The Big Picture

Democrats are anxious to get a healthcare bill, any healthcare bill, passed as soon as possible.

What else explains the difference between the official PRESBO rhetoric and the reality of congressional sausage making?

Their argument is that we have to do something, anything, to save our healthcare system.

But the reality is they just want to change the debate.

The hard debate is whether this enterprise is something the federal government should undertake, so let’s get that out of the way. They’d rather be debating the ins and outs of how the system will work. They like making rules. So let’s ram this unpleasant business down everyone’s throat so we can get to the fun stuff (like figuring out ways to pay for it).

The problem is this particular debate shouldn’t be occurring at all.

Pretend for a moment that government run healthcare is a great idea, and that everyone is for it.

The reality is that no matter how good or bad it is we cannot afford it.

Our nation is broke. The current national debt is around $11.7 TRILLION (one one, seven zero zero, zero zero zero, zero zero zero, zero zero zero dollars) and growing by leaps and bounds every day.

Federal tax receipts for 2008 totaled $2.52 TRILLION (ignore for a minute that receipts are going down).

If we could somehow get some fiscal sanity and start saving 10% of receipts (to pay the debt down) and also have our debtors stop all interest from accruing (so we only pay the current principal) it would take us 46 years to get back to zero!

46 years. And that is a very simple payback estimate. In reality it can’t be paid back. (Very likely we will do the dishonorable thing and inflate our way out of this mess – read this if you want further proof our government is selling us out)

So the real debate right now should be how to get fiscal sanity back into the federal government. But that’s grown up work.

And we have a government full of clowns.

Remember, debt is slavery.

(Maybe that’s why they keep increasing the national debt?)

How much am I paying for free radio?

Riddle me this: what is the national, or public, purpose of NPR? What critical function does NPR perform that a privately owned station can't? If its programming is prohibitively unprofitable, what does that say about the value of the content?

I caught a few minutes of Market Place this evening (brought to you by American Public Media). The host, Kai Ryssdal, was interviewing a Univ. of Nevada professor about the impact of global warming/climate change on supply-chain management.

Here's a sample:

RYSSDAL: Let me test the hypothesis here that climate change and global warming will inevitably affect the traditional supply chain that we have.

CARTER: That's probably a very, very strong hypothesis.

Okay, so how will global warming affect supply chain management? Will rising sea levels swamp the ports? Will F7 tornadoes and Cat-9 hurricanes wreck both rail and ship? What does all this have to do with UPS?

Nothing. It's not The Day After Tomorrow that's going to slow us down, it's the increased costs caused by cap-and-trade and myriad other regulations making fuel and shipping more expensive. Looks like the cure may cost more than the disease; is there a price at which the proponents of climate intervention will back down and say that this is all just too expensive?

Back to the conversation:

RYSSDAL: Do you suppose this trend that we're seeing might accelerate with the Copenhagen summit on climate change coming up in December, and more pressure frankly on this issue.

CARTER: Oh, absolutely. Companies are very, very aware of the issue. And there's a lot of uncertainty, too, in terms of when oil prices will rise again, not if because they certainly will. And also what kind of regulatory structure we might have here in the United States in terms of a cap-and-trade system.

Now there's an anthropogenic problem for sure!

But don't worry, Mr. Ryssdal is looking out for you:

RYSSDAL: Would there be do you suppose any economic benefit to the United States? I mean the corporations will benefit for sure, but what about the rest of us?

Yes, Mr. Ryssdal, the rest of us. Thank you for looking out for the non-corporations rest of us.

And thank you, public radio, for giving me as much as I'm willing to pay for. A true bargain!

2+2=5

How do you explain support for a program (greater government intervention in health care) that seems unable to accomplish (according to the CBO) its most touted purposes (cost-savings and universal coverage)?

This was the whole secret of it. At first, I kept wondering how it could be possible that the educated, the cultured, the famous men of the world could make a mistake of this size and preach, as righteousness, this sort of abomination--when five minutes of thought should have told them what would happen if somebody tried to practice what they preached. Now I know that they didn't do it by any kind of mistake. Mistakes of this size are never made innocently.

Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, p. 668.

