The Shell Game

There is an old saying, that laws are like sausage, it is better not to see either being made. This whole health care fiasco is a case in point. However, we are all fortunate that there are lots of people watching it being made. For some unknown reason, on his "signature" issue, "The One" chose not to propose anything specific, but just leave it up to Congress. Virtually every president I can think of "proposed" legislation and had someone or a committee in Congress introduce it. In this instance, Obama just left it up to Pelosi, Reid and their minions to come up with legislation for "his" plan. In typical fashion, Congress responded and we have 5 different health care bills working their way through the process. If I had better feelings for the motivation of Obama, Emanuel, Axelrod and company, I might chalk it up to politcal naivete. However, these are seasoned veterans of Chicago machine politics. It appears to me that something else is in play. It basically reminds me of the old shell game.

Case in point, the Joe Wilson, "you lie" comment. President Obama during his umpteenth speech on healthcare (even though he hasn't proposed a single plan yet) said it was a lie that illegal aliens were covered. That prompted the heckling by a sitting member of Congress. (The first time in memory that has occurred!) The Democrats proudly point to a provision in one of the 5 bills that excludes illegal aliens, saying that proves this idiot Republican doesn't know what he is talking about. However according the the Congessional Research Service, none of the other 4 bills contain that provision. In fact a headline on an article I read today stated, "Rep Wilson Outburst Leads Senate Dems to Close Loophole." So the Senate version now contains that language. But to take it one step further, during the committee hearing on the 1 house bill that does contain the prohibition, there were a number of votes to add enforcement language to that provision. They were all defeated on a party line vote.

Similar to that story is the one about the "death panels". Whether one agrees or disagrees with the interpretation that there were "death panels", within a couple of days of that story breaking, there was great hoopla that the Senate version of the bill had stricken that language that led people to that conclusion.

All of this basically reminds me of the old shell game. Obama is the shell man. He is peddling a great story. Pelosi, Reid and their allies are the shills, crowding around us to prevent us from leaving or seeing for sure what is going on. If someone objects to something...not in this bill, you don't know what you're talking about. On another objection they point to another bill. Oops, you missed. The American people are the mark. We're getting taken if we let it happen. We've all seen too many stories too many times where a single Congressman or Senator inserts provisions in bills at 2 am behind closed doors during "conferences" and then that being passed into law to feel comfortable with the assurances of what is and isn't in this bill. When you see the games being played around what is or isn't in the bills that makes me even more leery.

I only see one way around this. Obama on Wednesday "promised" he wouldn't sign anything into law that added one dollar to the deficit. According the the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, none of the 5 bills that are being considered meet that requirement. So, President Obama, propose a new piece of legislation that carries out your objectives and won't add to the deficit. Let's have a debate about the merits of YOUR proposal. Let there be enough time that those that are interested can provide their input. Let Congress vote that up or down. In my opinion, that is the only way for you to regain credibility on this issue.

Mixed emotions

All the furor over President Obama's "Back to School" speech has really left me with mixed emotions. A president making a speech to school children about studying hard, taking responsibility for your actions and behaving is something that we should embrace wholeheartedly. That is basically what the speech is, at least the version that has been released. No one will know whether the furor caused a change in the text or not. What was disturbing to me was the Department of Education's "proposed" lesson plans that talked about having kids write letters to be collected by the teachers of how they were going to "help" President Obama. As I've blogged before, I feel there is a "cult of personality" that is being developed around the president. With the mainstream media adulation of Obama, the fact that candidate Obama, who promised to change the way Washington does business, has as President Obama, made the partisan divides even sharper in the last six months has fed into that. I obviously am not the only one that is feeling that sentiment. In that context, I understand the furor.

The flip side of the coin bothers me as bad. The people who are pulling their kids out school or opting out of having their kids listen to the speech are to put it bluntly, scary. It always strikes me that someone is very insecure in their own beliefs that they can't even dare to hear an opposing view. I know over the years, that my opinions on issues have changed and nuanced because of listening to the "opposite" side. While I always thought I had a normal childhood, I sometimes now wonder. I can remember vividly a number of times where as a family we "talked" about stuff that had occurred at school. My sisters or I would talk about what our teacher had said, and my parents would certainly share their views. There were certainly times that my parents didn't agree with what the teacher had said. On the ones where they disagreed, I remember I believed my parents over my teachers, but I still remember those discussions. Even if the parents disagree with the message, not allowing their kids to hear it isn't the answer. If parents are that concerned it needs to be a topic of conversation around the supper table. Keeping them from hearing the message isn't a reasonable or responsible answer.

The final concern that I have over this whole issue again goes back to the partisan divide that we are seeing in this country. For 8 years I watched the left view George Bush as the devil incarnate. Nothing he could do or say was correct. Unfortunately I am seeing the same thing from the right as they view Barack Obama. Part of the blame can be placed on the doorstep of Barack Obama. During the campaign, he promised to govern from the center and to change the way things happen in Washington. His far left policies and appointments have made things even worse. A significant amount of the furor over the "Back to School" speech is simply based on that, which is absolutely idiotic. As much as I may disagree with this or that policy he is the president. Even if the left didn't treat Dubya with the respect that the office deserves, the right should treat "The One" with that respect.

