Sunday, August 30, 2009

A quick one--that Coexist Bumper Sticker

This is the best retort to the "Coexist" bumper sticker I've seen to date.


Don't get me wrong. I'm all for the concept. I'm just not the one standing in the way of implementation.

Monday, August 24, 2009

Former Marine asks Congressman Brian Baird tough questions

This is well worth your time to watch.

Friday, August 21, 2009

Sharia in America

Most of Islam is actually peaceful. It's a personal faith. However, there's also a branch of political Islam that seeks to enforce Shari'a, or Koranic law on everyone, whether we wish to be subject to it or not. Please note that Shari'a law is not compatible with the Constitution of the United States of America.

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

The Problem with Universal Health Care

Proponents have been calling the socialized medicine bill happy euphemisms like "Health Care Reform," "Single Payer Health Care" and "Public Option" rather than Government Health Care, Socialized Medicine and so forth.

Universal health care is a flawed concept. Top down control of health care at the national level is a ludicrous concept. Let me explain why.

The concept of Universal health care would involve everybody being treated according to the recommendations developed for the average populace. That would be fine, if everyone were average. We'd need just a few doctors developing policies and a lot of nurses carrying out those policies.

Instead, we have trained scientists specialized in the human body, who we call doctors, and we have a lot of them.

There's a simple reason for that: averages work fine for statistical analysis, but they're not so good for individual care. Any doctor will tell you that while we have usual, expected responses to procedures and medications, individuals vary widely. That is why you need a trained scientist involved in caring for the health of an individual.

Health care is not, nor can it ever be, controlled centrally by a government, applying average recommendations to every individual. Laying every other issue aside (and we shouldn't there are plenty to examine), the concept of Universal health care is at best a joke, and at worst, a death sentence for individuals who don't fall within the statistical averages.

Sunday, August 9, 2009

Paying for Health Care "Reform" "Volunteers"

Now that's an awkward use of quotation marks, but this will make the point. The Health Care bill isn't reform, and the "volunteers" aren't volunteers. This is unbelievable. I don't know how long the SEIU or other organization will leave these up, so I've grabbed an image as well as the link:


Grassroots conservative movements have been denigrated by the Left, with Democrats claiming they're racist or organized by some Republican machine, yet they're the ones paying for help to try to jam this plan down the throats of an increasingly reluctant American public. If your representative supports this bill and recall is an option in your area, let's demonstrate actual organization and make them realize how very unpopular this bill really is.

Thursday, August 6, 2009

Nancy Pelosi says Town Hall protesters are carrying Swastikas

Here's an incendiary commentary from Nancy Pelosi:

Can anyone help me understand why a member of the National Socialist Worker's Party would object to Socialized medicine or expanded government control over individuals in the U.S.? Either Speaker Pelosi isn't very bright, or she believes we aren't. In her words, "You be the judge."

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

Common Sense vs. the Black Panthers

I guess there's still some common sense in the U.S. after all. The Black Panthers, according to the poster, were trying to protest the home of a man who shot burglars in his home. The community responded. I strongly recommend turning your volume to the lowest setting before starting the clip. Also, the first minute or so is all one needs to see to get the gist. The Black panthers left after about 10 minutes of this.

By the way, I don't begrudge the Black Panthers their activism, so long as they keep it within the bounds of the law. If the story is as presented they need to choose better reasons to demonstrate, however. Shooting a burglar in one's own home, if one believes there is imminent danger, is considered acceptable everywhere in the United States. It's not a race thing, it's a self-defense thing.

Well-Dressed Protesters

From Hot Air:
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) appeared on Hardball last night in support of the Left’s attempt to discredit the people showing up to townhalls in protest of ObamaCare. Boxer says she can tell that they’re fakes, because they’re too well dressed.
Full story and video here.

In the end, I guess that's a very reasonable argument for her. After all, everyone she knows who is well dressed is a compulsive liar.

