Ground Hog Day

Notre Dame, South Bend, IN - In the coming New Year, 2012, both Groundhog Day and the State of the Union address will occur on the same day. This is an ironic juxtaposition of events. One involves a meaningless ritual in which we look to an insignificant creature of little intelligence for prognostication.

The other involves a groundhog.

-30-

The groundhog is like most other prophets; it delivers its prediction and then disappears.
- Bill Vaughan

More EPA wisdom for the good of all, of course.

Lenoir, TN - In yet another stroke of stunning consequences-be-damned thinking the EPA, acting under a directive from the idiots leading Congress, are going to increase the percentage of ethanol allowed in gasoline blends. The old line was 10%, the new line is 15%.

In a move that triggered immediate, furious controversy, the government said Wednesday that gasoline now may contain up to 15% ethanol — grain alcohol, usually from corn in the U.S. — instead of just 10%.

The Environmental Protection Agency ruling approves E15 only for 2007 model and newer cars and trucks. But EPA hinted it soon will include vehicles back to 2001. "Thorough testing has now shown that E15 does not harm" newer vehicles, EPA chief Lisa Jackson said.
USA Today: Ethanol content of gasoline can be 15%, up from 10% now

The EPA says that this blend is currently only legal in 2007 or newer cars. But how are they going to guarantee that fuel stays out of older cars in states that require ethanol blended gasoline? I think we are about out of nozzle sizes. We could go to the round peg in the square hole concept, but what about all those 2007 and newer vehicles already on the road? It will be even worse if they extend the standard retroactively to the 2001 models. (Wonder if we can get that "won't hurt newer cars" in writing…)

This new glitch in logical thinking will finish what "Cash For Clunkers" started. Older vehicles designed before the Gasahol craze with rubber based parts in the fuel system are already suffering some damage from the alcohol in the fuel. The 50% increase in ethanol will rapidly accelerate that damage. Those cars will either have to undergo costly repairs or they will scrapped.

It does not take a social engineer, in depth surveys or the US census to tell us who drives the vast majority of older vehicles on the road today. Those are people that can least afford to replace them. A brief and highly unscientific survey among the servers here at the Cracker Barrel in Lenoir, TN reveals that 7 out of 11 drive vehicles from the 1990s. Only one drives a car that is newer then 2007.

This change in fuel blends eat a lot of tip money. Money most of these severs say they don't have.

For an administration that is supposed to be all about the little guy, they sure spend a lot of time screwing him.

Oh yeah, almost forgot. Hope you aren't too fond of that trusty old lawn mower. If it even runs on that mix, it will probably kill it in just a few tanks of the 15% blend.

-30-

As we all know, no crude oil refineries have been built in the United States since 1976. During that time, close to 100 ethanol refineries have been built.
- John Shimkus

Who really decides US elections?

Slidell, LA - It recently came to my attention lots of folks do not understand who decides elections in this country. The key words for the purpose of this post are "who decides."

When a Democrat speaks to an all Democrat crowd that is called preaching to the choir. Unless that Democrat screws up beyond belief, no one in that room is going to vote for the Republican. If that same Democrat speaks before an all Republican crowd, that is called preaching into the wind. None of them are going to vote for that Democrat no matter what is said.

So there are two substantial groups of people out there that are already decided. Many members of both groups are decided even before the candidate is nominated for the race.

The rest of the electorate is made up of the people that will cast the deciding votes in most US elections. These are the undecided independent voters. In most races neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have a numerical majority by themselves. It takes the votes from those people in the middle to push one candidate ahead of another.

This is why most politicians forget their voting records and put on a game face more palatable to the center during election cycles. Of course once they are done with the election, those campaign statements are promptly "refined" to suit their actual mind set.

This post comes from my expressing concerns the Republicans will run Sarah Palin for President in 2012. Many of my conservative friends are appalled at my doubt she is electable.

But there is no escaping the fact Gov. Palin scares the Hell out of a large number of independent voters. Not only that, some of her message doesn't sit all that well with more then a few conservatives.

The 2010 general election promises to send a lot of liberal representatives home. The 2012 presidential election is in the Republican's hands right now. The conservatives quite literally will have to go out of their way to lose it as things stand now. (Based on current approval polls. Looking at the President's programs, projects and ideology, I don't see any change for the better anywhere on the horizon.)

