Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Il Duce sets a trap

Il Duce gave his State of the Union speech last night. Deadeye watched the speech. I went to bed - 4:30 AM comes early, ya know. She said Il Duce did a good job. Good for him. [/sarcasm]

I read the transcript. It's the best way with these kinds of speeches. It's just so easy to get caught up in the applause lines and rhetorical flourishes otherwise.

The speech was actually quite good. Give credit where credit is due. But he also set a trap for the Republicans, a trap they'd be wise to avoid.
Now, I have heard rumors that a few of you still have concerns about our new health care law. (Laughter.) So let me be the first to say that anything can be improved. If you have ideas about how to improve this law by making care better or more affordable, I am eager to work with you. We can start right now by correcting a flaw in the legislation that has placed an unnecessary bookkeeping burden on small businesses. (Applause.)

What I'm not willing to do — what I'm not willing to do is go back to the days when insurance companies could deny someone coverage because of a preexisting condition. (Applause.)

I'm not willing to tell James Howard, a brain cancer patient from Texas, that his treatment might not be covered. I'm not willing to tell Jim Houser, a small business man from Oregon, that he has to go back to paying $5,000 more to cover his employees. As we speak, this law is making prescription drugs cheaper for seniors and giving uninsured students a chance to stay on their patients' — parents' coverage. (Applause.)

So I say to this chamber tonight, instead of re-fighting the battles of the last two years, let's fix what needs fixing and let's move forward. (Applause.)
Let's fix what needs fixing and let's move forward. Yeah.....

If Team Elephant's so-called leadership falls for this "please don't throw me in the brier patch!" tactic, they deserve the electoral slaughter they'll incur in 2012.

Il Duce is trying to set up a situation where the abortion that is Obamacare becomes associated with Republicans as well as Democrats. If he gives a little here and there but keeps the essential structure of Obamacare intact, he reasons, when people face the nightmare that health care will become, their ire will be bipartisan.

Of course, the RINO leadership in Congress is just stupid enough to fall for this transparent ruse.

I said some time ago that the Tea Party made a gargantuan mistake by not forming a third party or joining forces with one of the existing third parties. When I'm right, I'm right.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Vulture Droppings: Electoral Defeat

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.


Some of you are going to read the title of this point and come to the conclusion that I've finally gone around the bend.  You're going to assume that I've completely LOST IT.  While you may, in fact, be right about my failing sanity (until you've lived a workload like I've had for the past 4 months, you have NO IDEA what insanity really feels like), I am speaking from the heart here.

This edition of Vulture Droppings deals with my analysis of the 2010 elections, which are, thankfully, finally over.  If I had to watch one more ad for Candidate A in which Candidate B was painted as Hitler's more evil twin, followed apace by an ad for Candidate B in which Candidate A was painted as worse than Stalin, I think I would have stuck a pencil in my eye.

It is said that a pessimist views the glass as half full, while the optimist sees it as half empty.  So what does that make me?  I see the glass as nearly empty, leaking, and what little water remains in it is polluted.

What most so-called conservatives are touting as a major electoral victory is nothing of the sort.  Team Elephant won the House - hey, how 'bout that?  "Oh come on, Vulture!  Even you have to concede that the historic taking of the House is a major victory!"

No.  No I don't.

The House will make for a nice, boisterous legislative soap opera for the next two years.  But the Senate is still under the control of Harry Reid (more on that later), and the White House is still in the clutches of Il Duce.  Good luck getting anything constructive done in the next two years.

What constitutes victory? What defines defeat?  Let me take a stab at it.
  • Victory would have included a major purge of Team Donkey leadership.  
See Harry Reid?  Still standing.  See Nancy Pelosi?  Sure, she's no longer the Screecher of the House...but she's still standing.  See Barney (Elmer Fudd's evil twin) Frank?  Still standing. Team Elephant might not have had a legitimate chance at taking down "Air Force 3".  But that senile old fool Harry Reid was ripe for the taking.  And Barney Frank was extremely vulnerable, given his cozy relationship with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  But the elitist snobs that run Team Elephant (into the ground, I might say) weren't about to lend any material support to a commoner like Sharon Angle.  She wouldn't fit in at a Washington cocktail party at all!  Neither was there any real effort on the part of the Elephants to take down Frank.  You leave Harry Reid and Barney Frank standing -- that's not victory.
  • Victory would have included a change in the kind of candidates elected by the Elephants.  
Set aside for a moment Rand Paul's win in Tennessee.  See anyone else "different" winning anywhere?   I don't.  And, no, Marco Rubio doesn't count.  I think he's every bit the faux conservative that John Boehner is.

Sharon Angle?  Joe Miller?  Christine O'Donnell?  They were undermined at every turn by the Elephant elites.  Face facts, conservatives: your side threw the game.  They were happier with losing those races than with dealing with commoners in their midst.

But don't worry.  John McCommie won reelection.  Yeah....
  • Victory would have set the stage for the dismantling of Obamacare.
You can't roll back Obamacare with just the House.  Face facts -- we're stuck with it.  In 2 years, even if the Elephants win the House, the Senate, and the Presidency, they'll throw up their hands and say that Obamacare can't be rolled back because too many people are dependent on it.  That's Washington DC Realpolitik.

You're going to think I've lost my mind, but I'm actually sorry that Russ Feingold lost his Senate seat in Wisconsin.  Yeah, he's a big Lefty.  But he's an HONEST big Lefty.  And he was one of the few in Washington willing to stand up to the abuses of the DHSS (you can't spell Schutzstaffel without the double S).

One final observation on the election.  No matter the political climate.  No matter the economic parameters.  Even if the very survival of the human race were at stake, it just wouldn't matter.  The People's Republic of Maryland will vote Democrat.

The Elephants didn't even bother to field a candidate against Senator-since-Reconstruction Barbara Mikulski.  Yeah, there was some guy's name with an 'R' next to it on the ballot.  But I wouldn't recognize him if he was standing in my kitchen carving the turkey at Thanksgiving wearing a sweater with his name embroidered on it.

6 of 8 Congressional districts went Donkey.  The 2 that didn't?  Frederick County and points west, and the Eastern Shore, both heavily agricultural.

Martin O'Malley, quite possibly the worst governor in the State's history, won in a crushing landslide against former governor (and RINO) Bob Erlich.

Yeah, I'm ready to move.  You can't live in Libtardia for 20-plus years and not have it affect you.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Saturday, October 16, 2010

The OC attacks

For the most part, I respond to comments in the {expletive-deleted} Echo comments.  But when there is a comment requiring too much response for just a comment, or a comment that really sticks in my craw, I reply with a blog post.

This comment met both criteria.  It was in response to my comment that we are "living in Atlas Shrugged".
You're living in Atlas Shrugged, which was the vision of a lunatic who has as much insight into living human beings as Dustin Hoffman's "Rain Man". To be a consistent Randian you need to have as much contempt for Christianity as for Socialism. Of course it was all that "Good Samaritan" and "Golden Rule" crap that she particularly hated. Is that part of your Christianity?

If you can back up your claims with anything besides wordplay and overuse of the word "literally", that might hold some interest . As it is, you remind me of the "merry pranksters" of the 60s/70s with their "radical" "underground newspapers" with everyone they opposed dressed up as Nazis. I like you in many ways -- primarily when you talk to me directly; not so much when you're preaching, but I gotta speak the truth as I see it.
Don't put words in my mouth. I was neither preaching, nor espousing the incoherent, contradictory, and, frankly, sophomoric epistemology of Ayn Rand.  When I said that we are "living in Atlas Shrugged", I meant the world portrayed by Rand in the novel.  In the book, the government and industry were run by looters --  looters who raped the productive by pushing legislation in the interest of "fairness", etc.

