Will Someone Turn Off the Broken Record?

I know that I haven’t posted for a while.  Besides life and work going on at the usual frantic pace, there really isn’t much new to post about.  Sure, there are developments on the current stories and topics, but essentially there really isn’t much new under the sun.  The following, however, did catch my attention during the ad hoc sabbatical:

The investigation into the Russian hacking/interfering of the US elections is turning out to be a three ring circus with the WAH! Party* playing the part of the clowns.  While there has been a revelation that Russia did attempt to access voter records, it was unsuccessful.  While the WAH! Party* and their sycophants in the Media point to this as being “evidence” that there was collusion between the Russians and the Trump Campaign, no hard evidence has been presented to show that this is the case.

But the question begs to be asked – If there was collusion, why would the Russians throw their resources behind the Republicans and not the WAH! Party*?  Other than the generic “business dealings” explanation, nothing else sticks.  Indeed, if there were charges of collusion, it should be against the WAH! Party*, and here’s a couple of reasons why:

  • During the 2012 campaign, then President Obummer was caught on an open microphone talking to the Russian President and stated ““This is my last election … After my election I have more flexibility.”  This was in reference to the US-led missile defense of Europe through NATO.  Almost sounds like the President was willing to throw our allies under the bus in favor of the Russian Bear…
  • It is well known that while Felonia von Pantsuit was the the Secretary of State, she negotiated a contract with Russia for access to uranium mines and material located in the US, possibly in return for “contributions” to her personal slush-fund known as the Clinton Foundation.  Sounds very favorable to the Russians and potentially damaging to the WAH! Party* candidate (subject to blackmail or at least conflict of interest charges).

Currently, there is a witch-hunt going on that will supposedly “find” evidence of collusion between the Trump Campaign and the Russians.  Personally, I believe that the WAH! Party* made this up to explain why their candidate lost to a non-political candidate.

Last, considering that then President Obummer sent US taxpayer dollars to influence Israel’s election is absolutely hypocritical.

Moving on…

The disaster known as ObamaCare is failing in more states as insurance companies pull out of more exchanges, leaving some people without insurance options.  Obamacare was designed to fail, and the WAH! Party* was playing the long game, fully expecting the voters to continue electing their candidates in order to pass single-payer government funded health insurance legislation to “save” the people.  This POS legislation needs to be repealed, not replaced, by the Republicans.


Terrorist attacks continue in Europe with the incompetent Progressive politicians stating that terrorism is now a way of life, and wants the population at large to be disarmed so that the government can protect them better with unarmed police.  Doesn’t work in France or England as the terrorists still find a way to find arms, make bombs, and run over people with vehicles in a largely gun-free zone/country.


Another anniversary of D-Day has passed.  A lot has changed from the character of the young men who rushed into danger and death.  Now the young people rush from bad words, hate speech, and hurtful ideas to safe zones with puppies and play dough because they need protection from all things that create micro-aggressions in some of the most expensive colleges that are educating tomorrow’s leaders.

Pathetic and sad, and doesn’t bode well for the future of the country…

Climate Warming/Cooling/Change is being revealed as being more scam than science.  If it was really true, then the computer models would all agree without having to fudge or cherry-pick the data, and would also explain why the Earth has warmed and cooled in the past without man’s interference.  All one has to do is follow the money between the proponents of Climate Warming/Cooling/Change and the politicians & scientists that derive power & funding to know that their isn’t a bit of reality to any of it.  I applaud President Trump calling out these hypocrites, withdrawing from the non-binding Paris Accord that penalizes the US & almost no one else, and allowing the eco-wienies to collectively throw hissy-fits.

Yes, I will admit to a bit of schadenfreude watching them…

While there is more that can be commented on, this is what is at the top of my list at the moment.  Until next time.

* The WAH! Party stands for Whiners And Hypocrites, of which the Democratic Party has become.

What’s Next?

This past week, the Republicans found that talk was cheap compared to the actions that they needed to take to repeal and replace the monstrosity known as ObamaCare.  The solution that they came up with fell far short of what was expected of them.

One would think that it would be easy to simply repeal the existing law and set everything back to the way it was before the Democrats inflicted this POS legislation upon the American people.  But it’s not that easy.

The problem is that ObamaCare has become an entitlement that some people depend upon at the expense of hurting far more people.  The result is a program that is failing (it was designed to, by the way) – insurance companies fleeing the exchanges with those that remain charging higher and higher premiums with deductibles that people ultimately cannot afford.

The bad news is that the Republican’s replacement to ObamaCare failed to get the necessary votes in the House to pass the Bill to the Senate where, in my opinion, it would have been shot down in flames with all its flaws exposed.  The worse news is that ObamaCare is still law, and it is going downhill fast.


