What Is Seen And What Is Not Seen-The Real Effects Of Socialized Medicine
What will a government takeover of the healthcare industry do to the American economy? “It probably won’t mean very much.” An article published in this morning’s Wall Street Journal claims, further explaining that “[s]ocialism, or social democracy, or whatever else you want to call it, doesn’t seem to have hurt stockholders overseas too badly. As evidence, the article cites the fact that “[o]ver the past 10 years, according to MSCI Barra, stock markets across socialized Europe have produced total returns of about 2% a year in U.S. dollar terms, according to MSCI Barra. The figure for France is just over 2% and for left-wing Britain and Holland nearer to 3%. Pinko Denmark has boomed by 10% a year.” Of course, corporate profit increases say nothing about a country’s economic health, which is measured by the overall prosperity of its people. In fact, corporate profits are often a direct result of oppressive socialist regulations that only fatten the pockets of select businesses through laws that discourage competition and create artificial monopolies. Conversely, the damage caused by socialism is easily recognized by anyone with enough common sense to trace its effects to their logical conclusion. Government, by and through the force of law, either prohibits or compels. In the case of socialized healthcare, the federal government will compel its citizens to pay large amounts of money which it will then payout to doctors and hospitals so that they will treat patients. Unless doctors and hospitals comply with government regulations, they will be prohibited from receiving that money, and eventually, may be denied the right to practice medicine altogether. Consequently, only those doctors and hospitals that comply with government regulations will profit. Without the pressures inherent in market competition, innovation will die, and with it, the advances in the standard of living–which cannot be measured by corporate profits–will slow. At its best, socialism produces economic stagnation. At its worst, socialism produces tyranny.
Doctor’s Bill-The Cost Of Healthcare Reform
The Washington Post reports that the House of Representatives, after deciding that it actually was ok to vote on the constitutionally questionable ‘deem and pass’ self-executing quasi amendment/bill, has unveiled its list of “changes to compromise health-care legislation” which the Congressional Budget Office estimates will cost “$940 billion over the next decade.” The bill will be “paid for by slicing nearly $500 billion from Medicare and other federal health programs.” And the other $440 billion, you ask? Well … that’s a really good question …
Eric Holder… Psychic
The Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder, is under fire again after making some ill-advised remarks about how the administration looks at the leadership of trans-national terrorist organizations. The crux of the idiocy seems to have occurred following a question by Republican member of the House.
“Let’s deal with reality,” Holder said. “You’re talking about a hypothetical that will never occur. The reality is that we will be reading Miranda rights to the corpse of Osama bin Laden. He will never appear in an American courtroom. That’s the reality. … He will be killed by us, or he will be killed by his own people so he’s not captured by us. We know that.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34525.html#ixzz0iUHSt6iD
Eric Holder seems to approach this hypothetical with the pompous arrogance of, well, his superior. Simple peons! We know better than to think we could possibly catch Osama alive. Apparently, the Attorney General is not an advocate for looking into serious tensions between the law and security, war-time and peace-time differences in application of law et cetera because he has everything figured out, including the future. His prescience reminds me of The Chili Song by Gary P. Nunn in which a part of the verse goes:
Some people think we’re strange, just a little bit crazy,
Cause we can see tomorrow, yesterday
Apparently, the Obama Administration is beyond having to thinkabout these matters, because they have justice completely figured out. Whereas, those in the Bush Administration who knew justice to be an ever elusive ideal worth striving for because it is the highest component of the soul, actually received the bad rap of being close-minded and Neanderthal-like in their group-think, despite that fact that the so-called “Torture Memos” were the rich pontifications of such matters as they pertain to law, war and peace. I like how an Administration like Obama’s, that so publicly lashed out at the previous administration for Water-Boarding, is content with just killing Osama bin Laden without a trial as long as it gets Eric Holder out of question and answer time with Congress.
What’s good is that my lady Liz Cheney and her Keep America Safeorganization is already holding Holder accountable for his testimony. Debra Burlingame was quoted in Politico:
“Putting Charlie Manson in a civilian court didn’t endanger any intelligence secrets,” Debra Burlingame, a member of the Keep America Safe Board of Directors, told Politico. “When he draws analogies like that, that’s when he loses people. It appears as if he doesn’t know we’re at war.”
Furthermore, General McChrystal had to come out and assure people that their intention was to capture Osama so that they can extrapolate intelligence (I guess by asking pretty please) and track down the other members in the network and prevent future plots.
