December 11, 2019
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) made a puzzling argument on Tuesday in order to counter a conservative nonprofit's argument about free markets providing paid family leave."Do we know how long puppies are allowed to stay with their mothers after a dog has given birth?" she asked during a House Oversight Committee hearing on paid leave.
"Uh, eight weeks. So, the market has decided that women and people who give birth deserve less time with their children than a dog," she added.
Ocasio-Cortez seemed to be referring to the practice of breeders keeping puppies until they reach 8 weeks of age,at which point they're sold and likely never see their parents again.
Paid family leave generally refers to a limited period of time in which human parents can leave work to take care of a new child. The parent is still able to live with the child after that paid period ends.
She made those comments in an apparent attempt to dispute Heritage Foundation scholar Rachel Greszler, who had advocated businesses and workers negotiating their own terms for wages and paid leave. Greszler, in a statement provided to Fox News, criticized Ocasio-Cortez's comments.
"As a woman who has given birth to six children, I find being compared to a breeding dog with puppies incredibly offensive. What AOC failed to point out is the reason many states require puppies to spend at least eight weeks with their mothers is in the context of them being sold to people after that period," she said.
Ocasio-Cortez's use of the word "allowed" indicated some kind of legal prohibition -- meaning that by definition, the government interfered rather than allowing the free market to act. A long list of states has instituted regulations surrounding that point in development.
Not to mention that it's not a legal requirement that puppies be removed from their home after eight weeks, either. It's just a standard practice among professional breeders that they aren't sold or given away before eight weeks. But as we know, facts never get in the way of a liberal's story. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-dog-breeding-paid-leave
I sure wouldn't let her take care of my dog!
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
11:06 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 404 words, total size 3 kb.
CNN, which has breathlessly covered every second of the impeachment, is passing on Michael Horowitz testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. That committee is investigating the FISA abuses by the FBI.
From Breitbart:
So CNN is rather going to attack Trump than advertise the abuses by the FBI? The article continues:
The report Monday answered accusations from PresidentDonald Trumpthat the bureau acted improperly in its surveillance of former campaign adviser Carter Page, as it related to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
"He will deliver a detailed report of what he found regarding his investigation, along with recommendations as to how to make our judicial and investigative systems better,†said panel Chairman Sen.Lindsey Graham.
Horowitz’s report, however, said there were aspects of the FBI’s surveillance activities that were rife with errors. It specified 17 inaccuracies in three FISA applications that may have inflated the bureau’s justification for surveillance against Page.
Horrowitz noted that the FBI’s efforts were "in compliance with department and FBI policies,†and that he didn’t find "documentary or testimonial evidence†that showed the bureau acted with political bias or improper motivation.â€
I hope they put Horowitz on the hot seat. He seems to have pulled a James Comey, accusing the FBI of "mistakes" but concluding they aren't prosecutable based on his own ideas. (You may remember Comey, after excoriating Hillary Clinton, said no prosecutor would bring charges and thus closed the case.)Horowitz is a Democrat. You must remember that. And he's a Deep State insider. Too many on our side expected him to tear the FBI up and down. We should never have believed that.
Horowitz needs to be grilled, and hard. And it is as newsworthy, if not more, than all of Schiff's impeachment witnesses and "evidence". Strange how it's not "newsworthy" to CNN.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:59 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 348 words, total size 3 kb.
Democrat Karen Bass says she's open to impeach Trump again if he gets reelected in 2020
Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., said Tuesday she's willing to impeach President Trump again if he wins reelection in 2020.
TMZ founder Harvey Levin presented Bass with a scenario in which Trump wins a second term but Democrats take over the Senate from the Republicans.
"There's no such thing, really, as double jeopardy in an impeachment trial because it's political," Levin said. "Suppose he gets reelected... and you win back the Senate in a big way. If you did that, would you be inclined to take a second bite at the apple and reintroduce the exact same impeachment articles and then send it through again a second if you have a Democratic Senate on your side?"
"So, you know, yes, but I don't think it would be exactly the same and here's why," Bass responded, "because even though we are impeaching him now, there's still a number of court cases, there's a ton of information that could come forward. For example, we could get his bank records and find out that he's owned 100 percent by the Russians."
Maybe it's just me, but I'm thinking that reality is not this gal's strong suit. I think she's farther out in space than the rest of her party. And this Harvey Levin -- how does he think the donkeys will take the Senate in 2020? There's just too much totally wild speculation here.
