America 2 Revolution

The Farmer in Chief

2009-08-21T21:59:00.000-07:00

President Obama fielded softballs on Thursday at his so called "Town Hall" titled the “Organizing for America National Health Care Forum.” Though it was tough to watch him mendaciously smother these balloons, it was far better than the national embarrassment endured by millions watching him “throw out” the first pitch at the All Star game. If we are determined to appoint Czars fully funded yet totally unaccountable to the American taxpayer and their representatives, could we please appoint someone whose sole responsibility is to make sure the President does not further embarrass this once proud nation? That is the one Czar I would be willing to approve and fund. This may actually be a two or three person czarship. In addition, can we make it illegal for Democratic Presidents or candidates to attempt to demonstrate athletic skills, especially on baseball fields or in bowling alleys?

But we digress. During this illuminating Town Hall event the President was challenged with this profound query from one of his cloying sycophants:

I have a two-part question. One is choice, the choice that we make to eat the foods that we eat and the lifestyle that we choose to engage in. And the second part, your family is very fit. What do you and the First Lady and the girls do to encourage physical fitness, and what can we—not the government, not private corporations—do to encourage activity in the public-school system and in young people?

Yes, enough with this tedious healthcare debate, lets cut right to the burning issues of the day. The President responded in kind with the typical scholarly reply we have come to expect from the “smartest guy ever to become President” (at least according to Presidential historian Michael Beschloss); and no, this is not a reference to the President's erudite description of Washington insiders as "wee weed up." While in character, that comment occurred earlier; but the audience continued to be wowed with these pedantic thoughts from our Commander in Chief:

When it comes to food, one of the things that we are doing is working with school districts. And the child nutrition legislation is going to be coming up. We provide an awful lot of school lunches out there and—and reimburse local school districts for school-lunch programs. Let’s figure out how can we get some fresh fruits and vegetables in the mix. Because sometimes you go into schools and—you know what the menu is, you know? It’s French fries, Tater Tots, hot dogs, pizza and—now, that’s what kids—let’s face it, that’s what kids want to eat, anyway (Laughter.) So it’s not just the schools’ fault.

A, that’s what kids may want to eat. B, it turns out that that food’s a lot cheaper, because of the distributions that we’ve set up. And so what we’ve got to do is to change how we think about, for example, getting local farmers connected to school districts, because that would benefit the farmers, delivering fresh produce, but right now they just don’t have the distribution mechanisms set up.

So, you know, Michelle set up that garden in the White House?

One of the things that we’re trying to do now is to figure out, can we get a little farmers’ market—outside of the White House—I’m not going to have all of you all just tromping around inside—(laughter)—but right outside the White House—(laughter)—so that—so that we can—and—and—and that is a win-win situation.

It gives suddenly D.C. more access to good, fresh food, but it also is this enormous potential revenue-maker for local farmers in the area. And—and that—those kinds of connections can be made all throughout the country, and—and has to be part of how we think about health.

The President’s reply to this inquiry, inane as the inquiry (and answer) were, offers significant insight into his larger view of the role of government, individual liberty, and the responsibility such liberty entails. In addition it portrays a staggering lack of appreciation for the potential effects of government intervention in what heretofore had been a free market economy.

After listening to the President for seven months I have to ask is there anything the man likes about this country? Am I the only one who feels this way? Does the President believe there is anything worthwhile that has ever been singly achieved by this nation? Is there any evidence that he believes anything worthwhile has ever occurred in this nation that did not result from government intervention? Does the President believe there is any redeeming value to a critical contributor to American exceptionalism, the free market?

The assumption in the President’s statement is that families cannot feed their children. If that is true, how did we get to this point? Were school lunch (and breakfast) programs considered a necessity prior to the wondrous achievements of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society and the evolution of the welfare state? Question authority? That is a liberal privilege. Just like global warming, the fact that parents cannot feed their children is established fact; and of course, we have to do something, and who better to do something than the government. Right? Well, not so fast. According to the President, the government run school lunch programs don’t have it right…yet. Not to worry though…there is nothing that government can’t fix.

The President and First Lady are “on it” and have analyzed identified the reason for inadequate school lunches. It seems that fresh fruits and vegetables have yet to be discovered by the stewards of school lunch programs, though it is not their fault. Government has just not evolved the power required to adequately address the problem. The purchasers of school lunch programs simply do not have access to local farmers and their produce. What "we" have to do is figure out how to connect local farmers to schools and improve the food distribution system. As one listens to Mr. Obama you would assume that he is President of the Sudan. One would never suspect, based on the President’s comments, that we are the most agriculturally proficient nation in the world.

The President cites Washington, DC as being particularly lacking in access to “good, fresh food.” Has the President, during the few years he has spent in Washington, ever taken a break from his campaigning career to look around the city? There are too numerous too count farmers markets in the DC area. Any failure of government bureaucrats to make fresh foods available to public school students, in DC or anywhere for that matter, is not due to lack of supply. If the President feels compelled to comment on deficiencies in DC schools, he might have tried something new, non-fiction. Under the watchful eye of city fathers, DC schools have garnered the title of most expensive and ineffective schools in the world. The Washington Post reported in 2008 that the cost per pupil in the DC system is an astounding $24,600. This compares to an average of $10,000 per pupil in DC private schools. One can only assume that after further discussion with Arne Duncan (Secretary of Education) and Bill Ayers that the President will be getting back to us with a plan for building on the staggering success only John Dewey could have envisioned after decades of expensive and destructive statist educational experimentation.

As regards Ma and Pa Obama, the citizens of DC do not require the first family to establish a White House Farmers Market. Further, if the President understood (or cared about) the free market and basic economics, he would appreciate that a White House Farmers Market would attract legions of Obama fawners (that would be the majority of District and Northern Virginia residents) who would no longer support pre-existing markets. On the other hand, if the President took a real interest in operating such a market, it would offer him business and supervisory skills which we all might benefit from.

Mr. Obama’s comments on the need for a White House Farmers Market offer irresistible analogies to his views on medical care. Many Americans cannot feed their own children and a village is required to fulfill this obligation to our youngest citizens. The government has been charged with this task for years but has performed poorly. Despite substituting cheaper, less effective services, the needs of our children are not being met. They are being offered substandard food. An expansion of government authority is required here to achieve the necessary goal. If we are truly to make certain that children in our schools have universal access to proper food, government must not only control distribution, which it has managed poorly, it must control production. Similarly, the President sees only benefit to government assuming control of the production, pricing and distribution of healthcare services. It is as intuitive to the President that government should exert its beneficent hand in food markets as it is that government would assume control of auto makers, insurers and the home finance industry.

Dissent is patriotic in this nation well, for, liberals. The unfortunate problem for hardcore liberals is that their core convictions are built on a foundation of antipathy to the United States envisioned by the Founders. The intent of leftists and Alinskyites is to destroy the historical and traditional systems of order and governing established in Western democracies and this nation over hundreds of years. It is near impossible to find any comments by the President that suggest the American governmental experiment is exceptional, that the dream of millions worldwide is to come here, even under risk of death, or that in our short history that we have uniquely offered heroic service and sacrifice on an unprecedented scale to the larger world community. No, for our President any American achievements are always suffused in a melange of moral equivalence.

It may be that the President has never seen “It’s a Wonderful Life”. I suggest that Gordon Brown might send it to him next Christmas…or holiday season. Imagine the world over the last century without the United States. Any reasonably honest analysis of such a proposition should leave champions of individual liberty, responsibility, freedom, and free markets with an overwhelming sense of nausea.

It would seem that the Bill Ayers, Saul Alinsky, Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, Eric Holder, Rahm and Zeke Emmanuel, Arne Duncan, Michelle Obama and Barack Obamas of the world have spent decades committed to the obliteration of American tradition without taking any time to consider how they would govern, if they ever got the opportunity. Driven by an instinctual urge for power, they have always presumed, against overwhelming historical evidence, that absolute government control was the way to utopia. Despite proclaiming concern for the common man as their battle cry, the agents of hope and change have always presumed that it was they that possessed the wisdom to determine how utopia would be defined. It would be a core group of imperious government elitists who would determine what would best serve the citizenry and more importantly, how the citizenry would best serve.

The President creates an interesting metaphor…President Obama as the Farmer in Chief. Consider the power exercised by the farmer as he oversees his land with the express intent of generating the most bountiful harvest. Individual plants are of little interest to the industrious farmer. There is no individualism recognized by the farmer raising his crops. Fertilizer and water are distributed equally to all. Diseased plants are sacrificed for the greater good. Weeds considered a threat to the well being of the larger crop are destroyed. Hardier genetically engineered crops may take precedence over natural growth. The farmer takes all steps to protect the greatest percentage of his crop, the crop which he and the market judge as valuable.

Based on the principles of the President’s plans for healthcare “reform”, his commitment to redistribute wealth, and his demonstrated and espoused willingness to pursue control of key industry sectors, can there be any doubt that the President sees himself as the Farmer in Chief. As master of the American estate he believes his responsibilities include proper watering, feeding, fertilizing and culling of the harvest. The farmer is an American hero. He supports what most of us consider to be an exceptional and unique creation. Mankind. The Farmer in Chief is surrounded by gentrified political utilitarians who not only deny American exceptionalism, but who advocate political philosophies which will ultimately require questioning the exceptionalism of mankind.

Quite simply it is anathema to the President that anything other than government should control the healthcare, finance and energy industries. So when you are that committed and catechized to the most radical liberal progressivism, why wouldn’t the White House assume responsibility for disbursement of one more critical resource?

American Gothic, meet the Obamas. This is contemporary horror, of the non-fiction variety, that even Stephen King could not imagine. Welcome to the Green House.

Quaere Verum

Summit on Peace Street

2009-07-30T05:05:00.000-07:00

We journeyed to Raleigh to show the President hear how we feel about his vision of government and the need to go “all in” on healthcare. It was a great crew. Mom of eight accompanied us and she is amazing. The QVs have our hands full with three. Mom of eight makes it look easy….and she and her family were the talk of Peace Street. Eric unsheathed our most powerful weapon in this battle, and led us all in the rosary. This was a particularly powerful repellent for Planned Parenthood sign wavers who packed up and sought more secular shelter. Other protesters and concerned citizens joined us in prayer. It was quite a sight as we all took it to the streets of Raleigh. We are front and center proudly waving our signs. The post here describes events well.

The whole exercise was reasonably peaceful. There was a little yelling, but no physical altercations. There were at least 500 citizens on the corners of Peace and St. Mary’s. Numbers in opposition to the President’s policies and proposals were easily 3:1. Opponents were vocal but all activities were G rated and there were no threats or personal attacks targeting our President. I did not hear one person opposed to the President's policies state, "Not my President." This likely seemed pretty tame to our moveon.org friends who are used to conducting business a little differently.

The good news and bad news is that while there were lots of citizens opposed to the President’s proposal, this was a grass roots activity with poor organization. The Wake County Republican Party and NC branch of Americans for Prosperity had sponsored a healthcare event pre-rally and attempted some organization but it was invisible at Broughton High School. We were initially directed, as the post describes, to a location which never saw Obama. We all noticed the lower level of security in this staging area, the lack of news crews and pressed on to an area the GOP had explicitly advised those opposing the President’s policies to steer clear from. The note from Wake County Republican Party stated, “We have been asked to NOT have people congregate at the corner of Peace and St Mary's as the moveon.org people will be occupying that space.” Hundreds of us ignored this request. St. Mary’s and Peace was where we needed to be.

We greeted the President as loudly as we could as he whizzed past. He then went into the school and, from all accounts, wowed enthralled “townhallers” pitching softballs with his well worn diatribes against the “naysayers” and “chatterers” unable to appreciate the need to hand healthcare over to a government that lists the impending failure of the postal service as its achievement for the week.

Interestingly, after the President’s motorcade passed, the local ABC affiliate stood on the corner of Peace and St. Mary’s with Obama supporters tight and bunched up, yelling and screaming. He then began filming. No doubt the evening news will be filled with shots of the “throngs” of Obama supporters out to greet the President. A few of us crossed the street after the President had passed to inject some reality into the news broadcast being fabricated by the TV crew. Some of us engaged the President’s supporters in animated and ultimately thoughtful discourse.

Once the shouting stopped, we talked race, we talked racism on the part of the President, we talked religion and faith, we talked abortion, and we talked about the current healthcare legislation. We talked about the implicit and explicit racism of current government policies. We talked about the comments of Justice Ginsburg in which she stated that she always assumed the Roe decision would lead to public funding of abortions to decrease “population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.” We also talked real possibilities for building on the best healthcare system in the world and assuring care for the 10-15 million who desperately need a safety net. Our dialogue ranged from eliminating state insurance mandates, to delinking health care from employment, to tax credits for insurance purchase, to malpractice and tort reform, and then to a discussion on the wisdom of guaranteeing that illegal immigrants be guaranteed a government healthcare benefit.

It was a bit heated at times and while the police allowed us to continue the discussion they were standing by. One African American Obama supporter got an answer he didn’t seem to expect when he stated, “You have to know this is a white man’s world. Black people have had to struggle for everything and now we have to fight for healthcare.” The response…pretty close though probably some paraphrasing, “You know why that is? It’s because the African Americans of this country have for 60 years been willing to be the victim of liberal politicians and Great Society mad scientists. They have devised a government run social support system that promises blacks everything…healthcare, homes, income and food…and yet ultimately has delivered nothing but decimation of the black family, destruction of a sense of individual responsibility, destruction of black neighborhoods and livelihoods, and absolute dependence on the government. Blacks continue to vote for politicians who promise the moon and deliver only more dependence. Government dependence is a drug worse than crack. You may have broken out of your shackles 150 years ago, but you are still on the plantation. And if you give this government absolute control over your health, you will never escape.” Not sure of what the response to this would be, the speaker braced. The Peace Streeter considered this and said. “You make some good points brother.”

I’m not sure any of us changed anyone’s minds today. It was an open and brutally honest exchange, however. I certainly doubt the President was influenced by the crowds you will not see on the evening news tonight. The folks we interacted with on Peace St and St. Mary’s were willing to listen, as were we. Our new friends on Peace Street made it crystal clear that there is deep frustration within the African American community. There was a knee jerk reaction of our colleagues on Peace Street to blame this frustration on the failure of “government” to help black people. We argued that this frustration is a result of failed government policies which have decimated the African American community. In the end the Peace Streeters did not disagree.

Ultimately this frustration can be channeled in one of two ways. As the President has done, it can be channeled to develop support for more government intervention in all our lives. The President has made a life of exacerbating racial tensions and class warfare in pursuing his objective of an increasingly powerful centralized state which subjugates the needs of the individual to the needs of the state. He called his grandmother a “typical white woman”, he would sit in the pew of Jeremiah Wright for 20 years, he portrayed Midwestern voters as bitter and clinging to their guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them and he described the textbook performance of a model white policeman as “acting stupidly”, fueling unsupportable charges of racial profiling as he prefaces his comments with the admission that he did not know all the details of the case.

Alternatively, if race baiters like the President, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and the rest would stand down and allow individuals like those of us talking on the corner of Peace Street and St. Mary’s today, we might channel this frustration in more constructive directions. One of the corner delegates said, “All we want is the American dream man. Not sure we will ever get it.” With a black community committed to supporting “leaders” and politicians whose survival requires that African Americans believe they are perpetual victims, while they peddle more government dependence and the lure of guaranteed outcomes, I sadly had to agree.

Our friends on Peace Street have been promised much, little of which has been delivered over the decades. Another community, the Hispanic community, is now marching down the same road. They also have lots of checks in the mail. They have taken their number as the next minority group to be consigned to the ash heap of terminal liberal victimhood as politicians say anything to gain their support.

Would that politicians would commit themselves to strengthening the America which has been the incubator for the “dream”, an America which fosters individual growth, liberty, independence, self-reliance and reverence for our divine origin, not the reflexive expectation that it is government that can and must provide. It takes a village? The village is government. Government, for many of us, exists to support the freedoms which build self-reliance, faithful individuals and strong families. Such a “dream” includes not only the enormous possibility of success, but the risk for failure. A nation which supports a government which guarantees mediocre outcomes determined and measured by prejudiced bureaucrats is not free. This is not an incubator for the American dream my Peace Street friend is after. This was one thing we all agreed on at the corner of Peace Street and St. Mary’s today.

Despite a provocative discussion, a sobering comment was made by one of the delegates as we packed up to head home. After admitting that the black community at this point has to bear some responsibility in who leads it, a remark was made, "Well, we do have a black President. Doubtful many civil rights warriors thought that would happen in their lifetimes." The response from the African American Peace Streeter was laughter followed by "The President ain't black. He's half white."

Back to square one.

Is it really possible to reverse the course of victimhood set over the past sixty years?

Quaere Verum

Say Anything...Its Now or Never

2009-07-18T18:16:00.000-07:00

According to our President, it is now or never for healthcare reform. Familiar message? “Now or never” for the nation-saving prokulus stimulus bill. “Now or never” for the auto industry. Now or never for the finance industry. Now or never for reduction of CO2 emissions and saving our planet from global warming. Anyone notice a record low “high” of 64 in Wisconsin Friday? Thank goodness Hillary apologized to the world yesterday for America's role in "climate change." Now it is “now or never” for healthcare.

The government already owns 50% of health care in Medicare, Medicaid, Tricare (the military health system) and the Veterans Administration. The portion of healthcare that Fed and state administrators operate is insolvent and headed to bankruptcy. The portion not owned by the statists is used to cover the losses hospitals, practices and health plans suffer at the hands of government bureaucrats. Government masters have refined the art of waging an administrative and pricing war while demanding that healthcare subsidize the health costs for 15 million illegal aliens here as a result of another failed government failure, the lack of enforcement of standing immigration law.

Now the Obama administration wants the whole medical enchilada...and they want it now. Those who say this requires a broad, detailed discussion and analysis are demonized by the President. This is a favortie tactic of the Obamamafia, rolled out on Day 1, when those who failed to see the need for speed with porkulus, or for legislators and constituents to read a 1000 page bill before it was signed, were demonized. The President builds the perception of crisis in healthcare. He fiddles as the government consumes 46% of GDP, his minions develop plans for more governement spending and unemployment is at 9.5% and headed north.

VP Biden told us this week that "We have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt." There is no other description, while entertaining, the VP is an imbecile, the court jester who regularly creates media distractions for the President. The President, however, is a conniving liar. He will spare no deception or duplicity in attempting to build a consensus that the root of all evil in America is our useless, wasteful medical system. Does this President like anything about this country? Re this miserable medical system of ours, will the President be flying to Italy for his healthcare, as the Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi flew to the Cleveland Clinic for care of his cardiac condition? Will the President be the first to sign on for the “government option” which will offer consumers so much choice? I think we know the answers. Teddy Kennedy flew to Duke University for treatment of his advanced brain cancer.

Memo to any of the 47 million uninsured who have brain cancer: Taxpayer funded trips to Duke University for the most advanced medical care will only be approved for "treasured" politcal VIPs. Generally consideration will only be given to liberal misogynists who have lived a life demonstrating absolute contempt for the common man. Lest your friends refer to you as a "Lion of the Senate", chances are you will be taking a number with everyone else. Last Canadian time check shows that the MRI you need will be scheduled in 110 days! The good news is that by the time Obamacare diagnoses and begins treatment for your condition flying to Duke would only be necessary if the University's historic Maplewood cemtery is your final resting place.

“A bankruptcy occurs every thirty seconds occurs as a result of American healthcare costs.” Lie. “My plan will allow for greater choice and competition.” Lie. “My plan will save money.” The Congressional Budget Office weighed in on this two days ago. Lie. “America has embarrassing infant mortality rates.” Only if you fail to account for the counting and care we give the most fragile of infants, extremely low birth weigh newborns not even considered as live by most nations. So, another lie. “America has unacceptable life expectancy rates given the money we spend on healthcare.” If one considers violent deaths (mainly a result of 50 years of Great Society liberal do-gooding experimentation in our inner cities) and car accidents, we top the world in life expectancy. More lies.

“Government programs have far less administrative cost than private programs.” Medicare, Medicaid and Tricare put all the administrative costs back on to the hospital or facility. In addition, the government spends relatively little time and money in trying to prevent fraud and abuse. In the end hospitals charge private payers more because they have to make up losses on the government side, which is…yes, 50% of the current system. “At least 47,000,000 are without insurance.” A half lie. The inference is that these people are without healthcare. No one is without healthcare in this country. See EMTALA and the legal requirement to treat anyone who walks into an emergency room. However, the 47,000,000 without “insurance” are one third illegal aliens and one third are individuals who could afford insurance if it was a priority for them. That leaves approximately 12-15,000,000 who truly are unable to get the insurance they need. That’s less than 4% of a population of 305 million. For this we need to nationalize 17% of our nation's $14 trillion economy and change the current care that 89% like? Surely there are other solutions, but not when its “now or never.” If the President’s lips are moving and healthcare is mentioned, he is not telling the whole story.

Well, we all know Americans support Big Pharmaceutical Companies committed to one thing and one thing only, profit. Other governments, however, have tamed the pharma monster. Sure. Has the President told us, as a result of regulation and safety requirements, that it currently costs a drug company $1 Billion to bring a drug to market? Has he mentioned that only 0.1% of new drugs actually make it to market and this process takes 10 years? This is asking a lot, but how about our fearless leader telling America that just as we are the only free nation left in the world willing to defend itself and its allies, we are also in a league of our own in developing new drugs and medical technology? Americans pay the freight because we can. Want to get tough Mr. President, tell our freedom loving foreign friends, if any remain, that the time has come for them to pay the bill not only in national defense but in healthcare research. The President believes the solution for healthcare is to build on his successes in revitalizing the American auto industry. More lies. Big lies.

The push for government control of your healthcare system is on. Even reasonable citizens will have a hard time voting for less government when your healthcare is completely state run. If you ever cared about anything, you should care about this. If the President rams through “healthcare reform”, more properly called “healthcare destruction”, by his artificial and mandated August 7^th deadline, your life and the lives of generation of your family members, will be irrevocably changed.

One might ask why such a short time frame to make such a monumental decision? Well, if citizens, and more importantly voters, had time to really consider this issue and think about their healthcare being directed by the same folks who run the DMV, public schools, and screen your bags at the airport, you might want to consider other options. Crisis, diversion, deceit, lack of transparency and complacency on the part of the American citizenry are the only ways this Machiavellian power grab can occur.

There are two hopes here. Even if united in opposition, the Republican party will not be able to derail this freight train. There is hope in the possibility that the American electorate will wake from the change and hope stupor. There is also hope that sensible, thoughtful patriots remain in the Democratic party. As of this week there appear to be some Dem lawmakers willing to break the Obama-Reid-Pelosi omerta. These supposedly centrist, fiscally conservative Democrats are the "blue dogs". It is refreshing to know that there may be some on the Dem side of the aisle who have not succumbed to the pressure to completely sell their souls and who have begun to appreciate the true intentions of the Obama administration. The last patriots left in the Democratic party can be reached through the Captiol switch board or their web sites. If emailing be sure to use a return address from their district on the contact form, otherwise your message will not be accepted.

Capitol switchboard is 202-224-3121:

Reps. John Barrow (D-Ga.)
Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.)
Baron Hill (D-Ind.)
Jim Matheson (D-Utah)
Charlie Melancon (D-La.)
Mike Ross (D-Ark.)
Zack Space (D-Ohio)

As we have watched the development of a system of thirty plus “czars” put in place by the President, with no funding accountability and no oversight, these Democrats appear to be poised to rise and provide the infusion of courage which will be required for this nation to resist its current descent into socialism.

As for our part, we the citizens need to be letting our representatives know how we feel about a takeover of one of the great American industries, healthcare, by the federal government. Visit, call or email your representatives, in that order. Also contact the “blue dog” Democrats willing to consider defying their liberal masters in DC. These individuals are listed with their office contact numbers.

For those of you who are more visually inclined, if you doubt that the inefficiencies that exist in some areas of our current health care system could ever be worse, try this on for size:

To the parapets. Let your representatives hear you. Fill their waiting rooms, flood their servers, burn up their phone lines, shut down the switchboards. The socialists are still coming!

Quaere Verum

Independence Day 2009: "A republic...if you can keep it"

2009-07-04T02:58:00.000-07:00

"It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible."

