THE JOE WILSON SHOW

It's time for another episode of The Joe Wilson Show tonight, and you've got a sneak preview exclusively here on edwardgroberts.blogspot.com, so tell all of your friends. You can catch the live broadcast tonight at 9:00 PM EST on the channel that would otherwise be broadcasting something worth a squat. Without further ado, here it is:

BILL LIVINGOOD: Madam Speaker… the President of the United States.

(applause)

BARACK OBAMA: Madame Speaker, Mr. Vice President, Members of Congress, and the First Lady of the United States:

One year ago we started down a new pa- oh, and my fellow Amuslicans. One year ago we started down a new path: one of hope and of change. We have come a long way, the light is at the end of the tunnel, yes we can, we will win.

(short applause from Pelosi and Biden)

Thank you. Thank you. Today some are suggesting that our efforts are not working, but I want to be perfectly clear – they are.

Unemployment may be up, but hope is high. This administration’s approval ratings may be low right now, but so are copper prices. What does all this mean? It means our economy has never looked better. And with me in the White House the hope is going to change all of this into a more stable and viable national agenda capitalizing on helping Americans and immigrants create a better tomorrow for the future of children...

(confused silence)

We are going to fix all of this over the next year and here is how I am going to do it:

(applause)

I’m putting a freeze on all domestic spending for the next three years. The deficit is at an all time high due to an unprecedented and reckless amount of spending, and we must put a stop to it. For too long Washington has been throwing money around as if it were just that *snap* easy to print, and those who are responsible must be held accountable. My staff and I will be going over George Bush’s economic record right down to his personal checkbook to find out where all this money has gone.

If Americans are going to be on top again we must fix the education system. To that end I am calling for a 6% increase in Education spending domestically. This will create much needed jobs at both the teaching and administration levels, and represent a huge increase in government education contracts. I am also introducing a brand new idea that I came up with… well, me and the Democratic members of congress that are up for re-election this year – they helped me on it, so remember that. Anyway, we’re going to start Charter Schools all over the country. This will introduce competition in education, just like in business.

And speaking of business, some CEOs seem to be under the impression that I am against big business. I want to be perfectly clear on this: nothing could be further from the truth.

JOE WILSON: You lie!

(loud murmur and applause from all but Pelosi and Biden)

BARACK OBAMA: The caps on CEO wages that I am endorsing are for your own good. With that your compensation is tied to stock market value through stock bonuses and buy-backs, rather than the long term value of the company and its product. This way the economy turns around faster on paper and you get a bigger piece of the pie through Wall Street manipulation. Good for you. Good for stockholders. Good for my administration. Good for everybody.

During this time of economic hardship it seems that prices on commodities are rising without any logical reason. Oil fluctuates daily though the supply and refining capacities remain either constant or on the rise. This is due to the health care situation in this country. I want congress to buckle down and get something passed before Novemb- uh, before we lose the momentum needed to bring about what all of the Americans who can’t afford it want.

As you all know, recently the Supreme Court ruled that corporations and other far right interest groups will be able to make movies that send messages to the voters. This decision could very well be used to try to discredit the health care reform that we are working so hard on, or our initiatives to reign in out of control business in America. That is why I am taking steps to dampen the effect of this ruling against the American voice. I am appointing Michael Moore as the Czar of Media Messaging.

Finally, some in the media have suggested that I did not respond adequately to the attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound commercial airliner in December. I want to be clear on this: nothing could be further from the truth. And I really don’t think these hate-mongers represent the best of America. To show just how wrong they are I am announcing a new initiative to battle terrorism.

Thanks to some family ties on my father’s side, we will be taking over all administrative duties of Al-Qaeda starting immediately. This will be a three-pronged approach. First, we have determined that Al-Qaeda Afghanistan, where we have made great strides militarily, is just too big to fail. So, starting now we will be funneling monies from the pirates in Somalia and terrorist cells in other parts of the Middle East and redistributing it to those in the hills of Afghanistan. We call this the Terrorist Activity Realignment Plan. This will keep a concentration of terrorists in Afghanistan, thus giving the US military a more manageable area of operations where they can continue to keep their performance numbers up.

