Health Care Reform Becomes Insurance Mandate

After all the hullabaloo about public options, socialized medicine, death panels, and employer mandates, yada yada, it all comes down to this, judging by the bill the U.S. Senate is poised to pass:

You must buy health insurance or go to jail. Or pay a fine. Or get a government subsidy. Or thumb your nose and see what happens (probably nothing).

WINNERS: Insurance companies.

LOSERS: Just about everyone, as this will no doubt raise premiums sky high even as services are reduced to cover new, unserviceable demand.

PREDICTION: If Obama and the Democrats survive in power after 2012, look for the public option to come back in full force as they once again demonize the insurance companies, when in truth it's Medicare and Medicaid that are driving the system bankrupt and unaffordable.

Canada Supreme Court Sides With Wal-Mart

After its outlet in Jonquiere, Quebec, Canada, voted to unionize, Wal-Mart acted quickly and shut the damn place down. Predictably, the union sued and vowed to hold its breath and turn blue until justice prevailed.

Justice did prevail--on the side of Wal-Mart. In a 6-3 vote (I can't understand the stupidity, er, rather, I fully understand the stupidity of the three dissenters), the Canadian Supreme Court ruled that there is no law requiring companies to stay in business.

Justice Ian Binnie, citing previous case history, said no law can forbid a business from shutting down, even if it does so for "socially reprehensible" reasons.

Full story here.

Holder Lets ACORN Continue Receiving Funds

Remember when the big to-do about the videotapes of officials with ACORN advising people how to set up prostitution rings forced Congress's hand? Politicians of both stripes voted quickly to cut off ACORN from public funding.

ACORN immediately sued because it claimed Congress was passing an unconstitutional bill of attainder (laws can be written to single and punish out either individuals or individual groups).

That lawsuit is still in the legal mill, but it appears that it doesn't really matter. Attorney General Eric Holder has ruled that Congress's ACORN law is unclear (huh?), so the federal tap remains open.

Let James Simpson explain it all:

The actual ban reads as follows: "None of the funds made available from this joint resolution or any other prior Act may be provided to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries or allied organizations." (Emphasis added.)

The Justice Department has decided that the phrase "provided to" is unclear and "has no established meaning in appropriations law." They cite terms more frequently used, such as "obligate" and "expend," that have widely accepted meaning in spending legislation. They go on to arduously defend their point by exhaustively listing the many definitions of "provide" given in Websters, Oxford and American Heritage dictionaries and even Roget's Thesaurus. Like Bill Clinton, they probably could have found as many definitions for the word "is..."

In short, ACORN is still getting the funds--and probably still advising people on how to avoid taxes and set up prostitution rings.

Endless Tax Hikes to Pay for Health Care Reform

The Americans for Tax Reform site has a great collection of all the taxes coming our way if Obamacare is enacted.

The list is endless.

A Cool $10B for Unions in House Health Bill

One of the motivations behind the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) and other Obamaic union-ripoff measures is to replete the unions' pension fund coffers, which have been horribly managed and looted for political purpose (e.g., electing Obama).

Now, the House health care bill is rushing to the aid of unions as well, earmarking $10 billion for a "reinsurance fund" to help pay retired union members' health care bills.

On top of that, if a public option passes in the final health care measure (if the package itself passes), it will require that any provider participating in the plan be unionized.

Thus health care reform=more union bailouts (think Chrysler, GM as precursors).

Do a Favor, Get Sued for Weight-Loss Surgery

This actually happened, and it's pretty chilling from an employer's perspective.

A pizza shop owner in Indiana hired a cook weighing 380 pounds because, for starters, the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination against the morbidly obese.

All goes well for a while...until the chef gets knocked in the spine by a refrigerator door and requires surgery. The owner's workers' comp insurer agrees to cover the surgery, but the doctors advise weight-loss surgery before the spinal work. Worker's comp insurer refuses to pay, so worker sues employer and worker wins. Employer appeals and employer loses.

Bottom line: Employer is out $20,000 for doing the guy a favor, and now he may be losing his business as well.

Read it all here.

No Health Insurance=5 Years Jail and $250K Fine

If Pelosicare, which passed a midnight vote this past Saturday, becomes the law of the land, failure to carry an approved health care plan could land you in jail for five years and get you socked with a $250,000 fine.

There's also a misdemeanor violation good for one year behind bars and a $25K fine, but you get the picture. At the very least, when you submit your income tax return each year, if you don't include proof of insurance, you'll be taxed at least at 2.5 percent of income as a fine. Become a scofflaw, and the slammer awaits.

On top of that, a qualified plan is priced merely at $15,000 (and up) for a family of four under Pelosicare.

Good deal, huh?

READ MORE HERE

Obamacare Won't Pay for Death by Hospital

NEWS ITEM: AHRQ says hospital deaths waste $20 billion a year!

REACTION: Obamacare removes payments for hospital stays that result in death, thereby saving $200 billion over ten years.

Fact or Fiction?

So far, just a glint in Zeke Emanuel's eyes, but it could be enacted by fiat (health czar, you know) once Obamacare is passed. NOTE: Obamacare already reduces payments for readmissions to hospitals within 30 days, so this isn't that big a stretch.

The New Misery Index: Five Factors for Pain

Back in the woebegotten Carter era of the 1970s, someone came up with the "misery index"--you add the unemployment rate to the inflation rate to determine its value. Obviously, the higher the number meant the higher the people's misery.

But how about the new millennium? Do unemployment and inflation account for our current misery and economic woes? Unemployment is certainly still a factor, but inflation is just about non-existent. In fact, we were experiencing deflation up until recently.

Fortunately, someone came up with a new misery index made up of five indices: food stamps (number of people receiving them), bankruptcies, foreclosures, long-term unemployment, and credit card defaults.

>SEE THE RESULTS FOR YOURSELF!

NMB Relaxes Unionization Standards

In an apparent effort to help organizers establish a union at Delta Air Lines, the National Mediation Board (NMB) has voted (along party lines) to change the secret ballot standard for unionization.

Airlines (and FedEx, which is currently subject to another political hatchet job to be forcefully unionized) are regulated by the Railway Labor Act rather than the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The NMB has traditionally interpreted unionization voting standards as requiring a majority of affected workers to vote affirmatively, meaning that those who don't bother to vote are counted as "noes."

No more, the NMB action yesterday (Nov. 2, 2009) means that organizers now need just a majority of votes cast even if the number of those voting doesn't even add up to a majority of affected workers.

Cute trick. The only thing now standing between Delta's unionization by minority vote is a 60-day public commentary period following the NMB vote.

If you want conspiracy theory, here it is: On the Friday before Monday's NMB vote, the International Association of Machinists (IAM) withdrew its application for a unionization vote at Delta.

Delta says the IAM withdrew its ballot request to delay the vote until the new rule comes into effect.

You think?

Health Care Reform Not Favored by Most

Pollster.com, which scientifically melds results from all the other polls into one, shows that, overall, Obamaic health care reform is not favored by most Americans, though the gap isn't too wide between pro-ers and con-ners (I can hear the far lefties running with that con-ners construction!). Here's Pollster's explanation of methods and complete results. Below is the graph encapsulating the results:

Are There Jobs Americans Won't Do?

One of the arguments for immigration reform (read: blanket amnesty)--the surface argument that masks the real reason, which is to farm Democratic votes--is that there are simply too many jobs that Americans "won't do."

However, a study by the Center for Immigration Studies used 2005-07 data to look at 465 occupations. Only four had a majority of immigrants in them: plasterers and stucco masons, agricultural graders and sorters, personal appliance workers, and tailors and dressmakers.

In every other occupation, such as janitors, maids, and groundskeepers, a large majority were filled by native-born Americans. The report's conclusion: "The often-made argument that immigrants only take jobs Americans don't want is simply wrong."

So, there you go, Dubya--who once said there are simply jobs "Americans won't do"--has been proven wrong again.

SGR a Bargaining Chip for AMA Support

The charade of balancing the Medicare budget known as SGR, sustainable growth rate, is on the bargaining table to gain support from the American Medical Association for the Senate's health care reform measure.

The offer was made by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D.-Nev., but ignored by AMA President James Rohack, M.D.

SGR is an automatic payment deflator that supposedly adjusts Medicare reimbursement downward each year to eventually reach a balanced budget. Problem is, the AMA has been successful every year since its adoption in getting the Senate to vote away the SGR decreases.

When the House of Representatives health reform measure passed, a provision in the bill killed SGR. However, the Senate Finance Committee measure includes no SGR eliminator.

In a related move, however, Senator Debbie Stabenow, D.-Mich., has introduced a measure totally separate from health care reform to end SGR. The measure has to be separate because it ends all illusion of ever balancing Medicare's budget and thus throws health care reform into the reality of red ink, which is where it's always been except for vast budgetary and legislative tricks that push costs down the road but implement new taxes and other "revenue enhancers" up front.

What this all boils down to is what no Democrat will ever admit: The health care crisis in America, which they blame on private insurers, is at root a Medicare problem that, arising from the root, has now poisoned the trunk, branches and leaves of the entire health care tree.