What needs to be addressed, however, is the fact that Eric Holder should not be asked what he plans on doing with Osama bin Laden when he’s caught, because that is not Eric Holder’s place. The nation is at war, and if Osama were captured, I would expect him to receive a tribunal like any other enemy combatant.
-rj
Less is More-The Great Awakening of Anti-Federalist Liberalism
In an op-ed for today’s New York Times, Kirk Johnson describes the modern political push away from centralized government. For the first time in a long time, lawmakers, both liberal and conservative, are actually discussing the substantive import of constitutional provisions such as article one and the ninth and tenth amendments which limit the authority of the federal government and require that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Rather than a retreat from change and progress, the new movement actually signifies an effort to make government more effective. By divesting the federal government of its grip over social programs–such as education, healthcare, and social security–and returning power and authority to the states waste and corruption will be greatly reduced, and benefits will become more readily accessible as states compete one against another for citizenry. Sometimes, less really is more.
Irreconcilable Differences-How Bad Politics Creates Bad Policy
An article published in this morning’s Wall Street Journal details the process some house members are pursuing in order to pass the government-healthcare-industry-takeover bill proposed by the Senate. “Under the “reconciliation” process that began yesterday afternoon, the House is supposed to approve the Senate’s Christmas Eve bill and then use “sidecar” amendments to fix the things it doesn’t like. Those amendments would then go to the Senate under rules that would let Democrats pass them while avoiding the ordinary 60-vote threshold for passing major legislation.” As the article explains “[t]his two-votes-in-one gambit is a brazen affront to the plain language of the Constitution, which is intended to require democratic accountability. Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution says that in order for a ‘Bill’ to ‘become a Law,’ it ’shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate.’ … As Stanford law professor Michael McConnell pointed out in these pages yesterday, ‘The Slaughter solution attempts to allow the House to pass the Senate bill, plus a bill amending it, with a single vote. The senators would then vote only on the amendatory bill. But this means that no single bill will have passed both houses in the same form …” thereby undermining senate rules, and flying in the face of the Constitution. Of course, for the bill to become to become law, fifty one senators would still need to vote in favor of the amendments proposed by the House, which would require some to abandon both the Constitution and their ‘core beliefs’ in exchange for the Harry and Nancy’s good graces.
Kucinich Thrown Under The Bus
Ohio Democratic Representative Dennis Kucinich is truly a far-left liberal. He supports a Department of Peace, told me he was against free trade when he visited my campus, was the only 2008 Democratic candidate for President who voted against invading Iraq and was slammed by Daily Kos founder and far-left fanatic Markos Moulitsas for being too principled on health care reform. (Kucinich is opposed to the current version of health care reform because it is not liberal enough.) Being a conservative, I disagree with Kucinich on just about every policy issue and perspective. However, as is true with most extreme Members of Congress- Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) and Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), for two examples- I respect his holding to his principles.
Unfortunately for Kucinich, President Obama has an odd way of showing his respect for Kucinich’s principles. The president was in Kucinich’s district to talk about health care reform today, where he commended Kucinich for fighting for the average person. As a follow-up, literally seconds later, Obama asks an audience member who yelled “Vote Yes” to repeat his statement.
Perhaps I’m reaching for straws here, but why is President Obama needling Kucinich? The man introduced impeachment articles against former President Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney, and supports enacting a new Fairness Doctrine. He is not going to bow to pressure. Besides, as AllahPundit put it, Kucinich could very well be the deciding vote on health care reform. Alienating him is not a good way to get his vote.
Another Sign of the Obama Administration’s Commitment to Israel
As part of my duties as an intern with Laura Ingraham, I went to the State Department’s web site to find information about Israel. I clicked on Israel…and found this: “We’re sorry. That page can’t be found and may have moved.”
Here is a list of countries I went through that did have links: Afghanistan, Iceland, Italy, Venezuela, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Egypt, Haiti, Holy See, Honduras, Iraq, Kosovo, Kuwait, Lebanon, North Korea, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Syria, Turkey, Tajikistan, Iran, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyz Republic, Bahrain, Turkmenistan, Palestinian Territories,
In short, what I believe is every Middle Eastern country (except for the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Yemen, which did not have links), plus a few others I decided to check, have a link to the State Department’s information about the site. To verify, I asked two friends to check, one from his home computer and one from his work computer, and they found the same thing. I have also checked on two different computers that have two different servers. Israel is not on the State Department’s web site.