The world we live in has looters pushing legislation "for the children", "to save the planet", "to make us safe from terrorism", "to make health care affordable for everyone", "because they're too big to fail".  The end result of all of these legislative "responses" to "crisis" is the same as those portrayed in Rand's novel.

Wealth is confiscated from the productive.
Government amasses more power over all facets of our lives.
Our personal liberties are lost.

You cannot deny this - not if you're paying attention, not if you're being honest and not disingenuous.

You believe in AGW - hey, how 'bout that?  I don't.  ALL proposed "solutions" to AGW involve confiscation of wealth.  That and nothing more.

You're free to continue your misplaced "faith".  I see AGW for what it is: the hijacking of science to promote an agenda that centralizes government power, redistributes wealth (mostly to crony capitalists), and destroys individual freedoms.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Sunday, September 26, 2010

Pledge to America is lame

Nearly assured of a massive victory at the polls in November, Team Elephant did what it does best: it undermined its own chances for success.  Their chosen mode of self-immolation this election: Son of Contract With America.

This propaganda masterpiece, called  A Pledge to America, is a real head-scratcher.  There is no reference to nor acknowledgment of the Tea Party.  Why would the Elephant elites give any credit to people they both loath and seek to discredit?

A lot of slick pictures accompany the propaganda piece.  These are images meant to elicit an emotional, patriotic response from the reader.  It made me sick.

The document is divided into sections tailored at issues the elitists think are important to ordinary Americans. The promise in the preface to "honor the Constitution" and "those precepts that have been consistently ignored – particularly the Tenth Amendment", is broken right away in the Foreword, where they state that, when it comes to spending cuts, "common-sense exceptions for seniors, veterans, and our troops" will be made.  Business as usual, anyone?

Here's the worst from each section.

Section 1, Job Creation.  Job creation.  Job creation.  They still think the GOVERNMENT creates jobs.  Nevertheless, the steps they propose to take, while hardly representing job creation, do at least improve the business environment to where employers MIGHT consider hiring.

Grade: B

Section 2, Reduce the Size of Government.  The people who gave us King George the Dim's War Without End are trying to sell us reduced government spending and the size of government?  That's rich. 

They promise to "act immediately to reduce spending" (yawn).  They promise to cut government spending to "pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels".   Hey, how 'bout that? [/sarcasm]   Pre-bailout levels?  That's it?  WTF!  I think the American people -- and particularly the people who make up the Tea Parties -- want more than that.  Much more.  This "promise" is a joke.

They want to put "limits" on the growth of Government.  Limits?!?!? On growth?!?!?  Are you effin' kidding me!  A real plan would seek to reduce the size of government by at least 15% JUST FOR STARTERS.

They plan to hold weekly votes on spending. Hey, how 'bout that? [/sarcasm] And this dog and pony show will achieve what exactly? 

But it's the last "promise" that really set my teeth on edge.  "We will make the decisions that are necessary to protect our entitlement programs for today’s seniors and future generations".  You can't make this stuff up. 

Grade: F

Section 3, Health Care.  They promise "repeal and replace".  70% of Americans support repeal.  But replace

Part of what constitutes "replace" is to "ensure access for patients with pre-existing conditions."  I kid you not.

Grade: D-

Section 4, Reform Congress and Restore Trust.  I laughed my ass off when I read that.  Seriously?  Among the promises in this section is a promise to "adhere to the Constitution".  How, precisely, do you plan to do that AND "ensure access for patients with pre-existing conditions" AND "maintain entitlements", neither of which is Constitutionally permitted?

Grade: F

Section 5, National Security.  I can summarize this in two sentences.  Spend more money on defense systems like missile defense.  And continue the War Without End.  There is also a hollow promise to "enforce our immigration laws".  Nobody believes that.  Nobody. 

Grade: F

Section 6, Checks and Balances.  The shortest section, this is yet another attempt by the Elephant elites to sucker us.  I can sum this section up in two words: "Trust me".  The right answer -- No way!

Grade: F

There you have it.  Aren't you impressed?  Doesn't this steaming POS make you just long to rush to the polls to vote for the guy with the 'R' by his name?

Now, if you'll excuse me, I think I'll get a shower.  I feel dirty.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Sunday, September 19, 2010

The OC responds

I really like Hal (the OntologicalComedian, or OC for short).  He is smart and makes solid, effective arguments.

He and I recently got into a little back-and-forth over AGW (renamed yet AGAIN this week from 'Climate Change' to 'Climate Disruption' in an effort to mask the fact that there is no warming occurring in the 21st century).  His latest comment posts inspired me to make this entry.

Hal believes the AGW science.  I do not.  I won't be convinced that the frauds in East Anglia are doing anything but manufacturing propaganda to help bring about the glorious One-World Socialist Utopia.  Does this make me anti-science?  Hal intimates as much.
In the 60s/early 70s, when some idiots went around calling police "pigs" and that sort of thing, there was the saying "OK, when you get mugged, call a hippie". By the same token, since you don't seem to believe there is a real pursuit of truth in scientific institutions, if you get cancer, call a blogger.
But I haven't criticized medical science...or physical science...or any other branch of science.  The practitioners of those branches of science actually practice the scientific method - results are falsified, tested, and retested, until the findings are a certain as can be possible in this imperfect world.  No one shouts down scientists who deny that coffee is health food.  No one prevents the publishing of contradictory articles claiming that coffee is good for you or bad for you.  No one tries to deny funding to studies of pain management.  Or those trying to falsify the results of those studying it.  Yet those techniques are employed and applauded by AGW true believers!  If that doesn't make one suspicious, then I have no further argument that might possibly convince them.

Hal takes issue with my references to the Propagandist-in-Chief of the AGW crowd as "Al Gorebells".  Yet, can ANYONE deny that Gorebells is the best propagandist this world has seen since the master, Joseph Goebbels?  His movie is a monument to propaganda and quack science.  I will not cease to refer to Mr. Gorebells by that name until it is universally acknowledged that the man is a fraud seeking to cash in, not a prophet seeking to "save the planet".

Hal and I agree on one very important thing: government, in league with large multinational corporations, is a power to be feared.  Where we differ is in degree of guilt.  Prior to the 1850's there was no such thing as a giganticus mega-corporation.  What happened to change that?  Railroads.  The government started choosing winners and losers among those endeavoring to build America's railroads.  It was government that created the monster...and, before long, it was government in bed with that monster against We the People.  Hal believes it is the corporations who are the power behind the monster.  I disagree.  But only in degrees; after all, the people who power the multinationals are the same people occupying positions of power in our corrupt government.  See Chaney, Geithner, Greenspan, Bernanke, et al. 

One thing Hal said that I wish to correct, posthaste:
There is nothing magically virtuous or magically demonic about government, and you can't just trust a government with the power to redistribute all wealth, and expect good things to happen. The government is simply the Res Public, (ironically the party that took its name from that now goes around mouthing the belief that you can't trust anything to a Res Public, except the ability to wage war and seize people by force and put them in jail -- don't trust them with health care or you'll inevitably get a totalitarian society).
If by any stretch Hal thinks that I'm one of those "except the ability to wage war and seize people by force and put them in jail" people, I want to categorically disabuse him of that notion - right now. A true small-"L" libertarian wants neither government health care NOR a government running amok among the nations inflicting Democracy at bayonet point.  A libertarian wants the ridiculous laws that unnecessarily put people in jail for what are truly victimless crimes revoked.  Drug laws?  Not a Federal issue.  Prostitution?  I don't like it...but I don't want people in jail for it, either.  I, like other libertarians, simply want to be left alone to live our lives without the uncertainty of government sticking its nose into our lives.

Government is a necessary evil.  Without government, the "society of contract" cannot exist.  Without the "society of contract", trade cannot exist, and we're back to feudalism.  But when government starts to dictate winners and losers, especially via a tax structure that specifically targets small businessmen and the upper middle class as "losers", that is a government that must be changed.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Monday, August 9, 2010

Vulture Droppings - catchup

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.