Health care reform (which just mandates that everyone purchase health insurance to increase the money pool to cover Medicare losses) is thus in reality a Medicare band-aid. It is certainly not going to result anytime soon in anything approaching universal coverage at affordable prices. In fact, as the insurance companies are warning, it's going to result in more expensive health insurance that has to be purchased by more people who can't afford it and may not even want it.

Not to worry, just as they will jettison SGR to placate physicians into supporting health care reform (which isn't really reform, etc.), the Democrats will try to placate the newly mandated health insurance consumers with tax breaks and subsidies.

In other words, infinitely more red ink so the Democrats won't ever have to confront the reality that their beloved Medicare is bankrupt and unsustainable.

Change you can believe in.

But not me.

Unlike Her Cohort, Susan Collins Makes Sense

Maine's other Republican Senator, Susan Collins, reacted swiftly to the pro-health reform vote of Olympia Snowe, who calls herself a Republican but says her party has changed for the worse.

Seeing through the Senate Finance Committee reform plan, Senator Collins said the bill not only does not lower costs but actually raises them:

The goal of health care reform must be to rein in costs and provide consumers with more affordable choices. Yet, many individuals and families would be forced to pay more for their health care under the Finance Committee bill, and they would have fewer choices. Our health care reform efforts should give Americans more, not fewer, choices of affordable coverage options.

She also lamented the gutting of Medicare for senior citizens.

It would be laughable if not palpably tragic to listen to Barack Obama and his Demo-cronies hail health reform as "deficit-neutral" and lowering costs for Americans.

Instead of my going on and on, however, read Senator Collins' perceptive comments here.

Must See in Germany: The OSH Museum

OSH stands for Occupational Safety and Health, and it's the name of both a Nixon-era law--the OSH Act--and an ongoing federal agency, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA). It's also the name of a museum in Dortmund, Germany.

I have no first-hand knowledge of the Occupational Safety and Health Museum, but since OSHA in the U.S. deals with a lot of workplace injuries and fatalities, I can imagine all kinds of grotesqueries in the museum, but that's evidently not the case. Here's a description for the site travelblog.viator.com:

Amongst the many, many things on offer are playful robotic arms, interactive games that mess with your visual perception, aircraft cockpits to sit in and mock-ups of a power station’s control room.

All manner of machinery is on display, from weaving looms and printing presses to helicopters used to repair power lines. There are lots of buttons to press, computers to play with and enormous contraptions to control. All information is in German, so you might not understand what’s going on most of the time if you don’t speak the language, but the sheer scale and ambition of the exhibition make it worth visiting.

Unfortunately, the site offered no pictures of the place.

Predatory Cell Phones Target of New Law

As I've mused before, why don't they just implant us all with mind-reading GPS devices at birth? They, of course, are our brilliant legislators in Washington, D.C., Sacramento (fill in your state's capital), and in every City Hall nationwide.

Now comes this gem out of a Republican Congressman from New York. His Camera Phone Predator Act (he wasn't watching his abbreviations here--this works out to CPPA and CREEP would be better) would require cell phones with cameras to make a loud noise every time a photo is snapped. This, he reasons, would alert women that they were being photographed up skirt, as it is called.

Presumably, another law covers the taking of illicit photographs of people's privates, but CPPA would make it a crime to disable or silence the camera tone.

Brilliant, isn't it? Barf....

Baucus Bill Saves Money by Spending It--Right!

Only in the nation's capital could this equation work: You save money by spending more of it.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has come out with an estimate that the Max Baucus Senate Finance Committee health reform measure will cost taxpayers $829 billion over ten years. Okay, the CBO is probably off by a full measure, and the subsidies and other costs in the measure will probably come in closer to $2 trillion in a decade.

But that's not the real problem with this equation. This is: In 2019, the CBO says the Baucus bill will start saving $81 billion a year. From what and how? Even if that's true, it would still take more than a decade to pay back the original 10-year outlay with no interest or accommodation for inflation.

Only in D.C. could such voodoo arithmetic be acceptable. After all, they're not spending their own money. They're just printing it and asking others to foot the bill through Treasury bonds. Or inflation. Or economic devastation.

Can I print my own money and issue bonds? I could live like a king (or Congressman) too if all of us were allowed to play by the same rules as those in power.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio Obamacized

Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona (think Phoenix), has denounced the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for rescinding his 287(g) privileges, which allowed him to round up illegal immigrants for deportation proceedings. He now says he'll continue his raids under state law and drive the illegals to the border himself if he has to.

After Arpaio called officials at DHS "liars," Homeland Security spokesmen declined to comment, saying they are still reviewing their agreement with the sheriff’s department and the other 65 agencies that participated in the 287(g) program that allows local and state officers to make immigration arrests.

I'd call it being Obamacized as the new administration hopes to round up illegal immigrants into voting-rights citizens to produce what they hope will be an insurmountable Democratic super-majority for all time. The sheriff is just one more hostage along the way.

Immigration Reform: A Nation Without Borders?

The thinking goes something like this: In states where we can register Latin voters, we can increase the ranks of Democrats and elect more Democrats (hopefully, permanently), so why now legalize all the illegals? Hell, tear down that wall and let them all in!

Even the New York Times is writing about Obama's plan to legalize all those would-be Democrats, and the head of the United States Citizenship and Naturalization Service (USCIS), Alejandro Mayorkas, is already preparing for an onslaught of 12.5 million applicants for visas.

Planning has become so intense that the USCIS is setting up a system of what it calls lockboxes (sort of like stand-alone mail receptacles), so the illegals can mail in their applications. No word on what happens after that. Maybe ACORN will use their names and addresses and go register them to vote.

Meanwhile, USCIS head Mayorkas is the same Clinton appointee who, when Clinton issued his notorious midnight pardons upon leaving office, got a convicted Argentine cocaine smuggler named Carlos Vignali released from a 15-year prison term. Mayorkis was later forced to resign in shame from his position as a U.S. Attorney in California for his role in the pardon. Now he's the head of the USCIS, so expect more of the same. In short, money--and in this case, votes--talks.

France Telecom: 24 Suicides in 18 Months

Here's a case where a company weaned from a state monopoly--France Telecom--may have gone too overboard in management style, which a union leader labeled as "real indifference, no humanity."

A call center worker for France Telecom this week jumped off a bridge into onrushing traffic to become the company's 24th suicide victim in 18 months.

As that above-quoted union leader noted after the worker's death: "[A}ll they talked about was numbers and workers were treated like sausage meat."

When France Telecom's market was deregulated, stress levels began rising as management pushed to reach goals free-market style. As the stress rose, so did the suicide rate.

Maybe a little socialism isn't such a bad thing, after all. No one ever accused a socialized company of causing stress. Death by boredom, yes, but never suicide.

What Are the Odds of This Law's Surviving?

The Senate Finance Committee, in the legislative equivalent of a show trial, has voted unanimously to force Members of Congress and their staffs to choose their health insurance from the proposed insurance exchanges beginning in 2013.

The exchanges, under health care legislation being currently considered, would be the one-and-only-stop shop for health insurance for the public, and it would look unseemly for politicians to exempt themselves in favor of the VIP health plans they currently enjoy.

Of course, it's easy to vote for something that makes you look like one of the public when the vote doesn't mean anything. By the time this provision gets to the full Senate floor, however, it'll be invisibly swept under the rug and forgotten forever.

It would be sheer delusion on our part to think that the politicians who enact our laws ever have any intention of following them themselves. They routinely exempt Congress from the laws they themselves pass, including sexual harassment and other acts they routinely engage (read: revel) in.

Currently, Congress and federal employees get to choose from a generous array of health plans administered by the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), which candidate Obama promised he'd extend to all Americans but which President Obama has conveniently forgotten in favor of "Medicare for all" and rationing for the elderly.

There's no way the Congressional elite is going to give up its exclusive, VIP health packages. While the rest of us will be forced onto a health care dole, our politicians will continue to have gold-plated private care that knows no boundaries.

ARRA Targets $600K to Nonexistent Schools

Veep Joe Biden was named the watchdog for ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) funds, but he and his don't seem to be paying much attention. While Biden is busy bragging that ARRA is working better than anyone imagined (oh, yeah), the people at ProPublica point out that:

In Kansas, 11 school districts that no longer exist are on the U.S. Department of Education's distribution list for stimulus funds. They are set to receive nearly $600,000.

We found these school districts when Kirby Ross, managing editor of the Phillips County Review in Phillipsburg, Kan., alerted us that our county-by-county stimulus tracker [1] included two districts in his area that didn't exist. That prompted us to do some more digging.

Is it too late for me to set up a dummy school district and line my pockets?

Cost of Regulation in California $493B a Year

A study purportedly done at the behest of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger shows that the Golden State inflicts a burden of $492,994 billion a year in regulatory mandates on business. This is nearly five times the state's general fund budget and almost a third of the state's GDP.