The bigger question is who’s going to be hurt most by this failure.  I will guarantee that it won’t be the insurance companies or the politicians – the insurance companies have been playing both sides where they would come out winners (remember the section in ObamaCare that guarantees for the Government to cover any losses by the insurance companies?), and the politicians have their own health plan (they quietly repealed the section of the ObamaCare law that mandated that they would be on the same plan as the rest of us).  So once again, the American taxpayer will bear the costs of this insanity.

I found a commentator by the name of Dan Carlin who takes a neutral political view of the situations in the world.  His take on health care finances, the healthcare industry, and the politics behind it are eye-opening and interesting.  While I do not agree with everything he says, he does make a compelling case for an alternative healthcare system in his latest audio “Common Sense 314 – Unhealthy Numbers.”  His show notes point to a resource that has graphs that show that our healthcare system is sick, and probably headed for financial collapse.  For example:

Squires OECD Exhibit 01

To sum up the audio and the show notes, Americans spend the highest amount for healthcare insurance and health care, but receive lower benefits from that health care.  Where does that help anyone in the long term?

Regardless, the passage of ObamaCare was to force the health care insurance industry into a single payer system – the government – with the health insurers as their surrogates.  The end result is that the American taxpayer would pay not only for the program in taxes, but fees to the insurance companies in amounts greater than if the politicians had stayed out of it.

The solution, in my opinion, is to 1) repeal the Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare) in it’s entirety, 2) provide a financial safety net for those who have paid voluntarily into an optional program that would not be used for any other purpose except health care (something that Social Security was originally set up to be), 3) enact laws that will allow insurance companies to compete across state lines with the usual protections against price fixing/gouging and monopolies, 4) establish tax-free health savings accounts similar to Roth IRAs, and 5) remove any governmental management of health care from the private sector (we all can see how well government management works in the healthcare industry with the Veteran’s Administration).

I’m sure there are other ideas on this subject, but I already know that the politicians are ill equipped to handle any financial decisions.  Otherwise, how in the Hell could our country be trillions of dollars in debt, and needing loans from other countries to keep afloat?

Driving Off The Cliff

Do the Republicans have a fricking political death wish?

This past week, the Republicans have put forth their initial proposed replacement (not repeal) of the Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare) titled the American Health Care Act, or AHCA.  The critics have called the AHCA a number of names including ObamaCare Lite and ObamaCare 2.0.  Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY) stated:

“It’s a stinking pile of garbage. …It’s not a Republican, conservative bill. …One thing that I’ve maintained is that this bill was written with the help of the insurance companies, just like Obamacare. That’s why it looks so similar.“

From the articles that I’ve read so far, the AHCA is a tweak to the existing law, keeping the popular parts, dumping the unpopular parts (mostly), but keeping the government firmly in charge.  And by the way, it appears that you would be required to buy insurance by law.  Fix it

A far cry from the “repeal and replace” campaign promises of the Republican Party.  One begins to wonder why, and that brings back something that I wrote over a decade ago:

In case any of you didn’t know, a typical politician’s primary job is not to serve the people who elected him. His primary job is to get himself (or herself) elected or re-elected. Second is to reward all those contributors that gave $$ to help him get elected. Third is to get as many perks & benefits as he can while he is in office. Last on the list is the common person like you & I.

And here we go again – that vicious circle where We The People vote professional politicians into office based on their promises only to get screwed again.  To continue with the same post:

What happens is that anything that the politician has promised, said they would do, or otherwise look into during the campaign is promptly forgotten, and we, as the stupid idiots that we are, forget right along with them. That is, until the next time re-election comes up… Then it’s the “other party’s” fault for putting up roadblocks, vetoes, filibusters, yadda, yadda, yadda as to why they couldn’t fulfill their promises.

Does this dance routine sound familiar?  But the voters have woken up, and if the Republicans continue the politics as usual routine, they could find themselves in the same condition as the Democratic Party, and We The People might just find ourselves with a vengeful Democratic Congress back in power.

Here’s the problem – government entitlements like ObamaCare are rarely (never) repealed in their entirety.  There are certain groups that depend on the entitlements, and they are usually 1) very vocal about their support, 2) the Media makes it their “human interest story” about the government abusing their power (!) by taking away their civil rights (!!) to such a program, and 3) the Media putting the politicians trying to curb the entitlement through the 9th circle of Hell for even thinking to reduce government entitlements.

I’ve read somewhere that politicians, as a whole, are some of the most risk adverse people on the planet.  And it’s true – they will go to almost any length to avoid controversy that they cannot control or benefit from.  This is exactly what is happening here.  They want to keep the entitlements for the minority while trying to appease the majority with legal smoke and mirrors – a difficult balancing act that isn’t going to go too far with an awake electorate.