Given that it has been nearly a week since I last posted (my, how time flies when you're having hell!), I thought I would "drop" a VD to catch up with what has been going on in the world.

The first two items are courtesy of xfloggingkylex.

This comes from an article on a study by UC Berkeley computer scientists.
A new security threat revealed by computer scientists at the University of California, Berkeley, may be enough to drive some people away from their computer keyboards and back to pen and paper. The researchers show that a simple audio recording of those keyboard clicks can betray the text you just entered, from passwords to secret love notes.

The researchers were able to take several 10-minute sound recordings of users typing at a keyboard, feed the audio into a computer, and use an algorithm to recover up to 96 percent of the characters entered.
So the question becomes: is this REALLY a cause for concern? Yes and no. Yes in the sense that the contents of a document or email can be trapped for nefarious use. No for the fact that the software cannot really differentiate the control, alt, or shift keys...at least not yet. But, as the article states, the utility of typed passwords is rapidly drawing to a much-deserved end.
"There are different forms of authentication that could be used, including smart cards, one-time password tokens or biometrics," said Tygar.
Please, make it so. If I have to change one more password, I'm gonna go mental.

This one causes me great ambivalence.
I have told this trick to several friends and it has lead to instant dismissal from the courtroom each time. By the end of this article you’ll understand why it works guaranteed 100% of the time. Knowing will not only empower you, but also disturb you. Judges and prosecutors are wary of the common excuses. Who knew that court turned so many people into racists, caused people to forget the English language and trigger sudden terminal illness! Once you’ve been picked to serve on a jury and the trial is about to commence, the judge informs the jury of its duty. Duty – singular.1) The jury must decide the facts of the case.It should actually be duties though – plural.2) The jury must decide on the law in question.Judges do not inform juries of their 2nd responsibility and if you come into court for the voir dire process aware of it - you will be dismissed from the court.

A jurors right to veto the law is probably the best kept secrete of the court system and is what separates democracies from republics
What disquiets me about this blog post is that the type of person who believes in the concept of jury nullification is EXACTLY the kind of person who NEEDS to be on a jury.  This is NOT the person who need to be skipping out on jury duty.

For the record, I'm a huge fan of jury nullification. There are laws that are, quite frankly, nothing more than excuses for Leviathan to stick its nose into our business; those laws NEED nullification.

Last week those aligned in opposition to the anti-freedom agenda of Il Duce had what they thought was a huge victory in the form of a vote in Missouri to prohibit Big Brother from enforcing the mandatory parts of Obamacare. It was a short celebration.

Just hours later, a Federal Judge threw out the result of the Proposition 8 initiative. This proves, once again, that our ruling class doesn't give a rat's ass what we the people want. They'll get what they want, one way or another. Our "votes", inasmuch as they align with the goals of the ruling class, will be honored; inasmuch as they collide with their goals, an avenue will be found to negate those results.

So Missouri can celebrate now, but their victory will be every bit as short lived as that of the Prop 8 voters.

Elena Kagen was confirmed. Hey, how 'bout that? [/sarcasm] For those of you in the "Vote Republican" crowd, take note that 5 of your team voted to confirm this patently unqualified Harriet Miers clone with a decidedly authoritarian worldview. Hey, how 'bout that? [/sarcasm]

Hopefully life will slow down a little bit for me and I'll be able to blog more frequently. This Summer has been one for the ages. And "age" is what I've done.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Sunday, July 18, 2010

Vulture Droppings: Obamacare begins

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.


As modern politics dictates, bad news is always released just prior to the weekend.  This is done to assure that most of the sheeple aren't paying attention.  I mean, it's not like the sycophantic lickspittles of Big Media (the BM for short) are going to go out of their way to embarrass their lord and savior.  They'll report the bad news.  They just won't make much noise in the process of said reportage.

As one would expect, this was the treatment given to the sudden torrent of details regarding Obamacare that spewed out on Friday.  The Drudge Report was the source for these links.  What?  You expected maybe CBS news?  HAHAHAHAHA!

This edition of Vulture Droppings will address those details.

With one breath, with one flow
You will know Synchronicity


The first detail of note is a dramatic change of semantics regarding the requirement for every American to have health insurance.
When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”

And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.

Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.
It's not a tax...until it's challenged...and THEN it's a tax.  Give credit where credit is due.  This is shear genius.  They rammed through the legislation all the while claiming it wasn't a tax (which would have increased opposition to it) but will defend its patently unconstitutional dictates by claiming it IS a tax, which takes a major bite out of the States' challenges to its unconstitutionality.  Can you say "evil genius"?

Don't be surprised as more of these changes in semantics start to creep out, not just in response to challenges, but also as regards policy.  We won't appreciate fully the enslaving power of this POS until much, much later.

Many miles away something crawls from the slime at the bottom of a dark Scottish lake

The next item deals with physician choice, something we were assured that the Obamacare legislation would not change.
As the Obama administration begins to enact the new national health care law, the country’s biggest insurers are promoting affordable plans with reduced premiums that require participants to use a narrower selection of doctors or hospitals.

The plans, being tested in places like San Diego, New York and Chicago, are likely to appeal especially to small businesses that already provide insurance to their employees, but are concerned about the ever-spiraling cost of coverage.

But large employers, as well, are starting to show some interest, and insurers and consultants expect that, over time, businesses of all sizes will gravitate toward these plans in an effort to cut costs.

The tradeoff, they say, is that more Americans will be asked to pay higher prices for the privilege of choosing or keeping their own doctors if they are outside the new networks. That could come as a surprise to many who remember the repeated assurances from President Obama and other officials that consumers would retain a variety of health-care choices.
We're shocked -- SHOCKED -- to find out that our choice of providers would be impacted by Obamacare. SHOCKED! [/sarcasm]

Many miles away something crawls to the surface of a dark Scottish lake

Next comes news that Taxachusetts is finding that employers are *shock* looking out for their own interests and dumping the responsibility for health care on the state.
The relentlessly rising cost of health insurance is prompting some small Massachusetts companies to drop coverage for their workers and encourage them to sign up for state-subsidized care instead, a trend that, some analysts say, could eventually weigh heavily on the state’s already-stressed budget.
If this is a surprise to anyone, they're an idiot.  Because, as night follows day, employers are going to dump their health insurance responsibilities on the State as a matter of self-preservation.  This is, not surprisingly to those of us who truly understand what der Staat is, exactly what the administration wants to happen!  There'll be single-payer health care on the British/Canadian model before you know it, administration "promises" to the contrary notwithstanding.

Many miles away there's a shadow on the door of a cottage on the shore of a dark Scottish lake

Now for the money shot - the taxman cometh!
If it seems as if the tax code was conceived by graphic artist M.C. Escher, wait until you meet the new and not improved Internal Revenue Service created by ObamaCare. What, you're not already on a first-name basis with your local IRS agent?

National Taxpayer Advocate Nina Olson, who operates inside the IRS, highlighted the agency's new mission in her annual report to Congress last week. Look out below. She notes that the IRS is already "greatly taxed"—pun intended?—"by the additional role it is playing in delivering social benefits and programs to the American public," like tax credits for first-time homebuyers or purchasing electric cars. Yet with ObamaCare, the agency is now responsible for "the most extensive social benefit program the IRS has been asked to implement in recent history." And without "sufficient funding" it won't be able to discharge these new duties.

That wouldn't be tragic, given that those new duties include audits to determine who has the insurance "as required by law" and collecting penalties from Americans who don't. Companies that don't sponsor health plans will also be punished. This crackdown will "involve nearly every division and function of the IRS," Ms. Olson reports.

