Right Thinking From The Left Coast
Adventure is worthwhile - Aesop

Sunday, July 19, 2009


Man, I used to think Larry Summers wasn’t that freaking out there, compared to the usual moonbat that is. This was reinforced after he got in so much trouble for pointing out that there are differences between men and women, and that said differences could very well explain the disparity between the two in certain professions. But ever since then his need to atone for that act of anti-PC blasphemy with the left, has made me wonder if he isn’t out-moonbatting the moonbats. Now that he is an economic apologist advisor for the WH however, he is gunning for a new low:

Of all the statistics pouring into the White House every day, top economic adviser Larry Summers highlighted one Friday to make his case that the economic free-fall has ended. The number of people searching for the term “economic depression” on Google is down to normal levels, Summers said. Searches for the term were up four-fold when the recession deepened in the earlier part of the year, and the recent shift goes to show consumer confidence is higher, Summers told the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Summers continued the administration’s push-back against critics of President Barack Obama’s handling of the recession, defending the economic stimulus package against Republicans who have tried to paint the program as a failure because it hasn’t stemmed the unemployment rate.

Yeah, that’s right. The economic slump has turned around because less people are looking up the words “economic depression” on Google. The same Google that has repeatedly been shown to rig search results to favor the “progressive” ideology? That corporation that handed the Obama people a trough of cash? If one could make the case that the number of searches for, for example, “AGW is a cruel collectivist hoax”, “the inside job to destroy America and Western civilization”, “the communist/fascist take-over of America”, “the coming dark age of collectivism” and so on, are all up, would Summers conversely feel obliged to admit that these things were now on the rise?

I swear that these people just can’t seem to find new lows to explain or mask their level of incompetence. The fact is that not a single one of them has a clue how destructive what they are doing is (if they do then we really are in trouble). These communists/fascists “progressives” have a fantasy ideal of what the world should be like, are ignoring over a century of evidence that every attempt to do what they are doing ended up in a tyrannical government that enslaved its people and murdered those that did not want to go along, and are repeating the same failed experiment in this country. Google that you idiots!

Cross posted at Wasting time with Alex

Posted by AlexinCT on 07/19/09 at 12:11 PM in Left Wing Idiocy   Politics   Law, & Economics  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

One-Sided Competition

I caught some of the Sunday morning chat shows today and watched, with amusement, as the Obama people tried to spin their way around the damning CBO analyses that are showing that Obamacare is going to be outrageously expensive.  I actually felt sorry for Kathleen Sebelius, having to go and defend this turd of a program.  But listening to them triggered a memory.

They are continuing to flog the idea of a “public option”, claiming that it will “keep the insurance companies honest” and spur innovation.  You know ... the same way Freddie and Fannie spurred innovative new loan ideas and kept mortgages companies ...

Oh, wait.

But as I listened to this, I keep saying to myself, “They don’t believe this.  This is nonsense.  These people don’t believe in competition.”

And then I remembered this, from the second Presidential debate.  It was Obama responding to McCain’s idea that insurance companies be allowed to compete across state lines.  The idea is that people in, for example, Illinois—where Barack Obama supported numerous coverage mandates that raised the minimum price of insurance—be allowed to buy insurance in Arizona, which has fewer mandates and therefore cheaper options.

Obama said, in response:

And the reason that it’s a problem to go shopping state by state, you know what insurance companies will do? They will find a state—maybe Arizona, maybe another state—where there are no requirements for you to get cancer screenings, where there are no requirements for you to have to get pre-existing conditions, and they will all set up shop there.

That’s how in banking it works. Everybody goes to Delaware, because they’ve got very—pretty loose laws when it comes to things like credit cards.

And in that situation, what happens is, is that the protections you have, the consumer protections that you need, you’re not going to have available to you.

[Side note: Barack Obama cites Delaware as a state with bad bank regulation.  Good thing he didn’t pick a vice-president from that state who was well known to be in the pocket of ... oh.]

First, note the arrogance and the cynicism of that remark—the only reason, the only reason you have good insurance is because the government has mandated it.  If the states didn’t mandate it, our insurance companies would have us digging through hospital trash for unused vicodin.

Second, what sort of regulatory structure will the “public option” be under?  It will be allowed to compete across state lines in a way that private insurance companies can not.  Of course, given the Democrats’ proclivity for bending over for special interests, that will probably have lots of mandates ... eventually.  After it has bankrupted insurance companies that can’t cook the books and get federal subsidies.

