By Timothy Birdnow

First we had free electric golf cartscourtesy of Cash for Clunkers, now we have free cell phones with free airtime courtesy of Barack Hussein Obama and his overstimulated plan. According the the SafeLink Wireless website:

_{"Lifeline Assistance is part of a program that was created by the government to provide discounted or free telephone service to income-eligible consumers. To help bring you this important benefit, SafeLink Wireless is proud to offer Lifeline Service. Through our Lifeline Service you will receive FREE cellular service, a FREE cell phone, and FREE Minutes every month! SafeLink Wireless Service does not cost anything – there are no contracts, no recurring fees and no monthly charges. Any Minutes you do not use will roll-over. Features such as caller ID, call waiting and voicemail are all also included with your service. If you need additional Minutes, you can buy TracFone Airtime Cards at any TracFone retailer Walmart, Walgreens, Family Dollar, etc). SafeLink Airtime Cards will be available soon."}

Look, I get it; I work with the poor myself, and know that the poor often do not have phone service - and understand the hardship that can impose. Still, free cell phone service is a bit much. What's next? Prada shoes? Gucci handbags? Perhaps free limo rides to the local food bank? These big-hearted programs have done much to cement the poor into a permanent state of poverty and hopelessness, and there is no reason to believe this will be an exception. It certainly does little for long-term economic growth as the recipients will not renew when government money runs out. The sole purpose appears to be to give a freebee to the poor, who will then hopefully vote Democratic in the next election. Now those poor people can be contacted more easily by Democrat operatives to get them to the polls! What we have here is a plantation network.

American taxpayers should speak clearly and concisely on this waste of our collective money. CAN YOU HEAR US NOW? GOOD!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:20 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 346 words, total size 2 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

This from the Federalist Patriot:

Believing themselves to be smarter than the average bear, bureaucrats in the Obama administration continue their quest to create a, well, bear market -- at least for oil. The White House decided to designate more than 200,000 square miles of Alaskan land and coastline as "critical habitat" for polar bears -- the same bear population that has reached greater numbers than previously recorded in history. In fact, despite what Al Gore and his fellow global warmists would have us believe, the population has actually risen by 40 percent since 1974.

This new non-endangered species habitat is enormous enough to qualify as the third largest state in the union, placing it between Texas and California in terms of square miles. Former UnitedHealth general counsel and now Assistant Interior Secretary Tom Strickland claimed at a news conference that the greatest threat to the bear is Arctic ice melt and that "we will continue to work to protect the polar bear and its fragile environment."

However, the new designation as a critical habitat is the first step in requiring even more government consideration of the supposed negative effect on the escalating polar bear numbers before allowing oil and gas development. The state of Alaska responded by filing a complaint in an effort to stop the listing under the Endangered Species Act.

In the meantime, some 30 percent of the world's gas supplies and 4 percent of the estimated global oil supply will be placed off limits because of this deceitful claim that the polar bear population is endangered. Next up, the loggerhead turtle, which, if listed as endangered, would bring regulations on everything along the eastern seaboard, including what lights you can put on the ocean-facing side of your house.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:07 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 303 words, total size 2 kb.

Jack Kemp (not the late politician)
 
Well, not everyone in the Northeast forgot about The World Trade Center.

For those of you able to come to New York City, there will be a commissioning and open house for the USS New York this coming week. You can learn about the ship with its 7.5 tons of steel salvaged from the World Trade Center, at their website at http://www.ussny.org/ . Some great photos at this and the following website.
 
And there is a History Channel DVD about the USS New York, detailed below in this posting.
 
The ship's Schedule of Events in New York City is at the website
http://www.ussny.org/commissioning.php and also posted next here.

PLEASE NOTE: USS NEW YORK will be open for public visiting for several days during the ten day period when she will be in New York City, and those dates and times will be posted on the official commissioning website in October. However, because of extremely limited space, attendance at the commissioning ceremony will be by invitation only. Please return regularly to www.ussny.org for the latest information on visit dates and times.

The ship will be at Pier 88, at 48th Street and 12th Avenue, New York City.

Schedule of Activities (Schedule Subject to Change)
Monday, November 2
Ship arrives at Pier 88 (at 48th Street and 12th Avenue) in New York City to a gala welcome in New York Harbor by fireboats and private vessels.
Commissioning Committee arrival event for ship's officers and senior enlisted.
Tuesday, November 3
12:00 - 4:00: Onboard reception for 9/11 families and First Responders.
Wednesday, November 4
Special events throughout the day to honor the ship and crew.
10:00 - 4:00: Ship opens for public visiting.
Thursday, November 5
NYC visit for crewmember families with events to include tours, sporting events, theater and a visit to the World Trade Center site, with reception to follow.
1:00 - 4:00: Open for public visiting.
Friday, November 6
Captain's reception for Commissioning Committee, Sponsors and Dais Guests.
Continuation of visits by crewmembers' families and special city events for the crew.
Saturday, November 7
Commissioning Ceremony: Attendance limited to ticketholders only.
Sunday, November 8
9:00 - 12:00: Open for public visiting.
12:00 - 4:00: Onboard reception for 9/11 Families and First Responders.
Monday, November 9 through Wednesday, November 11:
9:00 - 4:00: Open for public visiting.
Thursday, November 12
USS NEW YORK departs New York harbor.
 