The "Cost of State Regulations on California Small Business Study," conducted by Sanjay B. Varshney, Ph.D and dean of the College of Business Administration at California State University, Sacramento, "uses original analyses and a general equilibrium framework to identify and measure the cost of regulation as measured by the loss of economic output to the State’s gross product," according to the author.

Varshney says the cost to each small business amounts to nearly $135,000 annually, on average, while small businesses account for 99.2 percent of all statewide enterprises. He writes:

The total cost of regulation was $134,122.48 per small business in California in 2007, labor income not created or lost was $4,359.55 per small business, indirect business taxes not generated or lost were $57,260.15 per small business, and finally roughly one job lost per small business.

The result, he says, is the loss of 3.8 million jobs statewide, roughly one-tenth of California's population.

Now, you know why economic recovery in California will not only be slow but probably non-existent.

What the Public Option Will Mean to Your Wallet

If the Democrats succeed in creating their "robust public option" of health insurance for those who currently don't have any insurance, there will be blood. Well, maybe not actual blood, but the color of blood--red--all over the budgets of people and entities from coast to coast.

Consider this:

A study by the actuarial firm Milliman calculated that public programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, currently shift $88.8 billion in costs onto private payers per year, increasing the typical American family's annual private health insurance premium by $1,512. Can you imagine the cost shift if 103.4 million more Americans were on a government plan?

Pretty frightening, huh? And since the "public option" will be just as underfunded as Medicare/Medicaid, you can chalk up another $37 trillion in unfunded liabilities over the next 50 years or so.

But the Democrats will forever be able to charge at election time that "the Republicans will take away your health care" and thus presumably win votes.

However, since they'll also have to ration and deny health care just to be able to pay 80 percent of what private insurers do (in order to make the public option "affordable"), taking away one's health care won't amount to a whole lot. You won't be able to get any medical services anyway, so what will there be to take away?

Can Reform Help This Kind of Health Care?

I just a chilling article about two nurses in West Texas who anonymously reported to the Texas Medical Board a doctor in their hospital who was peddling his own herbal remedies to patients as well as neglecting his official duties and, basically, practicing bad medicine.

Seems the Good Doc, however, was in cahoots with the local sheriff in the herbal remedy racket. Said sheriff then swooped in, seized computers, found the nurses, charged them with crimes, got them fired, and now they're out on $5,000 baiil awaiting trial.

Herbal remedy sales are still booming throughout the ordeal, evidently.

However sad this sordid little tale is, what is even more shocking is how widespread deliberate malpractice is. Chew over this tidbit:

Medical professionals, especially nurses who are generally lower on the food chain, so to speak, are increasingly reticent to speak out when they see unsound, unethical or corrupt things going on in healthcare. It is hard to do the right thing. They know and see the consequences of following their consciences and the Code of Ethics. This is not an isolated incident. Three California nurses were suspended after they reported a doctor who later admitted giving a lethal injection to a child and another nurse was threatened with firing after refusing to follow a doctor’s verbal order to administer morphine until a patient stopped breathing.

When our health care system fires people who want to do good and right while it protects the evil-doing doctors, then we clearly need more than health care reform. We need to stay healthy enough so that we never have to go to a hospital. Here's to dying like Bing Crosby--falling over dead while playing golf on a course in Spain.

Joe Wilson to Arlen Specter: 'You Lie'

The specter of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) is haunting newly minted Democratic Senator Arlen Specter so much that he's turned to making things up evidently.

At the AFL-CIO Convention this week in Pittsburgh, the former Republican maverick, who is now being threatened with extinction in the Democratic party by labor leaders if he doesn't support EFCA, announced that he had the 60 votes necessary to pass a revised EFCA.

However, no one else in the Senate appears to know of the deal, which Specter said would involve five-day elections instead of card check and "baseball" arbitration instead of open-ended arbitration (baseball arb empowers an arbitrator solely to choose either the "last best" contract offer from labor or the one from management).

Senate leader Harry Reid says he knows of no deal and furthermore thinks card check must be part of the final bill.

Best bet is that Specter is scared to death of Pennsylvania union activists siding with his Democratic challenger in the upcoming primary and of Big Labor sending millions to his opponent lest Specter deliver on EFCA.

Republic Windows Owner Jailed, Charges Filed

Richard Gillman, former owner of Republic Windows and Doors in Chicago, is in jail facing a whopping $10 million bail bond after being arrested and charged with fraud, money laundering, felony theft and other crimes.

You'll remember Gillman from when he abruptly shut the doors on Republic and moved his operations to Iowa. However, his displaced workers refused to leave the premises until Gillman finally paid them two months' severance pay.

Turns out that, after moving to Iowa and taking ten truckloads of equipment (felony theft charges) from his Chicago plant with him, Gillman defaulted on the mortgage (fraud charges) to his new site and also screwed creditors out of payment (part of the money-laundering charges).

The guy would've been better off taking all that dough and relocating to Brazil back when the Republic closing story broke.

This is one story where the union was right all along, and consequently a union spokesman was quick to lump every other boss and business owner in America into the same class as Gillman:

"We feel like justice has finally come and we all hope that this is the beginning of more bosses being held accountable for their crimes against workers", said Melvin Maclin, vice-president of UE Local 1110 and a former Republic Windows and Doors worker.

Stand up and be counted, you scumbags. It's off with your heads!

Union Boss Admits Coercing Union Activism

Maybe "buying" would be a better term, but the proverbial cat is out of the bag thanks to a piece in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

You're probably familiar with those huge rallies by union folk in support of this or that (liberal and far-left) political cause that then show up on your (liberal and far-left) TV news shows that night.

Impressive, huh? Except that the participating union members are often forced into attending, and if not coerced, then induced with visions of sugar-plum fairies and the other good stuff in life like lavish pensions and overtime pay for not working.

James A. Williams, president of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades in Philadelphia, has a telling tactic. He reduces union dues on unemployed members (which, of course, brings up a couple of questions--why do they have to pay dues when they're not working, and why isn't the union finding them jobs?) to a buck a month and forgives the rest--provided they render political activity support.

As the Prez explains:

So instead of having the big drop in membership, this way here, we utilize them for political events, we can keep them informed on various things and still keep them as active members.

And we can expect unions to play fair if they can organize a plant with card check?

Sure, about as much as you can trust a fox with your hens.

A Switch in Time Saved Now, and Now This....

There's a famous saying about how "a switch in time saved nine" Supreme Court justices under FDR, who was threatening to pack the court unless it quit ruling his laws unconstitutional. When one judge switched to the liberals' side, it was just in time to save all of them.

Now, for all of us who consider the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) evil incarnate, it was an ill senator who saved the nation from the twin terrors of card check unionization and forced contract arbitration.

One of the EFCA's sponsors, Senator Tom Harkin (D.-Iowa), has revealed he had a deal in place in July to pass EFCA--with labor leaders set to descend on the capital to celebrate--when all he needed was just one more vote to reach the 60-vote cloture threshold. That vote belonged to the late Ted Kennedy, but when Harkin inquired of Kennedy's doctor if the senator could spend just three days in Washington, D.C., the answer was no; he's too ill.

Harkin wouldn't reveal what was in the deal:

"I will not say [what was in the bill] because it was closely held, it never leaked out and it still hasn't," Harkin said. "I took it off the front-burner and put it on the back-burner so it is still on warm, OK?"

No Surprise in This Lilly Ledbetter Endorsement

I came across an obscure news item in the Web site for Alabama TV station WHNT, which announced that Lilly Ledbetter--she of the eponymous Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act--had endorsed Democrat Artur Davis for governor of her home state of Alabama.

The last line of the brief article pretty much summed up Ledbetter's rationale--and gave me a good chuckle at the same time: "Davis was the only Alabama congressman who voted for the Ledbetter act."

HR 3200 in One Illustration and One Page

If you can figure out this illustration, you're a better man than I am, Gungha Din. However, it gives you a pretty good idea of what a monstrosity the House health reform measure (HR 3200) is.

Also, here's a rundown of some of the salient features of the legislation, ranging from home visitations to governmental access to your bank account for payment!

Japan's New First Lady Flew UFO to Venus

Now, tell me this doesn't sound surreal (if not downright wacky)?

"While my body was asleep, I think my soul rode on a triangular-shaped UFO and went to Venus," Miyuki Hatoyama, the wife of Japanese premier-in-waiting Yukio Hatoyama, wrote in a book published last year.

"It was a very beautiful place and it was really green."

I bet.

Give Him a Gun and a Chamber, He's Dr. Mengele

One of the heads of the Obama Administration's effort to reform health care says the Hippocratic Oath is to blame for our woes. To wit, we treat patients too well and shun the hard decisions regarding who should live and who should die, and thus our health care costs too much.

Meet Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of White House Svengali Rahm, who together seem on a fascistic mission to take over every industry and service in America. You know, just like Mussolini made the trains run on time, they obviously know better since they're better than you and I, so don't challenge their assumptions and viewpoints.

Zeke is the more transparent of the two since he's been writing about how to whack away old people and save medical costs for a long, long time now. Given the choice between saving a 65-year-old and a 25-year-old in a "cost-effective" health care environment, Zeke has been known to quip, "Well, the 65-year old has already been 25." Time to check out, baby!