And third—note the implicit statement:  competition is only good when the government does it.  If we allow insurance companies to compete, they will race to the bottom.  Only government competition should be allowed.  Only competition with a subsidized, less-regulated, less-hamstrung statist entity is acceptable to Barack Obama and the Democrats.

Because they don’t really want competition.  They want control.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 07/19/09 at 10:27 AM in Health Care  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Saturday, July 18, 2009

If you had any doubts…

For anyone, like the Obama WH, that thinks the good guy in Honduras was the deposed president Zeyala, check out this Spanish language news report about what was found:

La Dirección Nacional de Investigación Criminal decomisó varios ordenadores en la Casa Presidencial en los que estaban registrados los supuestos resultados de el referéndum sobre la reforma de la Constitución que tenía previsto hacer el mandatario depuesto, Manuel Zelaya, el pasado 28 de junio, el día que fue derrocado.  La Fiscalía investigará ahora si se trata de un posible delito de fraude y falsificación de documentos, debido a que algunas actas habían sido rellenadas con los datos de las personas que supuestamente participaron en el fallido referéndum que no pudo llevarse a cabo por el golpe de Estado.

Translation: The National Criminal Investigation Directory seized several computers on June 28 from the Presidential House, on which the supposed results of the planned referendum for a constitutional reform that the deposed president Manuel Zeyala, on the very day that he was overthrown. The prosecutors are investigating whether it a possible crime of fraud and falsification of documents occurred, because some records had been from persons who allegedly participated in the failed referendum which could not be carried out by the coup d’état, had been tampered with.

This is the supposed constitutional referendum to allow Zelaya to remove the term limits which were blocking him from running for the office again that the press seems constantly to miss. In keeping with the typical collectivist leftist paradise tactics, it seems that this referendum - done with the help of Chavez, and in opposition to the will of the Honduran people, as expressed by the actions of both the Congress and the Supreme Court, dominated by his own party mind you, which were forced to act when Zeyala tried to do a run around the law that denied his request and tried to make himself resident for life anyway - was just another rigged election. With Chavez’s involvement in this fiasco, there should have never been any doubt of that.

I think our White House now has a lot of egg on their face and again shown that we have the most inexperienced, uninformed, naïve, and dangerous bunch of losers in charge of our foreign affairs. They should have instinctively taken the opposite stance of someone like Chavez. Now they are going to be embarrassed by this if the MSM ever deems it appropriate to actually report the news and real facts about this story, including their continued use of the claim this was a coup attempt by the Hondurans instead of Zeyala.

Cross posted at Wasting time with Alex

Posted by AlexinCT on 07/18/09 at 06:06 PM in Left Wing Idiocy   Politics   The Press Machine  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

The Medical Sellouts

Liberals are crowing that the American Medical Association and American College of Surgeons have endorsed the Democratic healthcare plan.

Michael Cannon notes:

The docs are supporting the Democrats’ health care plans because the Democrats are buying them off.

The American College of Surgeons boasts that its executive committee voted unanimously to support the House Democrats’ bill because it would increase Medicare’s price controls so that over the next 10 years, Medicare would pay physicians $284 billion more than under current law.

This is part of a much larger campaign of bribes and industry protectionism the Obama Administration is using to bring organizations like Walmart and PhRMA on board.  I’ve said this before but it bears repeating: remember when politicians and industry interest groups going into cahoots was a bad thing?

Healthcare reform is not about “standing up” to the special interests; it’s about empowering them.  What the fuck do people think is going to happen when our healthcare is controlled by politicians?  Are liberals naive and stupid enough to think that the special interests will pack up and go home?  Or do they have enough of an inkling of how things work to realize that healthcare will become more politicized, more controlled by powerful interests, more subject to the whims of pin-headed politicians.

I understand why the politicians love national healthcare: it means that every doctor, every insurance company, every pharma exec and every patient will come to them on bended knee begging for their piece of the pie.  And yes, even The One—that pragmatic guy with the soothing voice and eephus pitch—craves their unceasing attention.

I understand why special interest groups like the AMA—whom my father quit 15 years ago after they sold us out on RBRVS—would support this.  More politics in healthcare means more influence for the AMA means more doctors joining and contributing to make sure they’re not the ones getting fucked.