Second, we are going to offer all terrorists employment through their local governments. These jobs will include everything from repairing road surfaces damaged through wars and years of neglect, to damaging road surfaces to ensure continued employment. These will be stable, government jobs. It is time to get them off the battlefield and onto the public payroll.

And finally, in order to win the terrorists loyalty and divert their attention away from the fact that we are trying to destroy their way of life and turn their nations into the picture we have in our minds, we are going to offer them universal healthcare. We will be able to raise the money for this by taxing their income – from those government jobs we are setting up – at a 50 to 60 % rate. Actually, I really don’t know how much it will be – we’ll figure that out after the fact. But no matter what it will buy their loyalty and bankrupt their operations.

PELOSI: Uh, Mr. President… doesn’t that seem a bit far-fetched? I mean, they’ll never go for it.

BARACK OBAMA: You’d be surprised, Nancy. You'd be surprised.

(room fills with maniacal laughter)

TOO GOOD TO MISS

You may recall that back in the bailout days Congress purchased, with our tax dollars, a stake in CitiGroup for about $45 billion (with another $300 billion guarantee) on the grounds that it was "too big to fail."  In actuality, it was just the right size to fail.  CitiGroup is an institution that has extended credit card lines to everyone from little old widows on Social Security to family pets.  This practice created not only a huge dependence upon credit by your average Joe (more credit card use just to be able to make the minimum payment on the credit card used to buy that 2nd four-wheeler), it also resulted in an unacceptable percentage of defaults.  It's true.  You can look it up.

Many other companies also engaged in this practice.  The overall effect was devastating, but blame was shifted to the housing market to cover up the irresponsibility of these leeching credit companies.  The fear generated (and the drying up of other credit lines, such as those for small business - the true motor of this country) has resulted in a very real housing and construction crisis, as prophesied by the administration and Fed last year.  Because of this, most of the banks that received any kind of bailout funding are sitting on the money because they are worried about loan defaults - the very issue that got them in trouble in the first place. The President has asked them to start freeing up some of this money, but there just aren't that many small businesses left to issue loans to - and those that are managing to hang on are no longer safe bets.

There is good news, though!  CitiGroup is repaying their $20 billion obligation to the government.  The other $25 billion was given in stock.  Congress will now sell that stock, which - for those keeping count - is worth 20% more now than when Congress purchased it a year ago.  This will bring in about a $15 billion return on stock that has fallen in value 40% this year.  Pretty sneaky profit they made with our tax dollars.  I'll be waiting for my dividend check...

Maybe it will be enough to cover the extra income tax burden we'll get hit with due to Obama's "Making Work Pay" Program from last year!

HELTHКAЯE ЯEFORM (Part 9)

THE GREATEST OFFER ON EARTH!!!

Don't wait! Sign up NOW!

Announcing the formation of the Home Appliance Cooperative. From this day forward you will never again have to worry about having to wash your dishes by hand, eat your bread untoasted, or heat your dinner on the stove. Sign up now and you will be part of the program. Here's how it works:

Each member will pay into the Home Appliance Cooperative a low monthly fee. This money will be pooled into a central account, so it is important that everyone participate. Anyone in your neighborhood who is not a member will be fined and that money will sift down into the account.

In the event that any member's appliance goes out, the Cooperative will repair or replace said appliance free of charge, immediately. Of course, there may be a little delay due to processing and determining which affected appliances get seen to first, but the Cooperative will have a system in place that will look at keeping the system as efficient as is likely given the complexity of the problem and nature of the issues involved and other things you really probably wouldn't understand and don't really need to know about.

Let it be known that all members of the Cooperative will pay the same monthly fee, regardless of the quality or age of their appliances. Of course, members who earn more than $500,000 per year will be subject to a small surcharge.

No one will be denied membership based upon the condition or age of their appliances, or their personal history of appliance failure.

Pre-existing conditions are not a factor for membership. This means that even if your appliances are very old, have had multiple repairs in the past, or have recently gone completely out, you are free to join the Cooperative at the standard membership fee; we will replace/repair those appliances.

