We all hear that perhaps 70% of Americans are opposed to BO’s plan. Perhaps, but we know plenty of lefties who think it’s just fine. Actually, "think" is not the correct word with reference to these poor souls. They don’t think in the sense most of us understand the word. It’s closer to a hot flash or a random blast of emotion, untethered.
Anyway, it’s curious that they claim (change of word) it’s just fine. If they cared about their own self interest and that of their family naturally they would oppose the plan. There’s something else afoot. Part of it is pure partisanship; they’d swallow more Kool Aid if the DNC called for it. Part of it is a sense of embarrassment; there’s no way they’re about to admit a major screw up, and those who continue to look for an admission of guilt just aren’t going to get it. Folks who’ve been taken by their own party may talk about it, but only behind closed doors.
BO has acted perfectly in character, yes, but we don’t think he has got all of us in a heap of trouble. This is not Greece. Even some of the Founders lost hope just after the Revolution. Don’t. Americans won’t let this thing stand. It’s true that BO’s operatives went for health as the vehicle to the promised land because they know that repeal is difficult - conventional wisdom is that once it’s done, it’s done. No, we will get free-market reforms that work.
But certainly the Republicans were asleep at the switch. Some say it is the party’s marriage to the insurance companies, just as others, us included, know that it is the Dem’s beholden to trial lawyers that kept any cost savings out of BO’s bill. For whatever reason, if the Republicans had acted early on they would have saved all of us a heck of a lot of trouble.
However, there is one flip side to the fact they didn’t, and, it’s not a bad one - the recent exercise means an end to the far left other than as an outlier, for generations to come. They 1) gained traction, 2) showed their stuff, and 3) it gagged most normal folk.
We’re optimistic for this Country.
Robert Craven
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
The Unforgiven
Suddenly, in headline after headline and each with the flair of original discovery - "Hey, wait a minute, this thing wasn’t even about health care. What gives?"
Oh, that.
We can surely understand why the Investor’s Business Daily declared, "We've done more than 150 editorials in the past year or so documenting these problems. Democrats surely understand them. Yet, despite a recent CNN poll showing that 59% of Americans oppose ObamaCare, Congress approved it anyway. Why? Because it's not really about health care. It's the largest wealth grab in American history, masquerading as health care ‘reform,’ another step in the socialization of Americans' income in the name of ‘fairness’ and ‘spreading the wealth around,’ as Obama himself has put it."
Must have read our blog.
Many patriots are disheartened. Don't be. This whole shebang is a fluke. Time was compressed. The near-meltdown of Q4 '08 (triggered by the Dem’s refusal to reform the twins) coupled with political correctness got us an extremist for a president. The odds are tiny that we will ever see such a combination again.
Still, many reasonable observers think it’s all over for America.
Some herald the post-war UK as our destiny. As Mark Steyn notes, "the greatest empire the world had ever known would have shriveled to an economically moribund strike-bound socialist slough of despond, one in which (stop me if this sounds familiar) the government ran the hospitals, the automobile industry, and much of the housing."
True. I know. I was there when Mark was in diapers. Being a student traveler with no $ I befriended a family of four and was taken in. The Mr. worked for a coal-driven electrical generating plant. Being on strike, he and I and his wife and two daughters took the car ferry to Ireland and toured for a week (stopping precisely at 1 pm every day, pulled off the road with our gas burner, for tea). I hadn’t grown up; I still harbored the silly and glandular notions of a college kid - the same notions that our lefty friends in Marin took into adulthood. I listened to a week’s worth of complaints. It was always someone else’s fault. They had rejected Churchill, adopting the nanny state, and now things weren’t working out just as planned.
But guess what? Lo and behold, the UK righted itself. Dear Margeret had a lot to do with it. So did the people. They’d had enough.
Our correction will be more accelerated and for the single reason that in-house extremists have shown their colors in an instant. Not sneaky and not gradual, but in our face.
Big mistake.
It’s all been fast forwarded. Nothing about BO’s agenda can be called "creeping." The time of a lifetime for these misfits called for gestapo tactics. That won't work in America.
Normally, folks might opt for a ball game (while experiencing the death of 1000 cuts) but this time it scares the pants off most of them, that is, those who retain their sensory capacity. They’re not going to accept this sin.
Recall Eastwood’s The Unforgiven. Cross the line, and you’re about to become history.
Robert Craven
Oh, that.
We can surely understand why the Investor’s Business Daily declared, "We've done more than 150 editorials in the past year or so documenting these problems. Democrats surely understand them. Yet, despite a recent CNN poll showing that 59% of Americans oppose ObamaCare, Congress approved it anyway. Why? Because it's not really about health care. It's the largest wealth grab in American history, masquerading as health care ‘reform,’ another step in the socialization of Americans' income in the name of ‘fairness’ and ‘spreading the wealth around,’ as Obama himself has put it."
Must have read our blog.
Many patriots are disheartened. Don't be. This whole shebang is a fluke. Time was compressed. The near-meltdown of Q4 '08 (triggered by the Dem’s refusal to reform the twins) coupled with political correctness got us an extremist for a president. The odds are tiny that we will ever see such a combination again.
Still, many reasonable observers think it’s all over for America.
Some herald the post-war UK as our destiny. As Mark Steyn notes, "the greatest empire the world had ever known would have shriveled to an economically moribund strike-bound socialist slough of despond, one in which (stop me if this sounds familiar) the government ran the hospitals, the automobile industry, and much of the housing."
