Posted on: September 21, 2009 2:23 pm

The gilded cage...Obamacare

As we continue to trend left toward the socialist agenda of our leadership I am reminded of this parable:

The hamster lives a wonderful life.  His food and drink is provided, his home is provided, and even his exercise is provided through great distances of twisty tubes and things that spin.  He even has a maid come and clean his house every so often. When he is sick, health care is provided free of charge.  He really has it made.


So why is it he is always trying to chew his way to freedom?


We all have our own definition of freedom and none of them include a gilded cage.

Minus 5 in the turnover margin is a recipe for defeat anywhere including in the SEC. WVU is minus 8 in its last two games and is 1-1.  Get it straightened out and the Eers could be tough.
Posted on: July 24, 2009 12:30 pm

One way to free up Packer's seats....

Borrowing from another Blogger I thought some of you might like to read this....

Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)

Monday, July 20th at 2:31PM EDT

H.R. 3200 is the Democrat healthcare bill.

Let’s back up for a minute. I noted some time ago Jay Rockefeller went on record to say that at some point the government has to decide whether or not you are allowed to receive any more medical benefits if the cost outweighs the potential benefits.

As Mickey Kaus has noted, both Ezra Klein and Matt Yglesias are on record agreeing. Kaus writes:

Democratic blogger Ezra Klein appears to be positioning Dem health care reforms as a way to cut costs, on the grounds that a reformed system will be able to make “hard choices” and “rational” coverage decisions, by which Klein seems to mean “not providing” treatments that are unproven or too expensive–when “a person’s life, or health, is not worth the price.” Matthew Yglesias’ recent post seems to be saying the same thing, though clarity isn’t its strong suit.

Weirdo intellectual Peter Singer, a man who favors post-birth abortions of disabled children, took to the New York Times to write

You have advanced kidney cancer. It will kill you, probably in the next year or two. A drug called Sutent slows the spread of the cancer and may give you an extra six months, but at a cost of $54,000. Is a few more months worth that much?

If you can afford it, you probably would pay that much, or more, to live longer, even if your quality of life wasn’t going to be good. But suppose it’s not you with the cancer but a stranger covered by your health-insurance fund. If the insurer provides this man - and everyone else like him - with Sutent, your premiums will increase. Do you still think the drug is a good value? Suppose the treatment cost a million dollars. Would it be worth it then? Ten million? Is there any limit to how much you would want your insurer to pay for a drug that adds six months to someone’s life? If there is any point at which you say, “No, an extra six months isn’t worth that much,” then you think that health care should be rationed.

In his article, he argues that, in effect, we should euthanize the elderly.

I think, given that the member of Congress who drafted H.R. 3200 read and take seriously people like Klien, Yglesias, and Singer, we should be very troubled by Section 1233 of H.R. 3200. The section, titled “Advanced Care Planning Consultation” requires senior citizens to meet at least every 5 years with a doctor or nurse practitioner to discuss dying with dignity.

The section requires that they talk to their doctor, not a lawyer, about living wills, durable healthcare powers of attorney, hospice, etc. Given the progressive intelligentsia already being on the record in favor of euthanizing the elderly, it is no small leap to see where the Democrats are headed with this.

Legally forcing senior citizens to have “death with dignity schedules every few years is just another way to say the government wants to make sure seniors know it is time to commit suicide to save the system money.

And saving any medical system through encouraged deaths of the elderly or unborn is not a medical system worth having. The Hippocratic Oath requires doctors to “do no harm.” That’s meant toward the patient, not the costs to the government.

Posted on: February 10, 2009 4:39 pm

The Leather Bodice and the Mask


Three ladies meet for lunch.  One is engaged, one is a mistress, and one has been married for 20+ years.  They were chatting about their relationships and decided to amaze their men by wearing a black leather bra & bodice, stiletto heels and a mask over just our eyes. They agreed to meet in a few days to exchange notes.

Here's how it all went:

The engaged woman said:
The other night my boyfriend came over and found me wearing a black leather bodice, tall stilettos and a mask.
He saw me and said,  'You are the woman of my dreams. I love you.' Then we made love all night long.

The mistress:

Me too! The other night I met my lover at his office and I was wearing the leather bodice, heels and mask over my eyes and a raincoat. When I opened the raincoat he didn't say a word, but we had wild sex all night.