There will be a governing board over all similar cooperatives. You do not have to remain with any particular cooperative for a set amount of time. For instance, if your stove goes kaput and you then join the Home Appliance Cooperative, your stove will then be replaced. You have no obligation to remain with that particular cooperative, even if you have only made one monthly membership fee payment. The membership fees of the other members of that cooperative will cover the cost of your appliance. You are free to go on to the Cooperative of Home Appliances, or any one of the many regulated private cooperatives, or you may choose the public option, GAC, although the membership fees for it are a bit higher.

And don't worry if this sounds more like a pyramid scheme than a cooperative; it's not insurance, either.

PS: My brother-in-law happens to sell home appliances, so all cooperative appliance purchases will be made from Chip's Home Appliances & Charity Bingo Hall. Chip assures me he will offer the best prices and highest quality... trust us.

HELTHКAЯE ЯEFORM (Part 8)

Ignoring all pleas and protests to the contrary, the House formally known as 'of Representatives' has passed a 1990-page Healthcare Reform Bill, ready for Senate approval. The final vote was 220-215, with 39 Democrats voting against it, and only one Republican voting for the bill. With numbers like that it is clear Nancy Pelosi is doing everything in her power to make sure the whole of the American public is behind this, and that nothing is ramrodded through Congress against the will of We the People...

I'll cover some of the highlights of the bill over the next few days, but for now, let's try to get a handle on this price tag: $1.2 trillion or, if you're not into the whole brevity thing, $1,200,000,000,000.00.

How much is that, really? What is that number? Well, it's what is going to have to be spent on this health care overhaul. It's the amount that is going to be added to our national debt; therefore, it's what your kids will be repaying. Remember those 7th graders from Part 7? Yeah, they're the ones who will have to pay. Well, just how much is $1,200,000,000,000.00? Good question. Let's put it into perspective.

Imagine that you were to be paid $1.00 for every second of the day. One dollar per second. In one minute you'd have earned $60.00. Pretty sweet, huh? In an hour you'd have earned $3,600.00. Really sweet, right? Let's expand that same rate on out a little further:

Day = $86,400
Week = $604,800
Month = $2,600,640
Year = $31,536,000

Wow! Now I would take that! Who wouldn't? Heck, that's about 1.5 times the $19 million that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is worth. It's hard to even imagine that much money, but that's what you would have if someone paid you $1.00 for every single second of the year. Enough to buy any car you wanted. A mansion. Jewelry. Servants. A second iPhone. Anything.

And if you paid that much - $1 for every single second of the year - toward that Health Care Bill? Why, you'd have it paid off in just 38,452 years.

38,452 years.

Say that out loud: Thirty-eight thousand, four hundred and fifty two years. Go on, say it again. In fact, say it out loud to your 7th grader: Thirty-eight thousand, four hundred and fifty two years.

I know, that's pretty dramatic. Nobody gets paid a buck a second. Well, that's not completely true. The apolitical Tiger Woods makes a little over $3 dollars a second, and Barack Obama's campaign manager Oprah Winfrey rakes in $8.72 per second. (It would take Oprah a mere 4,364 years to pay off the Health Care Reform Bill.)

Of course, statistics suggest that your little middle-schooler, as talented as he/she is, will not grow up to be either the greatest golfer or the biggest gabber of all time. In fact, statistically speaking, he/she will grow up to make $18.60 per hour, during the work week. That comes out to a yearly salary of $38,390.40. Not bad, but not quite enough to cover the $1.2 trillion tab in one lifetime. In fact, it will take him/her 31-million, 257-thousand, 814 and one-half years to pay off the House's health care reform. Go ahead and say that one out loud:

31,257,814 and 1/2 years.

Before you point out that it's the whole of the population and not just one person that will be paying the tab, consider that at the average salary it will take 400,177 lifetimes to pay it off, if every single cent of salary were put toward it. But given that the average worker doesn't put in a full 78.11 years worth of 40-hour weeks, but more like about 45 years worth, the total comes to around 700,000 lifetimes. Do the math... I've given you the links. Now, who works a lifetime with absolutely no personal gain, all of the fruits of their labor going to someone else? Slaves, that's who. It looks as though this bill will create the equivalent of three-quarters of a million slaves in this country. Which ones will it be? Mostly, the ones not even old enough to vote yet.

