Tuesday, July 31, 2012

So Who's More Racist: Mitt Romney or the Palestinians?

Among the barrage of negative media about Mitt Romney's trip overseas this week is the assertion that Mitt Romney was racist for saying that the cultural superiority of the Israelis is the reason they have fared so much better than the Palestinians.  This isn't just the Huffington Post.  It's the mainstream media message.  Here's ABC.

Before going any further, let's just remember what the Palestinians are all about.  Let's remember how they celebrated in the streets when the World Trade Center was attacked on 9/11:

So what do you think of Mitt Romney's assertion?  Do you think that you first need to clamp down on honor killings and basic human rights before you can have a prosperous society?  Are you really racist or even politically incorrect if that sounds kind of reasonable?

At first glance, Mr. Uygur from the Huffington Post seems to have some pretty reasonable points in his article.  He basically points to the unfair playing field of Israel receiving about $3B per year in U.S. aid that Palestinians do not and he points to Arab States that are more prosperous than Israel, e.g. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Jordan.  I suppose if Israel had vast reserves of oil to export to the rest of the world, they could probably figure out how to pump gas, too.  In terms of the foreign aid, liberal activists in this country are constantly protesting because the U.S. doesn't treat the Palestinians the same as they treat Israel.  Well, no thanks - I don't want to be the turtle to give that scorpion a ride across the river.  If we cut the Palestinians a $3B check, they'd use it to kill as many Americans and Israelis as possible.  They can't help it; that's just who they are.  And Mitt Romney's got nothing to do with it.

Obama and other well-intending Democratic liberals are susceptible to being the turtle at every turn, whether it's sending aid to radical Islamists, keeping borders open to illegal immigrants, or providing endless benefits to the non-working class.  Times are tough in America and getting worse.  We need to practice some self preservation and think with our heads more than our hearts.  Leading with our hearts is being politically correct and we need to be rational right now even if it's mean at times.

Saturday, July 28, 2012

Instead of Obamacare...

Current polling shows that 52% of likely American voters favor repealing Obamacare while 43% oppose repealing the signature legislation of the Obama administration.  While this gap of nearly 10% is lower than it has been for well over a year, it remains clear that Americans generally oppose this sweeping overhaul in healthcare.  Mitt Romney has made it clear that he plans to repeal the law immediately if elected and several strategies have been identified for ways he can prevent its enactment pending an official repeal by Congress.  However, the Republicans should better communicate specifics on plans that could replace it.  Their approach to health care has to be more then simply repealing Obamacare.

The problems with Obamacare are numerous and serious.  I found a really nice overview here.  One is the deep-seated aversion Americans have to mandated products or services of any kind and the Constitutional precedent Obamacare sets by allowing Congress to use tax penalties to compel people to buy something they may not want or need.  Wait times and access to health care are issues in Canada and other countries with similar health care systems that people don't want to see in the U.S.  In Canada, the average wait in 2011 for an elective procedure was nearly 5 months.  Obamacare is also an expensive entitlement to add considering the exploding debt.  Finally, Obamacare may greatly influence treatment courses patients and doctors will be able to pursue.  Remember that report that came out a couple years ago recommending that women wait until age 50 to get mammograms?  There were strong emotions on both sides of the issue, but it ultimately brought new awareness to the potential risks of frequent mammograms for women to consider.  However, under Obamacare, these kinds of reports and recommendations could become new medical policy whether you like it or not.


In a country as prosperous as America, I agree that no one should be left in the streets without access to emergency care.  Another noble goal of health care reform is to address rising costs.  Some system is needed that provides catastrophic and maybe preventative coverage to everyone.  In addition, the costs of the medical procedures and medications people use should be transparent and there should be incentive to spend less.  Under Obamacare where the goal is to cover everything for everyone, there is no built-in competition to keep prices in check.  For the most part, this is the case for our conventional health care system, too.  Those with health insurance naturally seek out the most reputable, most qualified care available, because they don't have to pay the bill.  Alternatively, if there were a system of health savings accounts people used to purchase care, they would be more inclined to seek out less expensive options, which would drive costs down.  The closest I've seen to this kind of plan so far is the one already in place for the employees of Whole Foods.  I'm sure it would need a lot of tweaking, but it's going in the right direction.  I wouldn't mind a health care plan with much cheaper insurance than I currently have and a flat percentage copay for anything I choose to do.