For those who are conspiracy theorist conservatives, perhaps UAE, Jordan and Yemen are other countries we are cutting ties with under Obama, or for those believers in the military industrial complex, we are going to bomb them. For me, it’s kind of funny that- coinciding with the Biden/Obama slam of Israel this week- they do not have the page up. Perhaps we shall check in next week?
The Cure for The Common Republican-A Pedagogical Argument Against Healthcare Reform
Republican resistance to healthcare reform (or, more appropriately, a federal takeover of the healthcare industry) has been, and continues to be strategically ambiguous, if not just plain quirky. Their latest tactic, as reported by Bloomberg, is “telling House Democrats they can’t rely on the Senate to approve the [desired] changes [in the healthcare bill], which congressional leaders are trying to navigate through a process called budget reconciliation.” By painting their constituents in the senate as untrustworthy, Republicans hope to … convince house democrats to give up healthcare reform altogether? Maybe? The problem with such political tactics is a lack of vision; Republican leadership has failed to effectively communicate what should be its central message–that any healthcare reform legislation that expands federal control of the healthcare industry, be it through regulations, subsidies, or social programs, is bad policy and will, inevitably, increase costs and stifle innovation. It’s a simple, empirically backed argument that speaks truth to the common sense of even the most uneducated american. Of course, taking such a position to its logical extreme would require opposition to not only healthcare reform, but Medicare as it now stands. And, like Social Security, many Republicans see Medicare as politically untouchable. Why? Who knows. The last true dismantling of a federal social program, in the form of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, worked wonders. The same could, and should be done for Medicare. De-regulation–now that’s a strategy.
Talking With Terrorists-Israel’s Stand Against Palestine
U.S. treatment of Israel over the course of the last twenty years has been anything but realistic; Vice President Biden’s condemnation of Israel’s recent decision to expand its borders by allowing building permits in East Jerusalem, demonstrates just how out of touch with reality many politicians truly are. Due in part to forced concessions of peace from the Bush administration, Israel spent a large part of the first decade withdrawing from the Palestinian Frontier, and practicing a defensive posture. In response to Israel’s attempts at peace, Palestine unleashed the second intafada, in which over one thousand Israeli’s were murdered in terrorist attacks. Consequently, Israel’s current prime, Benjamin Netanyahu, has decided that the best defense is a good offense, and begun once more to expand Israel’s borders in the hopes of swallowing up the Palestinian threat. While Israel is a far cry from a perfect republic, it provides a stark contrast to it’s lawless Palestinian neighbor. Insistence by U.S. officials that Israel return to the negotiations table ignores the last decade of history. If Israel is to survive, it must, like any other nation, defend itself from terrorism.
God Help Me. I Agree With Kennedy…
…now granted, there are myriad ways I agreed with John F. Kennedy (and many where we disagreed); there were not very many instances where I agreed with the old “Liberal Lion” though and let’s face it, his son Patrick is a bit of a tool. Let’s just say, if he asked me to go for a joy ride in his Mustang Convertible, I would kindly take a rain-check.
But Patrick Kennedy did something yesterday, that I believe deserves bi-partisan support. He went after the media for turning our Federal government into a circus show, 24/7, and perpetuating the belief that Congress is nothing more than an episode of Maury in expensive suits. And the media is guilty of the charges that were levied against them.
He’s right. How many of our nation’s bravest men and women have laid down their lives in far away places, only to have their memories passed over because the press finds sexual harassment and “world’s ugliest dog” far more interesting? And this is by no means, a liberal or conservative issue: news organizations with a favorable sway towards either ideological camp are guilty of this, even though I find FoxNews and MSNBC to be the worst offenders.
Congressman Kennedy and I may part ways on every political issue under the sun, and we even disagree with what the objective of the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, I believe the impassioned monologue he delivered yesterday should speak to all Americans and remind them that the most important issues are those that have to do with our security and the security of our men and women overseas. So what Massa might be gay (a topic unworthy of discussion, as I cannot imagine someone going on Larry King Live and having the Crypt Keeper on that show hammering them on whether or not that guest is straight … hard hitting indeed) and he may be a nutjob for lack of a better term; there are more important things out there to be talking about. But many people in the news media wouldn’t know, because they are just as seperated from everyday Americans as politicians are.
-rj
