Cell Phones are Universal

Cluster41 Comments

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the AHA this week, and the liberal universe is all a flutter over the possibility of the bill being struck down, which it should be. In my opinion, the personal mandate is not even close to being constitutional, and considering the severalty nature of the bill, if the mandate is struck down, the entire bill is struck down, which would be a good thing and may allow us to have an adult conversation about health care without the input from people like Nancy Pelosi. This current bill was put together behind closed doors on a highly partisan basis, by narrow special interest groups, and is still not universal, nor efficient, and is proving to be a typical government bureaucratic over reach. For example, if this bill were to pass, I would be required to obtain insurance that covers substance abuse despite the fact that I don’t do drugs, don’t smoke, and rarely even have a drink. But according to the ruling elite, I need to have substance abuse coverage within my insurance policy. Brilliant, right? Well that’s a good example of how big government, know it all liberals like to govern. Find a minor problem, and design a solution that impacts everyone. In this case, approximately 13% of the population is without health care insurance, so liberals have designed a program that adversely impacts 87% of us to accommodate that minority. Again, brilliant right? The reality is is that this bill is so convoluted, so awash in bureaucratic red tape and such an over reach response to what that actual problem calls for, that striking it down and starting from scratch would be just common sense. So what to do?

First of all, let’s first admit that the vast majority of Americans do have insurance, and according to recent polls, most of them are quite pleased with their coverage. So the issue is finding a cost efficient way to bring health care insurance to the 13% that either can’t afford insurance, or simply choose to go without, which is a reality liberals do not want to admit. Currently, the largest health care insurance provider in the market place is the federal government, so liberals are simply trying to resolve this problem by expanding the already sizable reach of the government, and considering the current problems we are facing with the federal government in the lead already, giving them a bigger role, hardly makes sense right? Wouldn’t it make sense to go the other direction and allow the free market place to fill the void, and allow consumers to make their own decisions? The free market place is an amazing mechanism, and consumers are a lot smarter than government gives them credit for. Despite the fact that cell phones were very expensive when they first came out, today, you can buy one for $10, and I would guess that the vast majority of those 13% of people without health insurance, have a cell phone. Let’s look at another example of car insurance. I will wager to say that a majority of that 13% also drive, and have car insurance which can be purchased for as little as $20 a month according to the commercials in my area, so that’s two examples of the free market bringing products to consumers and providing them at a cost that is universally affordable. How about if we try that with health insurance? If health care insurance providers were allowed to compete in every state, for everyone’s business, and were allowed to design their policies to meet individual needs, I can guarantee you that costs would come down, substantially. Combine this effort with tort reform, and get the government and lawyers away from the doctor patient relationship, and you will achieve universal health care.

How to Deal With the “Bus Monitor Bullies”

Mark Noonan59 Comments

I’m sure you’ve all heard the story and, of course, the rather astounding news that the bus monitor has been lavished with donations from the general public.  But there is a bit of a debate on what to do with the kids who did the bullying.  So let’s debate – choose one of the following options:

1.  Carefully tell them that it was mean to do that and that they shouldn’t do it again.

2.  Give them detention so they’ll think about what they did.

3.  Send them to jail so they can learn to be first-rate criminal barbarians.

4.  Give them psychological counseling so they’ll learn that their bad behavior is someone else’s fault.

5.  Spend $100 billion on anti-bullying PSAs.

6.  Flog them.

I tend to think that a child, faced with the prospect of having his back laid open with a whip, might decide to behave himself.  But, then again, maybe the earnest entreaty by a caring psychologist will get the kid to do the right thing.  I mean, after all, we’ve been using the caring, psychological model for 40 years or so now and its turned our schools from places where the biggest problems were chewing gum and running the halls to places where you have to be on guard against rape and murder, so we can see how well child psychology works out as a palliative.  I mean, let’s get real here – the bus monitor wasn’t physically assaulted, so the bullies in a sense are right up there as honor students, relatively speaking.

When we add in the rest of the benefits of public schools – illiteracy, teen pregnancy and a lot of self-esteem – it just might be that a larger dose of what we’ve given will work.  You never can tell with these things…just one more anti-bullying public service announcement might be all it takes to turn these kids around.