A Tweet follows containing a video, and although I didn't watch it, I'm confident it's for the birds. Go here https://www.foxnews.com/media/karen-bass-impeach-trump-2020 for the whole thing. And you did catch that she's from the Peoples' Republic of California, didn't you?She continued, "You are absolutely right in your scenario, but the only thing I would say slightly different is, it might not be the same articles of impeachment because the odds are we would have a ton more information, and then the odds of that, sadly enough, is that, you know, he probably has other examples of criminal behavior."
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:53 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 355 words, total size 3 kb.
Feds Discover $1.3B in Unreported Foreign Funding of U.S. Universities
Any wonder why our universities are so left wing and Islamophilic?
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:38 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 31 words, total size 1 kb.
Alan Dershowitz scoffs at the articles of impeachment against Trump, saying they don't meet Constitutional muster.
From Newsmax
Neither of the two articles - abuse of power and obstruction of Congress – presented by the Democrats "satisfies the express constitutional criteria for impeachment,†as both are not crimes or even mentioned in the Constitution.
This means that the Democrats are placing themselves above the Constitution, he wrote.
Dershowitz argued that both articles of impeachment "are so vague and open-ended that they could be applied in partisan fashion by a majority of the House against almost any president from the opposing party.â€
He added this notion is exactly what the framers sought to avoid – a decision to impeach based on "the comparative strength of parties,†rather than on "innocence or guilt.â€
Indeed, had they had any evidence of wrongdoing the Democrats would have made a more surgical charge. As of now it is a shotgun blast, with the hope that something will strike the target.Notice how they gave up on bribery, which IS mentioned specifically in the Constitution. They realized they couldn't make that stick.
So they have gone with the broadest charges imaginable. Where does it say the President has to cooperate with Congress in coiling the rope with which they plan to hang him? He is a co-equal branch of government. "Obstructing Congress" is not a charge with any validity. And what exactly constitutes "abuse of power"? They are making this up on the fly; they didn't see Obama as abusing power when Lois Lerner was systematically using the power of the IRS to suppress conservatives. But Trump asks for a corruption investigation after the target brags about squelching one and they accuse him of abusing power! And they couldn't establish a quid pro quo, a tit for tat, a if this then that. Ukraine got their money and never opened the investigation. And the President was on record as saying there was no quid pro quo implied to one of his subordinates who acted as witness FOR THE PROSECUTION.
The real abuse of power is in the House of Representatives. Nancy Pelosi should be under investigation. So should Schiff, and Nadler.
I hope Bob Barr is doing exactly that. But he won't; he's a member of the Ruling Class himself. He might investigate, but he's not going after the heart of darkness.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:34 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 404 words, total size 3 kb.
The cowards in the Senate GOP are going to hold a quick, content-less Senate trial in the impeachment of Donald Trump.
According to the Washington Examiner:
They say there's "no appetite" for a real trial!
Why?
Because the Senate is full of RINO Republicans, a festering sore in the heart of the swampland. None of these people wanted a popular uprising, and they have labored to tamp down any successes by Trump. The only legislation they moved to Mr. Trump's desk was the tax cut; everything else that Trump promised has died in committee.
And Mitch McConnell was earlier advising Republicans to run on local issues and avoid associating themselves with Trump.
McConnell is an old enough hand to know the Democrats were going to impeach Trump at the first opportunity. He was planning a no-defense strategy from the beginning.
Bear in mind McConnell is as underhanded a weasel as you will find. McConnell has labored behind the scenes to keep conservatives out of office in multiple states across the country. It was McConnell who recruited Roy Moore in Alabama in order to split the conservative vote and get his buddy, the comic-book supervillain-named Luther Strange the Senate seat. (He wanted to deny Congressman Mo Brooks,w ho would have won, a seat in the Senate.) When Moore won it was quite possibly McConnell who dug up these chppies to accuse Moore of sexual misconduct. When Moore wouldn't quit McConnell pulled the rug out on him, preferring a Democrat to the monster he had created.
McConnell also the driving force in kicking Jeneane Hampton off Benjamin Bevin's gubernatorial ticket in Kentucky, a move that cost Bevin his governorship, at least in part.
McConnell is not a conservative, although he does play one on t.v.