There are those who will pooh-pooh this blog, claiming that this country can't afford NOT to pass health care reform legislation. Now, I'm just a regular Joe, working a job and raising a family. My wife is a regular Jane doing the same. With the money from our two jobs we often use the phrase, "How are we going to afford...?" As in:

How are we going to afford Christmas presents for the kids?
How are we going to afford that repair on the truck?
How are we going to afford braces?
How are we going to afford propane for the winter?
How are we going to afford groceries next week?

We use those phrases often, but I can't remember one single time in my LIFE that I've ever used the phrase, "We can't afford NOT to..." I just can't understand that mentality, especially when talking about $1.2 trillion of our children's money.

Maybe I could understand it if I was worth $19 million.

Hire Education

The College Board has released its annual report on the cost of a college education in America. It turns out, again, that a higher education is just that - higher... in cost. This year the average tuition increase is 6.5% for in-state four-year public college programs, and 4.4% for private institutions. And what do you, as parents, get in return for the hard-earned dollars you pour into these institutions? (Watch this where you can turn up the volume and listen.)


Mom...Dad... this is what you are getting for your money.

And a quick aside to Suzie Student:

Shut up, sit down, and listen. You are a student. No matter what you may think, you do not have any of the answers. You likely don't even know that the G-20 isn't a move in Battleship. You will one day look back on this video with embarrassment. Maybe you shouldn't have posted it on the internet.

That is what you are getting for the tens of thousands of dollars you are spending on expanding your child's mind. In more cases than not your little one is being instructed by a professor who is qualified to do nothing other than instruct the unknowing. If you've engaged in continuing education in your profession you likely have looked back at your college professors and realized just how unknowledgeable they really were. Well, it ain't getting any better. But we know that.

Still, a child has to have an education. Now, more than ever. Almost all career level jobs out there require a four-year degree, and the ones that don't come with experience requirements that trump anyone under the age of 147 from qualifying. The time spent in college is looked at only as evidence that the applicant completes what he or she starts. A headhunter once informed me that 80% of the people he places are working in fields totally unrelated to their major course of study. Let's take a look at some of those degrees:

Retail Floristry
Adventure Recreation
Physical Education
Peace Studies
Angling

And a thousand other hobbies disguising themselves as college degree curricula. Kids, if it's something other people learn to do on the weekends as a distraction from work, you needn't spend your parents' retirement learning it from a college professor. There are precisely four real jobs in the world where the degrees above might serve you... and three of them are already taken.

Also, when choosing a major, a good rule of thumb is that the more words there are in the title of the degree (i.e.: Psychology of Ancient Greek Mythology as it Relates to Post-Industrial Revolution Arkansas) the fewer jobs there are related to the degree. Keep to degrees with short titles like Finance, but not too short like Dance. And stay away from degrees that preclude required conditions. Philanthropy comes to mind. This is essentially teaching you how to give away money. If you have your heart set on being a philanthropist I'd suggest you start by building a railroad, steel conglomerate, or computer company. Just an idea.

Where do all of these major courses of study come from? Obviously from schools, but why? For years primary and secondary schools have been convincing everyone - students and business leaders alike - that everyone needs a college degree. In an effort to attract everyone colleges have offered more and more varied degree choices, watering them down to the point that a four-year degree is now looked at by the business world as merely an attendance record... a $100,000 attendance record!

When I was in television most of our younger photojournalists had complete four-year photojournalism degrees that held no value whatsoever. Many of them did not know how to use a tripod correctly, set up a shot at all, or even care for a $10,000 piece of equipment... or they didn't care. These guys were making less than twice minimum wage, yet carrying a $15- to $20,000 college loan debt. This resulted in an understandably sour attitude. Most of them, to my knowledge, left the industry. Imagine if they had started training directly out of high school: a $10,000 camera would be an object of extreme value, nearly twice minimum wage would be more than they had ever earned in their lives, they would have no student loan to pay off, and the experienced photojournalists that actually work in television could train them to be real photojournalists. Money would be saved and the on-the-job training would represent actual value.