I would like to hear arguments that explain (1.) the legislators' motives and (2.) the legislation's mechanics, and see if these add up to better health care or greater savings or anything thing else that I would want more of. I think it's more likely that I'll hear different definitions of "health" or "savings," and that 2 and 2 make 5.

The root of all evil (30)

Inspired by a discussion with Paul (We are both reading Atlas Shrugged)

"But money demands of you the highest virtues, if you wish to make it or to keep it. Men who have no courage, pride or self-esteem, men who have no moral sense of their right to their money and are not willing to defend it as they defend their life, men who apologize for being rich--will not remain rich for long. They are the natural bait for the swarms of looters that stay under rocks for centuries, but come crawling out at the first smell of a man who begs to be forgiven for the guilt of owning wealth. They will hasten to relieve him of the guilt--and of his life, as he deserves.

"Then you will see the rise of the men of the double standard--the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money--the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law--men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims--then money becomes its creators' avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they've passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.

181 Billion (29)

(Side note: almost to thirty!)

The deficit grew by $181,000,000,000.00. . . in July.

The CBO probably should throw this chart away and start over.

Mob rule (28)

I've now seen the John Adams mini-series, and there was quote that stuck with me. President Adams at one point states (paraphrasing):

A mob is no less a mob just because it is on your side

This got me thinking.

I really enjoy what's happening lately at these healthcare reform townhalls all over the county. I think it's great that conservatives and others who have shied away from political protest (for whatever reason) have found passion in keeping their Republic from slipping further down the socialist slope.

(Also the escalation of confrontation, being pushed by Democrats, and using union cronies from groups like SEIU, only highlights their inherent weaknesses.)

One thing to consider though is that these protests will only carry us so far. Eventually it will have to be our arguments that turn hearts and minds.

Expose their lack of knowledge on the subject. Question their honesty (How will putting everyone on the government dole save money? Why do you say we can keep our private insurance when the bill clearly will drive insurers out of the market?). Question them using numbers from the CBO. Force them to promise to read the bill personally before signing.

It is not enough to crash the party. We have to take over the turntables and pick the music.

The Party of NO (27)

Democrats have been painting Republicans as the "Party of No" since PRESBO took office.

I don't want to defend Republicans. They've got enough party faithful and money to take care of themselves.

I would, however, like to consider for a moment who really is the "Party of No."

Consider that there is only one party who answers to all of the following questions with NO.

Can you defend yourself with a gun?

Can you prepare for your financial future (retirement)?

Can you decide whether you want health insurance and, if you choose yes, earn and save the appropriate amounts to afford it?

Can you get your own mortgage without government help?

Can you purchase a vehicle that is appropriate for your circumstances with respect to fuel economy and ability?

Can you be responsible for yourself?

I'm not saying Republicans are perfect, but the game is rigged, and we are all but forced to choose for one of the two major parties. For now, for me, Republicans are the lesser of two evils.

Disturbing (26)

Evan Coyne Maloney discusses the legality of the Whitehouse's request to report "fishy" speech:

It turns out, even asking for citizens to report on each other may be illegal. According to the Department of Justice, “the purpose of the Privacy Act is to balance the government’s need to maintain information about individuals with the rights of individuals to be protected against unwarranted invasions of their privacy stemming from federal agencies’ collection, maintenance, use, and disclosure of personal information about them.”

Further, anything is considered a “personal record” if it identifies an individual (an e-mail address would qualify), and “federal agency” specifically includes “the Executive Office of the President.”

Curiouser and Curiouser! Note, however, that Dear Leader wants both the agitator and the snitch:

It has come to my attention that if you send an e-mail to flag@whitehouse.gov to report unwarranted criticism of President ∅ your IP address will go into a permanent file.

No anonymous snitching you snitcher!

Troubled? Don't be. Just have some fun with them:

For the record, I'm not completely freaked out by the White House having my IP address permanently in a database. Because I know the more I post flag@whitehouse.gov here and around the web, the more robo site-crawling spambots will join me on the enemies list. The White House hates re-financed boner pills from Nigerian governments-in-exile. That address again: flag@whitehouse.gov

I doubt our humble blog will catch enough traffic but what the hell! flag@whitehouse.gov

flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov flag@whitehouse.gov

Inspiring confidence (25)

Good thing the fed stepped in to help out Fannie Mae:

Fannie Mae plans to tap $11 billion in new government aid after posting another massive quarterly loss as the taxpayer bill from the housing market bust keeps growing.