If the conservatives run an extreme candidate like Gov. Palin, there is an excellent chance we will see four more years of Obama's politics. Hopefully conservative voters will see this in the 2012 primaries. What is left of our future is in their hands.

-30-

Hell, I never vote for anybody, I always vote against.
- W. C. Fields

Independence Day

On this day in 1776 our nation was born. The colonists won this nation with blood. They released the people of this new nation from tyranny, outrageous taxes and no representation in government. Our Founding Fathers set out to protect the people from tyranny by their new government. The instrument of this protection is the Constitution of the United States of America.

I think it is good to occasionally remind the general population that our Constitution is designed to limit government and preserve individual freedoms. The Founding Fathers intentionally made changing the Constitution very hard to do. They did this with good reason.

The US Constitution was never designed to be a "living document" subject to change the whims of the current political climate of the time. If you are one of these people claiming the US Constitution is a "living document" in need of some updating, be careful what you wish for. You might get it.

-30-

Neither James Madison, for whom this lecture is named, nor any of the other Framers of the Constitution, were oblivious, careless, or otherwise unaware of the words they chose for the document and its Bill of Rights.
- Diane Wood

"Groups" want FCC to police "Hate speech" on the web

My cousin turned me on to this entry on "The Hill"

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is being urged to monitor "hate speech" on talk radio and cable broadcast networks.

A coalition of more than 30 organizations argue in a letter to the FCC that the Internet has made it harder for the public to separate the facts from bigotry masquerading as news.

The groups also charge that syndicated radio and cable television programs "masquerading as news" use hate as a profit model.

"As traditional media have become less diverse and less competitive, they have also grown less responsible and less responsive to the communities that they are supposed to serve," the organizations wrote to the FCC. "In this same atmosphere hate speech thrives, as hate has developed as a profit-model for syndicated radio and cable television program masquerading as 'news.'"
The Hill: Groups want FCC to police hate speech on talk radio, cable news networks

There are a couple of problems with this...

Free speech is free speech. Even the ACLU recognized the Klan's right to spread their ignorance in Skokie, IL. We either have it or we don't. It doesn't matter if that free speech is in the form of a march or broadcast on radio or TV.

These "groups" (usually read liberals) consider any statement that contradicts their views to be hate speech. They use this tactic because most of their arguments cannot stand up to facts and figures. Those arguments almost always fail under the hate filled question, "Who's going to pay for this?"

It is interesting to note many of these "groups" complaining about hate speech on the airwaves have absolutely no problem comparing comparing President Bush with Hitler. This they don't consider hate speech.

-30-

Censorship reflects a society's lack of confidence in itself.
- Potter Stewart

Quote of the month...

Hagerstown, MD - I caught a sound bite on TV today that almost made made me inhale my shaving cream. It was among a montage of sound bites taken from various congress critters in Washington, DC. I am dying to know who said it, but I was not quick enough to drop the razor and get to the TV to catch the name. Not too worry, this one has got to come up again…

"Arizona made it against the law to be an illegal alien."
- Unknown… for now.

From the mouths of politicians come these pearls of wisdom that will be forever archived in news rooms around the world as monuments to the question, "Who elected this clown?"

-30-

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
- H. L. Mencken

If you build it, we will come…

Merritt Island, FL - All the empty words about stopping proliferation of nuclear weapons and securing nuclear material stock piles around the world become even more empty when we look at the realities of Iran and the people running the show there. Check this latest ration of noise:

Iran is so powerful today that no country would dare attack it, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Sunday during an annual army parade.

"Iran's army is so mighty today that no enemy can have a foul thought of invading Iran's territory," the Iranian leader said, according to state media.
CNN: Iran too 'mighty' to attack

Ahmadinejad cracks me up.

We could solve this with seven simple words: "If you build it, we will come." That should be our national policy on the matter. No clarification needed. No modifiers. No conditions. Plain and simple. When ever the question of Iran and nuclear weapons comes up, those seven words are the response, substituting "they" for "you" where appropriate.

But that would also require a real leader in the White House. One with a basic understanding of the real world and some focus on the security of Israel as well as our own national interests. And one with the backbone to follow up on those words. Unfortunately the current President is lacking in all those areas.

Ahmadinejad knows this too.

---

Obama's views on Iran are "utterly immature" and comprised of "formulations empty of all content."
- From a translation of an interview given by French President Nicolas Sarkozy

Socialist Health Care: It's Done.

