Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer today published their latest surreal editorial claiming that town hall protesters, the vast majority of which are concerned seniors and others concerned about out-of-control government spending, are "un-American." Aren't these the same Democrats that, during the the Bush Administration, vocally exclaimed Thomas Jefferson's contention that "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism?"
I find this ironic when just this week, Kenneth Gladney, an African-American concerned with the spiraling national debt and surge in government intrusion into the private lives of Americans, was physically attacked and called racial slurs by "patriotic" members of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) when he was handing out "Don't Tread On Me" flags and buttons at a town hall meeting held by his congressman, Representative Russ Carnahan. Yes, the SEIU; the largest union of "patriotic" dissenters during the last Republican administration.
What has this world come to when our national leaders seek to convince us that their obvious deceptions warrant more trust than our own common sense and good nature as Americans? Is this what President Obama meant when he said that liberal groups should "Punch back twice as hard?"
Monday, August 10, 2009
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Why Does The AARP Support Dem's Reform?
If you have been paying attention to the national debate about socialized health care, you no doubt will have witnessed the oft repeated statement that President Obama makes that Americans should support his health care reform initiatives because the AARP, the American Association of Retired Persons, supports his plan. That got me thinking: Why would an organization that purports to represent seniors support a plan that would inevitably result in reduced access, rationed care, less medical innovation, and reduced quality of life for their members?
First and foremost, what we must understand is that the AARP is an interest group and a political organization more than anything else. Political interest groups exist to expand their power and influence, contrary to the notion that they exist to represent their members. The political reality is that if the Democrats' plan for single payer nationalized health care passes, all future elections will be fought, not over education, foreign policy, or social issues, but rather over funding levels for government health services. As far as the AARP is concerned, the level of funding will always be inadequate and it will be their self-appointed mission to increase government funding (aka, higher taxes). And as the most influential senior lobby group in Washington, all seniors will be dependent upon the AARP to secure that funding. More dependence leads to more dues, which leads to more power, which leads to more influence, which leads to more members, and so on.
The sad fact is that the AARP support for the Democrats' designs on our health care system has nothing to do with better access, lower costs, or better care for their members. In fact, the plans before congress right now will reduce health care access for seniors, increase costs, ration care, and destroy medical innovation in elderly-focused areas of innovation like Alzheimer's research.
Witness in this video how interested the AARP is in the sincere viewpoints of their members during a recent "listening tour":
The "Public Option", a deceitful program designed to destroy private health insurance in America, and tax increases to pay for it, must be stopped, and it must be stopped now. Once it is in place, there is no turning back. The American health care system, the pinnacle of life saving innovation and the envy of the world, will be destroyed forever.
Take action! Take action now!
First and foremost, what we must understand is that the AARP is an interest group and a political organization more than anything else. Political interest groups exist to expand their power and influence, contrary to the notion that they exist to represent their members. The political reality is that if the Democrats' plan for single payer nationalized health care passes, all future elections will be fought, not over education, foreign policy, or social issues, but rather over funding levels for government health services. As far as the AARP is concerned, the level of funding will always be inadequate and it will be their self-appointed mission to increase government funding (aka, higher taxes). And as the most influential senior lobby group in Washington, all seniors will be dependent upon the AARP to secure that funding. More dependence leads to more dues, which leads to more power, which leads to more influence, which leads to more members, and so on.
The sad fact is that the AARP support for the Democrats' designs on our health care system has nothing to do with better access, lower costs, or better care for their members. In fact, the plans before congress right now will reduce health care access for seniors, increase costs, ration care, and destroy medical innovation in elderly-focused areas of innovation like Alzheimer's research.
Witness in this video how interested the AARP is in the sincere viewpoints of their members during a recent "listening tour":
The "Public Option", a deceitful program designed to destroy private health insurance in America, and tax increases to pay for it, must be stopped, and it must be stopped now. Once it is in place, there is no turning back. The American health care system, the pinnacle of life saving innovation and the envy of the world, will be destroyed forever.
Take action! Take action now!
Friday, July 31, 2009
Is America Waking Up?
A new poll released July 30th conducted by the Wall Street Journal/NBC News, indicates Republicans have made major gains against the Democratic Party with voters in virtually every policy area, erasing major gains made by Democrats during the Bush Administration. See the full results here.