True. I know. I was there when Mark was in diapers. Being a student traveler with no $ I befriended a family of four and was taken in. The Mr. worked for a coal-driven electrical generating plant. Being on strike, he and I and his wife and two daughters took the car ferry to Ireland and toured for a week (stopping precisely at 1 pm every day, pulled off the road with our gas burner, for tea). I hadn’t grown up; I still harbored the silly and glandular notions of a college kid - the same notions that our lefty friends in Marin took into adulthood. I listened to a week’s worth of complaints. It was always someone else’s fault. They had rejected Churchill, adopting the nanny state, and now things weren’t working out just as planned.
But guess what? Lo and behold, the UK righted itself. Dear Margeret had a lot to do with it. So did the people. They’d had enough.
Our correction will be more accelerated and for the single reason that in-house extremists have shown their colors in an instant. Not sneaky and not gradual, but in our face.
Big mistake.
It’s all been fast forwarded. Nothing about BO’s agenda can be called "creeping." The time of a lifetime for these misfits called for gestapo tactics. That won't work in America.
Normally, folks might opt for a ball game (while experiencing the death of 1000 cuts) but this time it scares the pants off most of them, that is, those who retain their sensory capacity. They’re not going to accept this sin.
Recall Eastwood’s The Unforgiven. Cross the line, and you’re about to become history.
Robert Craven
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Dupes
Our lefty friends celebrate the health care heist. They’ll want to hide that from their kids, a few years down the line. As a parent, no use being made out to be the fool.
Jack Welch, former CEO of GE and perhaps the most respected business leader ever, said in a recent interview that this thing’s a disaster, and will cost all of us a fortune.
But the run-of-the-mill left? They don’t understand, not a clue what their party has done to them. They’ve been taken.
BO just said, "Hey there pal, we’re going to take a buck or two of yours and give it to someone else." But our friends here in Marin County think this is great stuff.
This is not a plan about covering the uninsured, or the poor. We already do that (Medicaid, BadgerCare, emergency care).
It’s a lie to say it pays for itself. Our lefty friends pay, via the half-trillion in new taxes.
It isn’t about making health care affordable. The bill does nothing about the cost of health care. Tort reform? Scares the left to death.
Medicare’s actuary says our costs will rise even faster than they are rising now. Thank you.
This bill is a scam. No one we know personally will experience one red cent of savings because of it. They will all pay more.
Why are the lefties in a state of delirium? Their own gov’t just said to them, "Hey, did you know that you are an incorrigible slob? No? Well, you are. From now on you troglodyte, you cannot choose to buy coverage but must buy it. Washington will design the plans. The prices will be controlled. The doctors will be told how to practice. "
OK?
Robert Craven
Jack Welch, former CEO of GE and perhaps the most respected business leader ever, said in a recent interview that this thing’s a disaster, and will cost all of us a fortune.
But the run-of-the-mill left? They don’t understand, not a clue what their party has done to them. They’ve been taken.
BO just said, "Hey there pal, we’re going to take a buck or two of yours and give it to someone else." But our friends here in Marin County think this is great stuff.
This is not a plan about covering the uninsured, or the poor. We already do that (Medicaid, BadgerCare, emergency care).
It’s a lie to say it pays for itself. Our lefty friends pay, via the half-trillion in new taxes.
It isn’t about making health care affordable. The bill does nothing about the cost of health care. Tort reform? Scares the left to death.
Medicare’s actuary says our costs will rise even faster than they are rising now. Thank you.
This bill is a scam. No one we know personally will experience one red cent of savings because of it. They will all pay more.
Why are the lefties in a state of delirium? Their own gov’t just said to them, "Hey, did you know that you are an incorrigible slob? No? Well, you are. From now on you troglodyte, you cannot choose to buy coverage but must buy it. Washington will design the plans. The prices will be controlled. The doctors will be told how to practice. "
OK?
Robert Craven
Monday, March 22, 2010
Flip Side
No sooner had we warned in our Mar/20 sketch, Rule Of Law, why the Dem’s tactic would not pass muster with the Judiciary than Nancy abandoned that tactic 12 hours later (come on Nancy, you’re no fun). That subversion of the Constitution was abandoned when it became clear that the Supreme Court would not put up with a law that had been "deemed" to have passed. So instead, BO and Pelosi relied on time-tested, gestapo, strong-arm tactics of bribes and threats to intimidate the frail to succumb. That worked.
And we cannot only blame the left. These clowns are opportunists, sure, knowing a vehicle to the promised land when they see one. But where were the Republicans, years back? Plenty of folk had a cure for our health care costs; we’ve listed most of these, past blogs. It sure would have been a lot easier if they’d have shown a little initiative.
Now What?
"Don’t worry," our lefty pals tell us. "You’ll get used to it," citing (to them) obvious precedence. But Medicare and Soc Security passed by overwhelming bi-partisan majorities. This health scam pass is lopsided in the extreme. That’s why they should worry.
Already? Pelosi’s favor ability rating at 11% yesterday? Maybe you should worry a little bit dear girl (and change your lipstick, please).
Well, no one’s about to dump their wheel chair into the Boston Harbor. But, we’ll experience the equivalent ongoing. Perhaps 2/3's of Americans will support some form of repeal, believing that a free-enterprise-fix is preferable to the dumbing-down impact of gov’t intrusion.
