NAIVE AND EGOTISTICAL
This is news?
Thoughts on Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Engineering. Oh, and Politics.
People who fail to pay the $1,900 fee for not purchasing coverage under Obamacare would be charged with a misdemeanor, charged a penalty of up to $25,000 or face up to a year in jail.Will they get ObamaCare while in jail? And will they be required to pay for it?
There is usually only a limited amount of damage that can be done by dull or stupid people. For creating a truly monumental disaster, you need people with high IQs.A case in point: Argentina
In an age when facts seem to carry less weight than the visions of brilliant and charismatic leaders, it is more important than ever to look at the actual track records of those brilliant and charismatic leaders.
Argentina began [the 20th] century as one of the 10 richest nations in the world [but] politically brilliant and charismatic leaders, promoting reckless government spending-- of whom Juan Peron was the most prominent, but by no means alone-- managed to create an economic disaster in a country with an abundance of natural resources.Read the rest of the article to find out where Sowell fears the U.S. might end.
PetExemption.com founders Leo Grillo and Robert Davi are pleased that the Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years (“HAPPY”) Act was introduced last week in the U.S. House of Representatives. The legislation introduced by Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI) is a federal bill that would reward pet owners by allowing them to deduct up to $3,500 for pet care costs, including veterinary services.Why not just declare pets to be dependents? I’ll gladly take the $3500 standard deduction for Shadow, Daisy, and Diamond ....
Sooner or later it is going to occur to Barack Obama that he is the president of the United States. As of yet, though, he does not act that way, appearing promiscuously on television and granting interviews like the presidential candidate he no longer is. The election has been held, but the campaign goes on and on. The candidate has yet to become commander in chief.From Richard Cohen, one of the Washington Post’s chief Obama apologists, no less.
The trouble with Obama is that he gets into the moment and means what he says for that moment only. He meant what he said when he called Afghanistan a "war of necessity" -- and now is not necessarily so sure. He meant what he said about the public option in his health-care plan -- and then again maybe not. He would not prosecute CIA agents for getting rough with detainees -- and then again maybe he would.... [H]e gave Congress an August deadline for passage of health-care legislation -- and then let it pass.Cohen has belatedly recognized that every Obama promise -- every single one -- comes with an expiration date. What’s next? -- recognition that Obama will vote “present” until someone else is forced to make a decision -- and then “tut,tut” the decision with his (inevitably) perfect hindsight?
What's driving the great health debate of 2009 is not a popular clamor for universal insurance.... The underlying driver is politicians' psychological quest for glory.I’m afraid he’s right.
[Jill Abramson, the NYT managing editor for news] and Bill Keller, the executive editor, said last week that they would now assign an editor to monitor opinion media and brief them frequently on bubbling controversies. Keller declined to identify the editor, saying he wanted to spare that person "a bombardment of e-mails and excoriation in the blogosphere."Somehow, I think that the refusal to identify the editor is to protect him/her (and the New York Times) from being “bombarded” with facts, tips, research, stories, leads, etc., from the right side of the blogosphere. It’s hard to maintain plausible deniability of knowledge of a story when a hundred bloggers can post “Hey, I sent you a tip on ... and here’s the email to prove it.”
[E]ach acre of food we idle in the United States - just like every barrel of oil we don't pump - means we will import what we take for granted from somewhere else.TANSTAAFL.
We can be sure that even if we find the money to pay those who sell us our imported food and fuel, they will produce it in a lot messier fashion than we can ever imagine - ensuring a poorer America and a dirtier planet all at once.
With the start of sixth grade this year, my son officially became a latchkey child. School lets out at 3:15. My husband and I both work and often don't get home until well after 6. [I]n elementary school, there were at least four different formal after-school programs that filled the gap between the end of his school day and the end of our workday [but] the little that [i]s available for his age group [i]sn't right for him.Well, she and her husband both work - doesn't that suggest something?
I found smug comments lamenting parents' love of two incomes over the well-being of their children. (Anybody bother to digest the statistic that nearly 80 percent of women with school-age children work outside the home? That's up from 55 percent in 1975. And my guess is they all love their children very much.)But did she think to look for data about what percent of women with school-age children had to work outside the home? Nope. She has a right to work outside the home, a right to have children, and a right to have the government take care of them.