What kind of service is it going to be?

Serving one's community is a great thing. I try to do that through my church involvement and involvement with various civic groups. I say this not to brag, because I'm sure even with that, I don't do enough. I like and participate in community service. I just don't want anyone to construe what I say here as being opposed to community service. However I am concerned about the "National Day of Service and Remembrance" on September 11. It is now federal law and we have federal money going to various groups to "promote" service. Good "upstanding" groups like ACORN are involved, but that is really a subject for another blog. I extremely concerned about the emphasis I'm seeing on service and the de-emphasis on the remembrance part. According to many planners their goal is to turn 9/11 into something "positive", "forward-leaning" and "productive". I think that focus is entirely wrong. 9/11 should be a time to focus on patriotism, national security and terrorism. We are in a war with Islamofacist terrorists. These religious fundamentalists want to destroy us and our way of life. 9/11 was a seminal event in that war. We have an administration that seems to think nice language and "talking" to these monsters is the best way to handle the war on terror. They won't even call it a war on terror. Is this day of service just one more attempt to sweep the monstrosities of what has occurred under the rug? We don't want to offend someone by pointing out that in the name of their religion these crazies killed thousands of innocent people on that day.

We already have too many holidays where the meaning of the holiday has been lost. Memorial Day is a perfect example where pitifully small crowds show up at events designed to commemorate those fallen in defense of this country which it was designed for. Instead we as a society have let Memorial Day become a time to open swimming pools, have "great" sales, celebrate the beginning of summer. It took years for that change to occur in our society. Now we are less than 8 years from the event which we are commemorating and we seem to have a government that is actively pursuing the task of trying to wipe out the true meaning of 9/11.

I'm sure it's not what the Obama people had in mind, but I'm tempted to find a tea party to volunteer for on September 11. That might be the best kind of community service I could provide.

Two Wrongs....

For 8 years in the eyes of the left, nothing George Bush could do was correct. He was blamed for everything from subverting the constitution to causing global warming to about anything else. However an interesting trend has developed. It has happened to me on several comments I've made on various news stories in my local paper. It has happened with comments I've made online in various forums. It has happened numerous times to comments, links and blogs made by others including my nephew Will. The most recent example was on my nephew's Facebook page where he posted a link to an article about the White House using taxpayer dollars to hire a firm to make mass emails about the benefits of the health care proposal. In other words taxpayer dollars are being used to spam people. One of the comments made by one of Will's "friends" was "So how is that different from what the "Bush" White House did to spam the entire country about WMDs." Leaving aside the factual inaccuracies of that statement and many that led me to write this, the sentiment is the same in all of the responses. When you talk about spending and the deficit, the first response is "well George Bush did spent us into the deficit." When you talk about Obama going back on his promise to close Gitmo, (which I'm glad he has by the way, I just don't appreciate his lies about it during the campaign) you get a response, well George Bush had Gitmo. The litany goes on. Every time anyone dares to criticize "The One" the first and almost immediate response is "Unhh Unhhh. George Bush did something like that." As my Mom tried to drill into my head years ago,"two wrongs don't make a right". If George Bush, in the eyes of the left was so wrong on everything, why is it all of a sudden the first line of defense that George Bush did x.

We are no longer in the Bush years. This is Obama's government. How much longer are we going to have to hear that everything bad in the world was caused by George Bush and that "The One" is only correcting those issues? How much longer are we going to have to hear the defense of any criticisms of "The One" as well how is that any different than what Bush did.

Right now, the emperor has no clothes. Whether or not the prior emperor had clothes is completely irrelevant, and I'm quite frankly tired of hearing it.

Moving the needle

I've never really been an ideologue. Oh, I'll be the first to admit I've been right of center politically my whole life. I grew up in a politically active Republican family in western Kansas, and it came naturally. (I tend to agree with some of the studies that shows there is at least a genetic disposition to political views). However needless to say as a pro-choice, pro-gay rights, anti-censorship Republican, I don't fit in well with the "socially" conservative wing of the party.

Despite all that, the first seven months of Obama, Reid and Pelosi being in power has done more to make me a right wing ideologue than anything that has happened in my entire life. The bailout of the financial industry, the bailout of the auto industry, the "stimulus" package, and now the health care debate. Obama has doubled our national debt in seven months. It took us some 233 years to do what he has done financially in seven months. Unfortunately, there seems to be no regard for who is going to pay those bills.

Simply because I am one of many that oppose the federal takeover of my health care decisions, I have been likened to a Nazi, a brown-shirt, and a mobster. The White House has asked us to "snitch" on our neighbors and report "fishy" e-mails about the health care. Amazingly though, all of a sudden people that hadn't ever signed up got emails in support of the Obamacare from the White House. Damn, apparently none of my friends emailed the White House with one of my "fishy" emails. I feel left out. However, the thought of the White House collecting email addresses for blatant political purposes either in support of their program or to collect an "enemies" list, is rather scary as I've blogged before.

