s that? Less than an inch per decade? Not exactly reason to abandon the beach-front home, hm?

Since 1993, Dr. Moerner says, when satellites first began to measure sea-level changes, the rate of increase has been a measley 1 foot per century. But - another oops coming here - there has been no statistically-significant sea-level rise during the past three years."

But don't let this get in the way of your cap and trade massive-tax-increase/power-grab-masquerading-as-environmental-salvation schtick, Democrats.

Pithy Take On Iran

Mark Steyn: Iran neutrality not an option for Obama | obama, president, leader, world, supreme - Opinion - OCRegister.com: "The polite explanation for Barack Obama's diffidence on Iran is that he doesn't want to give the mullahs the excuse to say the Great Satan is meddling in Tehran's affairs. So the president's official position is that he's modestly encouraged by the regime's supposed interest in investigating some of the allegations of fraud. Also, he's heartened to hear that O.J. is looking for the real killers."

Mark Steyn, again, naturally. Do read the whole column via the link above.

Pithy Take On North Korea Nukes

Transcript: "we have the Secretary of Defense of the United States making a serious, sober statement about protecting Hawaii from a nuclear attack by a state that has a lower GDP per capita than Zimbabwe. This is deeply damaging to American credibility in the world today."

Mark Steyn on Hugh Hewitt Show.

Chinese Students Know the Score Even if Mainstream Media Doesn't

UPDATE 3-Geithner tells China its dollar assets are safe | Reuters: "Chinese assets are very safe,' Geithner said in response to a question after a speech at Peking University, where he studied Chinese as a student in the 1980s.His answer drew loud laughter from his student audience, reflecting scepticism in China about the wisdom of a developing country accumulating a vast stockpile of foreign reserves instead of spending the money to raise living standards at home." [italics mine]

First of all - I only learned of this startling event by reference made to it in a blog at NRO. Did anybody see this on the news or read about it in their newspapers? Had Geithner been a Bush cabinet member it certainly would have been all over the front pages.

Secondly, congratulations to Reuters for reporting it, but notice the words in italics. This is not an opinion piece, but supposedly a news report. Yet the reporter claims to know the motivation for the audience's laughter, and, what's more, his theory is ludicrous. Had Geithner just said, "China is wise to practice thrift, and invest in foreign bonds," perhaps this theory might have some credibility. But Geithner wasn't commenting on the wisdom of China stockpiling foreign reserves, he was commenting on the safety of the assets that had already been stockpiled (primarily in US Treasuries). It was the assertion that the already stockpiled debt was safe which prompted the loud laughter from the audience.

A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words, or A Picture Can SAVE A Thousand Words...

This YouTube video is awesome. It's true, the President inherited a mess. But he loves to throw around numbers and plans and agencies and trillions of dollars in tax money based on bogus economic models and projections like the ones lampooned in this video. We all knew the stimulus wouldn't work as advertised by the President. In fact, we knew that the stimulus wasn't a stimulus at all, just long litany of pay-offs to Democratic sacred cows, approved in a frenzy, under the cover of an economic crisis.

Doctors Boo Obama's Obeisance To The Trial Lawyers

IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- Why He Was Booed: "HHS has further said that reasonable limits placed on noneconomic damages in malpractice cases would save $60 billion to $108 billion a year...'These savings would lower the cost of health insurance and permit an additional 2.4 million to 4.3 million Americans to obtain insurance,' the department said.

Nearly 10% of the cost of health care services, figures PricewaterhouseCoopers, is attributable to medical malpractice lawsuits. Roughly 2% is caused by direct costs of the lawsuits while an additional 5% to 9% is due to expenses run up by defensive medicine...PricewaterhouseCoopers also found that half of health care costs are due to wasteful spending and said that defensive medicine is the biggest producer of waste.

It would make sense to anyone who wants to bring down health care costs that caps on medical malpractice awards should be on the table — unless that person was beholden to the trial bar that is filled with members who make fortunes suing doctors."

Like the UAW, the trial lawyers are a Democrat sacred cow. And they are being paid off by this President with YOUR tax dollars.

Pravda (aka ABC News) Special Report - Greetings, Comrades, and Glorious News From White House on Five Year Plan for Health!!!

DRUDGE REPORT: ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA 2009®: "ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA; NEWS TO BE ANCHORED FROM INSIDE WHITE HOUSE
Tue Jun 16 2009 08:45:10 ET

On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care -- a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!

Highlights on the agenda:

ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.