The first changes under the new health care law will be easy to see and not long in coming: There'll be $250 rebate checks for seniors in the Medicare drug coverage gap, and young adults moving from college to work will be able to stay on their parents' plans until they turn 26. Then what? What about next year, and beyond?
As National Review editors note, this legislation "will increase taxes, increase premiums, and increase debt, while decreasing economic growth, job growth, and the quality of health care." Oh, that. And the WSJ adds, "This week's votes don't end our health-care debates. By making medical care a subsidiary of Washington, they guarantee such debates will never end. And by ramming the vote through Congress on a narrow partisan majority, and against so much popular opposition, Democrats have taken responsibility for what comes next—to insurance premiums, government spending, doctor shortages and the quality of care. They are now the rulers of American medicine."
And that folks begets optimism. Easy - the masses don’t want this deal. So we are stuck with some form of government control of a good portion of our economy, for a while. Fine, because at the same time we are rid of a flagitious collection of bottom dwellers, the likes of which, believe me, we will never see again in our lifetimes. Without them (Nov elections) we will begin to cleanse.
When BO signs this bill, he signs his and his party’s death sentence.
Heck folks, let’s celebrate!
Robert Craven
And we cannot only blame the left. These clowns are opportunists, sure, knowing a vehicle to the promised land when they see one. But where were the Republicans, years back? Plenty of folk had a cure for our health care costs; we’ve listed most of these, past blogs. It sure would have been a lot easier if they’d have shown a little initiative.
Now What?
"Don’t worry," our lefty pals tell us. "You’ll get used to it," citing (to them) obvious precedence. But Medicare and Soc Security passed by overwhelming bi-partisan majorities. This health scam pass is lopsided in the extreme. That’s why they should worry.
Already? Pelosi’s favor ability rating at 11% yesterday? Maybe you should worry a little bit dear girl (and change your lipstick, please).
Well, no one’s about to dump their wheel chair into the Boston Harbor. But, we’ll experience the equivalent ongoing. Perhaps 2/3's of Americans will support some form of repeal, believing that a free-enterprise-fix is preferable to the dumbing-down impact of gov’t intrusion.
The first changes under the new health care law will be easy to see and not long in coming: There'll be $250 rebate checks for seniors in the Medicare drug coverage gap, and young adults moving from college to work will be able to stay on their parents' plans until they turn 26. Then what? What about next year, and beyond?
As National Review editors note, this legislation "will increase taxes, increase premiums, and increase debt, while decreasing economic growth, job growth, and the quality of health care." Oh, that. And the WSJ adds, "This week's votes don't end our health-care debates. By making medical care a subsidiary of Washington, they guarantee such debates will never end. And by ramming the vote through Congress on a narrow partisan majority, and against so much popular opposition, Democrats have taken responsibility for what comes next—to insurance premiums, government spending, doctor shortages and the quality of care. They are now the rulers of American medicine."
And that folks begets optimism. Easy - the masses don’t want this deal. So we are stuck with some form of government control of a good portion of our economy, for a while. Fine, because at the same time we are rid of a flagitious collection of bottom dwellers, the likes of which, believe me, we will never see again in our lifetimes. Without them (Nov elections) we will begin to cleanse.
When BO signs this bill, he signs his and his party’s death sentence.
Heck folks, let’s celebrate!
Robert Craven
Saturday, March 20, 2010
FLUKE
A majority of Americans finally understand the consequences of the proposed health bill.
We don’t mean premiums, nor coverage expanded to the 32MM currently without, nor denial due to preexisting conditions nor dropping the sick. We don’t mean BO’s buy-offs and special deals. We don’t mean that if you don’t have health insurance you could go to jail. These are not consequences; these are side-effects, offshoots, adjuncts to BO’s effort.
For the first time in my lifetime (1947 - ) the stars aligned perfectly for a radical element of US society; the far-left gained traction. No one would ever have predicted as much. Historians will consider this development a fluke.
This segment of the US population has only distaste for American society, for America’s history, for America’s place in the free world.
They are out to conduct a great leveling.
We will learn tomorrow if they succeed.
Robert Craven
We don’t mean premiums, nor coverage expanded to the 32MM currently without, nor denial due to preexisting conditions nor dropping the sick. We don’t mean BO’s buy-offs and special deals. We don’t mean that if you don’t have health insurance you could go to jail. These are not consequences; these are side-effects, offshoots, adjuncts to BO’s effort.
For the first time in my lifetime (1947 - ) the stars aligned perfectly for a radical element of US society; the far-left gained traction. No one would ever have predicted as much. Historians will consider this development a fluke.
This segment of the US population has only distaste for American society, for America’s history, for America’s place in the free world.
They are out to conduct a great leveling.
We will learn tomorrow if they succeed.
Robert Craven
Rule Of Law
We are witnessing, first hand, a power grab. Not behind closed doors. Right in our face.
Obama’s tactics fast-forward the warnings of economists Hayek and von Mises, those of the founders James Wilson and Gouverneur Morris, and the 18th century Scots Francis Hutcheson and Thomas Reid. Wilson, Morris, Hutcheson and Reid illuminated the notion of a "natural law" as a source of natural rights - the right to property, life and liberty, in the days it wasn’t taken for granted. We moderns understand this as the "rule of law;" that is, the basic rights which those elected, those who are the servants of the electorate, must secure for us (or they’re fired). These laws are clear, publicized, stable and fair. They are both beacon and anchor.