~ George Washington (1789 - 1797), first President of the United States

Quaere Verum

Dissecting the Obama Healthcare Infomercial

2009-06-29T15:47:00.000-07:00

We're Burning Daylight

2009-06-28T06:39:00.000-07:00

The healthcare debacle will put our nation in socialist chains, cap and trade and the global warming snake oil salesmen will destroy the one means to avoid the coming socialist catastrophe…the engine that had once been the American economy. While some people may be able to get job training making windmills for a time, the end result will be a loss of 2-3 jobs for every job that might be created (or will it be created or saved) in the “green economy”. Sky high energy prices (will conservatively cost the average family of four $2000/year) are coming if this passes folks. More detail on the great global warming scam, and the impact of cap and trade (cap and tax), here, here and here.

Our fear mongering President tells us that “we have to have courage. The time is NOW.” Apparently for everything….healthcare reform, energy reform etc. Anyone who is not on board is guilty of spreading disinformation or is a coward. Everything you need to know about the honesty and transparency of this administration was on display last Wednesday night. The President’s infomercial on healthcare, produced by ABC “news”, permitted no formal presentation of opposing views regarding healthcare reform. Courage Mr. President? Your subjects, I mean the American citizenry, might ask that you, Sir, find the courage to debate the reasonable concerns regarding all these matters, and put away the Rahmbo porculus (stimulus) bill tactics. That will not be happening in this Administration.

The House of Representatives was handed a 1000 plus page piece of legislation related to cap and tax Friday night. There was not even time to package the bill and its 300 amendments in a single document. The President shifted into the only real gear he knows…crisis. “We need this now.” “We have to have the courage to face the future.” “America can no longer continue on its current path.” “If we don’t get it done now we never will.”

Madame Speaker, reminiscent of Gollum responding to her master’s call for action, pushed this bill through with an extremely tight vote. Eight Republican House members provided cover for the Democrats. These GOP pretenders, in obtaining prime seating on the Speaker’s taxpayer funded jet services, sold their souls in order to obtain the liberal cred they perceive they need to maintain RINO status and hold onto their office. For pols it’s generally not about principle, it’s about staying in office.

These turncoat Republicans allowed eight challenged Democrats to vote no on this legislation. These Democrats, with electoral challenges in 2010, are now able to return to their districts and report that they courageously stood on principle to vote against this bill.

Pictured are the GOP traitorous eight. If they supposedly represent you, please let them know how you feel. The cap and tax bill will now go to the Senate. It is not clear when a vote will take place. Start the calls to Senators now. Melt the phone lines. Your calls, letters and visits matter! Info for Senate contacts is available here.

To some it may seem far fetched that Dem leadership could be so conspiratorial in nature. If you feel this way, you simply aren’t paying attention. Did you miss porculus (the “stimulus bill”), the auto takeover, the ownership of banking firms and co-opting of the home finance business by the government?

At this point healthcare is a crapshoot for the Administration. We can only hope the President’s reform push will fail, but at this point it is not absolutely critical for the administration. Whether it has been the plan all along or not, healthcare has become a screen for getting cap and trade through. The Obama gang MO, orchestrated by Chief of Staff Rhambo Emmanuel, is to push 2 or 3 major issues hard and see how the shot sets up. It is all about misdirection, overwhelming the public and GOP leaders and isolating a target. Right now, the administration may lose healthcare (I may be a little too optimistic here), but they have a good chance at sap and trade, cap and tax, or knee cap our trade. Whatever you call it, it is economic suicide. The Obamafia reran the porculus drill for this. You know, produce a 1000 page cap and trade bill which doesn’t even really exist (there was no complete, physical comprehensive bill for legislators to review, even for the speed readers in the group), throw it into the House and Rahm it through. In this case even make some of our fine Democratic colleagues from challenging districts look good with the help of some GOP traitors.

The President can bide his time on healthcare, if he doesn’t get it now. Cap and tax he needs now. Some of the wheels are coming off the global warming bus (like the coolest temps in decades, reports suppressed by the EPA and the defection of numerous scientific types). Re healthcare, the government already owns 50% of the current system. With budget cuts at the state and Center for Medicare and Medicaid level, payments will be whittled away. As payments for government patients dives, provider organizations (hospitals etc) will be put in crisis mode. More and more cost will need to be shifted to private payers. There is not much more cost shifting room there. Purchasing groups (insurers, brokers etc) will be driven to make tremendous cuts, eventually being driven out of the market. As more and more folks are unable to get the private insurance they need at a reasonable price (unreasonable because the government calls the ball on the reimbursement for services), choice will become limited. Hospitals and provider groups will be forced to limit services, cut personnel, and go out of business. If unsuccessful now, there is still possibly time for our President to resurrect this issue and offer the hope of a government takeover later.

Simply put, a frontal assault on healthcare may not matter at all because, if one takes a little longer view, the administration has the tools right now to erode the healthcare system and make perhaps even a stronger case for Obamacare later.

The question is when do people wake up and see these arrogant, self-serving, power hungry miscreants for what they are? Despite quadrupling down on Hoover’s progressivism and laying the socialist ground work for a depression within the Depression, FDR was re-elected in 1936. We have a long history in this nation of obsession with personalities and inability to grasp the issues of the day, even when they directly threaten us as individuals.

There is ZERO leadership emerging on the GOP side. At this point the GOP is worse than the gang that couldn’t shoot straight. It seems that even a gathering of the most unfortunate village idiots could not repetitively inflict so much injury on themselves (see Sanford, McCain still supporting cap and tax, defectors on porculus and cap and tax, alternative healthcare bills offered by Republicans). It almost seems that this is intentional and that some GOP members are complicit in this absolute failure of leadership.

Bottom line, there is no visible GOP party leader, no rallying voice. I fear 2010, an enormous opportunity to propose an agenda to advance the principles which have led to America's exceptionalism, could turn into a route of the few remaining loyal GOPers. The hope is in new blood at the local and state levels but there needs to be a national voice differentiating and identifying a clear Republican alternative to the statism of the left. I would recommend that this effort be unapologetically based on the foundation laid by the Founders and the Constitution.

If loyal opposition is to be a memory, at least let Americans know that they have made a clear decision to make it so by discarding the principles of our founding. Without this type of clarity it will be extremely difficult for even the best of new local candidates to break through the mind numbing rhetoric from the left which saturates all elements of our lives.

Who will supply this leadership? Divine intervention formed us; will it continue to maintain us? I absolutely believe that such leadership exists. Time is running short, however, and she or he is burning daylight.

Quaere Verum

Getting Back To Normal?

2009-06-24T05:07:00.000-07:00

In my industry we pay very close attention to the Consumer Confidence Index. Primarily because this helps us gauge the consumers desires to buy or not buy things. As the U.S economy and my industry is largely based on consumerism this helps us forecast future trends.

We have noticed recently an increase in consumer interest to purchase as well as following through with such purchases over the last three weeks. There doesn't appear to be any significant market conditions that would encourage this behavior. I could argue just the opposite and that certain indicators trend to a further slowing of the economy.

One idea I have as to why this sudden surge is that the Obama hysteria is fading. It has been over two years of fanatic slobbering of what was to come from this self proclaimed messiah that reality is starting to settle in that he isn't anything more than a community organizer with no business experience. Many who voted for this accomplished party guy are beginning to awake to a hangover illuminating a President who really does want America to become a Socialistic Country.

Any good American politician understands that the United States people are conservative in nature. So when Obama starts inviting Iranian leaders to our 4th of July celebrations or entertains Huffington post bloggers at an international press conference the hearts of these elected officials start to skip a beat.

So as the Obama rage disappears then the political rhetoric of both aisles increases thus the grinding engine of the U.S. Congress begins to slow. I believe Americans are now seeing things getting back to normal and thus are able to come out of there homes and start living their lives again.

Leader of the Free World

2009-06-22T18:18:00.000-07:00

The world is in turmoil. North Korea is threatening nuclear war and a missle launch at Hawaii. Iran is in flames as freedom fighters attempt to topple its Mullah Thugocracy. Can you identify the Leader and Best Hope for the Free World? Polls are open.

Quaere Verum

Wile I was Away

2009-06-19T03:55:00.000-07:00

So it has been a bit since I last wrote and as I sit overlooking the ocean I wonder why write now? It is because now while I am alone with nothing but the ocean breeze in my face and a cardinal chirping do I have some peace to reflect that I believe I was in moat mode. Moat mode is when you say 'I'm out of here' to the rest of the world. I am going to take my family, secure them in my castle and protect them from the outside evils with my moat and other capable tools.

Building a moat is different then sticking your head in the sand. I know what the threats are out there in the real world I just don't want my family to have to confront them. I understand sticking your head in the sand and not wanting to even acknowledge the problems but that's not beneficial long term.

With a clear head I realize that at some point I am going to have to come out of my castle, lower the bridge and take on the wicked head on. Its a battle that I subconsciously chosen to avoid thinking it may just pass us by but it won't and as I overlook the sea realize I must come out strong, with a fierce will not to fail because its not me I am fighting for, its my babies back in the castle.

How to Destroy a Healthcare System (Part IV)

2009-06-15T20:57:00.000-07:00

The "Uninsured" Masses

In case you hadn’t heard within the past hour, there are reportedly 46,000,000 Americans without healthcare insurance.

Where did this number come from? This number is derived from the American Community Survey (ACS) conducted annually by the Census Bureau and supplemented with data from the Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASES). This is a staggering figure endlessly cited by collectivists home and abroad as exhibit one in the case for the need to rush to a government run medical system in America. Those interested in this socialist vision disingenuously create the image that 46,000,000 are wandering aimlessly through our streets ravaged by diseases with no opportunity to receive medical care.

This horrifying picture should prompt at least two comments. First, could this picture possibly be a reasonable rendering of current conditions? The answer would be no. Under EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act) it is illegal for a hospital to deny emergency and delivery care. Secondly, who are these 46,000,000 unfortunate victims who, while they do have access to medical care, may not have access to what we all might consider optimal medical care? Can it be possible that we as a nation have ignored the plight of 46,000,000 citizens who lack health insurance, requiring us to radically revise an irreparable healthcare system?

In order to determine who the 46,000,000 are it is necessary to consider definitions used by the Census Bureau. This number repeated ad nauseum by proponents of a single payer, government run system is based on the annual Census Bureau estimates of individuals who have spent at least part of the year without health insurance. The Census defines an individual as “uninsured” if they were not covered by any type of health insurance at any time in that year. The report does not specify the periods of time that individuals might have been uninsured. Included in this number are uncertain numbers of citizens who after being laid off or switching jobs may have had some period without insurance but were back on insurance roles during the year.

In addition, the latest Census Report states, “Health insurance coverage is likely to be under reported in the Current Population Survey (CPS). While under reporting affects most, if not all, surveys, under reporting of health insurance coverage in the latest ASES appears to be a larger problem than in other national surveys that ask about insurance. Some reasons for the disparity may include the fact that income, not health insurance, is the main focus of the ASES questionnaire.”

Somewhat more reliable data is available from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). In a report issued in 2003, “How Many People Lack Health Insurance and For How Long?”, the CBO, commenting on the most recent year of reliable data (1998), “In recent years, the number of uninsured people in the United States has been pegged at approximately 40 million, or about 16 percent of the non-elderly population. By CBO's analysis, that estimate overstates the number of people who are uninsured all year and more closely approximates the number who are uninsured at a point in time during the year. A more accurate estimate of the number of people who were uninsured for all of 1998--the most recent year for which reliable comparative data are available--is 21 million to 31 million, or 9 percent to 13 percent of non-elderly Americans.” There is no more recent CBO estimate of the number of individuals who may be uninsured for a significant portion of the year. So, if CBO estimates are to be believed, over a given year and based on current numbers, there might currently be closer to 25 to 35 million with sustained lack of medical insurance.

So the numbers of individuals going without health insurance for a full year is far less than some would have us believe; but for some, not all, a short period without health insurance could be difficult. Who are the individuals being denied the opportunity at least 245,000,000 of us now enjoy? The medically uninsured is talked of as a homogeneous group but nothing could be further from the truth. Many individuals move in and out of this group based on employment transition over the course of a year. For those truly interested in developing the best possible healthcare system in this nation, it is critical to further describe the remaining very heterogeneous group of “uninsured”.

The CPS provides reasonable descriptions and estimates of the subgroups which constitute this whole. Based on the CPS, at least 9.7 million foreign born, non-citizens are part of this group. These are illegal aliens, generally in low income categories based on the CPS, who are not on the current insurance roles. The federal government has abetted the influx of illegal aliens for decades. We now are counting 10,000,000 of them as uninsured “Americans.” No other nation on the planet assumes they have an obligation to provide medical care to illegal aliens. There is none.

The CPS also reports that 8.4 million households with an income greater than $50,000 and 9.1 million households with an income greater than $75,000 are without insurance. According to the American Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) survey for 2006-2007, the average national individual and family medical policy premiums were $2613 and $5799 respectively. A significant number of these households are single wage earners but that data is not readily available from the CPS. The Commonwealth Fund reports that one of the fastest growing segments of the uninsured population is the 19-29 demographic. While many in the $50,000 to $74,999 category may be single, let’s assume these are all large families incapable of purchasing medical insurance. We then have 9.1 million households (uncertain number of individuals) that should reasonably be able to afford medical insurance with an income above $75,000.

The catch is that the average policy costs are significantly higher in a number of states. This is because of government meddling. The cost of insurance is directly related to state required mandates placed on health insurance policies offered within the state. The largest number of mandates, is, not surprisingly, found in blue states. In New Jersey, for example, the average individual and family premiums were an astounding $5326 and $10398. Like it or not policy purchasers in New Jersey will be covered for in vitro fertilization, autism, ostomy supplies, breast reconstruction and contraceptives.

The last subgroup to be considered in the pool of 46,000,000 is those who are eligible for government insurance (Medicaid, SCHIP and Medicare) but are not enrolled in the proper program. This number is estimated at 12-14,000,000 individuals.

So lets put this all in context. After subtracting illegal aliens, households which theoretically could afford insurance (>$75,000 income only) and those eligible but not enrolled in government programs, we are left with approximately 13-15 million who fall into the category of without health insurance for some period of time during the year. This number (perhaps 8-10,000,000) includes a large number of individuals with chronic medical problems who are chronically underinsured and are unable to support their healthcare needs. In the end, we are talking generously about approximately 10-15,000,000 individuals whose needs are not capable of being met by the current healthcare system. This constitutes at most 5% of the current population of the United States.

One would never know that the real crux of the healthcare debate is 5% of the population. Those interested in a government run healthcare system lie and distort numbers to create the picture of a nation abandoned and without medical services. Government should play a role in supporting a free market environment which is encouraged to provide care for the 5%. That, however, is not what the President and his minions have in mind. The President is interested in the federal government assuming the power and responsibility for the healthcare sector, which is now responsible for 16% of GDP. Car companies, tobacco companies, even the banking industry takeovers pale in comparison to what government ownership of healthcare would mean.

Healthcare is the Holy Grail of statists in America. Once less than 50% of people pay income tax and the central planners control their healthcare, the citizenry has become a ward of the state.

And who wouldn’t want the government to oversee the healthcare industry. The 45 year old government adventure in health care, Medicare and Medicaid, is bankrupt and unsustainable. It only makes sense that in the name of 5% of the population we would hand over the remaining 50% of healthcare to the lunatics who are burning down the asylum.

Quaere Verum

How to Destroy a Healthcare System (Part III)

2009-06-12T22:04:00.000-07:00

As the rhetoric of the healthcare debate heats up, the quality of American health care is a prominent target. Daily we are hectored with tales of the inadequacy of our medical system. We’re told by the President regularly that we have the most expensive health care system in the world but we are not any healthier for it.

From President Obama on May 18th in New Mexico:

We spend more per capita than any nation on Earth…in some cases we've got worse outcomes. We've got higher infant mortality rates; we've got higher rates of some deadly diseases. That doesn't make sense.

WHO You Gonna Believe?

You’re right Sir, it doesn’t make sense. Do we really believe that we rank 37th in the world behind Cyprus, Morocco, Colombia, Portugal and Costa Rica? That’s what the last World Health Organization (WHO) Report (2000) claims and that’s what supporters of a government run health system proclaim.

There is much to critique in the WHO Report. Thinking people might ask are the measures used defined similarly in all countries, or is it apples and oranges time? On the subject of infant mortality, which is a critical element in calculating life expectancy, the Colombians, ranked ahead of us, would say "confundir la mierda con la pomada". Nevertheless, WHO uses its calculated value of life expectancy, built on faulty assumptions to derive life expectancy as an indicator of health system performance.

An additional reason for the head scratching view of healthcare systems which results from the WHO survey is the heavy weighting of “fairness” of health care distribution in developing rankings. From the Report:

Together, the levels of health and of responsiveness receive a weight of three-eighths of the total. The three distributional measures, which together describe the equity of the system, account for the remaining five-eighths.

Lets review this statement. WHO is not interested in whether your nation's care is good. WHO is most interested in everyone getting the same care, good or bad. Even if WHO could determine accurately the “distribution of healthcare”, a nation with overall stellar care, super stellar at one end of distribution and stellar at the other end, would be penalized! Yes, health tourism in Morocco is booming.

Nations unwilling or unable to invest in healthcare, who sentence all their citizens to the same mediocre care, are revered by the WHO. Commitment to mediocrity, our battle cry! Welcome to the brave new world of socialized medicine.

Infant Mortality

Infant mortality in the US is regularly cited by WHO and others as an indicator of the poor return we get on our health care dollars. The fact is that the US reports on all births more completely than any other nation. A livebirth in the US refers to any infant who on birth shows any evidence of life, including respiration, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or voluntary muscle movement. While there is some state variation for reporting, almost all states mandate reporting for infants greater than 20 weeks gestational age.

From US News and World Report (2006) and Dr. Bernadine Healey:

In Austria and Germany, fetal weight must be at least 500 grams (1 pound) to count as a live birth; in other parts of Europe, such as Switzerland, the fetus must be at least 30 centimeters (mean length at 22 weeks gestation) long. In Belgium and France, births at less than 26 weeks of pregnancy are registered as lifeless. And some countries don't reliably register babies who die within the first 24 hours of birth. Thus, the United States is sure to report higher infant mortality rates. For this very reason, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which collects the European numbers, warns of head-to-head comparisons by country.

Infant mortality in developed countries is not about healthy babies dying of treatable conditions as in the past. Most of the infants we lose today are born critically ill, and 40 percent die within the first day of life. The major causes are low birth weight and prematurity, and congenital malformations. As Nicholas Eberstadt, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, points out, Norway, which has one of the lowest infant mortality rates, shows no better infant survival than the United States when you factor in weight at birth.

Form Kramer at al in Pediatric Perinatal Epidemiology in 2002:

The huge disparities in the ratio of fetal to infant deaths less than 750 grams (1.6 lbs) and in the proportion of live births less than 750 grams among these developed countries probably result from differences in birth and death registration practices. International comparisons and rankings of infant mortality should be interpreted with caution.

Infant mortality rankings are not an issue of poor quality of care for the US, they are an issue of our willingness to attempt to support extremely tiny babies and reporting bias. There are disparities in infant outcomes in the US, especially along racial lines, but these have less to do with the healthcare system than societal and cultural factors which the healthcare system has little control over. Our strict definitions of live birth lead to the reporting of thousands of infant deaths annually which are never given a second thought even in Western Europe, the purported mecca of high quality healthcare.

Life Expectancy

Life expectancy in the US is another crude indicator of healthcare system quality frequently cited by critics of American healthcare as emblematic of our deficiencies. While average life expectancy in the US is 78, we still rank behind thirty other countries including Japan, France, Sweden and Hong Kong. What life expectancy as an indicator of quality in healthcare fails to account for are detrimental cultural and societal behaviors which limit life expectancy. US reporting of infant mortality certainly has a negative impact on this number but so do two other vital factors, homicides and car accidents. For 2004, the US homicide rate was 5.9/100,000. The rate was 1.95 in Canada, 1.64 in France and 0.98 in Germany. The US auto fatality rate is also higher. In 2006 the rate was 14.2/100,000 in the US. The rate in Canada was 9.25, in France 7.4, and in Germany 6.19.

The fact that the U.S. has a disproportionate number of individuals who die as the result of fatal injuries compared to the other wealthy nations of the world should be considered in any discussion of life expectancy rankings, but rarely is this recognized by those eager to find fault with American medicine. The destruction of inner city communities and mandates for a nation of automobile nomads to drive increasingly more fuel efficient and less safe automobiles does not reflect upon the quality of health care in the U.S. Death in these situations almost universally occurs independently of the condition of health of the individuals who die as a result of these factors.

When authors Robert Ohsfeldt and John Schneider in The Business of Health (2006) adjusted international life expectancy data for these variables, it turns out the US leads the world in life expectancy:

Table 1-5: Mean Life Expectancy at Birth, OECD Countries, Actual and Standardized by OECD Mean Fatal Injury Rates, 1980-99

OECD Nation 5	Actual (Raw) Mean (Does Not Account for Fatal Injuries)	Standardized Mean (Accounts for Fatal Injuries)
United States	75.3	76.9
United Kingdom	75.6	75.7
Switzerland	77.6	76.6
Sweden	77.7	76.1
Norway	77.0	76.3
Netherlands	77.0	75.9
Japan	78.7	76.0
Italy	76.6	75.8
Iceland	78.0	76.1
Germany	75.4	76.1
France	76.6	76.0
Denmark	75.1	76.1
Canada	77.3	76.2
Belgium	75.7	76.0
Austria	75.3	76.0
Australia	76.8	76.0

The President is correct when he reports that Americans experience higher rates of deadly diseases. Specifically, America has high rates of heart disease and diabetes. The cause of this, however, is not the American Healthcare system. It is directly related to the fact that 31% of Americans are obese compared to 14% of Canadians, 13% of Germans and 9% of the French. According to Ron Bailey, science correspondent at Reason Magazine:

Taking all these unhealthy proclivities into consideration, the American health care system is most likely not to blame for our lower life expectancies. Instead, American health care is rescuing enough of us from the consequences of our bad health habits to keep our ranking from being even lower.

Statists interested in further expansion of government power eagerly proclaim that medicine has neglected its responsibilities in wellness and preventative care. Speaking to a crowd in Wisconsin this week the President, when asked about wellness and personal responsibility, immediately redirected the question to the responsibility of employers, government and medicine to keep individuals slim, trim and disease free. The canard of wellness will be used by statists interested in tightening control over the medical sector, which has no ability to influence societal ills created by decades of central planning. This heavy club will also be used to bludgeon other industries (tobacco, food) into submission, all in the name of health and “bending the healthcare cost curve downwards.”

Miracles of American Healthcare and the Mediocrity of a Single Payer System

Cancer

For those genuinely interested in maintaining the best medical system in the world, there are many factors well beyond the control of the healthcare system which determine an individual’s health. While US critics are fond of inaccurately attributing quality deficiencies of our healthcare system, rarely do we hear of the incredible success stories that have resulted from American medicine. It is more likely that we will hear about the wonders of Cuban medicine in mainstream media.

“Cancer” is the word that strikes fear into the heart of all when they sit in a physician’s office. Should it strike more fear for patients in different healthcare systems? Short answer, yes it should.

From an article entitled Socialism and Cancer, written by Dr. David Gratner, a Canadian, in The New Atlantis:

A working group associated with CONCORD (the European NGO Confederation for Relief and Development) recently completed a study comparing five-year cancer survival rates for several malignancies: breast cancer in women, prostate cancer in men, and colon and rectal cancer in both women and men. Combining the efforts of some hundred researchers and drawing data from almost two million cancer patients in thirty-one countries, the study, published in the August 2008 issue of The Lancet Oncology, is groundbreaking.

The CONCORD study finds that the United States leads in the field of breast and prostate cancer. France excelled in treating women’s colorectal cancer and Japan in men’s colorectal cancer. And the United States clearly leads other nations in overall survival. Regrettably, great discrepancies do exist between white and black Americans and among residents of different cities. That said, given a cancer diagnosis, patients overall do better here than anywhere else.

Why the difference in cancer care in the American healthcare system? The short answer is better access to screening (preventative care), specialists, medications (expensive chemotherapeutic agents) and technology. Yes, you read that right, we do cancer prevention better than any country on the planet.