Arthur Schaper at Townhall.com has an interesting take on what should be done:

…repeal the whole damn Obamacare monstrosity, and let the free market make us healthy…

Don’t just repeal Obamacare, but repeal all the stupid rules pushed by government and corporate interests to enrich themselves while impoverishing everyone else. And about more policy-oriented discussions …

Let’s repeal the nasty notion that health care is a “right” which the government must provide. It’s not working in Canada, the United Kingdom, or Sweden. Bernie Sanders is a spoiled regressive from Vermont. He should try getting health care in Canada, where he can pull a number of hope that he wins a locale’s once-a-month lottery to see a family doctor. The animals get better care than human beings.

Don’t just repeal the Obamacare monster. Remove all the decades-old layers of government regulation. During World War II, FDR imposed age controls, so employers offered health insurance to compete for jobs. Now Americans expect third parties (including the government) to bear the burden)

Arbitrary caps on medical students, guild-system quotas on medical professionals, and arbitrary licensure laws are not helping. The government that wants to keep us healthy is making us sicker.

When Medicare arrived, more people ended up spending other people’s money for less healthcare.

Get rid of it.

The tort-lawyer lobby is kicking taxpayers’ butts. Time to discourage punitive damage awards? Restore the Common Law provisions which forced lawsuit losers to pay back the winning party’s attorney’s fees?

Sounds like a winner to me.  Hope the Republicans are listening…

A Response to Facebook Question

A longtime friend saw the following graphic on my personal Facebook page a couple of days ago –

People vs Govt

– and asked me the following question:

“Not meaning to pick a fight — I promise to listen and not to rebut — but what areas of government don’t work for you, at any level, federal, state or local? Thanks in advance.”

Here’s how I responded:

“Hey R. – Sorry for taking so long to respond to your question.  You asked a serious question, and I wanted to take the time to answer seriously instead of a flip, half-assed answer.

“The biggest negative impact that government has had on my family and I is in the healthcare regulations brought on by the Affordable Healthcare Act, aka ObamaCare.

“Every year, I get a physical.  Being the same age that I am, you understand that monitoring the state of our health is extremely important.  But every year, it costs me more out of pocket to get that physical.  While the physical itself is covered 100%, the lab work that go along with that physical are only partially covered.  But it wasn’t always that way.

“Like you, I get my healthcare subsidized by my company, and every year we go through the sign-up process.  Each year, we are presented with different plans to choose from.  And each year, the number of plans are reduced, the deductibles rise, and coverage is often (for lack of a better word) tweaked from last year.  And each year, the HR Benefits person states that these changes are in response to the regulations of ObamaCare, and these changes are to bring our coverage into compliance.

“Before ObamaCare, my physicals including labs were covered 100%.  My deductible was minimal for the coverage selected.  The fees for routine doctor visits (for colds, aches, immunizations, etc.) were also minimal.  Now, doctors visit fees are twice what I used to pay, and the labs are several hundred dollars (more if I need to wear a heart monitor to check a condition that I have).

“But that’s just me.  Since my wife had cataract surgery, any eye examination is now a medical exam, which was not the case before.  And those visits are barely discounted through the insurance, leaving a huge fee that gets applied to a large deductible.  And that stings – a lot.

“But I’m not the only person affected by this.  I know for a fact that a person that I used to work with has had her family’s health care premiums triple in the past 7 years.

“My savings per year is not the $2,500 that was promised, but quite the opposite.  I’m paying more that I ever have for routine health care.

“When the government passes a law that it is not Constitutionally allowed to, which was against public opinion (remember the multiple townhalls that were held and the attendee’s told the Congresscritters “NO!”?), passing the law without a full-reading of the text, and fails on each and every promise that was given to gain public support, then yes, there is a problem with the government going against the wishes and best interests of the citizens of this country.

“Just remember – Every law or regulation that is passed must be funded by the taxpayer in one way or another.  Also, to rely on the government for anything long-term is stupidity at best and insanity at worst.  ObamaCare hasn’t lasted 7 years and it’s failing, and it was touted to be a long-term cost-saving solution to the supposed health crisis.

“Sorry for the long-winded answer, but I hope this answers your question.”

With the ObamaCare fiasco hitting before the election, and the FBI reopening the email investigation, I hope that the voters wake up and see that a career political operative like the Hildebeast is not the right person to right the ship, but a political outsider.

We’ll see…

Plumbing Karma

Unabashedly borrowed from Conservative Tribune.

Only weeks after leaving office on Jan. 20, 2017, former President Barack Obama discovers a leak under his sink, so he calls Troy the Plumber to come out and fix it.

Troy drives to Obama’s new house, which is located in a very exclusive, gated community near Chicago where all the residents have a net income of way more than $250,000 per year.

Troy arrives and takes his tools into the house. He is led to the guest bathroom that contains the leaky pipe under the sink. Troy assesses the problem and tells Obama that it’s an easy repair that will take less than 10 minutes. Obama asks Troy how much it will cost. Troy checks his rate chart and says, “$9,500.”

“What?! $9,500?!” Obama asks, stunned, “But you said it’s an easy repair. Michelle will whip me if I pay a plumber that much!”