Tuesday, August 4, 2009

What Gates & Birthers Teach Us About Obama

Amazingly, both of these events teach us the same thing about Obama:
  1. Obama is incredibly arrogant, and,
  2. Obama is the quintessential community organizer
The arrogance is obvious in the Gates case, Obama jumped in without knowing the details. Even for the so-called "beer summit" he allowed this not-so-flattering picture to be taken (the police officer he accused of racism is the one helping his friend down the steps):

Obama wouldn't lower himself to dignify the birthers. He sees it as below him. Also, he was arrogant enough to jump into Gates' arrest even though he didn't have the details. Andy McCarthy points out that given the number of lies Obama has told about his past, it's not really that unreasonable to ask for it (though it's silly to spend as much time on it as people have):

Yet we now know that this life story is chock full of fiction. Typical and disturbing, to take just one example, is the entirely fabricated account in Dreams from My Father of Obama’s first job after college:

Eventually a consulting house to multinational corporations agreed to hire me as a research assistant. Like a spy behind enemy lines, I arrived every day at my mid-Manhattan office and sat at my computer terminal, checking the Reuters machine that blinked bright emerald messages from across the globe. As far as I could tell I was the only black man in the company, a source of shame for me but a source of considerable pride for the company’s secretarial pool. They treated me like a son, those black ladies; they told me how they expected me to run the company one day. . . . The company promoted me to the position of financial writer. I had my own office, my own secretary, money in the bank. Sometimes, coming out of an interview with Japanese financiers or German bond traders, I would catch my reflection in the elevator doors — see myself in a suit and tie, a briefcase in my hand — and for a split second I would imagine myself as a captain of industry, barking out orders, closing the deal, before I remembered who it was that I had told myself I wanted to be and felt pangs of guilt for my lack of resolve. . . .

As the website Sweetness & Light details, this is bunk. Obama did not work at “a consulting house to multinational corporations”; it was, a then-colleague of his has related, “a small company that published newsletters on international business.” He wasn’t the only black man in the company, and he didn’t have an office, have a secretary, wear a suit and tie on the job, or conduct “interviews” with “Japanese financiers or German bond traders” he was a junior copyeditor.

Now, think of Obama as a community organizer. Community Organizers don't solve problems, they aggravate them and then take advantage of them. Obama did that with Gates, trying to play the race card. He only backpedaled when it blew up in his face and even then didn't apologize. In the birther case, Obama hasn't found a way to exploit it. Letting it fester is doing the job for now, but if he's backed into a corner, he will use it somehow, just you wait.

Report your Neighbors! Woodrow Wilson is back

I was shocked when I saw this information, forwarded by a friend from Red State. Here's that post. Here's the scary information:
There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to
You can find that here at between the videos presented there. Um, excuse me? You want us to report people exercising their 1st Amendment rights to the Government? Since when is that a real American value?

Oh, right. Since Woodrow Wilson held 150,000 political prisoners for disagreeing with him in the early 1900's.

Monday, August 3, 2009

Obama on Single Payer Health Care

Here we have the frank admission of Obama's feelings on single payer (government health care or socialized medicine). This means the elimination of private plans, not that you can keep your current plan. Here's the raw, uncut version.

Here's a more refined version put together by the Glenn Beck Program.

Sunday, August 2, 2009

Socialized Medicine causes care rationing in the U.K.

I stumbled across this one while looking for entirely different stories this morning:
The Government's drug rationing watchdog says "therapeutic" injections of steroids, such as cortisone, which are used to reduce inflammation, should no longer be offered to patients suffering from persistent lower back pain when the cause is not known.

Instead the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is ordering doctors to offer patients remedies like acupuncture and osteopathy.

Specialists fear tens of thousands of people, mainly the elderly and frail, will be left to suffer excruciating levels of pain or pay as much as £500 each for private treatment.
Source here.

I'm not a doctor, but thought inflammation-reducing shots also helped prevent additional damage to joints.

If you don't think similar rationing will happen in the U.S. should the current socialized medicine "reform" bill go through, you're kidding yourself. We have more people, and we're in much deeper financial trouble than the U.K. The effects on care would likely be immediate.

Saturday, August 1, 2009

Egalitarianism in Health Care

As a libertarian, I really don't think the government has any business interfering in most private matters, and for the most part that includes health care. Much like the current financial market, things have grown so complex that some regulation seems to be in order, but I still believe that government interference is a last resort, and an informed consumer is still the best way to control any system. If a practice is unfair, people won't buy that product or service, ending it without need for regulation. This is similar to politics. the best way to moderate politicians isn't term limits, it's an informed electorate that will vote out a bad politician.