And with such a devious nature, I was convinced McConnell was going to let Trump twist in the wind as much as possible. See, he needs to punish Trump and the people who put Trump in office, but not actually lose the Presidency. Better to have an impotent Trump and show America the folly of going outside of the professional political class.
Lindsay Graham, the former McCain protege and sometime-Trump ally, says "I want to end this".
Senator John Barrossa of Wyoming stated:
So it's all about getting it off the plate. Don't these imbeciles understand that the American People need to be shown that this was a lie straight from Hell? Don't the Republicans get it? This whole thing was political, and it has to be dealt with in a political fashion.
A quick vote suggests that Trump is guilty and the GOP covering for him. That is how it will look to the public. They need a slow, thorough trial with many witnesses. And they need to expose the cabal that has tried this coup. Sunshine is the best disinfectant.
Which is why the Establishment in the GOP doesn't want sunlight. They are trying to protect the Swamp. If they start calling witnesses and grilling them they will have things come out they want to remain hidden. In fact, one wonders how much dirt the CIA has on the Republicans in the Senate? Remember, the CIA and FBI and other security agencies were weaponized by Barack Obama, and it is they who started this all off in the first place.
Does anyone remember the impeachment of Bill Clinton? The GOP in the Senate acted precisely the same way. They wanted a quick trial with no witnesses called. It was a farce, and Clinton was quickly acquitted, despite being patently guilty of actual crimes (obstruction of justice and perjury in a Federal court.) The Senate then acted terrified, and George Stephanopoulis warned of a "sexual apocalypse" if the GOP pursued the matter; he knew they had in their possession for years those 900 FBI raw files and would use them against anyone who voted to remove Mr. Clinton. The GOP ran like thieves.
And it cost them. They lost Senate seats in the next election, ending up with a split Senate. They wound up losing seats in the House, too.
It may well be worse if the GOP does this. They will lose the moderates who voted for Trump. They will lose some conservatives who have had enough of the cowardly behavior. But I think that is fine with McConnell, who would rather be shed of both and retain control of "his" party.
And then things can get "back to normal". But they never will.
Angelo Codevilla, the scholar who coined the term "Ruling Class" penned an essay in which he sadly eulogized the American Experiment, stating that America as we know it is over. He states:
He's not being pessimistic; he is a realist. The notion of America as the great compromise is ended. Politics, always nasty and contentious, has now become open warfare, and the law is being used to criminalize political disagreement. The Left is the culprit here; they understand nothing but power. You can thank Saul Alinsky for that. Oh, and Stalin, and Lenin, and every other jack-booted commie. But it is now a part of America and we have a war being waged against the American People by the Ruling Class. That is what Codevilla meant. The Ruling Class was always at least nominally restrained by public opinion. No longer. They seek absolute power now. The Country Class has rebelled and they are now trying to destroy our independence of thought. This impeachment is nothing but the Return of the Sith. It is about revenge against the Country Class, whom the Elites always disliked but now openly hate.
At any rate, here is more from the Examiner:
The president is not in danger of being removed from office by the Senate, a move that requires 67 votes.
But in a trial, he is seeking exoneration. Some Republicans question whether that’s possible without hearing from witnesses, whether it be these or other less politically charged figures. "Not sure how you have a fair trial without calling witnesses,†said one Trump ally in the House. But with some Senate Republicans facing uncertain 2020 reelection contests and others privately unhappy with Trump’s behavior, mustering 51 GOP votes for Trump’s dream witness list appears impossible.
They don't want an exoneration; they want Trump hanging by his fingernails. They want a long, painful, slow crucifixion.
They have to know it will never be over. The Democrats will try to remove Trump as long as they draw breath. They will simply find a new outrage and draft impeachment articles based on that.
And if they take the Senate, which is a good possibility? Trump had better ask for asylum somewhere that can guarantee his safety.
This is a fight to the death. It has moved beyond a political campaign. Only one side will be standing at the end of this. But the Republicans continue to prattle and preen. They think it is just another political season.
But out here in flyover country we see the rage and anger rising. This thing is going to turn into a full blown civil war if the GOP doesn't find its spine.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:45 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1450 words, total size 10 kb.
December 10, 2019
If I lived in her town, I'd be in her restaurant at least once a week. Even if the food was lousy, and I'm doggone sure it isn't!Lauren Boebert, a Colorado gun owner who garnered national attention when she challenged former 2020 candidate Beto O'Rourke on his controversial gun buyback plan, is running for Congress.