Wilson, Morris, Madison and others went further at the 1787 Convention. Thus, finally written into the Constitution was the notion of the separation of powers - the checks and balances we moderns take for granted. This tool insures that corrupt individuals, especially governing officials, can not oppress the people, can not violate the rule of law through legislation. The idea was to ensure that the new government actually followed the consent of the governed.
They explained that failing the checks on government, officials would naturally ignite a wave of control over things both economic and social, ignoring the rule of law. Hayek warned further that such erosion would lead eventually to some form of totalitarian regime, the soft variety (US) or the hard variety (Stalin, Mao, Hitler). History of course vindicates this view.
This my friends is where we are today.
In a recent interview BO dismissed Constitutional procedure. Come again? In an even earlier interview he labeled the sometime messy workings of democracy "unfortunate." This is no surprise to most of us as Obama has nothing in common with the Founders, or, with most Americans so why would he care about that dated document.
And in fact the tactics being used by the Democrats to force legislation violate at least the spirit of the Constitution. From the Heritage Foundation, "At a bare minimum, article I, sec. 7, cl. 2 of the U.S. Constitution requires that before it becomes law "(1) a bill containing its exact text was approved by a majority of the Members of the House of Representatives; (2) the Senate approved precisely the same text; and (3) that text was signed into law by the President." Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417, 448 (1998)." That’s all we need. Options that the Dems are trying this weekend violate the Constitution’s requirements of bicamerialism and presentment.
Re-read our comments, esp Planners - A Threat To Liberty. Better yet, read Wilson. With that you will have a handle. And it means that if you are a Democrat you have a considerable amount of soul searching ahead of you (primarily because you have lived a phony existence). But even if you don’t bother, the Judiciary will do it for you.
Robert Craven
Obama’s tactics fast-forward the warnings of economists Hayek and von Mises, those of the founders James Wilson and Gouverneur Morris, and the 18th century Scots Francis Hutcheson and Thomas Reid. Wilson, Morris, Hutcheson and Reid illuminated the notion of a "natural law" as a source of natural rights - the right to property, life and liberty, in the days it wasn’t taken for granted. We moderns understand this as the "rule of law;" that is, the basic rights which those elected, those who are the servants of the electorate, must secure for us (or they’re fired). These laws are clear, publicized, stable and fair. They are both beacon and anchor.
Wilson, Morris, Madison and others went further at the 1787 Convention. Thus, finally written into the Constitution was the notion of the separation of powers - the checks and balances we moderns take for granted. This tool insures that corrupt individuals, especially governing officials, can not oppress the people, can not violate the rule of law through legislation. The idea was to ensure that the new government actually followed the consent of the governed.
They explained that failing the checks on government, officials would naturally ignite a wave of control over things both economic and social, ignoring the rule of law. Hayek warned further that such erosion would lead eventually to some form of totalitarian regime, the soft variety (US) or the hard variety (Stalin, Mao, Hitler). History of course vindicates this view.
This my friends is where we are today.
In a recent interview BO dismissed Constitutional procedure. Come again? In an even earlier interview he labeled the sometime messy workings of democracy "unfortunate." This is no surprise to most of us as Obama has nothing in common with the Founders, or, with most Americans so why would he care about that dated document.
And in fact the tactics being used by the Democrats to force legislation violate at least the spirit of the Constitution. From the Heritage Foundation, "At a bare minimum, article I, sec. 7, cl. 2 of the U.S. Constitution requires that before it becomes law "(1) a bill containing its exact text was approved by a majority of the Members of the House of Representatives; (2) the Senate approved precisely the same text; and (3) that text was signed into law by the President." Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417, 448 (1998)." That’s all we need. Options that the Dems are trying this weekend violate the Constitution’s requirements of bicamerialism and presentment.
Re-read our comments, esp Planners - A Threat To Liberty. Better yet, read Wilson. With that you will have a handle. And it means that if you are a Democrat you have a considerable amount of soul searching ahead of you (primarily because you have lived a phony existence). But even if you don’t bother, the Judiciary will do it for you.
Robert Craven
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Real Stand Up Guys
We’re proud of our lefty friends. They discovered a year ago that a few Americans are uninsured. The fact that half of these are either illegal or, simply happy that way, is beside the point. The left is always out to protect you against your self. And not only that, our pals are willing to pay for it, bless their little hearts.
That’s right folks. If this health blight passes 1) our premiums are going up and 2) our taxes are going up. These are the two things that will change. But our pals at the nursery are real stand up guys - they figure, fine, that’s the price we’re willing to pay. They’ve thought this thing through.
From our friend the economist Walter Williams, "For Congress to guarantee a right to health care, or any other good or service, whether a person can afford it or not, it must diminish someone else's rights, namely their rights to their earnings." Sure. Think the govt. has a slush fund somewhere for goodness sake?
Williams continues, "The fact that government has no resources of its very own forces one to recognize that in order for government to give one American citizen a dollar, it must first, through intimidation, threats and coercion, confiscate that dollar from some other American."
I see, but again, no problem as our lefty friends have thought this one through.
Williams isn’t telling them anything when he states that, "If one person has a right to something he did not earn, of necessity it requires that another person not have a right to something that he did earn." They know that Williams. What’s wrong with you? They’re just down right generous with their funds. Think they just talk the talk here in Marin County? Not these guys.
There are a few of these saintly folk around and we’re just so dog gone proud to be able to do our little bit to honor them.
Robert Craven
That’s right folks. If this health blight passes 1) our premiums are going up and 2) our taxes are going up. These are the two things that will change. But our pals at the nursery are real stand up guys - they figure, fine, that’s the price we’re willing to pay. They’ve thought this thing through.