Well, well. Republicans argued during the health debate that the IRS would have to hire hundreds of new agents and staff to enforce ObamaCare. They were brushed off by Democrats and the press corps as if they believed the President was born on the moon. The IRS says it hasn't figured out how much extra money and manpower it will need but admits that both numbers are greater than zero.
Big Brother just got "bigger". "Do you haff the required insurance, Herr Vulture? Vee haff vays of finding out!"

If you think Das Überwachenden has its nose in your business now, just wait.  It'll only get worse.

So what does it all mean?  It means that we've barely scratched the surface of the real impact of Obamacare.  The enslaving nature of this POS has yet to be fully revealed.  When it is, don't come crying to me.  I fully understood what it was really about from day one.

* Section captions from Synchronicity I and Synchronicity II by The Police.  What it is that's crawling from the bottom of that lake, I'll leave to the imagination of the reader.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Friday, April 16, 2010

Tone-deaf, patronizing, and mendacious

Il Duce finds it amusing that American citizens were out in the streets protesting the absurd level of taxation to which they are subjected by our overbearing government.
President Barack Obama said Thursday he's amused by the anti-tax tea party protests that have been taking place around Tax Day.

Obama told a fundraiser in Miami that he's cut taxes, contrary to the claims of protesters.

"You would think they'd be saying thank you," he said.
There are a couple of problems with Il Duce's reaction and his assertion that he cut taxes.
  1. Tax cuts?  WTF?  Did I miss some major piece of legislation in the past year and a half that provided for a smaller tax burden for the American people?  And why does the media let him get away with dropping whoppers like this?

  2. By preventing the parts of the Bush tax cuts that expired in 2010 from being extended, he assured that the taxes of virtually every American will rise for this tax year.  Paint it as you will, but that is hardly a "tax cut".

  3. The first wave of Obamacare begins soon.  No one has identified just how much taxes will rise in the next few years to support that abortion, but rise they will.

  4. We ARE overtaxed...and, no, it's NOT funny.

  5. The fact that a sitting President of the United States would express amusement at the concept of Americans assembled in protest of government policies is mind boggling.  It's further proof that he doesn't give two shits about the wishes of the serfs and is only about acquiring and wielding power.
Did I miss anything?

Il Duce's mind-blowing disdain for ordinary Americans is beyond comprehension.  Were it not for a complacent lapdog media and a tuned-out populous, this guy would be rode out of Washington on a rail!

Will the sheeple EVER wake up? 

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Vulture Droppings: Health in the balance

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.


As I write this, the hinges are being torn off of the gates and the barbarians are storming the Bastille.  No, wait, that's what we have to look forward to in about 10 years.   Right now, our Noblesse Oblige government is going through the motions of a parliamentary ritual designed to fool the sheeple by giving them the impression that the process is on the up-and-up.  Hint: it isn't.

Here is the latest.  The House will vote on the original Senate Health Care Reform Bill Takeover Bill as-is.  This bill includes the Louisiana Purchase, the Cornhusker Kick-back, and other bribes yet to gain the infamy of those first two.

The House Pro-Life Democrats have been assured that no federal abortion funding will be part of the legislation...even though the bill specifically mandates it...because Il Duce promised to sign an Excecutive Order prohibiting federal spending on abortions as part of the Health Care bill, thus proving, as we have long suspected, that Rex est Lex in the Obama administration.

There are problems with that little scheme.
  1. There's no Constitutional provision for such an action.
  2. The President doesn't hold the keys to the national purse.  Congress does.
  3. Why do we even BOTHER with a legislature if Il Duce can simply sign a paper and - voila! - it is law?
Then, once that steaming abortion of Legislative assault against what was once a free, sovereign people, has passed, the House will vote on the "corrections" to that legislation - the Reconciliation.  After all, they had to shine that turd and make it nice and pretty for the folks back home serfs so that they will have some prayer of being re-elected.  Once the steaming Fascist takeover bill has passed, the Reconciliation bill has passed, and Il Duce has signed his little Executive Order and the Legislation itself, there will be dancing in the streets.  Yeah......dancing.

There's just one itsy-bitsy problem with that scenario.  It's illegal.  The "Limitation of Changes to Social Security Act" of 1985 prohibits Reconciliation for any bill that impacts Social Security funds.

What does that mean?  It means that we've been presented with a bait-and-switch.  What we'll be left with when all is said and done is the Senate bill, complete with the Louisiana Purchase, etc.  And, knowing Il Duce as we do, who's to say that he won't go back on his dubious Executive Order once the Reconciliation Bill hits the fan?

It's the worst possible scenario.  It's a horrendous bill that make health care worse and cedes individual freedoms to the complete control of government bureaucrats.  With the passage of the Senate Bill, we will have officially made the transition from citizens to serfs.

Fortunately, it's not really over once the legislation has passed.  As I posted a few days ago, Idaho, Virginia, and perhaps as many as 35 other states plan to sue the Federal Government on the grounds that several provisions of the legislation are unconstitutional.  Several?  Try the whole steaming mess!

Whatever.  As long as there is some hope that this corrupt, freedom-ending nightmare can be shot down, there is still hope.  But I wouldn't get too exited about those prospects.  Remember, one of the key bribery tools in Il Duce's bag of dirty tricks is the appointment of Federal judges.  I'll be amazed if this hostile take-over is interrupted, rolled-back, or otherwise deterred in any meaningful way.

Welcome to Amerika!  Now take a number.  You might get sick soon.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Fred Reed: prophet

Fred Reed is one of my go-to reads.  He's an expatriate Gringo holed up in Mexico, a glass of Padre Kino in one hand, a cigar in the other.  He's half blind and half loco.  It must be the 'half-loco' part that makes him such a great writer.

His latest musings deal with how the American people should deal with opposing the degenerates in Washington.
Washington is out of control. It does as it likes, without restraint. It spends American money and American lives to fight remote wars for which it cannot provide a plausible reason. It determines what our children will be taught, who we can hire and fire, to whom we can sell our houses, whether we can defend ourselves, even what names we can call each other. The feds read our email and track the web sites we visit, make us hop around barefoot in airports at the command of surly unaccountable rentacops. They search us at random in train stations without even a pretense of probable cause. We have no influence over them, no way of resisting.

Except, perhaps, to ignore them.
He goes on to clarify.
The government doesn’t work. It is broken. It can’t be fixed. It can’t be fixed because only those within it could, and their interest lies in not fixing it.

The only remedy short of armed rebellion is civil disobedience at the level of the states. Clear constitutional justification for refusal to obey Washington lies in the Tenth Amendment:

“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.”
Hmmm. Intriguing. Do go on.
Now, if Idaho passes a law (I’m making this up) saying that no restrictions on the ownership of guns will be enforced within the state, Washington might choose discretion over valor and ignore it. Legalizing marijuana, however, or refusing to accept compulsory medical care, would be a direct if not necessarily intentional challenge to the power of the central government. The feds could not afford to let either of these things slide. The danger of the precedent to the grip of the governing classes would be too great. A deadly serious confrontation would ensue.
Now Fred has crossed over from writer to prophet. Because Idaho HAS, as point of fact, crossed that line, as has Virginia.
Idaho took the lead in a growing, nationwide fight against health care overhaul Wednesday when its governor became the first to sign a measure requiring the state attorney general to sue the federal government if residents are forced to buy health insurance.
A spokesman for Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II (R) said this afternoon that Virginia will file suit against the federal government if the Democratic health care reform bill is approved by the U.S. Congress.
Well, Fred. What will Washington's answer to these challenges be?
What could, or would, the federal government do in response to defiance? Send the Marines to occupy Sacramento? Or the FBI to arrest Arnold and the legislature of California?

Or cut off California’s financial water? No bailout for the state’s tottering economy, no more fat subsidies to the universities, and so on?