From the History Channel's DVD on the USS New York:
http://ussny.navyleagueshipsstore.com/memorabilia/uss-new-york-dvd.html
 
Partially constructed from the steel of the World Trade Center in a stirring tribute to the heroes of 9/11, this amphibious surface ship is one of the most technologically advanced vessels ever constructed.

HERO SHIPS comprehensively profiles the revolutionary USS New York, tracking the progress of its development through detailed technical explanations, expert interviews, and amazing footage of the ship itself.

Those working on this engineering marvel are engaged in a race against time and the elements as they strive to design a ship that can face the mounting challenges of modern warfare and live up to the valor of her World War I and II predecessor, the venerable battleship USS New York, heroic veteran of numerous battles whose keel was laid in 1911.

Fast-paced and riveting, USS New York narrates the U.S. Navy’s remarkable quest to create the world’s most advanced expeditionary warfare ship.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:44 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 566 words, total size 4 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

My father-in-law sends this our way:

Pelosi Health Care Bill Blows a Kiss to Trial Lawyers
Posted By Capitol Confidential On October 30, 2009 (12:17 pm) In Congress, Healthcare

The health care bill recently unveiled by Speaker Nancy Pelosi is over 1,900 pages for a reason. It is much easier to dispense goodies to favored interest groups if they are surrounded by a lot of legislative legalese. For example, check out this juicy morsel to the trial lawyers (page 1431-1433 of the bill):

Section 2531, entitled “Medical Liability Alternatives,” establishes an incentive program for states to adopt and implement alternatives to medical liability litigation. [But]…… a state is not eligible for the incentive payments if that state puts a law on the books that limits attorneys’ fees or imposes caps on damages.

So, you can’t try to seek alternatives to lawsuits if you’ve actually done something to implement alternatives to lawsuits. Brilliant! The trial lawyers must be very happy today!

While there is debate over the details, it is clear that medical malpractive lawsuits have some impact on driving health care costs higher. There are likely a number of procedures that are done simply as a defense against future possible litigation. Recall this from the Washington Post:

“Lawmakers could save as much as $54 billion over the next decade by imposing an array of new limits on medical malpractice lawsuits, congressional budget analysts said today — a substantial sum that could help cover the cost of President Obama’s overhaul of the nation’s health system. New research shows that legal reforms would not only lower malpractice insurance premiums for medical providers, but would also spur providers to save money by ordering fewer tests and procedures aimed primarily at defending their decisions in court, Douglas Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, wrote in a letter to Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah).”

Stay tuned. There are certainly many more terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad provisions in this massive bill.

Article taken from Big Government - http://biggovernment.com
URL to article: http://biggovernment.com/2009/10/30/pelosi-health-care-bill-blows-a-kiss-to-trial-lawyers/

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:18 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 345 words, total size 3 kb.

The Southern Agrarian passes along a good idea:

http://nationalstrikeofnoconfidence.blogspot.com/
 
Spread the word, Target date? 
 

Veterans Day - November 11, 2009
Pearl Harbor Day - December 7, 2009

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:57 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 31 words, total size 1 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Over at Intellectual Conservative, Larry Kaufman tells us who should have won the Nobel Prize this year.
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/10/30/nominee-for-next-year%e2%80%99s-nobel-peace-prize/

Dr. Kaufman holds a Ph.D in Economics, and blogs at Yeah Right http://www.yeahrightblog.com/

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:15 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 39 words, total size 1 kb.

Dana Mathewson

Here's a pdf  http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gao.spb.ru%2Fenglish%2Fastrometr%2Fabduss_nkj_2009.pdf  of a Russian article (don't worry, it's translated very well) about what's REALLY going to happen, and why.

Too bad liberals can't read or understand something on this level.  Warning -- it's 15 pages long and scientific.  The last two paragraphs are as follows:

"For several years until the beginning in 2013 of a steady temperature drop, in a phase of instability, temperature will oscillate around the maximum that has been reached, without further substantial rise. Changes in climatic conditions will occur unevenly, depending on latitude. A temperature decrease in the smallest degree would affect the equatorial regions and strongly influence the temperate climate zones. The changes will have very serious consequences, and it is necessary to begin preparations even now, since there is practically no time in reserve. The global temperature of the Earth has begun its decrease without limitations on the volume of greenhouse gas emissions by industrially developed countries; therefore the implementation of the Kyoto protocol aimed to rescue the planet from the greenhouse effect should be put off at least 150 years.

"Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop, but not catastrophic global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social, demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop, which will directly affect the national interests of almost all countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably weaken the crisis."
END QUOTE

I LOVE the remark about Kyoto.  The article stresses how CO2 has nothing to do with what's going on, and that the rise in CO2 is an effect, not a cause, of the recent warming trend -- as it has been during EVERY warming trend.  And this article explains how and why it happens.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 01:58 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 343 words, total size 3 kb.

And a black lawyer is running ads exposing him!  http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/29/dc-voucher-program-fights-to-survive/

Eric Holder told him to stop -- in front of witnesses.  I'd call that a dumb move.  The lawyer, to his credit, refused.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 01:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 40 words, total size 1 kb.

Larry K. has a terrific review of Not Evil Just Wrong, the documentary that exposes the intellectual nudity of the Climate Change alarmists.

http://www.yeahrightblog.com/yeah_right/2009/10/movie-monday-not-evil-just-wrong.html

Here is a brief excerpt:

"Continuing a recent Movie Monday trend, this week's film is also a documentary, the blockbuster-in-the making Not Evil Just Wrong.  This is a different kind of blockbuster, though, since it was not released commercially or (with rare exceptions) screened in theaters.  But in terms of its impact, this may prove to be one of the most influential non-fiction films of all time.

Not Evil Just Wrong was created by Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney, the husband and wife team whose previous film Mine Your Own Business examined the impact that environmental restrictions on mining have on the economic welfare of poor people throughout the world.  Not Evil Just Wrong ups the ante and takes on the Big Kahuna of environmental issues, global warming.  The film was made available for purchase through their website, and it premiered October 18th in thousands of homes and similar venues for small to medium-sized groups across the globe. 

The film itself packs a wallop, and exposes the many exaggerations and outright deceptions that global warming advocates have peddled over the years.  The infamous "hockey stick" graphs are seen to be a fraud, since they omit the medieval warming period when global temperatures were substantially higher than today.  The film also interviews two independent researchers who examined the data which NASA scaremonger James Hansen used to claim that 1998 through 2006 were the hottest years on record.  Their analysis revealed that Hansen made several critical errors which, when corrected, show that the warmest decade of the 20th century was the 1930s, when the world was mired in an economic depression and not exactly gobbling up fossil fuels.  One of the most delicious moments in the film is when James Hansen is forced to admit his errors but can hardly bear hearing the names of these researchers (Stephen Mcintryre and Ross McKitrick), as he haughtily dismisses their work as being "of no importance."

The great white whale of the movie is of course Al Gore.  Here he is thundering about the need to freeze global carbon emissions immediately.  There he goes saying "the basic problem is cars, coal and buildings" (is that all?  sounds like an easy fix!).  And now he's at an event honoring Rachel Carson, the author of Silent Spring and acknowledged inspiration for Gore's environmental activism. Her tome led to a worldwide ban on DDT, which in the 50s and early 60s was widely used to eradicate mosquitoes and, in the process, control the diseases they spread.  Ms. Carson was particularly concerned about the impact of DDT on birds, which she believed were accidentally being wiped out along with the mosquitoes (the loss of their birdsong made the spring "silent")."

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:46 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 481 words, total size 3 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

My father-in-law forwards this refreshingly common-sensical piece by Ann Coulter:

I'll Pass on 'Opting Out'
by Ann Coulter

The Democrats' all-new "opt out" idea for health care reform is the latest fig leaf for a total government takeover of the health care system.

Democrats tell us they've been trying to nationalize health care for 65 years, but the first anyone heard of the "opt out" provision was about a week ago. They keep changing the language so people can't figure out what's going on.

The most important fact about the "opt out" scheme allegedly allowing states to decline government health insurance is that a state can't "opt out" of paying for it. All 50 states will pay for it. A state legislature can only opt out of allowing its own citizens to receive the benefits of a federal program they're paying for.

It's like a movie theater offering a "money back guarantee" and then explaining, you don't get your money back, but you don't have to stay and watch the movie if you don't like it. That's not what most people are thinking when they hear the words "opt out." The term more likely to come to mind is "scam."

While congressional Democrats act indignant that Republicans would intransigently oppose a national health care plan that now magnanimously allows states to "opt out," other liberals are being cockily honest about the "opt out" scheme.

On The Huffington Post, the first sentence of the article on the opt-out plan is: "The public option lives."

Andrew Sullivan gloats on his blog, "Imagine Republicans in state legislatures having to argue and posture against an affordable health insurance plan for the folks, as O'Reilly calls them, while evil liberals provide it elsewhere."