Clearwater, FL - Everyone reading this blog knows my feelings on Obama-care. There is no point wasting bandwidth with them now. The good side fought the good fight. But the dark side headed by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Harry Reid and President Barak Obama managed to pull it off in spite of opposition from the overwhelming majority of people in this country.

So today I'll leave you with someone else's thoughts from 200+ years ago.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage."

–author unknown (often mis-attributed to 18th century Scottish writer/lawyer, Alexander Tylter)

I guess 234 years wasn't a bad run.

-30-

The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.
- Michelle Obama

Was part of your vote for Obama based on warrant-less wire tapping?

Many people, some who might even be reading this blog, based some part of their 2008 presidential vote on objections to President Bush's warrant-less collection of cell phone call records, location data and taps on international calls. No matter how misguided and misinformed those perceptions were, that was one of the Left's chief complaints and rallying cries against the Evil Right Ring Overlords (tm).

The following is for all those aggrieved when the New York Times (a/k/a/ Al Queda's US Intelligence Arm) exposed the up-till-then remarkably effective counter-terrorism surveillance operations:

Even though police are tapping into the locations of mobile phones thousands of times a year, the legal ground rules remain unclear, and federal privacy laws written a generation ago are ambiguous at best. On Friday, the first federal appeals court to consider the topic will hear oral arguments (PDF) in a case that could establish new standards for locating wireless devices.

In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts. U.S. Department of Justice lawyers say that "a customer's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records" that show where a mobile device placed and received calls.

Those claims have alarmed the ACLU and other civil liberties groups, which have opposed the Justice Department's request and plan to tell the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia that Americans' privacy deserves more protection and judicial oversight than what the administration has proposed.
CNET: Feds push for tracking cell phones

So when will we see mass protests against President Obama and the Justice Department? Everything that was thrown at the Bush administration needs to be thrown at the new bosses now. We need to hear the shouted calls for impeachment, criminal proceedings, banishment to Hell, etc. We need to see protesters at every Obama event complete with signs and fliers. The Daily Kos needs to write an article a day condemning Obama and his efforts to secure the country. The Huffington Post must eloquently detail their indignation at the invasion of their rights. Where are the comparisons with Hitler?

I'm waiting…

Fair is fair, right?

Come on…

Heh… I didn't think so.

-30-

There is no better illustration of that crisis than the fact that the president is openly violating our nation's laws by authorizing the NSA to engage in warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens.
- John Conyers

ACORN busting film maker busted!

Decatur, AL - James O'Keefe made a name for himself with clandestine videos of ACORN staff members assisting what they believed to be a pimp. O'Keefe led the ACORN staffers to believe he wanted to set up a brothel and staff it with underage girls brought in from overseas. Most of the ACORN staff in several locations were only too happy to assist.

Alas, the young man with "60 Minutes" ambitions and no common sense stepped over a line and now finds himself in hot water. It seems that somehow he got it in his head that it would be a great idea to impersonate telephone repair people (can't say repairmen any more), enter Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu's New Orleans office and play silly buggers with her office telephone system.

Activist James O'Keefe, 25, was already in the New Orleans office of U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu on Monday when two of the accused showed up claiming to be telephone repairmen, U.S. Attorney Jim Letten's office said Tuesday. Letten says O'Keefe videoed them with his cellphone.

The two men, Robert Flanagan and Joseph Basel, both 24, asked the reception for and received access to the main phone at the desk, and later asked for access to a phone closet, Letten's office said. The men were directed to another office in the building, where they are again accused of misrepresenting themselves as telephone repairmen.

Federal agents arrested them later. A fourth man, Stan Dai, 24, was also arrested, but Letten's office said only that he assisted the others in planning, coordinating and preparing the operation.
USA Today

Not smart!

How can this Mike Wallace want-to-be forget who is in charge now? He had to know a target appeared on his forehead the day he busted the ACORN people.

Other then finding a way to shut down Fox News and any effective US intelligence operations, there is nothing US Attorney General Eric Holder would like more then to prosecute the snot nosed little brat that embarrassed his President's favorite community organization. Especially when it is a slam dunk case like this that will almost certainly draw jail time.

Let's see now...