From our friend the economist Walter Williams, "For Congress to guarantee a right to health care, or any other good or service, whether a person can afford it or not, it must diminish someone else's rights, namely their rights to their earnings." Sure. Think the govt. has a slush fund somewhere for goodness sake?
Williams continues, "The fact that government has no resources of its very own forces one to recognize that in order for government to give one American citizen a dollar, it must first, through intimidation, threats and coercion, confiscate that dollar from some other American."
I see, but again, no problem as our lefty friends have thought this one through.
Williams isn’t telling them anything when he states that, "If one person has a right to something he did not earn, of necessity it requires that another person not have a right to something that he did earn." They know that Williams. What’s wrong with you? They’re just down right generous with their funds. Think they just talk the talk here in Marin County? Not these guys.
There are a few of these saintly folk around and we’re just so dog gone proud to be able to do our little bit to honor them.
Robert Craven
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Marin County
We have pondered - how in the world did so many come so completely unhinged in so little time?
Marin County was normal a few years back, or, just barely left-of-center. But now there are more lefty extremists per square foot in this county than there are fleas on my favorite dog Kona. We mean big-time liberals - liberal with everyone else’s money but their own, rabid environmentalists for example unless of course that creek full of salmon just happens to be getting in the way of their new driveway. So nothing unusual with the left here on that account - all of ‘em talk the talk.
But back to our central consideration - why are there so many of these little darlings in this county?
One of the most astute observers of the political scene today is Victor Hansen, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution (plus a man in ownership of a list of other honors that if detailed would fill this space). Hansen surmises that a good part of the answer is weather and geography. In this most temperate of climates, "It is as if nature offers no reality check to human naVveté, no reminder to the would-be utopian that, yes, there are rigorous impediments like snow and constant storms that transcend man’s ability to ensure the good life with tenured, high-paying government jobs, lavish payouts."
In other words," he continues, "a communitarian statist morphs out of control in a place like Mill Valley in a way he would not in equally liberal Minneapolis. The sun multiplies the therapeutic efforts of the state; in addition, the natural bounty that good weather and geography bring can, for a while at least, cover the results of human foolishness."
That’s a good long way to our explanation folks. The weather and geography have always been here, it’s just that it became fashionable. These types are driven by fashion, and so here they came.
Plus let us add that political choice in this county is more glandular than cerebral. Lefties here don’t understand the implications of their view but even if they did, they wouldn’t care. There’s enough of them in this county to give them effective mass; that is, they can be quite content reassuring each other at the nursery counter or the salon, of their wisdom - the blind, holding hands together in the dark.
They live as if in a cocoon but they know it. They know they’re an outlier; they know they’re not held responsible for real-world results. They get a pass just as handicapped folk get a pass. If not, and they actually cared for their kids, they’d have to change. They’re free to make noise because no one, no normal person, no regular American takes them seriously.
But they get a kick out of it.
Robert Craven
Marin County was normal a few years back, or, just barely left-of-center. But now there are more lefty extremists per square foot in this county than there are fleas on my favorite dog Kona. We mean big-time liberals - liberal with everyone else’s money but their own, rabid environmentalists for example unless of course that creek full of salmon just happens to be getting in the way of their new driveway. So nothing unusual with the left here on that account - all of ‘em talk the talk.
But back to our central consideration - why are there so many of these little darlings in this county?
One of the most astute observers of the political scene today is Victor Hansen, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution (plus a man in ownership of a list of other honors that if detailed would fill this space). Hansen surmises that a good part of the answer is weather and geography. In this most temperate of climates, "It is as if nature offers no reality check to human naVveté, no reminder to the would-be utopian that, yes, there are rigorous impediments like snow and constant storms that transcend man’s ability to ensure the good life with tenured, high-paying government jobs, lavish payouts."
In other words," he continues, "a communitarian statist morphs out of control in a place like Mill Valley in a way he would not in equally liberal Minneapolis. The sun multiplies the therapeutic efforts of the state; in addition, the natural bounty that good weather and geography bring can, for a while at least, cover the results of human foolishness."
That’s a good long way to our explanation folks. The weather and geography have always been here, it’s just that it became fashionable. These types are driven by fashion, and so here they came.
Plus let us add that political choice in this county is more glandular than cerebral. Lefties here don’t understand the implications of their view but even if they did, they wouldn’t care. There’s enough of them in this county to give them effective mass; that is, they can be quite content reassuring each other at the nursery counter or the salon, of their wisdom - the blind, holding hands together in the dark.
They live as if in a cocoon but they know it. They know they’re an outlier; they know they’re not held responsible for real-world results. They get a pass just as handicapped folk get a pass. If not, and they actually cared for their kids, they’d have to change. They’re free to make noise because no one, no normal person, no regular American takes them seriously.
But they get a kick out of it.
Robert Craven
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Living By Example
A dear friend from grad school days sent us a release from the Canada Free Press. It was about Michelle. She held forth a while back, saying that, "The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped educational system, someone is going to have to give up a piece of the pie so someone else can have more." OK, that’s perfectly consistent with BO’s agenda of redistribution; we all understand that. And we assume Michelle is not a flake, has been living by example, so fine, that’s her view.
But wait! Just before she said that, on Oct/15/2008 Michelle snacked at the Waldorf, room service for one that is, at 2 pm. For her snack she had lobster, Iranian caviar and some kind of champagne we never heard of; the bill was $447.39. Now that’s giving up to be sure, the poor thing. Hey, but she was a private citizen you say, not the first lady so throw her some slack?
