P.T.–Still Laughing At You

Time to write another post about that crap sandwich disguised as health reform, commonly called ObamaCare.

Remember, in our last post, we discovered that the Dems lied to us about the cost of the bill. They were forced to admit that they double counted their Medicare savings. Ooops.

And now, the American Medical Group Association weighs in:

Just over a month ago, the administration released long-awaited draft regulations for "accountable care organizations," networks of doctors and hospitals that would collaborate to keep Medicare patients healthier and share in the savings with taxpayers. Obama's health care overhaul law envisioned quickly setting up hundreds of such networks around the county to lead a bottom-up reform of America's bloated health care system.

But in an unusual rebuke, an umbrella group representing premier organizations such as the Mayo Clinic wrote the administration Wednesday saying that more than 90 percent of its members would not participate, because the rules as written are so onerous it would be nearly impossible for them to succeed.

And this:

The regulations are "overly prescriptive, operationally burdensome, and the incentives are too difficult to achieve to make this voluntary program attractive," the medical group association said in its letter. One of the major problems seems to be that medical groups have little experience in managing insurance risk, and the administration blueprint rapidly exposes them to potential financial losses.

But, my favorite line from the article is here:

Fisher, the medical association head, said he does not think the administration will easily back off its approach, because on paper it saves the government money.

So, in other words, the administration’s not going to back down, even though no one is going to participate, because “on paper it saves the government money”. That’s so laughable you could hurt yourself. As we’ve shown plenty of times already, there’s NO MONEY SAVINGS. Not for the government, not for anyone.

But, who are the suckers this time?

Many in the health care industry were silent partners backing Obama's overhaul law, but disappointment over the accountable care rules has put a chill into the relationship. During the congressional debate, Obama extolled Mayo and Geisinger, holding them up as a model of what he wanted to achieve for the nation. Industry criticism of his administration's proposal has been building up for weeks in online forums.

Bingo. Well, it’s not like you weren’t warned. Remember this?

Did you really think that was going to come without higher cost and burdensome regulations?

You got suckered, and now we’re all paying for it. Thank you very much.

Barack Obama’s (D-USA) entire Presidency has been a big game of Three Card Monte. He lets you think you can win, making you think you know what’s going on and that the game is going to work out for you, and then he hides the queen. And you lose. And you lose. And you lose.

The problem is that it’s not just some jerk on a street corner losing their money to another jerk on a street corner. It’s the entire nation losing all their money to a jerk in the White House.

Well, at least P.T. is still happy. He’s found some more suckers. Don’t worry. If you still believe in this law, P.T. will find you eventually. There may be one born every minute, but the number of ongoing ObamaCare suckers is shrinking fast.

The Fourth Amendment Gets Torn a Bit More–Here In Indiana!

The Indiana Supreme Court today decided that the Fourth Amendment doesn’t matter anymore.

INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.

"We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest."

Despite voting for President Barack Obama (D-USA), we’re pretty conservative here in Indiana. If our court can make a ruling like this, just wait until a similar case comes up in California.

Elections matter. Supreme court nominations matter. This is an abomination.

(wow, I’ve been using that word quite a bit lately)

Seven Minutes These Kids Will Never Forget

I tweeted about this a couple times this week, but wanted to save it on my blog for posterity.

Go read this at TIME, now: The Interrupted Reading: The Kids with George W. Bush on 9/11.

I’m not even going to quote anything. You need to read the whole article.

Eat that, Michael Moore.

What’s Up With The Huck?

Governor Mike Huckabee is going to announce something tomorrow.

Mike Huckabee told listeners during his radio show today to “be sure to catch my Fox News television show,” saying that a “very important announcement” would occur Saturday, according to ABC News.

Huckabee didn’t offer any further details, so it’s not clear if the announcement will relate to his plans about 2012, or will focus on an educational company that he just launched yesterday that will initially sell a history-oriented video series about kids time traveling.

Personally, I have a hard time believing that Fox would let him announce his candidacy on his show. The speculation right now is that he’s going to announce that he’s not running, something that Eric Erickson over at RedState has been certain of for some time.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee looks like he’ll give the 2012 White House campaign a pass, says Mr. Huckabee’s top political operative.