Don't take my word for it. The man who would be Health God is quoted and featured extensively in today's Wall Street Journal.

Catch this gem from his lips (or his computer anyway):

"When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged roughly [between] 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated."

Wow, this is precisely what Hitler aimed for--elimination of all who weren't productive for the social machine that was National Socialism. ("Chances" means: "Well, maybe we'll try to save your life if you're younger than 15 or older than 40, but don't count on it. If you can prove you can produce lots of taxes in the future, we'll negotiate. Otherwise, adios."

And how do you like that Orwellian construct--"the complete lives system"? Under this system, the only ones who are guaranteed to complete their lives are the ones running it.

The man also sees "the constant introduction of new medical technologies, including new drugs, devices, and procedures" as evils to be disparaged and contained--to be used only if they are universally applicable as well as dirt cheap.

I think The Good Doctor would, equipped with a harness and a pistol and an end-of-life (read: gas) chamber, fit right into Hitler's Germany.

But then I happen to believe in the Hippocratic Oath.

Poor me. My "chance" is slim under Zeke and Obama. I've already been 25.

There They Go Again: Stripping Nude in Protest

I've exposed you readers before to the nefarious tactics of French workers, who will take employers hostage and threaten to blow up the establishment if they don't get the proper severance package. Now some French workers are exposing themselves in the name of the cause.

Some 13 men from the Chaffoteaux et Maury boiler factory in Brittany have bared it all--save hard hats--for a nude calendar (how many months do they have in France?). Supposedly, they will use the proceeds to journey to the factory's owners in Italy to beg them not to close the facility.

It was not revealed if the male delegation will appear in calendar-ready costume.

Swine Flu Conspiracy: Listen to These People!

I've been fairly skeptical about the swine flu and even more so about the vaccines being developed against it.

However, my skepticism is nothing compared to what these people opined about the Centers for Disease Control and its plan to vaccinate the totality of the U.S.

They say it's all a conspiracy to reduce the population and swell profits for the laboratories and pharmaceuticals. Scarily, they may be at least partially--if not wholly--correct on one or both of the charges. (The last time there was a massive swine flu vaccination program--in 1976--25 people died and many more developed Guillan-Barre Syndrome, not a pleasant thing to have.)

READ WHAT YOUR FELLOW AMERICANS FEEL ABOUT THE H1N1 VACCINE PROGRAM

Double Dipping: I Earned You, You Can't Do It

As is true anywhere politicians ply their so-called trade (if lying and cheating can thus be called), Albany, New York, the state's capital, is rife with hypocrisy.

Taking advantage of quirky state law (which they themselves authored), Albany politicians can retire one day and return the next, collecting both their pension and their salary. The only loophole in the law is they have to be off the payroll for one day, so many just wait until the end of one term in office (on Dec. 31), retire, and then return to work on Jan. 1 for the new term. Bam--two paychecks, or what's called double dipping.

This is how Assemblyman Harvey Weisenberg engineered his double dip at the end of last year. He now earns $101,500 in salary and $72,000 in pension funds.

And catch this? Last year, the 75-year-old Weisenberg sponsored legislation to outlaw double dipping at the local government level.

When asked about the seeming contradiction in his own actions and his sponsorship of the measure, he quipped: "I don't see this as that [double dipping]. This is something I earned."

The arrogance and hypocrisy are typical of our ruling class, which is now conspiring to set up one health care system for us Average Janes and Joes (read: "public option") and another VIP (read: privatized) health care system for themselves.

Not only is that not "change you can believe in"; it's just business as usual, with the public being played for suckers.

Get Vaccinated or Go to Prison

The World Health Organization (WHO) is rapidly morphing itself into something akin to the first world government. It recently directed 200-plus nations to vaccinate all its citizens for the H1N1 (swine flu) virus--or else.

It's not clear what the "or else" is, but Nicolas Sakozy of France wasted no time in directing the military to forcefully vaccinate the entire French population.

Canada is mulling the same and talking about issuing certificates of vaccination, without which one cannot return to work or school or receive health care.

Seems we're on the verge of the Nazification of so-called health care--line up, folks, and submit to the government or else.

Maybe the military will just bayonet you if you refuse the vaccination.

Everything is evidently on the table when there's no proof that the swine flu will even return, let alone return in a more virulent form.

Meanwhile, Austria is investigating drugmaker Baxter for bioterrorism after reports that the company created and spread the H1N1 virus this past spring, launching it in South America.

The Obamacrats have yet to announce their vaccination plan, but the military option--like the public option in health care reform--is alive and well and under consideration.

My thanks to Gorilla Radio for providing a comprehensive survey of all things swine flu, from which I drew this encapsulization.

'Deathfest' Convenes Reps of Fastest-Dying Cities

There was no joy in Mudville, or most of Ohio, in 2008 when Forbes magazine ran an article to out "America's Fasting-Dying Cities."

But representatives from the ten named cities are meeting this week in Dayton, Ohio (one of the ten), for a symposium on "Ten Living Cities." Skeptics are calling it (more accurately, no doubt) a "Deathfest."

What got the cities on the list was a flight of jobs joined by a flight of residents, all resulting in cities decaying both physically and economically.

Four of the ten are in Ohio--Cleveland, Dayton, Canton and Youngstown--and two in Michigan--Detroit and Flint. The others are Scranton, Pa.; Springfield, Mass.; Buffalo, N.Y.; and Charleston, W.Va.

As usual, local observers were able to cut to the quick of the matter in rapid order.

Said student Joe Sack, 22: "It's like a gambling addict [trying] to help an alcoholic. It's hard to see what they can learn from each other."

I'll drink to that.

Nepal Will Pay You to Marry a Widow

Now here's a stimulus plan Obama might consider copying with a variation or two.

Nepal recently passed a law to pay men a $650 bounty to marry one of the country's many widows (what's killing off their husbands?).

Women, especially widows, didn't like the measure too much and took to the streets of the capital of Kathmandu (I love that name) to protest. Protestors carried signs that read, "You can't sell your mother" and "We don't want government dowries."

Rightfully sensing that the payment scheme would turn the men into rats who'd take the money and run after marrying them, the widows instead demanded jobs, education and health care.

A sensible demand, I'd say.

However, we could easily apply this idea to the U.S. and pay working men and women to marry unemployed men and women (I'm speaking only of heterosexual unions here, but in some states, same-sex could be subject to the subsidy as well).

Or how about a subsidy to marry the unmarriable (or is it un-marry-able?).

Now, let's stretch it a bit more: If you can trade in clunkers for cash, how about unwanted spouses for cash?

That last one gets my vote.

British Union Wants 'Sexist' High Heels Outlawed

The British Trade Union Congress (TUC) is railing against women's wearing high heels at work since they are "sexist and pose a health and safety hazard."

In the place of high heels, the TUC proposes "sensible shoes" that are no more than an inch high and are safer for the foot and back.

They didn't ask the women what they felt, evidently.

"This is absolutely ridiculous, and I think these union officials should be spending their time dealing with more important issues," said Michelle Dewberry, winner of the UK's The Apprentice. "I'm at work in five-inch heels and perfectly able to do my job. Heels are sexy, they boost your confidence and they are empowering to women."

Thanks to Erik Deckers for sharing this development with us across the pond. Deckers, however, sees men's ties as a bigger threat to safety, pointing to a man who got crushed to death when his tie got stuck in some machinery and pulled him through it.

Don't Read His Lips--It's All in HR 3200

The health care bill that emerged last week from the House of Representatives, HR 3200, indeed contains a provision mandating end-of-life planning despite Obama's insistence that no one would visit you to explain that health care ends when you get a terminal illness and you have no quality years left.

(There actually is a formula for figuring out quality life-years, and if you're retired, you're on the short end of that list. Quality in governmentese=productivity, or $$$ in taxes that you can pay.)

I bring this up because Fox TV's Glenn Beck has aired a video of Representative John Conyers, D.-Mich., explaining that congressmen are too busy to read bills before they pass them; besides, they couldn't understand them anyway. (Translation: "So long as my pet earmarks are in the bill, I'm votin' yes!")

Here's what the esteemed gentleman (I use the term quite loosely had to say):

"To get up and say, 'Read the bill.' What good is reading the bill if it's 1,000 pages and you don't have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?"

Scary, isn't it/he?

Despite What He Says, Home Visits Are Coming

I guess Barack Obama hasn't even bothered to read the Senate's HELP (Health, Education, Labor and Pensions) Committee health plan.

Yesterday, Obama went on the offensive to deny that government stormtroopers, er, employees, would start visiting old people in their homes to ask them how they want to die. While that is not (to my knowledge, anyway) in the HELP bill, there definitely is a provision to allow home visits to make sure children get all their vaccinations.

I can see that now: "Mrs. Smith, is little Johnny home? We see on his electronic health record that he's behind on his vaccinations. We're here with all the necessary syringes and vaccinations to get him up to date. It shouldn't take more than five minutes."

That scenario is very definitely authorized by the Ted Kennedy underlings who wrote the HELP bill.