[Ellie] Mitchell, director of the Maryland Out of School Time Network, argues, as does U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan, that the school day is outmoded. "After-school is always seen as something extra," she said. "But I don't know why 9 to 3 is so much more important than 3 to 6. It's all just the time that kids are not with their families."Doesn't she have a responsibility somewhere in all those rights?
1. Sin taxes are for our own good.
2. Soda is causing the obesity epidemic.
3. Soda taxes help everyone.
4. High-fructose corn syrup is extremely hazardous to your health.
5. Obesity is driving health-care costs up. A soda tax is just a user fee.
The triumph of Nazi propaganda in this period is the subject of a remarkable exhibit at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum....
[I]n the course of a few years, a fringe party was able to define a national community by scapegoating internal enemies; elevate a single, messianic leader; and keep the public docile with hatred....This obviously doesn’t apply to the Democrat party, right?
But it was radio that proved the most powerful tool.... “You were bombarded by information that you were unable to verify or critically evaluate. It was the Internet of its time,” [says Steve Luckert, curator at the HolocaustAh, yes, the “poor dumb masses” trope.
It is a disorienting atmosphere in which information is difficult to verify or critically evaluate, the rules of discourse are unclear, and emotion -- often expressed in CAPITAL LETTERS -- is primary. User-driven content on the Internet often consists of bullying, conspiracy theories and racial prejudice.... It ... allows hatred to invade respected institutional spaces on the Internet, gaining for these ideas a legitimacy denied to fringe Web sites.And “professional-driven” content doesn’t? (cf. “teabaggers”.)
Legally restricting such content ... is impossible. In America, the First Amendment protects blanket statements of bigotry. But this does not mean that popular news sites ... are constitutionally required to provide forums for bullies and bigots. As private institutions, they are perfectly free to set rules against racism and hatred. This is not censorship; it is the definition of standards.
Some online institutions, such as The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times, screen user comments ... to identify objectionable content.... [H]atred must be confined to the fringes of our culture -- as the hatred of other times should have been.
I guess I must be on the wrong page …Cash for Clunkers is just another example of government failure to think through all the possible ramifications of a policy. My Three Laws of Systems Engineering apply, at least indirectly, in that the intended consequence was to demonstrate environmental sensitivity without regard to cost.
A vehicle at 15 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 800 gallons a year of gasoline. A vehicle at 25 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 480 gallons a year. So, the average clunker transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons/year.
They claim 700,000 vehicles – so that's 224 million gallons/year. That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil. Five million barrels of oil is about 1/4 of one day's US consumption. And 5 million barrels of oil costs about $350 million dollars at $70/bbl.
So we all contributed to spending $3 billion to save $350 million.
How good a deal was that?
They'll probably do a better job with healthcare, though!
During my last shift in the ER, I had the pleasure of evaluating a patient with a shiny new gold tooth, multiple elaborate tattoos and a new cellular telephone equipped with her favorite R&B tune for a ringtone.This came to me as an email gone viral, but it is real - the author is on the emergency room staff at the Anderson Regional Medical Center in Meridian, Mississippi, and an 8th-generation Mississippian.
Glancing over the chart, one could not help noticing her payer status: Medicaid.
She smokes a costly pack of cigarettes every day and, somehow, still has money to buy beer.
And our president expects me to pay for this woman's health care?
Our nation's health care crisis is not a shortage of quality hospitals, doctors or nurses. It is a crisis of culture - culture in which it is perfectly acceptable to spend money on vices while refusing to take care of one's self or, heaven forbid, purchase health insurance.
Life is really not that hard. Most of us reap what we sow.
Starner Jones, MD
Since Obama himself offered the USPS as the model of the public option, we can point to this as the inevitable result of a government program in a private market. When it fails or runs over its revenue, the government will inevitably act to subsidize it. The public option will be no different at all in this regard.Surprise, surprise.
It is the role of the university, from a proper distance, to help [the unwashed masses] by making sophisticated, selfless decisions on health care and the environment that the unwashed cannot grasp are really in their own interest — deluded as they are by Wal-Mart consumerism, Elmer Gantry evangelicalism, and Sarah Palin momism. The tragic burden of an academic is to help the oppressed, but blind, majority.
It's becoming so simple to find the right path through the political mine-field -- If the Democrats are in favor, I'm against it. If the news media says it, I doubt it. If a politician says its critically important, I know it's pork.
Dear members of the Legislature:
It is now official: You are all morons.