So why are colleges skewing us away from training systems with real value and toward degree plans that are irrelevant to, in some cases, anything? The College Board itself points out the reason: "More than $168 billion in financial aid is available to students and their families."

There is a lot of talk about the rising price of equipment and facilities, the cost of quality instructors, the improvement in teaching aids and materials, and the overall rise in college standards. With the offering of classes like Philosophy and Star Trek, I'm not so sure I buy that excuse. Over the last ten years or so Pell Grants have increase 123% and Federal Student Loans have increased 107%. Over that same time period the average rise in tuition prices has been only about 22%. That's leaving a lot of federal money on the table. So where do you think future trends will take us?

The fact is college prices have increased because colleges have a way to charge the federal government. And where does that federal money come from? Your wallet. And when students default on their federal loans (do we need a graph to predict the future trend in that?), where does the money come from to refill the coffers you initially filled? Your wallet. With, by some claims, $180 billion in federal money on the table, are colleges going to decrease tuitions anytime soon? Is it in colleges' best interests to bring in more students? Will they have to water degree programs down even more to attract and retain those students? And if everyone in the country has a college degree, will there be much value to any one of them?

Now, am I suggesting that anyone drop out or forego college? No! The reality is you need that degree to get a job. The national average unemployment rate is currently around 9.8%. If you have a four-year degree it's more like 2.6%. If you just hold a high school diploma you are twice as likely to be out of a job, and if you dropped out of high school you are four times more likely to be unemployed. SO STAY IN SCHOOL! It is an investment in your future.

But to everyone, students, parents, and business leaders alike - we need to do some serious evaluation of the post-secondary education system in this country.

Students
Back in the 90s nutty people invested in Beanie Babies, thinking they'd resell them at such a markup that they'd retire off the profits. Ask yourself: is my degree plan a Beanie Baby?




Parents
Remember this phrase: Parents don't let kids major in liberal arts.

Employers
Do you want this guy training your future director of marketing?






And Taxpayers
With Federal money affecting college tuition prices as it is, what do you think is going to happen when it gets a hold of health care?

HELTHКAЯE ЯEFORM (Part 7)

Continuing our discussion of Helthkare Яeform, I want to pick up where we left off yesterday: namely, concerning the government's inability to compete in any way with the private sector. I promised that I would provide you with a number of quotes taken directly from the guy overseeing our current $1.42 trillion deficit, and so I am.

It’s not that private sector workers are so much smarter than government employees (except in the case of that girl I had to deal with at the DMV), it’s that they are better motivated. Every business expense a private sector employee incurs comes from the same place as their potential earnings. The more they improve the end product, the more revenue the company brings in, and the more benefits said employee may enjoy. With a government employee: “Here’s some taxpayer money. Spend it all or we will give you less next year. Oh, and nobody can fire you.” The math is fairly simple.

And yet even the President seems to have a hard time with this arithmetic. He’s made some rather… well, remarkable statements, mathematically speaking:

We will pass reform that lowers cost, promotes choice, and provides coverage that every American can count on. And we will do it this year.

It will limit the amount your insurance company can force you to pay for your medical costs out of your own pocket.

No insurance company will be allowed to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing medical condition.

I have also pledged that health insurance reform will not add to our deficit over the next decade -- and I mean it.

Hmm. I’m going through this scenario over and over and just can’t come up with the answer he’s claiming. Washington is going to create a system that provides coverage to every American – coverage we can count on – even to the 47 million Americans that currently don’t have insurance coverage? And the government is going to lower costs while doing this? This system is going to be affordable to all of us, won’t put small companies or the insurance industry out of business, and is going to promote choice? It’s going to do all of this but not increase the deficit? Not at all? Really, Mr. President? Oh, I see that you did include ‘over the next decade.’

But still, that’s a pretty tall order, even if Congress does find a way to put off some costs until the current crop of seventh graders in this country hits the workforce. There must be something else to this math that Obama is using. Perhaps more quotes will help us out:

It will keep government out of health care decisions, giving you the option to keep your insurance if you're happy with it.