Here's what the Prez said to a town hall gathering of AARP members (i.e., old people):

"You know, I guarantee you, first of all, we just don't have enough government workers to send to talk to everybody, to find out how they want to die. I just want to be clear: Nobody is going to be knocking on your door; nobody is going to be telling you you've got to fill one out. And certainly nobody is going to be forcing you to make a set of decisions on end-of-life care based on some bureaucratic law in Washington."

Actually, they won't be forcing anyone to make end-of-life decisions. They'll just do it for you, so technically, he's right, and we all lose if we fall for his version of health care reform.

Recovery in Slow Motion at Republic Windows

I somehow bought into what turns out to be a bunch of hype about the reacquisition and reopening of Republic Windows and Doors in an earlier post.

Veep Joe Biden, not one to shy away from spinning tales if not outright lying, even ventured to Chicago to grandstand in front of the Goose Island factory and caw on and on about the great victory of the stimulus plan in resurrecting Republic Windows and Doors. Of course, his grinning mug was then splashed all over the media, promoting and prolonging the hype that the factory would soon be back in operation with all 250 workers back on board.

Turns out that it's true that a California firm, Serious Materials, did indeed buy Republic Windows and Doors (read the story of its closing), and did promise to hire back the laid-off workers to get everything in full swing by May or June.

Those months have passed, and now it's almost August. At last count, about 15 former employees had been rehired while the factory sits mostly idle.

Serious Materials was--and is--gambling on a part of the Obamian stimulus plan that targeted money toward weatherization, which in turn would (Serious hoped/hopes) materialize in orders for green windows and doors from Republic.

Was Serious just being too optimistic? Time will tell, but you can read the full story here.

Meanwhile, I'm kicking myself in the butt for not doing my due diligence when the hype-filled story first appeared. I should've known that, if Joe Biden took credit for something, it was a pile of made-up manure to begin with.

Igor At It Again--Develops Own Health Plan

This guy Igor, who's produced the only known copy of Obama's birth certificate, has now solved the health care riddle with his own plan.

Go and get a good dose of reality with "Obama Care v. Igor Care."

To Save Their Factory, They Had to Destroy It

Or some such reasoning, if such a thing (reasoning) can be said to apply to French workers and politics.

I've blogged before about how terminated French employees will often hold their bosses hostage until a more suitable severance package is offered. As it turns out, "more suitable" has now been defined as 30,000 euros ($53,000) and hostage-taking has been replaced by explosive-wielding-and-threatening, to wit:

A French construction equipment plant owned by U.S.-based Oshkosh Corporation has agreed to boost severance packages for laid-off workers who threatened to blow up machinery, employers say. While only 53 workers are affected, each was guaranteed up to 30,000 euros ($53,000) in severance pay. The incident occurred during a week in which unions at three different French factories used threats of explosions to get their complaints heard.

In other such violent encounters, as at this one, French police refused to intervene.

If Obama and the laborcrats get their way, this is what America will soon be like, except here you can expect the bombs will actually be exploded.

Michael Moore Was Right: Card Check Was a Ruse

Mockumentarian and far-left spokesperson Michael Moore was right in saying several months ago that you could strip card check from the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) and still have businesses where you want them--on their knees and begging government to bail them out.

That's because the mandatory arbitration clause in EFCA lives on without card check, and it's those faceless bureaucrats running arbitration who are the unions' best friend. They'll be more than happy to split the difference between a 3,000-percent pay raise demand and a 3-percent pay raise offer--and come up with 30 percent or more.

That's why it's not surprising that the Democrats pushing EFCA are now more than willing to jettison card check and instead mandate elections within five or ten days of getting 30 percent of employees to sign up for a union. That's the current state of "compromise" in the Senate. Card check, it turns out, was just a Trojan Horse to get contracts dictated by bureaucrats to Mom-and-Pop businesses, to say nothing of the ultimate goal, the total take-down of Wal-Mart.

"First, Detroit, and now Benton, Arkansas" may as well be the union battle cry.

They won't stop until there is no private enterprise left--and government runs everything.

Oh, sad, sad day.

AHRQ Proves that Cold Weather Cures...

...the health care system anyway.

In its just-released comparative study on health care quality in the 50 states, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) ranks most states as average, but those few that came in as strong seemed to be--from my unscientific review of the data--located in the northernmost midsection of our nation.

Specifically, North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan and Iowa were deemed as having "strong" quality health care. Massachusetts slipped into the category too, which of course will have liberals shouting that "See, health care reform [socialization] works!" (Actually, Massachusetts has always had an advanced health care system even before Commonwealth Care, which may well end up destroying it.)

It also appeared almost axiomatic that the bigger the state, the worse the health care. Also, Sunbelt States didn't pan out too well either.

I'm doomed.

Pfizer Maintain: Who Says Free Enterprise Sucks?

Drug manufacturer Pfizer has launched a program called Maintain to provide free prescription drugs to laid-off Americans who lack insurance. Powerhouse drugs like Lipitor, Norvasc, Caduet and, yes, Viagra, are on the list, though you might be hard pressed to make a medical necessity case for the latter.

Cynics will counter that it's all "great PR," and I can see the New York Times invoking "the Obama Effect," as in "the Jesus Effect" in parting the waters, feeding multitudes with one fish--and now providing free prescriptions (soon health care as well).

As an enrollee you, of course, have to be able to prove your unemployment and meet other tests, but this sounds great to me (especially since I've used one or two of those drugs to treat my own conditions, and no, not Viagra--LOL).

Check out the program's Web page, or call (866) 706-2400.

Another Union Smokes Weed and Blows Smoke

Perhaps it's Kool-Aid that the Bakery, Confectionary, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers (BCTGM) union wants the workers it represents at the Stella D'oro Biscuit Co. to drink, but it seems more likely that union leaders are themselves smoking some noxious week and blowing smoke on union members and the public.

Here's a statement issued by BCTGM officials--take a guess at what "accomplishment" the union is bragging about here:

This decision vindicates the struggles and sacrifices of our members at Stella D’oro. The private equity predators at Brynwood Partners thought they could refuse to bargain with us, deny us information, break the law, tear up our contract, force a strike and break the union. But our members’ solidarity has held with the help of the community and our many supporters around the country and world.

Surely, they can't be referring to the decision to shut down Stella D'oro that Brynwood Partners logically made when it couldn't wrest concessions from the union to stay afloat. Instead, they are probably referring to a decision by a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) judge that forced Stella D'oro to take back the union workers who had been on strike, but which then led to the announcement that the Bronx plant would be shut down in October.

Bye, bye, unionized workers. This is what your solidarity got you.

I remember when I worked for a teachers' union, we vigorously supported a disastrous strike by the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union against Southern California supermarkets. The strike dragged on for months as union members either lost everything or were forced to take new jobs in a different field. When the union finally "settled" with the supermarkets, it was for terms much worse than offered by the contract they initially rejected and went on strike to protest.

The next day the UFCW proclaimed a "great victory" for its members.

Unions everywhere do the same thing--blow official smoke and require their members to drink the Kool-Aid of solidarity, which often ends in disastrous results.

Wal-Mart Finds Another Way to Crush the Enemy

It was big news when Wal-Mart came out this week in favor of an employer mandate for health care, meaning that all employers (unless exempted by size) would have to provide health care for their workers or pay a tax to the government.

Not only did Wal-Mart endorse the employer mandate now under discussion in Congress, but it also did so in concert with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) by issuing a joint statement.

Is this a reprise of the British surrender tune at Yorktown of "The World Turned Upside Down"?

Not really, though the news did garner gushing gagas from the liberal media.

In truth, there was at least one obvious motive in Wal-Mart's endorsement--crush the competition by making them spend their money on health care.

Behind the scenes, there may also have been some promises or compacts made between the SEIU and Wal-Mart: "Keep the unions out, and we'll endorse the employer mandate" or some such.

Finally, there's the obvious clout with official Washington that this brings to the nation's largest private employer.

Plus, why fight the obvious? With Democrats holding all the cards in D.C., an employer mandate is as sure as death and taxes.

Chalk one up for Wal-Mart.

No Award for Subtlety in this Burger King Ad

You be the judge on this:

Why Not Just GPS Implants?

It's probably just a ruse to get rid of E-Verify to woo the illegal immigrant vote (more on this later), but New York Senator Charles Schumer (Far Left-N.Y.) says the current online system for checking people's eligibility to work in the U.S. is "unfair and ineffective."

That system, called E-Verify, taps into databases at the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security to check if a job applicant really is authorized to work in the U.S., either by dint of citizenship or visa. In other words, it's a frontline defense against illegal immigrants' taking legal citizens' jobs away, and against employers' gaming the system.

E-Verify, however, is staunchly opposed by stalwarts such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (gee, I wonder what their motive is) and all Democrats except some of the Blue Dogs.

Democrats aren't really concerned about jobs (see: taxes, regulation, unionism, tort law, etc.), but--as always--about votes.

Thus E-Verify is an enemy to be swatted down and sent off into oblivion, so the illegal immigrant vote will collectively know the Democrats are on their side.