Boebert is a mother of four boys and the owner of Shooters Grill in Rifle, Colo. She's running to represent the state's third congressional district, a seat held by Republican Scott Tipton since 2011.
Appearing on "Fox & Friends" with host Steve Doocy, Boebert said that she felt it was a "very selfish thing" not to step up "on behalf of millions of Americans all across this country."
She told Doocy that she drove for three hours to see O'Rourke with her "Glock on her hip" and told him, "'Hell no, you're not going to take our guns.'"
Boebert also said that all of her wait staff open-carries firearms after an incident in an alley behind her restaurant left a man beaten to death.
"So, that immediately prompted the question: How would I defend my people?" she told Doocy. "That day I researched Colorado gun laws, and I began to open-carry to do exactly that: protect my people."
Boebert told the "Friends" host that she feels like she has to run for Congress to make the world a better place for her children.
"I feel that there is a mandate upon my life to prepare the world that I'm going to send them out into," she stated.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
11:15 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 312 words, total size 3 kb.
I've got your quid pro quo right here!
Obama Gave Common Core Contract to Publisher, Got $65 Million Book Deal in Return
And Obama gave the AMA control of the codes which are used to pay doctors in return for their support for Obamacare.
And don't forget the money he paid directly to Senators on the fence, such as Mary Landrieu in what came to be called The Louisiana Purchase.
Or Obama's giving pallets of cash to Iran to release hostages and sign his treaty.
What of the fact Obama gave ambassadorships to bundlers who donated half a million dollars or more to his re-election campaign? There were also many contracts and subsidies awarded to people who donated a lot of money to the BHO.
Funny how the Democrats and Media have forgotten all of this.
Remember Steve Wesley? He was a regular at the White House, and he raked in half a billlion bucks from the Stimulus for Tesla Motors.
The Stimulus itself was nothing but a giant quid pro quo, giving money to labor unions, left wing NGO's, and anyone else Obama needed to promote his re-election.
What was Obama want Medvedev to tell Vlad? "I'll have more flexibility after the election". Why did he need Putin to know that? What was he expecting in return for his gumby act?
If ever there was a man who traded American tax dollars and sold policy for favors, it was Mr. Obama.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:06 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 248 words, total size 2 kb.
Lookee here Hillary Clinton would be the frontrunner if she were to get into the Democratic primary!
From the Free Beacon article:
In this hypothetical scenario, 21 percent of Democratic respondents said they would support Hillary, enough to give her the lead over current Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden, who received 20 percent. The results suggest that were she to enter, Hillary would siphon support from many of the top candidates.
Oh, that is delicious!
Hillary would be a disaster for the Democrats. Even if she eventually lost, she would suck all the air out of the Democratic war zeppelin and she would not shrink from destroying what would be a viable Democratic candidate to get in herself. There is no reason to believe she would do any better than she did last time - or the time before that. In fact, she would probably get beaten in a landslide across the country. Yes, she'll win New York, Massachusetts, and California, and the overall vote numbers would be close, but she'll get CREAMED across America.
Of course, that will be grounds to push even more for eliminating the Electoral College and ramping up the "resistance".
I would like to point out that, according to Star Trek's Borg, resistance is futile. Of course, the Democrats are the Borg, the collectivists, who hate us individuals, so perhaps the analogy is faulty.
At any rate, trot out the coconut oil and get the popcorn going. It's going to be FUN!
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:32 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 290 words, total size 2 kb.
Detente only works when the other side fears retaliation. Our "champions" refuse to retaliate. It should be made quite plain that we are going to impeach their next president. In fact, we can impeach others from their party. I think Ruth Bader Ginsburg would be a good choice; she is beloved by them. As Sun Tzu said, you seize that which is the enemy holds dear.
MARK LEVIN: The Next Democrat President Must be Impeached
Sadly, the GOP will want to "take the high road" and "get back to normal".
Every bullied child with his pants removed and his lunch money gone wind sup there by "taking the high road". It's a recipe for a beating. Sadly, our side is more interested in going along to get along. They want to be tolerated, to make their lobbying dollars and get invited to cocktail parties.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:22 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 155 words, total size 1 kb.
Reminds me of Dr. Zhivago where the Bolsheviks make Zhivago's family take in all these homeless; they are stuck in one upstairs room while a bunch of freeloaders enjoy their house.
