Protesting against change

Everyone is trying to classify the tea party protesters. The coverage from Fox TV is favorable so most call them right wing and most call them republicans. This is a group however that defies easy identification. Many have never protested before, have never been active politically and have never been closely aligned with one political party. This may be why many call them racist. Lacking any easily identifiable markings observers note the obvious. The protesters are angry, the target of the anger is black, therefor the protesters are racists. This is no more true than the other labels.

The reality is these protests are a true grass roots uprising that has forced a widely divergent group of individuals together for common interest. Typically this type of group is seen in the "not in my backyard" protests such as those against walmart or prisons or power plants. This type of protest brings everyone in a geographical location together regardless of political affiliation or economic status.

The commonality is that all members of this new group feel disenfranchised, overburdened, afraid about the future and concerned with change. Most are concerned that the proposed changes are dramatic and permanent. They fear that this new vision for America proposed by the Obama has no place for them. His vision involves social and economic engineering they are not sure they want. ( This point is worth noting because the Obama was elected as an agent of change, so it seems clear that many are surprised by the type of change proposed by their new president. Could it be that all they really wanted to change was the tone and demeanor in Washington, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan our relationship with our foreign interests and maybe the face of the president?) They worry that taxes which are already high will grow higher for years to come. Most of all they fear that they are loosing footing on their economic tier.

The raw emotion and the inexperienced display offered by the protesters gives insight that these people don't quite know what they are doing but feel that they must act now. Many of the signs held up at rally's and many of the comments offered by protesters were absurd. Don't therefor dismiss them, instead consider the massive emotional content that brought them to this place. It will be a mistake to ignore them. The fear and anger they display suggest that they mean business.

A question as important as who are they, is how many are there? Is it possible that there are many more? Could there be 10 times or 100 times as many as we have seen so far? Anecdotal evidence suggest that this grassroots movement is very very large. Many times senators and Congressmen have seen their email servers, web portals and phone lines full to capacity and ground to a halt as floods of protests poured in from every corner of their districts. Town hall meeting are filled to overflowing and Glen Beck attracts over 3 million viewers at 5PM.

Two months ago they were AstroTurf today they are a political reality. Washington must acknowledge them or risk being overrun by them. Its a change you can believe in.

A black president and the race card collide

Opposition to the First black president is racist or at the least racially motivated. So says former president Jimmy Carter. This is the kind of disarming argument that liberals love to make as it allows them to dictate the terms of the argument and avoid actually discussing the subject at hand, such as socialized health care. They used the same tactic regarding gay marriage. It didn't matter how many thoughts you had on the subject the response was the same "don't be a hater". Instead of discussing the merits of your thought you are forced to defend your integrity.

This time the liberals may have overplayed their hand. The issues that lead to the Tea Party Patriots and the march on Washington brought together a very disparate group of people. Many of them are true independent voters that helped elect The Obama only to be shocked by his policies and immediately revolt. Turning on these important voters now risks alienating them for years. Another more interesting aspect of the race card is its recent overuse and the potential consequences of that. People will become habituated to its use and inured to its effects. Once this line is crossed the power of the race card will decline dramatically. Howard stern the shock jock is a perfect example of this effect. He said so many shocking things that listeners were no longer shocked by them.

The Obama must now realize he is in a difficult position. He has abandoned talking up the merits of his health care plan and instead has focused on attacking his opponents and ridiculing dissenting voices from the public. This approach seems unlikely to work as insults never win an argument except among children.

Death Panels are they real?

Much has been made by democrats regarding the term death panel. They correctly point out that women pregnant with a down syn drone baby will not be called to stand in front of a government panel who will parse out if your unborn will live or die. Neither will they ask the very old to stand while the death panel debated the merits of saving their life with heroic health care. What Govener Palin said about death panels sounds totally incredible when it is considered this way.

In reality the death panels will have a kind and safe sounding name like committee for excellent care. The British death panel is called N.I.C.E. , National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. This panel meets and decides how best to ration health care coverage. They use a model called Quality adjusted life years or QALYs. Rationing means not everyone gets every service. They have decided that those under 15 and over 65 should get a lower cost care with fewer heroic actions. They have even placed a dollar amount on the value of another year of life for an elderly person. If they can extend the life for a year and it costs less than $45000 then the patient gets the care. If it is far more than $45000 then give the patient pain meds and send them home to die. The Obama seems headed in this direction, Dr. Ezekial Emanuel is a key health care advisor to President Obama and the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. Earlier this year, Dr. Emanuel wrote an article that advocated what he called “the complete lives system” as a method for rationing health care. Here is that article