The question is how ugly might things get. Washington may be able to make the states back down. It may not. The peril for the feds is that it might occur to the states that, while they get their money from Washington, Washington gets its money from the states. The central government depends absolutely on the states, whereas the states would get along swimmingly without the current central government.
That last couple of sentences tell the tale. Washington IS wholly reliant on the states for its parasitical sustenance. It should be very interesting watching this play out. Very interesting indeed.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Missed it by that much

Right about now Il Duce is feeling the sting of defeat. And the Vulture is enjoying the bliss that is schadenfreude. Why? Because health care legislation the forcible take-over of 1/7 of the American economy by the federal government has gone down in flames.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that she lacks the votes to move the Senate's bill through the House and to Obama's desk. Under a plan backed by the White House, the new law would be followed by a separate measure making changes sought by House members, such as easing the Senate's tax on higher-cost health plans.
"Air Force 3" lacks the votes? But...the American people demand government health care! Il Duce said so!

The turning point? No surprise there: it was the election of Scott Brown as Senator in Massachusetts.
Pelosi, D-Calif., spoke to reporters after House Democrats held a closed-door meeting at which participants vented frustration with the Senate legislation.

Many rank-and-file Democrats said the stunning defeat in this week's Massachusetts special election — in which Republicans captured the Senate seat held for decades by the late Edward M. Kennedy — meant it was time to seek more modest health legislation.
Let me translate. Team Donkey Congresspukes saw one of their own go down in flames in the most liberal place in America outside of Berkeley, and it occurred to them that their cushy gig in Washington would surely meet a similar fate if they were caught on the wrong side of the steaming legislative turd crafted by "Air Force 3" and Harry Reid.

One vote. One special election turned the tide. Pelosi and Reid and Il Duce were simply going to hijack 1/7 of our nation's economy, the people be damned. One vote saved us from that.

We missed this fate by the narrowest of margins (as Maxwell Smart would say, "Missed it by that much!"). We just missed having our very lives consigned to Der Staat, signed, sealed, and delivered. We would have gone from citizens to property overnight.

Now is the time to ponder whether Il Duce is a skilled politician or simply an ideologue who's in way over his head. As I wrote prior to Duce's inauguration, he can overreach and recover, like Clinton. Or he can overreach and expose himself as a simpleton W-A-A-A-A-Y out of his league, like Carter. Or - the worst scenario of all - he can go all Woodrow Wilson on us and unleash the deadly power of Der Staat against its citizenry.

Interesting times. Interesting times indeed.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Vulture Droppings - Il Duce's first year in office

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.


It's been 1 year since Il Duce took his oath of office. 1 year ago, Il Duce put his hand on the Bible and swore that he would uphold the Constitution. And he has - if by "uphold" you mean "wipe your ass with it".

This special edition of Vulture Droppings is a look at the Obama presidency, year 1. And what a year it's been.

The following is a list of Il Duce's greatest achievements from his first year in office.

* sound of crickets chirping *

Uh.....yeah.

Even the Associated Press expressed dismay with the lack of tangible achievements from the President's first year in office in a piece entitled "After year, hope turns into disappointment."
Forget "can," "change" and, above all, "hope." The new word echoing in the blogosphere and beyond as Obama enters Year Two: disappointment.
Disappointment may be the word of the day for supporters of the One World Socialist Utopia, but the rest of us are left jaws agape at the magnitude of overreach perpetrated by Big Media's (the BM for short) Chosen One.

Where to begin describing the voracious magnitude of Il Duce's grasping? Here's the short list - I'm sure I've forgotten something.
  • The nationalization of 2/3 of the American automobile industry
  • The nationalization of a large number of financial institutions
  • A cabinet full of tax cheats and grifters
  • A racist Supreme Court appointee
  • A gargantuan, monstrous stimulus package (read: corporate welfare)
  • The decision to treat terrorists as criminals, complete with the rights guaranteed to American citizens
  • A Nobel Peace Prize for.........hmmm, I STILL haven't figured that one out yet
  • Cap-and-Trade legislation
  • The Hopenhagen "deal" (non-binding, thankfully) for reducing greenhouse gases
  • Escalation of the war in Afghanistan (breaking a campaign promise in doing so)
  • Nationalized health care (read: the forced takeover by the federal government of 1/7 of the American economy)
  • Trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see
Now, in fairness, it must be noted the the nationalization of the automotive industry and financial institutions was simply a logical continuation of King George the Dim's policies. It must also be noted that Mr. Obama inherited Afghanistan.

But the rest of it is all Duce's - every last fetid, steaming, freedom-sapping piece of it.

Il Duce's stunning affinity for the fascist (or corporatist) economic model has been breathtaking. Many mistakenly call Duce a socialist or communist. Oh no, not he! He is a National Socialist in the tradition of Mussolini, Franco, Peron, and, of course, Hitler.

Mind you, I want to make clear that Duce's comparison to Hitler is economic only -- at least for now. We'll see if he goes "Woodrow Wilson" on us as his plans for the reinvention of America begin to run into increased opposition.

So what can we expect in the coming year? It's hard to say, particularly today, when Massachusetts (WHA-WHA-WHAT?!?!?!?!) has elected a Republican to Teddy Kennedy's seat in the senate. There have been more documented Bigfoot sightings than Republicans elected to the Senate by Massachesetts, for crying out loud! I didn't think anyone could top Bill Clinton's feat of losing the House of Representatives to the Republicans after 40 years of Team Donkey control; this may, in fact, be bigger than that.

The fallout has been stunning. Many Donkeys are running for cover, not wanting any part of the healthcare legislation that Scott Brown used as the fulcrum to pry Kennedy's seat away from the Donkeys.

Il Duce insists that he is going to stick to his agenda. Apparently, that would include even more nationalization of private businesses, starting with student loans. It remains to be seen if Donkey party members of Congress will play along after losing the People's Republic of Taxachusetts.

So here's hoping that the DoublePlusGoodHopeChange we were promised dies a quick and painful death before our nation does. The 2010 elections can't come soon enough.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Monday, January 4, 2010

Wiener of the Decade

I've been awarding a Wiener of the Week since November of 2007. I've been awarding a Wiener of the Month nearly as long. I've awarded a Wiener of the Year three times as well. Now, in the year 2010, with the end of the nameless decade I'll call 'The Aughts', I'm presented with a rare opportunity for a new, first-time award: the Wiener of the Decade.

So many things happened during the course of The Aughts that negatively impacted our lives.

9-11 was an attack on America; what our President and Congress did in its aftermath -the Patriot Act, the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHSS) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSSA) [two S's required in each name, because you can't spell Schutzstaffel without the double S] - was an attack on Americans and American freedoms. That last sentence is sure to inflame True-Believer Republicans who are convinced that the aforementioned affronts were an important concession necessary for a nation at war with radical Islam. I dispute the benefit. The detrimental aspects of those actions, however, are beyond dispute. The worst part is that we've yet to see the Patriot Act exercised to its fullest by a mendacious, cruel ruler of the type that Il Duce has the potential to become.

The fraud that is AGW began to gather a head of steam in The Aughts. Al Gorebells, the chief propagandist for Big Warming, actually won a Nobel Peace Prize for his fraudulent over-the-top propaganda movie, An Inconvenient Truth. It was the single most outrageous example of the politicization of the Nobel Prize until 2009, when Il Duce was awarded his Nobel for.....uh....well, no one has figured that one out yet.

Two wars raged throughout the decade, in Afghanistan and Iraq. While American popular support for the war in Afghanistan was justifiably high, that support fell off in a hurry when the Iraq conflict because a quagmire where our men and women in uniform were left in an untenable situation.

Pop culture became more and more debased. The "reality show" became a staple of network television. Janet Jackson flashed a nipple. Bono dropped an F-bomb. The government responded to those two events in the only way government knows how: by further restricting freedoms.