Heart Disease

While cancer takes a considerable toll on residents of developed nations, heart disease remains the number one cause of death. There have been multiple developments in the field of cardiology and cardiothoracic surgery over the last several years. Significant advances include the introduction of cholesterol lowering medications, use of aspirin and other medications in the face of heart attack (MI), emergency percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) for unstable MIs, use of coronary stents and advances in by bypass surgery.
The British Medical Journal in 2006 published “National variations in the provision of cardiac services in the United Kingdom: second report of the British Cardiac Society Working Group, 2005.” The report is notable for several findings:

The UK cardiology workforce has grown significantly over the past five years (fig 4 , table 1 ). This has been most obvious in England (180 new posts advertised and appointed in the past three years), which initially had the fewest cardiologists per million population. Cardiologists are therefore now more equally distributed across the UK; nevertheless, staffing levels remain well below those reported in comparable western European countries and much lower than those recommended by the BCS workforce committee.

An analysis of audit data from the National Pacemaker Database for the period 1998–2002 has shown that the UK as a whole implants far fewer ICDs than most western European countries… Expert commentators have pointed out that these stark differences probably stem from limited access to cardiac catheterisation laboratories or a shortage of appropriately trained electrophysiologists or device specialists in many parts of the UK.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a complex form of pacemaker therapy that has been shown to improve the morbidity and mortality of selected patients with heart failure. The working group has found evidence of a very patchy uptake of this technology across the UK and believes that this reflects a shortage of the relevant expertise and difficulties in funding. Our first report identified alarmingly low coronary intervention rates in Wales.

Even allowing for the substantial number of patients who reside in North Wales but are referred to England for treatment, most forms of specialist activity in Wales remain worryingly low. There seem to be two reasons for this. Firstly, there have been difficulties in commissioning. The NSF for CHD has never been adequately funded in Wales and has become aspirational rather than pivotal in healthcare planning. Tertiary cardiac and other specialist services are commissioned nationally by Health Commission Wales; their budget has not been increased in line with the emergence of NICE-approved evidence-based technologies, and the new arrhythmia chapter to the NSF, which was introduced in England more than a year ago, is still to be approved in Wales. Secondly, the consultant cardiology workforce appears to comprise many physicians who have substantial general medical duties and relatively few specialists with skills in coronary intervention and electrophysiology. Unfortunately there seems little prospect of eliminating these inequalities in the near future.

This report should be required reading for misinformed supporters of nationalized health care. While there are some bright spots in the UK’s efforts to upgrade its cardiology services, the report overall is a critical look at a healthcare system struggling to support the cardiac needs of its citizens. For us it might be a look into the future.

Heart Surgery

Surgery remains a mainstay of therapy in severe cases of coronary disease. Most disconcerting is wait times for surgery for bypass cases. It is known that exceeding recommended deadlines for CABG, staged on the basis of a patient’s clinical condition, absolutely affect mortality. While coronary artery bypass surgery is serious business, it is not exempt from efforts by nationalized health care systems to push the envelope for waiting times.

The Canadian Medical Association published in 2008 “The Economic Cost of Wait Times in Canada.” This study evaluated the economic impact of having disabled Canadians wait to receive definitive medical care. Costs were reflected in loss of productivity, support payments and ongoing non-surgical medical care. The impact of just four conditions was examined. The analysis concluded that waits for these conditions cost Canada $14.8 billion in 2007. How long are the waits?

Waits are long. For cardiac patients not treated within the maximum recommended period, the average wait for coronary artery bypass surgery is over 3 months, more than double the maximum recommended wait. The situation for patients requiring an MRI is grave. The maximum recommended wait is 30 days, but the median patient still waits 56 days, while patients who do not get their scan within that maximum recommended period wait an average of 85 days.

From the vaunted Swedish single payer system comes a report published in 2005, in which the median wait times for patients classified as imperative (recommend surgery within 14 days), urgent (recommend surgery within 12 weeks) and routine (recommend surgery within 6 months) were analyzed.

The median waiting time for the 5453 patients that underwent CABG was 55 days (interquartile range 21 to 105 days). The median waiting time was 17 (7–39) days for the patients in the imperative group, 82 (49–133) days for the patients in the urgent group, and 100 (67–172) days for the patients in the routine group. A total of 3014 patients (55%) were operated on within the intended waiting time in their respective groups: 46% in the imperative group, 44% in the urgent group, and 77% in the routine group).

The authors, based on delays in surgery for patients at all acuity levels, were able to determine, unfortunately, the increase in deaths related to each month on the waiting list. From a previous analysis of this data the authors reported that “mortality risk increased with time after acceptance by 11% a month.”

There is no wait list for a CABG in the US. When Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi needed heart surgery in 2006, he didn’t use his nationalized health service. He flew to the Cleveland Clinic.

Other Surgeries

In Canada, wait times for surgery and other diagnostic procedures would be incomprehensible to most Americans. The major Canadian wait time metric is 90% wait time. This is the time at which 90% of cases are completed. Each province has set a goal for the 90% wait time for multiple procedures, and also carefully reports the actual 90% wait times for same procedures. The data is horrifying. For example, in the province of Ontario (includes Toronto), the provincial target for wait time for breast cancer surgery is 84 days. Fortunately, most centers achieve this benchmark, but the overall provincial wait time is still 38 days…for breast cancer surgery. While as inadequate as this may seem, it is clear breast cancer surgery has received the attention it deserves, especially when compared with prostate surgery...at least attention by Canadian standards. The provincial target for prostate surgery is a wait of 84 days. The actual overall wait is 89 days!

For overall cancer surgeries, the targeted wait time is 84 days in Ontario. The actual wait time outperforms the benchmark, however. In Ontario the average wait for a cancer surgery is 61 days. That would be two months waiting for a potentially curative surgery living with the fear that your cancer is growing.

Orthopedic surgeries are rarely life saving surgeries, but they have an enormous impact on productivity and quality of life. In Manitoba (Winnipeg), the median wait time for a hip replacement is 14 weeks. Not days, weeks, and that’s the median. At this point another 50% of replacements are still not complete. In New Brunswick the median wait time is 12 months. That would be a dream, however, for natives of Nova Scotia, living the glory of a single payer healthcare, where the 90% wait time for a hip replacement is 540 days. Nineteen months!

Well, it’s nationalized healthcare right. We have to ration services somewhere. Why not start with the aging population? While it might seem insensitive to some that we send early the message to the aging that they have a duty to die, surely a compassionate, government run, single payer system will make certain the children are cared for.

So how about children’s surgical services? The province of Ontario includes several well known Children’s facilities, most notably the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto. The 90% wait time for all pediatric surgeries in the province is 226 days! When one considers subcategories for more serious surgical conditions, the 90 day wait for neurosurgery is 71 days. The same wait for cardiovascular surgery is 206 days! There are not words to describe what I expect would be the reaction of anyone familiar with medical care, especially pediatric care, if the President told them the truth.

Diagnostic Tests

If the wait times for surgeries make you shudder, consider the fact that most surgical plans are formulated only after proper diagnostic testing is done. How long does it take to get these studies performed in a nationalized healthcare system?

A key imaging study performed regularly and with minimal delay in the US is MRI. In Ontario, the provincial target is a wait of 28 days, the actual wait time is 105 days! Well, maybe MRI is an expensive and overused technology whose value is totally overstated by greedy American hospitals and physicians. Okay, while many will point to the deficiencies of CT in numerous diagnostic areas, maybe the Canadians are just better at it. Surely that would mean easy access as well. The Ontario provincial benchmark for CT wait is 28 days, the actual wait time is 40 days!

So while it may seem that waiting 6-12 months for your hip replacement or 70 days for your child’s neurosurgical procedure is a lifetime, add in the time that has already passed as you waited for the imaging study required prior to a surgical intervention.

The National Health Service in Great Britain is no better. According to the Times (in 2005):

Ms Rachel King, 32, from Erith, Kent, was knocked down by a car in January. She suffered a broken collarbone, five broken ribs, a shoulder blade broken in three places and head injuries. She was in hospital for 17 days. After she suffered dizzy spells and reduced vision, her consultant referred her for an MRI scan. She said that she was appalled to receive the letter from King’s, saying that, because of “heavy demand”, the scan would be delayed.

What added insult to injury was the handwritten note on the bottom, which read: “If you want to go privately call 0845 6080991 for prices.”

When she did, the telephone was answered by King’s College Self Pay, who said that the cost of such a scan was £983, and she could have the procedure in a couple of weeks.

“It’s insulting” she said. “I was absolutely distraught. I need reassurance that the damage isn’t permanent. All I want is to know if it is going to get better.

“I still have falls, and I can’t return to work or drive. I’ve never signed on the dole in my life but I have had to now.”

King’s College Hospital said in a statement that it recognised that an 80-week wait for scans was unacceptable. It had recently received funds to expand its services, with the aim of getting waiting times down to 26 weeks by next March.

Ms King’s case is the starkest example yet of widespread delays in diagnostic tests across the health service. One in five trusts has waiting times of more than a year for MRI scans, and two in five have waits of more than six months.

A quarter of trusts said that 25 per cent or more of their scanning capacity was not used but lack of staff and resources prevent increased usage.

From the Telegraph:

An ex-serviceman is being left to go blind in one eye before the National Health Service will consider treating him for a condition affecting 250,000 people in the UK. Leslie Howard, 76, noticed problems with his right eye in November and was diagnosed with wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) two months ago.

His sight could be saved by a course of treatment involving new drugs which could cost more than £6,000 a year. But the local Primary Care Trust has told him it will only considering funding in his case once he has gone blind in one eye and developed wet AMD in the other.

A study sponsored by the Canadian Medical Association reports on the hidden cost of wait times:

Wait times in just 4 areas — joint replacement, sight restoration, cardiac bypass surgery and MRI scans — cost Canada $14.8 billion last year and lowered government revenues by $4.4 billion during the same period. The data, from a study done for the CMA by the Centre for Spatial Economics, were released in Toronto during a Jan. 15 speech by President Brian Day. “Our estimates are extremely conservative,” Day said. “Moreover, they do not include the costs, short and long term, of the deterioration that occurs while waiting. As an orthopedic surgeon, I have seen patients develop chronic and severe, irreversible damage, addiction to painkillers, and depression. And it need not happen.” Day looked back at the causes of today’s problems and ahead to potential solutions. He said causes range from decisions to cut medical school enrollment in the early 1990s to “self-serving” moves to protect the status quo.

Day also said Canada has fallen to 24th among OECD countries in physicians per capita, after ranking fourth in 1970. “How many of you have a doctor who is 50 or older? Who do you think will look after you when you are older and need medical attention?” Just to reach the OECD average of 3 physicians/1000 people, said Day, Canada would need to add 26 000 physicians, or more than 10 years’ output from its medical schools, at once. “It is not our role as physicians to passively accept the prolonged suffering of patients,” Day concluded. “We want to manage patients, not wait lists.”

The Canadians dedicate significant time and resources to trending and documenting waiting times in their medical system. While we all will be subjected to rationing and waiting periods that severely impact our health and welfare as we leap to a single payer system, the upside is that there will be more of the jobs created which the President makes best...government jobs. Armies of government agents charged with reporting on and examining time management in US healthcare will be put to work.

Medical Research

Stated simply, the United States puts more money into medical research than any nation on the planet. From Tyler Cowen in the NY Times in 2006:

In real terms, spending on American biomedical research and development (R&D) has doubled since 1994. By 2003, spending was up to $94.3 billion (there is no comparable number for Europe), with 57 percent of that coming from private industry. The National Institutes of Health’s current annual research budget is $28 billion, All European Union governments, in contrast, spent $3.7 billion in 2000, and since that time, Europe has not narrowed the research and development gap. America spends more on research and development over all and on drugs in particular, even though the United States has a smaller population than the core European Union countries. From 1989 to 2002, four times as much money was invested in private biotechnology companies in America than in Europe.

The 2009 NIH Budget alone is $40.9 billion. The pharmaceutical industry spent an additional $40 billion on R&D last year. America produces more than half of the health care technology products purchased globally. The Canadian 2009 budget allocates $5.1 (US) billion for all science and technology research. The Canadian Institute for Healthcare Research (CIHR) is budgeted $917 million for research this year. In Canada there are minimal contributions from the private sector given government regulation of the healthcare market. The UK through the Office of Strategic Coordination of Healthcare Research (OSCHR) has budgeted $2.75 (US) billion on medical research. US GDP is (was) 9.4 times larger than Canada’s and 5.3 times bigger than the UK’s.

One may argue the role of government support for scientific research of any sort, but the national commitments to medical research based on public funding alone are clear. As a percentage of GDP the US government spends four times as much as Canada and the UK on medical research. This does not include private funding for medical research, which at least doubles health research spending in America, dwarfing the commitments of other nations to research. Much as we militarily support the survival of the “great” European democracies, so do we support advances in their healthcare.

Quality Conclusions

While many have noted the so called “poor performance” of American health care with regard to the strawmen of infant mortality and life expectancy, what is rarely noted is that social and political experimentation in this nation over the last fifty years has created a Tower of Babel, not only linguistically but culturally. Health care is saddled with government mandated multilingual requirements and the need to support expensive interpreting services. We have an enslaved underclass in our inner cities who generations ago abdicated personal responsibility in favor of the snake oil peddled by statists who still find believers in the promise of a government sponsored utopia. We are bending under the weight of an illegal alien population lured here by open borders policies supported by politicians on both sides of the aisle.

The real wonder is that the American healthcare system functions at all. The fact that we achieve what we do is nothing short of miraculous, and is a tribute to the amazing men and women who are committed to health care service in all its facets.

“Worse outcomes” Mr. President? Compared to who? The President views a takeover of healthcare as one more brick in the wall of massive government expansion and central planning. The President assured us yesterday in Green Bay that he has no interest in a government run healthcare system. This would be the same President who now appoints the Board for Chrysler, GM and AIG.

The question is not what the motives of a statist President and liberal Congress are, those are clear. The President and the rubber stamp statists in the Congress tell us American medicine is in crisis, we have to reform now! Deja vu all over again...the banking industry, the housing industry, the auto industry. Next up, medicine and energy. Remember the battle cry of Rahm Emmanuel, "Never let a good crisis go to waste." The Alinsky corollary is to never miss an oppoortunity to create a good crisis. Team Obama is actively making the case that, despite the well meaning intentions of some, American medicine is failing the citizenry on all fronts.

The question is not what tactics the White House will employ in attempting a complete governement take over of healthcare. They will lie as they will diminish the amazing acheivements of Amercian medicine. They will ignore the terrible results of failing or failed governement run healthcare sytems across the globe. They will demean the benefits of capitalism and free markets which has made this country the greatest example of freedom and liberty the world has ever known. They will resort to the tactics which have successfully overwhlemed our nation and suckered a majority of Americans into believing they live in a hopelessly mediocre and greedy country whose success, if any, has been built on the exploitation of its citizenry.

Once again the President and Congress, creating an atmosphere of fear and chaos, will attempt to convince the American people that more government is the answer. We witnessed the President demanding "stimulus" legislation earlier in the year that "could not wait." In fact, the President, promising to be the most transparent President of all time, didn't even give legislators 24 hours to read a 1000 page spending bill! Americans and Congress yielded to our flim flam Presdient. The President, speaking about healthcare, has stated several times over the last week,"If we don't get it done this year, we're not going to get it done." Who says so? Why the rush? The rush is designed to prevent any reasoned discussion of the issues.

So the strategy in the White House is clear here. The important question is have Americans learned anything over the last year? Will Americans wake up and recognize what the President offers in trade for our current healthcare system? If we are willing to scratch beyond the rhetoric and look, we have clear previews. At home Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, Tricare and the VA are the 50% of our healthcare system the government currently operates. The government side of the house, if it were a business, would be bankrupt…much like Social Security. We only have to look across our border to see the full effects of government run healthcare.

Is this what we want as Americans? Do we want to wait a year for an MRI scan when we are experiencing dizzy spells and blurry vision 2 weeks after a car accident? Our healthcare system is imperfect but, when objectively examined, is the best healthcare system on the planet. There is a role for government in our health care system but history here and abroad demonstrates that it needs to be defined and limited. The current level of involvement has been devastating to our country, has destroyed the health care systems of other Western nations and has led to a stampede of nationalized health care systems trying to restore the private options they outlawed.

The reform required for American healthcare is not a government takeover, it is government divestment.

Wake Up America!!!!

Quaere Verum

How to Destroy a Healthcare System II

2009-06-08T20:53:00.000-07:00

At this point we are all able to recite the litany of healthcare horror talking points that foam from the mouths of rabid statists determined to do for healthcare what they have done for education, the auto industry, commercial air travelers, the banking industry, real estate, the environment, the Israelis, immigration etc. Space is somewhat prohibitive but a few of the more familiar refrains are worthy of deconstruction.

Myth #1: Medical Expenses are Responsible for the Majority of Personal Bankruptcies

Citing a 2005 study from Harvard the President regularly states that “half of all personal bankruptcies stem from medical expenses.” He has also stated, “"The cost of health care now causes a bankruptcy in America every 30 seconds. By the end of the year, it could cause 1.5 million Americans to lose their homes." This is pure political deception from the President. From Gary Langer at ABC News, the extrapolation of Harvard’s data to “a bankruptcy every 30 seconds,” which the President has mentioned on numerous occasions is from from a 2005 Washington Post piece by Prof. Elizabeth Warren, a co-author of the Harvard paper. Fact-check.org reports that even using Harvard’s numbers, it’s more like a bankruptcy every minute; indeed if you add up all bankrputcies in a year you barely get one every 30 seconds. (I've e-mailed Warren for comment.) But more to the point is that the Harvard data are clearly inflated, or at best, mischaracterized.

Even if one accepts fully the study cited, at best it supports a bankruptcy occurring only once every minute. While more dissembling from the great dissembler, the details are less critical than the fact that the whole concept is complete prevarication. Here is more from Gary Langer at ABC News, citing the response of Professor David Dranove from the Kellog School of Business at Northwestern published in the journal Health Affairs in 2006:

The Harvard report claims to measure the extent to which medical costs are “the cause” of bankruptcies. In reality its survey asked if these costs were “a reason” – potentially one of many – for such bankruptcies. Beyond those who gave medical costs as “a reason,” the Harvard researchers chose to add in any bankruptcy filers who had at least $1,000 in unreimbursed medical expenses in the previous two years. Given deductibles and copays, that’s a heck of a lot of people.

Moreover, Harvard’s definition of “medical” expenses includes situations that aren’t necessarily medical in common parlance, e.g., a gambling problem, or the death of a family member. If your main wage-earning spouse gets hit by a bus and dies, and you have to file, that’s included as a “medical bankruptcy.”

When I asked the lead author, Dr. David Himmelstein, about his definitions of medical bankruptcy back in 2005, he said, “It’s a judgment call,” and added that any death, for example, “to our mind is a medical event.”

A last problem was sampling: The Harvard researchers surveyed bankruptcy filers in five federal court districts accounting for 14 percent of bankruptcies nationally; projecting this to the other 86 percent is sketchy. Said Himmelstein: “Obviously the extrapolation is rough.”

In the end, based on the Dranove analysis of the Himmelstein study, perhaps 17% of bankruptcies might be linked to medical care costs. A more recent study by the Center for Studying Health System Change indicates that in 2007 about eight-tenths of one precent of Americans lived in families that filed for bankruptcy as a result of medical costs. This represents a total of 5% of bankruptcy cases. The authors noted that the vast majority of cases resulted from personal debt accumulation followed by unemployment.

Myth #2: Administrative Costs are Lower in Government Healthcare Plans

Candidate Obama’s health care proposal stated the following:

One-quarter of all medical spending goes to administrative and overhead costs…Insurance administrative overhead has been the fastest-growing component of health spending. The 2007 Commonwealth Fund Commission on a High Performance Health System reported that between 2000 and 2005, administrative overhead – including both administrative expenses and insurance industry profits – increased 12.0 percent per year, 3.4 percentage points faster than the average health expenditure growth of 8.6 percent.

Since his election the President has made similar references to the potential savings to be realized from a system that simplifies healthcare and reduces administrative costs. Recent Medicare Trustee reports describe such costs as 1.5 to 3% of total expenditures. For private health care, supporters of a government system report such costs at 10-20% of expenditures. Not discussed by same supporters are studies from the Council for Affordable Health Insurance that shows Medicare costs at 5.2% and private admin costs at 8.9%. Price Waterhouse Cooper has demonstrated that 6% of private healthcare fees go to overhead and that 86% of premiums go to the provision of actual medical care.

From the Heritage Foundation’s Walton Francis:

As the case of Medicare's anemic anti-fraud efforts painfully illustrates, less management and lower administrative costs do not necessarily mean the program is really less costly. Many argue that a public plan would cost less than private plans because its administrative costs are lower. This is a terribly misleading assertion and entirely an artifact of false comparisons that do not include all public and private costs. For example, assuming that fraud levels in Original Medicare are 10 percent of payments after spending 5 percent on administration, and in private plans fraud levels are reduced to 5 percent of payments after spending an extra 1 percent on administrative costs for effective fraud prevention (some think the differential is far greater), Original Medicare's failure to have effective fraud controls raises the denominator while lowering the numerator. On these numbers, for $100 of delivered care, Medicare seemingly spends $5 but actually spends $15 ($5 in administrative costs and $10 in fraud), while the private plan spends $11 ($5 plus $1 plus $5 lost to fraud) for the same $100 of delivered care. What is worse, the higher the actual fraud level, the "better" the Medicare administrative cost appears as a percentage of total spending.

So the purported administrative savings are entirely illusory when both numerator and denominator are appropriately adjusted.

There are many other missing or misrepresented costs in direct Medicare–private plan comparisons. For example, average enrollee medical costs in Medicare are roughly double those in the private sector simply because of enrollee age, so Medicare achieves per-enrollee economies of scale unavailable to any plan (including Medicare Extra) covering a less elderly population. Unlike private plans, Original Medicare does not cover most prescription drugs, small claims where administrative costs are much higher as a fraction of benefits. Government accounting does not assign the costs of capital to federal programs, or even estimate the economic welfare burden costs of using taxes to finance public programs.

Most important, the administrative costs that Medicare imposes on providers are not accounted for in government budgets. If a Medicare claim costs the government $2 to process, and the provider $3 to prepare, the administrative cost of a $100 claim is counted as $2, not $5, in the federal budget. Again, the purported lower cost of Medicare administration is overstated.

Some of these factors have been adjusted in comparative studies. But no existing study accounts for all these differences, or for some of the largest ones, such as fraud control.

Finally, government healthcare attempts to control cost via cost cutting or rationing. The inadequate payment schedules set by government entities results in hospitals, in order to maintain income, charging private insurers more for the same procedure. This cost shifting (well documented by the NY Times) from Medicare, Medicaid, and Tricare to private payers shifts an estimated $5 billion in California alone to the private sector. On top of this is the $45-50 billion annual bill for healthcare for the uninsured (illegal aliens) that hospitals subsidize via costs not to government programs (those rates are fixed), but by increased rates for private payers.

None of these factors are ever considered by those touting the administrative and overhead savings supposedly unique to government health plans. It really is an apples and oranges comparison. Government administrative healthcare costs are simply not visible.

Myth #3: The Magic of Health Information Technology

The belief that we can drive down healthcare costs with the magic of information technology is a concept espoused by President Obama, “We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost.” The Department of Health and Human Services received $167 billion in the National Recovery (Generational Theft) Act. A part of that funding is committed to, “Computerizing Americans’ health records, which will improve the quality of health care, reduce medical errors, and save health care costs.”

This all could be possible, and if so with proper planning should be done. American health care is comprised of a patchwork collection of proprietary electronic and paper systems with limited ability to interact and analyze data in a manner which would promote the greatest health care value. The question is not whether a revolution in healthcare technology would be advantageous? The question is why would we assume that the government is the best entity to create such a revolution, and more importantly, could government intervention actually hinder needed progress in our healthcare system?

As is often the case, history provides some insights to the real questions we should be considering in the discussion. In 1996 the government passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (the dreaded acronym is HIPAA and is familiar to all working in health care). The effective date of HIPAA legislation was 2001. HIPAA addressed three areas that were intended to revolutionize healthcare. First was portability and limitations on the ability of employers to exclude employees from insurance coverage based on existing conditions. The second was to guarantee patient privacy in the health care system. Third, HIPAA was to streamline communication across the healthcare industry.