Troy says, “Yes, but what I do is charge those who make more than $250,000 per year a much higher amount so I can fix the plumbing of poorer people for free. This has always been my philosophy. As a matter of fact, I lobbied the Democrat Congress, who passed this philosophy into law. Now all plumbers must do business this way. It’s known as the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act of 2014’. I’m surprised you haven’t heard of it.”

In spite of that, Obama tells Troy there’s no way he’s paying that much for a small plumbing repair, so Troy leaves. Obama spends the next hour flipping through the phone book calling for another plumber, but he finds that all other plumbing businesses in the area have gone out of business. Not wanting to pay Troy’s price, Obama does nothing and the leak goes un-repaired for several more days. A week later the leak is so bad Obama has had to put a bucket under the sink.

Michelle is not happy as she has Oprah and guests arriving the next morning. The bucket fills up quickly and has to be emptied every hour, and there’s a risk the room will flood, so Obama calls Troy and pleads with him to return.

Troy goes back to Obama’s house, looks at the leaky pipe, checks his new rate chart and says, “Let’s see, this will now cost you $21,000.”

Obama quickly fires back, “What? A few days ago you told me it would cost $9,500!”

Troy explains, “Well, because of the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act,’ a lot of wealthier people are learning how to maintain and take care of their own plumbing, so there are fewer payers in the plumbing exchanges. As a result, the price I have to charge wealthy people like you keeps rising. Not only that, but for some reason the demand for plumbing work by those who get it for free has skyrocketed! There’s a long waiting list of those who need repairs, but the amount we get doesn’t cover our costs, especially paperwork and record-keeping. This unfortunately has put a lot of my fellow plumbers out of business, they’re not being replaced, and nobody is going into the plumbing business because they know they can’t make any money at it. I’m hurting too, all thanks to greedy rich people like you who won’t pay their ‘fair share’. On the other hand, why didn’t you buy plumbing insurance last December? If you had bought plumbing insurance available under the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act,’ all this would have been covered by your policy.”

“You mean I wouldn’t have to pay anything to have you fix my plumbing problem?” asks Obama.

“Well, not exactly,” replies Troy. “You would have had to buy the insurance before the deadline, which has passed now. And, because you’re rich, you would have had to pay $34,000 in premiums, which would have given you a ‘silver’ plan, and then, since this would have been your first repair, you would have to pay up to the $21,000 deductible, and anything over that would have a $7,500 co-pay, and then there’s the mandatory maintenance program, which is covered up to 17.5%, so there are some costs involved. Nothing is for free.”

“WHAT?!” exclaims Obama. “Why so much for a puny sink leak?!”

With a bland look, Troy replies, “Well, paperwork, mostly, like I said. And the internal cost of the program itself. You don’t think a program of this complexity and scope can run itself, do you? Besides, there are millions of folks with lower incomes than you, even many in the ‘middle class’, who qualify for subsidies that people like you must support. That’s why they call it the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act’! Only people who don’t make much money can afford it. If you want affordable plumbing, you’ll have to give away most of what you have accumulated and cut your and Michelle’s income by about 90%. Then you can qualify to get your ‘Fair Share’ instead of giving it.”

“But who would pass a crazy act like the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act’?!” exclaims the exasperated Obama.

After a sigh, Troy replies, “Congress… because they didn’t read it.”

Obamacare is working just like the fictional “Affordable Plumbing Act.”  This is also how Socialism works, which does its damnest to redistribute wealth.  Last, think of the progressive tax system that is in place in this country – especially since tax season is just around the corner!!

Wouldn’t it be nice if the people passing the laws were affected by those same laws?

Supreme Disappointment

This past week, the Supreme Court handed down two decisions – one of which I predicted in a prior post (although earlier than expected), and the second which should not have been made.

The first decision was the legalization of homosexual marriage.  I predicted earlier that this would happen, although I was off by two years at the earliest.  What ramifications that this will have is to be seen, and will be highly speculative in nature, so let me take this opportunity to throw in my two cents worth.

I foresee that other groups will want legalization of their bedroom activities.  The first of these would be polygamy, which does have an Old Testament history, and is still practiced in other parts of the world.  However, I also see that other, more unseemly practices, will also come to the courts for approval, such as sex with minors (I won’t go into the other perversions that come to mind).