His Majesty, Barack I

Mark Noonan20 Comments

With the completely unconstitutional imposition of the DREAM Act and, now, the absurd claim of Executive Privilege regarding the “Fast and Furious” scandal, a lot of conservatives and libertarians are furious with President Obama over his assumption of rather autocratic powers.  But I ask everyone to pause for a moment – one has to consider just what sort of government the United States has.  To do this, I think it best to refer to an outside observer of proven sympathy for the United States, Winston Churchill:

…The rigid Constitution of the United States, the gigantic scale and strength of its party machinery, the fixed terms for which public officers and representatives are chosen, invest the President with a greater measure of autocratic power that was possessed before the war by the Head of any great State…

Churchill was referring, in that instance, to Woodrow Wilson.  Keep in mind the time frame Churchill was using – this was the day of Nicholas II of Russia, Wilhelm II of Germany and Franz Josef of Austria.  And yet Churchill was asserting that these three men had, in practice, less autocratic power than was held by Woodrow Wilson.  And, he was right.  Churchill correctly perceived a truth about the the United States which to this day escapes nearly everyone:  the President of the United States, while his term lasts, possesses an immense amount of autocratic power.  Boiled down, in our President we have an elected king – limited in real terms only by three things:

1.  His term of office.

2.  His inability to appropriate funds without Congressional approval.

3.  The risk of impeachment.

Lincoln understood this – stating that he would maintain the contest with the South until he died or his term ended.   When in 1864 Lincoln looked to be the loser of the Presidential election he was yet determined to win victory between election day and the end of his term (which in those days ended in March, not January).  And he could have done it – Congress could have cut off funds for additional military power, but the military power he already had was sufficient and no power in the United States government could have prevented him from ordering Grant to continue, election results be darned.

The real lesson in Obama’s abuse of power is this:  always have a great deal of care whom is elected President.  Because you’ve got him for four years and while you can limit the amount of money he spends, you can’t really limit what he does with the money he is allowed to spend.  Jokingly, someone has written a list of 10 things Romney can do after he takes office in the manner of Obama’s DREAM Act – among them, cease enforcement of various environmental laws and of any tax rate above 18%.  It was put out as a joke, but it is also a reality.  Suppose Romney did tell the IRS not to prosecute anyone who failed to pay more than 18% of their income as taxes – what could anyone do?  Impeach him?  Impeachment has only come up three times in American history: with Andrew Johnson it was a GOP witch hunt against a War Democrat; with Nixon it was a Democrat witch hunt against someone they didn’t like; with Clinton we actually had a genuinely impeachable offense but Democrats ensured that it wouldn’t go anywhere.  Impeach Obama?  It would require the votes of 20 Senate Democrats to do it – short of committing rape or murder live, on television, do you think that there is anything Obama can do which would move 20 Senate Democrats to vote to convict?  Get real!

We elect a king every four years and then allow that king one more shot at an additional four years.  In office, he is mostly limited by his own conscience and sense of right and wrong.  A President who simply does not care about the law (or, as in Obama’s case, understand what a law is) is highly dangerous – as we can see with Obama.  For more than two centuries we have been extraordinarily lucky – even with a cad like Clinton or a twisted man like Nixon, there was still a sense of respect for the Constitution and a desire to live up to great predecessors – looming over all was the figure of Washington, who defined what a President is and offered a model for all who came after if they cared at all about the United States.  Trouble is, if we get someone who doesn’t care about the United States – who, in a real sense, has nothing but contempt for Washington and the edifice he raised – then we’re in a bad way.

Now there are some practical steps we can take – from re-asserting Congressional power to declare war, to putting more strings on what is done with appropriated money, to insisting that no US ground troops are deployed outside the United States except during time of declared war.  These and other measures can hem in a President a bit and ensure that he seeks Congressional cooperation before doing something.  But, fundamentally, unless we want to re-write our Constitution in to a parliamentary abomination (ie, where the head of government is the leader of the House of Representatives and the President is a mere figurehead), then we simply have to ensure that when we elect a person to the Presidency that we are sure he or she is fit for the job.  King Obama is the first man we’ve elected who is entirely unfit by temperment, training and education for the Presidency – and it shows in the way he is (deliberately or not is immaterial) wrecking the manner of American government.

So, rather than whine about what Obama has done, let us set to work with a will to oust him on November 6th and then lay the lesson to heart:  never be fooled again.

