what if?

Probably Too Dumb to Vote, Too

My friend, Professor Keith Burgess-Jackson, posts today about a remarkable letter to the editor at the New York Times.

Regardless of their respective strengths and weaknesses, all of the bills for health care reform are too complex to explain, grasp and support. And Republicans have made it abundantly clear that they will oppose any truly meaningful change.

Yet these very obstacles present the president with the opportunity to do what is sensible and right: to put his conviction, passion and clout behind a single-payer system.

Will people be afraid of so radical a change? The majority probably will; people tend to fear the unknown.

But “the shock of the new” is as old as innovation itself. Eventually, people adapt to change and ultimately embrace it.

People cannot comprehend our health care bills?  So our president and Congress should force it through, irrespective of what people think of it?  Wow.

As far as I am concerned, if bills being proposed are truly incomprehensible, then that is the fault of our legislators.  Write them so people can understand what's in them.  Having representatives and senators actually read the darned things might not hurt, either.

And "Republicans will oppose any truly meaningful change"?  How can the Times in good conscience publish such a letter?  This is patently false. Many Republicans have agreed wholeheartedly that significant change is necessary.  But they disagree about the content of that change.  They prefer private, market based change with tort reform.

Perhaps someone can explain to me why so many liberals I know have such a lowly view of Americans in general.  Apparently they are too stupid to understand our bills and unable to read about campaign contributions to politicians and weigh whether they are rational or not (the reason we must not allow large campaign contributions).  They cannot save for their own retirement, they cannot be held responsible about what foods they put into their body and much, much more.

Do I think that we will all make wise decisions about everything in our lives if left to our own devices?  Absolutely not.  Still, many of us will do fine - and, more importantly, if decisions - and their consequences - become the responsibility of individuals, many will make superior choices.  If we know we are not going to be "saved" - we will have to do more of it.

Why do some Democrats (like this one) resort to lies about their opponents, stating that Republicans do not want change?  Why do they have so little regard for choices we make on our own?  I must admit, I do not understand it at all.

Your Tax Dollars at Work (So to Speak)

Well; thank goodness that migraine is over!

Now on to the news.  You know the "new transparency" we were going to have with "hope and change"?  You were told about the judicious spending?

Here you go.

A sleepy Montana checkpoint along the Canadian border that sees about three travelers a day will get $15 million under President Barack Obama's economic stimulus plan. A government priority list ranked the project as marginal, but two powerful Democratic senators persuaded the administration to make it happen.

Despite Obama's promises that the stimulus plan would be transparent and free of politics, the government is handing out $720 million for border upgrades under a process that is both secretive and susceptible to political influence. This allowed low-priority projects such as the checkpoint in Whitetail, Mont., to skip ahead of more pressing concerns, according to documents revealed to The Associated Press.

• A border station in Napolitano's home state of Arizona is getting $199 million, five times more than any other border station. The busy Nogales checkpoint has required repairs for years but was not rated among the neediest projects on the master list reviewed by the AP. Napolitano credited her lobbying as Arizona governor for getting the project near the front of the line for funding under the Bush administration. All it needed was money, which the stimulus provided.

• A checkpoint in Laredo, Texas, which serves more than 55,000 travelers and 4,200 trucks a day, is rated among the government's highest priorities but was passed over for stimulus money.

• The Westhope, N.D., checkpoint, which serves about 73 people a day and is among the lowest-priority projects, is set to get nearly $15 million for renovations.

More than $116 billion in freight passed through Laredo last year, according to the Transportation Department. It is one of the busiest border stations in the country. Unemployment in the metropolitan area is 9.4 percent.

Whitetail, Mont., an unincorporated town with a population of 71, saw only about $63,000 in freight cross its border last year. County unemployment is an enviable 4 percent.

I think I feel that migraine coming on again.......

"The CEO is An Ass"

One of the lefties I know sent out an email, laughing at me because I respect John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods.