Consider two things.  First, look at how well the market regulates the cost of procedures not covered by most insurance.  How many radio commercials have you heard for Lasik: "Do one eye, get the second one free!"    Imagine how expensive Lasik would be, even though you would have no way of knowing the exact cost, if it were routinely covered by insurance.  Imagine how much less a blood workup might cost if the prices were set and visible to everyone getting them.  Second, imagine how expensive auto repair would become if everyone had car care insurance and no one worried anymore how much their mechanic charged for a new set of brakes.  We need our health care choices to resemble a little more how we seek out car repairs.  In some cases, you find a mechanic you trust and you go with it.  Others get multiple quotes for major repairs and look for coupons and specials for routine maintenance.  You can go to the dealership, but no one is making you.


Wednesday, July 25, 2012

With All Due Respect, Rep Paul Ryan, the Bush Tax Cuts Are Still Tax Cuts

Don't get me wrong.  I don't want taxes to go up.  I want spending to come way down.  Also, I like Paul Ryan - I hope he ends up on the ticket with Mitt Romney.

However, I object to Ryan and much of the GOP calling it a tax increase if the Bush Tax Cuts are allowed to expire, arguing that they've been the tax rate now for 10 years.  This was Paul Ryan's position on Friday when he appeared on This Morning with Charlie Rose on CBS. When the Bush Tax Cuts were enacted, they came with a sunset provision to make them expire in 2010.  The country's revenue models assume that those taxes return on schedule.  Any deals to extend those cuts or make them permanent should be considered a new tax cut and the lost revenue should be balanced with spending cuts.  A deal was cut in 2010 to extend these cuts for two more years and included a smorgasbord of other stimulus measures, like a one-year 2% reduction in the payroll tax, an extension in unemployment benefits, etc.  All told, the cost of that legislation came to an eye popping $858 billion.  As far as I know, that cost was basically just tacked onto the debt.

President Obama used the same disingenuous "tax hike on the middle class" language to lambast the Republicans when that 2% payroll tax cut was about to expire on New Year's.  Remember Obama talking about how the middle class wouldn't be able to afford pizza night every Friday since the tax amounts to about $40 per week for the average family?  In the end, the Republicans went along with Obama to extend that cut for 2 months.  It was disgusting how they paid for it, though.  For the next 10 years, every mortgage will have a fee tacked on amounting to an interest rate hike of about 0.125% for the life of the loan.  That's a whole point - pretty steep for 2 months of pizza nights!  Also, the money generated by that mortgage fee does not go into the Social Security fund where the payroll tax revenue belongs, but rather goes to the general Treasury where Congress can spend it.  I missed the deal that extended the payroll tax into the summer, but it looks like they're letting it expire at last.    

In the latest Bush Tax Cut fight, the Democrats want the cuts to expire except for those making under $250k and the Republicans want to extend the cuts for everyone.  The Republican House and the Democratic Senate seem intent on preventing either bill from going anywhere.  Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) has made the gutsy, responsible vote of NO on both bills.  See article.  Way to go, Scott - thank you for making the tough call.  Of course, Elizabeth "Fake Indian" Warren has already hounded him for hammering working families, but deep down, I think we all know that one day, the Chinese are going to want their money back for all the tax cuts we insisted on taking without any spending cuts to offset them.  Only when Congress gets around to cuts in spending will I feel like they're looking out for our best interests.  I'm not holding my breath.

As for the "tax hikes" and "hammering working families" attacks, spare me the misrepresentations and lies.  If the recent cuts to student loans rates from 6.8% to 3.4% ever go away, I suppose that'll be a doubling of student loan rates - those mean Republicans.  We'll have to slash unemployment benefits to ever see them go from 99 weeks back down to 26 weeks where they were when the system was solvent.

Monday, July 23, 2012

Well said, Scott Brown!!

In case you haven't had the pleasure yet, meet Senator Scott Brown's opponent, Elizabeth "Fake Indian" Warren (she comes on after Obama).  Believe it or not, she's quite popular in Massachusetts.

(Downloaded from www.scottbrown.com)

Sunday, July 22, 2012

My Pick for VP

I think that Paul Ryan is the best pick Mitt Romney could make for his running mate.  A recent Fox News poll recently showed Condoleeza Rice as the Republican favorite for VP with 30% of the respondents choosing her vs. only 8% choosing Paul Ryan.