Step two of this political fox trot is to grant amnesty and eventually citizenship to the illegals, who will then be indelibly grateful to the Democrats and vote for them forever, meaning the U.S. will become virtually a one-party country (according to liberal thinking).

Now, back to my headline about GPS implants: Schumer said he prefers a biometric ID card over the "ineffective" E-Verify system.

If he has his way, soon we'll all be lining up to have a hologram of our heads made to be implanted in some kind of U.S. ID Card.

I say take all this a step closer to its logical conclusion and put little GPS tracking implants inside each of us and assign us a number for tracking.

At the same time they can hard wire the implant so it can control our voting hands; then in the voting booth our little pinkies will always punch the button for (guess who?) the Democrats.

Why fiddle with half-measures?

Painting 'The Doctor' Far From Today's Reality

Sir Luke Fildes lost his eldest son Phillip on Christmas Eve 1877 while a doctor spent a compassionate vigil at the child's side. In commemoration, Sir Fildes painted "The Doctor" (above) in 1891 to depict "the physician in our time."

This same painting was used by the American Medical Association (AMA) in 1949 to stop President Harry Truman in his attempt to nationalize health care. The message was "Keep Politics Out of This Picture."

The AMA can't use this picture or tactic this time around. Things have changed too much.

Some of us who've lived long enough can actually recall how doctors once did make house calls and could even be reached on weekends and evenings for emergencies. (Today, you get a voice recording commanding you to "Dial 911.")

To say the least, we've come a long way in our medical care, and in one sense Obama is correct--the system is broken if you're looking for compassion and home visitations.

But it's not really broken, just adapted to a new reality. We're now a nation of 300 million people with nowhere nearly enough doctors to even treat all of us, let alone make house calls (though some still do and swear by it).

Medical care is now like visiting an auto mechanic. "Doc, it hurts here." "Let me take a look." A few small probes and examinations later, and the doctor is ready. "Fortunately, nothing is broken. I'll prescribe you some painkillers. You should be fine in a few days."

Okay, so I've simplified things here a bit (I left out the two sets of x-rays and follow-up MRIs), but the general picture of "sick care" in America is just that. It's like taking your car into the shop, except it's your body--and your life.

Paucity of time and doctors can account for our new reality, but the biggest contributing factor to what Obama calls our "broken" health care system is Medicare and Medicaid.

Since most doctors won't accept the payment structure of Medicaid, leaving that to emergency rooms, your family doctor is modelling his or her practice on the Medicare payment structure--the more procedures he or she can perform, the more the office can bill for your visit. ("I also notice your car's belts are getting worn. We'd better replace those for $125 before you get stuck on the freeway." Get the analogy?)

So, the next time you hear politicians' bemoaning our "broken" health care system, remember it's only broken because Medicare made it into an assembly-line industry, with each nut, bolt, worker, and procedure along the line being billed for and paid separately.

This is the typical pattern with government: First break it, then blame it on others and come rushing to the rescue to garner votes for the next election, reality be damned.

Politicians just created the housing and credit crises by pushing banks to create "affordable housing." Now they're blaming the bankers and everyone one else in the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac food chain and claiming to have the solution with "more regulation."

If they really wanted to "fix" health care, all they have to do is fully fund Medicare and come up with a payment structure that rewards healthful results rather than procedures. That'll stop the cost-shifting to private insurers and build some efficiencies into the system.

Instead, they'll give us more regulation (read "rationing") and expand Medicare, the very cause of the crisis in the first place.

Welcome to the Soviet Socialist Republic of Bozeman, Montana

The City of Bozeman, Montana (population: 27,509), is now screening job applicants for their "moral character" by asking them to fork over logins and passwords for all their social networking memberships.

No doubt a simple picture of you at a party with some hot babes or dudes with a keg of beer nearby would get you scratched immediately. Anything really suspicious and you'd probably be turned over to the local gestapo.

Obviously, you'd have to be an idiot to surrender such information. Either that, or awfully desperate for a dead-end government job.

Put it this way: If Barack Obama doesn't have to produce a birth certificate even when he's on vacation in his birth state of Hawaii to prove he's a U.S. citizen, why the hell should any birth-certificate-holding citizen have to compromise his or her privacy and integrity for a job way down the government food chain?

Remember when they ask you for such info that one doesn't even need to pay one's taxes to work for the president. A nice double standard.

Wealth Stays the Same Except Under Carter

The Democrats always bill themselves as the party that will redistribute wealth and make the common Joe better off, but the stats prove them wrong--except for a couple of years under Jimmy Carter.

Why Carter? I think the simple answer is that he managed to ruin the economy better than anyone before or after his hyperinflationary reign. Of course, from what's been transpiring under Carter II (Obama), we may be (are) headed for a repeat of the 1970s and skyrocketing inflation, which denudes everyone's bank account.

Anyway, here are the statistics to which I'm referring:

How Do 3.5 Million Promised Jobs Become 600,000?

Answer: When it was all BS to begin with.

Remember when the so-called stimulus bill was rushed through Congress to the tune of $787 billion? It was promoted as the cure for the Great Depression Part II that would "create or save" 3.5 million jobs.

Well, the official back-pedalling has now begun. First, Obama this past week said that 150,000 jobs had been or would soon be created from the stimulus, and now his right-hand truth fabricator Joe Biden said on Sunday that the stimulus would create 600,000 jobs by the end of summer.

Why the backtrack? As Biden says, "The economy was worse off than we thought."

Actually, statistics now show that the recession was milder that the Obamacrats had been portraying it (not that 15 million unemployed is mild).

Truth be known, the stimulus package a) had nothing to do with creating jobs and b) had everything to do with expanding government and government control over the economy.

So, if you're one of the 15 million looking for work, don't expect the stimulus dollars to create a job for you--unless you plan to work for the government.

Basic $12K-a-Month Employee Wins $4.1B Lawsuit

Some lucky dude by the name of Paul Thomas Chester was fired by iFreedom Communications. Chester had been paid $12,000 a month plus a 5-percent commission on gross sales and also had a bunch of stock guaranteed to him.

When iFreedom fired him, Chester filed suit, which went first to an arbitrator and then to a superior court that affirmed the arbitrator's judgment.

Result? Chester walked away with $4.1 billion.

Now, I'll give you one guess about which state this occurred in. Answer here.

Graphic Follow-Up to My 'True Lies' Posting

Here's a nicely done graph that shows the Obama economics team originally projection of unemployment with the stimulus plan (in dark blue) and without the stimulus plan (in light blue). The red dots show actually unemployment rates:


I shamelessly "borrowed" this illustration from a blog entitled Innocent Bystanders.

No Republican Could Ever Get Away With Such Lies

Can you imagine if George Bush were president and he bragged about having "saved or created x [fill in the blank] number of jobs"? He'd be howled off the podium with scorn and derision.

So what happens when Barack Obama actually does that, as he did yesterday in claiming that he had "saved or created 150,000 jobs" with the stimulus bill? The lapdog, fawning liberal media sucked it all in and praised the great man for his accomplishment.

Meanwhile, remember how Obama promised that the stimulus plan would keep unemployment below 8 percent and that, without it, unemployment would rise about 9 percent? Got news for you, Obamaites, unemployment is now at 9.4 percent nationwide, and while you claim to have "created or saved 150,000 jobs," the economy has actually lost another 1.6 million jobs since inauguration day.

Nice job.

Though the media will never call the Obama administration out on this particular deceit, one from the Democrats' own ranks did during a hearing with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner:

"You created a situation where you cannot be wrong," said Senator Max Baucus, a Democrat from Montana. "If the economy loses two million jobs over the next few years, you can say yes, but it would've lost 5.5 million jobs. If we create a million jobs, you can say, well, it would have lost 2.5 million jobs. You've given yourself complete leverage where you cannot be wrong, because you can take any scenario and make yourself look correct."

Again, just imagine what would happen if some Republican tried to get away with such self-evident acts of deception?

Income Distribution in the U.S.: True Lies Exposed

I found this (now-purloined) graph prepared by an economist writing about health care in the United States in the New York Times. His purpose was much different than mine. I'm reproducing it to show how politicians blatantly lie everytime they say they're going to tax the wealthy and leave the middle class alone. Yeah, right, and har de har har. All the money is in the middle, as the graph clearly shows (totals include cost of benefits and Social Security/Medicare contributions borne by employee and employer):

R&D, and It Ain't Research and Development

Rather, it's the two words the Democrats crafting so-called health care reform won't mention, and if they're uttered around them, will instantly dismiss as fanatical right-wing hallucinations--rationing (R) and denial (D) of medical service or medicines.

Just this week, Obama vowed to cut $300 billion over ten years from the Medicare budget by streamlining administrative procedures and rooting out waste and corruption.

Two more words, "Yeah, right."

The only way he'll save a penny, other than cutting payments further, is to do what every other respectable left-wing government does with its health care--ration it (long lines and waiting periods) and deny it ("you're too old for a hip replacement, so live with it").

I hate to disillusion all you "free health care" daydreamers out there, but this is change we can live without. Let's hope no one really believes in all the ridiculous promises being made.