Wow.  I had no idea just how right she was!  Here is a link to one of the more offensive posts Mackey has made on this blog.  If you do not have a strong stomach, you'd better stop reading right here....

This is one of the most offensive sections.

I am now 53 years old and I have reached a place in my life where I no longer want to work for money, but simply for the joy of the work itself and to better answer the call to service that I feel so clearly in my own heart. Beginning on January 1, 2007, my salary will be reduced to $1 per year and I will no longer take any other cash compensation at all. I will continue to receive the same benefits that all other Team Members receive, including the food discount card and health insurance. The intention of the Board of Directors is for Whole Foods Market to donate all the future stock options I would be eligible to receive to our two company foundations — The Whole Planet Foundation and The Animal Compassion Foundation. In case there is some technical, tax, or legal reason why these stock options cannot be given to our two foundations, then I will retain future option grants and will pledge to donate 100% of the gain from those options to the foundations.

At least I warned you.

This is pretty scary, too.

Clunker Remorse

In the heat of passion, many spurned their clunker for a hot, new vehicle.  Now, however, some are having clunker remorse.

A CNW Marketing Research survey of about 1,000 clunker traders found that 17% now have doubts about the decision. Most said their regret is about having monthly car payments despite incentives up to $4,500. Typically, remorse hits 6% to 8% of new vehicle buyers within a month.

Others are wondering if the auto industry will have an even bigger drought, now that the clunker cash is over.

Now there's a calm after the storm. Car-shopping service Edmunds.com says half as many people are researching a new car purchase on its website as were looking during the peak of the clunker frenzy. Traffic is even off 10% from June levels, ahead of the clunker kickoff on July 27.

"Cash for clunkers distorted the market in a way that benefited the industry for four weeks. Now, the payback begins," said Edmunds CEO Jeremy Anwyl in a statement.

But - at least we stimulated the American automakers!  Right?  Right?!?!?!  Uh.......

CASH-FOR-CLUNKERS SCOREBOARD | Story

Top new vehicles bought	Top trade-ins	Top makers, vehicles sold
1. Toyota Corolla	Ford Explorer1	Toyota	19.4%
2. Honda Civic	Ford F-150 pickup2	GM	17.6%
3. Toyota Camry	Jeep Grand Cherokee1	Ford	14.4%
4. Ford Focus	Ford Explorer2	Honda	13.0%
5. Hyundai Elantra	Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan2	Nissan	8.7%
1 = four-wheel drive; 2 = two-wheel drive Sources: Associated Press, Department of Transportation

Sweden's Shame

A good explanation by Alan Dershowitz about how free speech really ought to work.

Nobody is talking about censoring the Swedish press or imprisoning the writer of the absurd article.  What we are talking about is expanding the marketplace of ideas to include a completely warranted condemnation of sloppy journalism and outrageous accusations that foment an already increasing anti-Semitism in

Sweden

.  Freedom of speech is based on an open and vibrant marketplace of ideas.  No journalist is immune from criticism for bigotry and defamation, even from high ranking government officials. 

 Recall that virtually every government official in

Europe

went out of their way to condemn the depiction of perfectly innocent cartoons that offended some Muslims by portraying Mohammed.  (More recently, the Yale Press withdrew these cartoons and other classic art depicting Mohammed out of fear of violent reaction.)  Without getting into the business of comparative offensiveness, no reasonable person could argue that depicting a long-dead religious figure comes anywhere close to falsely accusing contemporary Jews of murdering innocent Palestinians to steal their organs. 

 I am offended by

Sweden

’s craven complicity with evil not only as a Jew, but also as a strong defender of freedom of speech.  Freedom of speech carries with it certain obligations as well.  One of those is to condemn false speech.  The best answer to false speech is not censorship, it is truthfulness.  By remaining silent in the face of the bigoted falsities contained in the Aftonbladet article, the Swedish foreign minister inevitably creates the impression that he sympathizes with the writer, and perhaps even with his conclusions. 