Technology, particularly the exponential growth of the Internet, has made it possible for more and more voices to weigh in and, to a small degree, has broken the grip of Big Media (the BM for short) regarding "truth". The Dan Rather forged documents scandal was an example of bloggers - simple citizen reporters and opinion writers - fighting the BM and bringing out the truth. Rather was forced out by CBS as a result. Good riddance to bad rubbish!

Okay, enough with the history lesson. Let's review the also-rans first.

  • Al Gorebells. Very few people had as much impact on the world in the past decade than Mr. Gore. His bald-faced propaganda, coupled with complicit "science" and an even more complicit media, have led to treaties and legislation designed to create global governance and to tax away the wealth of the West. Mr. Gore is a hypocritical enemy of freedom and a scumbag. Wiener-worthy, to be sure. But, alas, he's just an also-ran.

  • Alan Greenspan. Mr. Fed fed the dot-com boom-and-bust, then turned around and drove interest rates lower and lower, creating first a credit boom, then a housing boom, both of which went bust. The current economic woes we are experiencing would have occurred sooner and would have been less severe had Mr. Greenspan just done...wait for it....NOTHING! Wiener-caliber? No doubt!

  • Big Media. The BM called King George the Dim everything but a Child of God during the course of his presidency, then has the audacity to grumble about the "incivility" of politics now that their guy, Il Duce, is running things. And make no mistake, he is THEIR GUY; the love affair between Il Duce and the BM during the 2008 election was absolutely appalling. What occurred in that election cycle was nothing short of journalistic fellatio. Were they capable of shame, I would say that they should be ashamed. I wish I could give them the Wiener, but, alas, they too are also-rans.

  • John McCommie. Not since Bob Dole has there been a Presidential candidate less appealing or more curmudgeonly. Not even the addition of Sarah Palin to the ticket could make a silk purse out of this sow's ear. And let's not forget First Amendment-shredding McCain-Feingold! Definitely a Wiener; just not the winner.

  • Team Elephant. A dispassionate observer might well conclude that the Republicans threw the 2008 election by pumping a 70-something, nasty, borderline Socialist candidate as the "conservative" alternative to Il Duce. In my opinion the Republican party has spent the last 20 years trying to pay penance for Ronald Reagan. True Wieners, this crowd.

  • Congress. What a collection of elitist, out-of-touch, officious douchebags. These collectivist bastards wipe their collective fat asses with the Constitution daily. Their contempt for ordinary Americans is breathtaking, particularly Nancy "Air Force 3" Pelosi. Bastile Day would be too good for those scumbags. Definitely Wieners. Definitely.

  • The Supreme Court. Talk about judicial malpractice! These clowns actually ruled that McCain-Feingold was Constitutional! Are you effing kidding me?!?!?! WHAT is more indicative of the founders' insistence on free speech than POLITICAL SPEECH?!?!? Yet these fossilized crypt-keepers turned their backs on the Constitution and upheld that completely absurd and freedom-limiting POS. Wieners for sure!
That's quite a collection. I grudgingly omitted additional candidates such as "Judge" Barbara Walther and Prosecutor Mike Nifong since they were previously named Wiener of the Year. Their Wiener-worthiness is indisputable.

The Wiener of the Decade is the man who stood largest, for better or worse, throughout the decade. Indeed, one cannot think of The Aughts without thinking of the biggest ZERO of a decade of zeroes: George W. Bush, AKA King George the Dim.

If you look at the events of The Aughts, GWB's fingerprints are all over everything. While he was borderline brilliant in the aftermath of 9-11, pretty much everything he did thereafter was cover-your-eyes awful.

He was the force behind the Patriot Act and the creation of the DHSS and TSSA. He and his Neocon cronies pushed and pushed to get us a war with Iraq, and disingenuously made Iraq an extension of the war on terror.

He pushed for yet another government-provided "entitlement" with the Medicare prescription drug benefit. I said at the time that the Medicare legislation was the camel's nose in the tent, that King George had set the table for Hillary Health. Little did I know how right I was.

He pushed for the gigantic 2008 bailout of the financial sector ("They're too big to fail!!!"). He tried to appoint Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. That woman isn't qualified to be a CLERK of the Supreme Court!

But the worst thing he did was to make Il Duce possible. It has been said for decades that it took Jimmy Carter for us to get Ronald Reagan. Conversely, it took 8 years of King George the Dim to give us Il Duce. Of all of the unforgivable things King George did, THAT is the most unforgivable.

Congratulations, GWB - you're the Wiener of the Decade.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Storms

As I write this there is a blizzard pounding the East Coast. A big one. A real, live Nor'easter. Unofficially, Frederick has received 22" of the white stuff, with the snow projected to last through tomorrow afternoon. The wind has been gusting, so there are drifts over 4' tall alongside the house. The steps out the back door are completely covered.

But this storm is a big, fat nothing compared to two other storms brewing on the horizon. On Friday Il Duce reached an agreement with other nations complicit in the the fraud that is the Hopenhagen debacle. Oh, sure, you say, it doesn't really have any teeth to it; there's nothing to worry about. Ah, but that's where you're wrong. When the details of this little agreement finally trickle out -- from European and Internet sources, NOT Big Media (the BM for short)- you will find that our "leaders" are using this invented "crisis" to sell off our sovereignty.

The other brewing storm is much more worrisome. The last domino has fallen in Der Staat's longstanding quest to take ownership of our very persons via the fraudulently-sold universal health care.

Senate Democrats appear within reach of the 60 votes necessary to pass President Barack Obama's health care legislation after a long year of struggle and a final burst of deadline bargaining with holdout Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska.
There it is. Just like that troll Mary Landrieu from Louisiana, Nelson has sold his soul for over $300 billion in Federal goodies.

So Congress is going to put something worse than a lump of coal in our respective stockings. The steaming pile of legislation we'll find in our stockings is never going to be confused with candied apples.

God bless us -- we're gonna need it.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Sunday, November 22, 2009

I don't know about you, but I find it offensive in the extreme when Congress tries to hide their mendacity by convening during the weekend when citizen awareness of news events is at its lowest. Such an example occurred yesterday, as a procedural vote on health care reform nationalization went down in the Senate on a Saturday night.

So this is going to be another WotW for Congress, right? Wrong. There was actually a more deserving candidate.

This article, with an AP byline, was the first thing I saw this morning when I opened my newspaper. Gee, I wonder where the "reporter" stands on the issue of health care reform nationalization.

Invoking the memory of Edward M. Kennedy, Democrats united Saturday night to push historic health care legislation past a key Senate hurdle over the opposition of Republicans eager to inflict a punishing defeat on President Barack Obama. There was not a vote to spare.

The 60-39 vote cleared the way for a bruising, full-scale debate beginning after Thanksgiving on the legislation, which is designed to extend coverage to roughly 31 million who lack it, crack down on insurance company practices that deny or dilute benefits and curtail the growth of spending on medical care nationally.
Who wrote this? The AP, or the DNC?

No mention of the potential (and probable) negatives this steaming pile of legislation portends. Just a highly enthusiastic example of media cheerleading, complete with DNC talking points.

Fabulous. Just fabulous.

AP - you're the Wiener of the Week.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Coffee is health food

Yes, you read that title correctly. Coffee is actually good for you.

Recent studies indicate that coffee drinkers are less likely to develop Alzheimer's, colon cancer, and diabetes compared to non-drinkers, and they're also less apt to die from heart disease.
Woo hoo! Who knew that I was contributing to my long-term health and well-being all those years I've spent pounding cup after cup after cup of coffee? I can now add "Nutritional Expert" to my titles alongside "Pain Management Expert".

But like all good things, there ARE detrimental effects to coffee in addition to its numerous beneficial effects. It is essential for women to take heed of this risk. Am I referring to insomnia, rapid heartbeat, or irregular heartbeat? Who cares about that stuff? I'm talking about something REALLY important!
Around half of all women possess a gene shown to link breast size to coffee intake.