From Scott Withrow, author of Managing Healthcare Compliance:

The final HIPAA privacy rule estimates net costs (not savings) of $17.5 billion over ten years (2003-2012). Industry estimates of the cost of HIPAA compliance exceeded the government's estimates by up to six-fold. The proposed security rule recognizes, but does not attempt to estimate, the significant costs to comply with the security procedures. HIPAA's only hope for achieving savings lies in standardization of electronic transactions. DHHS estimates were that electronic processing would generate savings of $1.00 per claim for health plans, $1.49 for physicians and $0.86 for hospitals. HHS assumed that electronic processing would grow with standardization, creating a total savings of $29.9 billion over ten years (2002 to 2011), before the offsetting costs of implementing privacy and security protections.

A major study of HIPAA impact was undertaken by the American Hospital Association (AHA). Amongst the findings was this:

Given that the five major hospital system vendors cannot currently provide all of the functionality implied by the proposed HIPAA privacy rule, hospitals could require more significant upgrades, potentially making the information system costs substantially higher.”

Substantially higher would be higher than the $22.5 billion cost identified in the study. The DHHS estimated that HIPAA implementation would cost $3.8 billion. Their analysis amazingly did not include the most costly HIPAA provisions. From the AHA Report:

By excluding from its impact analysis the most costly and burdensome provisions of HIPAA privacy on providers (such as the minimum necessary use standard, the monitoring of business partners and state law contracting), HHS’ projected 5-year total cost of $3.8 billion to all covered entities (health plans, providers and clearinghouses) cannot be considered comprehensive.

Many of HHS’ cost calculations are derived from dollar and percentage numbers that lack a stated or logical source, and some specific assumptions appear inappropriate. Calculations are not based on an approach that reflects the likely tactical and operational approach that hospitals will take to comply.

HHS assumes an alignment in the timing of the HIPAA privacy rule with that of other HIPAA components that will not likely occur. HHS grossly underestimates the likely costs of the technical requirements.

Eight years after implementation the health care industry is still reeling from and paying for the cost of HIPAA. From Sally Pipes, health economist, in The Top Ten Myths of American Health Care:

There are currently 12 different federal agencies with overlapping oversight when it comes to health information technology (HIT). The dirty dozen already produces a mountain of red tape…This is hardly the best way to spur HIT innovation. With all these different governing bodies private IT companies have an even harder time creating solutions because their products need to comply with a morass of regulations.

Some postulate a partnership between government initiative and private know how. Its one thing for an HIT product to succeed as a result of competition in the marketplace; its quite another for an HIT product to be the outcome of complying with complex government mandated specifications.

We don’t need government to bribe companies to innovate. The $2.3 trillion health care marketplace is already an enormous opportunity for the HIT sector and private companies realize this. Google has announced a service that will allow people to track and monitor their health records.

Somewhere down the road advancements in HIT may truly revolutionize medicine. And make it more affordable. Its already starting to happen. The irony is that by trying to speed up HIT innovation, government may end up slowing it down and costing taxpayers a boatload of money in the process.

Myth #4: Big Pharma is Killing American Healthcare

On the campaign trail, President Obama made clear his feelings about one of his pet peeves…profit:

Another, more controversial area we need to look at is how much of our health care spending is going toward the record-breaking profits earned by the drug and health care industry. It's perfectly understandable for a corporation to try and make a profit, but when those profits are soaring higher and higher each year while millions lose their coverage and premiums skyrocket, we have a responsibility to ask why.

The free market, capitalism and profit are what have made this nation great and unique. The net effect of individual pursuit of prosperity has been the evolution of a nation which has been an economic tour de force unsurpassed in human history. The innovation nurtured by the free market has led to some of the greatest advancements in the history of humankind…light bulb, assembly line production, automobile, steam boat, airplane, vulcanized rubber, telephone and cell phone, air conditioning, MRI scanner, and computer operating systems…to name a few. All of these efforts have been enormously profitable.

While American industry is on increasingly unstable ground, we continue to lead the world in innovation. We are in this position because those innovations, at least for the moment, remain profitable. Statements from those making the case for more government health care cite the profit margins of leading industry sectors as a remedial element in the healthcare debate.

Health care is expensive, so goes the argument, because of profits being generated by these sectors. The demagoguery in this debate focuses on “Big Pharma”. There’s always a “big something” bent on our destruction in the name of the unspeakable notion of "profit." The "Bigs", “Big Oil” or “Big Banking” or “Big Energy” or "Big Tobacco" are all committed to our ruin and their own success. “Big” in liberalspeak is a synonym for “profitable, despicable and taxable." When "Big" is spoken, brace yourself, the demagoguery is about to begin.

One might assume Big Pharma was the most profitable industry sector in the nation based on the demonizing rhetoric promulgated by President Obama and his staff. In fact it was the third most profitable sector in 2008 according to Fortune Magazine. Network and Other Communications Equipment was number one, followed by Internet Services and Retailing sectors at number two. These sectors generated profits of 20.4 and 19.4% respectively. How about some individual companies? Microsoft, a member of the Software sector which didn’t even make the top ten for profitable industry sectors, had profits of $17 billion or 18%. If Microsoft were a pharmaceutical firm, they would have led all companies in profit. We don’t hear much, however, about “Big Networking” or “Big Internet” or “Big Software” right now. If I were them, though, I would be very nervous.

The President, ala Saul Alinsky, has aggressively attempted to isolate, freeze, demonize and attack the pharmaceutical industry. The welfare of the citizenry would be best served by an honest discussion of the economics of drug costing and the value many, admittedly not all, contribute to ours and the world’s health. Rather than chasing after profitable and valuable companies like villagers with pitchforks after Frankenstein (H/T to The Absurd Report), lets explore the facts.

In 2007 the US spent $286 billion on prescription drugs. As Sally Pipes reports, that is more than the entire GDP of Ireland. Drug spending is a greater portion of healthcare than ever, currently responsible for 10-12% of healthcare costs. The simple fact, however, is that we are living longer than ever before, we are more obese than we ever were, and as a result chronic disease is more prevalent.

Given the latter two how is the former possible? The pharmaceutical industry is one of the reasons. When the average life expectancy in 1940 was 62, cancers, heart disease, stroke and diabetes were less

common concerns, and less well understood. In 1970 the average life expectancy was 71, it is now 78. As we live longer and add obesity as an increasing complication, the development of chronic diseases requiring a myriad of potential management approaches is unavoidable… unless we decide that an additional seven years of life has no value. The health needs of an increasingly aged and expanding population are different, more intense and if we intend to value life and the quality most Americans appreciate as a result of their added years, we will need the pharmaceutical industry.

The simple choice in many cases is would you rather pay for Lipitor or undergo an emergency coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery?While drug costs are enormous, numerous studies document that spending on a variety of medications (to treat diabetes, hypertension, asthma, depression and elevated cholesterol) can provide a net reduction in healthcare costs. More upcoming about the role American drug research pioneers play not only in supporting the quality of American healthcare, but how they support medical quality the world over.

Do newer, more expensive drugs always add to this potential benefit of medical therapy. The answer is no. Have drug companies pursued development of look alike drugs given upcoming patent expirations in order to maintain profit in the market? Yes. The answer to such behavior, however, is not to demonize an industry which has added years to the lives of millions around the world.

So why are drugs so expensive? And only in America? How come those nationalized systems get cheaper drugs? Why don’t we purchase our medications from overseas? That’s the ticket, we’ll teach those evil pharmaceutical executives? This approach was proposed by both John McCain and Barrack Obama during the election. Punish these uniquely repulsive, heartless individuals.

Would that such a strategy would fix the problem. It won’t. First off, while ideologues may choose to believe it, it is unlikely that pharmaceutical executives are any greedier than Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, George Soros, T. Boone Pickens, Sergey Brin, Al Gore, Oprah Winfrey, Tiger Woods or Jay-Z. And there’s a big difference. The successful pharma corporations have produced products which have directly and regularly improved our own life or the life of someone we care deeply about. Traditionally America has begrudged no one the opportunity to succeed and profit. In fact, that some of the individuals noted above can be so successful is a tribute to this country and should give everyone hope that they are capable of greatness. So lets assume rational people can accept that while yes, there may be some in the drug industry who are more interested in profit than the well being of Americans, they are a minority.

Drugs are expensive because they cost a lot to develop. For every 5000 compounds tested, five will make it to clinical trials. Estimates vary but bringing a drug from concept through the animal and then human clinical trials required for FDA approval takes 5-15 years. At any given time there are 2000-3000 new drugs undergoing FDA review for thousands of medical conditions. From Sally Pipes, “Of course many of these drugs will never make it to patients, but these drugs offer hope to the countless individuals who suffer from cancer, Alzheimers, and other debilitating and life threatening diseases.” The cost of this process is estimated at between $500 million and $1.3 billion per drug. Money for drug research and development comes from investors. If pharmaceutical companies are not attractive investment opportunities, investors will invest elsewhere.

If the cost is high, so are the rewards. There clearly are monetary benefits that accrue to investors (that would be many of us) in successful pharmaceutical companies. The fact that average Americans share in the success of drug companies through a variety of investing vehicles is almost as rarely mentioned in these debates as is the effect of human lives saved.

As for overseas, brand name drugs are cheaper there. In Canada, prices may be up to 70% cheaper than in the US. Tapping into the Canadian markets would seem to be an obvious solution to our drug cost problem, or is it? The reason many drugs are cheaper overseas is that all government run health systems have placed price controls on prescription drugs. They have to do this. Otherwise they would be unable to sustain and fund their health care systems. Back to Sally Pipes, who hails from Canada:

In Canada, an agency called the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board ensures that drug prices are not excessive. This board strictly monitors the prices at which manufacturers may sell drugs to wholesalers and pharmacies, and the price at which pharmacies may sell to the public.

To save funds Canadian health officials routinely delay the approval of new and more expensive drugs. After the drug is approved and a price set, the provincial governments decide whether to put it on the formularies.

A report from the Fraser Institute, an independent non-partisan research and educational organization based in Canada, puts it succinctly:

Health Canada takes up to a year to approve new medicines as safe and effective. And while private insurance plans will immediately cover those medicines, the provinces can take up to another year to decide if they will pay for the same drugs," said Brett Skinner, Fraser Institute Director of Health, Pharmaceutical and Insurance Policy Research and author of Access Delayed, Access Denied: Waiting For New Medicines in Canada.

That additional one year delay keeps these new medicines out of reach for the one-third of Canadians who rely on provincial drug plans.

The study shows how two separate stages of Canada's drug approval process contribute to delays or result in new drugs being unavailable for some patients. First, Health Canada must certify a drug is safe and effective for public use, then provincial governments must decide if the drug will be covered by public health plans.

On average, Health Canada took 380 days to approve new drugs for sale, while the provinces added another 323 days to approve new drugs for coverage under provincial drug plans in 2006. This is an improvement from the waits recorded in 2004 when Health Canada took an average of 548 days and the provinces took 546 days to approve new prescription drugs, a total of 1,094 days or almost three years.

The study also found that while delays for access to new prescription drugs remain unnecessarily long, the provinces are also increasingly denying coverage for many new prescription drugs altogether.

According to 2006 data, only 39 per cent of new drugs approved by Health Canada were being fully reimbursed by provincial drug plans, a drop from the 44 per cent that were being fully reimbursed in 2004.

“Canadian patients are facing lengthy delays for government permission to get new medicines and then provincial drug plans aren't covering the costs of many new medicines," Skinner said.

"This is in direct contrast to most private insurance plans which cover 100 per cent of all new drugs certified by Health Canada. Ultimately, public drug plans cover less than half of the drugs covered under private sector insurance plans."

Why? Delays may cost lives, but they save the system money.

A number of brand name drugs that are price controlled are cheaper abroad; but there is no generic market and many new and effective drugs are not approved. Many inexpensive drugs here cost more overseas because there are no generic products in other nations. Generics account for 65% of the drug market in the US. The reason generics are cheaper here…a thriving free market which encourages competition…unlike the economic environment in Europe or Canada. With prices already controlled to less than profitable levels there is no profit for generics in these systems. The Wal-Mart $4 generic drug plan will not be available in Toronto, London, or Brussels any time soon.

So government run programs ration and offer a more limited menu of medications. Can’t we still import the brand name drugs that they sell at 50% discounts?

The larger question is why do drug companies even agree to ship drugs to these nations which mandate unprofitable price controls? There are two reasons. First, as long as America supports the majority of drug costs, companies can afford to sell their products at a discounted rate to smaller markets and maintain a profit margin. If we embarked on a large program of drug reimportation to the US, the drug companies would be forced to make a decision. Accept a significant reduction in revenue or forgo the Canadian market. In other words, just as we have militarily, the US supports the pharmaceutical needs of the rest of the world.

Why don’t drug companies demand higher reimbursement rates and refuse to ship to nations with draconian price controls? One phrase…patent theft. If a manufacturer were unwilling to sell its products at the government determined price, the country could, in some cases, allow a generic manufacturer to produce and sell a copy without the approval of the patent holder.

Myth #5: Disease Prevention, the Untapped Reservoir of Health Savings

The administration, in discussing methods to reduce healthcare costs, is fond of talking about the need to shift our focus from disease treatment to prevention.

From President Obama during the campaign:

We have to ask what we can do to provide more Americans with preventative care, which would mean fewer doctor's visits and less cost down the road.

Preventative care and population health have great potential to improve overall health and quality of life. Preventative care has repeatedly been shown, however, to increase healthcare expenditures. Living longer means more healthcare costs, albeit at a later point in life for many of us. The cold, hard truth is that healthcare is cheaper if a citizen dies. From the New England Journal of Medicine during the 2008 campaign:

Sweeping statements about the cost-saving potential of prevention,however, are overreaching. Studies have concluded that preventingillness can in some cases save money but in other cases canadd to health care costs.

Our findings suggest that the broad generalizations made bymany presidential candidates can be misleading. These statementsconvey the message that substantial resources can be saved throughprevention. Although some preventive measures do save money,the vast majority reviewed in the health economics literaturedo not. Careful analysis of the costs and benefits of specificinterventions, rather than broad generalizations, is critical.Such analysis could identify not only cost-saving preventivemeasures but also preventive measures that deliver substantialhealth benefits relative to their net costs; this analysis couldalso identify treatments that are cost-saving or highly efficient(i.e., cost-effective).

We should pursue disease prevention strategies but understand that preventative care is similar to health information technology. We should carefully consider who guides its development, and implementation but it is pure deceit to promise that investing in these strategies offers a treasure trove of healthcare cost savings.

It is difficult to find any mention of merit in our current healthcare system in the rhetoric of those supporting a single payer, government run health system. "Big Healthcare", like all the other “Bigs”, refers to the collective of pharmaceutical companies, private insurers, private healthcare purchasers and physician groups more interested in profit than serving citizens. What the single payer proponents conveniently ignore is the fact that a majority of our current system is government health care. It is Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, Tricare and the VA.

Based on 2008 WHO data, U.S. government programs accounted for over 45% of US health care expenditures. This makes the U.S. government the largest insurer in the nation. We are well down the road to a government system already. What we are being asked to accept is increasing doses the same. Reasonably observant individuals might notice that the increasing cost and inefficiencies of our health system track with increasing government involvement and regulation of our health care system. In the Wonderland of Barrack Obama things are never what we have traditionally been taught, but it seems pretty clear that our increasing health system difficulties are more attributable to “Big Government”, not “Big Healthcare”.

Are there ways to reduce cost in the US healthcare system and retain value? Yes.

Is the President’s plan the answer to healthcare costs? No.

Simply put by Robert Moffit at the Heritage Foundation, the President’s proposal offers “hopeful savings and costly change.”

Part III of "How to Destroy a Healthcare System" will review two other important criticisms of our current system...quality and access. This exercise will continue then with a dissection of the propoganda surrounding the Obama Health Care plan and a discussion of what it will mean to patients, families, providers and employers. Then we can consider real opportunities to improve what absolutely is, by any honest reckoning, the best healthcare system in the world.

Quaere Verum

How to Destroy a Healthcare System (Part I)

2009-06-08T05:30:00.000-07:00

When did this nation stop believing in capitalism and free markets and start believing that government was the answer to all our problems? The Founders saw government as a necessary evil, but one that required restriction and limitation. It appears we have gone from the invisible hand to the beneficent hand, to talk to the hand and now the back of the hand.

Why would any American presume that the matter of their healthcare could best be managed by the federal government? Why would any thoughtful individual trust that the most personal of decisions is best made by the state and federal authorities who brought us the IRS, the Katrina debacle, a bankrupt Medicare and Medicaid system, an insolvent social security system, failed public education, the Department of Motor Vehicles, 20 million illegal aliens and the inept INS, a cap and trade plan built on pseudo-science that will further bankrupt an economy on life support, the destruction and decimation of the inner cities (via the Not So Great Society programs) and the TSA.

No one would deny that our healthcare system is imperfect, especially those of us who work in it. That doesn’t mean that we should abandon the system of care people the world over travel here for. The primary criticisms of cost, quality and access are fair criticisms. They deserve examination which extends beyond the demagoguery of those who would double down on the failed socialist medical experiments of Western Europe and Canada in societies which are much smaller and far less diverse than our own. Doubling down is exactly what the President proposes. The government already is responsible for the majority of the healthcare delivered in America. Government is a massive part of the current problem. If you like Medicare and Medicaid, you will love Obamacare.

This will be a multi-part effort to explore the rhetoric driving the left’s determination to present the state as the only solution for another in the endless maladies which plagues this wretched nation infected by liberty and capitalism, an analysis of what President Obama truly proposes as his alternative to our current system, and finally a discussion of solutions, never seriously considered by the Obama Administration, which would enhance for all the significant value our current system already provides.

Healthcare Costs Too Much

Yes, American healthcare costs more than the fabled nationalized systems of some other nations, but to the inquiring consumer the question should be less one of expense than one of value. Spending at 17% of GDP certainly is significant, but lets put it in context.

Federal, state and local government now write annual checks approximating 41% of GDP. This figure, based on OMB data, details government spending of $6.1 trillion dollars in a nation whose GDP is $14.1 trillion. The only other comparable period of spending occurred during WW II.

Spending will go higher if the Obama health plan moves forward. While few seem interested, the President tells us he needs to spend $600 billion as a “down payment” for his health care program over the next ten years. This is above and beyond the $200 billion already approved this year in the “stimulus” bill (generational theft act) that earmarked funds for SCHIP, Medicaid, the creation of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, and “investments” in information technology. (Yes, you read correctly, this is “stimulus money” approved under the guise of putting people back to work.) If only we all lived in the magical world of our President where more spending is the answer to too much spending.

A digression, but this is related to the question of the cost of healthcare. The Obama team is also working feverishly on an “energy plan”. It is the snake oil offered as an elixir for the hoax that is global warming…errr…climate change. Based on the ever changing con that man, not nature, is responsible for global warming (snow in North Dakota in June, cooling over the last decade, revising past temperature records), make that man made climate change, the administration, with multiple Congressional dupes in tow, including John McCain, has designated CO2 a pollutant. And what do we do with pollutants (and healthcare, and energy, and education, and business, and car makers, and…you get the picture)…we regulate! We will control CO2 emissions through cap and trade legislation! Are you serious? Yes we are. We will sell vouchers for CO2 emissions to businesses and they will pay for their CO2 emissions.

Memo to the President, businesses will pass those costs on to consumers in the form of increased prices for energy and a host of other goods.

Hang in there, this is about healthcare. Cap and tax comes with a huge cost in taxes that will be paid for initially by energy producers and then passed on to consumers. The net effect estimated by CBO is a reduction in GDP of 0.3 to 0.5%. Others predict the impact will be greater, approaching 1% of GDP. That will automatically increase government spending as percentage GDP.

So what about healthcare costs? Well, the President has to fund his healthcare plan. He had hoped to spend all the money he takes from you under cap and trade (approximately $3900 per family per year) and use it to pay for his healthcare reform. Unfortunately, as of this weekend, the President reported that the $600 billion he planned on coming in from cap and trade will not be enough to support the incredible cost cutting healthcare system he is bringing you. He will need to consider taxes on the wealthy, reducing deductions for mortgage interest and charitable donations. When gas is $5/gallon and electricity costs reach the levels the President promised you prior to the election (“Under my plan of a cap and trade system electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket, even, you know, regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad, because I'm capping greenhouse gases, coal powered plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.”), remember you are doing your patriotic duty. Take comfort from the scholar in residence at the White House, Joe Biden, “Time to be patriotic ... time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut." Thanks Joe.

In 1950 healthcare costs were 5% of GDP. Per the CBO, government spending in 1950 was 23% of GDP. Yes a 250% rise in relative heath care spending based on GDP, to 17%, over 60 years is concerning, but why don’t we hear similar concerns about a near 200% rise in government GDP spending?

All these GDP numbers are impressive, but what does the average US household pay out of pocket for healthcare? As percentages of our 2007 national household budgets, according to the US Department of Labor, we spent 34.1% on housing, 17.6% on transportation, 12.4% on food (5.4% on food away from home), 5.7% on healthcare, 5.4% on entertainment, 3.8% on clothing, 0.9% on alcohol, and 0.7% on tobacco products. Interestingly, and incorrectly, the White House website reports “Americans spend more on health care than on housing or food.” The President needs to check with the Department of Labor.

The message from those advocating nationalized healthcare is that healthcare is a right, much as the government attempted to make home ownership a right (via Fannie, Freddie, and the community Reinvestment Act). That worked out well.

Most of us consider food, clothing and transportation a necessity for survival. How about government issue food or clothing or automobiles? Well never mind that last one. We will have Obama Motors but is anyone really looking forward to bouncing around in the 1.1 Liter Marxi Clown Car?

The point is, right now, the average household spends more on entertainment than healthcare. The average household spends more on eating out, alcohol and tobacco than they do on healthcare. This is not everyone mind you, it is the average American household based on Department of Labor statistics. So where is the outrage over the 13.6-percent increase in entertainment spending in 2007?

Lets break that down. In 2007, expenditures for pets, toys, hobbies, and playground equipment rose by 35.9 percent. When will the President talk about the cost of tickets at Yankee stadium? Who will control Big Baseball? Also under the category of entertainment come pets. According to the Department of Labor this massive burden levied on American households was due to a large increase in spending on pet purchases, supplies, and medicine.

As a Memorial Day offering, President Obama once again opened the flood gates of the bottomless reservoir of hope he revealed during his campaign and encouraged us with the unbridled optimism which suffuses his views of America:

“Well, we are out of money now. We are operating in deep deficits, not caused by any decisions we’ve made on health care so far. This is a consequence of the crisis that we’ve seen and in fact our failure to make some good decisions on health care over the last several decades….If we don’t reduce long-term health care inflation substantially, we can’t get control of the deficit.”

Aside from his failure to comprehend that it is unlikely that the deficit can be controlled by quadrupling it in your first 120 days in office, President Obama has a point. Healthcare costs are unsustainable. Unfortunately it is not necessarily human health care costs. Unspoken in the healthcare debate is the fact that, unlike their Great Depression counterparts, today’s Americans are straining under the burden of caring for their pets. Per the American Veterinary Association Americans keep 164,000,000 dogs, cats and birds kept as pets. In 2004 only 3% of these pets were insured. While 10% of American citizens uninsured for a year is worrisome, it pales in comparison to the 97% of domestic dogs, cats and birds whom are uninsured. The average annual medical costs for a dog or cat is $200. Food aside, Americans are paying $30 billion annually for pet healthcare. Thirty billion dollars!

Where is the outcry for universal pet coverage? Why is there no discussion of price controls for big animal pharma? President Obama promised hope for all, when will he speak for the animals and there beleaguered owners? American humans, illegal or not, will be cared for when they show up at an emergency room. That is not the case for your neighbor’s adorable mutt or the charming Tabby down the street. There is no Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) for animals. Have we all become speciests?!