Liberal Portland Wants to Force Building Owners to House Homeless
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:10 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 45 words, total size 1 kb.
December 09, 2019
Ain't that the truth! We've known that all along.On the latest episode of "Life, Liberty & Levin" on Fox News Channel, law professor Alan Dershowitz completely destroyed the Democrats' impeachment case against President Donald Trump. "They're searching for a crime... There is no case for bribery," Dershowitz told Levin.
Host Mark Levin asked Dershowitz about the meaning of "bribery." It has, he said, specific meaning. "It doesn't mean everything. It just doesn't necessarily mean this. What does it mean?"
Well, Dershowitz explained, "There are four criteria... We know it when we see it." For example, "when you pay a government official corruptly to perform an illegal act or an act that is motivated by money. But it can't operate when you're the president of the United States and you're conditioning or withholding money in order to make sure that a country isn't corrupt, and you're asking them to investigate. That just doesn't fit any definition of bribery — common law definition of bribery, statutory definition of bribery. However you define the constitutional word bribery, it just doesn't fit."
So, what are Democrats doing, then? "What they're trying to do is what the KGB under Lavrentiy Beria said to Stalin the dictator -- I'm not comparing our country to the Soviet Union, I just want to make sure it never becomes anything like that. Beria said to Stalin: 'Show me the man and I'll find you the crime.' And that's what some of the Democrats are doing. They have Trump in their sights. They want to figure out ways of impeaching him, and they're searching for a crime."
"First they came up with abuse of power," Dershowitz went on to say, "[which] is not a crime, it's not in the Constitution. So now they're saying bribery but they're making it up. There's no case for bribery, based on... even if all the allegations against the president were to be proved, which they haven't been, but even if they were to be proved, it would not constitute the impeachable offense of bribery."
Dershowitz also wondered why Democrats were allowed to get three expert-witnesses, and Republicans only one. Prof. Jonathan Turley did a fantastic job, he said, but this discrepancy alone is reason for concern. "You know, Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist Paper number 65, the greatest danger would be if impeachment turned on the number of people each party had.* If impeachment turns on the fact that the Democrats now have a majority in the House but not in the Senate, that would be a complete abuse of what the framers had in mind."
It goes without saying that Democrats couldn't care less what the framers had in mind. They hate the framers. They despise them. They were "slaveholders!" "Racists!" "White men!" The only reason their so-called expert witnesses referred to the framers every now and then during their testimony was to give their coup against President Trump some legal backing.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:47 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 617 words, total size 5 kb.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:23 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 64 words, total size 1 kb.
Folks, the next couple of days are going to be hit or miss (more miss than hit, I fear) as I have a busy schedule. Please be patient.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:28 AM
| Comments (185)
| Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.
From the Bloomberg article:
The reason this matters isn’t that we must somehow be bound by the dead hand of the past, and always interpret the Constitution to mean what the framers intended. To the contrary. The reason the framers’ ideas matter here is that our living Constitution is the product of an ongoing, centuries-long process in which we try to give contemporary meaning to the laws, values, and ideals that the framers specified. That’s why it’s always a good idea to start a conversation about the meaning of the Constitution with what the framers had in mind — and how things have evolved since.
We know with certainty that the framers were deeply focused on the dangers of a too-powerful president. In contrast, we don’t know anything like as much about what the framers would have thought about issues where technology and morality have both evolved, such as abortion rights or gun rights.
We are, or we should be, still worried about a president who abuses his office to corrupt the electoral process, fulfilling framers’ worry that he would "spare no efforts or means whatever to get himself re-elected.†That’s why the framers’ views still matter.
NOW this guy worries about what the Founders thought. Where was he when Barack Obama's IRS was suppressing conservative groups opposed to him politically? Or when Obama's Attorney General was meeting with Bill Clinton on the tarmac during the heighth of the e-mail server scandal? Where was this guy when Bill Clinton brought trumped up charges against Billy Dale and the White House Travel Office so he could put his own people in? Or when Clinton took money from Indonesia via James Riady and Charlie Trie? Where was he when Hillary Clinton wiped her subpeona'd servers? Funny how only now he finds his inner Constitutionalist.