Open Thread

Cluster37 Comments

Have at it folks, There is a lot going on, so I want to know what’s on your mind:

– your thoughts on Obama’ s immigration decree

– your thoughts on MSNBC editing another tape to make Romney look bad having learned nothing from the Trayvon Martin shameful incident

– your thoughts on calls for Holder’s resignation

– your thoughts on Romney’s campaign so far – is his message resonating

And so many other issues of interest, so have at it and keep it civil

 

 

Hey, Obama: Where is My Hoover Dam?

Mark Noonan11 Comments

Interesting news story:  Voyager 1 is now on the very edge of the outer solar system and will soon enter inter-stellar space, the first man-made object to do so.  Clearly, a milestone in human achievement.  But here’s the kicker – its actually an achievement of the 1970’s, as Voyager was launched in 1977.  That got me thinking – our government has been wasting bags of money for the past 80 years, but we’re always getting less and less from it.

Think of it like this:  when FDR started us on our path to bankruptcy, we at least got the Hoover Dam; the Civilian Conservation Corps (any of you camping enthusiasts out there can probably name a half dozen camping/fishing spots which were created by the CCA); Mt Rushmore.  For Ike’s bags of money spent we got the inter-state highway system.  For JFK’s profligacy we got the Moon shot.  It all started to go wrong with LBJ; his building of the Great American Bankruptcy got us the “Great Society” and Vietnam.  Nixon just went from bad to worse – spending still shot up and we lost Vietnam and got millstones like the EPA.  And on and on it went – until, now, we’ve got Obama…who has spent at least $3 trillion more than would have been spent if McCain had been elected, and what did we get for it?  Solyndra.

Our liberals are spending more money than ever and we are getting less and less for it – just more government; more payoffs to cronies; more bailouts for the well-connected.  We, the people, are more than used to getting robbed blind by liberals…but at least we used to get something useful thrown in.  Like the Hoover Dam and the Moon shot; in other words, things which useful people can either use or at least glory in.  Can you imagine the shivers of horror among liberals if anyone suggesting building another Hoover Dam?  Carving another mountain in to a grand, American monument?  If, on the other hand, you offered to re-carve Mt. Rushmore in to a Gay Pride display, liberals would allow it – with no more than 10 years of bureaucratic red tape between proposal and first action.

Small minded, cowardly, little cretins who’s only concern is their place at the trough – that is modern, American liberals.  That, by the way, is what was rejected in Wisconsin.  That, also, is what the battle is ultimately about – will America shake off the chains of liberalism and rise to new heights of glory, or will we go on our knees and, fearful of doing anything, die a slow, painful death?  Will we, that is, take the path of least resistance until the whole United States is Detroit?  Or will we recover our courage and not only save America, but even return Detroit to its glory days?

Obama offers us nothing but more bureaucrats and more money for his cronies – Romney offers us a return to American greatness.  A return of an America which can, indeed, put a man on the Moon.

My choice is made; and never have I had an easier one.

Dreamers

Cluster31 Comments

So Friday was an interesting day. Julius Caesar or I mean President Obama decreed that illegal aliens between the ages of 18-30 I believe along with some other criteria, will no longer have to  worry about being deported and can obtain work visas. A noble idea to be sure, and one that would find little argument amongst conservatives, but the manner in which it was done is not only politically questionable but once again is legally questionable. Obama has a sworn duty to uphold the laws, and can not give orders to any federal agency to over look those laws, so once again Obama may find himself in court. But the bigger question is the political one, and there are plenty of those, justifiably. First of all, Obama had two years of a super Congressional majority during which he could have accomplished a lot, and actually did, much to mine, and many others chagrin, but failed to do anything about immigration reform which he had actually promised to do. Instead, he spent that time chasing the democrats holy grail of government run healthcare. That should tell the Hispanic community of where his priorities are, and this last minute bone he is throwing them is an actual insult in my opinion. Of course that is in stark contrast as to how the Obama sycophantic media is reporting it, according to them, this was a deft move that caught Romney off guard.