But would any non-politico with an IQ bigger than his shoe size embrace this?  Yes, the free market is sometimes ugly and cruel and unfair.  But the unfree market is far worse.  In the struggle between powerful lobbyists, politicians and patients, who the fuck do you think is going to lose out?  Are liberals so blinded by their visions of national healthcare that they fail to see what’s happening right before their very eyes?  Apparently, yes.

The only way to decrease the influence of special interests is to stop making it worth their time and money.  The bigger and more powerful we make government, the more critical it becomes for every Tom, Dick and Harriet to have an office on K-street.

Update: Just in case you think it’s just the medical interests getting bought off, check out Walter Olson on a lawyer-enriching provision the Democrats slipped into the bill.  The more we look at this, the more it looks like special interests ganging up on the taxpayer.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 07/18/09 at 08:21 AM in Health Care  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Friday, July 17, 2009

Good Night, Walter

Ironically, perhaps his most memorable moment was 40 years ago, when he had to take off his glasses and compose himself while reporting the lunar landing. It was either that or his report of Kennedy’s murder.  Now he’s gone.  It’s no sad thing.  He lived to be 92 and saw more than just about anyone who ever lived.

Godspeed, Water.  You were the voice of the 20th century.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 07/17/09 at 07:40 PM in Life & Culture  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

The Walmart Of Non-Profits

Oh, you can just smell the irony, can’t you?

The Fund for the Public Interest raises money for all kinds of liberal causes, but a lawsuit has forced it to pay millions of dollars in overtime to its legions of idealistic door-knockers.

The nation’s largest fundraiser for progressive causes issued checks to thousands of former workers in the last several weeks after settling a $2.15 million class-action suit alleging it subjected workers to grueling hours without overtime pay.

The nonprofit Fund for Public Interest Inc. was set up in 1982 as the fundraising arm of the network of Public Interest Research Groups, which was founded by Ralph Nader. It deploys legions of door-to-door and street canvassers—and once counted a young Barack Obama as one of its New York City organizers—to solicit contributions for the Human Rights Campaign, the Sierra Club, Environment America, and other groups that together spend millions of dollars each year lobbying Congress.


Those organizations often battle with deep-pocketed corporations; the money raised by canvassers is an important source of funds. In many cases, however, the employees collecting those donations made an hourly rate that worked out to less than minimum wage.

The abrupt shuttering of its Los Angeles office after employees took steps to unionize also brought allegations of illegal union-busting from many, including Christian Miller, an L.A. employee from 2002 to 2006 who filed the suit on behalf of 12,000 canvassers and directors.

If you’ve ever read Do As I Say Not As I Do, you’ll be very familiar with the exploitive labor practices of such as Ralph Nader and Michael Moore.  ACORN has also tried to argue that they shouldn’t have to pay the minimum wage.  I believe that a huge reason these liberal organization and individuals support “the working man” is that they assume everyone else is a greedy, controlling and exploitative as they are.  Now they’ve been caught.  And they should never live it down.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 07/17/09 at 07:23 PM in Left Wing Idiocy  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Economic recovery? Not with these people making the decision.

When the collectivists decided on their big stimulus patronage bill back when and told us all they had to ram it through ASAP, according to many of our law makers without even reading it because it was so urgently needed, many of us pointed out this was a mistake. Of course we were lambasted for stopping their attempt to fix the economy. Arguments that big government pay-offs, scheduled to not happen until right before the 2010 elections so democrats could benefit from that temporary bump of course, would not make any difference and do nothing to help restart the economy were greeted with scorn, contempt, and accusations of trying to keep doing more of the same.

With help from the MSM the left told us that the crisis was Bush’s fault, and people ate it up. This despite the fact that the crisis is directly tied to PC policies pushed by democrats to force the financial sector to both make home loans to high risk people and trade CDs composed of these highly toxic loans as if they were worth a lot of money. Even more important is the fact that the economy did not head south – and the deficit spending did not climb to real big numbers – until the 2007 budget rolled along. Now what do you think happened in 2006 that changed things, huh? That’s right: the democrats won big and took over congress. Let’s not even point out that after they raised the deficit spending to new records and caused an economic collapse of the housing markets (look up Chuck Schumer), they ran against those deficits and that economic crisis, blaming Bush for them of course, and won big in 2008 as well.