But the only reason government health insurance will be more "affordable" than private health insurance is that taxpayers will be footing the bill. That's something that can't be opted out of under the "opt out" plan.

Which brings us right back to the question of whether the government or the free market provides better services at better prices. There are roughly 1 million examples of the free market doing a better job and the government doing a worse job. In fact, there is only one essential service the government does better: Keeping Dennis Kucinich off the streets.

So, naturally, liberals aren't sure. In Democratic circles, the jury's still out on free market economics. It's not settled science like global warming or Darwinian evolution. But in the meantime, they'd like to spend trillions of dollars to remake our entire health care system on a European socialist model.

Sometimes the evidence for the superiority of the free market is hidden in liberals' own obtuse reporting.

In the past few years, The New York Times has indignantly reported that doctors' appointments for Botox can be obtained much faster than appointments to check on possibly cancerous moles. The paper's entire editorial staff was enraged by this preferential treatment for Botox patients, with the exception of a strangely silent Maureen Dowd.

As the Times reported: "In some dermatologists' offices, freer-spending cosmetic patients are given appointments more quickly than medical patients for whom health insurance pays fixed reimbursement fees."

As the kids say: Duh.

This is the problem with all third-party payor systems -- which is already the main problem with health care in America and will become inescapable under universal health care.

Not only do the free-market segments of medicine produce faster appointments and shorter waiting lines, but they also produce more innovation and price drops. Blindly pursuing profits, other companies are working overtime to produce cheaper, better alternatives to Botox. The war on wrinkles is proceeding faster than the war on cancer, declared by President Nixon in 1971.

In 1960, 50 percent of all health care spending was paid out of pocket directly by the consumer. By 1999, only 15 percent of health care spending was paid for by the consumer. The government's share had gone from 24 percent to 46 percent. At the same time, IRS regulations made it a nightmare to obtain private health insurance.

The reason you can't buy health insurance as easily and cheaply as you can buy car insurance -- or a million other products and services available on the free market -- is that during World War II, FDR imposed wage and price controls. Employers couldn't bid for employees with higher wages, so they bid for them by adding health insurance to the overall compensation package.

Although employees were paying for their own health insurance in lower wages and salaries, their health insurance premiums never passed through their bank accounts, so it seemed like employer-provided health insurance was free.

Employers were writing off their employee insurance plans as a business expense, but when the IRS caught on to what employers were doing, they tried to tax employer-provided health insurance as wages. But, by then, workers liked their "free" health insurance, voters rebelled, and the IRS backed down.

So now, employer-provided health insurance is subsidized not only by the employees themselves through lower wages and salaries, but also by all taxpayers who have to make up the difference for this massive tax deduction.

How many people are stuck in jobs they hate and aren't good at, rather than going out and doing something useful, because they need the health insurance from their employers? I'm not just talking about MSNBC anchors -- I mean throughout the entire economy.

Almost everything wrong with our health care system comes from government interference with the free market. If the health care system is broken, then fix it. Don't try to invent a new one premised on all the bad ideas that are causing problems in the first place.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:22 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 967 words, total size 6 kb.

Jack Kemp

No, this isn’t an Onion article. This is keeping with the surreal mode of newspeak journalism.
Jayson Blair will be speaking on ethics at Washington and Lee University in November, according to the Associated Press.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Disgraced-exreporter-to-speak-apf-3393370068.html?x=0&.v=1

One would presume that this is the beginning of his rehabilitation, that other journalists think the public – or at least the young students – have no past memory or have forgotten the details of his leaving the New York Times in disgrace. The topic of his speech will be “Lessons Learned.” One wonders if the lessons learned will be whether to not do what he did -- or to craft a better subterfuge and not to get caught in the future. Some may find this a harsh judgement, but lying is much more acceptable these days than even a few years ago, particularly if you are on the left. Lies about Rush Limbaugh, my congressman Weiner lying about 30 percent health insurance profit margins at a town hall I attended, Obama lying about wanting to pursue the “real war” in Afghanistan and saying you can keep your insurance company as an “option” under his health plan, etc.

Well, those in attendance at Mr. Blair’s talk will presumably find out what type of remorse or explanation he has to offer.

Be there or be square.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:08 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 229 words, total size 2 kb.

Jack Kemp

The only surprise is that the Post-Dispatch ran this article.
 
Jack
 
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/laworder/story/9250F6CB3C607A998625765D000312CC?OpenDocument
 
Suit claims East St. Louis passed up white police chief over race
By Nicholas J.C. Pistor
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
10/28/2009

EAST ST. LOUIS — City officials seeking a new police chief passed up the former director of the Florida Highway Patrol, who formerly was a top commander of the Illinois State Police, because he is white, two former members of a city board claim.

Wyatt Frazer and Della Murphy allege in a federal lawsuit that they were forced off the Police, Fire and Civil Service Board for their advocacy of a white candidate when the chief's job was open in 2007.