It will be interesting to see if the Republican Party can keep up the momentum. Does anyone think this might have anything to do with Democrats' designs on the government takeover of our health care system?
It will be interesting to see if the Republican Party can keep up the momentum. Does anyone think this might have anything to do with Democrats' designs on the government takeover of our health care system?
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Real Clarity on Global Warming Consequences
As the debate about the science and politics of global warming rages on, even gracing the pages of this humble blog from time to time, the most important outcome from the debate is a clear examination of the consequences of global warming policy.
Reasonable people with differing interests and values can come down on different sides of the debate around the science of global warming. After all, most of us are not scientist and we must make reasonable judgments about the science we see. We also know that scientists, global warming "experts," and business leaders are hardly disinterested participants in the debate. Ultimately, however, intellectually honest individuals confronted with a clear analysis of the ultimate consequences of climate change policies they and their adversaries advocate can come to only one conclusion: climate change policies are potentially more dangerous, deadly, and costly than climate change itself.
In this illuminating new documentary by Mario Lewis, "Policy Peril: Why Global Warming Policies Are More Dangerous Than Global Warming Itself," Mr. Lewis examines the unintended consequences of climate change policy.
Please take a few minutes of your time to view this film and share it with your friends. We don't have to solve the debate about the merits of global warming right now. We don't even have to agree. All of us must, however, in an intellectually honest way, examine the real consequences, in terms of life, liberty, health, and well-being of people around the world, of those policies currently proposed by congress and the White House to arrest global warming.
Seek clarity. Think. And act.
Reasonable people with differing interests and values can come down on different sides of the debate around the science of global warming. After all, most of us are not scientist and we must make reasonable judgments about the science we see. We also know that scientists, global warming "experts," and business leaders are hardly disinterested participants in the debate. Ultimately, however, intellectually honest individuals confronted with a clear analysis of the ultimate consequences of climate change policies they and their adversaries advocate can come to only one conclusion: climate change policies are potentially more dangerous, deadly, and costly than climate change itself.
In this illuminating new documentary by Mario Lewis, "Policy Peril: Why Global Warming Policies Are More Dangerous Than Global Warming Itself," Mr. Lewis examines the unintended consequences of climate change policy.
Please take a few minutes of your time to view this film and share it with your friends. We don't have to solve the debate about the merits of global warming right now. We don't even have to agree. All of us must, however, in an intellectually honest way, examine the real consequences, in terms of life, liberty, health, and well-being of people around the world, of those policies currently proposed by congress and the White House to arrest global warming.
Seek clarity. Think. And act.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
What Does Real Health Care Reform Look Like?
Why is it that whenever politicians talk about reform, it always comes with the heavy hand of more government control? Such is the case with the current debate about health care reform despite the fact that government run health care systems the world over have been dismal failures in their efforts to control costs, and inevitably result in rationed care and long waiting lines.
But, what is the alternative to government control in health care? What does real health care reform look like? Well, one of the inherent advantages of the free market system is the constant stream of innovation and new ideas. And yes, this even applies in the area of health insurance.
What if I told you there was a company that has seen its health insurance costs remain flat over the last four years while health insurance premiums across the country have increased 38% and Medicare costs have skyrocketed? What if I also told you that this was accomplished without restricting employee access to health care, while at the same time leading to employee obesity and smoking rates over 30% below the national average? A sinister plot you say? Okay, what if I told you that the employees love it, it is completely voluntary, and participating employees save significant money out of their own pockets?
Well, Safeway, the supermarket chain, has implemented a number of significant health insurance innovations since 2005 with astounding results. Recently, Steven Burd, Safeway's CEO, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal explaining their success and how it could be applied to the nation as a whole.
This, my friends, is real health care reform, and it is brought to courtesy of the free market.
This on the other hand is not real reform:
Its deception.
But, what is the alternative to government control in health care? What does real health care reform look like? Well, one of the inherent advantages of the free market system is the constant stream of innovation and new ideas. And yes, this even applies in the area of health insurance.