read the attached
http://www.hlc.org/020108.pdf

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=33100

Obama care

Evidently the new health care overhaul is 1500 pages long. No one it seems, especially those in the congress or the senate, has read it cover to cover. Well here is a quick sketch of the proposed changes. The people who do have health care are going to begin to pay for the people who don't have health care. This burden will fall most heavily on small business owners and the wealthy but all of us will pay a part of the new expenses. Your doctor will have to take on about 20% more patients as the people who didn't have insurance begin having regular visits. This will mean it will be much harder to see your doctor and vastly more difficult to see a specialist or get a procedure done. There are just so many doctors around and 20% more patients for the doctor means 20% less service for you.

When the government takeover of health care is in full swing cost control will become a priority. Cutting cost means cutting service. Yes there is waste in the current system but I pay for it through my health insurance premiums and I like knowing that everything possible will be done for me to see that I have the best possible outcome. In the future your doctor will not be the sole decision maker regarding your care. A vast federal government agency will also have a say in how you are treated. Their goal will not be the single best outcome for you, it will be the most cost affective outcome for a vast group of people. We will be transitioning from health care that seeks excellence for you to health care that seeks affordability for all. An automobile analogy would be going from Cadillac to Kia.

If we look around us we can see what cost control looks like. In Canada they have significantly higher death rates for some illnesses than in the US despite having the same treatments as here. Why? Because they don't treat disease promptly. It might take 6 months to see your primary care doctor, six months to see a specialist, six months for a follow up visit and all the while your cancer was progressing. Hence a higher death rate. In other countries the higher death rates are caused by refusal to use the very best medicine because its to expensive. Right now the standard of care is safe and effective. We are switching to a standard of safe and COST effective. Still in many other cases they simply give you pain meds and tell you no to the hip or knee replacement that you need. Your pain it seems is cost effective.

Then there is the Trillion dollar price tag. Yes Trillion. Its a budget buster. Its going to cause increasing deficits for ever. In fact if you look out past the first ten years of this program the numbers become staggering. Its clearly a budgetary black hole swallowing up every dollar that comes into its path. In the end everything will be sacrificed to feed this beast including defense spending and private health insurance. When you consider the financial implications of this plan its clear that Obama care is not just a plan to change health insurance its a plan to change the United States of America. Twenty years from now The US will only be ably to afford a very modest defense budget as Obama care becomes a third rail budget item. Private insurance too will suffer as more money is needed for Obama care. Eventually it will lead to a single payer system as it requires more and more taxpayers to keep it afloat. Democrats know this and many have stated it over the years including the President and Barney Frank.

Hope Change Transperency

The Obama swept into the White house waving a banner of hope and change. He promised to be open and transparent. He said that business as usual in Washington was over while he was president. Well it seems that this may not be true. Its turns out that the Obama has just had an Inspector General fired for doing his job. Further he was fired in a manner that broke a law that the Obama himself had co sponsored. In explaining the Obamas law breaking his aids called it an act of political courage. I think that's like calling a bully's beating, self defense.

Here is the story. Inspector General Gerald Walpin was investigating how $850,000 was spent by St Hope run by former NBA star and Obama supporter Kevin Johnson. St. HOPE had received an $850,000 AmeriCorps grant, which was supposed to go for three purposes: tutoring for Sacramento-area students; the redevelopment of several buildings; and theater and art programs. Mr. Walpin's investigators discovered that the money had been used instead to pad staff salaries, meddle politically in a school-board election, and have AmeriCorps members perform personal services for Mr. Johnson, including washing his car.

At the end of May, Mr. Walpin's office recommended that Mr. Johnson, an assistant and St. HOPE itself be "suspended" from receiving federal funds. The Corporation's official charged with suspensions agreed, and in September the suspension letters went out. Mr. Walpin's office also sent a civil and/or criminal referral to the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of California. Well Mr Johnson became Mayor of Sacramento and it now looked like that city would not be allowed to receive stimulus funds due to Mr Johnsons suspension. A political pressure cooker began and massive pressure was place on all to fix this issue. Mr. Walpin agreed that Mr. Johnson should pay back money but objected to lifting the suspension. He noted that Mr. Johnson has never officially responded to the Corporation's findings and that the entire point of suspension is to keep federal funds from individuals shown to have misused them.