Their solution after they won? Do as much deficit spending as was done in 8 years under Bush, and do it all in a single year. Then tack on even more record setting deficit spending going forward. Because without the spending government would go bankrupt. Genius! Of course some of those that are less enthusiastic about this economic approach have a very different view of things to come. And it looks like since comedians seem to be the one that provide the unwashed masses with what they should think is good, and practically always and without exception what is presented seems to be more of this idiotic collectivists pap and historical revisions that favor the collectivist agenda, that they have figured more comedy is needed.

But the reality is that while the usual suspects keep telling us their scam is working, that the facts, when the MSM deigns to report them, speak very differently. If you do the research you can find out that all the projections and claims of success are pure posturing and blatant lies. The reality is that the one thing that would restart the economy or indicate a restart – employment - is relentlessly going the wrong way. And nothing, absolutely nothing, in the stimulus patronage bill they passed is supposed to help create private sector jobs: the one and only thing that can reverse our current crisis.

Get used to the economy being down, and likely getting worse, people. As long as we have these collectivists in charge and they continue to push their agenda, there will never be any kind of recovery. The unavoidable truth is that this kind of government depends on the private sector to steal the money it needs to keep the machine going. But these people are also unbelievably hostile to private industry and have made it very clear they would love to dismantle it. Or at a minimum control it (same thing). No amount of government spending can reverse the course we are on. In fact, the more government spends, and the more government takes over, the worse things get. Pray we do not turn into Zimbabwe before people wise up and these collectivists and their ideas are again send to purgatory.

Cross posted at Wasting time with Alex

Posted by AlexinCT on 07/17/09 at 06:33 AM in Left Wing Idiocy   Politics   Law, & Economics   The Press Machine  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

The Overpopulation Czar

If you ever want to take the wind from the sails of the global warming hysterics, forget about global cooling.  Ask them about overpopulation.  In particular, you might want to ask Obama’s science czar, who apparently had some very czar-esque ideas about how to handle overpopulation.

Internet reports are now circulating that Obama’s Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, John Holdren, penned a 1977 book that approved of and recommended compulsory sterilization and even abortion in some cases, as part of a government population control regime.

Given the general unreliability of Internet quotations, I wanted to go straight to this now-rare text and make sure the reports were both accurate and kept Holdren’s writings in context. Generally speaking, they are, and they do.

The Holdren book, titled Ecoscience and co-authored with Malthus enthusiasts Paul and Anne Ehrlich, weighs in at more than 1,000 pages. Of greatest importance to its discussion of how to limit the human population is its disregard for any ethical considerations.

Read the whole thing, which has the full quotes.  I don’t believe that these are out of context, mainly because a lot of ZPG assholes were saying similar things and Ehrlich, in particular, was an advocate of radical action to curb overpopulation.

You haven’t lived until you’ve read (or at least blogged) quotes from Ehrlich’s books to modern environmentalists.  Everything the population hysterics said was wrong.  Everything.  Predictions of the collapse of Western Civilization, of massive plagues, of dead oceans—all of it was total bullshit.  It wasn’t that there was no legitimate concern—the population of the Earth was rising exponentially.  Some of the concerns related to overpopulation—overfishing in particular—are still legitimate worries.  And it was the concern about overpopulation that led to the problem being ameliorated.  In particular, Borlaugh’s green revolution—which is still putting food into the mouths of billions—was motivated by concern about overpopulation.

Nevertheless, the parallels remain eerie.  The overpopulation hysterics did not embrace sensible, humane and forward-thinking policies as Borlaug and others did (they opposed a lot of them actually).  They embraced radical action—a complete upheaval of the human order.  They never once questioned their hysteria, as Robert Heinlein did between The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress and Expanded Universe.  Ironically, if we’d acted the way they wanted, we might have had the problems similar to the one China is having, in which their one child policy has radically skewed the gender ratio and created a silent nation of aborted or abandoned girls.

The comparison to global warming isn’t 100%, since the latter is based on much harder data and projections that are more reliable (although, perhaps not as reliable as the radicals would like to believe).  And, as I said, it is worth noting that concern about overpopulation spurred some of the great achievements of the Green Revolution and is still spurring fantastic breakthroughs on sustaining fish populations and creating GM crops.  But is it the best cautionary tale I can think of for not taking environmental concerns hysterically, for not embracing radical dramatic action over small sensible steps.  It is an example of putting your faith in human ingenuity and morality, rather than authoritarian fatwas.  If global warming is a problem, we need to address it the way we addressed overpopulation—with innovation, with science, with research, with caution—not with hysteria, with Washington diktats and with crushing burdens on industry.