All in all, the last six months of Obama, Pelosi and Reid has done more to make me a right-wing ideologue than anything in my entire life. As Thomas Paine once wrote, "It is the duty of the patriot to defend his country from his government." And to the extent that Obama, Pelosi and Reid, represent that government, anything I can do to oppose them and any success they may try to have, is in my opinion a patriotic statement.

Proud Member of the Un-American Mob

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently called many of the Americans who were showing up at town hall meetings with their Congressmen as un-American. Other Democrat elected officials have described the crowds as "mobs". These citizens were actually exercising their first amendment rights of free speech and daring to laugh at, boo, jeer and yell at their elected officials when the official responded to questions and concerns about the proposed federal takeover of the health care system by parroting the democrat party line. Funny how in just a short period of time, Queen Nancy can have done an about face on such protests. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Pelosi said in January 2006 when anti-war protesters interrupted one of her town hall meeting, "It's always exciting. This is democracy in action. I'm energized by it, frankly." At another meeting where anti-war protesters interrupted the meeting in June 2007, her comment was "just go for it. I respect your enthusiasm."

Other than the obvious double standard, I think the Democrats are missing the boat on this whole issue. I think the protests are just a tip of the iceberg with a general mistrust of government. The general populace recognizes there are issues with health care, but you don't have to turn the system on its head to solve those problems. They have seen the centrist rhetoric from candidate Obama turn into hard left policy of President Obama. They have seen massive "bailouts", the takeover of large parts of the auto industry a "stimulus" bill that hasn't stimulated anything. The economy, despite all assurances, is not improving because of the government. Huge government spending increases and huge deficit increases will not and cannot get us out of the problem, and the health care bill is going to cost us a trillion more dollars over the next 10 years. And no government program ever comes in under budget. Look at the Cash for Clunkers. One billion dollars was supposed to last for 5 or 6 months of the program, it lasted a week and they went back and gave the program an additional 2 billion dollars.

Despite claims of savings to the contrary, no one has been able to point out where any cost savings will come from. Most experts are saying the only way we can cut costs is from rationing of care. In other words, a government bureaucrat will determine that this illness can only get this treatment, or if you are over 65 forget about a heart valve replacement. These are just examples, I know there are more out there. While it isn't explicitly in the bill, that is about the only logical conclusion one can make.

Put simply the majority of Americans that I am seeing at these town hall meetings are fed up with the way Washington works. We've seen too many instances of backroom deals cut on legislation in the middle of the night to trust what the liberals are saying about what is in and not in the health care bill. Despite claims to the contrary, there is video evidence of Barack Obama supporting a single payer government health care system. He claims his proposal doesn't do that. However, when government becomes involved, the cost of doing business for the insurance companies will increase dramatically. The rules and regulations they follow will become staggering. In the end many of them will simply get out of the health insurance business, leaving the "public" option as the only option. Thus while not explicit in the bill is the most logical outcome a couple of years down the line.

Funny thing is, all the "mob" activity is taking place at the Democrat town hall meetings. The Republican meetings where the representatives are sympathetic to the concerns of the citizens are being described as crowded but polite. Maybe it is the condescension that is so typical of the left. They know what is right for everyone and anyone who disagrees with them is a lunatic.

As Thomas Jefferson once said, "What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?" So Mrs. Pelosi, sign me up as one of the Un-American mob. I don't want government to take over my health care and I'll tell anyone including elected officials exactly why.

Something fishy

John F Kennedy once said, "Without debate, without criticism, no administration and no country can succeed and no republic can survive." Claiming there is a lot of "disinformation" circulating, the White House this week asked citizens if they got an email or blog from someone about the health care debate that they thought was "fishy" they should send it to the White House. So, the White House is going to be collecting names, email addresses, IP addresses and private speech of citizens who oppose their massive government takeover of health care. For what purpose? To create an "enemies list"? To target these people for government paid "propaganda" to "educate" them as to the errors or their ways? I can see no other purpose for sending private emails and blogs to the White House on this specific purpose. I'd love to hear a rational explanation, but so far have yet to even hear the White House acknowledge the program. What are we going to have a "TRUTH CZAR"?

Just a quick question, is the disinformation from the Obama White House going to be reported? Despite claims to the contrary, there is video evidence that Barack Obama wants to go to a single payer government health care system. However, he now claims he is opposed to such system. Was he lying then? Or is he lying now? Or has he changed his mind, and if so, why? Sounds fishy to me.....someone ought to report it to the White House.

Besides having serious issues with the policy direction of this administration, the political power grabs are even more disconcerting. Government has taken over large parts of the financial system, the automotive manufacture and is now proposing a health care takeover. More "czars" have been appointed than I think Russia ever had. These shadowy positions bypass the ordinary "checks and balances". There was a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth about the alleged attempts by the Bush administration to consolidate power in the executive branch. Yet the appointment of all these czars and the government takeover of industry and finance is the biggest power grab going.

As I wrote before, there is a disturbing cult of personality rising around Obama. And just one more step in that direction is the White House request for us to "snitch" on our neighbor who disagrees with the President. It is quite frankly getting scarier by the day.