Tongue in cheek, yes, but only by half. Are there other target rich environments in the federal and private spending world beyond healthcare that threaten our economy? Yes there are. Would it be worthwhile pursuing opportunities to reduce cost in our current healthcare system? Yes it would…if the overall value is maintained. The President, however, is convinced, and has convinced much of the nation, that healthcare reform, the above facts aside, is the critical area requiring government intervention. He regularly regales us with several talking points to make his case that healthcare costs are obviously outrageous and that government is the answer to reigning things in.

A discussion of the top five on the Obama list of healthcare cost myths in the next installment.

Quaere Verum

Et Tu, America?

2009-06-02T07:58:00.000-07:00

We all as Americans should be hanging our heads in shame right now. Under the skilled and nuanced leadership of the Obama administration we have abandoned the only friend and ally we have ever had in the Middle East. Over the last several months President Obama has attemepted to bully Israel into a suicidal two state solution proposed by Arab nations openly committed to Israel's destruction, has further opened OUR coffers to murderous Palestinians incapable of agreeing on only one thing...the need to exterminate Jews, has greeted the Saudi king on bended knee, and will repeat his oath of fealty this week as he travels to Saudi Arabia and then Cairo to deliver a speech to the Muslim world.

A State Department cable sent last week to all U.S. embassies and consulates encouraged U.S. diplomats to invite their Iranian counterparts to attend Fourth of July festivities. Today, in a BBC interview, President Obama stated when asked about Iran acquiring nuclear capability, "Without going into specifics, what I do believe is that Iran has legitimate energy concerns, legitimate aspirations."

Sweet dhimmitude descends on cataleptic Americans who actually believe that, despite $11 trillion dollars in debt, rising inflation and energy prices, a President whose energy program is building clown cars and windmills, and a government whose appetite for more power is insatiable, we are a nation on the road to economic recovery. Israel, however, faces a starker reality which America, over the last thirty years, has abetted and created.

We are entering a new era, however, in the decline of American exceptionalism. America has now embarked on the open abandonment of its commitment to freedom and liberty, not only here at home but abroad. Much as Churchill rallied Britain to face down the Nazi onslaught, the fate of a people, and perhaps the world, will again be on the shoulders of one courageous man, Binyamin Netanyahu. Disgracefully, it appears he will not have the support Churchill received from an America that once understood evil. It is becoming increasingly obvious to even the most suicidal of Jewish apologists that the Israelis have two choices. Exit the trains and enter the gas chambers quietly or stand and fight. It is unlikely that Israelis are interested in a remake of the Holocaust.

This is how Israelis see the world:

Welcome to Our Reality
Jun. 1, 2009

Say you live in any one of these cities: Oslo, Berlin, Paris, Madrid, Amsterdam, Edinburgh, London, Stockholm or Washington, and at 11 a.m. today the war siren goes off. You've been told it's just a drill - your city isn't being attacked by ballistic missiles or long-range rockets. Your country neither plans to attack anyone, nor is there intelligence indicating it is the target of imminent attack.

Still, the wailing siren - a curiously anachronistic instrument for the 21st century - is upsetting. You do as you're told and seek out a nearby bomb shelter, or enter the reinforced-concrete room common in homes built since the 1990s.

At work, there is some gallows humor as colleagues file into the bomb shelter. At school, your children will head into the shelters with their teachers. It may strike you that the authorities were imprudent in collecting for refurbishment those cardboard boxes with their plastic shoulder-straps containing gas masks and a chemical-warfare antidote.

Of course, if you do live in any of the above-mentioned capitals, this scenario is beyond far-fetched. There are no shelters. No safe rooms. No gas masks.

No one is threatening to wipe Sweden, Germany or Scotland - or any of the others - off the map. There are no Sajil II ballistic missiles aimed your way. Your country didn't absorb 5,000 rocket hits in the course of a single summer. It doesn't share a border with a country that deploys Scud D missiles. And the notion that missiles laden with WMDs could explode over your head is simply beyond imagination.

Though Muslim extremists struck in Spain, Britain and the United States, the sense that any further danger looms is not widespread. That's why no one undergoes a security check to enter a supermarket, department store or cinema. And why armed guards are not posted outside schools.

WE ISRAELIS live in a very different reality.

That truth was brought home in remarks Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu made at Sunday's cabinet meeting regarding Turning Point 3 - the week-long nationwide emergency drill.

The exercise is "routine," something the country does annually, he said, adding that it "reflects the special way in which we lead our lives - which, upon reflection, is not all that routine."

Want to understand the Israeli psyche? Consider that when our country was born, those with whom we sought to share this land rejected our right to exist. Though we have created a technologically advanced, Western-oriented country, and made peace with Egypt and Jordan, our "normality" still demands that a high-school graduate head not to university or for a gap year, but to basic training.

Throughout the 1950s and 1960s (when there were no settlements and no "occupation") our homeland was under attack anyway. A single example: On March 17, 1954, gunmen ambushed an Eilat-Tel Aviv commuter bus. First they murdered the driver, then they proceeded to shoot the passengers, one by one.

In the 1970s, we fought off a surprise attack on our most solemn holy day - after having withstood a war of attrition. In the 1980s, we fought bitter wars in Lebanon to fend off attacks against our northern border.

In the 1990s, we signed the Oslo Accords with the Palestinian leadership. And since then? More Israelis have been murdered by terrorists than ever before.

Efforts to reach an accommodation with a violently fragmented Palestinian polity have thus far proven fruitless. The "moderates" appear no less unyielding than the fanatics.

We caught the Syrians, to our north, building a clandestine nuclear facility under North Korean tutelage. They make no secret about hosting Hamas's politburo, pressuring it to resist even a tactical timeout in its anti-Israel belligerency.

Hizbullah dominates Lebanese affairs and provides Iran with shock-troops along our border.

Then there is Iran, which may have enriched enough uranium to manufacture a nuclear bomb by year's end. Even as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatens our obliteration, he insists that the Nazis did not systematically destroy European Jewry. Yet he is feted at UN forums, while Europeans shamelessly subsidize trade with his country.

That is our reality. It's the one many of us will be contemplating at 11 a.m. today, when the siren sounds.

THE JERUSALEM POST

Pray for Us. Pray for Israel.

Quaere Verum

Defining Terrorism and Capitalizing on Crisis

2009-05-31T21:28:00.000-07:00

George Tiller, a Kansas physician whose Women's Health Care Services clinic in Witchita has been one of only three clinics in the United States that performs late-term abortions, was murdered today in the lobby of his church. The gunmen is in custody. Tiller was previously survived a shooting in 1993 by an anti-abortion assailant. A family practitioner by training, Tiller's practice has been devoted to abortion since the late 1970s. Tiller’s website reports "more experience in late abortion than anyone else." The website also documents his experience in partial birth abortions, citing that over 60,000 such procedures have been performed in his clinic.

Tiller recently was tried on 19 misdemeanor counts stemming from charges that he broke Kansas law requiring approval from two physicians that a late term abortion was medically indicated. Tiller had hired Dr. Ann Neuhaus to serve as his regular second opinion in such cases. He was acquitted of the charges which all related to Tiller having an improper financial arrangement with Dr. Neuhaus. From Audrey Barris at The Christian Post, “Despite the acquittal, the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts released a statement saying it plans to move forward with a disciplinary petition the board filed against Tiller last December. The petition includes 11 allegations, including performing an abortion on a fetus that was viable without having a documented referral from another physician not legally or financially affiliated with him; unprofessional or dishonorable conduct or professional incompetency; and commitment of acts likely to deceive, defraud or harm the public.”

George Tiller was an evil man, but no one I know would have wished him killed and all leadership groups in the pro-life movement have condemned his murder.

It’s been 11 years since Eric Rudolph bombed a Birmingham abortion clinic and Dr. Barnett Slepian was killed in Buffalo. There have been no other episodes of assault on abortion providers reported by the National Abortion Federation since then. That hasn't stopped abortion supporters from painting pro-life supporters with the broad brush. From Huffington Post today, a comment representative of hundreds, "These home-grown right-wing extremists pose the most serious terrorist threat that we face." Yes, despite ongoing attacks and the killing of 2974 by Muslim terrorists on September 11th, pro-life extremists, responsible for the murders of possibly eight individuals working at abortion clinics over the 36 year history of the Roe decision, are absolutely the greatest terrorist threat this nation faces.

Unfortunately we can't get opinions of the 16,000,000 unborn infants aborted since the first of seven reprehensible murders of abortion clinic staff occurred in 1993. I suspect that these infants might differ with the Huff Po crowd, however, regarding the efforts of the pro-life movement. Millions of pro-life supporters are committed to peaceful, legal activities which have protected many human lives from the threats of abortion, infanticide, and euthnasaia. Nevertheless, the Tiller murder will be cited as prima-facie evidence by liberals and abortion supporters that the pro-life movement is home for hateful, dangerous domestic terrorist types.

While he did rescind the Mexico City policy, President Obama has had little to say specifically about the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) since assuming office, though I suspect few believe he has forgotten his pre-election promise to Planned Parenthood. On his much vaunted One Hundred Days Press Conference the President stated:

Now, the Freedom of Choice Act is not highest legislative priority. I believe that women should have the right to choose. But I think that the most important thing we can do to tamp down some of the anger surrounding this issue is to focus on those areas that we can agree on. And that's — that's where I'm going to focus.

In his Notre Dame speech the President, ala Saul Alinsky, speaking at what years ago had been a center of American Catholicism, did his level best to polarize Catholics. Church teaching clearly states that abortion is a staggering evil, but the President knows that a significant number of American Catholics have been persuaded that the the seamless garment of social justice is an equally acceptable, more reasoned and evolved approach to meeting the faith demands of Catholicism. Unfortunately it requires abandonding the Magisterium and key elements of the Catholic faith.

At Notre Dame the President said:

The question then…the question then is how do we work through these conflicts? Is it possible for us to join hands in common effort? As citizens of a vibrant and varied democracy, how do we engage in vigorous debate? How does each of us remain firm in our principles, and fight for what we consider right, without, as Father John said, demonizing those with just as strongly held convictions on the other side?

It is very possible that a pro-life supporter, absolutely distraught with the recent verdict in the Tiller case and Tiller's ability to continue an abortion practice which specializes in late term abortions, carried out this heinous crime. The timing of this act in relation to the President's comments at Notre Dame, however, creates the potential for a perfect storm.

The President’s first few months have seen him successfully push a statist agenda which has led to a drop in public support. One can only hope more Americans seriously question the "change" they voted for in November, but with a drop in public approval and the need to press “reform” in healthcare and energy, abortion has been forced to the back burner. The murder of one of the world's most notorious abortionists, in his church, possibly by a pro-life supporter, adds enormous fuel to the smoldering inferno that is the abortion debate in this nation. This is a watershed moment not only in the abortion debate, but possibly in the discussion of domestic terrorism. No doubt strategists are busy right now trying to determine how best the murder of George Tiller can advance the abortion agenda of the White House. I suspect Secretary Napolitano is having Department of Homeland Security personnel print extra copies of her favorite publication, "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" tonight, in preparation for operations targeting national pro-life organizations and their members in the morning.

Many on the left are already labeling this act terrorism. From Kim Gandy, the president of the National Organization for Women, “We call on the new attorney general Eric Holder and head of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to treat these murders in the same way they would treat politically-motivated domestic terrorism of any other kind and put the full resources of their two departments behind that effort.” Attorney General Holder has responded:

The murder of Doctor George Tiller is an abhorrent act of violence, and his family is in our thoughts and prayers at this tragic moment. Federal law enforcement is coordinating with local law enforcement officials in Kansas on the investigation of this crime, and I have directed the United States Marshals Service to offer protection to other appropriate people and facilities around the nation. The Department of Justice will work to bring the perpetrator of this crime to justice. As a precautionary measure, we will also take appropriate steps to help prevent any related acts of violence from occurring.

Before the Obama administration labels the Tiller murder terrorism, we might review a few other events (of many) from the last few years which have twisted political leaders and mainstream media into semantic pretzels. On July 28, 2006, on the eve of the Jewish Sabbath, Naveed Haq, a Muslim of Pakistani origin, forced a 14-year-old girl to get him into the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle building by holding a gun to her back. He then pulled out the two large-caliber semi-automatic pistols he had just purchased and went on a murderous rampage. Mr. Haq killed one woman, Pam Waechter, 58, an assistant director at the federation, and injured five others, one of whom was 17 weeks pregnant. This rampage was classified as a “hate” crime, despite statements by Mr. Haq during the siege that included “I am a Muslim American. I am angry at Israel.” Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels said, "This was a purposeful, hateful act, as far as we know by an individual acting on his own." The prosecutor in the case added, "there is no evidence the shooting itself was an act of terrorism".

On March 3, 2006, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, 22, an Iranian immigrant, drove a sport utility vehicle into a crowded pedestrian zone at the University of North Carolina. He struck nine people but, fortunately, none were severely injured. Despite remarks after his arrest that included that he acted to "avenge the deaths of Muslims around the world", UNC Chancellor James Moeser stated, "As we have investigated this, we've come more and more to the conclusion that this was one individual acting alone in a criminal act." The initial NY Times report on the incident didn’t even mention Taheri-azar’s jihadi diatribes or the fact that he was a devout Muslim.

When Sulejman Talovic, an 18-year-old Bosnian Muslim immigrant entered the Salt Lake City Trolley Square Mall on February 12th, 2007, he was loaded with enough ammo to “inexplicably” kill dozens of victims — and he would have, if an alert off-duty cop hadn’t returned fire and stopped him. Talovic still managed to methodically murder five and wound four others with a shotgun before he died. Talovic had a histroy of regular mosque attendance, had told several acquaintances his grandfather was part of the jihad in Bosnia and was wearing a Koranic necklace at the time of the shootings. In documents recently released under a Freedom of Information Act request, FBI Special Agent Tim Fuhrman says the FBI does know the attack wasn’t a terrorist attack, as some had speculated. “Clearly, he had some religious beliefs, but just because someone has religious beliefs doesn’t mean anything is a terrorist act”, he said.

Headlines tomorrow will no doubt report on the poisonous and dangerous rhetoric of pro-life supporters which demonizes those on the other side of the debate and encourages violence. We live in a nation in which the murderous acts of Jihadists, stating they are acting in the name of Islam, are called “hate crimes”; we are told that perpertrators of such crimes suffer from mental disorders. We are never under the threat of violent jihadi domestic terrorism. Nothing to see here, move along.

George Tiller will be memorialized as a martyr for women's rights, freedom of choice and a heroic victim of a pro-life movement which is treacherous. For President Obama, going to Cairo this week, September 11th and the string of Jihadi outbursts are "man made disasters" or the criminal actions of mentally deranged individuals. The murder of George Tiller will be characterized as something very different.

Quaere Verum

Time For a Cool Change

2009-05-27T03:32:00.000-07:00

What to say about Judge Sotomayor? President Obama had his choice of activist liberal judges who would be easier to confirm and would be more than happy to dance on the Constitution than Judge Sotomayor. None have made comments as radical and discriminatory as her remark that the circuit courts "make policy" and "make law," and her praise of the "wise Latina" as wiser than the average white guy. Her hearings should focus like a laser on her disregard for the Constitution throughout a long legal history.

In the bigger scheme of things, now the conversation is all about a mediocre nominee, racist liberal who replaces a milquetoast liberal on the bench. It is an important appointment for Americans because if Soto is confirmed, we have accepted the living, breathing Constitution. It is an important appointment for the President because she placates Hispanic supporters ignored till now, throws a little red meat to the ultra left and provides yet another diversion for the radicals in the Obama administration to continue the war of change.

Look now, no one is talking about the economy. In fact, some are wowed that the markets are up and consumers are more confident than ever! That may be but the rest of the world is talking about the US losing its Triple A bond rating while gas prices rise and the President plans a takeover of the healthcare (healthcare reform) and energy systems (cap and tax to protect us from global warming, I mean man-made climate change, I mean that evil pollutant CO2). While all this is happening many are brushing off the North Korean (NK) nuclear blast and three missile tests (as of this hour) as more noise from that annoying guy with the bad hair who will always have nuclear aspirations but who is all bluster. Pay no attention to the fact that the NKs are partnered with Iran in pursuit of nuclear ambition, that Iranians are in NK to observe all these tests (and likely supporting NK financially), and that the NKs advised the Syrians in construction of a nuclear reactor destroyed by Israel earlier this year.

Thoughtful people might not only be concerned by these activities but would question who is behind the curtain pulling these strings? It is likely the puppeteers for this show include the Chinese (certainly as far as NK is concerned) and possibly the Russians (engaged with the Iranians and Iran’s other “bestest” friend, Venezuela).

Our fearless leader’s response has been to ignore that phone ringing at 3AM the last two mornings and to call the UN…after he changes his rubber pants in the morning. Offer more concessions, issue the standard “grave concern” message, get to the gym…check….what a way to start a day.

The chaos that has evolved since this Administration took office is astounding. It may be proven to be the result of the incredible ineptitude of the keystone cops we elected, but some of this chaos, perhaps all of it, has been courted by the Obama administration. Telling us we are out of money in one breath this weekend and stating it is a result of our failure to fix healthcare in the next is pure prevarication. Memo to the President…you cannot add $11 trillion to the national debt and expect the presses at the Federal Reserve not to burn out. Healthcare requires attention, not the attention you prescribe by the way, but it is not the reason the world is talking about downgrading us as an economic investment.

Chaos clearly reigns. I love the smell of chaos, it smells like…“change.”

Joe Biden, rarely truthful, always entertaining, was right.

Gird your loins people.

Quaere Verum

The Radicals' Rules

2009-05-17T21:38:00.000-07:00

The President spoke at Notre Dame today, and for those who may have missed it, you’ve seen it before. The greatest divider who has ever inhabited the White House continues to run plays from the only book he knows… Saul Alinsky’s classic Rules for Radicals.

Saul Alinsky was the original “community organizer”. Born in Chicago, he began actively “organizing” in the 1930s. Casting himself as the champion of the downtrodden and living a life committed to his quest for social justice, he worked tirelessly initially in the slums of Chicago, and later nationally. Alinsky’s vision of social justice was anti-government, anti-corporate and socialist. From The American Thinker, “In the Orwellian upside-down world of the Left, community organizers disorganize communities. That is the meaning of revolution, to overturn whatever exists today in the raw pursuit of one's own power.” While politically aligned with extreme left, Alinsky’s legacy is less ideological than methodological. He left behind a set of specific rules and guidelines for those who, in the name of the supposedly oppressed, seek power through revolution.

Alinsky formalized his methodologies for community organization in three books he wrote. The Industrial Areas Foundation Training Institute, known as the Alinksy School, backed initially by cash infusions from department store giant Marshall Fields, assured that the Alinsky tradition would thrive. The Alinsky School was the oracle for Barrack Obama’s early mentors in his Chicago organizing days, Mike Kruglik and Jerry Kellman. Other noted followers of the Alinsky way include Bill Ayers and Hillary Clinton. Clinton did her Wellesley thesis on Alinsky and was offerred a job by him after graduation. She opted for law school.

Profound economic injustice was by no means America’s only shortcoming, as Alinsky saw things. Lamenting the nation’s “rather confused and demoralized ideology,” he further identified “unemployment,” “decay,” “disease,” “crime,” “distrust,” “bigotry,” “disorganization,” and “demoralization” as inevitable by-products of life in capitalist America. Such a state of affairs, he said, made life for a majority of Americans nothing more than an exercise in drudgery. “At the end of the week,” said Alinsky of the average American, “he comes out of the hell of monotony with a paycheck and goes home to a second round of monotony…. Monday morning he is back on the assembly line.… That, on the whole, is his life. A routine in which he rots. The dreariest, drabbest, grayest outlook that one can have. Simply a future of utter despair.” People hunger for drama and adventure, for a breath of life in a dreary, drab existence,” he expanded.According to Alinsky, this unhappy existence exerted a profoundly negative influence on the American character. Alinsky perceived most Americans as people who were governed by their prejudices, and who thus felt great antipathy toward a majority of their fellow countrymen -- particularly those of different racial, ethnic, or religious backgrounds. This might be familiar to some of us who got beyond change and hope in the last campaign. “Most people,” he said, “like just a few people, and either do not actively care for or actively dislike most of the ‘other’ people.”

As author Richard Poe puts it, “Alinsky viewed revolution as a slow, patient process. The trick was to penetrate existing institutions such as churches, unions and political parties.” Alinsky advised organizers and their disciples to quietly, subtly gain influence within the decision-making ranks of these institutions, and to introduce changes from that platform. But it is not enough for the organizer to be in solidarity with the people. He must also, said Alinsky, cultivate unity against a clearly identifiable enemy; he must specifically name this foe, and “single out” precisely who is to blame for the “particular evil” that is the source of the people’s angst. In other words, there must be a face associated with the people’s discontent. That face, Alinsky taught, “must be a personification, not something general and abstract like a corporation or City Hall.” Rather, it should be an individual such as a CEO, a mayor, or a president.

According to John Perrazo at Front Page, “Having painted a verbal portrait of a thoroughly corrupt and melancholy American society, Alinsky was now prepared to argue that wholesale change of great magnitude was in order.” In his Rules for Radicals Alinsky taught that "truth is mutable and will change from time to time as necessary. “The organizer is in a true sense the highest level for which man can reach - to create, to be a ‘great creator’, to play God.”

Alinsky was a focused, determined, pragmatic and ruthless revolutionary. Alinsky dedicated Rules for Radicals:

"Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”

To the subject at hand, President Obama delivers the Commencement Speech at Notre Dame today. Rule number 12 for Alinsky is, “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." This roughly translates to cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. A corollary to Rule 12 is to go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.
The President in opening comments, as he did on the campaign trail for months for those willing to listen, as he has continued to do in office, focused on several targets and attempted to isolate and marginalize them using the straw man strategy he has honed to perfection. The President spent a significant portion of his speech on abortion. Before edifying us on the possibilities that exist to unite and resolve this conflict, in the spirit of unification, he made his requisite shout out to the greed mongers responsible for the economic crisis, chastised those who cling to outworn prejudice and fear those who are unfamiliar and then offered this:

“The soldier and the lawyer may both love this country with equal passion, and yet reach very different conclusions on the specific steps needed to protect us from harm. The gay activist and the evangelical pastor may both deplore the ravages of HIV/AIDS, but find themselves unable to bridge the cultural divide that might unite their efforts. Those who speak out against stem cell research may be rooted in an admirable conviction about the sacredness of life, but so are the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes who are convinced that their son's or daughter's hardships can be relieved.

The question, then _ the question then is how do we work through these conflicts? Is it possible for us to join hands in common effort? As citizens of a vibrant and varied democracy, how do we engage in vigorous debate? How does each of us remain firm in our principles, and fight for what we consider right, without, as Father John said, demonizing those with just as strongly held convictions on the other side?”

Given the recent kerfuffle over interrogation tactics, definitions of torture, the leaking of the identities of field interrogators, the refusal to declassify memos detailing the possible success of such techniques and the President’s willingness to consider releasing photos of actual interrogations, what is the soldier to make of his comparison with the lawyer? The President has made it clear he is at odds with the methods employed to keep pour country safe over the last eight years. He has sent a clear message that the saving of thousands of lives, by tactics which are used to train our own troops, is wrong and immoral; though it was not immoral for Democratic party leaders in 2002. Viewing the world through his political prism, he has given clear sign that he is of a mind to resolve this conflict between lawyers and soldiers, but it is unambiguous who will lose this contest as political leaders call for torture hearings. The spread of AIDS in the gay community is the result of one thing…promiscuity. The evangelical pastor views promiscuity as immoral. The gay activist views this behavior, assumedly, as acceptable. The evangelical pastor will never accept this behavior as moral. The evangelical pastor will, however, love the sinner while hating the sin. The pastor would not deny AIDS victims AIDS medications. He might ask that the AIDS activist honestly report that the use of condoms, allowing said continued promiscuous activity, has not diminished the AIDS epidemic here or in Africa. Abstinence has. There is no cure on the horizon for juvenile diabetes with embryonic stem cells, but that’s OK. There have been series of juvenile diabetes cases cured with use of their own or adult stem cells.