• Criminal impersonation
• Felony tampering
• Criminal trespass
• Illegal wire tap (Depending on what they did.)
• There has to be some law about messing with a congress critter's office...
• No doubt there is something under new and shiny anti-terrorism statutes the government can throw at him.
• Felony stupid.
• One count of conspiracy to commit for each of the above

Ah, the impetuous nature of youth. You just have to love 'em while they get their life lessons under their belts. Hope O'Keefe hasn't got any plans for the next ten years or so. I don't see him getting a plea bargain on this one.

-30-

"Here's your sign…"
- Bill Engvall

Ding dong the network's dead…

Harrison, OH - Air America is dead. It's all over but the liquidation. The Air America web site blames the failure on a "very difficult economic environment."

The New York Daily News had a much different view. Their article cited no direction, no talent, bad paychecks, bad timing and no listeners.

As Rush said a few days after that debut, you can't build a popular radio show, or network, on ideology – and rightly or wrongly, Air America got the image that it was working from a playbook.

"First," said Limbaugh, "you have to entertain people. You have to make it interesting to listen. I don't hear any of that."
The New York Daily News

Even Nathan Harden writing in the Huffington Post had to admit, "Talk radio is a tough gig. You have to sustain three hours of conversation, five days a week, in defense of your ideas."

But then he comes right back with this load of crap, "Conservatives like to say that liberals aren't successful on the radio simply because their ideas don't hold up."

Actually, that is exactly why Air America and other liberal/socialist bastions eventually fail. "Feel good" ideas are warm and fuzzy and junk, but they don't put food on the table, generate wealth or revenue, create jobs, nor do they put money in the bank. After a while, someone has to pick up the bill.

Here are a few other takes on Air America's demise:
USA Today: Liberal radio network Air America files for bankruptcy
Air America to close, files for bankruptcy
News: Air America Radio Closing, Filing for Bankruptcy

President Obama has a really short memory

Tampa, FL - Last night while addressing the nation President Obama said the following:

"It's easy to forget that when this war began, we were united -- bound together by the fresh memory of a horrific attack, and by the determination to defend our homeland and the values we hold dear.  I refuse to accept the notion that we cannot summon that unity again."
The White House Web Site, text of the address 

Mr. President, with all due respect let me remind you that it was you, your party and most of the people that support you who spent the last few years using the war on terror as a wedge to divide our nation.

Give me a break.

---

A house divided against itself cannot stand.
- Abraham Lincoln

More liberal scoffing at analyzing the health care bill before voting on it

Today I caught a sound bite from one by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (Twit-RI), comparing reading the 2000+ page health care bill to a 13 year old girl blowing through a Harry Potter novel. That's an interesting take on it.

For the sake of argument, let's have a look at the difference.

A Harry Potter book runs in sequence, is cohesive and makes sense. Everything you need is right there in the same book and given to you in a logical sequence. That means that by the time you get to page 341, you have everything you need to make sense of what you are reading on that page.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (Twit-NV) Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is not quite so simple. For example, have a look at the first page of proposed legislation after the index.

1 TITLE I—QUALITY, AFFORDABLE
2 HEALTH CARE FOR ALL
3 AMERICANS
4 Subtitle A—Immediate Improve
5 ments in Health Care Coverage
6 for All Americans
7 SEC. 1001. AMENDMENTS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
8 ACT.
9 Part A of title XXVII of the Public Health Service
10 Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg et seq.) is amended—
11 (1) by striking the part heading and inserting
12 the following:
13 ‘‘PART A—INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP MARKET
14 REFORMS’’;
15 (2) by redesignating sections 2704 through
16 2707 as sections 2725 through 2728, respectively;
17 (3) by redesignating sections 2711 through
18 2713 as sections 2731 through 2733, respectively;
19 (4) by redesignating sections 2721 through
20 2723 as sections 2735 through 2737, respectively;
21 and
22 (5) by inserting after section 2702, the fol
23 lowing:

You got all that, right? And that is just the fist page. The entire bill reads just like that. Don't believe me? Click the link and look for yourself.

There is a reason that legislators need time to not just read, but interpret anything they are going to vote on. In this case the proposed health care legislation will make changes made in almost every section of federal law from the Tax Code to Education to Social Security.  Properly interpreting the bill requires constant reference to vastly divergent parts of the United States Code to see what effect each and every one of those changes has on the existing law

Never forget that the only thing worse then a bad law is a badly written law.