And we sure as shit don’t address it with a power and money grab disguising itself as environmental legislation.

Anyway, regarding Obama’s science czar: I’m sure he’ll issue some statement about how he was young and foolish and it was thirty years ago and he’s realized he was wrong and this is all the carbon industry trying to destroy him, etc.  But forget his ranting about forced sterilization and putting birth control in our drinking water.  What this reveals is a man who will embrace radical action at the drop of a hat (and the Obama administration, as I noted earlier, has already been caught lying about the connection between global warming and hurricanes).  This, in my opinion, makes him unsuitable to be a “science czar”.  It makes him unsuitable to even be a “science court jester”.

Of course, I don’t think we should have a “science czar” at all, since authority and free inquiry into the Universe do not match well.  But that’s a post for another day.

Update: More from Harsanyi.  The more we look, the more Holdren comes across as a Grade A hysteric.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 07/17/09 at 06:05 AM in Science and Technology  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Green Shoots Turning Into a Prairie Fire

While a great deal of posting is being devoted to healthcare, I wanted to put up a contextual post on the economy as a whole.  Let’s start with the Delaware Lip, Joe Biden, who opened his mouth and crammed not just his foot, but his whole leg down his gullet: (via Drudge)

(CNSNews.com) – Vice President Joe Biden told people attending an AARP town hall meeting that unless the Democrat-supported health care plan becomes law the nation will go bankrupt and that the only way to avoid that fate is for the government to spend more money....
...“Now, people when I say that look at me and say, ‘What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’” Biden said. “The answer is yes, that’s what I’m telling you.”

This comes on the heels of Robert Gibbs and Jared Bernstein repeating the Obama lie that the stimulus was meant to be a two year project: (via Jake Tapper’s blog)

ABC News’ Yunji de Nies reports:

Turns out the $787 billion “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” (AARA) was not designed for full economic recovery, but rather to “stabilize” the downturn.  That’s the word from White House officials today, who held off-camera briefings with reporters on how the AARA is working so far.

“This legislation was designed to cushion the downturn,” said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. “That’s why we have always talked about this as one function of economic recovery.”

When pressed about the change in terminology, Gibbs said he was not trying to temper expectations after the fact. “I can probably find 15 or 20 occasions when I said this in the lead up,” Gibbs said, explaining that he had always defined the AARA as part of a “multi-legged stool.”

Senior Economic Adviser Jared Bernstein said that the economy is improving—or at least getting “less bad.” And he said, that’s a good thing.

“It’s always challenging to explain that things getting less bad is actually a necessary path on the way to them being good, but that’s the truth,” Bernstein said. “The trends have to go recession, stabilization, recovery. Negative, less negative, positive.”

He continued, “For many key indicators, not all but many, we’re in that second stage, we’re in that stabilization stage. And it’s a fragile place to be, and it’s a good thing that this recovery act is a two year plan.”

Barney Frank even had the gall to go on the Daily Show and tell Stewart that the stimulus--oops, I mean “stabilization"--would have been even better if Specter, Snowe, and Collins had not demanded to leave $40 billion out of a $800 billion bill. (If there is a hell, I hope Frank’s version of it consists of him being raped by female porn stars)

Why is this important?  Because the administration and their supporters, having lost their hedge bet that the economy would start to pick up naturally this year and they could promote the stimulus as the keystone, are now trying to press the meme that the economy is getting “less bad,” and is therefore getting better and will be fine next year.  The only problem is, it probably won’t, as I’ll explain below the fold.

Posted by on 07/16/09 at 08:41 PM in Left Wing Idiocy   Politics   Law, & Economics  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

More healthcare news part deux

No need to point out how rigged the current democrat health plan is and that the intention is to break the private insurance sector and get us all beholden to big government for our healthcare. That’s because page #16 of this new bill that Pelosi & Co. have promised King Obama will be pushed through in a flash codifies the end of private insurance by making it illegal.

Congress: It didn’t take long to run into an “uh-oh” moment when reading the House’s “health care for all Americans” bill. Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal. When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee. It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage,” the “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the bill clearly states

“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day” of the year the legislation becomes law.

So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won’t be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.