There is also the censorship of opinions on this decision.  Already, a Pennsylvania paper, the PennLive / Patriot News in Harrisburg will no longer accept opinion editorials or letters to the editor concerning opposition to same-sex marriage.  The rationalization is that the paper “would not print racist, sexist or anti-Semitic letters” and thus would include the topic of same-sex marriages in that editorial policy.  The politically correct speech police adds another topic to their list…

Here’s a nation, one of the founding pillars was freedom of speech and freedom of expression. And yet, we have imposed upon people restrictions on what they can say, on what they can think. And the media is the largest proponent of this, crucifying people who say things really quite innocently. – Benjamin Carson

Freedom of speech includes the freedom to offend people. – Brad Thor

Last on my list would be the freedom of our various religious institutions to believe and teach that homosexual unions are a violations of their religion.  Anything from hate speech charges to loss of tax-exempt status are possible with this latest decision.  For the tax-exempt angle, take this excerpt from and article on American Thinker:

Lost in the celebrations over universal gay marriage, like abortion, being deemed a right found in the “penumbras and emanations” of the Constitution is the chilling effect the ruling has on religious liberty.  In a telling exchange between the Obama administration’s Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli, Jr. and Justice Samuel Alito, detailed by Tom Blumer at Newsbusters.com, in which Verrilli admitted that churches could lose their tax exemptions if they refuse to perform gay weddings:

“Justice Alito: Well, in the Bob Jones case, the Court held that a college was not entitled to tax­exempt status if it opposed interracial marriage or interracial dating. So would the same apply to a university or a college if it opposed same­-sex marriage?

“General Verrilli: You know, ­­I don’t think I can answer that question without knowing more specifics, but it’s certainly going to be an issue. I don’t deny that. I don’t deny that, Justice Alito. It is­­ it is going to be an issue.”

So the administration admits that the tax exemption of institutions could be at risk if they refuse to acquiesce in the acceptance of gay marriages.  There is no reason to assume that this mandate would not apply to institutions such as the Catholic Church.  Those who think this is a red herring forget that this is the administration dragging the Little Sisters of the Poor, a group of elderly nuns devoted to helping the aged poor, through the courts, because they won’t comply with Obamacare’s contraception coverage mandate…

Somehow, I think that the government will force (or attempt to make) various churches perform homosexual weddings or they would be charged with a civil offense.  I would, however, like to see them try to force an Imam to perform such a service in a mosque…

If you don’t think that the above is possible, consider the second decision that the Supreme Court made this week.  This one ignores the law that was passed by Congress & signed by the President, and reinterprets it in a way that boggles the mind.  From Townhall.com:

The issue in King v. Burwell is simple: The Affordable Care Act provides subsidies for taxpayers who cannot afford health care, but the law clearly states those subsidies are available only to those who purchase insurance in “an Exchange established by the State under [42 U. S. C. §18031].” Since its implementation, however, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), following the command of the Obama administration, has been granting subsidies to all citizens who otherwise qualify under the law, even if they live in states that are using the federal health insurance exchange, which is obviously not “an Exchange established by the State.”

This struck many observers as an open-and-shut case: The law strictly confines subsidies to state-established exchanges, but the IRS has been granting subsidies to everyone, in violation of the law.

[Chief Justice] Roberts reasons, “Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter.”

In other words, Roberts and the Court majority decided the law is “ambiguous” because the court needs it to be ambiguous to fit a particular policy goal, not because its meaning actually is indeterminate.

…All that matters is protecting Obamacare no matter the cost, as Justice Antonin Scalia illustrated in his scathing and heroic, albeit ultimately unavailing, dissent: “Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the Government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present Court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved.”

Welcome to America, where laws do not matter, but opinions and good intents do.  And it seems that the opinions that do matter are Progressively Liberal in nature, where the intent overrides any possible negative outcomes or consequences.  Here’s a list of “truths’’ that we’re to accept without question unless we want to run afoul of the Thought Police and be denounced as a hater (from National Review):

Exchanges established by the federal government are exchanges established by the state. Rachel Dolezal is black. Iran will honor an agreement not to develop nuclear weapons. ISIS is a JV team. There’s an epidemic of sexual assaults on college campuses. Michael Brown had his hands up and pleaded “don’t shoot.” Caitlyn Jenner is a woman. Obamacare is working. 2+2 doesn’t necessarily equal 4. The polar ice caps are disappearing. The IRS is doing a decent job. The border is secure.We’ve ended two wars responsibly. Hillary Clinton turned over all work-related e-mails. An $18,200,000,000,000 debt can grow without mention. People who burn down buildings and overturn cars aren’t thugs. The OPM hack is manageable. We’ve reset relations with Russia. Entitlement reform can be kicked down the road. We’re more respected around the world.

Fantasy is always preferable to reality.  However, reality is a vindictive bitch, and will eventually slap the politicians back into the situations that they want to avoid.  Reality is coming, and it won’t be pretty because these bastards will not take any responsibility for the mess they created, and it will be up to the American people to clean it up if that’s even possible.

We had better elect good, responsible people to our government, or I have very serious doubts that this country will survive in any way, shape, or form.

Are You Being Served? *

The main topic of 2014 is going to be ObamaCare – what’s it going to do to the American People in terms of cost, employment, and the effect upon the economy.  We’ve seen the effects of a bungled website and broken promises upon the people who had individual healthcare insurance plans.  With 2014, it will be the people who have insurance through their employers.  And that, my friends, will be a bigger disaster than what we have seen so far.