The senator's suggestion that reading the healthcare bill compares favorably to a Harry Potter reading binge is complete bullshit. That leads us to one of two possibilities:

1. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (Twit-RI) really believes what he said. If that is the case he demonstrated in a highly public manner that he never personally read a bill in which case he has no place in U.S. Senate passing laws over the rest of us.
2. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (Twit-RI) intentionally set out to deceive the public. If this is the case, he has no place in U.S. Senate passing laws over the rest of us.

It is sometimes insulting to see just how stupid some of our congress critters think we are. But then again, we do keep electing them.

-30-

Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made.
- Otto von Bismarck

Fines for not having health insurance? Oh Hell no!

Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) has an interesting idea to get universal health insurance coverage in the United States. He proposes fines on people that do not have health insurance. Read it for yourself.

The fines would be the stick to enforce a proposed requirement that all Americans get health insurance, much as auto coverage is now mandatory. The penalties would start at $750 a year for individuals, and $1,500 for families. Households making more than three times the federal poverty level - about $66,000 for a family of four - would face the maximum fines. For families, it would be $3,800, and for individuals, $950.

Baucus would offer carrots as well: tax credits to help pay premiums for households making up to three times the poverty level, and for small employers paying about average middle-class wages. People working for companies that offer coverage could avoid the fines by signing up.
The Associated Press: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

So lets see now…

We all know how well mandatory liability insurance on cars worked. 100% compliance and low prices across the board, right?

And if you lose your job and your insurance, big fine! Oh yeah, that's going to help. Just what every man and woman out of works needs is one more worry.

Do you think this policy will apply to illegal aliens too? It will be fun to watch Uncle Sam try to collect those fines. The feds will probably be at least as successful as the traffic courts and insurance companies that are chasing illegal aliens that have car accidents without the benefit of auto insurance.

Actually, to me it seems Sen. Baucus stumbled across a sure fire way to turn the tide of public opinion in favor of a government option. Think about it, if you are flat broke, unemployed and facing a yearly $1500 fine, a free ride from Uncle Sam suddenly looks really good.

Come on 2010, it is well past time to clean house.

-30-

Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices.
- Voltaire

Thoughts on Senator Kennedy

Tampa, Fl - It was interesting listening to all the talking heads eulogize and canonize Senator Kennedy after his death. The praise came from all corners of the media. This included praise from people that just the week before were extremely critical of his health care stance.

What makes this interesting is that I was alive during the events the talking heads hashed over. I remember the things he wanted to to do and the things he did. That makes it hard to believe that last week's talking heads went through the same time line as myself.

For balance let me tell you what I remember of him.

I remember a short drive off an even shorter bridge resulting in the death of Mary Jo Kopechne. It is hard to forget the profound lack of prosecution for a DUI accident, leaving the scene of an accident and vehicular manslaughter. Just to make sure there is no mistaking the circumstances involved, let us not forget the Senator waited until the following morning to call his lawyer. Then he called the police. For some reason the thought of calling rescue personnel didn't cross his mind the night of the crash.

I remember the women. His antics with the fairer sex were legendary inside the Beltway, Cape Cod and around the Florida residence. A writer covering the Kennedy's Florida compound summed it all up several years ago when he said in a CNN interview, "What can I say? The Kennedy's like to get laid." There were several "tell all" books on the subject. A couple of payoffs made it into the public spotlight as well.

"Integrity is the lifeblood of democracy. Deceit is a poison in its veins" is a quote attributed to Senator Kennedy.  Sadly, those powerful words lose a great deal when considering the man that coined them is the same one that did the things listed above.

I remember the booze. Right after Bobby's death the spotlight focused on Ted. Commentators to comedians all focused on the Senator's legendary appetite for liquor. Liquor and parties with lots of women, awe struck by power. There's not really anything wrong with this. But the fact does lend itself to the next paragraph.

Most of all I remember the pass he got from the media back then and even through today on all these personal failings and more. There are two sets of rules for politicians. One for media pets like the Obama and Kennedy clans. And another set for those that really did some good in for our nation like Presidents Bush, Bush and Reagan.

Anyone under the second set of rules would have been out of public life for good on any one of the above items. But not Sen. Kennedy. He was too important to the movement to tarnish with these trivialities.