The mounting price tag for the rescue of Fannie and its goverment-sponsored sibling, Freddie Mac, is surpassed only by insurer American International Group Inc., which has received $182.5 billion in financial support from the government so far.

Fannie Mae's new request for $10.7 billion from the Treasury Department will bring the total for Fannie and Freddie to nearly $96 billion. Freddie is expected to report its quarterly results on Friday.

The government has pledged up to $400 billion in aid for the two companies. . .

$Four zero zero, zero zero zero, zero zero zero, zero zero zero. zero zero.

Good for the gander (24)

Sorry, but after eight years of this:

I've begun to love political art:

Why so socialist?

Slacking off (23)

Looks like I've been slacking off.

The last few days have been crazy. SWMBO and I were sans children the last two nights, so we ran to the movies!

We've also watched a record number of movies and shows on DVD the last week.

DVD - Taken - Rented via Redbox. Great movie. Didn't know it was possible but here's a film were Liam Neeson was badder than a Jedi. Great fun, and better than all Bourne movies combined. At least Neeson's character has a real purpose for all the mayhem.

DVD - Gran Torino - Rented via Redbox. When I reach a suitable age I will growl just like Clint. Great film.

DVD - Coraline - Rented via Redbox. I love animated movies, and great stop motion is even more fun nowadays due to the quality of CG available (as in a showcase of what's possible using real props). Fantastic fantasy.

DVD - John Adams, parts I and II - rented via Netflix. Good stuff, but I was a little disappointed. Two more discs to go and we've already reached Independence! I love the move 1776 (despite the flaws) (and the singing), because it spends so much time on the debate surrounding Independence. But we'll see where the series goes before final judgement. (BTW did Charles Adams -the second son - become famous (or infamous)? They constantly get onto him in the first two parts.)

In theaters - The Proposal - this was SWMBO's pick. Not bad for a chick flick, but there are better ones (and certainly there are worse ones). I liked how Sandra Bullock was not afraid to choose a younger looking man as her co-star. Reminds me of Cary Grant, who in several films (North by Northwest; To Catch a Thief) was as old as the woman playing "the old lady" (I.E. his mom, or his girl's mom), while the girl's were young.

In theaters - Transformers 2 - ROTF(L) - At best it was OK. Very crude (and I'm not a prude - or a poet). Essentially the same story as the first movie with 10x more Transformer Action. The only reason to see this in theaters is for the gigantic robot fighting, but even that's not really enough.

The "right" to healthcare (22)

Simon at Classical Values has a great question regarding the "right" to healthcare:

To exercise the right to keep and bear arms you have to buy your own. Will the same be true of medical care?

Probably not. Obama only cares about positive rights. People are giving up their negative rights for the security of the positive.

And speaking of positive and negative rights, I understand the intent of the description, but I can't help but think of these descriptions as some kind of marketing tool. I heard an older clip of Obama talking about "positive" rights (on Glen Beck this morning), mainly with respect to wealth redistribution. Anybody not wise to the nomenclature would surely think these "positive" rights were great and we should adopt them.

(Forgive me; Paul's the lawyer)

They should say each zero (21)

I think elected officials should have to say every zero in a spending/budget number rather than million, billion, or trillion:

The government plans to issue $2 trillion in new bonds this year to finance economic and financial rescues.

That's $2,000,000,000,000.00.

So if I were King they'd say Two, zero zero zero, zero zero zero, zero zero zero, zero zero zero and zero zero cents.

Maybe then our overlords would take these number a little more seriously.

Dereliction of duty (20)

Too big to read.



Is that like too big to fail.

I believe companies too big to fail are too big.

The same should apply to bills.

Did Conyers vote for Cap and Trade? Did he read it?

These people are not serious.

Two from Freeman (19)

Today I present two videos, courtesy of (or at least I found them at) Freeman Hunt.

First, the courtroom speech of Howard Roark from the film adaptation of The Fountainhead. (Transcription below from www.americanrhetoric.com).