Mr. Huckabee has told followers to tune in to his Saturday evening show on Fox News for what he calls a major announcement. But Ed Rollins, who directed his 2008 campaign and has been organizing his 2012 campaign-in-waiting, said he has not been consulted.

“I’ve heard nothing, which indicates to me he’s not running,” Mr. Rollins said in an interview.

Possible, but more and more I think Katrina nailed it first. He’s going to talk about his new company.

The Obligatory ‘Ron Paul Is In’ Post

Ron Paul announced his candidacy today on ABC’s Good Morning America, thus ensuring that only about a dozen people got to see it live.

This will be the third time out for Paul. He first ran as a Libertarian in 1988, then 20 years later as a Republican. Now he’s the second Republican this week to formally announce, following on the heels of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

Paul, 75, who tweeted yesterday that he would make a “major announcement” this morning, said he wants to run because “the time is right.”

“Time has come around to the point where the people are agreeing with much of what I’ve been saying for 30 years,” he told me.

Uh, yeah. Sort of. He’s always been for fiscal sanity and always against the Fed. But, Paul’s still an isolationist, and while I’m no believer in global gov’t, and often wonder if we should get out of the UN, we can’t have an isolationist President in the 21st century.

Why I Don’t (Yet) Support Mitch Daniels

No, it doesn’t have anything to do with his comment about a “truce on social issues”. Couldn’t care less. He was making the very valid point that right now we need to concentrate on the economy and getting our fiscal house in order. His social conservative credentials are up there with just about anyone’s.

Now, a little history.

In 2004, on election day, I stood outside my local polling place in the rain all day long, wearing my green “MY MAN MITCH” t-shirt. I was one of those meet and greet people, “Do you have any questions? Are you sure you’re at the right place? Anything I can help you with?” etc. I’ve voted for Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN) twice for Governor, and if he could run again, I’d vote for him again. I’m not thrilled with the whole Daylight Savings Time thing, but I understand it, and he did campaign on the issue, so I have no legitimate gripe. He kept his campaign promise.

So, it’s not as if I’m anti-Mitch. I think he’s done a spectacular job as Governor. And I think he’d likely be a good, possibly great, President. I’d happily vote for him for President, if he’s the nominee. And he’s one of only 2 or 3 people I can say that about. I’m just not convinced of his ability to be a good candidate.

I’m gonna pick on Kevin Eder here, who works for the Media Research Center, but he expresses views I’ve heard elsewhere. Here’s a tweet I got from Kevin last night.

@ChrisOfRights I have no issues with his record, but he gets me as excited as a...zzzzzzzzz.

And that’s the truth, and it’s the way a lot of people are going to see Mitch. He’s not dynamic. He’s not charismatic. He’s not even combative. He simply comes out, says what he intends to do, and then does it.

Now I’m gonna pick on Bruce Newman, who follows me on Twitter, and opined on this as well.

@ChrisOfRights @keder I'm wondering if this is the cycle where someone who isn't so glamorous and charismatic can win.The anti-Bama

This is the general rebuttal you get from Mitch’s supporters when presented with statements like Kevin’s. And it does make sense on some levels. President Barack Obama (D-USA) was definitely treated like a rock star by the MSM, and maybe we do need someone who’s more down to earth.

However, there’s a problem. Let’s look at the last 9 Presidential elections. All but one were won by someone with that charisma and flair. Maybe not at Obama levels, but certainly higher than Daniels. We had:

1976: Jimmy Carter
1980: Ronald Reagan
1984: Ronald Reagan
1988: George H.W. Bush
1992: Bill Clinton
1996: Bill Clinton
2000: George W. Bush
2004: George W. Bush
2008: Barack Obama

With the exception of 1988, all of these were pretty charismatic people. Now, you might argue that President George W. Bush (R-USA) didn’t exactly light up a room, but there’s no doubt that he was personable and friendly and genuinely warm. People enjoyed seeing him and being with him. One of the MSM memes at the time was that the pool reporters following his campaign started liking him too much to write bad stuff about him. He’s a likeable guy.