Lastly I remember the Senator's obsession with my guns. He wanted nothing more in his life then to take my guns from me and every other private citizen. It is understandable. Having two brothers killed by assassins with firearms might twist him a little. So he gets a partial pass on this one. But the end result was that Sen. Kennedy had absolutely no use for the second amendment and no respect for law abiding firearms owners.

So consider this little rant equal time and balance to all the praise we heard last week.

He wasn't a saint. No where near it. He was just a man pursuing his ideals and living life for all he could get out of it.

That's really not a bad eulogy when you think about it.

-30-

"I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him. The evil that men do lives after them. The good is oft interred with their bones. So let it be with Caesar.

The noble Brutus hath told you Caesar was ambitious. If it were so, it was a grievous fault. And grievously hath Caesar answered it."
- William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act 3, Scene 2

National Health Care Lies - More on "You can keep what you have"

One of the repeating public health care themes coming out of the White House is "If you like your current health care, you can keep it." From the President, on down through Press Secretary Robert L. Gibbs to congressional representatives, we hear it over and over again.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The proposed health reforms will eliminate private health insurance. The reason is simple math and business sense.

Most people get health insurance through their employers. Unless you are buying your health insurance on your own, the decision will lay with your employer rather then you.

To how this works let us create a fictitious company. Our company has 50 employees and an annual payroll of $2 Million. Shopping around on the internet uncovered stripped down family policies available to groups of 50 for a little over $600 a month per employee. To make the math easy, we will use $600 for an annual fee of $360 Thousand.

That is not the only employer expense when providing private health insurance. With 50 employees, the employer has one person that spends at least part of their time administering the health insurance policy. At $600 per month for family coverage at a group of 50, the employer is probably also dealing with complaints from employees that are not getting all the services they think they should have.

H.R. 3200 Sec. 412 (see text below) will levy a maximum 8% tax on employers that choose not provide employee health insurance. An 8% tax on $2 Million comes out to $160 Thousand per year.

A government health plan gives our fictitious company two options. They can stay with the private option at $360 thousand per year as outlined above or go with the government option of $160 Thousand dollars per year. And the government option carries the added bonus of eliminating all the administration costs and employee griping.

Which option do you think most employers are going to go with? I know which option my employer will take.

As employees are shifted in massive numbers out of the private sector that pool of private insurance money used to pay claims with will shrink dramatically. That will cause the price of private health insurance to go up. More employers and individual policyholders will abandon the private companies for the less expensive government option.

Once that snowball starts down the hill it will not stop until there is nothing left. Eventually, one buy one, the private health insurance companies will become insolvent and die.

History shows what happens when government enters into direct competition with the private sector. For example, the Roosevelt Administration set up government run electric utilities in direct competition with private concerns. The Tennessee Valley authority destroyed Wendell Willkie's Commonwealth and Southern and wiped out millions of depression era stock holders.

How does this happen? It is simple. The play field is severely tilted.

A government entity pays no taxes. The federal government has the purchasing power to get well below market prices and terms on everything they need. Government can and will set rules and regulations that favor the government enterprise.

If government sets up a public health plan under the terms outlined in H.R. 3200 no private insurance company will survive. The tax advantage alone will be too much of an edge.

Legal scholars on both sides of the public health fence debated to exhaustion whether or not the now infamous Sec. 102 will end private insurance in five years through the language in the proposed law. Both sides have valid points. The debate comes from the fact that other parts of H.R. 3200 will change some of the existing statutes referenced in Section 102. Those changes will cause contradictions within section 102 itself.

I think the legal argument is academic. If there is government financed health insurance, in five years there will not be a private option left to test the law.

For the record H.R. 3200 Sec. 412 will change the Internal Revenue Code with the following language:

SEC. 412. RESPONSIBILITIES OF NONELECTING EMPLOYERS.

(a) In General- Section 3111 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d) and by inserting after subsection (b) the following new subsection:

`(c) Employers Electing to Not Provide Health Benefits-

`(1) IN GENERAL- In addition to other taxes, there is hereby imposed on every nonelecting employer an excise tax, with respect to having individuals in his employ, equal to 8 percent of the wages (as defined in section 3121(a)) paid by him with respect to employment (as defined in section 3121(b)).