The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775. You have had 234 years to get it right. It is broke. Social Security was established in 1935. You have had 74 years to get it right. It is broke. Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 71 years to get it right. It is broke. The War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 45 years to get it right. One trillion dollars of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor"; it hasn't worked. Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 44 years to get them right; they're broke. Freddie Mac was established in 1970 - you have had 39 years to get it right. It is broke.
Trillions of dollars in the massive political payoff called the TARP bill of 2009 show no sign of working.
And finally to set a new record: "Cash for Clunkers" was established in 2009 and went broke in 2009! It took good dependable cars (that were the best some people could afford), replaced them with high priced, and mostly Japanese models, so a good percentage of he profits from the sales went out of the country.
So with a perfect 100% failure rate and a record proving that the "services" you shove down our throats are failing faster and faster, you want Americans to believe you can be trusted with a government-run health care system? 15% of our economy? Are you crazy?
Truly, the inmates are running the asylum!
Does anybody remember the reason given for the establishment of the Department of Energy during the Carter Administration?Another example of an unintended but easily foreseeable consequence of a "good idea."
Anybody? ... No? ... Didn't think so. Bottom line .. we've spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency ... the reason for which no one can remember.
It was very simple and at the time everybody thought it very appropriate. The Department of Energy was instituted on August 4, 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil.
And now it’s 2008, 31 years later, and the budget for this necessary department is $23 billion a year. It has 6,000 federal employees and approximately 100,000 contract employees and look at the job it has done!
This is where you slap your forehead and say “What was I thinking?” And now we are going to turn the banking system, auto industry, and health care over to them?
Ok, I came in, dissed Bush, offered hope and change, and deigned to sacrifice myself, the smartest you’ll ever meet, for you, the world. So now we aren’t Bush’s America, but Obama’s America, and therefore I expect you to reciprocate in kind — since you only have one last chance to get a divine American president of my caliber.Victor Davis Hanson observes: “Obama tragically does not understand that America made him — he does not make America.”
My thoughts, too. In terms of attitude, I went from Granddad to Dad during the Watergate years; and from Dad to Son following the 2008 presidential election.
Granddad: "I remember thinking we could trust politicians to do what's best for us."
Dad: "I remember thinking that some politicians might not be lying sometimes."
Son: "I'm thinking that if a lobbyist paid 'em to, there isn't one who wouldn't kick a nun in public ... then write a book and blame 'the system'."
1. Open a new file in your computer.Via Don Surber. Thanks for the laugh!
2. Name it ‘Barack Obama’.
3. Send it to the Recycle Bin.
4. Empty the Recycle Bin.
5. Your PC will ask you: ‘Do you really want to get rid of ‘Barack Obama?’
6. Firmly click ‘Yes.’
7. Feel better?
Tomorrow we’ll do Nancy Pelosi…
How about slower traffic, less accidents, safer streets?I've argued something similar - that seat belt usage can encourage more aggressive driving habits.
In a never ending quest to make our streets safer and more predictable, we may have actually made them more dangerous and so mind numbingly easy to drive that we enable bad behaviors ... while driving.
Let me reiterate .. the design of our streets may be partially to blame for drivers text messaging.
"Our country is great because people can say what they think and they believe," [Speaker of the House Nancy] Pelosi added. "But I also think that they have to take responsibility for any incitement that they may cause."... play the 'fear' and 'violence' cards.
When it comes to greenhouse-gas emissions, Energy Secretary Steven Chu sees Americans as unruly teenagers and the Administration as the parent that will have to teach them a few lessons.Yep. Put pre-K in charge of the high-school classroom.
“The American public…just like your teenage kids, aren’t acting in a way that they should act,” Dr. Chu said. “The American public has to really understand in their core how important this issue is.”
We are living in a dangerous time. It seems highly unlikely that Barack Obama will get his way in domestic affairs. The Democrats may control Congress, but they now fear a rout in 2010, and they are likely to tread with caution from now on. In foreign affairs, however, presidents have a relatively free hand, and this president has ample time to do damage to a country that, there is reason to suspect, he deeply hates.Read it all, and make your own decision.
2008: Peter Orzag, director of the Congressional Budget Office from January 2007 to November 2008: “deficits in Social Security would not come until 2019.”At least I’ll get (some of) mine. Tough luck for the rest of you.
2009: Peter Orszag, director of the [White House] Office of Management and Budget, member of the Obama Cabinet: “the CBO has determined that Social Security will run cash deficits next year and in 2011, and by 2016 will be more or less in permanent deficit mode.”