Enter US Attorney Lawrence Brown, his office produced a settlement draft that significantly watered down any financial repayment and cleared Mr. Johnson to receive federal funds. Surprised and concerned about the St. HOPE mess, Mr. Walpin wrote a 29-page report, signed by two other senior members of his office, and submitted it in April to Congress. Last Wednesday, he got a phone call from a White House lawyer telling him to resign within an hour or be fired. IG Walpin He says the phone call firing him came from Norman Eisen, the Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform, who said the President felt it was time for Mr. Walpin to "move on," and that it was "pure coincidence" he was asked to leave during the St. HOPE controversy.

Here is where it gets interesting, last year Congress passed the Inspectors General Reform Act, which requires the President to give Congress 30 days notice, plus a reason, before firing an inspector general. A co-sponsor of that bill was none other than Senator Obama. Having failed to pressure Mr. Walpin into resigning (which in itself might violate the law), the Administration was forced to say he'd be terminated in 30 days, and to tell Congress its reasons. This law was totally ignored. Political courage or business as usual?
Daniel J Hoban

Don't tase me Bro !

Twice in my life I have witnessed police being forceful with persons under arrest or soon to be under arrest. I was in full agreement with the police actions each time. Its possible it could have been beyond standard protocol but it seemed proportional and appropriate to me at the time.
Recently I have seen you tube videos of people getting tased by police or security guards. In 90% of these situations I very strongly disagree with the police actions. This is the most striking and perverse abuse of human rights as I have ever seen in the United States. I think it sets a terrible standard that we must all fight against. Police nation wide are establishing the concept that they are justified in tasing anyone if they become difficult in any way. It is not necessary to be violent or dangerous. It is not necessary for the office to feel overwhelmed, out manned out or gunned. The first words out of their mouth is or I'll tase you, Like they have a God given right to be cruel and abusive to any citizen any time. It is a crazy world where we are outraged when a horrible terrorist is water boarded but ok if a 90 pound lady is tased by a 200 pound police officer because she didn't say "how high sir" when he said jump. The worst aspect of this brutal development is that according to the social contract officers have no real rights. We the people are allowing them use of our rights because it is in the public interest to have organized and centralized ,protection and law enforcement. In a horrible turn those we have allowed the use of our rights to self defense, become our attackers. I studied martial arts for a short time. I know that with very modest training the police would almost never need to taser anyone. There are a hundred very effective wrist, finger and arm locks that are easy to use and work wonderfully. I see no reason to give into police brutality when there are good alternatives to the taser. Watch the videos on You Tube. Get outraged and let someone know how you feel.
Daniel J Hoban

Now there you go again.

The Obama swept into the White house on a platform of change. During the election he built a long list of strident promises that he said would change business as usual in Washington. I understand politics. I know these promises are made to be broken but some of them are such surprising turnabouts that they need to be considered.

Lie number one No earmarks

This is worth looking at because its a lie that was smashed to pieces in a very public way when the interim spending bill was passed. There were in fact thousands of earmarks essentially giving the victors (democrats) the spoils. Here is what John McCain said about it.

it is "insulting to the American people" for Obama's budget director to indicate over the weekend that the president will sign a $410 billion spending bill with what Republicans critics say is nearly $5.5 billion in so-called "earmark" projects.

"So much for the promise of change," McCain said in this year's version of what has become his annual tirade against pork-barrel spending.

Lie number two "Lobbyist and special interests will have no part in my administration"

In fact the revolving door between business and elected officials is open and spinning rapidly. Thus far The Obama administration has hired or appointed 17 people that are or have been lobbyist's , leaders of special interest groups or held high positions in interested corperation's .

Lie number three Sunlight before signing

This one seems small but is actually key to change that The Obama had promised during his election campaign. This speaks to his many promises to make the political process open to the people, fair, free of last minute earmarks and unfettered by pork barrel spending and most of all by partisan. The Obama promised to leave every non emergency bill available to the public for 5 days for viewing and discussion, to insure that it is understood, acceptable to both parties and free of wasteful spending. Thus far he has broken that promise As the Cato Institute's Jim Harper notes, the Administration only fulfilled its "Sunlight before Signing" pledge on one of the first eleven bills the President signed into law. That's less than 10 percent. On the bright side, there's plenty of room for improvement.

Close Gitmo

He may close it but he now has plans to hold the detainees permanently in other locations without proper legal trials as he argued for during the election.

Recognize the Armenian Genocide

The anniversary came and went recently and the word genocide was never mentioned.

End the war in Iraq

Not even close.

Renegotiate NAFTA

No plans at all for this one.

Eliminate all income taxation of seniors making less than $50,000 per year

Hahahahahahahahahahaha !