-30-

The only thing worse then a bad law is a badly written law.
- Me

Yet one more act of democracy to be held against me…

I attended the town hall meeting in Monticello, FL where Rep. Allen Boyd (D-FL). listened to comments and concerns about H.R.3200, America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. The doors opened at 4:00 p.m. and by 4:30 the doors were closed when the court room reached a capacity crowd. My count was roughly 165 people. I'm told that another hundred or so people were left outside. I do know those left outside were a rowdy bunch.

The crowd ran 12 to 1 against H.R. 3200. Some comments were very concise and well spoken. I think what struck me the most was the vast amount of misinformation on both sides of the debate. One man wanted to know if the congressman would be giving up his fully paid, no deductible health insurance. Rep. Boyd corrected him on that misconception. Another lady extolled the virtues of a single payer system and how it wouldn't really cost any more then what we are paying now. A man complained loudly about the non-existent part of the bill that requires euthanasia of older patients.

Rep. Boyd handled the comments and questions fairly well. I was impressed with his ability to listen and respond. Respond he did, but answer he did not. It is hard to explain how he did it, but he did it well.

He did affirmatively state that he could not support the bill as it is written. He said that he would vote for what was best for the country.

I hope the bill does not change to something he can support. And lately the leadership in Washington seem to have lost sight of what's best for America. At least the America we know now.

-30-

"Americans haven't given up on the idea of a free press, but they don't think the press is unbiased. They see the press as valuable in tracking what government does and giving them information on some very basic and real issues like the war on terror. But large numbers of Americans wish they got a better news report. The public wants us to redouble our efforts to be fair and unbiased, or at least acknowledge bias."
- GENE POLICINSKI, acting director of the First Amendment Center.

National Health Care Lies: Part 3 - We can do it better if everyone has health insurance

How many reading this are old enough to remember when liability insurance on your car was optional? All of you old enough think back to that simpler time in your life. The rest of you follow along, there is an example here.

Remember the insurance companies testifying before your state legislators? They said if everyone is covered there won't be anymore more uninsured losses, law suits will drop dramatically and therefore premiums will drop by double digit percentages. The laws were passed, people were ticketed and some lost licenses for not having proper car insurance.

As the laws passed, auto insurance rates took off like sky rockets. As each state required insurance, rates in those states went up in double digit percentages. At the same time, insurance rates in states still holding out against mandatory car insurance saw no or very small increases during the same time periods.

Auto insurance companies blamed the evil trial lawyers for screwing up the plan. Funny as it may be, states that did not have mandatory insurance laws during the same time period must not have had the same trouble with the trial lawyers. The only thing we can deduce from that information is that trial lawyers are a direct result of mandatory insurance laws. 

Now fast forward from the 1970s and 80s to March of this year. Karen Ignagni testified on behalf of the health insurance companies before the US Senate. Then she gave an interview to USA Today.

"This is a major step, and it changes everything about how the market works," Ignagni told USA TODAY. Insurers, she said, are prepared to "offer coverage to everyone who applies."

In return, however, they want a system similar to the one that now exists only in Massachusetts, in which all residents are required to get insurance. Insurers want the federal government to help those who cannot afford private insurance with subsidies or tax breaks.

Insurers also want to prevent any new system from including a government insurance plan similar to Medicare. Ignagni said such a plan could attract 100 million people who now have private insurance, because the government can bargain for lower rates with providers.
USA Today: Insurers' proposal requires coverage for all

Last weekend Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) appeared on the Mike Huckabee show. She said that "we all have to be insured" for the federal health system to work and keep costs down.

Where have we heard that before? I'm not certain, but I might have seen this tap dance before.

You can be certain the insurance companies do not want to see a government run insurance option. That is a matter of simple survival. A government run plan will exterminate the private option for all but the very wealthy.

But it is almost a sure bet the private health insurance industry longs for a Massachusetts style law requiring health insurance on everyone. Once they have a captive market, the price of the policy is no a key concern.

So everyone will have insurance, but at what cost? Once health insurance is required by law the sky is the limit.

Been there, done that, got the ticket. (Dismissed, found the insurance card later.)

-30-

"You have awakened a sleeping giant."
- Katy Abram addressing Arlen Specter (D-PA) at a town hall meeting in Lebanon, PA

Certified Fishy and un-American.

I am proud to display the "Certified Fishy" seal of disapproval. It is an honor and a privilege to be declared fishy by those who think H.R. 3200 is a good idea. To think that my thoughts were able to tweak those that believe in social and economic justice (What ever the Hell that may be) even for a minute means I'm doing something right.