STEPHANOPOULOS: How about the funding for ACORN?ACORN is the best-known community organizing group in the country. Obama was a community organizer. He knows perfectly well where their money comes from.
OBAMA: You know, if — frankly, it’s not really something I’ve followed closely. I didn’t even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money.
Today, the military is perceiving that the administration is punting the question of a troop increase in Afghanistan, and the military is even questioning the administration’s commitment to succeed in Afghanistan.It appears that Obama is trying to vote “present” again. He should pay less attention to Jimmy Carter and more attention to another Democrat former president, Harry Truman, who famously said “The buck stops here.”
The mistake of crying racism is especially tempting to upscale, influential liberals who, no less than protesters on the right, are ducking the true causes of dispossession, fear and rage: the premises and practices of financial capital, predatory consumer marketing and a national-security state boondoggling.After all these years, liberals are still smug in their certainty that there can't possibly be principled opposition to their plans and programs.
[The] U.S. president’s cancellation last week of plans to place missile interceptors in Poland and a radar station in the Czech Republic ... came on Sept. 17, the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland.The Poles were not amused.
Great fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite 'em,Swift:
And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so ad infinitum.
And the great fleas themselves, in turn, have greater fleas to go on;
While these again have greater still, and greater still, and so on.
So, naturalists observe, a flea[Added Note]: The phrase “mimsy were the borogroves” is from Lewis Carroll’s Jabberwocky. It’s also the title of a science fiction book written by Lewis Padgett (aka Henry Kuttner and Catherine L. Moore), published in 1943, which I read - and enjoyed - as a teen sci-fi addict.
Has smaller fleas that on him prey;
And these have smaller still to bite ’em;
And so proceed ad infinitum
The Committee concludes that no rational exploratory program can be funded under the existing funding constraint and that plans for America's space exploration program would de facto be halted and human operations limited to low earth orbit.... The reason ... is, simplistically stated, that for sixty percent of the needed funds, one cannot go sixty percent of the way to Mars.Given the proclivities of the current Administration, this doesn’t look good.
The most fundamental principle liberals have is that they are all very, very smart, and everyone should listen to them. Nothing angers them more than [having someone challenge] them.
The 2010 QDR seeks to answer the question of whether the US should posture its forces and focus its acquisitions on dealing with conventional threats from rising peer competitors or more asymmetric threats emanating from weak and failing states.The QDR is, at its best, a difficult high-wire act with no safety net, long on good intentions and short on successful actions. Given the dramatic philosophical difference between the Bush and Obama administrations and the demonstrated incompetence of the Obama administration with respect to its domestic agenda, dead on arrival looks right.
The search for answers is being structured around the concept of "hybrid warfare," ... a concept ... so loosely defined that it does not provide clear criteria for decision-making. Service efforts to define it have so far been little more that shopping lists for every possible contingency mixed with buzzwords that appear to have meaning only as long as they are not examined in any detail.
In practice, any concept that effectively justifies anything ends in justifying absolutely nothing.
One, illegal immigration. [S]top coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders.
Two, the TARP bill. Freeze, repeal.
Three, Czars. Fire the czars.
Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over.
Five, universal healthcare. Slow down. Don't you dare try to pass this in the middle of the night.
Six, growing government control. Shrink it down. I want less government, not more.
Seven, ACORN. I want them investigated.
Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no. I work for my money. It is mine.
Nine, charitable contributions. Charity belongs in our local communities. Butt out.
Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. [Let them} sink or swim like the rest of us.
Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? [G]ive the buzzwords a rest and have some straight honest talk.
Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.
I want [my patients] to have insurance that will pay for their care, and I want to be able to offer new medications and the most sophisticated treatment. I want to be able to give preventive care as well as to monitor patients effectively if they develop diseases. I want to be able care for my patients in their homes, and I want to offer palliative care if it becomes necessary. I want them to be able to afford all this.Here’s Dr. Feldman’s “top ten” list. My comments are in italics.
I want to see major reforms in health care -- I just don't want what is on the table.
I respect his experience, but I suspect the problem is over-regulation rather than under-regulation. I’d like to be able to buy health insurance to my own specification, even with a pre-existing condition, outside an employer plan, as an individual or as a member of a “common-interest” coalition, out-of-state, if necessary. Over-regulation, not under-regulation, prevents me.2. We urgently need tort reform, but it's nowhere to be seen.