It is disingenuous to introduce these political footballs as indicators of our inability to engage in meaningful, vigorous debate and resolve conflicts in a common effort. For many who have not reached the postmodern evolutionary stage required for the pragmatic Alinsky acolyte, there remains, in some matters, truth. The President asks for us to join hands in a common effort. Unfortunately for conservatives, such an invitation always means the sacrifice of conservative principles. It never entails the limitation or modification of liberal dogma. The abortion issue, as discussed by President Obama, is framed as one in which there is disagreement, equal moral concern but nevertheless the opportunity for all to agree to a commitment to reduce the use of abortion.

For those of us who believe abortion is the killing of a child, this is not completely satisfactory but it something certainly worth striving for. Unfortunately, the President’s past and recent history make the sincerity of this proposition impossible to accept. President Obama, was unwilling to support the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, has supported all forms of abortion including partial birth abortion, and has named one of the most ardent abortion supporters in the country to head the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Secretary Sibelius, as Governor of Kansas, received thousands of dollars of questionably legal contributions from one of the most notorious partial birth abortionists in the country. In addition he has told Planned Parenthood that a priority for his administration will be passing the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) which will dramatically reduce existing regulations related to abortion, including limiting the ability of providers to object to participating in abortion services based on conscience.

Regarding the latter, today the President stated, “Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded not only in sound science, but also in clear ethics, as well as respect for the equality of women." Awful big of the President to respect the conscience of pro-life health care workers and offer the possibility that he might consider a clause that accommodates such beliefs.

Who can blame the President for taking up the offer of Father Jenkins and the other useful idiots at Notre Dame to address a student body increasingly divorced from the University's suppossed Catholic heritage. Notre Dame long ago abandoned any of the underpinnings of a true Catholic University. The appearance of the President today continues the great Notre Dame tradition of undermining the Catholic faith by providing a national stage for yet another politician to instruct American Catholics and the Catholic Church on what it means to be Catholic. The President’s references to “Fr. Ted” and Cardinal Bernadin harkens back to a dark day twenty five years when a previous pro-abortion and Catholic politician, Mario Cuomo, appeared on the Notre Dame stage at the behest of Father Hesburgh. Then Governor Cuomo educated us all on the unique requirement for politicians, seemingly specifically Catholic politicians, to check their religious principles at the door in considering affairs of state. Gov. Cuomo also referenced Cardinal Bernadin and his seamless garment of social justice for the Catholic Church, a garment in which abortion was equal to issues related to homelessness, nuclear weapons, immigration and the death penalty.

The President used his speech today to attempt to isolate believers in the Catholic faith, who are by definition pro-life, as the irreconcilable element in the abortion conversation. The President knows that 54% of “Catholics” supported him in the election. He understands the seamless garment tradition of moral equivalence on “life” and social justice issues established by Cardinal Bernadin, formalized by Mario Cuomo at Notre Dame in 1984, and which has provided cover for too numerous to count Catholic politicians since. As far as the the Catholic Church goes, there is one mission, isolate and polarize. As Alinsky said, “The despair is there; now it's up to us to go in and rub raw the sores of discontent.” Bravo Mr. President. Saul Alinsky would be proud.

There is some hope for Catholics but the light is as dim as an Al Gore compact flourescent bulb. Nationally, USCCB policy stands in opposition to the Obama speech today. In addition 74 bishops came out in opposition to the Obama appearance at Notre Dame. The only hope for Catholics at Notre Dame is that Father Jenkins might develop the same enthusiasm for the Magesterium that he has for the most pro-abortion President in our history and the Vagina Monologues.

Quaere Verum

The Country's Divide

2009-05-08T05:08:00.000-07:00

If you watch television, listen to radio or read a newspaper you quickly understand that there are two polar opposite views of the direction this country is taking. It could be argued that this has been brewing since the 60's when as a country we decided that what was more important then the family is the individual. And actually that would be the individual that agreed with liberal view points and not the old fashioned non-progressive standard bearing person. I think that once the courts said a baby in the womb can have its skull punctured at the whim of the mother our nations nucleus began to fall apart.

Abortion is another topic but its interesting to look at today's problems and ask questions like what people are in jail and why? Why are our children's education behind other country's? Why are so many people in debt beyond reasonable? Why do 50% of American not pay taxes? I believe the answer lies in the family. Once we diminished the importance of a two parent mother and father family, blurring each ones roles and taking away the parents right to parent along with the self centered mandates handed down by legislatures we began the fast track to self destruction.
So where are we right now? I see two completely different teams that are currently choosing up sides. One I will call the revolutionists. The strategy for this team is to get back to basics such as downsizing homes, purchasing guns, growing gardens, homeschooling, anything that will make them less dependent on the government and more self sufficient.

The other team I will name the progressives. Their game plan is of an aggressive nature, to isolate each player of the opposing team by demonizing them either as greedy companies, religious extremists, or red necked mountain people who cling to their guns. Their intent is to make the other team provide for all their desires.

Each team will not allow for moderation. You cannot be a member of the revolutionists or the progressives without being fully committed to how the game will be played. And don't think you can sit this game out. Oh no, one thing each team can agree on is if you don't want to play ball your the first one who gets his ass kicked.

Stay At Home Dads

2009-05-06T18:06:00.000-07:00

A renewed craze in the media today is the highlight of stay at homes dads. Being portrayed as fine men who because of the current economic circumstances and losing their jobs have elected to take on the role of Mr. Mom. Pictures of them changing diapers, joining 'dads who stay at home' meet up's and the theme of just enjoying their new life tending to their infants. The intent being as we look at these metro-sexual guys in their new found role as something as a natural advancement to the majority of neanderthal like men currently corrupting our families.

Well the reality is these males are exactly what is destroying the fabric of our society and corrupting the culture that has survived for millennium. I am all for tending to your family but not as a mother but as a father. The United States has become a place where boys have role models that prefer to shop for the finest cheese or listen to Abba rather then those who stand for teaching discipline, chivalry, strength, and duty. The feminist Nazi's have infiltrated into our society that a man being a woman is just fine. In fact, if a woman can become a man then utopia has been reached.

I am giving a shout out to those guys who have had a brief lapse in their judgement, perhaps may have even considered a thong as comfortable to quickly grab an employed buddy, preferably one who enjoys sports or hunting and go have a cigar at a local tavern and ask him how the hell you can get out of your state of femininity you are in and rejoin the kinship of brotherhood.

Swine Terror

2009-05-06T10:22:00.000-07:00

I have a great idea! Since we can no longer use effective methods to interrogate terrorists per President Obama's order... And our news and government have us hiding in terror from the terrifying Swine Flu... we need to get creative.

With swine flu running rampant throught the states we need only allow our interrogaters to COUGH in the presence of the detainees. Let the dangers of H1N1 work its natural wonders.

A bonus by-product of this strategy would be the required quarantine of all the detainees-effectively extending the life of holding camps like GITMO.

Dumbing Down Torture

2009-05-03T21:05:00.001-07:00

Dear Mr. President,

In what appears to be your weekly prime time event Sir, you educated us all on waterboarding. "What I have said, and I will repeat, is that waterboarding violates our ideals and our values," Mr. Obama said. "I do believe that it is torture. I do not think that is just my opinion; that is the opinion of many who have examined the topic. And that is why I put an end to these practices."

A few questions Mr. President:

1. We annually waterboard thousands of our own troops in training. The techniques and limits we use in training are the same as those that have been applied to captured jihadists whose mission is to kill innocent Americans en masse. Waterboarding is uncomfortable and can be terrifying for some, but is conducted in a manner in which there is never a risk of death, disfigurement, injury or scars. Can this truly be called torture?

2. It sounds like we are banning waterboarding of captured jihadists Sir. Will we continue to waterboard American troops in training?

3. While you direct the traitorous Kabuki dance over defining torture Sir, could you remind Americans of your outrage over the deaths of PFC Kristian Menchaca and PFC Thomas Tucker? We missed it. These brave American infantrymen were captured defending a forward outpost near the town of Youssifiyah, south of Baghdad, in 2006. A week later their mutilated, defiled and beheaded bodies were discovered. The maiming included eyes being gouged out as well as genital mutilation. Well, that was an unfortunate case. Perhaps Mr. President you might reference your fury over the ambush of American contractors in Fallujah in 2004. Their vehicle was riddled with bullets. It is unclear whether the contractors were alive or dead at that point but they were dragged from their vehicle. Their bodies were then burned, hacked, mutilated and then two of the charred bodies were hung from a bridge across the Euphrates.

If waterboarding is torture Mr. President, what term of the lexicon describes this savagery? Do you seriously believe demonic Jihaidsts have been pushed to this point because we waterboarded three high value Jihadi operatives? Are you actually suggesting that enemies bent on our destruction, who kill indiscriminately, derive their motivation from our use of waterboarding vice sleep deprivation or 6 hours in a cell with a life insurance salesman as an enhanced interrogation technique?

4. In your weekly prime time event Sir, you commented on abortion:

"I think that those who are pro-choice make a mistake when they - if they suggest - and I don't want to create straw men here, but I think there are some who suggest that this is simply an issue about women's freedom and that there's no other considerations. I think, look, this is an issue that people have to wrestle with and families and individual women have to wrestle with," Obama continued.

Let me see if I have this right. Waterboarding, a procedure designed to produce transient fear and discomfort with no risk of death, which may lead to the reporting of vital information which could save hundreds or thousands of lives, is “torture”. Abortion is a procedure which sentences an unborn infant to death. It is occasionally preceded by stabbing a needle through the unborn infants chest into the heart to administer potassium chloride, dismemberment, excruciating pain, and in the case of older unborns a scissors is jammed through the infants skull and the brain suctioned out prior to delivery. This procedure is not torture but, "is a moral issue and an ethical issue." Thank you Sir, that clarifies things a bit.

Sir, would it be possible that you consider the following: How about we keep waterboarding safe, legal and rare and we call abortion torture?

5. It seems to me that there is much commonality between the fate of the American soldier captured by Jihadists and an unborn infant whose mother has entered a Planned Parenthood Clinic. Conversely, murderous Jihadists know they will never be killed and that there are strict rules of engagement which cover even the laughable practice of waterboarding. The Isalmofascist monsters we face have witnessed the angst caused by an Abu Ghraib and the silence over the barbaric murders of fallen American heroes. The enemy knows that the American liberal majority is so self-loathing of America that words do not even exist to describe the tactics they employ in attempting to obtain information or simply defile American service men and women.

President Obama, is torture, narrowly and ludicrously defined by you to include methods which manipulate fear and anxiety, something only Americans are capable of committing? The rationale that ending waterboarding will improve treatment of our troops when captured by the enemy, now primarily rogue nations and non-state actors, induces laughter amongst American troops. Every American soldier knows he or she would rather die than be captured by our enemies in the bad war in Iraq or the good war now in Afghanistan.

6. You have released memos detailing enhanced interrogation techniques rarely used by American interrogators on high value Jihadi leaders. What actually resulted from these interrogations Sir? Is it true that information obtained from Khalid Sheik Mohammad averted attacks on Los Angeles and the Brooklyn Bridge? Will you declassify the memos that detail the information obtained during these waterboarding sessions?

7. Sir, please instruct your staff to stop intermingling the rights of American citizens and the Geneva Convention into discussions related to the three Al Qaeda members waterboarded. These individuals were not uniformed combatants, are not American citizens and have no right to the protections offered by the Geneva Convention or the Constitution.

Congratulations sir. The memories of PFCs Tucker and Menchaca, brutalized as they experienced real torture and gave their lives for their country, are banished as we ring our hands over KSM taking a bath. Another generation of Americans would be ashamed, but instead we celebrate our commitment to "our ideals and values". We have abetted one more victory our enemies could never have achieved on their own. Your deft manipulation of the self-loathing and suicidal tendencies of the Western left, while serving your immediate political purposes, has set a course for crisis which even Joe Biden's formidable imagination is incapable of comprehending.

Quaere Verum

Fed Govt Flying-By the seat of their pants

2009-04-29T07:51:00.000-07:00

I don't live in New York City or D.C... I don't have to be a resident to know the personal terror that each one of them must have faced on 9/11. Each American shares their fear. I remember sitting in a high school stadium to watch my nephew play football in southeastern city far from New York and DC and still feeling anxious in those weeks after 9/11 hearing a plane fly nearby the stadium.

My city has several tall buildings but nothing the likes of which one sees in NYC. Our airport is in suburbia. But I can tell you now that if I saw a large plane flying low near buildings with fighter jets in tow I would be calling 911 myself and saying prayers.

In this day and age of photoshop and airbrush did we really need to buzz NYC with Airforce One for a photograph???

Cost for this atrocity $328,835 !!! Most of the witnesses that fled their buildings and ran for their lives might have preferred to be "water-boarded" than have their post-traumatic stress disorder reactivated in that manner. The President says he didn't know, that it was a mistake, and it won't happen again. Of course it won't happen again. But what is the next stupid thing we will spend money on for the continued political campaign of this sitting President?

Astro-turf or Grassroots?

2009-04-16T03:10:00.000-07:00

Darn it! I must have missed my marching orders. I didn't get the phone call, the email, the certified letter. Somebody rich in Washington was "organizing" and sending out drones to do their bidding on April 15th. The Richest of the Rich wanted to have a bunch of white redneck drones show up for what Pelosi called "astro-turf" Tea Parties because they aren't REAL GRASS ROOTS. These "rich orchestraters" want to protest the rich being taxed more under Obama.

I really missed the memo. So did the other 2000 people at my local tea party. My 13 and 11 year old holding the signs we made from the poster board bought at Staples that afternoon helped me push the stroller with the baby around road work to get to the state capitol. We were walking next to other moms with babies, dads with toddlers on their shoulders, guys on motorcycles, minivans of boy scouts, some retired veterans, some in business suits stepping out of the office at the end of the day to join us.

Most of the participants would benefit from a tax cut on the middle class. So why would they be at the tea party protesting taxes on "the rich"? Because we know that tax slogan is a fallacy. If you pay a utility bill, if you buy gas, if you use a telephone or cell phone,if you (God forbid) smoke, or consume alcohol: your taxes are going up! That sounds like middle class to me. If my husband succeeds in his business he will eventually move us into the $250,000 tax bracket. We had hoped at one time that the day would come... what is our incentive now? An extreme liberal relative (Obama supporter)complained to me the other day that she received a bonus check but such a large portion of the bonus was taken in tax that she will have to wait a year to get it back in her return. I wanted to say "why do you want it back"? Don't other's need that money? Isn't it going to important programs, necessary bailouts, mortage foreclosures? But more importantly, please notice that even the most loyal Obama supporter or tax and spend liberal does not like it when it is THEIR money taken. Its easy to take it from the "rich".

Nancy Pelosi, there was a time when our leaders would not disparage the average American for expressing their peaceful opinion. But now we find ourselves in an age when the first female Speaker of the House will disparage some of the taxpaying citizens and VOTERS of the country as mindless drones organized and paid for by the rich elite.

You dear lady are the mindless drone. You represent the worst of the rich elite and 'entitled'. And You put the ASS in Astro-turf.

Party Like Its 2099...Last Mortgage Payment

2009-04-14T17:00:00.000-07:00

Not only is capitalism evil, but, this just in...We have identified the clearest and most present danger to our nation. No, not smelly pirates dressed in rags holding a gun to a merchant vessel captain's head while keeping the US Navy at bay for 5 days, no not Islamic jihadists beheading innocents in the Middle East, not reformed bomb throwing terrorists who now write school curricula, not the cartoon Hitler puppet of the mullahs in Iran who almost daily informs us of Iran's progress to a nuclear weapon, not an abortion industry which is responsible for the deaths of 1,000,000 unborn infants a year, not the Chia Pet puppet of the Chinese in NK, not neighborhood shakedown artists who stand at voting sites with billy clubs in hand, not flim flammers who buy the votes of homeless with cigarettes, not the never ending list of Presdiential nominees who can't pay their taxes, and not Congressman who arrange the firebombing of the subprime housing market and then claim to be firemen.

No, the particle physicists at the Department of Homeland Security, led by Secretary Janet (would somebody survey our villages) Napolitano, the wizard who prefers that jihadi terrorism be called a "man caused disaster", have discovered that the clear and present danger to American sovereignty is, well, read for yourself:

"Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration..."

"Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election time frame to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers."

The unbelievable rest of this declassified DHS report is here, linked off Michelle Malkin.

D-Day in the battle for the fate of our nation is Election Day 2010. The glove has been thrown, however, and not by "right wing extremists" who inhabit the hallucinogenic imaginations of misguided liberals.

Tomorrow is April 15th. Like paying taxes now, just wait. Think about what the tax burden for us and the next two generations will be as a result of the mortgage which now exists on our nation. Three trillion dollars spent over the last six months, with another eight trillion pledged. We haven't even gotten to cap and trade, restructuring the energy industry and nationalizing healthcare. This is money spent by elected officials who haven't even read the legislation which they signed and which committed these monies.

A small but significant response to this irresponsible, reckless and treasonous governance starts tomorrow. Your voice counts, and can be heard, for the moment. Take advantage of this opportunity. Get thee to a tea party tomorrow. There is one near you.

Quaere Verum

Capitalism is Evil?

2009-04-13T11:12:00.000-07:00

We have a country today whose people are with little education and parents unwilling to educate their children. Perhaps because they are uneducated themselves. No, not the formal education from college institutions but by what used to be called 'street smart'. When 20% of our population believe Socialism is better than Capitalism and even worse 27% can't even decide we then have truly become a Country with very little knowledge of history, finance, government or how to survive with liberty and freedom.

Tea Anyone?

2009-04-05T21:07:00.000-07:00

The current accumulated total of bailouts initiated by the Bush administration, and now quadrupled down on by the Obama Administration, is a commitment of $11.6 trillion of our tax dollars; of this $3.8 trillion has already been spent over the last six months! We're just not exactly sure where the money has gone; but its a lot of money, surely you understand.

Just to give this some perspective, the combined, inflation adjusted costs for the Civil War, New Deal, Marshall Plan, Korean War, Vietnam War, and the Iraq War (2003-today) is $3.2 trillion. World War II cost an inflation adjusted $3.6 trillion. In six months we have already paid for one WW II! For the 50% of you wealthy people left paying taxes under the redistribution scheme of the Obama administration, your future, and that of your children and grandkids, has been mortgaged. Michelle Malkin has properly phrased this criminal activity generational theft .

Take a minute to quantify and personalize the impact TARP, the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act" etc will have on your family. If you dare, click quantify to go to the bailout calculator and evaluate this situation for yourself...Warning, this should not be done if you suffer from cardiac, seizure, or anxiety disorders.

In a world in which an innumerable multitude of men incessantly endeavours to procure the petty and paltry pleasures with which they glut their lives, above this race of men stands an immense and tutelary power. This power takes upon itself alone to secure their gratification and to watch over their fate. The power is absolute, minute, regular, provident and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent, if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks on the contrary to keep them in perpetual childhood: it is well content that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing. For their happiness such a government willingly labors, but it chooses to be the sole agent and the only arbiter of that happiness; it provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances; what remains, but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living.

After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp, and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arms over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rule, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting: such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people till they are reduced to be nothing better than a flock of timid animals of which the government is the shepherd.

The preceding two paragraphs are commentary from Alexis De Tocqueville writing in Democracy in America. Published in 1835, De Tocqueville was commenting on his perception of future threats to the newly formed democracy in America born as an alternative to the traditional European aristocratic regimes. Democracy in America is perhaps the best study of early American society and government ever written, and De Toqueville was prophetic in his analysis.

April 15th 2009 , “Tax Day” for many, is an opportunity for concerned Americans to register their disapproval of the current course being charted for our nation. Federal government spending in the name of "crisis" has now compromised the future of the next two generations of Americans. Tax Freedom Day is the day the average American has earned enough income to pay local, state and federal tax obligations for the year; after that day all money earned is ours to keep. Astoundingly, Tax Freedom Day this year will be April 13th. Four months of working to support the government. Not since 1967 has Tax Freedom Day fallen earlier than April 13th; and the latest Tax Freedom Day has ever fallen was May 6th in 1992. An early Tax Freedom Day this year is a result of the recession and current tax cut provisions which expire in 2011. So April 15th, “Tax Day”, truly marks the end of the tax season for the vast majority this year and possibly next year. It is extremely likely, however, given planned tax increases and despite a faltering economy, that Tax Freedom Day will be occuring at least 1-2 weeks later over coming years to meet our new tax obligations.

In 1773 colonists, protesting the Tea Act, and the monopoly it granted to the East India Tea Company, boarded merchant ships in Boston Harbor and dumped 342 chests of tea into the water. The Boston Tea Party led to other similar protests across the colonies. On Feb 19th, CNBC Reporter Rick Santelli expressed his disgust with the endless stream of “stimulus spending” pouring out of DC.

Santelli’s call for a Chicago Tea Party has led Americans, frustrated with an unprecedented centralization of power in DC funded by our tax dollars, to organize grass roots protests nationwide. Many have laready occured, though the mainstream media has had little to say about them. On April 15th Tea Parties will be occurring on a national scale and there will be one in an area near you. Several sites are detailing events nationally and include downloadable suggestions for protest signs and posters.

Over the last seventy five years we have allowed the continuous erosion of liberty given us by the Founders, and which De Tocqueville feared might be a transient moment of brilliance in world history. The current administration, indistinguishable form an equally liberal legislature, has dramatically quickened the pace of this erosion and we are faced with an avalanche. Politicians committed to statism and “soft” socialism have vilified capitalism and, over years, convinced much of the citizenry that they are incapable of making the decisions required to order their lives. Health care, retirement, housing, education, and the amount of income required to meet the needs of daily living are all decisions now in the hands of government agencies. Discussion of free markets, liberty, individual responsibility, and American exceptionalism are dismissed as quaint but archaic concepts negated by the paternalism exercised by our political leaders.

Previous posts have discussed steps we must consider taking if we as the loyal and patriotic opposition hope to stem this tide. Tea Party Day, April 15th, represents a unique opportunity for Americans to have their voices heard. National news coverage of a number of recent large (15,000) Tea Parties has been scant. Mainstream media, manipulating an increasingly malleable electorate, is in large part responsible for the election of President Obama. Until an opposition movement gains more strength and organization, the communications organ of the Democratic Party will assume this is all passing bluster.

The local media and the citizen’s media, the blogosphere, however, will be there to report. Make it clear that this movement represents hard working Americans who value liberty, responsibility and the opportunity to succeed (and fail) in a capitalist society. Political leaders will not change course based solely on the events of April 15th. This is a beginning, however.

Many state school systems found reasons to be closed on Inauguration Day. The unspoken subtext was that the initiation of the Obama Presidency was a historic day. Yes it was. April 15th, Tea Party Day, is a day of similar consequence. The impact of a million Americans turning out across the nation to protest the current sprint to socialism would be momentous.

Then the hard work begins. Make your coming out on Tea Party Day a sign of your formal commitment to help build a political organization committed to the principles espoused by the Founders, principles which have made this country extraordinary and exceptional .

Quaere Verum

Outrage over HR401.09

2009-04-01T04:13:00.000-07:00

A new bill introduced in the House of Representatives is gaining support and may come up for a vote as early as today. This amazingly has been kept out of the mainstream news by the heavy reporting of the President's trip overseas and the protests there.

Let your like-minded friends know that we cannot alter our founding documents for any reason!

In part, the Bill reads:

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 401.09) to revise the exclusive language and give further clarification to our Declaration of Independence. (Reported in House)

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men, women, transgendered, and androgynous are created equal; and if in the course of human events it becomes apparent that there are inequalities present, in order to secure this equality, Governments are instituted among men, women, transgendered, and androgynous to impose regulations upon those that have been created with more to ensure balance and restore the necessary equilibrium;that they are endowed by their Creator, Science[praise be to its name], with certain unalienable Rights to be determined day by day by the Judicial branch and frequent litigation, that among these are Life that we deem worthy, Liberty to do anything except practice Religion in the public square and the pursuit of Happiness at any cost to others.

To learn more about this unbelievable Bill click here

By the people, for the people?

2009-03-31T20:34:00.000-07:00

It would be too easy to jump on the new administration and some of the things that they are doing these days with regard to “running” the country and “serving” our best interests. No, I think I will take this opportunity to vent about one particular pet peeve of mine that gets to the core of my angst with how government has been growing recently. Don’t you just hate terms like Big Government? Good thing we have people staging modern day “tea parties” to show their dissatisfaction; but I digress.