In addition to that the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (Twit-CA) and House Majority Leader,  Steny Hoyer (D-MD) declared those speaking out against health care (myself included) to be un-American. They did so in a joint opinion column that ran in today's USA Today.

Let me share part of that column with you:

These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task for decades.
USA Today: 'Un-American' attacks can't derail health care debate By Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer

Does anyone remember when the New York Times exposed critical anti-terror operations? Critics called the reporters, editors and publisher of the New York Times un-American for doing that. (I used the phrase traitorous, but tact has never been my strong suit.)

Does anyone remember Rep. Nancy Pelosi and company spending hours on CNN and MSNBC vilifying President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and those complaining about the New York times? She was one of the chief cheerleaders rallying the troops against the evil right wing war mongering conspirators. Nancy and Co. were all very free with the word "un-American" while referring to the people listed above.

Hey pot, which kettle are you calling black?

A tip of the hat to my cousin who indirectly turned me on to Verum Serum. On their page they have a link to a template that allows you put whatever you want in the middle of the seal. I bought the kitty with the fish bone from ClipArtOf.com for ten dollars. Well worth the money.

-30-

A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it.
- George W. Bush

National Health Care Lies: Part 2 - All Anti-Health Care Protestors Are Professional Rabble Rousers

The August break for Congress is traditionally used so representatives may return home and meet with constituents. This year the constituents are not just asking to be heard, they are demanding it. At meetings across the country, the prospect of government run healthcare is bringing out lots of people for lots of reasons. Most of them are pissed off beyond belief over one or more aspects of the plan. They are are not being shy or even tactful when personally delivering that message in town meetings.

Democrats are attempting to paint everyone showing up at town hall meetings as agitators from out side the district and Tea Party Patriots. Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (Twit-CA) coined a new term for these protestors, "This initiative is funded by the high end. We call it "Astroturf," it's not really a grass roots movement. It's AstroTurf by some of the wealthiest people of America." 

Nancy and the rest of the people making these claims seem to think we, the American public, are going to be diverted form the real issue by this verbal slight of hand. But fortunately this particular magic trick is so bad that even the most wide eyed innocents are laughing at it.

A few of the people showing up for these meetings are coming at the behest of e-mailed requests, web postings and talk radio shows. So what? The point is these people do not believe the brand of government run health care being proposed is good thing for them or their country.

Most of the people are showing up on their own volition without the extra prodding. They do so because they believe the proposed health care plan is so bad that it is worth going to the meeting to be heard in person.

All of the people showing up for these meetings have a reason for being there. Many are worried about the cost, the effect on the federal budget and their taxes. Many know their existing health insurance will eventually dry up under government competition and are gravely concerned about what will replace it. A large number of older constituents are very concerned about what will happen when free health care over loads the system and the federal budget. Everyone wants to know where the lines will be drawn when the resources eventually run out. A few are even more concerned over who will be drawing those lines.

The idea that all the people showing up at these meetings are rabble rousers out to torpedo Democrats is pure political fantasy. It is so fantastic that only the most fanatic "The US Bombed the World Trade Center" believers are buying into it.

That leads us to one of two possible conclusions:

• The Democratic leadership actually believes that this is nothing but semi-pro rabble rousers making trouble at the town hall meetings. In this case it means the Democratic Leadership is so far disconnected from the reality of what their constituents want that they have no place making laws and spending decisions over them. We are talking a disconnect so severe that even the "we know what's best for you" elite are becoming concerned.

Or…

• The Democratic leadership believes the American public is stupid enough to buy that load of fertilizer they are shoveling. If that's the case they have proved themselves to be snake oil salesmen and con artists with no place in making laws and spending decisions over any of us.

I recommend that anyone reading this seek out the nearest town hall meeting and be heard. It doesn't matter which side of the debate you are on. What does matter is the badly needed reality check for our representatives. It never hurts to remind elected officials from time to time that their cushy jobs still depend on the unwashed masses that vote for them. Who knows, they may actually listen to we voters instead of those high priced lobbyists.

Well, at least for a while. 

-30-

"It is kinda funny, though, having a professional neighborhood organizer [President Obama] crying "foul" because those of us upon whom this abomination will be foisted may be organizing to protest."
- My Cousin