And there you have it. Does your employer have an annual enrollment program? Are you switching jobs? Do you want to increase your coverage? You got married, or had a kid, adopted a child, need any kind of update update? Well, you now no longer have coverage from private insurance Bubba! VOILA! Do not pass go. Do not collect any money (in fact pay a ton in taxes). You are now a member of the government plan baby!

Yeah, this certainly is about insuring those poor people without coverage and not about rigging the game so we all become dependant on government for our healthcare coverage. For those of you telling the rest of us healthcare is a right, let me ask how we will protect this right from a government that is giving it to us by means of a massive deception to begin with? I wonder when the press will make this obvious finding public…

Posted by AlexinCT on 07/16/09 at 05:18 PM in Health Care   Left Wing Idiocy   The Press Machine  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink


Forty years ago today, Apollo 11 blasted its way from Florida toward the moon.  The globe has some stunning pictures and NASA is digitally restoring the footage.  Click the links and be sure not to drool on your keyboard.


I’ll be frank: I think the Apollo Program is the pinnacle of human achievement.  You could take all the wonders of the world—the Pyramids, the Great Wall, the Porcelain Tower, etc., put them all together and I would still take Apollo as my civilization’s top achievement.  If I met Thomas Jefferson and he asked me what the nation he created had done, the first thing I would say is, “We put a man on the fucking moon.”

I’d leave off the part where we didn’t go back for a four decades.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 07/16/09 at 05:06 PM in Science and Technology  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

The Non-Rebuttal Rebuttal

Over at TNR, Jonathan Cohn responds to the chart Harley put up yesterday.

But these charts--and, more important, the Republicans who use them as propoganda--tend to ignore one inconvenient fact: American health care is already complex. Ridiculously complex. Thanks to decades of haphazard, disorganized growth, it’s evolved into a mind-numbing web of institutions, agencies, businesses, and individual actors. And while that may be self-evident to anybody who’s ever had to deal with, say, a billing dispute between an insurer and hospital, it’s easy to lose sight of that when the discussion is all about what reform might do--rather than what health care would be like without it.

They have their own chart.

My response to this?  Thank you, Johnathan.  Thank you so much for making our point better than we could.  First of all, the entire point of federalizing healthcare, according to its minions, is to simplify the situation.  So, looking at their chart, I can see that the situation is not being simplified by the Democrat plan.  Also, keep this in mind—TNR’s chart is based on an existing situation.  The GOP chart is based on a plan.  Do you think that plan will get more complex or less complex once it has contact with reality?

Here’s an idea.  Why don’t we work to remove some of the arrows on the existing system before we throw down six thousand more arrows?

Second, most of the interactions in TNR’s chart are voluntary interactions.  Where it isn’t, there is usually either a government agency or government tomfoolery (the bizarrely one-sided insurance tax deduction) at fault.  In a government system, every single one of those arrows would be ironclad and bound by law (i.e., force).

Third, which do you think is better at handling a complex situation?  Government or a free society?  A flow chart for how computers are made and manufactured would be massively complex.  A flow chart for how food gets from field to stomach would be complex.  Any flow chart for any process more complicated than shooting someone is going to be complex—which is why we usually task the government with comparatively simple things like ... shooting people.

I’m really inspired by how well the supporters of healthcare reform are making the case against it.  We were told it would improve healthcare access; now they’re telling us that we may have to cut back.  We were told it was going to save money; now the biggest (and most coherent) part of the plan is how to raise taxes to pay for this catastrophe.  We were told it was going to simplify healthcare; now it’s being defended as being only slightly more complex than the existing system.

Liberalism.  In the end, it refutes itself.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 07/16/09 at 08:50 AM in Health Care  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Say it ain’t so!

Don’t mean to come off as an a$$, well I do want to rub it in, but I told you so. All the “Hope & Change” has not succeeded in getting the WH to engage the monsters running Iran. This despite their best efforts, which included siding with the thugs killing the Iranian people protesting the rigged election, and attempts to kiss thug arse, for some reason didn’t work. All that bluster about how they were the ones smart enough to finally get Iran to talk and abandon their nuclear weapons program seems to have gone up in smoke.

July 16 (Bloomberg)—Iranian leaders are turning inward and rejecting engagement with the West as they blame outsiders for street protests, even as President Barack Obama’s administration pushes for curbs on Iran’s nuclear program.