Yes, but ... the neurosurgeon who operated on my mother was afraid of single-payer healthcare specifically because there would be no lawyers. His fear is that malpractice will increase rather than decrease under a single-payer healthcare system.3. "Prevention" won't magically make costs go down.
Too true, and much under-discussed. The fact is that “prevention” has been driving costs up, not down.4. Reform efforts don't address our critical shortage of health-care workers.
Agreed, but 4 and 5 are not health insurance issues.6. We have to streamline drug development and shake up the Food and Drug Administration.
Yes, but again it isn’t an insurance issue. The FDA is far too conservative, and its “nanny-ish” tendencies badly need curtailing.7. We can't fund health-care reform by cutting payments to doctors.
We can if we cut their overhead at the same time. I’ve read that something on the order of 30% of a doctor’s income is spent to comply with pointless bureaucratic regulation.8. We can't forget about research.
OK, but again, this isn’t an insurance issue.9. Cutting reimbursements could shut some hospitals down.
Same comment as 7 above.10. We need to improve the quality of care.
Quality? or process? In either case, it isn’t an insurance issue.My bottom line is that we need to put the patient (me!) back in charge. To put it somewhat crudely, I own the car; I drive it; I’m responsible for it. Therefore I make the decisions.
Eighty percent? There may an 80% agreement that certain things need to be fixed, but I think the agreement on how to fix them is substantially less.DETAILS
Unless the plan you have disappears, or the doctor leaves. That’s already true under the current system, and there’s nothing in ObamaCare that leads me to believe that it won’t get worse, with the “public option” as the plan of next resort.Obama: “[It will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a preexisting condition ... or ... drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it most.”
And every one of these “against-the-laws” will cost additional money. How can they not increase the basic cost?Obama: “[Insurance companies] will be required to cover ... routine checkups and preventive care ....”
Obama: "We’ll creat[e] a new insurance exchange - a marketplace where individuals and small companies will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices.”
First, it’s already been shown that preventive care does not save money in either the short or long term.
Second, if it covers routine/preventive care, it’s not insurance; it’s prepaid medical care. I have no problem if some folks want to buy prepaid medical care, but what of those of us who want insurance for catastrophic events (like hospitalization)?
This is actually a good idea, and one I could agree with if Obama would limit the government role to writing the law allowing private cooperatives to be formed.Obama: “[F]or those ... who still can’t afford ... [insurance] ... we’ll provide tax credits ....”
For example, I’m a member of the Northern Virginia Electric Cooperative, which supplies electricity to my house. I own it (well, along with thousands of others) and consequently have immediate motive to ensure that it’s well run.
I’m also a member of a number of professional organizations and credit unions who could serve as the “sponsor” of an insurance exchange. In each case, I have reason, responsibility, and means to ensure it would be run to my satisfaction.
Which will have to be paid for by taxes somewhere else. Who? I'll bet that since I'm the one who can (barely) afford insurance, I'll get the "privilege" of paying more for the same service. Give me a reason why I should.Obama: "[I]ndividuals will be required to carry basic health insurance.”
The auto insurance analogy Obama used is clever, but wrong. States require auto liability insurance - for damage to others. Personal property, collision, and comprehensive are not required (except by the lienholder).LIES AND MISREPRESENTATIONS
More importantly, how does the administration propose to verify -and enforce - the requirement that every individual has insurance? Never mind the probable invasion of personal privacy; think about this: How many uninsured vehicles are on the road, despite the fact that all cars must be registered with the state to travel on public highways?
“No insuring illegal immigrants.”
Of course not. The “death panel” is a metaphor - vivid, it's true - for the certain knowledge that Obama’s health care reform will be resource limited and inevitably rationed.
Our current system already rations health care - by price. So knowing that rationing already exists, the "death panel" question is simply one of "Who gets rationed?"
And knowing what we already know about the government’s efficiency at delivering services, is there any reason to believe that the rationing won’t get worse?
Technically, the statement is true, I suppose, but without an enforcement mechanism - which isn't in the bill before Congress - it’s meaningless.“No federal dollars for abortions”
So does that mean that the “public option” will cover less than private plans? I suspect that there's a discrimination question yet to be addressed in the "no federal dollars" assertion.“No ‘government takeover -’ public plan is an option only for those who don’t have [private] insurance.”