Well, Michelle's now at the WH. She has 22 people on her staff to whom we pay a sum total of $1,591,200 annually, not including make up artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles and "First Hairstylist" Johnny Wright (my goodness, if Johnny's a "first," how many more?).
OK, that’s at least 22, compared to Mamie Eisenhower’s one (1) paid for out of Ike’s salary / Jackie, Rosaline and Barbara Bush’s one (1) each / Hilary’s three (3) naturally, and Laura Bush, one (1). From one (1) to twenty-two (22) for someone with no official executive duties under the constitution? Does this simply smack of the need for luxury, as did the $447.39? No, the conclusion none of us can escape is that Michelle is living perfectly by example, that of a confirmed statist, and the wife of a confirmed statist, neither of which has ever seen a branch of government they would not embrace; in this case, Michelle simply created her very own.
Robert Craven
But wait! Just before she said that, on Oct/15/2008 Michelle snacked at the Waldorf, room service for one that is, at 2 pm. For her snack she had lobster, Iranian caviar and some kind of champagne we never heard of; the bill was $447.39. Now that’s giving up to be sure, the poor thing. Hey, but she was a private citizen you say, not the first lady so throw her some slack?
Well, Michelle's now at the WH. She has 22 people on her staff to whom we pay a sum total of $1,591,200 annually, not including make up artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles and "First Hairstylist" Johnny Wright (my goodness, if Johnny's a "first," how many more?).
OK, that’s at least 22, compared to Mamie Eisenhower’s one (1) paid for out of Ike’s salary / Jackie, Rosaline and Barbara Bush’s one (1) each / Hilary’s three (3) naturally, and Laura Bush, one (1). From one (1) to twenty-two (22) for someone with no official executive duties under the constitution? Does this simply smack of the need for luxury, as did the $447.39? No, the conclusion none of us can escape is that Michelle is living perfectly by example, that of a confirmed statist, and the wife of a confirmed statist, neither of which has ever seen a branch of government they would not embrace; in this case, Michelle simply created her very own.
Robert Craven
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
TYRANNY
Because not everyone reads this blog, yet, there are still plenty of folk out there who continue to believe that Obama’s health initiative is about health. This is simply not true. These poor lambs have been had.
One of today’s astute political observers, Mark Steyn, puts it this way: "The governmentalization of health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture. It redefines the relationship between the citizen and the state in fundamental ways that make limited government all but impossible. Government health care is not about health care, it’s about government." Thank you.
We’ve already looked at the bill in detail, earlier posts; as Buffett and others now understand, it will raise not lower costs, and, break the federal bank in the bargain.
No one argues that the US has the world’s best health care. No one argues that it is expensive, either. But it’s not a secret how to fix that - start with tort reform, then unleash the hand of competition, nationwide. Improve the private health sector incrementally and judiciously, and with the agreement of the majority. To quote Jeff Anderson of the Weekly Std., as a start, "end runaway malpractice lawsuits, allow Americans to buy insurance across state lines, and allow companies to offer lower premiums for healthier lifestyles." These reforms could be implemented independently. Anderson concludes, "All three involve having the government or the legal system get out of the way, thereby enabling health care costs to decline."
Even the far left understand that’s the right way to go. They also understand it does not fit their agenda.
Know what folks? It doesn’t matter one bit if anyone out there wants BO's health initiative or not (and hardly anyone does). Opposition is just noise, a nuisance. Representation is not on the table in Washington. Far-left "representatives" - BO, Pelosi and the rest - are not representatives at all, they are dictators. Theirs is a barely-disguised tyrannical existence with one aim - to effect permanent change by annexing about 16% of the economy to serve their statist agenda.
It is the chance of a lifetime for these extremists, Americans only on paper and patriots not at all.
Robert Craven
One of today’s astute political observers, Mark Steyn, puts it this way: "The governmentalization of health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture. It redefines the relationship between the citizen and the state in fundamental ways that make limited government all but impossible. Government health care is not about health care, it’s about government." Thank you.
We’ve already looked at the bill in detail, earlier posts; as Buffett and others now understand, it will raise not lower costs, and, break the federal bank in the bargain.
No one argues that the US has the world’s best health care. No one argues that it is expensive, either. But it’s not a secret how to fix that - start with tort reform, then unleash the hand of competition, nationwide. Improve the private health sector incrementally and judiciously, and with the agreement of the majority. To quote Jeff Anderson of the Weekly Std., as a start, "end runaway malpractice lawsuits, allow Americans to buy insurance across state lines, and allow companies to offer lower premiums for healthier lifestyles." These reforms could be implemented independently. Anderson concludes, "All three involve having the government or the legal system get out of the way, thereby enabling health care costs to decline."
Even the far left understand that’s the right way to go. They also understand it does not fit their agenda.
Know what folks? It doesn’t matter one bit if anyone out there wants BO's health initiative or not (and hardly anyone does). Opposition is just noise, a nuisance. Representation is not on the table in Washington. Far-left "representatives" - BO, Pelosi and the rest - are not representatives at all, they are dictators. Theirs is a barely-disguised tyrannical existence with one aim - to effect permanent change by annexing about 16% of the economy to serve their statist agenda.
It is the chance of a lifetime for these extremists, Americans only on paper and patriots not at all.