Now, let’s look at the nominees who never were elected President in that same period:

1976: Gerald Ford
1984: Walter Mondale
1988: Michael Dukakis
1996: Bob Dole
2000: Al Gore
2004: John Kerry
2008: John McCain

Pretty much all of these people are dull, dull, dull. Note too, that while President George H.W. Bush (R-USA) won 1988 without much charisma, he was facing someone at just about his same level in Governor Dukakis (D-MA). And he also was running on being the successor to the incredibly charismatic President Ronald Reagan (R-USA). And he lost in 1992, when facing someone with actual charisma, then Governor Bill Clinton (D-AR).

Which group does Mitch fit better with? I think he clearly fits in better with the second group than the first. So, to win, Mitch would not have to be just the anti-Obama, but also defeat a 35+ year trend in Presidential elections.

It’s quite simple, really. In America, we like charismatic Presidents. Yes, that’s stupid, but it’s also undeniably true. I think it’s very likely that to defeat Obama, we’re going to need someone with a similar level of charisma. Do I like that thought? No, but I’m being honest and facing reality.

Now, maybe Mitch will run and start showing some fire and energy. That will certainly help. I hope he can and does. If he does, I will definitely start writing more supportive posts. I’m keeping an open mind on him, but so far I just don’t see it.

(Yes, I know 4 posts are missing from my blog. See here. I can recreate them if I have to and will do so, but am going to wait a bit longer to see if Blogger can restore them for me)

The Obligatory ‘Newt Is In’ Post

I like Newt. If I could have him as a next-door-neighbor, I’d be thrilled. I’d love to sit and shoot the breeze with him. He has an incomparable knowledge of history, and there are very few politicians with his intelligence. He’s an idea guy and most of his ideas are brilliant. He’s also very quick on his feet and understands the issues that face America, both foreign and domestic. I have sympathy for anyone who faces him in a debate. On just about any subject.

Now, having said all that, he’s not who I would support for the GOP nomination, and I hope he doesn’t win because I would have serious concerns about his ability to defeat President Barack Obama, and serious concerns about his ability to preside over America as well.

His marriage issues show that he has some character flaws. Now, I’m definitely not without sin myself, and I don’t expect any sinless person to show up this campaign season. But these are character flaws that I find disconcerting an unacceptable. You may disagree. That’s your prerogative.

Then there’s this:

 

To have bought into the whole AGW nonsense is bad enough, but to sit next to that woman on that couch…ugh.

And there’s the matter of the worst kept secret in Washington, D.C. during his heyday as House Speaker. The story goes that starting in about 1996, the Republican House leadership refused to let him meet privately with President Bill Clinton (D-USA) anymore. Because while Newt talked a good game on the outside, he always fell to Clinton’s charms one on one and caved. Now, that may or may not be true, but I’ve heard it too many times to just discount it automatically.

But, finally, there’s this. And I’m going to say this about several people running for President this year. He’s a twentieth century politician. I honestly do not think he understands the Tea Party, or the need to “just say no” to the Democrats. I think he still believes that much can be achieved through compromise with them. And I think it’s clear that through at least the last 30 years or so, that whenever the GOP has compromised with Dems, we’ve lost much more than we’ve gained. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: you can not compromise with people who want to unmake America and take it completely the wrong direction. All a compromise does in such a scenario is move us towards their goals, but slower. We have to move to our goals, that of preserving America and American values.

And I just don’t think he’s the man to do that. Twenty-first century politics demands standing up and saying not just “no”, but “hell no!” I believe I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of politicians who are willing to do that, and so far he doesn’t make the cut.

For a more complimentary view of Newt, from a man who rarely has anything good to say about any politician, read Neal Boortz’ take here.

UPDATED:

Newt makes it official at 4:23 EDT with this tweet:

Today I am announcing my candidacy for President of the United States. You can watch my announcement here. http://bit.ly/kEbh7d

And here’s the vid:

My Letter to Mitch McConnell

This is my week for letters. This wasn’t an open one though. I sent it directly to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) through his form on his Senate website. I encourage you to do the same.

Dear Senate Minority Leader McConnell,

Please explain to me why the vacant seat on the finance committee went to Senator Burr, who stated publicly that he didn't want it, rather than Senator DeMint, who stated publicly that he did?

I can only see this as a blatant attack on DeMint and the Tea Party.

Do you remember last November? Last November was all about fiscal sanity. Senator DeMint is exactly the type of voice we need on that committee, not someone who doesn't understand the concept of small and limited government.

Amnesty for Illegals? TARP? S-CHIP? Burr.