Actually, I have that option now, without government involvement. Kinda sounds like the Mafia protecting my business from being burned to the ground by the Mafia.

This isn't about me. I have great health insurance, and so does every Member of Congress.

That’s right. It’s not about you or the members of Congress. It's about today’s seventh graders, the ones that will get hit with the bill a decade from now. But still I am not seeing the math. How about one more quote… looks like this one may be for you old-timers, lest you think my theory about reform being aimed at eliminating Medicare and Medicaid is somehow misguided:

And it's about the fact that the biggest driving force behind our federal deficit is the skyrocketing cost of Medicare and Medicaid. So let me be clear: if we do not control these costs, we will not be able to control our deficit.

Seems pretty clear to me. How about to you, Herman?

This is a key clue to the Democrats’ position on a public insurance plan. They have no real desire for one… they are trying to get rid of those already in place to pay for this government control of the health care industry. But if you are going to negotiate with a party that fears (publicly, at least) the notion of ‘socialized medicine,’ are you going to start from the position of keeping the insurance industry privatized but controlled? No. You are going to present a hard-lined position that you will appear to back away from for the sake of compromise. Check out this little gem from July 22, 2009:

If you don't have health insurance, or are a small business looking to cover your employees, you'll be able to choose a quality, affordable health plan through a health insurance exchange -- a marketplace that promotes choice and competition.

This is not a “public option.” This is the government setting prices and packages throughout the industry, listing it for you, and letting you “choose” which option you want. In other words, a fascist health care system. The Democrats will have appeared to have backed way off of their demands and the Republicans will have appeared to have saved face. And all of us will be reaping the… well, I’ll let you characterize the results any way you wish.

HELTHКAЯE ЯEFORM (Part 6)

This is a continuation of a series, the fifth part of which can be found here. If you are like me and can't remember where you put your keys or what your middle name is, please go back and scan over it before continuing.

Let’s step inside the boardroom with the insurance industry leaders and the government health care reform bureaucrat:
“So, you want us to maintain health insurance plans for our clients’ employees even after retirement?”

“Yes, for this plan to work everyone will need to be insured, and why should an employee who’s had the same plan for twenty years need to go out and switch it just because he retires? Employers will need to offer these plans after retirement.”

“But surely we can increase the premiums after they are no longer with the company and enjoying the benefits of being part of a large group?”

“No, that would be contrary to keeping health coverage affordable. Don’t worry… the employer will still be paying his portion. You can increase his expense if you’d like.”

“But isn’t part of the government’s complaint that health insurance premiums are already too high. Isn’t this because companies pass the costs on to their employees?”

“We’ll cross that bridge when it comes up… if it ever does.”

“It says here that we will be required to offer insurance policies to everyone, regardless of previous health conditions.”

“That’s correct. As I stated, in order for the plan to work everyone must be insured.”

“Surely we will be able to charge higher premiums to someone who knowingly comes to us with, say, Stage III cancer or diabetes or heart disease? Their medical expenses are going to be astronomically higher than a healthy 22-year old single male’s.”

“No, the plan protects people from those types of discriminatory practices. That’s why we’ve had to step in for reform. The people demand it.”

“So we are, by law, hereby required to offer everyone health care insurance at the same rate, regardless of current or previous health conditions, regardless of whether they are part of a larger group or not, and provide said coverage for them from birth until death?”

“In a word, yes. It’s what’s fair… everyone deserves health care coverage.”

“But we can’t discriminate between healthy and ill and we can’t raise our rates or penalties?”

“Correct. In a free society everyone deserves equal access to life… and thus, health care insurance.”

“And just how are we supposed to stay in business?”

“I’m not an expert on matters of profit. That’s your job. We are here merely for the public good, not the insurance industry. Do you really want the government to start telling you how to run your business?”


With the help of one Republican vote (Olympia Snowe – ME) they are well on their way. That vote by Olympia Snowe assured the passage of a health care expansion bill through the Senate Finance Committee, and provided the Democrat Party the example of bipartisan capitulation… uh, cooperation they needed to turn the media back on to Helthkare Яeform. More about the meaning of Republican Olympia Snowe’s vote and others like it later.

