Category Archives: Democrats

Update III: Where’s Obama’s Midas Touch?

Democrats, Elections, Politics, Republicans, States' Rights

Obama stumped energetically in the two governor races in which the Democrats have lost miserably:

Conservative Republican Bob McDonnell’s victory in the Virginia governor’s race over Democrat R. Creigh Deeds and moderate Republican Chris Christie’s ouster of unpopular New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine was a double-barreled triumph for a party looking to rebuild after being booted from power in national elections in 2006 and 2008.

The Obama mediacrats are worried sick: Is the Republican’s victory a referendum on Obama’s polices? Or so they’ve been quizzing themselves throughout the day. As much as the Obama media has tried to console itself to the contrary, the conclusion is inescapable.

I did want to see Conservative Doug Hoffman, for the 23rd Congressional District of New York, win in the historic challenge, but it seems he’s trailing Owens (D) by about 4 percentage points.

For the rest, I don’t have a dog in the fight.

Update I (Nov. 4): ABC: “Bill Owens defeated Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman, in a race that highlighted fractures inside the GOP that resulted in the Republican candidate dropping out of the race and endorsing Owens.”

It was close: Owens’ 49.3% to Hoffman’s 45.2%. And you’re talking about the atrophying, socialist New York!

Update II: Not yet a year after the elated election of a messiah-like figure who won some unlikely traditionally conservative states, the tide is turning. Yet, as MSNBC, the megaphone of that messiah reports,

“The White House distanced itself Wednesday from Democratic losses in two states, saying the races for governor hinged on local issues and were not a referendum on President Barack Obama.”

Sadly, the fork in the road leads to a dead end: to Republicans, their fake shows of fiscal conservatism and phony promises. So this nation has doomed itself to one of two false choices.

Update III: It’s rather funny how Democrats are diminishing the significance of their election losses (Virginia and New Jersey) and exaggerating their wins (the 23rd District of NY). How do you reconcile that?

Update III: Where's Obama's Midas Touch?

Democrats, Elections, Politics, Republicans, States' Rights

Obama stumped energetically in the two governor races in which the Democrats have lost miserably:

Conservative Republican Bob McDonnell’s victory in the Virginia governor’s race over Democrat R. Creigh Deeds and moderate Republican Chris Christie’s ouster of unpopular New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine was a double-barreled triumph for a party looking to rebuild after being booted from power in national elections in 2006 and 2008.

The Obama mediacrats are worried sick: Is the Republican’s victory a referendum on Obama’s polices? Or so they’ve been quizzing themselves throughout the day. As much as the Obama media has tried to console itself to the contrary, the conclusion is inescapable.

I did want to see Conservative Doug Hoffman, for the 23rd Congressional District of New York, win in the historic challenge, but it seems he’s trailing Owens (D) by about 4 percentage points.

For the rest, I don’t have a dog in the fight.

Update I (Nov. 4): ABC: “Bill Owens defeated Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman, in a race that highlighted fractures inside the GOP that resulted in the Republican candidate dropping out of the race and endorsing Owens.”

It was close: Owens’ 49.3% to Hoffman’s 45.2%. And you’re talking about the atrophying, socialist New York!

Update II: Not yet a year after the elated election of a messiah-like figure who won some unlikely traditionally conservative states, the tide is turning. Yet, as MSNBC, the megaphone of that messiah reports,

“The White House distanced itself Wednesday from Democratic losses in two states, saying the races for governor hinged on local issues and were not a referendum on President Barack Obama.”

Sadly, the fork in the road leads to a dead end: to Republicans, their fake shows of fiscal conservatism and phony promises. So this nation has doomed itself to one of two false choices.

Update III: It’s rather funny how Democrats are diminishing the significance of their election losses (Virginia and New Jersey) and exaggerating their wins (the 23rd District of NY). How do you reconcile that?

The Miracle Of Free Markets

Ann Coulter, Capitalism, Democrats, Free Markets, Government, Healthcare, Uncategorized

Ann Coulter: “There are roughly 1 million examples of the free market doing a better job and the government doing a worse job. In fact, there is only one essential service the government does better: Keeping Dennis Kucinich off the streets.

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

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

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

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

As the kids say: Duh.

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

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

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

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

More.

Updated: ‘Fannie Med’ On The March

Democrats, Fascism, Healthcare, Regulation, Socialism, Uncategorized

Cato’s Michael F. Cannon on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s latest bright idea: “President Obama and his congressional allies want to create yet another government-run health insurance program (call it Fannie Med) to cover yet another segment of the American public (the non-elderly non-poor).

The whole idea that Fannie Med would be an ‘option’ is a ruse.

Like the three ‘public options’ we’ve already got – Medicare, Medicaid, and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program – Fannie Med would drag down the quality of care for publicly and privately insured patients alike. Yet despite offering an inferior product, Fannie Med would still drive private insurers out of business because it would exploit implicit and explicit government subsidies. Pretty soon, Fannie Med will be the only game in town – just ask its architect, Jacob Hacker.

Now the question before us is, ‘Should we allow states to opt out of Fannie Med?’ It seems a good idea: if Fannie Med turns out to be a nightmare, states could avoid it.

But the state opt-out proposal is a ruse within a ruse.

Taxpayers in every state will have to subsidize Fannie Med, either implicitly or explicitly. What state official will say, ‘I don’t care if my constituents are subsidizing Fannie Med, I’m not going to let my constituents get their money back’? State officials are obsessed with maximizing their share of federal dollars. Voters will crucify officials who opt out. Fannie Med supporters know that. They’re counting on it.

A state opt-out provision does not make Fannie Med any more moderate. It is not a concession. It is merely the latest entreaty from the Spider to the Fly.” [End excerpt]

And this from Tom DiLorenzo:

“The only sensible approach to healthcare ‘reform’ would be massive privatization of America’s socialized hospitals, combined with deregulation of the medical professions to introduce more competition, and deregulation of the health-insurance industry. Free-market competition would produce medical ‘miracles’ the likes of which have never been seen, while dramatically lowering the cost of healthcare, just as it has done in every other industry where it is allowed to exist to any large degree.

This is not likely to happen in the United States, which at the moment seems hell-bent on descending into the abyss of socialism. Once some states begin seceding from the new American fascialistic state, however, there will be opportunities to restore healthcare freedom within them.”

Update (Oct. 28): To the erroneous comment below from “Moonbat”: The market NOW in its knee-capped state still delivering abundance and plenty. The consumer/citizen is obvious to what comes as a seemingly effortless result of the Invisible Hand. So good ideas do not win out; ditto liberty.

Milton Friedman spoke about mankind’s oblivion to the abundance of the market with great clarity.

“The aggregated wisdom of men acting freely in the market place accounts for the cornucopia Americans take for granted. This abundance does not preclude affordable health insurance. For six dollars a day, the baying Boobus can purchase pretty comprehensive coverage, no deductibles or screening for pre-existing conditions. The average immoral dolt, however, prefers to spend the meager sum on a six-pack and hope that others will be coerced into covering his care.”