The network plans a primetime special -- 'Prescription for America' -- originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate."

This is going to backfire on the President.

Where's the EMPATHY for Thrifty Middle Americans Who Play By The Rules?...

GM's deal erased many average Americans' savings - Washington Times: "When people think of 'bondholders,' they imagine tycoons. J.P. Morgan. Warren Buffett. Even the fictional Gordon Gekko of 'Wall Street' fame.

In fact, tens of thousands of the bondholders of General Motors Corp. are not rich at all — and never were, even before the value of their bonds collapsed in the months leading up to the giant automaker's bankruptcy filing."

...It is trumped by the need to pay off the UAW for its millions in political pay-offs to Democrat pols. Sorry Mr and Mrs John Q Public, you have to give up your legal rights in the auto bankruptcies, forget about that retirement nest egg. But just think how great you'll feel when Chrysler and GM emerge from this mess as dynamic, thriving global enterprises!

Right.

Don't Mess With Texas

Texas AG objects to GM dealer terms - Austin Business Journal:: "The Office of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has filed an official objection with the bankruptcy judge handling General Motors Corp.’s Chapter 11 reorganization proceeding, claiming that the federally backed GM is trying to subvert state law by requiring local dealerships to sign agreements that eliminate some protections in Texas."

This is what I was talking about in the federalism post on Saturday. States need to stand up for their rights. If more did this, the juggernaut could be resisted.

Devastating - Krauthammer Nails the Obama Persona

Charles Krauthammer - Barack Obama Surveys the World - washingtonpost.com: "Not that Obama considers himself divine. (He sees himself as merely messianic, or, at worst, apostolic.) But he does position himself as hovering above mere mortals, mere country, to gaze benignly upon the darkling plain beneath him where ignorant armies clash by night, blind to the common humanity that only he can see. Traveling the world, he brings the gospel of understanding and godly forbearance. We have all sinned against each other. We must now look beyond that and walk together to the sunny uplands of comity and understanding. He shall guide you."...

That's the problem with Obama's transcultural evenhandedness. It gives the veneer of professorial sophistication to the most simple-minded observation: Of course there are rights and wrongs in all human affairs. Our species is a fallen one. But that doesn't mean that these rights and wrongs are of equal weight...

For all of his philosophy, the philosopher-king protests too much. Obama undoubtedly thinks he is demonstrating historical magnanimity with all these moral equivalencies and self-flagellating apologetics. On the contrary. He's showing cheap condescension, an unseemly hunger for applause and a willingness to distort history for political effect.

Distorting history is not truth-telling but the telling of soft lies. Creating false equivalencies is not moral leadership but moral abdication. And hovering above it all, above country and history, is a sign not of transcendence but of a disturbing ambivalence toward one's own country.

The President's preening and posturing dissected, analyzed, and nailed. A must read Krauthammer column.

George Will Slaps Down Media Glbal Warming Chearleaders

George F. Will - Going Green to Alleviate Guilt -- but Not Much Else - washingtonpost.com: "In the history of developed democracies with literate publics served by mass media, there is no precedent for today's media enlistment in the crusade to promote global warming 'awareness.' Concerning this, journalism, which fancies itself skeptical and nonconforming, is neither."

So much said in so few words - awesome.

George F. Will - GM and Chrysler: Good Cases for Judicial Activism - washingtonpost.com

George F. Will - GM and Chrysler: Good Cases for Judicial Activism - washingtonpost.com: "courts have no nobler function than that of actively defending property, contracts and other bulwarks of freedom against depredations by government, including by popularly elected, and popular, officials. Regarding Chrysler and GM, the executive branch is exercising powers it does not have under any statute or constitutional provision. At moments such as this, deference to the political branches constitutes dereliction of judicial duty.

'At present,' notes the Economist, 'there's enough capacity globally to make 90 million vehicles a year, but demand is little more than 60 million in good economic times' (emphasis added). Unfortunately, says Reason magazine's Jacob Sullum, America's president 'can imagine a world in which the internal combustion engine is obsolete but not one in which GM is.' So, doubling down on his predecessor's misbegotten policy, the president is acting strenuously to perpetuate some of America's portion of the excess capacity."...

This would not be happening were Congress awake, or were the courts properly active. Constitutionalists are not amused.

OK, I was hoping there was some reasonable explanation, beside apathy or cowardice, that our Supreme Court didn't step in to defend the rule of law in the Chrysler bankruptcy. Sadly, as George Will so aptly lays is out in this piece, there isn't.