The Liberal / Progressives have all reassured us that all the problems with the website will be fixed soon (even though deadline after deadline has come & gone without resolution of said problems), and that everyone will be OK.  However, the website is only the beginning of the problems – the rules and regulations of the of the poorly written Affordable Healthcare Act (i.e. ACA or ObamaCare) as implemented by the Dept. of Human and Health Services (HHS)are not only voluminous but onerous (and that is being generous).

While I do admit to having a bit of Schadenfreude watching the Liberal / Progressive masterpiece self-destruct, I have to temper that with the 5-6 million people who have lost their insurance and cannot get it back either through the Exchanges or through their insurance companies.  Even if the few do get coverage, the numerous reports of increased premiums, larger deductibles, and unwanted services covered in the policies are legion, far outweighing the “success stories” put out by the lame-stream media.

And this year, the next folks in the ACA barrel will be people like me – those people who get their insurance through their work.  I’ve already had my monthly premiums raised slightly to cover what Human Resources calls “to comply with the Affordable Healthcare Act,” and that is before the so-called “Employer Mandate” kicks in later this year.  And folks, if you have been paying attention, the Liberal / Progressives want to delay the implementation of this mandate until after the 2014 Election.  I wonder why…not!

Our Congresscritters do not represent us, The People, for whom they were elected.  If they did, they would not have passed this legislation over multiple objections at multiple townhalls held throughout the country prior to passing this legislation.  Indeed, this POS legislation was passed without one Republican vote in the House or Senate.  So as far as I’m concerned, the Liberal / Progressive Democrats own this legislation, and must be held accountable for all of the legislation’s effects upon the American public.

While writing the above, I recalled some discussions and other posts of why our elected Representatives do not represent the people that elect them.  Part of the reason is a lack of individual accountability of the Representative to the population in their respective districts.

From Walter Williams in 2008:

The Federalist Papers, written by James Madison, John Jay and Alexander Hamilton, is the document most frequently referred to when trying to get a feel for the original intent of the framers of the Constitution. One such intention is found in Federalist 56 where Madison says, “…it seems to give the fullest assurance, that a representative for every thirty thousand inhabitants will render the (House of Representatives) both a safe and competent guardian of the interests which will be confided to it.”

Excellent research, found at http://www.thirty-thousand.org/index.htm, shows that in 1804 each representative represented about 40,000 people. Today, each representative represents close to 700,000. If we lived up to the vision of our founders, given today’s population, we would have about 7,500 congressmen in the House of Representatives.

James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, argued that the smaller the House of Representatives relative to the nation’s population, the greater is the risk of unethical collusion. He said, “Numerous bodies … are less subject to venality and corruption. ” In a word, he saw competition in the political arena as the best means for protecting our liberties.

Another problem of a small number of congressmen, with large districts, has to do with representing their constituents. How in the world is one congressman to represent the diverse interests and values of 700,000 people? The practical answer is they don’t and attempt to be all things to all people. Thus, a congressman who takes a principled stand against the federal government exceeding its constitutional authority — whether it be government involvement in education, business welfare and bailouts and $2 trillion dollars worth of other handouts — is not likely to win office.

The Constitution states in Article I Section 2 that

“The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative…”

Please note that Congress passed legislation in 1910 limiting the House to 435 members, but it is not a Constitutional Amendment!

From Margo Anderson:

The framers of the Constitution expected the House to grow with the population. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, in Federalist no. 58, noted that the purpose of the census was to “readjust, from time to time, the apportionment of representatives to the number of inhabitants . . . [and] to augment the number of representatives . . . under the sole limitation that the whole number shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand inhabitants . . . “

Let’s stop and think for a little bit.  While I’m certainly not comfortable with 7,000+ more politicians running around nor with one Representative for 700,000 people, there is a certain appeal to having the politicians being more accountable to their constituents.  Each politician would need to be more in tune to his voter base, and would theoretically be less influenced by special interest groups.

Opponents to this would include increased expenses for the politicians, no room in the Capitol for the increase in representatives, and an inefficiency in passing laws in their arguments against this line of thought.  Let’s address each of these:

Our representatives were not paid when this country was first founded.  Representing the People was considered to be a public service to the country, an honor, and was considered by many to be a duty.  (I personally would like to see the career politicians get a life outside of politics instead of dipping into the public trough for their livelihood.)  But that isn’t practical, so there should be a pay scale set up for the politicians based on the average income of the citizens of the United States.  If the People do better as a whole, then so will the Representatives.  If not, then they get to share the pain of their decisions as well as the rest of the People.

No room in the Capitol shouldn’t be a problem.  With technology being what it is, virtual meetings can be set up at almost any time at any location.  Voting on legislation can be set up in much the same way (as long as the same systems as Healthcare.gov are not used).  This way, the Representatives can stay home in their district to understand what the real issues of their constituents are concerned with instead of being insulated in the Washington DC Beltway.