Then the married woman shared:

"When my husband came home I was wearing the leather bodice, black stockings, stilettos and a mask over my eyes. As soon as he came in the door and saw me he said..."

"What's for dinner, Batman?"

Happy Valentine's Day boys.  I hope you remember the ladies in your life.  </tbody>
Category: NCAAF
Posted on: February 10, 2009 8:56 am
Edited on: February 10, 2009 10:42 am

The road to Elkhart...

One day I awoke with nothing better to do, so I drove to Elkhart, Indiana to look at recreational vehicles.  The fine people of Elkhart welcomed me.  The Elkhartians built the Mecca of RV's. As the boom of excess overtook America, Elkhart expanded. Elkhart's population exploded in the 1990's by 16.1% versus a population growth of 9% for Indiana.  More than 8000 people moved to Elkhart in that decade.  More than a few went there for a job in an RV factory.

The problem is they wanted to sell me a brick on wheels to suck gas in the ultimate excess of America, camping in a hotel on wheels. They grew beyond their actual market into the unsustainable growth region of the demand curve.  And like every other industry who grew too much.  They are struggling.  Talk about shortsightedness.  The mayor of Elkhart should have asked this question.  Are we at risk if the market dips?  We are providers of a commodity that is not a necessity, it is a pure luxury to be sure. Should we diversify? You better believe it.

Anyone else watch the press conference last night? My observations

  • How many times did he have to say Elkhart? 
  • And didn't it seem odd that he did everything in his power to blame his predessors for the crisis over and over again. Does he not realize that his party ruled both the House and Senate for the last 2+ years?
  • To the idiot who asked about A-Rod...stupid question.  Obama's answer should have been one word "disappointing."  Instead he talked about steroids in baseball after spending the first 40 minutes of the conference stating over and over how critical the Spendulus Package is.
  • Helen Thomas - please shut up, forever would be nice.  Obama called on her to give her a shot at another stupid question.  She delivered.  He was flabbergasted at the question.  I think he thought she would take it easy on him.  I do like how he cut her off when she tried to ask a follow-up.  Nice one Prez.
  • His tone last night put me off.  He chastized the Republicans over and over despite feeling the heat from his own party.  Remember, 11 Dems in the House voted with the Republicans.  His plea was passionate but also filled with so much dread.  How will we build confidence in the economy when we are under the constant deluge of negativity? Wasn't it Carter who told Americans to put on a sweater to combat cold during the energy crisis of the 70's?  How did that true but negative statement ring with Americans?  Not well.
  • He chastized Repubs for being irresponsible but then refused to listen to them when the pushed back on what they perceive as 'pork'.  Seems like a double standard. Interesting how most Americans who have looked in on the plan are against it.
Category: NCAAF
Tags: Waste
Posted on: February 5, 2009 10:59 am

Fear mongering? Or don't know what to do?

"Irreversible recession" Obama warned in his op ed piece in the Washington Post.  In all my schooling in Economics, macro and micro, I have never heard the term. 

What does it mean? I suppose it means Obama doesn't know what to do other than spend money to stimulate the economy with wish list pork spending and if he doesn't get his way we are doomed.  How can the Hope & Change candidate become so doom and gloom so quickly? 

Because there are myriad of ideas being floated that could stimulate the economy.  Things like tax cuts for individuals and business, you know, to let the people decide how to spend their money in their economy. This thing will take care of itself, you can bet on that.  When the government got involved in the Great Depression they prolonged it by 7 years by eliminating competition, instigating protectionism policy, granting sweeping power to Labor, legalizing collusion and anti-trust, wage fixing above market value, and the list goes on. Principles of Socialism, but I digress.

What gets me really irked by his Carter-esque gloom and doom was this comment:

He rejected the argument that more tax cuts are needed in the plan and that piecemeal measures would be sufficient, arguing that Americans made their intentions clear in the election. "I reject these theories, and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change," he wrote. Talk about over reaching the results of the election.  Wow, the arrogance is astounding!  The people did not vote for a Pork Stimulus Package when they elected him president.  I am absolutely certain I did not see that plank in his platform when I vetted him all last fall on my blog.  I don't remember any Obama supporters chastizing me last fall that I had ommitted it either.