"Drinking coffee can have a major effect on breast size," said Helena Jernström, a lecturer in experimental oncology at Lund University.
[...]
Studies carried out on almost 270 women showed that there was indeed a clear connection between coffee and smaller breasts. The results of Jernström's findings have been published in the British Journal of Cancer.
No! Not smaller breasts! Oh, the HORROR!

But don't fret. That which coffee taketh, it maketh up for by being a factor in preventing breast cancer!
[C]offee reduces the risk of breast cancer.
[...]
Previous studies have shown that women can reduce this risk [of breast cancer] by drinking at least three cups of coffee a day.
You may lose a cup(size), but you'll gain protection from cancer with three cups (of coffee). It's a tough trade-off, I know. Better healthy than huge, I suppose.

But now you know. The next time some snooty health freak starts giving you flack about your coffee intake, you let them know just how wonderful coffee is for your health.

I'm STILL waiting for the study that proves that bacon is health food....that, and chocolate.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Saturday, November 7, 2009

Wiener of the Week

You might notice that I haven't made a show of opining about the debacle that is Health Care "Reform". I've thought about it, but considered it redundant. After all, anyone who's ever read this blog knows how I feel about governmental intrusions into the lives of the American people.

But if, perchance, you're new around here or, God forbid, actually SUPPORT the government's attempted takeover of 1/7 of the American economy, to be run as a Fascist cooperative, you'll be enlightened when you read this post.

This week's Wiener is the person who may someday have the award named after her, she's received it so many times. I give you ChairTool Pelosi and her $15,000 "free" health care.

Today, Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.
[...]
Speaker Pelosi’s decision to leave in the jail time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000 premium her plan creates.
[...]
According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.
$15,000 is a small price to pay for trading in the Cadillac of health care for what will soon become the same nightmare of waiting and rationing that the British and Canadians now endure. Not to mention that we will be handing over to government lackeys the power of life and death over us once we reach a certain age or if we contract a disease whose treatment cost is deemed excessive.

Now THERE is "change you can believe in" [/sarcasm].

Nancy "Air Force 3" Pelosi, you're the Wiener of the Week.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

An honest assessment

There's a reason why Camille Paglia is the one left-leaning columnist I consider a must-read. She is unfailingly honest. Though she supported Obama in '08 (and continues to support him now), she is not above criticizing him or his administration. She is one of the few Liberals to listen to rather than simply demonize blather radio (I don't know how she does it - I can't take more than about 20 minutes of that crap before I want to blow my brains out, especially if the blatherer in question is that gasbag pretentious phony Rush Limbaugh, who's nothing more than a cheerleader for Team Elephant).

Her latest column is further proof of her honesty. I can't do it justice with excerpts - please read it, you'll be glad you did. There are two paragraphs I will excerpt just to whet your appetite (I read them and said to myself, "I wish I'd written that!").

Throughout this fractious summer, I was dismayed not just at the self-defeating silence of Democrats at the gaping holes or evasions in the healthcare bills but also at the fogginess or insipidity of articles and Op-Eds about the controversy emanating from liberal mainstream media and Web sources. By a proportion of something like 10-to-1, negative articles by conservatives were vastly more detailed, specific and practical about the proposals than were supportive articles by Democrats, which often made gestures rather than arguments and brimmed with emotion and sneers. There was a glaring inability in most Democratic commentary to think ahead and forecast what would or could be the actual snarled consequences -- in terms of delays, denial of services, errors, miscommunications and gross invasions of privacy -- of a massive single-payer overhaul of the healthcare system in a nation as large and populous as ours. It was as if Democrats live in a utopian dream world, divorced from the daily demands and realities of organization and management.
Those of you on the political Right are applauding and hooting in appreciation right now. Hang on - she's got something for you as well.
Having said all that about the failures of my own party, I am not about to let Republicans off the hook. What a backbiting mess the GOP is! It lacks even one credible voice of traditional moral values on the national stage and is addicted to sonorous pieties of pharisaical emptiness. Republican politicians sermonize about the sanctity of marriage while racking up divorces and sexual escapades by the truckload. They assail government overreach and yet support interference in women's control of their own bodies. Advanced whack-a-mole is clearly needed for that yammering smarty-pants Newt Gingrich, who is always so very, very pleased with himself but has yet to produce a single enduring thought. The still inexplicably revered George W. Bush ballooned our national deficits like a drunken sailor and clumsily exacerbated the illegal immigration debate. And bizarrely, the hallucinatory Dick Cheney, a fake-testosterone addict who spooked Bush into a pointless war, continues to be lauded as presidential material.
Like I said - I wish I had written that! May both parties go the way of the Whigs, the Federalists, the Tories, and the Bull Moose parties.

Read Paglia and grok an honest assessment of the current political climate.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Monday, August 10, 2009

Vulture Droppings - The Summer of Our Discontent

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.


Aside from the good news that Congress is on vacation, there really isn't much cause to feel optimistic about the future of the good old US of A. Truly this is the Summer of our discontent. This installment of Vulture Droppings takes a look at the battle lines being drawn (and one might add, quartered) over the issue of Health Care Reform the Fascist takeover of the medical industry.
I'll say this for Il Duce, he's an ambitious son of a gun. Not content with essentially running 2 of the Big Three automakers and a large portion of the financial sector, he wants to run the medical industry as well. What would you expect from a megalomaniac with messianic delusions?

In recent weeks there has been an groundswell of opposition over Duce's takeover plot. Unfortunately, the dim-bulbs showing up at the various town hall meetings have accomplished exactly the opposite of what they set out to accomplish. By foolishly chanting and creating a disturbance, they've given the opposition a plausible talking point: that they're afraid to have people hear about the plan because it isn't what the opposition claims it is.

Look, idiots. You've given Big Media (the BM for short) their talking points - "Look! See for yourselves! The anti-health care reform crowd is a bunch of screaming lunatics." Is that what you wanted? NO! You wanted to stop this mess. So do it like adults! Show up, allow the Congresslizard to speak, then quiz them on their lies. In a measured, adult tone. Without histrionics.

Your histrionics have also had the effect of giving Congresslizards cover for avoiding town hall meetings because of "security concerns".

I don't know who is stupider - Leftists who believe in Il Duce's DoublePlusGoodHopeChange, or so-called "conservatives" who think that acting angry in front of the TV cameras is a good way of winning people over to their side.

The opposition to his grandiose plan has seriously steamed the imperious Duce. He put out a message, ostensibly to his fellow Democrats, to "Punch back harder" at the opposition. Unfortunately, the message was received loud and clear, not so much by Team Donkey, but by Union thugs, who have shown up in force at town hall meetings to bust heads.

One man on the receiving end of a busted head was Kenneth Gladney of St. Louis.
Kenneth Gladney, 38, a conservative activist from St. Louis, said he was attacked by some of those arrested as he handed out yellow flags with "Don't tread on me" printed on them. He spoke to the Post-Dispatch from the emergency room at St. John's Mercy Medical Center, where he said he was awaiting treatment for injuries to his knee, back, elbow, shoulder and face. Gladney, who is black, said one of his attackers, also a black man, used a racial slur against him before the attack.
I suppose it was only a matter of time before Il Duce lost patience and went all Woodrow Wilson on us. Expect more of this type of thug action as Obama faces steeper opposition to his Fascist takeover.

Various members of Congress, particularly members of the so-called "leadership", have been vocal in their disdain for the opposition.

Senator Palpadine (AKA Harry Reid) had the gall to accuse those opposing the plan of trying to "sabotage" the democratic process.

Little Nancy "Air Force 3" Pelosi accused protesters of "carrying swastikas". She also teamed up with Maryland's own special kind of scumbag, Steny Hoyer, to write an editorial in USA Today essentially accusing protesters of being "un-American". That's some badge of honor, being accused of un-American activity by the likes of those two Fascists.