Their lawyer said Tuesday the spurned candidate was Ronald Grimming, a Metro East resident who rose to be deputy superintendent of the State Police before taking the top spot in Florida in 1993. Grimming could not be reached for comment.

The suit against Mayor Alvin Parks, City Manager Robert Betts and the city itself does not identify Grimming by name or qualifications.

But the plaintiffs' lawyer, Thomas E. Kennedy III, said it was Grimming, and that Parks told his clients "the city wasn't ready to hire a white police chief."

East St. Louis has a 97.7 percent black population, according to U.S. census records.

READ THE REST AT THE LINK ABOVE.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:02 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 235 words, total size 2 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

I knew it was coming; we would be extolled to give up eating meat!  According to the Timesonline, Lord Stern, chief economist at the World Bank and author of a ridiculous study 1996 study on the economics of climate change, said:

"Meat is a wasteful use of water and creates a lot of greenhouse gases. It puts enormous pressure on the world's resources. A vegetarian diet is better."

The Times article continues:

"Direct emissions of methane from cows and pigs is a significant source of greenhouse gases. Methane is 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide as a global warming gas.

Lord Stern, the author of the influential 2006 Stern Review on the cost of tackling global warming, said that a successful deal at the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December would lead to soaring costs for meat and other foods that generate large quantities of greenhouse gases.

He predicted that people's attitudes would evolve until meat eating became unacceptable. "I think it's important that people think about what they are doing and that includes what they are eating," he said. "I am 61 now and attitudes towards drinking and driving have changed radically since I was a student. People change their notion of what is responsible. They will increasingly ask about the carbon content of their food."

Lord Stern, a former chief economist of the World Bank and now I. G. Patel Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics, warned that British taxpayers would need to contribute about £3 billion a year by 2015 to help poor countries to cope with the inevitable impact of climate change.

He also issued a clear message to President Obama that he must attend the meeting in Copenhagen in person in order for an effective deal to be reached. US leadership, he said, was "desperately needed" to secure a deal.

He said that he was deeply concerned that popular opinion had so far failed to grasp the scale of the changes needed to address climate change, or of the importance of the UN meeting in Copenhagen from December 7 to December 18. "I am not sure that people fully understand what we are talking about or the kind of changes that will be necessary," he added.

Lord Stern, who said that he was not a strict vegetarian himself, was speaking on the eve of an all-parliamentary debate on climate change. His remarks provoked anger from the meat industry.

Jonathan Scurlock, of the National Farmers Union, said: "Going vegetarian is not a worldwide solution. It's not a view shared by the NFU. Farmers in this country are interested in evidence-based policymaking. We don't have a methane-free cow or pig available to us."

FULL STORY at <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6891362.ece

End Excerpt

A NOTE FROM TIM

I wrote about this very thing at American Thinker back in early 2007; and I would recommend everyone reread "Where`s the Beef" to gain a better insight into why this is important to the moonbat left. The left HATES meat, because they want to standardize diet as a means of creating an Uberculture. It takes a lot of grain to produce meat, and their hope is to remake the world according to a vegetarian diet to balance the inequity between what the rich and poor consume.

Hat Tip: CCNET

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:36 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 563 words, total size 4 kb.

Jack Kemp (the undead, not late non politician)

This story was linked to at American Thinker. I believe it applies to every State of the Union,

including Missouri, New York, and especially California.

Jack

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentary/65839382.html

Fred Zimmerman: That money is washing away

There's a growing public workforce, retiring early but living longer while drawing benefits. Do the math.

By FRED ZIMMERMAN

Last update: October 25, 2009 - 11:42 AM
Until it finally goes bankrupt. It will be interesting to see what happens. And it will be a very sorry situation for folks who have been… read more counting on this all their lives.If I were a teacher in my 40's or less, I think it would be wise to start an IRA account.
British scholar John Argenti said that failing organizations rarely go under because of severe external conditions. They usually fall prey, he said, to normal hazards after the organization has been weakened by incompetent management. Weaknesses of this kind are plentiful in American public policy today -- consider deficits and energy policy, among others. But there may be no better example than the festering problem of mushrooming and underfunded public retirement funds. The basic problem is that pension funds created to finance retirement benefits for thousands of public employees -- teachers, police officers, firefighters, and state, city and county workers of every description -- lack sufficient funds to meet their obligations. The result could be sharp reductions in future benefits, significant tax increases, or both.

Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak brought the scale of the situation home in his budget address last summer. He reported that nearly two-thirds of an 11.3 percent property tax hike next year would go to fund the city's pension obligations.

There are, of course, many dedicated public workers across Minnesota and the nation. Indeed, their numbers have soared, and that's part of the challenge.