Individual Freedom

My kind of Republican is for equal rights for all Americans.

Brescia, seeking to succeed retiring Democratic Del. Albert Eisenberg, has made gay rights a theme prominent enough in his campaign to be featured, if in generalities only, on his Web site.

“If I’m elected, I will actively fight for full equality under the law for gays and lesbians,” Brescia told the Sun Gazette.

While Virginia voters in 2006 approved a constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between a man and a woman - and did so with 57 percent of the vote - Brescia says he would seek repeal of the measure.

“Religious organizations should continue to be free to recognize marriages according to their own teachings, but the principles of separation of church and state and equality under the law demand that we allow consenting adults, whether gay or straight, to enter into civil marriage,” he said.

(…)

“Like all great reforms in American history, full equal rights for gays and lesbians will likely not occur without bipartisan support,” he said.

Brescia, an economist who was drafted to run earlier this year, said he supports ending prohibitions on service in the military by openly gay individuals; supports adding sexual orientation to protected classes in Virginia’s hate-crimes and fair-housing rules; and supports allowing local governments in Virginia to give certain benefits to unmarried partners of government workers, something Arlington officials have been seeking since 1997.

Brescia said it all boils down to basic Republican core values.

“I’m a Republican because I believe in individual freedom, the right to contract and equality under the law,” he said.

 

Offensive Awards

Does it sometimes seem impossible to discuss without name calling?  At times, so it seems to me.

Megan McArdle makes two excellent points on this topic.  The first is for my friend, Jammen - as I very much share Megan's opinion:

I think carrying a gun to a protest is at best stupid.  Whether or not they intend to provoke hysterical fear among a substantial portion of the population, they clearly are doing so, and that is not how you make your best case for the second amendment.  It's also not very nice, even if you didn't mean it.  So I think they should stop.  Meanwhile, I think that the left should also stop claiming, on little evidence, that they are crazed militia members.  Doesn't that seem like a reasonable compromise?

The second post highlights that we should save really despicable titles for those who are deserving of them.

The Bush administration did many bad things.  But to call his administration fascist is both to completely abuse the term, and to belittle the millions of victims of fascism.  Fascism is not just something of which you disapprove . . . nay, not even if that something involves the military.  The things that the US did to its POWs can be very, very wrong without rising to the level of the Gestapo.  And if you think that they are even close, I suggest that you reread the reports, and then go read some history of the Gestapo.  Afterwards, tell me that you would be indifferent to being a captive of Nazi Germany or the US.  Tell me whether you'd rather be a citizen of Iraq or Nazi-era Poland.  That we even have to discuss this is ridiculous.

Similarly, the fact that Hitler liked government health care is really totally irrelevant to this discussion, thank you so much for not bringing it up.   Hitler also liked cream puffs and dogs.  Shall we get rid of anyone who shows similar predilictions?  Not all forms of state intervention in the economy are fascist.  Fascism is a particular thing, not the amalgam of everything you happen not to like.  It is an embarassment to the right that anyone would even think of saying something so awful, much less put an effing Hitler moustache on a photograph of the man who is, when all is said and done, the president of the country you claim to love so much.  Your fellow citizens elected him.  Show some respect, if not to Obama, then to democracy.

No matter how much you may have hated having a Bush presidency - or now an Obama one - neither one really is anything remotely like Hitler.  So, be grateful that you live in a nation where you can call your president a fascist or paint Hitler-like mustaches on photos of the president.  In a true fascist nation - such an act would be your death sentence.

Send in the Clowns

How my state ended up with a mediocre clown in the Senate.

Peak Oil Pique

Anyone think that the hysteria from "peak oil" alarmists has a similar ring to that of the "global warming" crowd?  I do.

Expert Michael Lynch explains why their pique may be unsupported by the evidence.