The honeymoon for Obama ended far sooner than I ever thought.  The media is now awake and will pick him apart.  I would now put his odds at re-election at 1 in 4.

On the bright side of the economy, consensual sex is still free! Thank goodness....

Category: NCAAF
Posted on: January 9, 2009 9:51 am

Smorgie ogles her gardener...mmmm

I have this young man who takes care of my yard for me. He is 20 years old and uses the money to put himself through college. He is a very handsome fellow with dirty blonde hair worn a little long. He would be a surfer dude if there were any in Ohio. Ladies, I want you to know he is even more handsome when it is hot, because that is when he takes off his shirt. I must let you know, I fear he may suffer from dehydration some days so I make sure I present him with a cool drink as often as possible. Just applying the golden rule ladies! Anyway, I was thinking about hiring him to be my new regional sales manager reporting directly to me. He is soooo nice to look at and he does work hard (like his abs). I think he is qualified.


Is this what a majority of Americans wanted when they voted for Obama? Change was the slogan and it was shaped by the individual and the media to mean whatever to whomever. But here it is folks. The change you voted for is manifesting itself in some very dangerous ways. This week PE Obama leaked his nomination for the head of the CIA only to be rebuked by his own party for not consulting them. The people he forgot to consult were only the senior democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee, incoming chairman Diane Feinstein and outgoing chairman, Jay Rockefeller. Oops! Now that is not the dangerous part. The nominee, Leon Panetta, has no intelligence experience whatsoever. He was a congressman from California and Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff. Those are his credentials folks. Then there is that pesky little fact that Mr. Panetta is a self proclaimed passivist. Is this the person you want running YOUR intelligence agency? It is your agency, they work for you.

Keep in mind, previous attempts at having a politician run the CIA have been a disaster. Porter Goss comes to mind in 2004 when he, a bureaucrat, brought in his own team and fired the senior staff at the CIA. Those senior staffers are career intelligence officers. They know what they are doing. Goss was quickly shown the door in 2006 and efforts were made to restore the morale of the folks in Langley.

My stupid person of the week may have to go to the man soon to be at the top. Come on Obama, stop picking your cronies for these jobs. You promised us you were going to stop business as usual in Washington. Your choices so far are very suspect to me for some of you posts.

  • Hillary Clinton (former Presidential candidate) at State - her credentials are what? Trial lawyer, wife of president, Senator. Is she trained in international affairs? And then there are those massive donations to her husband's foundation from all around the globe.
  • Bill Richardson (former Presidential candidate) as Commerce Secretary. He faces an embarassing investigation about money from donors and New Mexico government contracts being awarded to those donors back in August 2008. Media just now got around to reporting on it I suppose. He took his name out of the hat. Thanks Bill.
  • Ram Emanuel for Chief of Staff. He is from the Chicago political system just like Obama. Quoted as saying, "Never waste a good crisis." As he alluded to the economic crisis and the Obama agenda. Fear mongering from the Democrats.

I'm going to stop here before my blood pressure gets up too far.


A question before I go...... why do Americans think a big government making decisions for them is the way to live? Obama's proposed agenda is consolidating power under the government's control, power that used to belong to the individuals of this country. I want freedom to make my own choices, not have the government do my thinking for me. Am I alone? Please Obama supporters, tell me why I am wrong because this stuff scares me to death.

Category: NCAAF
Posted on: January 8, 2009 9:50 am

Felt up for 20 bucks....

Last week the Wall Street Journal ran an opinion article about what Obama's National Healthcare Plan might be like. The author took most of their points form Tom Daschle's book on the subject and for those that don't know he has been appointed to lead the effort in the new administration. The main point of the article was the almost certainty of metered health care. By metered, they mean there will be an oversight committee (appointed, not elected) that sets the treatment plans paid for under the plan and to which age groups the service will be provided. Sorry, grandma, you are too old for knee replacement surgery. The author was looking to put fear into her reader with these comments but there is truth to it none the less.