I am sure the WH is thinking that had they been even more forceful in their efforts to kiss the rear-ends of the thugs running Iran that just maybe things would have worked out. That’s proof positive of how stupid or duplicitous these people were when they demonized those of us pointing out that over 7 years of talk with Iran, by the EU and us, had resulted in absolutely nothing, and that their efforts would be met with the same. If it was not feigned anger at Obama’s platitudes, it would have been some other feigned insult that would have kept the Iranians from talking anyway. They are stringing everyone along, and doing a great job of it. So with these new revelations, this lesson learned, do you think the WH has wised up?

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton responded yesterday that direct talks remain “the best vehicle” for presenting Iranian leaders with a choice of limiting their nuclear ambitions or continuing “down a path to further isolation.”

Yeah, I am sure Iran is horribly worried about how “isolated” they will be. It worked when the EU used that to stop their full speed march to build a bomb, and it worked when some other nations didn’t act as craven as our WH did and told the Iranians their response to the protests of the rigged elections was barbaric too. Oh, wait a second. No it didn’t work. What’s the definition of insanity again? Trying the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, right?

The regime is increasingly isolated since the election and more determined than ever to reject international demands that it give up uranium enrichment, a prelude to developing a nuclear weapon, said Fitzpatrick, who was deputy assistant secretary of State for non-proliferation until 2005.

Khamenei on July 6 warned that the Islamic republic would show an “iron fist” toward countries it regarded as “enemies.” Ahmadinejad said on June 14 that Iran would not tolerate outside pressure. “Our nation is not afraid of threats,” he told a news conference in Tehran. “It will stand up to those who want to prevent its progress.”

I wonder why? Don’t they know Obama wants to work things out? I have said this before and will repeat it again: there are only a hand full of options to stop the Iranian thugs from their pursuit of the bomb, and the current crop of idiots in charge has already made it clear that they think all of them will be off the table. It will be up to Israel, again, to spare the world the calamity coming our way, and they will, of course, be demonized for it.

Cross posted at Wasting time with Alex

Posted by AlexinCT on 07/16/09 at 06:11 AM in Left Wing Idiocy   War on Terror/Axis of Evil  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

More healthcare news

Why are we not shouting this from the roof tops? I understand why the MSM has a vested interest in keeping this under wraps, but anyone that sees the inherent danger of the current a massive collectivist government take over of healthcare and the subsequent downgrading of quality, access, and services, should be rallying against these communists and their plan:

Obama’s health care proposal is, in effect, the repeal of the Medicare program as we know it. The elderly will go from being the group with the most access to free medical care to the one with the least access. Indeed, the principal impact of the Obama health care program will be to reduce sharply the medical services the elderly can use. No longer will their every medical need be met, their every medication prescribed, their every need to improve their quality of life answered.

In short, to keep costs down, we are going to screw the elderly, and screw them hard. Real freaking hard too if you buy Obama’s argument that this reform is about cost cutting. The biggest cut in cost that can be made is denying elderly people, those that use the system and cost the most, as much expensive care – that means almost any care at all – as possible. There is an important point to be made here too:

It is so ironic that the elderly - who were so vigilant when Bush proposed to change Social Security - are so relaxed about the Obama health care proposals. Bush’s Social Security plan, which did not cut their benefits at all, aroused the strongest opposition among the elderly. But Obama’s plan, which will totally gut Medicare and replace it with government-managed care and rationing, has elicited little more than a yawn from most senior citizens.

The elderly were vigilant because the MSM fed them the democrat talking points verbatim. They were told Bush was going to take away their check. A blatant lie, but it worked to rile them up. Unfortunately we can kiss off any real reporting from the MSM on this issue. They are in the bag for the democrats. But the scary truth is that nobody, not even the politicians, have had a look at this monster bill. It is now almost 1100 pages already and growing daily with special pork and sweeping ideological generalities: healthcare is now a right! And it should be mentioned that Pelosi has made it clear she will call for a vote long before it is even ready to be read. The agenda is to push this through before anyone can figure out the damage and derail the plan and take over of 1/5th of the American economy.