(N.B.: Even the liberal New Republic has come out and demanded that the "reformers" level with the public about what's going on. Read "The Public Remains in the Dark.")

UAW Suspends Subsidized Viagra, Controls GM

So much for the great concessions made by all sides in the negotiations for Government Motors' Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

In labor's hip pocket, Obama first refused to let Chrysler and GM merge to combine operations and save huge costs because--you guessed it--the United Automobile Workers (UAW)--wouldn't agree since it would mean loss of jobs and, and mostly, loss of those lovely union dues.

Then, while publicly saying that all sides would make sacrifices to ensure GM's survival, Obama and his team let the UAW completely off the hook while screwing every single investor of his money (bondholders get worthless stock in exchange).

What did the UAW cede? Nothing really. The union agreed to "suspend" (har de har har) overtime pay for less than 40 hours worked, subsidized Viagra, and the JOBS bank that paid employees full wages not to work (good deal if you can get it, eh?). At the same time, the UAW retained veto power over GM's foreign operations, meaning the company can't do more work in Mexico without the UAW imprimatur.

Hourly rates and all benefits for current UAW workers remain locked in, though it may be necessary to screw retirees if the union can't sell its 17.5-percent stake in Government Motors to fund health care in the future.

Now, given that great sacrifice, how long do you think GM will survive?

Answer: As long as Obama and the Democrats are in power. Congress and the White House are now captive nations of labor--especially the UAW--and will write checks forever (at taxpayer expense) to keep GM afloat.

What about selling the government's 60 percent stake on the open market?

Answer: Fat chance. At its peak, GM was never valued at more than $52 billion, roughly the cost of Uncle Obama's current 60 percent share, so a half-size Government Motors would have to rise to $80 billion in valuation before the government could sell out.

More har de har har....

In This VAT, There Be Billions

Scrambling to come up with money (i.e., take it from us taxpayers), Congress and the White House are experiencing a taxing time figuring out sources of revenue that won't have serious political repercussions.

One that is almost sure to be enacted in the name of "healthcare reform" (since when did health care become one word?) is a tax on employer-provided health benefits, which will probably be skewed toward those with the highest wages and/or highest priced plans.

Inevitably, however, the good ol' value-added tax, or VAT, has resurfaced. In this tax scheme, a tariff is assessed each time a value is added to a product--when it's made, when it's shipped and when it's bought or consumed. Some 130 nations currently employ VATs, and one wag even argues that a VAT of 24 percent (!) would enable the federal government to balance the budget and drop all income taxes to zero for those earning $100,000 or less and to 25 percent for high-earners.

Of course, it would also horrifically raise the cost of everything from eggs to excess consumption--and everything in between.

Now, if Congress would actually incorporate a VAT in the name of ending most income taxes, I'd say it's worth a look, but I doubt you could get many Democrats to go along in the face of a) "lost" revenue from income tax and b) constituent outrage over soaring living costs. Plus, Republicans, theoretically at least, are opposed to all taxes, especially those proposed by donkeys. (Not that the elephants have much power anymore.)

The most commonsensical and best approach is, as always, an across-the-board flat tax on all incomes above..., well, fill in the blank. Or we could revisit Richard Nixon's plan for a guaranteed income for all and thus end the welfare debacle.

However, things that make sense can never make it past Democrats, whose sole purpose in life is to create constituencies that will be indebted to them forever and therefore always vote Democratic--even if the world is falling apart around them.

The Democrats, after all, have a program for everything--and a solution for nothing.

Countrywide Leads the List of Top 25 Bandits

I don't usually agree with AlterNet, which is generally a left-leaning (to say the least) site, but The Center for Public Integrity has a well-reasoned piece on "The Bad Guys of Subprime Lending Are Raking in Bailout Billions."

The article details the woeful and sordid spectacle of non-banks (for the most part) dishing out $1.4 trillion in subprime (paradoxically, actually meaning higher than prime rate) loans that could never be repaid, with ever-lowered standards of loan qualification.

Now, with 20 of the top 25 lenders either out of business or swallowed up, many of the worst culprits are now zinging Uncle Same to bail them out. I'm reprinting the chart that lists the top 25 bandits at right (click on image to enlarge).

Interesting, but how did $1.4 trillion in bad loans cause $3 trillion of federal expenditures in response? Wouldn't it have been easier just to buy up the foreclosed homes and take them off the books?

Answers: Government never takes the easiest or most sensible route since the goal is to buy support and votes, not necessarily to solve any problem.

Weird Weed Being Smoked in Budget Office

Budget Director Peter Orszag's proclamation over the weekend to CNN that health care reform will not increase the federal deficit must mean the administration plans to create health care collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and sell them to hedge funds to get the trillions needed and keep the debt off record.

Otherwise, Mr. Orszag has found some kind of noxious weed to smoke while on the job. Clearly, insuring an additional nearly 50 million people ain't gonna be paid for by passing individual mandates or even employer mandates. The fed guv, like Massachusetts' Commonwealth Care, will find itself either subsidizing tons of people or exempting them from the mandate.

Let's get real here, folks. Otherwise, make that weed available to the general public so we can all live in the same unreal world.

Obama Admits Not Enough Votes for EFCA

President Obama told a town hall meeting yesterday in New Mexico that "there aren't enough votes in the Senate to get it passed," referring to the controversial Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), or what's known as "card check."

“There may be areas of compromise to get this bill done,” Obama said at a town hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. “That’s what we’re working on.”

Filmmaker and radical liberal Michael Moore suggested months ago that the card check provision, which allows unionization through the collection of a majority of employees' signatures, could be jettisoned, and the bill would still accomplish its goal of strengthening unions.

Reason? Fines on employers (but not unions) would skyrocket, and employers would also have a gun held to their heads to cave into a contract within 90 days of unionization or have one crammed down their throats by an arbitrator.

In fact, card check may have been thrown into the bill just to assure passage through compromise of the other measures. Recent statistics show that unions win 67 percent of unionization votes, but that employers stall on the negotiations front so that only 56 percent of new unions ever get a signed contract. EFCA would solve that dilemma tidily for the unions.

My suggestion: Scrap the whole sorry piece of legislation and read this article on why unions already hold the advantage.

Database Shows Scheduled California Layoffs

Amazing the things you can stumble upon. Today I was reading an article in the online edition of the San Jose Mercury-News when I noticed a sidebar link for a California Layoffs Database.

The database is aggregated from advance layoff notifications given under the WARN (Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification) Act. My curiosity was to see if my company was on the list (it wasn't, confirming what I thought), but I was struck by some of companies that are planning huge layoffs.

Such as: the San Francisco Chronicle, which by the numbers listed looks almost as if it is going out of business; JPMorgan Chase, which appears to be gutting every banking branch in the state; USAA, my insurer, which is planning a grand total of two layoffs in Sacramento; and retailer Gottschalks, which is actually shutting down, I believe.

The site also incorporates a search function, so you can enter your company's name and location, or you can search by either company or city.

The site provides a type of morbid satisfaction where one can say to oneself, "There but for the grace of (fill in your religion's deity) go I," or if the other shoe is falling, "Uh, oh! What do I do now?"

Oh, Happy Day: Health Care Deform Pledged

President Obama and the Democrats announced yesterday that absolutely, certifiably and whether we need or like it or not, health care reform will be passed by July 31.

I've begun dubbing it "health care deform," as in deformation, since the consequences are going to be so awful. Read what Labor Law Guy wrote about the consequences of nationalized health care in Great Britain--if your treatment costs too much, you're on your own; the government won't pay for it. Oh, happy day, and this is exactly where we're headed.

Obama said the job must be done because "the stars are aligned." Yeah, and they were for Julius Caesar on the Ides of March.

Obama Budget: Punish Foes, Reward Supporters

There's probably nothing unusually (okay, let's take the "probably" out) about a president's slashing the budget in areas that his opponents favor and increasing it for items and programs his supporters favor. Witness Barack Obama, who has in his first budget has already cut defense, cut union oversight, cut abstinence education, and etc., etc. (though somehow the funding for E-Verify, bane of unions and liberals alike because it's so efficient and accurate in identifying illegals, got increased funding).

The author over at Sweetness and Light sums it up pretty well:

Defense, national security, prisons holding illegals, nuclear and coal production, farmers and those in rural areas – and anybody who might carp about his giveaways to his constituents are the ones having their funding slashed.

And this is just on-the-books funding. Think of all extra-budgetary funding for TARP and other programs that rely on conjured (i.e., printed or fake) money. And what about billions and billions every year to run Obama's new plaything, Government Motors (formerly General Motors) to proceed imaginary green cars that no one wants?

Welcome to the Great Repression (of freedom and capitalism).

Obama Billionaire Backers Nix EFCA--Surprised?

Warren Buffett, the sage of Omaha, was the first Obama-aire to come out against the EFCA (Employee Free Choice Act) and its card-check unionization. Now he's been joined by three other Obama-backing billionaires (did you realize that the Democratic Party has a much higher concentration of voters who make more than $100,000 a year than the GOP has?). The three nay-sayers all hail from Chicago.