This is an outrage.

Make no mistake about it. The RSCC will not be receiving any money from me this election cycle. You just blew it.

Sincerely,
[Your Name Here]
A concerned citizen

I’ve Become An Apple Fanboy

I managed to go 44 years of my life without buying a single piece of Apple hardware for myself (I’ve gotten two iPods for my wife). And in the last month, I’ve gotten an iPad 2, and the Apple TV.

How do I like them? They’re both wonderful. The iPad has become my default device for Twitter and RSS, and even for reading my e-mail (I still compose e-mail on the PC). I’m in love with Facetime, and wish I could get it for my EVO, because it’s a much better video calling experience than Qik or Fring. Actually, I’d love it if I could get Facetime for Windows too, so then my mother could make video calls to her two granddaughters. Yes, I know there are other ways to do video calling, but Facetime is just so incredibly easy to use.

As for the Apple TV, I think I like it better than my iPad. I can stream anything on my iTunes to it, including music, TV shows, and movies. I can set it up to have a screensaver made up of pics of my kids. And yes, I can do all of these types of things other ways too, but the Apple TV makes it painless. It has NetFlix integration (haven’t tried it out yet, can’t comment) and pay-per-view movies. Also has streamed MLB and NBA games, however I don’t plan on using that service. And the device itself is tiny. About the size of two decks of cards.

I could actually even see myself with an iPhone, if it was on Sprint, and had 4G, and better cameras, and a better UI, and Flash, and…ok, nevermind. I can’t see myself with such a wimpy phone.

Actually, the lack of Flash support irks me on the iPad too. Some days it really irks me. Yes, I know about Skyfire, but what about apps like Twitter clients that launch an internal browser? I assume it’s using some sort of hooks into the system browser, right? So, even if I had Skyfire, I wouldn’t get Flash from tweet links.

Maybe I’m wrong there. I haven’t tried it.

Oh yeah, that reminds me. There’s one other thing that sucks on the iPad. The App Store. When I buy an app from the Android Market, if I uninstall it in half an hour or less, I get my money back. Not so from the App Store. And unlike the Android Market, there aren’t many free apps. I must’ve installed half a dozen at least of Twitter clients and RSS readers, before I settled on ones I liked. And I paid for every one of them. And most of them I couldn’t uninstall fast enough.

Ok, I’m not an Apple fanboy after all.

Senator Reid, How Dumb Do You Think We Are?

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) took to the Senate floor today in defense of the NLRB trying to tell Boeing where it can and can not do business.

Here’s the video for your viewing pleasure. Keep a bucket handy.

Can’t watch? I’ll give you the money quote:

“The Founders created a system of checks and balances — three branches of government, for example, and two chambers of the Congress — precisely because they anticipated these passions,” Reid said on the Senate floor.

“Long after that system was created, a new independent federal agency was created in the same spirit of checks and balances,” said Reid. “That agency is the National Labor Relations Board, and it acts as a check on employers and employees alike.”

This statement might be even dumber than former Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA-08) “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it” statement.

I really did not think anyone would surpass that any time soon. What’s more, is he’s lying and he knows it. I don’t like Reid, but he’s not a complete idiot. And you would have to be a complete idiot to believe that statement. So, my only conclusion is that he thinks the people listening to him (i.e. you and I) are the idiots.

The Founders would like the NLRB telling a business where it can build a plant? You have got to be kidding me.

This is a huge issue. This blatant power grab by the executive is just as bad as anything in ObamaCare. This is exactly the kind of thing you see in Atlas Shrugged. And there’s a reason this was discussed in last week’s GOP debate, and the reason isn’t just because the debate was being held in South Carolina. No matter how this turns out, it’s going to be a campaign issue next year.

Boeing has done nothing wrong. No amount of spin can change that. They wanted to build a new plant to makes 787’s. They looked at lots of places, and narrowed the selection down to two, Washington and South Carolina (they already have plants in both). They eventually decided Washington was their first choice and went to the union there to discuss it. They could not come to an agreement with the union, so they went to their second choice. The union demands were pretty much off the charts. Boeing wanted to build the planes there. The union wouldn’t let them.

Don’t believe me? It’s all here in a wonderful article in the Washington Post by Jennifer Rubin entitled, “The NLRB hands the Republicans a  potent issue”.