Robert Craven
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Parenthood and the Left, or, Getting Personal
Folks, one day you may have grand kids. Put ‘em on your knee and tell ‘em about this most bizarre of American political experiences ever: Yep, I was there sonny; I saw it in 2010 - the attempted hijacking, the attempted theft of a major share of our economy by a group of far-left zealots, collectivists all in their blackest of hearts, moving zombie-like through the political landscape, satisfied, we knew, only when their thirst for blood and their craving for flesh had reduced those of us who were free to dried husks, merely dust in the wind. But we rose up I tell you, torch and ax in hand; we took out their hearts, threw them on Liberty’s fire, saved our country......
Whoa! Ok, let’s see. Seventy-three per cent (73%) of Americans told CNN (not FOX but CNN) that they don’t want BO’s plan. Fine. No surprise there. We understand that one. However, it’s not about health except as a vehicle; that is why this result is irrelevant to far-left operatives. It was never about care except to some naive partisans, never about Americans, except as dupes.
Let's pick up a book. Ah, F.A. Hayek’s The Road To Serfdom! Good. Turning randomly, we arrive at page 87, speaking of a planned society, of the sort BO has in mind: "There can be no doubt that planning...involves deliberate discrimination between particular needs of different people, and allowing one man to do what another must be prevented from doing....Where the precise effects of gov’t policy on particular people are known, where the gov’t aims directly at such particular effects, it cannot help knowing these effects, and therefore it cannot be impartial. It must of necessity take sides, impose its valuations upon people and, instead of assisting them in the advancement of their own ends choose the ends for them."
BO and others understand this, they know the implications; most of their following, that is, most Democrats, apparently do not. They simlply have not thought it through. The far left operates because there are enough folk out there looking for the easy way out. They don't understand perhaps that the Road To Serfdom is paved with good intentions. These folk are not only lazy, they are irresponsible. They have forsaken their own children, in the inactive sense as poor role models, through their lack of understanding, their lack of scholarship, in their lemming-like behavior. Or, they have forsaken their own children in the active sense by teaching them that only gov’t planning of their lives leads to happiness. Either way, they have failed miserably in their responsibility.
Robert Craven
Whoa! Ok, let’s see. Seventy-three per cent (73%) of Americans told CNN (not FOX but CNN) that they don’t want BO’s plan. Fine. No surprise there. We understand that one. However, it’s not about health except as a vehicle; that is why this result is irrelevant to far-left operatives. It was never about care except to some naive partisans, never about Americans, except as dupes.
Let's pick up a book. Ah, F.A. Hayek’s The Road To Serfdom! Good. Turning randomly, we arrive at page 87, speaking of a planned society, of the sort BO has in mind: "There can be no doubt that planning...involves deliberate discrimination between particular needs of different people, and allowing one man to do what another must be prevented from doing....Where the precise effects of gov’t policy on particular people are known, where the gov’t aims directly at such particular effects, it cannot help knowing these effects, and therefore it cannot be impartial. It must of necessity take sides, impose its valuations upon people and, instead of assisting them in the advancement of their own ends choose the ends for them."
BO and others understand this, they know the implications; most of their following, that is, most Democrats, apparently do not. They simlply have not thought it through. The far left operates because there are enough folk out there looking for the easy way out. They don't understand perhaps that the Road To Serfdom is paved with good intentions. These folk are not only lazy, they are irresponsible. They have forsaken their own children, in the inactive sense as poor role models, through their lack of understanding, their lack of scholarship, in their lemming-like behavior. Or, they have forsaken their own children in the active sense by teaching them that only gov’t planning of their lives leads to happiness. Either way, they have failed miserably in their responsibility.
Robert Craven
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Reality and Health Care
Plenty of folk believe that what is on the health menu in Washington will save them money. Why, just the other day I nearly had my heart torn out by an enraged nursery worker who saw me and my kind as standing between her and lower health bills.
This individual and so many others just like her - they are not cranks, they read the newspaper from time to time; they are however innocent of most forms of scholarship; worse, they are sadly and completely naive.
Reality is that Obama’s plan will raise medical costs, for all of us. Period. What part of higher medical costs is it that our nursery-worker friend and others don’t get?
Of course we can bang away in this blog; it’s something else when Warren Buffett gets it. "Unfortunately, we came up with a bill that really doesn’t attack the cost situation that much and we have to have a fundamental change," he laments. Heck, the president’s own Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services reported that the Senate bill would hike national health expenditures $234bln by 2019.
That is, BO’s plan(s) only make our present, horribly high costs higher. Why are our costs so high? Because, as Thomas Sowell points out, "When the ‘single payer’ was the patient, people were more selective in what they spent their money on. You went to the doctor when you had a broken leg but not..every time you had the sniffles or a skin rash." The obvious which comes up for all of us - Medicare, an example often used by our friends from the left of slick and efficient delivery. In fact it is grossly inefficient, for the simple reason that when someone else is paying care gets overused.
It’s easy. As the Heritage Foundation noted, "Our current system is out of control for the same reason most Americans over-eat at buffets: when you don’t have to pay for each plate of food, you usually eat more." We might add that it is our pricing, not delivery system which is out of control. And so it is. Out of pocket expenses by patients have fallen from 52% in 1965 to 15% in 2005. It’s the third party gov’t and insurance companies who pay for all this stuff.
Heritage concludes, "When prices are determined through administrative procedures rather than market processes, both patients and producers are anesthetized from normal market incentives to reduce prices and spending." Yet our friends from the left think that more of this will cure the problem. This excuses them from making the tough decision, a signature failing of the left.