The rich will be robbed again to come up with some of the nonexistent funding. What nobody is saying is that there simply aren’t enough rich people to cover even a fraction of this monstrosity. Sooner than later they will tax everyone working for this, everyone. There is no other way to come up with enough money. And there is no denying that the left’s ultimate goal is to force everyone into the arms of the government. That 8% surcharge will definitely force many businesses to simply stop offering healthcare and pay the tax. It is likely cheaper. Then once they have everyone, they can raise it to 20%, or even more. And I have not even bothered discussing the consequences of how we will be impacted by this plan. Just look at Harley’s post (corrected) though. It’s a disaster of epic proportions. The only thing that might save us is the massive cost and taxes that must come with this plan, and the craven democrats up for reelection’s need to not piss off their constituents any more than they already are.

Cross posted at Wasting time with Alex

Update: This is the future:

BOSTON — A hospital that serves thousands of indigent Massachusetts residents sued the state on Wednesday, charging that its costly universal health care law is forcing the hospital to cover too much of the expense of caring for the poor. The hospital, Boston Medical Center, faces a $38 million deficit for the fiscal year ending in September, its first loss in five years. The suit says the hospital will lose more than $100 million next year because the state has lowered Medicaid reimbursement rates and stopped paying Boston Medical “reasonable costs” for treating other poor patients. “We filed this suit more in sorrow than in anger,” said Elaine Ullian, the hospital’s chief executive. “We believe in health care reform to the bottom of our toes, but it was never, ever supposed to be financed on the backs of the poor, and that’s what has happened in Massachusetts.”

Not sure what that comment about the Massachusetts’ health system being financed on the back of the poor means – unless it is the likely usual collectivist MSM propaganda about how they should be sticking it to “the rich” to give these poor people “free” healthcare or simply these people using good PC political speech to point out they need government to steal and funnel more money their way – at all, but the rest is clearly obvious: government was forced to reduce the payment for services to cut the horrible costs for this “free” healthcare, and now the hospital is going broke. Don’t take my word for it:

According to the suit, Massachusetts is now reimbursing Boston Medical only 64 cents for every dollar it spends treating the poor. About 10 percent of the hospital’s patients are uninsured — down from about 20 percent before the law’s passage in 2006. But many more are on Medicaid or Commonwealth Care, the state-subsidized insurance program for low-income residents. One of the state’s reimbursement rates to Boston Medical, dropped from $12, 476 in 2008 to $9,323 by 2009, the suit says. Wendy E. Parmet, a professor at the Northeastern University School of Law, said the suit was “a step in a wider minuet” as state lawmakers, health care providers and other stakeholders try to figure out how to make the new law work in the long term.

“I think it’s going to be a very hard lawsuit for them to prevail on,” Professor Parmet said of the hospital. “I think they’re trying to bring another weapon into what is essentially, in many ways, a political and economic battle going on in the state about how to pay for health care, and making sure their voice gets heard.” The suit comes as Congress looks to Massachusetts as a potential model for overhauling the nation’s health care system. Even before the suit, the state’s fiscal crisis had cast doubts on the law’s sustainability.

Fun, fun, fun! This ends up only one way. More money is confiscated from the productive - leading to many deciding it is not worth the trouble, giving up or moving elsewhere, and the gravy train drying up, the trickle down effect costing many their employment, drastically reducing the available pool of cash, and increasing the number of “poor” needing the free care, a vicious never ending cycle - and as the cash dries up, more and more services being cut or denied, because they can’t be paid for. But everyone can be happy they now have “the right to free healthcare”! In the end government will own us lock, stock, and barrel.

Posted by AlexinCT on 07/15/09 at 01:40 PM in Health Care   Left Wing Idiocy   Politics   Law, & Economics   The Press Machine  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

The Flow Chart from hell.

You ever see one of those Ghastly flow chars that looks more like Modern Art than anything else?
Well Hold your lunch, boys, mine was ribeye and mashed..........  yummy.......
but here it is, A flow chart of the Democrat plant for national hearth care...so far.
Of course this is from the GOP, so take it with a grain of salt.

Click for full size

Is this not a convoluted cluster fuck?
Given the governments ability to make anything more complex and more expensive, not to mention more inefficient.......... this should if anything motivate you to action.
The Bill is in excess of 1000 pages,has anyone read it all? It places a 5.4% surtax on wealthy people to fund this, define wealthy, and how long wil lit be before the Government decides that the rate needs to be higher and cover a broader taxpayer base?
Especially when the more services are added, with increased costs!

I really do not know what to do. So I think im gonna go out and shoot something.

Posted by HARLEY on 07/15/09 at 11:23 AM in Health Care  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink
Page 3 of 6 pages « First  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  Last »