I would like to know what the turning point was when the government decided that it knew better than we did on how best we should protect ourselves. No, I am not talking about the military and protecting us from foreign enemies or our ability to arm ourselves for self defense. I am speaking about the sneaky way the government interferes in our daily lives to “protect” us from ourselves….simply because we don’t know better. Relax conspiracy theorists, I am talking about the seatbelt law or as it is commonly referred to with their catchy slogan…Click it Or Ticket!

I welcome the backlash for the commentary and argument that will follow as it is something that I have been arguing for several years now. If you are a little open minded…and I hope you are by following this site…you may have your opinions altered if not questioned in the end.
Back in the day, there was a nationwide speed limit of 55 mph. Studies showed the increase in safety and reduced fatalities by staying under this magical number. Yes, victory for the American citizen for arguing this and allowing…get this…the states to decide their own speed limits by the type of road etc. How about that….Federal Government makes a ruling and then defers to the States to set standards. Wow…the good ole days! Don’t get me wrong, I was ok with this attempt at “helping” us out since people are reckless and inherently bad drivers in this country. This law was actually an attempt to protect us from others that share the road with us.
Somewhere over the last decade or so, the government has come back to us with the “Click it or Ticket”campaign and subsequent policing in order to protect us and make us safer. I am not buying into this whatsoever. Don’t get me wrong, I wear my seat belt every time I get in the car. Yes, it is the first thing I do once I turn that bad boy on. But should it be an offense punishable by up to $250 for not doing so?

Look at that again. Should the government really be allowed to fine us $150-$250 for not wearing our seat belts? Who stands to get hurt in the event of an accident? Of course, we as individuals do or the passengers riding with us are in jeopardy. But is our safety really something that the government should mandate? Does an individual who elects not to protect themselves in their own car jeopardizing the safety of anyone else on the road or just themselves? Shouldn’t the individual be able to make the decision on their own as to how they “protect” themselves in their own car? Again...it is not like the seatbelt is going to make them a better driver or will it prevent them from getting into an accident. The seatbelts function is to protect the user from injury…Period.

If the government is really concerned about our safety and the safety of others….why isn’t there a National movement or law to ban cell phone use while driving? Why isn’t it a fineable offense to apply makeup or read or eat food while driving? Clearly all of these “activities” take the drivers focus off the task at hand…driving their car…and thus putting the safety of everyone else on the road in jeopardy. While I applaud states like New York and California for their laws banning cell phone use without a hands free device, I would like to know why this is not pushed on the Federal level.

Clearly there is a disconnect in the eyes of the governing body as to why certain laws are federally mandated while others are left to the states to decide. It is ok for the States to decide whether they mandate motorcycle riders to wear a helmet but the federal government mandates seat belt usage across the board? Isn’t that ironic? I can ride my motorcycle in most states with no protection on my head and certainly no seat belt and I am in compliance with the law. Too bad for that poor schmuck in the Hummer that got nabbed for forgetting to buckle up.
Isn’t the mantra, a Government of the people, by the people and for the people? Let’s hope the administration starts making the “change” they have talked about and start to do what was intended. Set the parameters and policy, allow the states to make their law and let citizens protect themselves.

Dinner With the President

2009-03-29T08:54:00.000-07:00

The kerfuffle over AIG and banking bonuses has been labelled bad Kabuki Theater by many. Not only did these AIG employees have an agreement with AIG, AIG had an agreement with the government. Chris Dodd, lead arsonist in the mortgage meltdown and now the Senate fire chief, Secretary of the Treasury (SOT) Geithner and the White House added language to the proculus, non-stimulus bill which guaranteed these bonuses. So how about some perspective? These bonuses are one time payouts which are budget dust when compared to the Obama stimulus package and budget bill. AIG bonuses are 1/18,500th of the proposed $3.1 trillion budget. The bonuses are 1/4000^th of the total porculus package and they were put in that bill by Democratic Leadership.

These bonuses were no secret to anyone in the Dem Leadership, the Treasury or the White House. We should all be very afraid if government believes it has the authority to retroactively tax monies from anyone, but especially when targeting specific individuals. If we don't speak now who will speak when they come for us. Niemoller is always relevant.

Now Dodd and Geithner are doing the two step describing what they knew and when they knew it about these bonuses. Sadly the President and Dem leadership, abandoning election vows of transparency, allowed no time for anyone in Congress to read the 1000 page compendium of liberal dream spending. Time was of the essence, however. We surely didn't want any patriotic Americans or congressman nosing around that bill and figuring out exactly what the administration was trying to pull off.

Dodd and others benefited royally from AIG contributions over the years and this may have been payback. This is the likely explanation. It may also have been done in the name of trying to keep some halfway qualified individuals at the wheel at AIG. There may be a third possibility, though it may be too clever by half to have been conceived by the keystone cops running the White House. What about the possibility that AIG was set up as a convenient strawman for populist rage? Knowing that the President's sprint left through his Fulda Gap would rouse the opposition; a number of diversions would be needed to keep the eyes of the public and opposition party off, or uncertain of, the real mission. Innumerable distractions would be needed to create the chaotic environment necessary to gain the acquiescence of citizens to solutions which mandated toleration of the horror of building trillion dollar deficits in the first weeks of office. While some adult Democrats, like Ben Nelson are just beginning to question the budget math behind this socialist agenda, 85 Republican House jesters including Minority Whip Cantor, joined in this Kabuki for the absurd production.

Team Obama continues to stagger to the end zone of an American socialist state. There appears to be no Republican on the field capable of stopping them. It seems the screaming fans are left only with the hope that some Republican upstart will leap from the bench and knock the legs out from under the ungainly President. The crocodile tears and forced “outrage” from grifters like Dodd, Frank, Schumer, Pelosi, Waters, Obama and the rest are part of the game plan and serves one purpose. It is to advance the mantra that chaos reigns in the financial world and we need even more government control! As Rahm Emmanuel says, "never waste a good crisis."

The President is delivering on the promises he made to the American people during the never ending campaign. The apathy and mindlessness of hopey-changey Americans led them to strike a deal with the devil. The promise of hope and change was the promise of a government committed to taking care of everyone’s needs. The President’s message, at times subtle and at times obvious, has always been a massive consolidation of power centrally. It seems only a handful understood this was socialism. Many still do not appreciate the socialist net being dropped on them. Who can forget the memorable words of Peggy Joseph, choking back tears, “I won’t have to work to put gas in my car…”

Years of indoctrination by socialists at the public school and University level have negated the evidence which demonstrates the abject failure of socialism and have made it impossible for a large number of Americans to thoughtfully analyze the lessons of history.

We are getting change. There just doesn't seem to be a seat reserved for hope at the table the President has set.

The Feds now own banking, housing, and the auto industry.

The Department of Education, the National Education Association and other teacher union associated organizations have big plans. All hands prepare for a Crazy Ivan turn portside.

If you like the selection of appetizers, next on the menu at the table of hope is resting control of the energy sector from private industry. For those who couldn’t hear above the din of “hope and change” in the week before the election, Candidate Obama told us, in comments that were recorded by the San Francisco Chronicle nearly a year earlier but which were only released a few days before the election, that we should expect electricity and other energy bills to rise.

"Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket...because I'm capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, natural gas -- you name it, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money they will pass that money on to consumers." Cap and trade, if it passes, will hamstring current energy industries, , make them unaffordable for Americans, bankrupt those industries and leave state run alternative energy options as the only option. The smart meters the President told us about last week are less about assisting you in optimizing energy use in your home and more about the government being able to optimize how best you use energy in your home.

Health care is a favorite on the Obama prix fixe menu. Democratic leaders are committed to a national health plan which will follow the course of all other such national systems. All points lead to rationing, restriction, and limitation under the watchful of eye of the same Congressional specialists that brought us the mortgage crisis. Those European nations that have not been successful in fully sanitizing the citizenry's free market memory are scrambling to re-introduce private enterprise solutions in efforts to resuscitate their failing health care systems. The costs of rationing are not merely inconvenience. Utilitarian methods will be part of the armamentarium employed to assist in rationing health care costs. This is standard operating procedure in the Netherlands, where adolescents may request euthanasia and infanticide is employed to kill infants determined to be doomed to a "poor quality of life and suffering." The methods to be used are well practiced and include limitation of care at the ends of the age spectrum (abortion, infanticide and euthanasia) and, for a number of conditions, palliative care (a good idea which has become perverted by some into a tool for actively ending life).

The culmination to this meal, the piece de resistance of this governmental orgy, is wresting control of other business sectors like manufacturing, farming and retail through an overhaul of immigration policy, elimination of current immigration restrictions and aggressive unionization.

What we are witnessing is nothing less than the march of a socialist blitzkrieg host whose only orders are to take no quarter and advance.

The government, including some sellout and cowardly Republicans, is absolutely responsible for the mess we now find ourselves in. First the Community Reinvestment Act which provided the opening to loosen lending strings and laid the groundwork for the mortgage crisis. Then the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 which began cutting the strings of sound banking practice. Finally, the corrupt growth of Fannie and Freddie provided the perceived financial backstop lenders would need in disregarding common sense reasonable lending practice. Fannie and Freddie had full support and backing, and received all the authorization necessary to become the base for this unsustainable Ponzi scheme, from Congress. The leaders of the charge for massive government intrusion into the housing market in Congress were none other than Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.

Politicians, mainly Democrats, in the early 1990s, determined that home ownership was the latest inherent human right overlooked by the Founders, joining amongst others the "right to reproductive freedom" and the "right to redefine marriage." Trumpeting home ownership became the battle cry of Andrew Cuomo (then at HUD, now the AG of NY chasing down all the evil AIG bonus recipients) and Bill Clinton in the 90's, supported by the watchful eye of bank inspectors, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Attorney General Janet Reno.

Banks and financial houses profited from this mess, yes. Some eagerly jumped on the mortgage party bandwagon, abused it, and deserve prison time. Countrywide is a great example of just such an organization. Countrywide was run by Angelo Mozilo. Some may remember who Angelo numbered among his friends and preferred clients? Yes, the senior architect of the subprime crisis, Senator Chris Dodd! Dodd received a $75,000 reduction in mortgage payments through the "Friends of Angelo" program at Countrywide. Dodd still refuses to release all records related to that transaction and Dodd still sanctimoniously calls for the hides of banking executives.

These banks and institutions, against the better judgment of many, were told to make these loans or else face scrutiny and suits from DOJ, bank inspectors and a variety of "community organization" groups. They were told not to worry about the loans defaulting, Freddie and Fannie were the backstop. The chronology is well documented at American Thinker. The bubble continuously expanded, burst and the rest is history; lots of people in homes they never should have purchased, bad loan paper everywhere, and financial mayhem.

The government has failed the nation miserably as it inserted itself into the housing market over the last 20 years. Yet the same leaders who got us into this mess are not only not held accountable, they are supervising the resuscitation of the patient and all they can prescribe is the same snake oil they have fed the citizenry for 20 years. More government intervention. Yeah, that’s the ticket.

As America burns, the citizenry blithely ignore the malevolent and criminal behavior of many in Congress who have led the assault on the principles which have previously guided our nation. Benjamin Franklin cautioned, when asked what type of government the deliberations of the Constitutional Convention had given the new nation, "A republic, if you can keep it." These words today fall on many ignorant or deaf ears.

We are all on the fast track to become wards of the state. In the next budget year it is likely that a minority of citizens will be paying taxes. So we ask why would we willingly allow this to happen? Why would we allow ourselves to go from the most productive nation on earth, and the greatest guarantor of freedom around the world, to a junior partner in the collapsing nations of the Western world socialist union club?

Europe has become torpid and apathetic, content to wallow in mediocrity in the name of increased state custodial care. Alexander Bernard writes eloquently on this topic in National Review. Europeans pay enormous taxes, work little as it only incurs greater taxation, produce less (from industry through the art world), are incapable of mounting even a decent military parade to celebrate European Union day, and don't have any interest in having children to contribute to a failing tax base which desperately needs more workers. Europe, from an indigenous European population viewpoint, is dying. A nation with households that average 1.1 children cannot sustain population growth. Those unfamiliar with the catastrophic demography facing Europe should read America Alone. With all due respect, we should acknowledge that given the utilitarian view of socialists, most in Europe see their own destruction as perhaps one of their greatest achievements.

Freedom is not free and while not lost yet, it is ours to lose. The greatest challenge is awakening an increasingly disinterested, self-absorbed populace with an attention span measured in seconds. We are witnessing the greatest transfer of wealth from the private sector to the government in the history of man. The President wrote in the Chicago Tribune last week, “I also know that we need not choose between a chaotic and unforgiving capitalism and an oppressive government-run economy. That is a false choice that will not serve our people or any people.” Mark Steyn replies, "Really? For the moment, it’s a 'false choice' mainly in the sense that he’s not offering it: 'a chaotic and unforgiving capitalism' is not on the menu, which leaves 'an oppressive government-run economy' as pretty much the only game in town. How oppressive is yet to be determined." Those who that say we have all already been victims of unforgiving capitalism review the previous synopsis of Fannie, Freddie and the unindicted arsonists Frank, Dodd and others.

From GK Chesterton, "The chief feature of our time is the meekness of the mob and the madness of government." So where to from here? D-Day is Election Day 2010, but those of us who are concerned with the survival of liberty have our work cut out for us. Conservative citizens should consider five actions:

1. Innumerable issues are under consideration now which will enormously impact the direction of our country. Conservative voices need to be heard by political leaders at the local, state and federal level. For those who have never called or visited a legislator's office, get to it. Email is convenient, but means little. We are still in the main guaranteed free speech, unless you work in a government agency or on a university campus, so use it.

2. Consider making campaign contributions, $10 or $25, to individual candidates committed to personal liberty and American exceptionalism. Do not contribute to general Republican Committees (the RNC, or the National Republican Senatorial Committee for example) until they hold phony Republicans accountable. Never forget that three Republican Senators, Collins (Me) Spector (Pa), and Snowe (Me), are responsible for the passage of the porculus "stimulus" package which we desperately needed, but waited five days for the President's signature in a staged Denver venue.

Candidates worthy of your support may not be in your district. You are free to support them, however. Examples include LTC Allen West running for Congress in Florida and Pat Toomey, who will declare as a candidate for Arlen Spector's Senate seat in Pennsylvania. Pray for the identification of strong Republican candidates in Connecticut for Chris Dodd's Senate seat, in Pennsylvania for opposition to the treasonous John Murtha, and in New Jersey for the Governor's seat in that great people's republic.

As conservatives it is our responsibility to be informed and understand where Republicans in name only serve and support conservative Republican challengers. The list of so called Republicans who need to either be defeated, or join the party which best represents their views, is lengthy. Identifying these individuals and other key political races local and nationally is labor intensive work. Mainstream media will not give any attention to such candidates and has become an organ of the Democratic political machine. The good news is that others in the new media of the blogosphere are committed to this purpose. Blogs such as Hugh Hewitt's and Michelle Malkin's are some of the increasing number of conservative political sites providing insights on candidates for key political seats at all levels.

3. Regarding voting, do it.Voting is a privilege shared by few other citizens of the world.We all need to exercise our right to vote.In addition consider volunteering as a poll watcher and support get out the vote efforts

4. References to supporting the Republican Party may not be well received by many who have given up hope on the GOP, but it is our current best chance to loyally oppose the Democratic Party's reckless lurch to socialism. Consider this time as an opportunity to remake the Republican Party. We have established that a nuanced, Republican lite non-ideology does not work. Ask Senator McCain. The Libertarian route has repeatedly proven to be a non-starter and recipe for, more often than not, Democratic success.

A return to traditional conservative principles of individual responsibility, limited but effective government, reduced taxation, strong national defense, energy independence and the stimulus of a new energy industry (oil drilling, nuclear power plant construction, clean coal and continued pursuit of alternative energy sources), appreciation of the right to life (for the unborn, for the aged), a responsible immigration policy, and a willingness to tolerate the Judeo-Christian Enlightenment tradition which has been the source of this nation's prosperity.

Many Republican Party organizations will need our assistance in the quest to rediscover their role as a party of loyal opposition committed to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This includes not only supporting proper candidates but reviewing current primary voting procedures which may have allowed, in many states and perhaps nationally, Democrats to have a greater influence on Republican nominees than Republicans.

5. If conservativism is to survive, concerned parents have to take a very active role in what is being taught to their children, wherever they may be schooling. Understand that there is an agenda at state schools which will likely only become more radicalized over the next several years. This may seem like the rhetorical comments of a knuckle dragging, narrow-minded ignorant conservative unable to appreciate the enlightenment offered by state education. It is the duty of thoughtful citizens to regularly re-evaluate their positions. On the matter of public education I take seriously the words of President Obama's good friend Bill Ayers. Ayers, in addition to being an unrepentant terrorist who bombed the nation's capitol, is also an internationally recognized Professor of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, recently elected vice president for curriculum of the 25,000-member American Educational Research Association (AERA), the nation’s largest organization of education-school professors and researchers. This board writes the curriculum agenda for public schools across

America

. Ayers terrorist history is reprehensible but worries me far less than the indoctrination he envisions for children in public schools. From the WSJ, "Mr. Ayers is the founder of the 'small schools' movement in which individual schools built around specific political themes push students to 'confront issues of inequity, war, and violence.' He believes teacher education programs should serve as 'sites of resistance to an oppressive system.' The point, says Mr. Ayers in his Teaching Toward Freedom is to 'teach against oppression, against

America

's history of evil and racism, thereby forcing social transformation.'"

Will we awaken from our self induced slumber and realize that the dream of individual liberty may have been just that, a short lived romp through a mesmerizing garden that required maintenance and upkeep we were unwilling to support? It seems we have beome a nation of Chance the Gardeners. Are we capable of recognizing that we are beginning a long day's journey into night? This journey is being expedited and its path obscured by the daily reaffirmation from leaders that chaos reigns and government must act now to save our nation. Our government retains all the superficial trappings of the vital republic it once was, but the advance of tyranny in premeditated fashion destroys the vital core that has made our nation great.

The words of the great American patriots, unknown to many Americans today, ring as true today as in 1776. From Thomas Paine, "These are the times that try men's souls: The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it Now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph."

Quaere verum

Are You Paying Attention?

2009-03-29T06:01:00.000-07:00

Back when the possibility of Barak Obama becoming President was a strong possibility I noticed a change occurring among the friends and people I associate with on a regular basis. There has always been a strong commitment with my friends towards God, family, patriotism, freedom, personal reliance and the belief that our forefathers new what they were doing when they founded the greatest country in the world.

But I found that many were "getting back to their roots". Now, an outsider looking at these families may say they were already checked out of normal society. They would see families of 6, 7, 8 or more kids, they would see parents homeschooling their children, stay at home mom's, a high proportion of business owners, a commitment to their church and a lack of material items. But I sensed something more than that was going on around me. Then Barak Obama became President Obama and he immediately began tearing down fibers that I believe hold this Country together; funding for worldwide abortion, rescinding the ban on stem cell research, government control of banks and financial institutions and the banning of guns just to mention a few.

It just happened that I was invited to several men's functions all in a short period of time, poker evenings, cigar get together and a dad's night out and I discovered these men are all on the move. They were either in the process of planning or some stage of completing things like, growing their own garden, moving their family out to more land or stocking up on guns. These are not a bunch of fanatics, these are smart men with great families. A group of guys I was honored to be associated with, whose opinions I trust and give much thought to and they were voicing concerns about issues happening in this country and how to handle them.

My family is moving forward with many of the suggestions I heard during these get together's and one of them was getting firearms. Something I haven't had around the house since my first child was born but something I felt was needed now more than before. I went to a gun show to get reacquainted with the industry and the products available. The entire time I was there I felt welcomed and among people with similar concerns, ideas and values, these were my people. Just regular dad's, some with their sons and a few with their entire family. I also noticed it was packed, wall to wall people. This wasn't a surprise since I have read how gun permits were up 40%, gun producers are up to 8 months behind on orders and some types of ammunition are jumping off the shelf. So my wife and I decided to buy some guns and start a program to get our whole family to learn to hunt, and protect oneself.

While at a local gun store I ran into the same quality of persons I did at the gun show. One of them who was a retired police officer from the great state of Texas. I began telling him my story of why I am now purchasing a hand gun and the reason why I feel my family needs this protection. He then retold a story of where he was involved in trying to bring order to the Hurricane Katrina area. He reminded me of how easy it was for some people once they became hungry to turn to violence. That if you did not poses a firearm at that time you were at a high risk of a home invasion, being robbed or even raped. He said that even though people knew they were being rescued at some point still resorted to violence. He told me that under duress there will always be some sizable portion of people who would turn to violence for their own survival.

This was my wake up call. Our Country is in economic duress, certainly not by any measure as bad as the great Depression but you wouldn't know it listening to our President. President Obama is and continues to feed the message that we are in for a whole lot more hurting. What if he's right? What if more people start having a harder time feeding their families? What if people who don't have any skills to provide for themselves or moral character decide they will just take it from me? My family isn't going to wait for that time to come before we are prepared and neither should you.

Judgment Day?

2009-03-26T18:58:00.000-07:00

I thought I would use the bulk of my blog this week to highlight something someone else wrote. It ties in with my last blog and goes with a continued theme I am hearing more and more from those of faith. There is a retired Catholic priest in my family that is the epitome of the righteous priest. He has lived a life of poverty and has served his community without self regard. In a conversation a few years ago, he alluded that we were coming up to a time of great changes in what our faith truly is. I have heard another prominent priest say that within the next 10 years, we may see Our Lord’s wrath. Another has said that our fate has been sealed by voting in Obama as our president. My parish priest has said (privately) that we should be prepared for something soon. All of these have come on the heels of our newly elected president. The third Fatima prophesy is thought to have not ever been truly revealed. Malachy, a 12th century Irish bishop, had revelation of the lineage of the Popes and by his recollection, we have only 2 more left. There are others that theorize what the Mayans meant by their 2012 prophesy. All of these culminate to the same direction. SOMETHING is coming. Those with deep faith and understanding in Jesus Christ have an idea.
Too many of us have our heads in the sand and shrug off the plain signs before us. If it looks, waddles and quack like a duck, guess what? It’s a duck! With all of the new policies Obama is putting forth, how much harder do you need to be hit over the head to understand what is happening? The democrats are setting us up for the coming of their messiah (please not to be confused by my Messiah, Jesus Christ) by enslaving the American people. When that fully happens, America will see that all they have left is Faith. Just as our Christian brothers and sisters did in Soviet Russia, Commie China, under Saddam’s Iraq, Palestine, various African nations and a host of other countries through out the world. It is coming. He is coming. To use a line I have heard some of our protestant brothers use, “You better have yourself right with Jesus.”