However this recent stunt by Obama is typical liberal – appeasing and assuaging the proletariat with feel good, do nothing policies that only serve to keep the masses wanting more. What needs to be done is serious reform, with compassionate measures such as this built in to the bill. In fact Marco Rubio is, or was, working on a very similar piece of legislation that he planned to introduce to the floor, you know the proper method of getting things done, until Obama delivered his sermon, so this is hardly an idea that will be fought. In fact, President Bush initiated reform legislation which was defeated mainly by conservatives because of the amnesty aspect, but there is common ground and their is a political will I believe on both sides of the aisle to get something done. A real leader would recognize and work wintin the system to get something meaningful, instead iwe get just a band aid on a gaping wound for our country and we will need serious people to resolve this problem – not some narcissistic, egomaniac looking to win an election.

The Race Card

Cluster84 Comments

Well it’s started, and it will only get worse. This morning on the Obama reelection network, MSNBC, Melissa Harris-Perry and her guests are bemoaning the fact that Obama is seen through the lens as the “first black president” and what an extra burden that is. Evidently they have forgotten how they celebrated that fact just 4 years ago, and the fact that Obama has taken every opportunity to remind people of that fact – “if I had a son he would look like Trayvon”, so why the disconnect? Obama is slipping amongst “white voters” so it must be because of racism right? After all, white unemployment is less than black unemployment so according to MSNBC, white voters should be flocking to the polls to vote for this President and if they don’t, well then they’re just ungrateful racists.

Yesterday, Sam Donaldson chimed in to support the noton that the recent heckling on behalf of the daily caller news reporter was because ……… wait for it ……. Obama is black. No other president has ever had to deal with rude press reporters before right Sam?  It seems to me Sam that you perfected the “rude press” persona, so it seems a little disingenuous for you to ascribe mal intent to other reporters following your lead.

This is going to be a vey interesting political summer folks, and the democrats will play every card they can to keep Obama in office. The race card will be just one of them, but it will trump all others.

Happy Father’s day to all you dad’s out there!

UPDATE:

As an addition to this thread, in my opinion we will have a very hard time moving this country forward, if we continue to wallow in the ethnic, race and financial divide that democrats, and Obama have us mired in. We are all children of God, regardless of our skin color, with the same needs and wants for ourselves and our family, so let’s stop listening to those who want to divide us for their political futures, and let’s start focusing on common sense policies that will benefit all of us, and not just a few.

Let’s Be Honest

Cluster45 Comments

I have grown really tired of the dishonesty not only coming from Obama, but also coming from the sycophantic media. He, and they, continue to perpetuate false hoods on a daily basis. Let’s take for instance the petulant need of Obama to constantly blame the bad economy on Bush’s policies. Well if we were honest about this issue, we would be blaming Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike, who used Fed money to incentivize banks to ignore their standard lending procedures, and give mortgages to people who would not normally qualify. This practice encouraged other sets of risky financial products, including the bundling of said securities and selling them off on the secondary market, which in turn created the derivatives debacle, and the risks continued to multiply. These sell off’s on behalf of the banks were designed to get those risky securities off of their books and on to someone else’s, and were certainly not a result of any of Bush’s policies. In fact, had Congress heeded the numerous warnings of Bush, we may not have found ourselves in this situation, however they did not, and representatives Frank and Waters applauded the efforts of the GSE’s as late as 2006, saying that there “was no problem with Fannie and Freddie”.

Another completely dishonest message Obama is trying to sell is that Bush deregulated the financial markets, which in fact he did not. Bush did not sign one piece of legislation deregulating the financial industry during his 8 years in office, not one. The last two pieces of legislation that lowered regulations on the financial sector were signed by Bill Clinton in 1999, and in fact as late as 2008, Clinton was defending that legislation, so again, blaming Bush for deregulation is not only wrong, it’s a lie and Obama and the media know it.

How can we ever get to the point of having an adult conversation on finding real and lasting solutions to our problems, if we are not honest about the origins? Here’s another one. Contrary to what Obama wants you to believe, this recession is not the worst recession since the great depression, not even close. In 1980 there was double digit inflation, double digit interest rates, and double digit unemployment, yet Reagan had it turned around by 1984 as a result of lowering tax burdens, lowering regulations and getting government out of the way. Obama has done the exact opposite – increasing regulations, increasing ancillary taxes, increasing the cost of living, and essentially injecting government in nearly every aspect of our life. The recent composite of the Life of Julia pretty much sums up what Obama believes – that many people are incapable of making it on their own without government help and this is a notion we need to move away from, by moving the Obama’s out of the White House on January 20, 2013.