Thousands of years ago, the first man discovered how to make fire. He was probably burned at the stake he had taught his brothers to light, but he left them a gift they had not conceived, and he lifted darkness off the earth.

Throughout the centuries, there were men who took first steps down new roads, armed with nothing but their own vision. The great creators -- the thinkers, the artists, the scientists, the inventors -- stood alone against the men of their time. Every new thought was opposed; every new invention was denounced. But the men of unborrowed vision went ahead. They fought, they suffered, and they paid. But they won.

No creator was prompted by a desire to please his brothers. His brothers hated the gift he offered.

His truth was his only motive.

His work was his only goal.

His work -- not those who used it.

His creation -- not the benefits others derived from it -- the creation which gave form to his truth.

He held his truth above all things and against all men. He went ahead whether others agreed with him or not, with his integrity as his only banner. He served nothing and no one. He lived for himself. And only by living for himself was he able to achieve the things which are the glory of mankind. Such is the nature of achievement. Man cannot survive except through his mind. He comes on earth unarmed. His brain is his only weapon. But the mind is an attribute of the individual. There is no such thing as a collective brain. The man who thinks must think and act on his own. The reasoning mind cannot work under any form of compulsion. It cannot be subordinated to the needs, opinions, or wishes of others. It is not an object of sacrifice.

The creator stands on his own judgment; the parasite follows the opinions of others.

The creator thinks; the parasite copies.

The creator produces; the parasite loots.

The creator's concern is the conquest of nature; the parasite's concern is the conquest of men.

The creator requires independence. He neither serves nor rules. He deals with men by free exchange and voluntary choice.

The parasite seeks power. He wants to bind all men together in common action and common slavery. He claims that man is only a tool for the use of others -- that he must think as they think, act as they act, and live in selfless, joyless servitude to any need but his own.

Look at history: Everything we have, every great achievement has come from the independent work of some independent mind. Every horror and destruction came from attempts to force men into a herd of brainless, soulless robots -- without personal rights, without person ambition, without will, hope, or dignity.

It is an ancient conflict. It has another name: "The individual against the collective."

Our country, the noblest country in the history of men, was based on the principle of individualism, the principle of man's "inalienable rights." It was a country where a man was free to seek his own happiness, to gain and produce, not to give up and renounce; to prosper, not to starve; to achieve, not to plunder; to hold as his highest possession a sense of his personal value, and as his highest virtue his self-respect.

Look at the results. That is what the collectivists are now asking you to destroy, as much of the earth has been destroyed.

I am an architect. I know what is to come by the principle on which it is built. We are approaching a world in which I cannot permit myself to live. My ideas are my property. They were taken from me by force, by breach of contract. No appeal was left to me.

It was believed that my work belonged to others, to do with as they pleased. They had a claim upon me without my consent -- that it was my duty to serve them without choice or reward.

Now you know why a dynamited Courtland. I designed Courtland. I made it possible. I destroyed it. I agreed to design it for the purpose of it seeing built as I wished. That was the price I set for my work. I was not paid. My building was disfigured at the whim of others who took all the benefits of my work and gave me nothing in return.

I came here to say that I do not recognize anyone's right to one minute of my life, nor to any part of my energy, nor to any achievement of mine -- no matter who makes the claim!

It had to be said: The world is perishing from an orgy of self-sacrificing. I came here to be heard in the name of every man of independence still left in the world. I wanted to state my terms. I do not care to work or live on any others.

My terms are: A man's RIGHT to exist for his own sake.

And Second, the national debt roadtrip. The fastest I've been (while actually driving myself) is around 118mph (my car was governed).

Paul update (18)

Wow, 18 posts and still no Paul.

I suppose he could be lurking, waiting to see where this goes. If so, Paul, I hope you aren't expecting much.

Of course I could call or email to let him know what I've been up to. . .

I'll wait him out at least until 30.

Taxes (17)

PJTV's Trifecta brings up something I've always thought with respect to taxes.

The beauty of taxes lies in withholding. Most people don't consider the money the government is taking from then. Additionally, many people even get a refund. How many times do you hear someone say, "I didn't pay taxes; I got money back!" Never mind they've given Uncle Sam an interest free loan.

I agree wholeheartedly with the idea that taxes should not be withheld. People should have to write an end of year check to the government (state and federal), lump sum.