I used to think that Condoleeza Rice was a good pick, too, but I've changed my mind.  Mitt's primary strength is the economy.  He lacks foreign policy experience, which is why I liked Rice.  I also like that she's a woman and that she's black, which sadly matter a lot to the media and the electorate.  However, some of the talking heads on the radio pointed out that adding Condi to the ticket would add several new issues to those that Mitt Romney would have to either embrace and defend, or worse - "flip flop" on.  Chief among those would be the wisdom of invading Afghanistan and Iraq, Guantanamo, and a host of other unpopular Bush legacies.  It's best to just move on from Bush's unpopular tenure.  One of the major deal breakers establishment Republicans have with Condoleeza Rice is that she's Pro-Choice.  Dudes - abortion is not exactly a hot-button topic this year.  Isn't there room in the Republican party for fiscally conservative, small-government people that are pro-choice and like to recycle?  Keep your eye on the ball.

What I really like about Paul Ryan is that he is an embodiment of the Tea Party and Ron Paul libertarians.  The Ron Paul crowd is an essential one to bring into the fold.  They are highly motivated voters who are just as likely to throw their vote away on a "protest" third party candidate as they are to vote for Romney.  Their defection could seal Obama's reelection.  Paul Ryan would add credibility to the Tea Party in the GOP.  The Tea Party isn't going to go away and their focus on balancing the budget and shrinking government should be wholeheartedly adopted by the Republican base if this country is going to be sustainable.  The VP shouldn't only have the credentials to take over the presidency in a worst-case scenario, but should also have a sufficient stature to head the ticket in eight years.  I think Paul Ryan is excellent in this regard.  While not quite in the same league as Paul Ryan, I think Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has similar Tea Party appeal as demonstrated by his success over the past year in standing up to the unions and reining in public-sector pension and healthcare costs as a component of balancing the budget in his state.    

Marco Rubio is certainly the favorite of many.  In the Fox News poll, he got 19% of the vote.  Rubio reminds me way too much of Barack, though.  He is similarly a rising star who has just arrived in the Senate.  Give him time to achieve something and earn his standing.  Marco Rubio was also raised as a Mormon until he was about eight years old.  Two Mormons on the ticket might be a bit much.  Harry Reid gets a pass for being Mormon, but it's hardly tolerated if you're a Republican.

Besides Condoleeza Rice, other women candidates are Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire and New Mexico Governor, Susana Martinez.  Again, Kelly Ayotte has only been in the Senate since 2010, so leave her alone for a while.  Although a brand-new Governor herself, I would be more excited about Susana Martinez for her geographic and Hispanic background.  Unfortunately, she has steadfastly refused any consideration of joining the ticket.  She is the guardian of her developmentally disabled sister and her father has Alzheimer's, so she doesn't want to go to DC.  As for Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin, neither of these Tea Partiers has managed to pass muster with the voters.  (This doesn't mean they shouldn't be applauded for all of their passion and hard work at the GOP convention, though!)

Chris Christie and Allen West are two other candidates with particularly attractive conservative credentials.  However, neither is shy about mouthing off, making them very prone to gaffes.  Allen West is African American and was a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army, but he made some missteps in Iraq that tarnish his military record.  In addition to his reputation for offensive rants, Chris Christie also really needs to lose some weight first.


Finally, other VP candidates that I don't think bring any excitement or new votes to the table, but at least wouldn't do much to damage the ticket are Tim Pawlenty, Governor of Minnesota; Bobby Jindal, Governor of Louisiana; Rob Portman, Ohio Senator; and Bob McDonnell, Governor of Virginia.  While they can probably hold their own against Joe Biden, they would be easily trumped by Hillary Clinton when President Obama finally announces her replacement of Biden as VP.  That is Obama's ace in the hole.

Saturday, July 21, 2012

From One Independent to Another

I'll first admit that I voted for Obama in 2008 and I voted for Kerry in 2004.  Now that any suspicions that I might be a right-wing extremist are hopefully addressed, let me put this election in succinct terms.  Whereas I was embarrassed and ashamed of George W. Bush as President, I'm terrified at the prospect of a second Obama term.