What if I told you there was a company that has seen its health insurance costs remain flat over the last four years while health insurance premiums across the country have increased 38% and Medicare costs have skyrocketed? What if I also told you that this was accomplished without restricting employee access to health care, while at the same time leading to employee obesity and smoking rates over 30% below the national average? A sinister plot you say? Okay, what if I told you that the employees love it, it is completely voluntary, and participating employees save significant money out of their own pockets?
Well, Safeway, the supermarket chain, has implemented a number of significant health insurance innovations since 2005 with astounding results. Recently, Steven Burd, Safeway's CEO, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal explaining their success and how it could be applied to the nation as a whole.
This, my friends, is real health care reform, and it is brought to courtesy of the free market.
This on the other hand is not real reform:
Its deception.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Milton Friedman Interview = Absolutely Brilliant
Every once in a while there comes a person who addresses seemingly complex issues and problems with such clarity that it can only be described as absolute brilliance. So it is that I stumbled across the following interview, conducted in 1979, of Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winner in economics, by none other than self-described liberal Phil Donahue. Here, Mr. Friedman addresses the issue of greed and virtue in the free market versus government. The conversation is no less relevant now than it was 30 years ago. Please, take a couple minutes and treat yourself.
Absolute clarity. Absolutely brilliant.
Absolute clarity. Absolutely brilliant.
Romney and Obama Tied in Latest Poll
In a new nationwide poll taken by Rasmussen Reports, if the 2012 presidential election were held today, President Obama and Mitt Romney would be tied at 45% to 45% among all voters. Also interesting, Romney polled ahead of Obama among Independent voters, 48% to 41%.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Free Us From "Reform"
The Obama push is on. That is, the effort to push through by any means necessary what is often described as health care "reform" but is actually the nationalization of your body. Under the guise of providing health insurance to the uninsured among us, the Democrats' health care plans will, in essence, result in government control of your health. How so? Well, if the government controls your health care, either through regulation or as the sole provider, you will be completely dependent upon the government for your health and survival. Need treatment for diabetes? Only if the government says so. Need bypass surgery due to a serious heart condition? Only if the government says so. Need that new biotechnology cancer medication to fight off the relapse of breast cancer? Only if the government says so. Your life and your health will be entirely dependent upon a disinterested government bureaucrat who will be weighing your life against the government budget.
In an effort to resist this push for socialized medicine, a grassroots effort has been formed to accumulate 1 million signatures on a petition to stop the Democrats' plans for a government takeover of health care. Please consider going to FreeOurHealthCareNow.com and sign the petition.
Be part of the effort to turn back this looming disaster.
In an effort to resist this push for socialized medicine, a grassroots effort has been formed to accumulate 1 million signatures on a petition to stop the Democrats' plans for a government takeover of health care. Please consider going to FreeOurHealthCareNow.com and sign the petition.
Be part of the effort to turn back this looming disaster.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Clarity on Unemployment and Wealth
It has been quite a while since I have published on "See The Forest" and I regret that. The hiatus has not stopped me in my quest for clarity, however.
The other day while in deep thought about the predicament in which our country finds itself, I had one of those rare moments of clarity. My revelation: unemployment results from a loss of wealth. Conversely, a sustainable rise in employment can only be brought about by an increase in wealth.
The reasons for this are many and undeniable. The vast majority of jobs in the United States are created by entrepreneurs and small businesses. Small businesses have more limited access to credit relative to large businesses and thus are more dependent upon cash flow to finance ongoing operations and growth. Is is this growth that leads to gains in overall employment. During economic downturns or when taxes are raised, cash flows drop, forestalling growth and leading to decreases in employment.
Socialist/liberal political and economic theory denies this very simple principle that employment and wealth are related. As adherents to Keynesian economic theory, in economic downturns Democrats seek to combat unemployment through increased government hiring and government spending. Increased government spending, however, crowds out private sector investment, and requires higher taxes that reduce the very cash flows that are required to drive private sector employment.
The inevitable result of denying the principle that wealth and employment are linked is the failure of government policy.
How does all this relate to situation in which America finds itself now? Well, I believe that the Obama Adminstration's efforts to boost the economy by instituting massive government spending in the form of the stimulus program ($800 billion), combined with the enormous increase in spending required (to the tune of over $1.5 trillion) to enact health care legislation, will require massive tax increases, while at the same time increasing interest rates, destroying wealth and leading to high structural unemployment. Many of the President's economist say that the spending is necessary and will create jobs. Well, all one needs to do is witness the relative economic stagnation and high unemployment across Western Europe since these same economic policies were instituted in the last thirty years.
