Friday, February 13, 2009

Rushing To Disaster

So, both houses of Congress are set to vote on their "stimulus" package. Too bad they're going to vote on something that none of them have freakin' bothered to read! Or will have the time to read.
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) predicted on Thursday that none of his Senate colleagues would "have the chance" to read the entire final version of the $790-billion stimulus bill before the bill comes up for a final vote in Congress.

“No, I don’t think anyone will have the chance to [read the entire bill],” Lautenberg told

The final bill, crafted by a House-Senate conference committee, was posted on the Website of the House Appropriations Committe late Thurday in two PDF files.

The first PDF was 424 pages long and the second PDF was 575 pages long, making the total bill 999 pages long. The House is expected to vote on this 999-page bill Friday, and the Senate either later Friday or Saturday. [Editor's note: The first PDF, as posted on the House Appropriations Committee website as of 8:20 AM Friday morning, had grown by 72 pages to 496 pages, increasing the length of the total document to 1,071 pages.]

Of the several senators that interviewed on Thursday, only Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) claimed to have read the entire bill--and he was speaking of the preliminary version that had been approved by the Senate, not the final 999-page version that the House-Senate conference committee was still haggling over on Thursday afternoon.

When asked members of both parties on Capitol Hill on Thursday whether they had read the full, final bill, not one member could say, "Yes."
Why the rush? Well, as is being reported by Drudge, it's all because of Nacy Pelosi and a planned Europe junket to Italy and other parts, so she can receive an award from the Italians.
Rep. John Culberson, TX claims the "stimulus" bill must be urgently voted on today -- because Speaker Nancy Pelosi is leaving at 6:00 PM for an 8 day trip to Europe!

Culberson made the charge on Houston's KSEV radio.

Pelosi is hoping to lead a delegation to Europe; there's a meeting with the Pope and an award from an Italian legislative group.

Calls to Pelosi's spokesman went unreturned.

In the rushing, Democrats have now broken their promise to have the public see the $790 billion bill for 48 hours before any vote.

They, those people who are going to rush to vote on this measure, are going to throw us into the fire of debt for political gain. It's not like this "stimulus" is going to actually work. Quite the opposite, in fact. This will do more damage to our economy than doing nothing would. Even though it is unlikely to work in any substantive way, give your Congressional "representatives" a call or an email on this. Demand that they not vote until the bill has been read and understood. And then vote no. We, and our children cannot afford this bill.

Technorati Tags:
, , , ,

Thursday, February 12, 2009

American Lenin

In "honour" of Lincoln's Birthday, an article by L. Neil Smith on the tyrant.
It's harder and harder these days to tell a liberal from a conservative -- given the former category's increasingly blatant hostility toward the First Amendment, and the latter's prissy new disdain for the Second Amendment -- but it's still easy to tell a liberal from a libertarian.

Just ask about either Amendment.

If what you get back is a spirited defense of the ideas of this country's Founding Fathers, what you've got is a libertarian. By shameful default, libertarians have become America's last and only reliable stewards of the Bill of Rights.

But if -- and this usually seems a bit more difficult to most people -- you'd like to know whether an individual is a libertarian or a conservative, ask about Abraham Lincoln.

Suppose a woman -- with plenty of personal faults herself, let that be stipulated -- desired to leave her husband: partly because he made a regular practice, in order to go out and get drunk, of stealing money she had earned herself by raising chickens or taking in laundry; and partly because he'd already demonstrated a proclivity for domestic violence the first time she'd complained about his stealing.

Now, when he stood in the doorway and beat her to a bloody pulp to keep her home, would we memorialize him as a hero? Or would we treat him like a dangerous lunatic who should be locked up, if for no other reason, then for trying to maintain the appearance of a relationship where there wasn't a relationship any more? What value, we would ask, does he find in continuing to possess her in an involuntary association, when her heart and mind had left him long ago?

History tells us that Lincoln was a politically ambitious lawyer who eagerly prostituted himself to northern industrialists who were unwilling to pay world prices for their raw materials and who, rather than practice real capitalism, enlisted brute government force -- "sell to us at our price or pay a fine that'll put you out of business" -- for dealing with uncooperative southern suppliers. That's what a tariff's all about. In support of this "noble principle", when southerners demonstrated what amounted to no more than token resistance, Lincoln permitted an internal war to begin that butchered more Americans than all of this country's foreign wars -- before or afterward -- rolled into one.

Lincoln saw the introduction of total war on the American continent -- indiscriminate mass slaughter and destruction without regard to age, gender, or combat status of the victims -- and oversaw the systematic shelling and burning of entire cities for strategic and tactical purposes. For the same purposes, Lincoln declared, rather late in the war, that black slaves were now free in the south -- where he had no effective jurisdiction -- while declaring at the same time, somewhat more quietly but for the record nonetheless, that if maintaining slavery could have won his war for him, he'd have done that, instead.
More at the source.

Hopefully, we'll never see his like again.

Technorati Tags:
, ,

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Government Health Care Is Here

Well, the Senate has passed Obama's spending bill, along with the tons of pork. It won't do any good, in the short or long term, but that's seemingly neither here nor there. Hidden amongst the hundreds of unread pages in this disaster is something much worse than all that spending. The politicians and Obama have managed to place a national health care scheme into this bill (.pdf). One in which the government, (not you and your physician) will determine what therapy you should receive. Thousands of people will be sentenced to death by the governments health "care" Tsar and their bureaucracy.
The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis.” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and “learn to operate less like solo practitioners.”

Keeping doctors informed of the newest medical findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.

New Penalties

Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)
The worlds best health care system just became a thing of the past, unless people can somehow persuade their politicians to yank this abomination from the bill, which the Senate and House will have to agree to. Do not expect Indiana's Evan Bayh to object to this, (he voted yes). He's a strong proponent of bigger, more intrusive government, like Mr. Obama. "Universal health care" is here.

Don't get sick in the future. Unless you want some government employee deciding your health care options for you.

Technorati Tags:
, , ,