Oil remains abundant, and the price will likely come down closer to the historical level of $30 a barrel as new supplies come forward in the deep waters off West Africa and Latin America, in East Africa, and perhaps in the Bakken oil shale fields of Montana and North Dakota. But that may not keep the Chicken Littles from convincing policymakers in Washington and elsewhere that oil, being finite, must increase in price. (That’s the logic that led the Carter administration to create the Synthetic Fuels Corporation, a $3 billion boondoggle that never produced a gallon of useable fuel.)

This is not to say that we shouldn’t keep looking for other cost-effective, low-pollution energy sources — why not broaden our options? But we can’t let the false threat of disappearing oil lead the government to throw money away on harebrained renewable energy schemes or impose unnecessary and expensive conservation measures on a public already struggling through tough economic times.

Will Congress Ruin YOUR Life?

They've surely ruined some.

Recent experience shows that Congress needs to be careful about imposing no-fault penalties. In 2004, Congress adopted very large automatic penalties for failures of taxpayers to attach a tax-shelter reporting form to their tax returns. While penalties make sense where a taxpayer deliberately fails to file a return, the approach here was too unforgiving.

The normal ability of the IRS to waive penalties was taken away. Predictably, the result was some taxpayers getting hit with penalties they didn't deserve.

Last June, the Small Business Council of America sent some compelling tales of woe to Congress, including one in which a 72-year-old owner of a coin operated car wash set up retirement plans for his seven employees and got socked for his good deed with a $900,000 penalty for not reporting the plans properly. The company and its owner are now headed for bankruptcy. In another case, a penalty of $100,000 each was imposed on the six minor children of an owner of a small business in Utah for not filing the right tax forms.

Protesters Serving Notice

Our current president is not Lincoln with a Blackberry.

So we are to have a French health-care system without a French tradition of political protest. It is odd that American liberalism, in a veritable state of insurrection during the Bush presidency, now seeks political quiescence. These "townhallers" who have come forth to challenge ObamaCare have been labeled "evil-mongers" (Harry Reid), "un-American" (Nancy Pelosi), agitators and rowdies and worse.

A political class, and a media elite, that glamorized the protest against the Iraq war, that branded the Bush presidency as a reign of usurpation, now wishes to be done with the tumult of political debate. President Barack Obama himself, the community organizer par excellence, is full of lament that the "loudest voices" are running away with the national debate. Liberalism in righteous opposition, liberalism in power: The rules have changed.

But ....

American democracy has never been democracy by plebiscite, a process by which a leader is anointed, then the populace steps out of the way, and the anointed one puts his political program in place. In the American tradition, the "mandate of heaven" is gained and lost every day and people talk back to their leaders. They are not held in thrall by them. The leaders are not infallible or a breed apart. That way is the Third World way, the way it plays out in Arab and Latin American politics.

Those protesters in those town-hall meetings have served notice that Mr. Obama's charismatic moment has passed. Once again, the belief in that American exception that set this nation apart from other lands is re-emerging. Health care is the tip of the iceberg. Beneath it is an unease with the way the verdict of the 2008 election was read by those who prevailed.

UPDATE:  Allahpundit quotes a different section from this opinion piece.

Let There BE Free Markets

Many liberals continue to remark that private markets have failed us in health care.  The problem is, we currently really do not have free markets for health care ....

Professor Charles Lipson from the University of Chicago explains.

Right now, the U.S. does not have a national market for health insurance. It has 50 separate state markets. Erecting walls around each state means less competition and higher prices for consumers. There's not even one market for the Chicago area. If you live in South Holland or Calumet City, your insurance options could be completely different from your Indiana neighbors in Hammond or Merrillville. What sense does that make?

The easiest way to see how insurance competition benefits consumers is to look at auto insurance. That's a huge, nationwide market and companies compete intensively for a share of it. Some stress their low prices, others customer service, whatever gives them an edge in the marketplace. Geico and Progressive have been especially aggressive in touting cost savings. State Farm and Allstate certainly compete on price, but they stress service after an accident. That's why Allstate says "you're in good hands," and State Farm says it will be there "like a good neighbor." Other companies, like SafeAuto, focus on drivers who want only minimum coverage to meet state license requirements. In short, auto insurance companies compete vigorously to provide what different consumers want, and they tell them so in national advertisements. Life insurance companies do the same thing. There are even companies that specialize in comparing policies for customers. Competition drives down excess profits and means better, cheaper options for consumers.