I spent a year living in Germany from 1998-1999.  That was at the height of the Impeachment of Bill Clinton, but nobody in Europe bats an eye at a good sex scandal.  America was at the top of its game and Americans were full of pride as the 20th century came to a close.  Then came September 11th, 2001, which provoked an enormous outpouring of sympathy from around the world.  Unfortunately, President Bush was very quick to squander that political capital.  No one minded much that he pounced on Afghanistan, but by the end of 2003, it was pretty clear that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and America appeared to be engaged in oil-thirsty Imperialism more than justified peace keeping.  Already, Americans abroad were experiencing condemnation.  Students traveling in Europe found that they were more accepted in public if they sewed a Canadian patch on their backpack.  I was very disappointed when the American people validated George Bush's presidency with a second term and I thought I was ready for "Hope and Change" when 2008 came around.  I felt that it was too soon for Obama considering he'd just gotten to the Senate, but he was the only alternative on the ballot.

Disappointment set in for me pretty quickly in 2009, though.  The trillions and trillions of dollars tacked onto the debt in order to bail out the crooks that caused the 2008 financial collapse were what sparked my political awakening.  I have been uneasy about the national debt ever since high school when a few thousand dollars per citizen was a shocking statistic.  Now it's ten times that amount with no slowdown in sight.  As one might imagine, I was among the first on the Tea Party bandwagon and was bursting with renewed hope when sanity prevailed and Massachusetts elected Scott Brown (R) to the Senate upon Ted Kennedy's death.  Nevertheless, the health care bill, which is unaffordable and rightfully unpopular, got rammed through in the most despicable display of Congressional gimmickry by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

Obama has simply failed to improve any of the problems he inherited.  In terms of the financial crisis, he is working only to worsen our long-term prospects.  A few of the more egregious examples are the aforementioned Obamacare; his extra-Congressional directive giving amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants without doing anything to secure the border; and the active recruitment of countless new enrollees of governmental assistance, e.g. free cell phones, EBT cards accepted for the most frivolous purchases, disability benefits for anyone suffering from "anxiety" that has already maxed out their 99 weeks of unemployment, and his new order reversing Bill Clinton's welfare reform by no longer requiring recipients to look for work.

Finally, Obama declared that successful startups and established businesses do not owe their success to the hard work and ingenuity of their founders and leaders, but rather to "everyone" for building the roads, bridges, schools, power grid, etc.  After such Socialist drivel, how is this race at all close?  Unless we manage to make a serious course correction in the fall, I fear that America really will go over the brink.  I pray that there are not too many states as incomprehensible as my state of Massachusetts, which will surely deliver a double-digit victory to Obama.  If you've already decided to vote for Obama, I hope you reconsider because I think you'll regret his second term as much as I have his first.

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

These Mass Dems Are Driving Me Nuts


Wakefield, MA is the proud home of the largest Independence Day parade in Massachusetts.  Cruising Main Street to see the thousands of chairs lining the sidewalk to reserve viewing spots for the afternoon parade adds to the personality of downtown and I look forward to the sight every year. 

This year, in addition to the chairs, I noticed two giant pairs of placards along the route advertising for the John Tierney and Elizabeth Warren campaigns.  The placards were positioned in large wedge formations on the sidewalk that were perhaps four feet by six feet on each side.  (I'll be sure to take a picture next time!)  I am increasingly exasperated by the unyielding support of Democrats, no matter what their stripes, in this state.  John Tierney and Elizabeth Warren are outright frauds.  John Tierney’s wife was convicted in 2010 for filing false tax returns to launder $8 million for her brother’s illegal gambling enterprise in Antigua.  John Tierney, of course, claims to have thought that the dough passing under his nose was entirely legit.  Naturally, he was reelected to his post in Congress in 2010 and likely will be this year, too.

Elizabeth Warren is equally insidious because she has benefited from undue Affirmative Action for years by claiming to be of Native American origin.  She cites only family lore when identifying herself as 1/32nd Indian because of a great-great-great-grandmother who was apparently Cherokee.  Extensive genealogy uncovered no documentation supporting even this absurd claim to Indian heritage.  Warren suffered zero racial discrimination, yet bears the torch of ethnic diversity when it benefits her or her employers.  I have mixed feelings on Affirmative Action in the first place and would be even happier to see the program go away now that I know how easy it is to defraud it.  If Elizabeth Warren can claim to be an Indian, then who can't??  Vote for Scott Brown - we don't need anymore frauds for politicians in this state!