The focus of this post is commentary made by President Obama about the current socialized medicine bill being worked on in Congress. The first comes from President Obama's fifth news conference:
Q And what about yourself and Congress? Would you abide by the same benefit package?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, I would be happy to abide by the same benefit package. I will just be honest with you. I'm the president of the United States, so I've got a doctor following me every minute -- (laughter) -- which is why I say, this is not about me.

I've got the best health care in the world. I'm trying to make sure that everybody has good health care, and they don't right now.
The second comes from a health care forum at the White House:
PRESIDENT OBAMA: ...end-of-life care is one of the most difficult sets of decisions that we're going to have to make...But what we can do is make sure that at least some of the waste that exists in the system that's not making anybody's mom better, that is loading up on additional tests or additional drugs that the evidence shows is not necessarily going to improve care, that 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.
For the interested, here's the video of that exchange:

The second has been characterized as indicating that for the old, it's better to give them pain medication than to use precious resources to treat them. In short, we should let them die. That's not quite what he's saying if one reads the whole quotation. However, the health care bill does include mandatory end of life counseling for senior citizens. That is, the government to reduce costs does seem interested in making sure seniors die sooner than they do now rather than go through expensive treatments.

Both of these quotations point to a real problem in the health care plan. In previous posts, I've indicated I don't believe there should be a political class living by a separate set of rules. They should have to abide by the same rules they make for their constituency, and live as their constituency does. When a separate political class with special rules exists, there is no justice, no egalitarianism, and none of the founding principles that made the U.S. great will stand.

What's truly irksome about the first quotation is that it's very easy to say, "Sure, I'd live with that plan," when the President knows he doesn't have to. He'll retire with his full pay and elitist health care plan paid for by the taxpayer. That's not acceptable even under the current system. I appreciate a president's service, and recognize he needs some pension and some protection for the rest of his life. I agree that in office, he needs the best medical care possible. Once he's out, however, he can buy insurance like the rest of us out of his pension.

"I would be happy to abide by the same benefit package... I've got the best health care in the world," is horrifically condescending and astoundingly arrogant. It is saying, "While I'd live like you plebes if I had to, I don't, and never will. My care is top notch, but you'll have to live with what you get." Thanks, Mr. President. Show some real dedication to egalitarianism and forfeit your Federal health plan when you leave office, and I'll believe you.

I don't think that socialized medicine is the answer for America. If it's to be implemented, however, I absolutely insist that there shall be no special classes of people, because that will mean it will be overturned in time. We've seen how the political elites of the U.S.S.R. were treated, and how they're treated in China and North Korea now. It's happening to a lesser degree in the U.S. and other Western countries. It must be stopped, not expanded.

Other evidence of the disparity between the elite political class and plebeians comes from current treatment of our politicians. Remember, at end of life, it might be a better option to save resources for younger, healthier people and let the elderly take pain killers, according to President Obama.

If that's the case, then why was Ted Kennedy given extensive and expensive treatment for his brain cancer? Why was his son Teddy given experimental treatment for bone cancer? Why will Senator Chris Dodd have surgery and treatment for his prostate cancer? If we're going to let nature take its course more often under this socialized medicine bill, the same way E.U. countries and Canada do, then these expensive treatments shouldn't happen, ever, for anyone. You get end of life counseling and some pain killers. Nearly all men will develop prostate cancer later in life. In many men, it won't progress quickly enough to end our lives before other causes cause our passing anyway, so wouldn't be treated under this new plan. So, Senator Dodd, I challenge you to let this cancer take its course. Let's see your dedication to health care "reform."

Now, while I do actually object to Senator Kennedy and Senator Dodd getting expensive treatments on the taxpayer's dime, I don't object to people with coverage getting these treatments. End of life care should be up to the individual and his or her family, never the government. If Senators Kennedy and Dodd are paying for these treatments out of pocket, I'm fine with that.

What I do object to is the abandonment of the excellent founding principles of our country for a health care system that is failing in most countries and locations where it has been tried (including Massachussets and Hawaii) under the guise of egalitarian health care for all. It won't be egalitarian, everyone still won't get it, and it will be used to extend government control into the lives of ordinary Americans using the excuse that we must reduce costs. That's unAmerican, unConstitutional and unacceptable.