Notice, too, how this man ignores the fact that the President was reacting here as opposed to driving events. What was he reacting too? An attempted coup-de-tat that was in the planning from the moment he won election BY the Bureacracy in cahoots with the former administration. There HAVE been crimes committed, but by the Bidens, by Barack Obama, and by our out of control national security apparatus. Were the Founders alive today they would be far more afraid of the CIA and FBI than a President asking a country to investigate a shady deal by a competitor.
I suspect Feldman is fully aware of this and is simply a liar. A man who believes in a "living Constitution" is essentially a liar, because he wants to alter the meaning of words to get what he wants. So we have established a pattern of dishonesty, and have no reason to believe this particular attack is any different
Another point to ponder; the Founding Fathers believed that Congress would be a part-time job with Congressmen serving one term and then leaving. Feldman knows that - or should. The idea that Congress would become a professional political class was objectionable to them. Also, they didn't think there would be political parties, or if there were that that there would be many of them. Nobody ever thought America would become this bipolar political system with two parties. That was why the Founders worried more about the Presidency than Congress; they figured Congress was too diffused to be a tyrant. (They also didn't worry at all about the Courts, since they had no money of their own and no enforcement powers.) It didn't work out that way, primarily because of "living Constitution" types like Feldman.
Madison and Jefferson and the rest would be horrified at the unanimity of the Congress as a result of party discipline. They never intended that.
So this scholar is full of s, er, bull.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:27 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 672 words, total size 4 kb.
The "goals" of higher education:
1). Load a kid with unseemly school loan debt
2). "Graduate" him with a meaningless, worthless degree
3). Make sure he can never repay that debt
4). Make him turn to and become dependent on government for life.
Brilliant.
(Good one, Jill)
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:50 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.
December 08, 2019
Here's a big win for the Administration and the People. Starting in 2021 hospitals are going to have to disclose prices to patients.
From the Yahoo News story (I'm sure it stuck in their throats at the leftwing electron rag):
Healthcare providers hide behind a maze of untangleable charges and payments, and it is nigh unto impossible to actually find out what any procedure or treatment actually costs. They do this to overcharge. They overcharge because they have to treat some people for free, those without insurance. Those people don't have insurance because the cost is too high and they cannot afford it. The cost is too high because the medical providers have to jack it up to cover the cost of the uninsured. It's a vicious circle.
Ultimately it's the insurance lobby that is at fault (well, and the government). The insurance industry wants everyone to be forced to buy insurance, and they actually LIKE high prices because ti makes it a necessary product. But they also like making money. So they promote this Byzantine system where they cut deals with the providers and hide other expenses.
Of course, ultimately this goes back to the government. Medicare artificially inflated prices by putting millions into a government run system, which is then negotiated by the Medicare (and Medicaid) people. The providers get the shaft by Medicare and Medicaid, so they jack up prices elsewhere.
What we end up with is exactly what we have; spiralling costs and ridiculous, serpentine bureacratic labrynths that nobody understands or can manuever. Obamacare just made the system worse, adding millions of new people chasing the same product. If demand rises prices rise. That is basic economics. And services decline.
Those rising prices have to be obtained in some way. That can only happen by hiding costs elsewhere. Medicare isn't going to raise what they pay, and neither are the Obamacare companies.
In the end, the person who cannot afford health insurance but is not destitute and on the dole is squeezed out of the market.
My brother is an example. He's been teaching adjunct at local universities for years (and he'll never get a full time gig because he won't hide his conservative beliefs). He cannof afford health insurance. He negotiates with hospitals and doctors when he has to go, but he usually does without. It's fine for now, but at some point he's going to be in big trouble. But he's working and earns just enough to not get a good subsidy. He would be in better shape if he were to lose his job.
Anything that opens up competition and simplifies the system is a major improvement. This isn't a big win, but it's a good start.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
12:52 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 510 words, total size 4 kb.
Here/2019/12/matt-gaetz-loses-it-at-hearing-and-calls-for-the-impeachment-of-barack-obama/]Here is an example of how the Left is both stupid and dishonest. Matt Gaetz suggested when cross-examining law professor Pamela Karlan that Barack Obama be impeached. Many on the Left have gone nuts about this - including some people I know on Facebook.
First, there is this quote:
Gaetz then went on to suggest that Trump is not the president that should be impeached…suggesting that former President Barack Obama should be impeached for tapping Trump’s phones during the campaign, which is not true, just another right-wing conspiracy.