The Team Donkey leadership's rhetoric will only get uglier as September nears and they re-adjourn.

Naturally, the BM has been foursquare behind their Beloved Leader. You can see it in the little jabs at the protesters; calling them "teabaggers", a reference to an ugly, sexually perverted act (see this entry from the Urban Dictionary for details). I never thought in my lifetime I'd see the BM stoop so low as that.

But even when they're not engaging in perverse slams, they're engaged in bald-faced promotion of the plan.
One of the signs waved by a plan opponent said "Don't tell my gigi how to die," referring to allegations that the bill would allow senior citizens to be euthanized, something the nonpartisan group FactCheck.org said is false. Cohen also denied that the bill would pay for abortions -- another claim made by opponents.

Roger Fakes, 70, said he sat quietly during most of the meeting, but Cohen's insistence that citizens would be able to keep their private health care drove him to his feet.

He argued that changes to private insurance would force citizens into the government plan.
Here's the thing. Technically, all of those allegations deemed "false" by the writer of this story are, in fact, in the bill.

Keep cheerleading, BM. It'll catch up with you soon enough.

So what is the denouement, Mr. Vulture? How will this little adventure end?

There isn't a chance in hell of this crap legislation passing unless public opinion is swayed by the childishness of the majority of the protesters. Please, do everyone a favor - STAY HOME is you're just going to scream and act like a child!

But, what happens in the off chance that this steaming pile of legislation DOES pass? Pray for good health, my friend. Because prayer is about all you're going to have once the rationing begins.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*

Saturday, August 8, 2009

Wiener of the Week

Jane Velez-Mitchell has issues. And, no, I'm not referring to the dopey name of her insipid show Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell. And it's not just the fact that she SCREAMS throughout here entire show (xfloggingkylex says you can hear her even after you press the Mute button). Nor is it the fact that her show is a formulaic ripoff of Nancy Grace's show, which, itself, after a fine start, gradually because a formulaic stultifying nightmare.

No, the issues to which I refer have to do with a failure to think.

The evening after that loser in Pittsburgh shot up a gym (Deadeye's comment to me was, "See. That's why I don't work out."), Jane hosted a panel of guest "experts" to discuss this heinous, cowardly act.

There were positive moments in the exchange, mostly provided by criminal profiler Pat Brown, who correctly categorized the shooter as a sociopath, NOT a psychopath. And Velez-Mitchell scored a correct answer when she categorized his attitude as "[A] victim mentality...Everybody's to blame but him. OK, he is not to blame."

But the rest? To quote my Jewish brethren, "Oy, vey!"

The following are excerpts from the transcript.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Apparently, he was using -- Jeanne, he was using 30-round ammo clips that were illegal before the assault weapons ban was lifted in 2004. And those ammo clips allow you to kill a lot of people very quickly, right?
Translation: 30-round clips - once illegal - make it "easier to kill people", so we should ban them again.

If this statement alone isn't worth of a WotW, I don't know what is! Bringing back the ill-conceived (and unconstitutional) Assault Weapons ban wouldn't have saved those people, you stupid cow!
[Dr. Judy] KURIANSKY: ... then guns are often that kind of a sexual acting out, because a gun is like a sex organ. And when men are extremely frustrating and frustrated, they can end up taking all that aggression out with a gun.
Translation: Guns are a substitute sex organ, and shooting them off relieves aggression just like an orgasm.

Again, a statement worthy of a WotW on it's own merits. This is quack pop psychology at it's worst.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Brad, you`re the defense attorney. Do these women who were injured and the families of the dead have a lawsuit, and if so, against whom?

[Attorney Bradford] COHEN: It`s definitely -- it`s something that they should consider. And it`s probably against L.A. Fitness for some sort of lack of security. He went there once before, and he was fully armed. I don`t know, in terms of what kind of security they have, if there is that kind of appropriate security that`s in place. But I`m sure, believe me, with civil attorneys around, there`s definitely going to be someone who`s going to be filing a civil lawsuit.
Translation: Can they sue? You're damn right! Let's start looking for deep pockets right now!

I thought my head was going to explode at this point. Are you kidding me? You're talking lawsuits? For WHAT?!?!? It's a gym, asshats! You don't have security at a gym! Nor should you! Memberships are expensive enough as it is! And the idea that the gym is responsible for a sociopath shooting up the place is absolute nonsense. This exchange alone is grounds for tort reform!
DAVID SCHWARTZ, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You know what the bottom line is, Jane? What are we going to do to prevent this in the future? You know, there needs -- we need to spend more money as a society on mental disease and defects. This is something very serious.
Translation: MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING!!!

That's right. We're already blowing out unrepayable debt into the third and fourth generation of our grandchildren. Let's spend some more money on...what? What exactly are you going to do? Screen for sociopaths? Who will do it? The government? Oh, THAT'S not a recipe for persecuting political enemies of Der Staat or anything! Assclown!
SCHWARTZ: We need more -- the insurance companies also...
Translation: Make the insurance companies pay!

Not content with mere government spending, Mr. Schwartz wants to FORCE insurance companies to spend more money on...what? Again, the act of spending more money does not a solution make.
KURIANSKY: No question that in this -- in this whole time of health care...[crosstalk]...we need to pay more attention to mental health care here. And there`s another important issue that`s very psychological that has to do with bystanders. Because there have been real-life bystanders who stand by when people get murdered and don`t want to get involved. And now it`s turned to the Internet and the responsibility that people have to notice what people are blogging about. And who are they going to report to? That`s what we need to pay attention to now.
Translation: Anyone who suspected this act has to pay!

So...if someone read the rantings of this loser prior to him going on a rampage (which, it turns out, wouldn't have been possible, since he posted the entire "diary" just prior to the event), they are guilty, too? What is this, the USSR? We're supposed to rat out people based on rantings?

I've spent a lot of time around teenagers. They go off on rants where they say they're going to do this or going to do that. If you're not familiar with teenagers, you'd be alarmed. If you are familiar with teenagers, you'll shrug. Why? Because it's all bluster. There are exceptions to be sure, like the Columbine teenagers. And that begs the question: if you can't separate the bluster from real threats, and you're "required" to "report threats", how long will it be before every little childish threat becomes a crime?
DAVID SCHWARTZ, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Jane, it does take an intervention. I have had plenty of cases where there have been psychopaths who have had this intervention.

This guy went 49 years without killing anyone. There needs to be an intervention; it does take a village sometimes. And I guarantee you the writing was on the wall. If you sent Tom Ruskin out there to that gym to do an investigation, I guarantee you in five minutes he would find people that would come out and say that the writing was on the wall in this particular case.
Translation: It takes a village. Sing Kum Ba Ya everyone.

No further comment necessary.

Megapoints to criminal profiler Pat Brown for this scathing comeback to an insipid Velez-Mitchell comment.
PAT BROWN, CRIMINAL PROFILER: Well, I would agree with you Jane, if I believed that this was actually necessarily true.

But the part about getting help; again psychopaths do not seek help because they don`t think they need any because it`s everybody else`s fault. You cannot help them. They wont -- they will lie to their therapists and that won`t go anywhere.

What we need to do is work with children who are small. To teach them that they`re not entitled to everything that -- the selfishness that they`re being brought up with where they just get everything they want and think they can have everything.

No. You have to bring up children to realize that you have to earn things and that sometimes it takes time. You have to wait for things. And this guy apparently didn`t grow up with that, so he thinks that he should get what he wants and he`s is not willing to do the work.

In other words, he could probably get a lady in his life if he treated them nicely. If he stopped looking for a cheerleader type of 20-year-old instead of perhaps a nice 50-year-old librarian, a little overweight, who he was sweet to. He could have somebody in his life. But he has chosen not to do that.
Pat Brown, you've made a fan of me.

But Jane Velez-Mitchell? You're the Wiener of the Week.

*------------------------------------*
*------------------------------------*