In 1950, about two-and-a-half times as many Americans were employed in manufacturing as in government -- 15 million in manufacturing, 6 million in government. Today, governments have 22.5 million employees, while manufacturing has 13.4 million.

No state has added either construction or manufacturing employees in the past recessionary year. But 32 states have added government employees.

These dramatic shifts in the nature of the American economy raise questions about the future of tax revenues.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:00 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 387 words, total size 3 kb.

Jack Kemp (not the late politician)

The doctors say they won't take new Medicare patients under Obama's 21 percent cuts, but the truth be told, the doctors are probably aren't taking in new Medicare patients NOW and just not admitting it to the press. As the old Metropolitan Life insurance commercial (seen in NY years ago and maybe elsewhere), "The Future is Now." Doctors have big expenses and are not going to wait to the last minute and be told by the government that they have to keep those patients by statute law.
If you are a smoker in a personal budget squeeze (lost job or job threatened) and you heard that the government was going to raise taxes on cigarettes next year, you would probably stockpile cartons now or enquire about getting either name or non-name brands from some Native American Reservation store or website. Or you would look into the possibility of some laser-based stop smoking cure.
Do you think doctors would be any less likely to move to keep their near future expenses down and keep their medical offices/facilities open? Doctors are more likely than an average person to anticipate a strong threat to their expenses and livelihood. And seniors would be highly aware of this change of medical circumstances.
Jack
http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/27/news/economy/healthcare_medicare_doctors/index.htm?postversion=2009102707
Special Report Fixing Health Care
Seniors squeezed as doctors shun Medicare
If a proposed 21% cut in payment rates goes through in 2010, it could spark a physician boycott against new enrollees.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Medicare has become a scary word to the doctors at the largest private group practice in Kansas City, Mo.
It's so scary that most physicians at Kansas City Internal Medicine, with 65% of its nearly 70,000 active patients age 65 or older, have stopped accepting walk-in Medicare enrollees, said Dr. David Wilt, an internist at the group.

Wilt and his colleagues say they are shunning the area's growing senior population because they believe Medicare doesn't reimburse physicians enough to cover the cost of care.

"And if Medicare further cuts its reimbursement rates, then we'll be functioning at a loss," said Wilt.

Wilt -- and doctors with lots of senior patients -- are especially troubled by a 21% cut in Medicare payments to physicians scheduled to take place in 2010. Last week, the Senate voted against stopping that cut, and more annual cuts over the next decade, from taking place.

"If the [21%] cut happens, that cut in our payments will exceed our profits. The only option to us to stay in business will be to fire employees," Wilt said.

Physicians say a boycott against Medicare has already begun because they are tired of dealing with the yearly threat of a payment cut.

Dr. John Hagan, a Kansas City-area ophthalmologist, offers a unique perspective. "I can speak to both sides of this," he said.

As many as 75% of patients at his group practice are Medicare beneficiaries who are treated for problems such as glaucoma or undergo cataract surgery. And if payment rates are cut 21%, after already being reduced to about half the going $1,200 rate for cataract surgery and care in Missouri, Hagan said he won't be able to see more Medicare patients because he won't be able to cover his expenses.

But Hagan himself became Medicare-eligible this month -- and he's nervous. "If I accept Medicare for myself and my wife, I'm fearful I won't be able to stay with my cardiologist and my wife won't be able to stay with her physicians," he said.

Hagan has elected not to enroll in Medicare. Instead, he's paying extra out of pocket for his company's insurance coverage.

"At some point I won't want to work," said Hagan. "At that time, I will be on Medicare, and I am scared to death."

Perception versus reality?
The federal government's Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) said it is aware of anecdotal reports of doctors not taking Medicare beneficiaries.

However, the agency maintains that its own data, and other industry reports, show only a small percentage of beneficiaries unable to get physician access.

CMS said 96.5% of all practicing physicians, nearly 600,000 doctors, currently participate in Medicare.

"Geographically, the level within every state is less than 5% of Medicare beneficiaries who have difficulties accessing a doctor," said Renee Mentnech, director of CMS' Research and Evaluation Group.

Mentnech also pointed to an August report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), an independent branch of the Congress, that showed less than 3% of Medicare beneficiaries reported major difficulties accessing physician services in 2007 and 2008.

But these numbers do little to comfort seniors such as Earl Bean, 67. He recently told CNNMoney.com that he couldn't easily find a new primary care physician who accepted Medicare after his former doctor retired and Bean himself had to move to a new city.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 05:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 812 words, total size 5 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

We have discussed the proposal for world government in the Copenhagen climate change treaty here at Birdblog, and there has since been no refutation of that provision in the bill. As everyone should know, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that international treaties supersede the Constitution, and therefore in cases of conflict between the two the treaty overrules the Constitution. In short, if this provision is not removed, and if Obama signs it and Congress ratifies it (something almost assured) then the U.S. will become a province in a one world government.