Ever see an ad touting health insurance? They are rare because the markets are small and companies don't need to compete aggressively on price or service. Introducing such competition would be good for consumers, wouldn't require another Washington bureaucracy and could be done quickly.

Hate to Wait To Vote?

Next time you feel like complaining about what a pain it is to vote - think about what these people risk when they go to the ballot box.

Taliban militants cut off the ink-stained fingers of two Afghan voters in the militant south during the presidential election, the country's top election monitoring group said Saturday.

Two voters who had dipped their index fingers in purple ink — a fraud prevention measure — were attacked in Kandahar province shortly after voting Thursday, said Nader Nadery, the head of the Free and Fair Election Foundation of Afghanistan. Kandahar is the spiritual birthplace of the Taliban.

Rumors that militants would cut off voters' ink-stained fingers spread before the vote.

Fair Weather Friends of Free Speech

The philosophy of health care and insurance is a deep and complex.  I found it so fascinating, I studied it for some years in my U of MN doctoral program.  Like so many other people, I have my own thoughts on health care about what makes the most sense and does not, what is ethical and what is not.  Nevertheless, I always welcome insights and opinions from others.  Whether those thoughts come from devoted liberals, the religious faithful or staunch libertarians, I like to hear them and weigh them and listen to their paths of reasoning.

Now that our nation is contemplating vast overhauls of our present health care systems, though, it seems many on the left are ready to listen to - President Obama and the Democrats.  Period.

Like I said; of course the President and the Democrats should offer their opinions.  But - so should the Republicans.  And religious leaders.  And business owners and CEO's and health care providers and insurers and drug companies and taxpayers . . . .

Why does it seem that so many on the left are supporters of free speech only when it is views that coincide with their world-view that is being expressed?  Matt Welch wonders this as he observes a boycott of one of the most progressively-run businesses in our country, Whole Foods, then offers this:

The liberal commentariat keeps telling us that we need to have a "serious debate" about reforming our dysfunctional health care system. Well, love 'em or hate 'em, Mackey came up with eight tangible ideas to do just that, and this is the reaction he gets.

I don't know the answer to why this is.  You tell me.

The Ends Justify The Means

Lying is OK - as long as your goals are noble.

Thus says Greenpeace leader Gerd Leipold.

Although he admitted Greenpeace had released inaccurate but alarming information, Leipold defended the organization’s practice of “emotionalizing issues” in order to bring the public around to its way of thinking and alter public opinion.

“We will definitely have to move to a different concept of growth. … The lifestyle of the rich in the world is not a sustainable model,” Leipold said.

The global-warming movement isn’t really about climate. It’s about stunting the economic growth of the West. That’s why groups like Greenpeace like to “emotionalize” rather than conduct and promote actual science. They’re interested in specific outcomes, not scientific truth, and that specific outcome is statist control over energy production and economic activity to redistribute wealth.

Want to Make Investing Safe?

You can't.

No risk?  No reward.

Charles Schwab, who revolutionized investing for the average guy, explains.

My company, Charles Schwab, was founded 35 years ago as a reaction to the high cost and inherent exclusivity of traditional Wall Street investing. Today we serve almost 10 million accounts. The majority are what we refer to as self–directed: They make their own decisions about what to buy, sell or hold. We provide them with an efficient platform, tools, assistance, education and, of course, low costs.

We are not alone. Our direct competitors serve millions of other American investors who are looking for essentially the same thing: the freedom to inexpensively invest on their own.