Our Founders did not set up a system of government to be efficient.  No, it was deliberately set up to be inefficient and accountable to the People it represented.  I understand that as of January 1, 2014, over 40,000 laws went into effect nationwide.  Taxes, restrictions, grants, and other laws were created by our Local, State, and Federal Representatives over this past year.  This disturbs me on several levels, and can be summed up with the following statement:

Every law or regulation that is passed must be funded by the taxpayer in one way or another, and will most likely take away either a freedom of choice or infringe upon a right. – Tom Roland

There is no way that anyone, no matter how steeped in the law, can know every single law and regulation.  And I know that there are laws that are contradictory and useless, but they remain on the books.  But I digress only slightly.

The Representatives that we have now are woefully ignorant (or deliberately ignoring) the Constitution that they all took an oath of office to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same”.  As such, they should, as a requirement, to read and reread the Constitution and the Amendments to understand their limitations as well as their authority and responsibility to the People of the United States.  As an added requirement, they should also be required to read the Federalist Papers, which would put them into the mindset of the Framers as to why the Constitution was written the way it was, and to fully understand the role of the Federal Government.  Walter Williams wrote in his January 1, 2014 Townhall.com column:

… Just as in a marriage where vows are broken, our rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution have been grossly violated by a government instituted to protect them. These constitutional violations have increased independent of whether there’s been a Democrat-controlled Washington or a Republican-controlled Washington.

There is no evidence that Americans who are responsible for and support constitutional abrogation have any intention of mending their ways. You say, “Williams, what do you mean by constitutional abrogation?” Let’s look at the magnitude of the violations.

Article I, Section 8 of our Constitution lists the activities for which Congress is authorized to tax and spend. Nowhere on that list is there authority for Congress to tax and spend for: Medicare, Social Security, public education, farm subsidies, bank and business bailouts, food stamps and thousands of other activities that account for roughly two-thirds of the federal budget. Neither is there authority for congressional mandates to citizens about what type of health insurance they must purchase, how states and people may use their land, the speed at which they can drive, whether a library has wheelchair ramps, and the gallons of water used per toilet flush. The list of congressional violations of both the letter and spirit of the Constitution is virtually without end. Our derelict Supreme Court has given Congress sanction to do just about anything for which they can muster a majority vote.

James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, explained in Federalist Paper No. 45: “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. … The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.” Our founder’s constitutional vision of limited federal government has been consigned to the dustbin of history.

And now, dear friends, we have come full circle to the start of this post.  The Representatives that we elected to govern us are not following the Constitution and are not representing the People that elected them.  This is why we have such legislation as the ACA / Obamacare.  But then again…

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

We The People are not being served, but we are on the darker side of “To Serve Man.” ** This is what happens when We The People make poor, uninformed choices when electing our Representatives to government. 

I can only hope that the People see what has been happening and make better choices in elections from 2014 onward.





* – “Are You Being Served” was a British sitcom that followed the misadventures of the staff of the fictional “Grace Brothers Department Store” that parodied the British class system.  I hope you get the irony here…

** – “To Serve Man” was a Twilight Zone episode based on a short story by Damon Knight.  Read the synopsis at Wikipedia to understand which definition of the word “serve” is being used above.

Thanksgiving 2013

As we gather around the table this year, there will be many, many discussions.  If the Liberals among us have their way, they will want us, the American People, to fall in step with their desires and outcomes.  In our house, I don’t think so.

President Obama and his supporters want us to tout the benefits of Obamacare (even though he no longer refers to the Affordable Healthcare Act by that name).  It doesn’t matter that the premiums are higher than what you have (or had), the deductibles are outrageous, or that the website that you are to sign up on is sicker than someone with congestive heart failure (I wonder if the website is eligible for treatment…)

Outgoing New York City Michael Bloomberg want us to talk about the evils of guns and why they should be banned.  Never mind that guns are not the problem as they are the tools of both criminals and law-abiding citizens alike.  Mr. Bloomberg neglects to tell us that while he wants us disarmed, he wants to be surrounded by bodyguards with…guns…of course for his safety.  As for the rest of us, not so much. 

To a lesser extent, President Obama has flip-flopped on his gun-control stance much like I thought he would.  If you remember, he (illegally) directed the CDC to research gun violence, and he didn’t get what he wanted:

president obama ordered the cdc to study gun violence and the results are in  President Obama Ordered the CDC to Study Gun Violence and the Results Are in...

The Senate Democrats would like us to laud them for their “leadership” in changing a long-standing Senate rule concerning using filibusters to block Presidential nominations to judicial and executive branch positions.  However, what they have done in reality is attack the rights of the minority party in opposing bad appointments.  From Richard Winchester’s article “America is One Step Closer to a One-Party Tyranny”:

By a 52-48 vote, the Senate voted to change the institution’s regulations related to the filibuster, thereby emasculating a political minority’s ability to thwart, or at least delay, majoritarian dictatorship.  A Senate minority can no longer thwart the president’s nominations of judges to lesser federal courts or of executive department officials.