I venture to bet that, given a real choice between the growth in prosperity that America has seen over the last three decades compared to the way Europe has withered, America would once again choose prosperity, i.e., lower taxes and lower government spending. Let's hope we get that choice before it is too late.
The other day while in deep thought about the predicament in which our country finds itself, I had one of those rare moments of clarity. My revelation: unemployment results from a loss of wealth. Conversely, a sustainable rise in employment can only be brought about by an increase in wealth.
The reasons for this are many and undeniable. The vast majority of jobs in the United States are created by entrepreneurs and small businesses. Small businesses have more limited access to credit relative to large businesses and thus are more dependent upon cash flow to finance ongoing operations and growth. Is is this growth that leads to gains in overall employment. During economic downturns or when taxes are raised, cash flows drop, forestalling growth and leading to decreases in employment.
Socialist/liberal political and economic theory denies this very simple principle that employment and wealth are related. As adherents to Keynesian economic theory, in economic downturns Democrats seek to combat unemployment through increased government hiring and government spending. Increased government spending, however, crowds out private sector investment, and requires higher taxes that reduce the very cash flows that are required to drive private sector employment.
The inevitable result of denying the principle that wealth and employment are linked is the failure of government policy.
How does all this relate to situation in which America finds itself now? Well, I believe that the Obama Adminstration's efforts to boost the economy by instituting massive government spending in the form of the stimulus program ($800 billion), combined with the enormous increase in spending required (to the tune of over $1.5 trillion) to enact health care legislation, will require massive tax increases, while at the same time increasing interest rates, destroying wealth and leading to high structural unemployment. Many of the President's economist say that the spending is necessary and will create jobs. Well, all one needs to do is witness the relative economic stagnation and high unemployment across Western Europe since these same economic policies were instituted in the last thirty years.
I venture to bet that, given a real choice between the growth in prosperity that America has seen over the last three decades compared to the way Europe has withered, America would once again choose prosperity, i.e., lower taxes and lower government spending. Let's hope we get that choice before it is too late.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Obama Policies a Threat to Social Security
The numbers are so huge they can not be comprehended. The projected size of the annual deficit under the proposed budget of President Obama and the Democrat congress is so large that the American public can not grasp its immensity. As a result, Obama and the Democrats are not forced to justify its size, or even explain how it will ever be repaid. It has proved difficult for the Republicans to criticize that which the public can not understand. Over the course of the next four years, President Obama and the Democrats will double the national debt and triple the national debt in the next ten years. The Democrats, even under their overly optimistic financial projections, will borrow more money than the total accumulated debt of every administration in over 200 years!
The consequence of this debt will be devastating. The burned on our children, and our children's children, is immoral. The result will be the bankruptcy of the country or hyperinflation that will destroy the financial assets of all Americans.
Perhaps the only way to truly make Americans understand, or even care, is to explain that massive spending by President Obama and the Democrats in Congress will destroy the Social Security system. Social Security will go bankrupt. That Social Security check that you are expecting to get after turning 67 (or maybe 70) won't come. If you get any check at all, it won't be worth anything. You are on your own. Hope you saved something or invested well. Because if you were counting on Social Security, you will be destitute!
Wake up America. And Republicans, you had better start explaining to your voters what is in store for them if they don't turn out the Democrats at the next election and reverse course.
The consequence of this debt will be devastating. The burned on our children, and our children's children, is immoral. The result will be the bankruptcy of the country or hyperinflation that will destroy the financial assets of all Americans.
Perhaps the only way to truly make Americans understand, or even care, is to explain that massive spending by President Obama and the Democrats in Congress will destroy the Social Security system. Social Security will go bankrupt. That Social Security check that you are expecting to get after turning 67 (or maybe 70) won't come. If you get any check at all, it won't be worth anything. You are on your own. Hope you saved something or invested well. Because if you were counting on Social Security, you will be destitute!
Wake up America. And Republicans, you had better start explaining to your voters what is in store for them if they don't turn out the Democrats at the next election and reverse course.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