The following is an email that was sent out. It sums it up better than I could, hence why I have included it:
Within the passed few years, I’ve been hearing a call which I was unfamiliar with. Not that the call was new, but is one that the world in large part has been suppressing. Now I am finding myself bombarded with this warning regularly; and I feel compelled to share it. so that all may either consider this for the first time or recognize that you, too, have been receiving this message.
I am not a prophet nor a theologian, so I offer own my simplistic understanding and childlike trust. Many whom I believe to be credible are speaking about the coming tribulations. While no man can claim knowledge of the day and hour, a few are actually speaking in terms of years. I’ve heard it twice stated that within the next 10 years a major event or correction will take place or begin. I, myself, have felt an urgent sense to prepare.
Some might call me naïve or over reactionary, but it doesn’t matter. Judge me personally, however you choose, but please do not ignore the message that I am attempting to share with you. One need only to look around to realize that the current times are troubling and I realize that many people are anxious. While I won’t deny my underlying anxiety which is the result of my weakness, I see this time as a gift.
From the time of Christ and His apostles, we have been called to preparedness. At first, when the return did not come, scoffers began to introduce us to doubt. Now 2000 years later vanity, impatience, and ignorance have obscured the words that were given to us. We prepare for nothing, but waste our time and energy filling up our days with selfish gain and material possessions. Adam and Eve were punished with pain and hard labor. We seek to find our way around this punishment, but we may have missed the point of God’s decree. Jesus did not deny the cross of daily life as the poor Son of a carpenter. I think that I need to reflect on His daily toils, so that I may follow Him instead of whining and whimpering when I am faced with the struggles and challenges of my vocation.
The sweat and discomfort of today are a gift that are meant to strip away my weakness and forge my strength. The sense of urgency I feel seems to be a very real need to teach myself and my children to become more self-reliant. Actually, we need to be dependent on Him by stripping away our dependence on the convoluted things and people of this earthly home. When I pray for my daily bread, I must trust in His goodness to provide it and accept the amount and means by which He gives it to me. As for my children, I must teach them that all of the glory and thanksgiving belong to their Lord and Savior, who loves them beyond measure. I must teach them that they have a purpose and help them to prayerfully discern their vocations. Realizing that I am full of sin, I beg my Blessed Mother to protect them and form them to be her soldiers for Christ Jesus .
Allow your ears to be open. Let the scales fall away from your eyes. John Paul II instructed us to be not afraid. Surely, we can see that this instruction wasn’t simply a message meant for t-shirts and bumper stickers, but to be burned into our hearts and minds. There are signs and messages all around us. We cannot escape the troubles ahead, but we can heed this warning and recognize that it is a blessing.
God, Who is Mercy and Justice, promised to return. He instructed us in the Way so that we may have eternal life. His ways are far above our own and they are for our good. Rather than write about countless examples, I think it better to encourage you to be alert and rediscover for yourself what is true. Read your bible, read your catechism and believe what is written. We are being called to prepare TODAY. The call is not new, but perhaps we might see it as a renewed gift. Perhaps, in passed years we were placated with the belief that time was on our side, but today we are being reminded that the time is coming like a thief in the night. We can repent, we can pray for mercy, we are being giving another chance to prepare.
God will show mercy to the righteous and justice to those that choose to remain in their sin. Be not afraid because you already know that in the end Jesus Christ is victor, but do not do nothing. You were made by Him, for Him, proclaim that truth to all in everything you say and, perhaps more importantly, do. We will be persecuted for this. Do not doubt that fact, but do not let the persecutions distract nor deter you. Pray for those who are persecuted, so that they might be strengthened. Pray for our Holy Father because His persecutions have begun. Pray for the priests and bishops.
Ask the Holy Spirit to reveal His Truth and His Will to you today. For me today, I was led to read 2Peter 2 & 3. Again, I am not claiming any glory nor acclaim for myself in sharing this message. I am nothing, but I feel prompted to write these words perhaps for someone’s benefit. Go beyond me and find the Truth as it is being made evident to the world today. Prepare the way for the One, Who is the Way, the Truth and the Life.
All glory and honor be Your’s, Christ Jesus. Let not me nor mine be lost, but given to Thee through the hands of the Immaculate.
Our Lady of Perpetual Help, pray for us.
Our Lady of Good Counsel, pray for us.
Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us.
Mother of the Word, pray for us.

Police State?

2009-03-25T15:28:00.000-07:00

How would you like an MP pulling you over?
Currently in Schenectady NY there are 5 police officers facing disciplinary action or criminal charges of some sort. And the messy history of the men in blue in that town goes way back. The Schenectady Police Department employs approximately 160 sworn officers but those 5 in trouble along with the troubles of the past are giving the department a bad name. The town is small… only 60,000 and there doesn’t seem to be much trouble there except for the naughty police. Why not just get rid of them? It’s not that easy. It seems the union that they have there has made it nearly impossible to get rid of bad apples unless they can be criminally charged and convicted (which some have).The desire the “clean house” and start over is there but the union stands in the way. This has led the mayor of Schenectady to some pretty remarkable suggestions. First on the list is the possibility to merge with the county police department, or bring in the state police. But again the union would force the current long timers including any bad apples be considered for rehire first. Finally the Mayor suggested declaring Martial Law and bringing in the militia.

Military police.

In a regular US town not under dire emergency.

Do you remember Posse Comitatus post from last week?

Does anyone else have trouble getting a foothold on this slippery slope?

The Apathetic American

2009-03-24T04:34:00.000-07:00

I love this country and all that it stands for. I still get goose bumps during the national anthem and I thank those that served on Veterans Day. I do however have contempt for the majority of people that make up this country due to their lack of consistency and general apathy to what goes on in the world around them…unless it impacts them directly.

Take a trip back in time roughly 7 years ago to one of our countries darkest moments. 9/11 is embedded in our memories much like that of the Kennedy assassination and the bombing of Pearl Harbor…people remember all of the details of the time and place where they were when they heard the news etc. Moments like these are etched in our memories forever…time invariably stands still…at least for a little while.

This is where my angst comes in. For a short period of time following 9/11, I was inspired by the unity that the event of that day brought to this country. People banded together with a single purpose and goal to stand up for this great land much like our ancestors did some 60 years earlier. Race wasn’t an issue. Little things did not matter anymore. People were friendly to one another. The core values of being happy to be alive and having friends and loved ones meant so much to everyone. Why is it that good things never seem to last.

One could argue that this Nationalist sentiment and Patriotism has endured to this day but that would be wishful thinking at best. In fact, quite the opposite is true. Living in the New York area I was shocked at how quickly the tarnish formed on the Patriotism in the region. Once things stabilized and people realized that the world was not going to end...things got back to normal and people went back to their “old ways”. People in this country only care when something DIRECTLY impacts them...short of that Apathy reigns supreme.

If you were to doubt this assumption, fast forward to the events of the last 6 months. Up until last summer things were pretty quiet on the National Front. Sure there were fights to be had and issues to argue but nothing widespread enough to knock the National Apathy off its perch. Not until the stock market took its historic plunge. Sure people would complain about Bush, they would lament at the housing crisis, mock the war on terror…all over cocktails before dinner. Still, it didn’t really effect that many…not to where there was outrage. You want to incent the public in the United States…hit ‘em where it hurts…in their 401(k).

Call me old fashioned but I wish I lived in the 30’s, 40’s or 50’s. Sure life was hard back then but more importantly, people in this country cared about this country. People worked hard and believed in the American dream. People knew that if they put forth the effort they could succeed and make a better life for themselves. They came from all walks of life and cared for their families, their neighborhood and their country. They took pride in their right to vote and used it wisely to elect those that they believed would serve them best. People took pride in themselves and the way they dressed…it was a more formal time but I feel a more dignified one as well. People cared…apathy was reserved for those that were truly oppressed.So how about it America? How about a little consistency? Why don’t we all just make an effort to read, listen, learn and talk more about what is going on in this world instead of only when it hurts?

When Will We Speak?

2009-03-23T00:27:00.000-07:00

We are a blessed nation. What other country can boast of a Speaker of the House who is a visionary Catholic scholar, as comfortable speaking on the Augustinian view on ensoulment, as she is on the inexplicable phenomenon of 500,000,000 Americans losing their jobs every month our nation is without a “recovery package”. The Speaker’s formidable intellect was once again on display when she was asked last month how expanding family planning services might stimulate the economy? Speaker Pelosi replied:

"Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government."

Pelosi, Reid, Biden, and Obama….Oh my. How about a mulligan on this one. Well, might we be able to exchange the plague America has wrought upon herself for the trivial annoyance of infestation by frogs, flies, boils, and locusts? Yes, elections do have consequences.

Even before this comment, there has been clear evidence that policy makers, while not all as vocal, are willing to at least give consideration to the utilitarian view, rooted in eugenics, and so candidly championed by the Speaker. Eugenics is the study of agencies under social control that improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations either physically or mentally. Utilitarianism is the belief that the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its contribution to overall utility or happiness. Succinctly, utilitarianism is the greatest good for the greatest number.

The work of Charles Darwin, in particular The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, formed the foundation of modern eugenic thought and inspired its founder, Francis Galton. Galton’s efforts led to an explosion of eugenic thought and practice which had its birth not in Nazi Germany but in the United States. The most staggering evidence of this is the forced sterilization and relocation program carried out in the United States over a period of thirty years in thirty one states. During this time over 20,000 “unfit” individuals were sterilized against their will. Notable amongst Eugenic advocates was Margaret Sanger. The founder of the American Birth Control League (ABCL) organization, the ABCL leadership council was dominated by members of the American Eugenics Society. Sanger ultimately went on to found the organization which became Planned Parenthood. Margaret Sanger stated birth control "is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives." Say what you want about Speaker Pelosi, she is honest in saying what she thinks about birth control, its usefulness in containing costs to society and her commitment to support it. Sanger would be proud of Speaker Pelosi’s candor.

Abortion, a primary plank of the Democratic Party, always shrouded in the language of “reproductive freedom”, has been the “secret” weapon in the liberal utilitarian march. At least two communities are prime evidence of this agenda. Exhibit one is infants with Down syndrome. Down Syndrome Awareness day was March 21st. Down Syndrome results from an extra (3) number 21 chromosomes…thus Down Syndrome Awareness Day is 3/21. The march of the utilitarians has led inexorably to the targeting of unborns with Down syndrome. It is very possible, given the current recommendations of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) that all pregnant women be offered screening for Down syndrome that in the future there will be no infants born with Down syndrome. It is a disturbing fact that 80-90% of unborn infants diagnosed with Down syndrome are aborted, and even more will be identified with current screening recommendations. Rates of births of Down syndrome infants have dropped in many nations. Denmark recently reported rates have been reduced by 50% with current prenatal testing. This is looked at by policy makers as a reduction in birth defects. Eugenicists, costumed as supporters of women’s health, reproductive rights, fiscal responsibility, and “quality of life”, wield abortion as a primary weapon in the battle to eliminate Down syndrome.

Despite the rapid disappearance of infants being born with Down syndrome, some of the greatest advocates for individuals with Down syndrome are incapable of confronting the larger utilitarianism at work. There is insistence from some advocates that if we are to reverse this disturbing trend of aborting unborn children with Down syndrome, we need to educate the community. Some believe that if more parents understood that individuals with Down syndrome can be functional community members, this trend of “discrimination” could be altered. Such work must be and is being carried out by tireless Down syndrome advocates; yet while all Down syndrome advocates ultimately believe that aborting the unborn with Down syndrome is “discriminatory”, the language is laughable. Only in 21st Century America would we call the systemic selective termination, abortion, and targeted killing of a population of the unborn, with a condition that is not life threatening but will render them less capable mentally, “discriminatory”.

As the ability of scientists to diagnose potentially undesirable traits in the unborn progresses, there will no doubt be more called to the eugenic banner. Genes for a predisposition to cancer, autism, and homosexuality are under investigation. Such diagnostic “advances” will lead to the further elimination of many unborns. What may be less consistently discussed in these cases is the uncertainty that even with a possible genetic predisposition it is not known whether such genetic material would ultimately be expressed in an individual. That aside, the ability to assess unborns for even mild abnormalities or a preferred sex will support a very personal eugenics. Imperfection, and eugenics, will mean different things to different people, and science will be expanding to accommodate the increasing demands from states and individuals for diversity in eugenic selection. What will become increasingly inapparent to our increasingly secular citizenry is the fact that we are all imperfect, in somebody’s eyes.

Peter Singer, the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and a leader in utilitarian thought, has openly stated what few find controversial, that it is moral and ethical to abort unborns with Down syndrome. Professor Singer, speaking for an increasingly vocal element of the utilitarian movement however, takes the next logical utilitarian leap. Professor Singer also supports the killing of infants with Down syndrome, and infants and individuals with other mentally and physically impairing conditions. From Professor Singer, “the fact that a being is a human being, in the sense of a member of the species Homo sapiens, is not relevant to the wrongness of killing it; it is, rather, characteristics like rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness that make a difference. Infants lack these characteristics. Killing them, therefore, cannot be equated with killing normal human beings, or any other self-conscious beings.” To the utilitarian, targeting the unborn population with Down syndrome offers the opportunity to eliminate a group of infants who, in their judgment, are incapable of societal integration, are a burden on families and communities, and would otherwise live a life of “suffering”.

Some have referred to the unborn with Down syndrome as the canary in the eugenic coal mine. The Down syndrome population is certainly the current canary in the ever expanding netherworld catacombs of the eugenicist coal mine. The mine floor, however, is littered with the bodies of millions of other victims. The African-American unborn infant population is the second exhibit in the expanding eugenic exhibit. African-Americans have historically used abortion services at three to four times the rate of other groups. The comments of Rep. Pelosi bring this well into perspective. While the Speaker prefers to use the terms family planning and contraception, refusing to use the “a” word, she makes her point. It seems unlikely that the Speaker is talking about family planning services reducing cost in families supported by “high skill people who are already professionals” or families supported by “white male construction workers”. These are not the groups that concern the Speaker, nor the President’s Economic Advisor Robert Reich for that matter. No, the Speaker is referring to individuals in low income groups who, if they were allowed to see the natural result of sexual liberties we promoted in their communities over the last forty years, would bankrupt the ever diminishing assets of state and federal treasuries. I will go out on a limb and presume the Speaker is referring to the African American community.

A rough estimate is that approximately 10-12,000,000 unborn black infants have been sacrificed on the abortion altar since the passage of Roe v. Wade in 1973. That represents an abortion rate of black infants at least three times the rate of white abortion rates. A rarely discussed medical finding is that abortion elevates the risk, in a dose dependent fashion (more abortions more risk), for a future extremely premature baby born at less than 32 weeks. Such deliveries can result in the death of the infant or injuries associated with extreme prematurity, including debilitating cerebral palsy. The evidence for this is powerful and based on over 100 studies over the past 40 years. So the end result of abortion is...well....it doesn’t end. For the black community it has meant not only the loss of millions of infants, it has meant extreme prematurity rates that are three to four times that of other groups. This means large numbers of premature deaths of very small African-American infants and much higher rates of cerebral palsy.

G.K. Chesterton, noted author and opponent of eugenic thought in the early 20th Century quotes, in Eugenics and Other Evils (Perry edition), the eugenics founder Francis Galton. Galton writes openly and unapologetically of strategies for developing acceptance of eugenic theory. “The course of procedure that lies within the functions of a learned and active society includes persistence in setting forth the national importance of eugenics. There are three stages to be passed through: (1) It must be made familiar as an academic question, until its exact importance has been understood and accepted as fact (Global warming anyone?) (2) It must be recognized as a subject whose practical development deserves serious consideration. (3) It must be introduced into the national conscience, like a new religion. It has, indeed, strong claims to become an orthodox religious tenet of the future, for eugenics cooperates with the workings of human nature by securing that humanity shall be represented by the fittest races.”

Chesterton offers another pearl, “There is one strong, outstanding thing about Eugenics, and that is its meanness. Wealth, and the social science supported by wealth, had tried an inhuman experiment. The experiment had entirely failed. They sought to make wealth accumulate and they made men decay. Then, instead of confessing the error, and trying to restore the wealth, or attempting to repair the decay, they are trying to cover their first cruel experiment with a more cruel experiment. They put a poisonous plaster on a poisonous wound. Vilest of all, they actually quote the bewilderment produced among the poor by their first blunder as a reason for allowing them to blunder again. They are apparently ready to arrest all the opponents of their system as mad, merely because the system was maddening.”

We are well down the road of Galton’s stages for the promulgation of a eugenic religion. It is standard fare now in the black community. African-American political leaders doggedly search for all variety of disparities and espouse their elimination, but in adhering to the abortion industry which has helped bring them to power, not only accept but vociferously defend policies which slay 300,000 black unborn infants a year. Their solution is to double down on affirmative action and diversity training which they claim will abate the racism cited as the root of all evils in the black community. Parents of Down syndrome children are routinely asked, “Didn’t you have the test?”, close their eyes to the wanton decimation of their communities ranks and put their faith in education to turn back the tide of the ultimate from of “discrimination.” Nancy Pelosi’s comments are stunning, not because they are revealing to anyone who has been watching, but because she, like Galton, feels no remorse at openly stating a eugenic agenda.

Rep. Pelosi went on to comment, later, “Let the State give every defective full knowledge of how to avoid children, and supply them free with contraceptives; better still, offer them a substantial monetary reward to consent to sterilization, and as long as they are given to understand that the operation ‘will make no difference’, they will in most cases agree.” Most of us would not be surprised to hear the Speaker utter these words on a national stage. Amazingly, I think few of us would have been shocked at all to hear her make such a statement, and some might actually agree. That is how desensitized many of us have become. These are not the Speaker's words, however. The above quote is from one of the primary eugenic journals of the 1920s, Birth Control News, published by Margaret Sanger.

Advocates of eugenic thought have increasingly fortified their position in American society. Like a malignant, determined tumor they have metastasized throughout their host over the past 100 years. These elements are now poised for a tumor explosion. While focusing on the unborn and young life in this discussion, the utilitarian menace is an equal opportunity destroyer, seeking out the defenseless whether they be unborn, young, old or otherwise infirmed. Maternity, geriatric, and chronic disease wards are target rich environments for the utilitarians. America may not have fully acquiesced in the Eugenics war but the clock is ticking. Lest we develop the will to overcome this utilitarian cancer, the end result will inevitably be the literal and figurative death of the host, an end to the American society built on individual liberty and the right to self-determination.

It may be that the outrageous targeting of unborn African-Americans and unborns with Down syndrome for elimination, if exposed, could be mobilized to expose the nefarious motives of increasingly utilitarian political and social policy. Many in racial and disability advocacy cling to the sacredness of women’s reproductive rights and the hope that education will stave off decimation of their communities. What we all must ultimately recognize is that the true utilitarian has no loyalties in determining who the non-persons are, who are the unfit. Authorities in the utilitarian movement reserve the right to judge cognizance, self-awareness, and the capacity to reason. These qualities define personhood for utilitarians. Many (the elderly, newborn and others) humans will find themselves unable to meet the utilitarian criteria of self-conscious beings or persons. Infanticide and euthanasia then become the order of the day. In Holland, euthanasia is common practice and protocols for euthanasia of infants are well developed and have been published in major American medical journals.

While we may not yet be the Netherlands, we have a President who has made it clear that it is "above my paygrade" to state when life begins. That said, the President seems willing to make some assumptions, given that he was unwilling, as a state senator, to support a vote on the same Born Alive Infant Protection Act that was supported by the staunchest abortion supporters in the US Senate. The Freedom of Choice Act, also supported by the President, will allow for an unprecedented expansion of access to abortion. Many seem willing to sprint down the path of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism, in deploying abortion and euthanasia, does not discriminate. There are multiple groups that are and will be targeted by the proponents of such a philosophy and we must be willing to confront this immoral ideology that has devalued life, born and unborn, to such a degree that it is left for a few to decide on a grand scale what life is worth living and what life is not.

At his time in our history, government appears to have become ungovernable. Chesterton described the rise of the Progressives in 1914 as a period where “law has become lawless; that is it cannot see where laws should stop. The chief feature of our time is the meekness of the mob and the madness of the government. In this atmosphere it is natural enough that medical experts, being authorities, should go mad as well.” As I have listened to very well meaning Down syndrome and African American leaders dismiss opposition to abortion in favor of advocacy strategies based on educating the public in an attempt to turn back societal tides, I am reminded of the words of Martin Neimoller, German Lutheran pastor in Berlin who lived through the rise and fall of the Nazis. He was an outspoken proponent for accepting the burden of collective guilt for WW II. He viewed this as a means of atonement for the suffering that the German nation, through the Nazis, had caused before and during WW II. He was imprisoned in 1937 and sent to Dachau. He barely escaped execution and wrote these words shortly after he emerged from prison:

First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.

Quaere verum

Taxing AIG

2009-03-20T05:41:00.000-07:00

The United States Congress is furious that employees of AIG are receiving personal compensation that the legislators have deemed excessive and unwarranted. AIG has responded with something similar to “…it’s in the employees contract, we have to pay them…” Well the leaders of the free world, President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are not going to get duped by that excuse, they have something in their back pocket, and it’s called taxation. The House of Representatives (and soon the Senate) have passed a bill imposing a 90% tax on AIG employee bonuses and in some cases taxing 100% leaving the worker with nothing. "I look forward to receiving a final product that will serve as a strong signal to the executives who run these firms that such compensation will not be tolerated," the president said in a statement.
I am not outraged as so many American’s are about executives of a U.S. bailed out company receiving a “Bonus”. But I am very scared that our citizens don’t recognize what has really happened. Let’s just review a few things. First, this is a United States Company and those receiving monies are U.S. Citizens. This is crucial in realizing that what is happening to them can happen to us. Second, the employees have a written contract to receive these funds. In our Country a contract is honored by the law. Third, the word “Bonus” is nothing more than deferred compensation. Lastly, the US Congress has passed a law targeted towards taxing a specific company.

The people receiving the “bonuses” are just like you and me, well several live a lot larger life styles than me but I am happy for them not jealous. These citizens made a deal, a contract with a company on what their job is and what they would take in compensation for doing it. None of us have read their contracts and have no idea whether they completed the tasks necessary to receive the compensation. But I am sure that under the duress AIG is currently under the employees must have fulfilled their tasks in order to get paid. This is no different than the contract I have with my kid’s orthodontist. I will pay him in full when he completes the task of making their teeth straight. He didn’t give me any guarantees that when he’s finished that my kids smile will provide them a better paying job or more dates. I may have hoped for that outcome but that wasn’t the deal.

You may say, “Fine, but they received tax payer money to keep the company afloat and without it these people wouldn’t have a job and therefore wouldn’t be getting a bonus”. Perhaps, but the company didn’t go under, they didn’t go into bankruptcy, they continued on running the business. Our representatives made the decision to spend our money to keep that business from going into bankruptcy. Our government made the decision to spend billions of dollars to make sure that these people who are now receiving bonuses stayed in action. You can’t have it both ways. The deal made by Obama, Pelosi and Reid was we need AIG not to fail, so here’s the money. Senator Dodd from Connecticut even had added into the deal that the bonuses were protected. That was the deal, the contract, the agreement.

So now we have an outraged public and every politician is deflecting this anger onto AIG as greedy people, with no conscience and self-serving one Senator even calling for them to commit suicide. To address the grumblings of its people our leaders have decided they have the authority to specifically tax a particular company or person in any manner they choose. Think about this, what is stopping them from coming after you? Do you think you’re safe because you “don’t make enough money”? Ask yourself, how much is not enough? Do you think your business is safe because “I’m just a small business owner?” Really, how small is too small? Perhaps you have said “well I’m not taking government money”. Is socialized health care, Medicare, social security, food stamps, mortgage assistance, or State colleges government assistance?

We all need to peel back the onion and see how we are losing freedoms and liberties at an alarming rate.

Who is Responsible?

2009-03-19T19:08:00.000-07:00

One thing that has dominated the airwaves of late and has been fodder for water cooler conversations from Coast to Coast has been the Madoff scandal. There is no need to rehash the specifics since it has been done ad nauseam over the last several weeks. We all agree that Madoff is pond scum and should rot in jail for what he did but I want to address a different take on this as well as a broader examination on something that is far too common these days – lack of personal responsibility.

When did America become the “it wasn’t me” or “it’s not my fault” nation? Regardless of the topic whether it is finances, education, job status etc, people are always quick to point the finger at others. This point has never been more prevalent then in the instances surrounding the Madoff scam.

First, what Madoff did was wrong. His Ponzi scam was illegal and he used deception to fraudulently “invest” money for the rich and famous. People involved in the scheme have lost millions of dollars. Many have lost “everything” and are left wondering how they will survive. Every television station has reported on these poor individuals and their plight often times fighting for ways for them to recoup their losses in some way. Madoff should pay or The government should bail them out etc.

Really? Let me offer a dissenting opinion. How about each one of these people recognize that they ALL made a bad financial decision. They ALL invested their money on their own free will and that investment went to Zero. To those that say that it wasn’t their fault as an advisor made the decision to invest with Madoff…those individuals still made the choice to invest with that advisor. Any way you try to deflect it, it still comes down to the decision that the individual made on what to do with their money. Trust me, when these people were making millions on other investments over the years, I will assure you they were bragging at cocktail parties as to how smart they were or how great their investment “team” was. It is typical how when things go bad, everyone else is to blame.

I would love to see the ONE individual step forward and say “you know what, I made a bad decision and now I have to live with it and move forward”. Taking responsibility for ones actions either good or bad WAS a cornerstone of this great country. Somehow, greed, apathy and irresponsibility have become the NEW way of life. It’s alright, corporate America has been getting away with this for quite some time…can you say Bailout. Wake up people! The only bailout that is on the horizon will occur when you stand up and recognize that YOU must take care of YOU. You are responsible to you, your family and most importantly your actions and decision made on their behalf.