One, Penny Pritzker, a Hyatt zillionaire, actually ran Obama's campaign finance committee, the one that racked up about $750 million (with nine-figure contributions from unions) for the presidential campaign and another $53 million just for the inauguration.

Neil Bluhm, founder of the private equity firm Walton Street Capital and gatherer of $160,000 for the Obama campaign, just says no as well, and is joined by another billionaire, Lester Crown, who runs an eponymous investment firm. Crown gave the max personal contribution allowable under the law to Obama.

What took them so long, or did they just notice Obama's true stripes?

EFCA Sponsor Says Card Check May Go Bye-Bye

Senator Tom Harkin, D.-Iowa, says compromise is in order to save the Employee Free Choice Act, specifying that the card check provision will no doubt have to be dropped.

“Compromises are going to be made,” said Harkin, 69. “It probably won’t be card check [as part of the final law], because too many people are opposed to it now.”

Card check allows organizers to unionize a company by merely getting 50-percent-plus-one of the employees to sign off on the idea. No election need be held, but the union (har de har har) could still ask for one. Business is unilaterally opposed to it, with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce calling the EFCA "Armageddon."

(New York Governor David Paterson has already created card check in his state by fiat--executive order. Henceforth, all businesses receiving government assistance in just about any form in his state will be subject to card check unionization.)

Harkin said he's hoping that the compromise bill he's negotiating with fellow senators will win the "grudging support" of both labor and "some business."

For its part, labor says card check is non-negotiable and absolutely essential, and from the business side comes the stance that, even with card check gone, the EFCA is still Armageddonish with its binding arbitration provision.

The proposed law mandates a two-year binding contract be imposed if the company and union fail to agree upon a contract after 90 days of direct negotiations and another 30 days of mediation.

In the words of Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?"

Evidently not.

Peering Through the DoubleSpeak to Clarity

Here's a piece on Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) and his "principles" on health care reform:

Rockefeller's principles. On April 21, 2009, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Senate Finance Subcommittee on Health Care, outlined his principles for a 21st century health care delivery system as the Finance Committee unveiled a series of roundtables leading up to health care reform legislation. Sen. Rockefeller’s principles for reforming the health care delivery system are: (1) create a National Director for Health Care Quality; (2) strengthen the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) and provide expedited implementation of its recommendations; (3) provide the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality with greater authority to coordinate public and private quality improvement; and (4) require health information technology as a “condition of participation” in Medicare by 2015.

Translation: We're gonna ration it, baby. You'll have access to health care (for an unspecified yearly and per-visit price), but you'll get nothing in return if it's too expensive. However, those of us in government--and our cronies--will have taxpayer-funded, gold plate, everything-is-available-and-free health care. These are my principles, sucka.

So, Which Swine Invented the H1N1 Flu?

I'm referring to human swine, of course. I've read all kinds of conspiracy theories about the current flu "pandemic," which, for a pandemic, seems to have panned at the box office. Let's see--100 "confirmed" cases in the United States, 10 or so in Europe, and that's a pandemic?

Worse, there is only one lab in the United States that can even test patients to see if they actually have the swine, oops, H1N1 flu, and that's the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta. Mexico has no lab that can test for it and relies also on the CDC.

Very interesting, isn't it, all these dire warnings? I betcha of the 100 U.S. victims, most don't have the H1N1 virus, and probably a lot of them don't even have the flu. Many probably developed sympathy symptoms when they heard of the flu's going round.

Now, for those conspiracy theories, here goes: 1) Baxter Laboratories developed the strain and tested it out in Mexico in anticipation of the day when the world's population needs to be reduced drastically; 2) Obama owns stock in Tamiflu; 3) The scare was fabricated to take the heat off governments as their citizens go broke, homeless and hungry; 5) The pandemic was engineered to coincide with the sale of U.S. Treasuries to create a flight to the safety of the almighty dollar during a global crisis. Got more?

I think there's a bit of truth in all these assertions, but it all brings me back to my original assertion--someone(s) invented all this--so the question remains:

Which swine invented the H1N1 flu?

It's Your Money (Debt), But Biden Takes Credit

The story at Chicago's Republic Windows and Doors actually is a good one, a victory for the workers that is all too rare in these days of massive layoffs and job destruction.

However, it sticks in my craw when someone as blatantly disingenuous as our Veep, Joe Biden, manages to take credit for saving the plant. He showed up there on Monday to boast about the admin's stimulus plan.

In fact, funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) are behind the resurrection of the factory. New owner Kevin Surace of Serious Materials eyed $8 billion in ARRA for weatherization and energy efficiency, hoping for a slice of the action, when he purchased Republic this year. Surace now intends to use the plant on Goose Island and another in Pittsburgh to churn out energy-efficient doors and windows and other weatherization products using ARRA bucks.

It's great news for the laid-off employees, who are now returning to work:

"We would have liked to run the factory ourselves, but things don't really work that way in this country," said Vicente Rangel, 35, who worked at the factory for 15 years. Since the factory closing he looked for work with little luck and took classes in computer skills. "There are not too many jobs out there," he said. "I'm a little bit surprised and glad to be back here. The workers stayed united and we were able to do this."

A good story, but Biden should butt out and go study the Constitution for the first time in his life.

Merging and Purging Their Way to Billions

I'm no fan of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), but the principle of organizing for better wages and benefits is a sound one--until it's abused. And union abuse is largely what doomed (along with better products from foreign competition) the so-called Big Three automakers in Detroit.

So, in unions you have a good thing in principle, and a bad thing in practice. Look at the routine corruption and power hunger at just about every union in America, and you'll see that the free pot of cash that unions blackmail out of the employees they bargain for affirms Lord Acton's observation that "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Anyway, the picture on the other side isn't any prettier. As much damage as the unions have done to industry in America, corporate chieftains have sent to their workplace graves millions of employees over the years.

Joseph Schumpeter called capitalism "creative destruction," and in any act of destruction, something is obviously destroyed--and that something in capitalism is workers' lives and livelihoods.

The sad fact is, for CEOs, destroying workers' lives through downsizing pays off big time. A study by the Institute for Policy Studies and United for a Fair Economy (admittedly, two left-leaning groups) shows that CEOs for the 50 companies that did the most downsizing in 2001 averaged 44-percent pay raises the next year. In fact, compensation for downsizing CEOs grew seven times faster than for CEOs in general.

The CEO for Hewlett-Packard since 2005, Mark Hurd, over the years eliminated 40,000 jobs through 31 mergers and acquisitions and reaped a cool $60 million-plus in 2008 alone. Larry Ellison of Oracle, with a personal net worth of $22.5 billion, eliminated 5,000 good jobs with his acquisition of PeopleSoft in 2005 and looks to axe another 5,000-10,000 this year through his acquisition of Sun Microsystems.

Now, to change the subject a bit and return to the plight of the Big Three: When I read over the weekend that the government would end up owning 50 percent of General Motors and the United Auto Workers most of the rest, it brought to mind this perceptive observation of Ronald Reagan's:

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."

In the case of the Big Three, Washington and the Democrats not only ruined them with taxes but also with ridiculous regulations like CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy), which forced the automakers to build cars no Americans wanted to buy. Now with the Obamacrats owning GM, we'll end up with an American version of the Yugo--and with an automaker (or two) that will be forever subsidized by the federal government (in reality, by you, me and all the taxpayers, who will have no say whatsoever in the matter).

Reagan was and always will be right about taxes and government.

To preview GM's future, just take a gander at these Soviet-mandated cars for the masses now lying in a Russian boneyard:

Card Check Rears Its Ugly Head in California

I guess that headline shows my bias. Anyway, turns out that the Golden State (doesn't glitter too much anymore, though) legislature will soon send a bill to Ahnold's desk that would allow agricultural workers to form unions by card check.

Card check is the now-infamous method proposed in the federal Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) that allows organizers to form unions by collecting signatures from 50 percent-plus-one of a firm's employees. The EFCA would enshrine the method nationwide, but that bill is locked in a pitched battle in the Senate.

New Jersey has a card check law, but it applies only to businesses that have no interstate commerce connections, such as race tracks, so its impact is limited. Similarly, the California law slips through the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by confining itself to in-state agriculture (though I'm sure the food is sold in other states--so a questionable bill at best).

The Governator has three times vetoed similar measures, and hopefully he will this time too.

In the meantime, catch a load of this surreal debate:

"How many summers do we have to go through of heat-related deaths? How many farm-related accidents...before we recognize that unions are most important for people who are the most vulnerable?" said Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg.

Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said his bill would prevent farm owners and labor contractors from intimidating workers before secret-ballot elections. But farm and business groups say the legislation could let the United Farm Workers pressure employees into signing the union cards.

Sen. Jeff Denham, R-Merced, questioned whether workers are any safer with union representation.

"I was unaware of the fact that under union contracts we have less heat-related deaths. Do you have statistics to back that up?" Denham said.

Steinberg did not produce statistics but said he was unaware of any unionized farmworkers dying from a heat-related ailment.