Also check out Steve Green's suggestion with respect to Congress (he attributes it to Heinlein). You have two houses of government. One house only writes laws, with a two-thirds supermajority required to pass bills. The other house only repeals laws, with a one-third minority required to do so. Talk about starving the beast! It would cannibalize itself.

Narcissism (16)

Down the rabbit hole (15)

I was using google to find an article where Obama discussed his children and healthcare reform (a hypothetical question regarding coverage and whether he would go outside the system for his kids). I don't recall and didn't find the original because my search for "obama kids" brought up this page:

10 Ways Kids for Obama can get involved:

* Create a Kids for Obama Group on My.Barackobama.com. For example, Chicago Kids for Obama or DC Kids for Obama and throw a party!
* Write a letter or editorial to your local news paper, expressing "Why Barack Obama should become the next US President".
* Find a Pen Pal - it could be in your school, city, state, or another state. Write and discuss different ways you can get involved.
* Draw a picture of Senator Barack Obama or "an expression of Democracy". For example, the Senator sitting in the White House or working on Capitol. Hill. You can send your drawing to the Obama for America Campaign Headquarters in Chicago and it will be posted for the Senator to see.
* Implement T-Shirt Thursday. Get friends to wear an official Obama for America T-Shirt to school.
* Take an adult (voting age) to the polls on Election Day and encourage them to vote for you, by voting for Senator Obama.
* Post an official Obama for America Campaign sticker/logo on your school bag.
* Wear an Obama for America Campaign button and/or clothing.
* Host a Senator Barack Obama House Party or sleep-over.
* Contribute to the Kids for Obama Blog .

Clearly this nonsense is from the campaign (I wonder if any unfortunate kids could only find a non-voting age adult!).

Going deeper lead to this:

When you create an account on My.BarackObama.com, you're joining the online community of organizers who helped elect the President and now are working to bring real change on critical issues, including healthcare, education and energy reform.

Why does the President need another network for his propaganda? Is the MSM and countless liberal blogs not enough? Does holding the highest office in the world not offer enough opportunities to get your point across?

Let's go a little bit deeper:

President Obama has announced three bedrock requirements for real health insurance reform:

* Reduce Costs — Rising health care costs are crushing the budgets of governments, businesses, individuals and families and they must be brought under control
* Guarantee Choice — Every American must have the freedom to choose their plan and doctor – including the choice of a public insurance option
* Ensure Quality Care for All — All Americans must have quality and affordable health care

I think we should add world peace to the list also.

This reads like the old designer/contractor saying "fast, cheap, and good; pick two." That's not to say we can realistically pick two of the above with Obama's plan but honestly are the people that believe this horseshit serious? How can you introduce central planning and guarantee the three "requirements" above?

You can't. It's only a power grab. Wake up.

On a roll today (14)

But alas, they are cheap posts.

Just wanted to note a college and a foundation I hadn't heard of until recently. The college is Hillsdale College.

Founded in 1844, Hillsdale College is an independent, coeducational, residential, liberal arts college with a student body of about 1,300. Its four-year curriculum leads to the bachelor of arts or bachelor of science degree, and it is accredited by the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools.

Hillsdale’s educational mission rests upon two principles: academic excellence and institutional independence. The College does not accept federal or state taxpayer subsidies for any of its operations.

Shame about it being in Michigan. Perhaps the state capitol should be moved to Hillsdale?

The institute is The Future of Freedom Foundation.

The mission of The Future of Freedom Foundation is to advance freedom by providing an uncompromising moral and economic case for individual liberty, free markets, private property, and limited government.

Read their about page. Inspiring stuff.

Of course instapundit led me to FFF with this quote:

A rule we can rely on to be unfailingly applied is this: No matter how much the government controls the economic system, any problem will be blamed on whatever small zone of freedom that remains.

You could apply that to every situation the federal government is dealing with right now. The financial markets are falling apart? Of course we should have more regulation of banks/markets/whatever. Healthcare costs through the roof? It's insurance companies and their profits, of course. Turn control over to the government so we can reduce costs. Global warming? Let's limit greenhouse gases via cap and trade (of course)!

And, of course, "read the whole thing."

Ezra says, "Of course!"