Huh?! A right wing conspiracy? In point of fact the Obama Justice Department went to a FISA court and got permission (by using the Steele dossier) to tap Trump's phones. This is not even remotely in dispute.
Look Obama spied on our allies and every American via the NSA. His administration had a notorious record of this. It was so bad our allies had to lodge angry protests about our spying on their leaders.
They wiretapped Paul Manafort. Manafort was Trump's campaign chairman.
Both James Comey and Robert Mueller denied the allegations, but both men have lied to Congress and the media in the past.
And Obama colluded with British Intelligence. A Brit named Robert Hannigan with (British) Government Communication Headquarters is implicated in wiretapping. See, Obama didn't want any American fingerprints on this, and the British wanted Hillary to be President. She was a born patsy, a sucker. They knew it.
Hannigan claimed his agency had intercepted communications by the Trump administration with "known Russian agents" and he dutifully turned this over to Robert Mueller.
Mike Flynn, Carter Page, and George Popodopoulis were also tapped, in addition to Manafort.
See, nobody tapped Trump, just all of his associates!
In completely ridiculous fashion, the Washington Post concluded:
"the articles all suggest that the FISA requests—if they happened—were done by the intelligence agencies and the FBI" so Obama is in the clear! He had NOTHING to do with this!
At any rate, there is much sneering about Gaetz's suggestion we impeach Obama.
It is entirely possible to impeach a former president. For one thing, it puts a black mark on his legacy. For another, his pension can be withheld. There is nothing at all wrong with the notion. It's never happened, but it probably will whenever the Democrats take power again; they'll impeach Trump then and convict him. This isn't going to stop when the Orange Peril leaves office.
This has never been properly investigated, and the media pronounced it "nothing to see here" from the get-go. But it is clear that multiple Trump advisers were tapped, that FISA warrents were granted on flimsy evidence, and that the Obama Administration brought the Brits in to aid them with it. Those who would put this thing under wraps have twisted themselves like pretzels to hide the truth.
We need an investigation.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
12:36 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 485 words, total size 4 kb.
He's not a genius, but he plays one on t.v. What a dimbulb. I guess he believes he's as smart as his character.
‘Young Sheldon’ Star Iain Armitage Upset He Was Too Young to Be Arrested at Jane Fonda’s Climate Protest
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
11:53 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 49 words, total size 1 kb.
A yellow brick road is being constructed in a Chicago neighborhood to honor L. Frank Baum, author of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and the other Oz tales.
Baum lived in the Humboldt Park neighborhood when he completed TWWOA.
According to this article:
A yellow brick road was recently completed in Chicago’s Humboldt Park Neighborhood in memory of L. Frank Baum, who wrote "The Wonderful Wizard of Ozâ€, while living at 1667 N. Humboldt Boulevard in 1899.
The yellow brick road at the corner of Humboldt and Wabansia spans about 70 linear feet and will also include a 5 x 11 ft Oz-themed mural by Chicago artist, Hector Duarte.
What isn't well known is that Baum had been politically active in the late 19th century and was particularly involved in the "Free Silver" debate. According to historian Quentin Taylor, the Yellow Brick Road was representational of the gold standard, and the ruby slippers in the movie were silver in the book, representing the demands for free coinage of silver. Oz itself is a name for ounces, the measure of precious medals. And the Emerald City? Greenbacks, worthless paper pretending to have value. Sort of like the Wizard, who is a charlatan.Also, many of the characters represented people and archetypes. For instance, the cowardly lion is said to have been based on William Jennings Bryan. Dorothy - naive and trusting - was supposed to represent the American People. The Scarecrow represents the American Farmer. And the Tin Man America's industrial workers.
It is also argued that the Wicked Witch's flying monkeys were representational of Native Americans. Baum wrote on a number of occasions about the mistreatment of Indians (a couple of times with a Swiftian call for their extermination) and the monkeys are enslaved by the evil witch, much as the Indians were under the thumb of the American government.
And "the man behind the curtain" was likely a reference to automated shop displays, which were reputed to be run by an unseen person "behind a curtain". Baum had been the editor of a trade magazine, after all.
At any rate, I find it enjoyable to analyze the story, but you can just take it for the fanciful tale if you please. I'm glad they are honoring Baum in this fashion.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:25 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 388 words, total size 3 kb.
46 queries taking 0.2844 seconds, 419 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