Obama [intentionally?] misses the point. The fear is that the “public option” cost will be low enough to encourage employers to quit offering insurance (and insurance companies to quit offering individual plans) and thereby force Americans into a public option plan backed by the federal government (where the risk is lower).“No taxpayer subsidy for the ‘public insurance’ option.”
Here’s the question: if there’s no taxpayer subsidy, isn’t it almost by definition just another private insurance option? For the answer, look to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Both are obstensibly private corporations, backed by "full faith and credit" of the federal government. Now ask yourself “What was the proximate cause of the housing bust?” Answer: government meddling.PAYING FOR OBAMACARE
If true, then Obama can’t sign the bill he outlined in his speech, as it’s already been scored as not deficit-neutral by the Congressional Budget Office.Obama: “[M]ost of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system, a system that is currently full of waste and abuse.”
Unfortunately, we’re all too aware that the federal government is bloated, inefficient, wasteful, and pork-laden; so there’s little doubt that savings are potentially there. How much? And can Obama produce them? Produce the savings first; then fund the reform.Obama: “[M]uch of the rest would be paid for with revenues from the very same drug and insurance companies that stand to benefit from tens of millions of new customers. And this reform will charge insurance companies a fee for their most expensive policies, which will encourage them to provide greater value for the money .”
Okaaaaay. I see two realistic possibilities. One, prices for the ‘gold-plated’ policies go up, or two, the gold-plating turns bronze. The latter seems more likely (and is probably the administration’s preferred option).To summarize my thoughts, essentially there was nothing new in President Obama's address. Despite his assertion to the contrary ("My door is always open ..."), there was no hint of bipartisanship in his address. His use of phrases such as “scare tactics,” “score short-term political points”, and “think it is better politics to kill this plan” were aimed directly at Republicans and intended to exclude them.
- Mullen: More Troops = Victory
- Senate Cuts ACORN Loose
- Closing In on Ivy League Campus Killer?
* 'Cash for Clunkers' Spawns Retail Sales Hike
- Airline Workers Busted on Drug Smuggling Charges
- Israel, Palestinians Guilty of 'War Crimes'?
- North Korea Unwilling to Give Up Nukes, South Says
- Recount Ordered at 10 Percent of Afghan Polls
* Iraqi Shoe Thrower Freed, Claims He Was Tortured
- H1N1 Spreads Long After Fever
- Obama Renews Push for Wall Street Oversight
* House to Discipline Wilson for 'You Lie!' Outburst
- FBI: Watch Out for Bomb Materials in NYC
- Schools on Pledge: You Have Right to Remain Silent
- Teens Sue Team Over 'God Bless America' Ejection
- Tracking Taxes: Unnecessary Earmark Projects Linger
? Baucus Health Bill May Leave Dems Cold
- Iran Nuclear Talks Likely to Be Held in Turkey
- McCain and Graham Hold Town Hall
- Student fatally stabbed at Florida school
- Actor Patrick Swayze dies after cancer fight
- Al Qaeda operative reported dead in U.S. strike
* Clunkers drives up retail sales
- 16 hurt after train hits barricade
- Ted's sons: Father 'very good at overcoming ...'
- Is Obama witch doctor image racist?
* Bush shoe thrower says he was tortured
? Don't cut my (public) health care
* Rep. Wilson faces resolution of disapproval
- Dem's 'urine' comments raise eyebrows
- Insurgents blown up by their own IED
- Girl, 8, hides, calls 911 during robbery
- Kanye tells Leno outburst 'was rude, period'
- Kanye gets called every name in the book
- Whitney Houston spills drug secrets
- Del Potro U.S. Open win is 'dream come true'
- 9 photos hooked on a feeling
- Police dog poisoned with anti-freeze
- Woman, 107, fears hubby No. 22 will leave her
- Senators split on approach to Afghanistan
There are lots of people in the Obama administration who want to do things that have not been done before-- and to do them before the public realizes what is happening.
Are they the world's best-trained physicians and health care professionals who care for our loved ones? Perhaps our hospitals, which bring both employment and cutting-edge medical technologies to our communities? Our pharmaceutical, biotechnology and device companies, whose researchers give hope to those afflicted with diseases once thought incurable? Or our insurance companies, which provide access to these vital health services and whose nurses help coordinate care for patients? The answer is all of these groups standing together. The villain is our collective overgrazing on the commons of the U.S. health care system.