Many of us have offered up good, real-world solutions to problems of health cost. These fall not so much on deaf ears but on a president with a radical, statist agenda.
Robert Craven
This individual and so many others just like her - they are not cranks, they read the newspaper from time to time; they are however innocent of most forms of scholarship; worse, they are sadly and completely naive.
Reality is that Obama’s plan will raise medical costs, for all of us. Period. What part of higher medical costs is it that our nursery-worker friend and others don’t get?
Of course we can bang away in this blog; it’s something else when Warren Buffett gets it. "Unfortunately, we came up with a bill that really doesn’t attack the cost situation that much and we have to have a fundamental change," he laments. Heck, the president’s own Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services reported that the Senate bill would hike national health expenditures $234bln by 2019.
That is, BO’s plan(s) only make our present, horribly high costs higher. Why are our costs so high? Because, as Thomas Sowell points out, "When the ‘single payer’ was the patient, people were more selective in what they spent their money on. You went to the doctor when you had a broken leg but not..every time you had the sniffles or a skin rash." The obvious which comes up for all of us - Medicare, an example often used by our friends from the left of slick and efficient delivery. In fact it is grossly inefficient, for the simple reason that when someone else is paying care gets overused.
It’s easy. As the Heritage Foundation noted, "Our current system is out of control for the same reason most Americans over-eat at buffets: when you don’t have to pay for each plate of food, you usually eat more." We might add that it is our pricing, not delivery system which is out of control. And so it is. Out of pocket expenses by patients have fallen from 52% in 1965 to 15% in 2005. It’s the third party gov’t and insurance companies who pay for all this stuff.
Heritage concludes, "When prices are determined through administrative procedures rather than market processes, both patients and producers are anesthetized from normal market incentives to reduce prices and spending." Yet our friends from the left think that more of this will cure the problem. This excuses them from making the tough decision, a signature failing of the left.
Many of us have offered up good, real-world solutions to problems of health cost. These fall not so much on deaf ears but on a president with a radical, statist agenda.
Robert Craven
Monday, March 1, 2010
The Jihad and Obama
We like Clive Cook, and we like his paper - London’s Financial Times. We’ve been featured in that fine paper ourselves a time or two, way back. Clive writes Mar/1 that, "What should have been clear all along is now impossible to ignore: the US is to the right of Mr. Obama on domestic policy." Oh, that. Should have been clear to whom? The media, academics, college kids, Clive? All of those who pulled the trigger? Is this an admission of lack of scholarship, or a told-you-so?
Stalin would have loved these guys. But at least Clive didn’t blame the whole shebang on the "ignorant masses," in the fashion of most of his US colleagues. In fact, the American people have stopped Obama before he could do more damage.
We’re not laughing at Clive; he and a lot of others are in the same boat - they have been in a state of denial about BO all along. Political correctness got us all in trouble.
In the meantime, prepare for the left’s operatives to continue to sacrifice their own, claiming as Pelosi recently did that it is for the good of their country. Certainly. Not all Democrats are ready to walk the plank of course; they’ve politely declined the Kool Aid which is precisely what the recent meeting in the Blair House was all about - to get them to reconsider.
Now that extremists have control of the party its demise is sealed, but even knowing that it is not enough to stop them. They don’t care. (A new Democratic party will eventually emerge, but closer to what Andrew Jackson had in mind.)
Friends have told us, "You’re nuts," for drawing as we recently did the parallel between radical Islam combatants and operatives of the far left. We are not crazy; we’re right; it may be chilling, but it is accurate. Naturally the far left are not out to murder each of us, but just like the jihadists they will sacrifice their own in their conflict. That’s why the rules are now changed. For both, there is no middle ground, no compromise, only their way. They’re not wired like normal people. Both the far left and jihadists are welded to an archaic document; neither has experienced a reformation. Both are out to extinguish a Western free society - muslim thugs with guns, radicals like BO and Pelosi, with suffocating government.
Robert Craven
Stalin would have loved these guys. But at least Clive didn’t blame the whole shebang on the "ignorant masses," in the fashion of most of his US colleagues. In fact, the American people have stopped Obama before he could do more damage.
We’re not laughing at Clive; he and a lot of others are in the same boat - they have been in a state of denial about BO all along. Political correctness got us all in trouble.
In the meantime, prepare for the left’s operatives to continue to sacrifice their own, claiming as Pelosi recently did that it is for the good of their country. Certainly. Not all Democrats are ready to walk the plank of course; they’ve politely declined the Kool Aid which is precisely what the recent meeting in the Blair House was all about - to get them to reconsider.
Now that extremists have control of the party its demise is sealed, but even knowing that it is not enough to stop them. They don’t care. (A new Democratic party will eventually emerge, but closer to what Andrew Jackson had in mind.)
Friends have told us, "You’re nuts," for drawing as we recently did the parallel between radical Islam combatants and operatives of the far left. We are not crazy; we’re right; it may be chilling, but it is accurate. Naturally the far left are not out to murder each of us, but just like the jihadists they will sacrifice their own in their conflict. That’s why the rules are now changed. For both, there is no middle ground, no compromise, only their way. They’re not wired like normal people. Both the far left and jihadists are welded to an archaic document; neither has experienced a reformation. Both are out to extinguish a Western free society - muslim thugs with guns, radicals like BO and Pelosi, with suffocating government.
Robert Craven
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