On Tuesday of this week, the WSJ printed several responses in the Letter's to the Editor page. These responses were from healthcare professionals (doctors and administrators). They brought up some great points. Like how is this any different from an insurance company today. They put limits on treatments today. True. But two such responders went on to write (paraphrasing) that many of the current treatments are marginal or only slightly better than cheaper treatments and, therefore, should not be used or more clearly, not covered under the plan. There is truth in this statement, but history shows that breakthrough invention is built on the backs of many failed attempts, marginal attempts and only slightly better attempts at improving whatever situation is at hand, be in medical or industrial or commercial. What this means to me is our healthcare system and the drive toward new cures and treatments may very well stagnate. We have to remember pharmaceutical companies are in the business to make money for their shareholders. It is that simple. If there is no money in new treatment options or the method of approval is too protracted, research will not happen. The regulations require a drug company to spend potentially hundreds of millions of dollars just to get it to market. If the National Healthcare System won't pay for the use or treatment, the drug companies will stop research and development. Progress in healthcare may cease or slow so greatly that twenty or forty years into the future we will have changed very little.

Think about the last 25 years with respect to heart by-pass surgery. It went from a radical surgery requiring many months of recovery to a ho hum procedure that sees the patient home in a few days. In those 25 years, the procedure has improved in small ways with better medicines and techniques. Each one slightly or significantly better than its predecessor. The result is what we have today. And those techniques and medicines have found their way into other procedures like joint repairs.

The root problem that causes a system to restrict the treatments is driven purely by cost. If it is too much, we will not do it. Eliminating treatments is one way to lower the cost. But what about lowering the cost of practicing medicine. I recently had my annual Ob-Gyn visit. The bill to the insurance company was $430 for one visit. Insurance paid $157. I paid $20 out of pocket. The doctor billed $430 and he received $177 (and was happy about it.) Does this make sense?

How about tort reform? You know, doctor screws up a procedure (they are human), sued for malpractice, settlement is for $5 million, lawyer gets $2 million, client gets $3 million. Oh, the patient is fine mind you, a little worse for the wear, deserves some compensation no doubt to make up for their loss. But the lawyer got how much!!! Doctor's insurance goes up. He passes the cost on to you and me.

So here is the rub. A National Healthcare System is probably a good idea. But how do we do it without killing our economy (cost) and still allowing the entrepreneurial drive that leads to innovation? How do we ensure that people want to be doctors in the future. If their hands are tied many may choose to do something else with their talents.  Caution is absolutely needed as we move forward.


Category: NCAAF
Posted on: January 7, 2009 2:07 pm
Edited on: January 7, 2009 2:23 pm

Gag reflex has been triggered! Spit it out!

Hard to swallow, may have to spit this one out.

Another stupid person(s) to point out per my New Year's resolution.

I was eating my lunch today with a friend of mine in a crowded bistro. The fellow next to us was reading out loud to his table mate the virtues of Obama's economic stimulus package from his newspaper. Both these gentlemen were excited about the prospects of tax relief and the immediate impact to the economy. These fellows are dyed in the wool Obama supporters and they were gushing about the proposal as if it were revolutionary and just what we need to get the country started in the right direction again. They actually said, "Damn George Bush!" Amazing.  (Didn't W send us all $500 or $1000 checks last summer?)

How does it taste to you, America?

Obama's plan is for a two year tax relief that amounts to $500 per worker or $1000 per couple for each year. Depending on the number of paychecks you get, either 24 or 26, this amounts to roughly $20 per check for a single. Let's see, that buys about 10 or 11 gallons of gas (at today's price) every couple of weeks. Or about 8 coffees at Starbucks. Or a round of drinks for a few friends. Maybe a box of condoms, a six pack of Keystone Light and some mints. Might cover the co-pay for a doctors visit (might not). Covers the cost of a month's supply of birth control pills. Good for 5 beers at a Piston's game. I can get half a new bra at Victoria's Secret or a week's worth of thongs.

Now I don't mean to sound like I won't accept the money. I will of course. But let's be real. Is $10 bucks a week gonna cause you to go out and spend our way out of recession? Is it going to make a dent in your credit card or mortgage payment? Is it going to restore consumer confidence? Anyone rushing out to buy an American car with the extra $40 a month? Maybe with all those rebates GM and Ford are throwing around you can get one for $40 a month (get real folks).

Who is the stupid person here? I will let you decide.

Category: NCAAF
Tags: democrats
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or