This is a very grave matter. Here is an essay from the Science and Environment Policy Project (SEPP) followed by comments from myself:

"No matter what happens in Copenhagen next December, it will be presented as a great success, like all the other global environmental conferences before. Some kind of a treaty will be signed at the last minute – after the traditional all-night session. President Obama will sign it. Most of the third-world countries will sign it because they think they’re going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regimes from the European Union will rubberstamp it. Virtually nobody won’t sign it.

But hidden within the draft treaty is language creating a “world government.” According to Lord Monckton, who has read the draft treaty carefully, “the word ‘government’ actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third-world countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, ‘climate debt,’ because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement.”

“Like the EU constitution, which when ratified will surrender most of national prerogatives to a Brussels-based bureaucracy, the Treaty will create world governance. Paragraphs 36 and 38 very clearly envisage the creation of a new world ‘government’ - the word occurs twice - with direct powers of intervention in the economic and environmental affairs of individual nations, over the heads of any elected government. The Treaty provides that the new ‘government’ will have three functions: government, redistribution of wealth from rich to poor countries in supposed reparation for imagined ‘climate debt,’ and enforcement. The last function, enforcement, is to be carried out via a many-tentacled series of ‘technical panels.’

“And all of this to address what is now proven by measurement to be the non-problem of ‘global warming’ - a non-problem which, even if it were a problem, could not possibly be usefully addressed by any attempted mitigation of our CO2 emissions. Of course, one can take the risk of hoping that the Treaty does not mean what I say it means: but I have long experience in the drafting and negotiating of international treaties, and this one is exceptional in the global power that it takes from individual nations and transfers to the new world government - a government not one of whose functionaries will be elected. Article VI of the US Constitution must be read in conjunction with the Vienna Convention on International Treaties. The Supreme Court has found that an international treaty prevails over the Constitution to the extent that there is a conflict.” Lord Monckton of Brenchley"

End Excerpt.

Some things begin with much fanfare and hoopla; consider the U.N., the creation of which offered the "last, best hope for Mankind" and which has subsequently become little more than a high school model government with prostitutes. But some very powerful and important things have started out quite small and seemingly inconsequential. As Jesus pointed out in the Gospel, the Kingdom of God is like a mustard seed; tiny seed, huge bush. 

Consider the European Union; originally created as a mere trade federation - the European Coal and Steel Community, it was ostensibly formed to protect and coordinate member coal and steel policy. It was successful, and other European nations, intimidated by the immense economic power of the United States and enamored of forming international institutions in the face of Warsaw Pact aggression, quickly signed on. This would be followed by the two Treaties of Rome establishing the European Economic Community, and the European Atomic Energy Community. This was followed by a continual encroachment on the sovereignty of European nations; Brussels 1965-68, SEA in 1986-87, Maastrich 92-93 (actually founding the European Union), Amsterdam, Nice, and Lisbon.  Piece by piece the forces of internationalism triumphed through treaty over European sovereignty, and now the nations of Europe are poised to cease to exist, melded into the liberal collective.

The E.U. is the most striking example of this, but history has others.  Certainly the Atlantic Charter (which gave us the U.N.) can be viewed as one such; it doomed the European system of colonialism, for instance.

The point is, we may not like the consequences of this feel-good treaty. Climate change is a pseudo problem; science increasingly suggests that there is no cause for alarm over increasing amounts of atmospheric carbon dioxide, yet political leaders and beaurocrats are moving forward with draconian schemes that will do little to prevent carbon build up. Why? Because there has been and is now a globalism, a notion among the world's elite that national boundaries are artificial and should be removed. George W. Bush believed that way; remember "family values don't stop at the Rio Grande"? He had dealt profitably with people all over the world, and came to feel (as opposed to think) that there was something antiquated about the concept of national boundaries.

Clinton thought that way, too, and the current occupant on Pennsylvania Ave. is clearly on board with this notion.

The fundamental question is, will world government really serve human interests?  Well, did the colonial empires serve human interest? They were larger than the nation states, yet are today considered a bad deal. The nation states themselves were massive things next to the old feudal kingdoms, and they were only helpful in that they imposed a sort of order on the endlessly warring kingdoms. Obviously, it is necessary to maintain civil societies, and perhaps a larger structure is useful in doing that, but what is the track record? Most larger nation states have become hopelessly corrupt and tyrannical as power has been gathered from the provincial to the center. Consider the U.S.; would the Founding Fathers have decided to create the Federal system at all had they known it would lead to an American Imperium?  Larger political entities require far more supervision to restrain. Governments are like fire; a good thing in small doses, a killer when large. We are witnessing a worldwide conflagration. This cannot be good.