We have never guaranteed individual success. Our investors understand that along with investing comes risk, as well as potential reward. Unfortunately, we are now seeing a conscious effort to limit—if not eliminate—all risks for the individual investor, whether through consumer "protection," fiduciary liability for brokers, or the threat of litigation that attempts to make our firm, and others like us, more like an insurance company than a broker.

**********

The issue at stake here is whether independent investors should be allowed the freedom to choose what they are allowed to buy, sell or hold.

**********

I've always believed in the power of the market to drive innovation and drive down cost. I also believe in the individual and his or her ability to make reasoned decisions. I don't think our clients, or our competitors' clients, are looking for regulators or politicians to protect them from risk by constraining their choices.

Let Insurance be Insurance

Our auto insurance doesn't cover putting gas in the tank or new wiper blades.  Our home insurance isn't the intermediary when you need your carpet cleaned or a faucet repaired.  Why then does health insurance cover common, expected items like a visit to the doctor for flu or an annual check-up?

Here is one of the best columns on health care I've read in a while.  It explains how we arrived at the mixed up spot in which we're in, plus several changes we could make that would improve our system dramatically.  Without spending trillions of dollars...

Let's give choice back to consumers, so they can behave as rational users of any product and service would.

End of an Era

A year ago, we lost Tim Russert.  Although I disagreed with his views on some issues, I held him on a pedestal as a human being and a journalist.  When interviewing conservatives, he asked them tough questions liberals would ask; when talking to liberals, he did the same from the conservative perspective.

This week, we lost another giant in journalism, Bob Novak.  Some referrred to Novak as the "Prince of Darkness."  In reality, Novak was a journalist unafraid to go where the truth led him, and willing to alter his views according to what he found.

Larry Kudlow also has a great remembrance of Novak.

With the sea changes in journalism, I wonder if we will ever see the likes of Russert and Novak again... 

Second Chances

Should Michael Vick be allowed to play pro football again after having committed a felony?  Apparently a majority of blacks think he should; a majority of whites disagree with that conclusion.

But as Juan Williams points out, it may well be variance in culture and experience that leads to these disparities; not racism. 

Please put me into the "he deserves a second chance" category.  The man served his time and is contrite.  I saw the Sixty Minutes interview with Vick; he is working to help other people understand why what he did was so wrong.

I do not wish to have a world where people are not allowed to do penance and recreate a good life for themselves.  Add me to the mix; I assure you I am quite distant from perfect. 

I also hope I am given a second chance with my readers.  My blogging has been pretty sporadic as of late: sorry!

Black Conservatives

Some people think that the above title is a contradiction in terms.

It is not.

While black conservatives surely are a minority, nevertheless there really are more than seventeen of them!  For years, I have been touting the blog of my friend Shay Riley, Booker Rising.  Between all the posts at her blog and on Facebook - plus the fact that she is not independently wealthy and has a job - sometimes I think she must not sleep!

In any case, although I don't know how she does it all - here are a couple new posts from today that are worth your time to read.

"The problem is not money. Spending does not correlate with academic achievement. Indeed, many of the worst public schools spend the most. They face enormous social problems, of course, yet there are private schools in underserved communities that confront the same difficulties and do far more with less. The problem is the system. The public school monopoly is organized for the benefit of political constituencies, not families. Administrators, politicians, and teachers unions all put themselves before students. Money is spent on bureaucracy rather than teachers. Jobs are protected irrespective of how badly teachers perform. Administrators and teachers alike dismiss parents' concerns and resist parental involvement -- other than to ratify whatever the system has decided. Teachers unions even have attacked private scholarship programs for poor students. In no way do such initiatives take money away from public schools, a common, though misguided, attack on voucher programs. Criticizing private people helping students attend private schools is a desperate attempt to protect unionized public school jobs. The interests of children are put last. The interests of other people's children, that is. Public school teachers send their children to private schools at roughly twice the rate of Americans generally. Public school teachers in the most troubled urban systems are most likely to place their kids in private schools."

Thanks, Shay!