The Senate, once said to be the world’s greatest deliberative body, has been reduced to the president’s rubber stamp.  Furthermore, if the Senate’s rules — originally written by Thomas Jefferson — can be changed at the majority leader’s whim, what is to prevent them being altered again, even to the point of eliminating the filibuster, which used to be called “the soul of the Senate”?

If Harry Reid’s assault on representative government, which was probably an attempt to distract public opinion from ObamaCare, remains in place, American politics will be forever changed…for the worse.

To comprehend the severity of the damage Reid and his minions have done, we need to explore the nature of representative government.

Whether the American regime is called a democracy — the most widely used term — or a representative republic — a less often used, but more accurate, descriptor — it must confront a dilemma that is virtually “baked into” this form of government: the inevitable tension between majority rule and minority rights.

We tend to forget that the Senate’s rule permitting extended debate was intended to be a formidable weapon against majority tyranny.

And the Senate via Harry Reid  is telling us that they did it to streamline the decision making for the good of the People.

Last on the list is the “deal” our esteemed Administration made with Iran.  I’ll let the following graphic say it all:

Photo: Let's make a deal........ugh

Folks, I am a Patriot, and I love our country.  I object to the way it is being run, and vote my conscience for the good of our Nation.  Thus –

“We need to stand up and say we’re Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration.” – Hillary Clinton

Please have a safe and Happy Thanksgiving.

ACA Schadenfreude

Schadenfreude – “malicious joy in the misfortunes of others,” 1922, from Ger., lit. “damage-joy,” from schaden “damage, harm, injury” (see scathe) + freude, from O.H.G. frewida “joy,” from “happy,” lit. “hopping for joy,” from P.Gmc. *frawa- (see frolic).

To say that I am experiencing a little bit of Schadenfreude over the House and Senate Democrats increasing discomfort over the fallout of their reckless passing of the Affordable Healthcare Act (i.e. ACA or ObamaCare) would be a severe understatement.  Indeed, these clowns are getting every bit of Hell from their irate constituents that they deserve.  After all:

However, I am fully sympathetic to those people who are finding themselves between a rock and a hard place with cancelled insurance plans and trying to get new insurance plans that are higher in cost and deductibles.  The exception is for those morons who thought that they could get something for nothing – you folks are getting exactly what you voted for when you bought into the Liar in Chief’s promises.  For this, I have the following graphic & comment:

When will you learn that the “progressive” Liberal Democratic politicians do not have your interests in mind with their voting records?

Now I fully understand that the Republicans have their own set of problems and issues, but I haven’t really seen them try to overtly screw over the American people with such callous disregard as the current crop of Democrats.

But the problem lies with us, the American People, for we have grown complacent and lazy, preferring to believe the lie that Government will take care of us, and that the laws of the land and the politicians that write them will protect us.  Instead of taking an active roll in using three of the following four:

…we’re forced to have this…

…by allowing the politicians of both parties to do this…

Folks, we need to understand the following:

Folks, the only way to dig ourselves out of this mess is to vote for responsible candidates of either party whose stated purpose is to repeal the biggest disaster that our government has imposed upon the American People.  The second part is to hold them to their promises – no more of the “I had to lie to get elected” bullcrap.  Vote them out of office as fast as possible with someone who will get the job done and keep on their butts to do it.

Otherwise, the fourth box above might need to be used as an absolute last resort.

Trick or Treat

Let’s make no mistake – the trick is on the American People, and the treats are going to the Politicians…

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Because we have a President who lied to get elected and re-elected…

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Who claims to know nothing about what is going on in his own administration…

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Because he hasn’t been briefed on the situation…

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

And refuses to take the blinders off to address the multiple problems of his Presidency…

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

But let us not forget the ones that really got the kettle going…

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Meanwhile, as the remainder of our innocence is being shredded…

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

The Liar in Chief rides off to his next fundraiser or golf game…

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

When at least one person should be held accountable for this latest fiasco…

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Simply because she didn’t keep a closer eye on these folks…

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

But we are faced with an undying, unaccountable, ever-growing government that wants your money, your life, your soul, and your brains…

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Because of a destructive political agenda that will only serve Government, and not the People…

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

And does this in part by blaming the people who cherish this Country and the ideals that it was founded upon…

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

While trying to bail their respective butts out of the mess that they themselves created…

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

And blow smoke in some uncomfortable places to the low-information voters, telling us everything will be fixed….someday…..somehow…..maybe….

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Happy Halloween, Everyone…because our nightmares have only begun!!

Note:  I will not be posting over the weekend as usual due to work commitments.