For hundreds of thousands of years Man lived in family units and small tribal communities. Sometimes overlords would tax them, but largely left them to live as before. With the coming of civilization, there has been an endless tug-of-war between those who want to centralize all power and those who would maintain a simpler system. Thus far the statists have been triumphant, and the belief among most people is that this is the tide of history. But changes in our technology make a return to a less centralized world possible; we can communicate directly, we can create things easily, trade with the push of a button. The elaborate infrastructure that necessitated these enormous political and economic systems is no longer necessary.

Human beings aren't army ants, or bees. We need freedom to thrive as surely as we need air or water. Creating another super empire will not serve our immediate or longterm interests.

We must kill the beast in-utero. We must stop the revolution in Copenhagen.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:13 AM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 1291 words, total size 8 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Americans for Limited Government (ALG) has a terrific overview of the Obama Administration and their usurpation of power over the rights of free Americans.

http://netrightnation.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1252032:special-report-a-clear-eyed-view-of-the-obama-regime&catid=1:nrn-blog&Itemid=7

With the hornet-swarm like attack on civil liberties by Obama and his people, it is easy to forget what he has done - and is doing. We need to keep our eye on the ball.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:02 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 65 words, total size 1 kb.

Jack Kemp

The Associated Press reports on health insurance profits being pretty small. You can read it at: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091025/D9BI4D6O1.html

This is a liberal news outfit...Hey, where was this report when Cong. Weiner was talking about 30 percent profits last summer at his town hall meeting I attended? I guess the AP now wants to either cover their assets or concedes this bill could lose and they don't want to be seen as on board for a loser...kinda...sorta...whatever.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:19 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 84 words, total size 1 kb.

Jack Kemp

 
Last week I found myself at a gathering in a bar, talking to a young man from Philadelphia. I brought up the subject of Joey Vento, the guy who placed a sign in his cheese steak restaurant that said if you don't order in English, you can't be served here. Liberals were aghast. Some of you who read my piece about Philadelphia Freedom on the Birdnow website know that I had met Joey Vento, knew he didn't learn English until he got to school - such as myself - and that I shook his hand at a protest in Philly.
 
The young man had this idea that a person who had to work didn't have the time to learn English. I told him my parents learned English in their early 40s.
 
I told him that many Europeans, without fancy eductions, speak three or four languages. He replied he had been to France and many outside of Paris don't speak English, changing my premise somewhat from "any language." This was going downhill fast.
 
The young guy said that that the Hispanics don't need to learn English, they can watch Telemundo and they can just be limited by their low paying job possibilities (his words). I told him that if they didn't learn English, they would also never be part of the culture and political life of American values. He didn't think that was important and that told me - de facto - that he favored an underclass in this country significantly blissfully ignorant of the rest of the country. But perhaps their alienation could make them easy to be politically manipulated by demagogues, I thought to myself.
 
We wound up just giving each other dirty looks and walking away, he seeing the "wisdom" of a "so what?" attitude and a large alienated population - and my seeing the stupidity of it. 
He probably learned this attitude in school, but one wonders how quick he was to agree with this lazy thought.
 
So this is liberalism. Telling an immigrant that they can't learn and achieve in English and they shouldn't even try. And they are supposed to be more caring than conservatives because they want to excuse anything not to better oneself. Yeah, that's a great life lesson in any language. 
 
The young liberal was a low level writer for a financial house and if he has excuses for others not wanting to become more than mediocre, being in America "here for the beer" only,  I suspect his own attitude in life reflects a similar attitude - but I can't prove that. The only thing I can prove - by his conceding it in the argument - is that if you don't make an effort to be part of the culture, the others who are part of the culture will only have low paying jobs for you - and the odds are higher that your kids will have the same psychological resignation to the lower rungs of society.
 
The Mayor of Los Angeles, although I don't agree with Antonio Villaraigosa's politics, didn't buy this line after his father abandoned his family and he contracted a tumor in his spine that paralyzed him from the waist down,  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Villaraigosa#Early_years_and_education . He didn't buy into this liberal kid's philosophy and give up. Although I just read Mayor Villaraigosa mini-biography for the first time after my discussion, I doubt that knowing it last week and using it to refute the soft racism of low expectations would have made much of a difference. But at least I could have weakened the smugness of his worldview that Hispanics should be all right with being low achievers.

Yes, many Hispanics are low achievers but so are people of other backgrounds. What one concentrates on and energizes in one's life for others and yourself is what you get. I've met some high achieving Hispanics, including an Army officer and a Mexican-American going for a Masters degree in a biological science on a job I had in a college laboratory many years ago. 
 
Rationalizing low expectations is an excuse factory. And it is an excuse factory for both native born and foreign born. And that is the one type of factory I'd like to be sent out of the country.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 05:59 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 716 words, total size 5 kb.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:40 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 492 words, total size 3 kb.