I know that to many of you the example above seems rather far-fetched. You will hear politicians and reporters swear that those points are not in the health care reform bills and that this scenario could never happen. Do not be fooled by such rhetoric. Ask yourself questions, seek the answers, and you will see through this kaleidoscope called reform.

The big source of contention at this point, between and amongst the parties, is whether or not there will be a publicly funded, government run insurance plan available to compete against the insurance industry and keep it in check. In general, the Democrat Party, less the so-called Blue Dogs, believes there should be, while the Republican Party, again, in general, believes there should not be such an option. Let’s take a quick look at the idea regardless of whether or not it will happen.

The idea of government-run anything competing against the private sector is ludicrous. I’ll never forget a government class I took at Texas A&M, a very conservative school. The professor (I’ll call her Mrs. Hinkley) wore her hair in what my wife informs me is a short flip. This caused Mrs. Hinkley to look reminiscent of The Flying Nun, which was not conducive to maintaining my concentration. So, it was understandable that one day I really thought I misheard her in class. In fact, what I thought she said was so far removed from common sense, let alone empirical evidence to the contrary, that I couldn’t take another note that day… I sat and stared at my notes in disbelief.

That was in my uniformed days, and we were encouraged not to make any “scenes” in class, so I waited to see The Professor in her office later that afternoon. “I know that I misheard you so I came here for clarification. What I wrote down was, ‘The government handles only those duties that the private sector tried to fulfill and failed.’ Now, what was it that you really said?” That’s what I asked her, right there in her office.


“You heard me correctly.”

“Um… (pregnant pause) what… um… what did you mean (pause) exactly?”

“Just what I said. The government does those things that the private sector has failed at.”

“Surely you can’t be serious? What on earth could the… the private sector can… with failures in the government… how can you possibly defend such a position? Can you name one thing the government does better than the private sector?”

“Education.”

I didn’t mean to laugh in her face, and did a decent job of pretending to choke on a grasshopper. “Education? Private schools versus public schools? You can’t be serious.” Remembering that she was employed by a state university, I decided to change tack. “Can you name another?”

“The mail service.”

“‘When it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight?’ The mail service is a government-enforced monopoly. Currier companies in New York have been shut down for delivering letter-sized-”

“Did you have any further questions… I’m very busy.”

I got a B in that course. A government course! Me!

The fact is the government can’t compete in anything. If there’s any need to explore the differences in education you clearly did not attend private school. Mail delivery? In 230+ years the biggest innovation the US Postal Service has managed to come up with is Saturday delivery… which they continually try to get rid of! My blog host just sent this 1,281 word paper to you in… well, we don’t even talk about transmission times anymore – that’s how fast. This technology was originally developed 30 years ago by Xerox, a private company. And the government is going to compete? The people want the government to run the health care industry?

Seriously, though, pick anything you want. Defense? Weapons are purchased through contracts with private companies. Companies that make airplanes for visiting your grandmother in Boca Rotan. Inoculations? Vaccinations developed and manufactured by private companies, purchased through contract with your tax dollars. Transportation, entertainment, food preparation, hospitals – I know that many in favor of health care reform like to claim that veterans are very pleased with the V. A. and that seniors are pleased with Medicare based upon the number that use them, but it's hard to differentiate between satisfaction and complacency in the absence of options.


Tune in for tomorrow's continuation when I let guest blogger Barack Obama fill in while I go to a heritage festival and car show (didn't I mention I was from the south?) Actually, he won't be writing it, but I have included a number of quotes from him. Tune in!

Let's All Go To Washington!

What do you get when tens of thousands of Gay Rights activists march on Washington?

A multi-media blitz

What do you get when 2 million taxpayers march on Washington in opposition to public funded bailouts of private companies?

A story on page D5 of the Akron Observer

You may have heard that there was a demonstration in our nation's capital this past weekend. According to media reports, this latest human deluge consisted of both homo- and heterosexuals supporting President Obama in his efforts to end the controversial "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" military policy. A closer examination of photos and interviews reveals that the group was not necessarily there to slap this year's Nobel Peace Prize winner on the back. It seems the issues involved ran the gamut from gay marriage to establishing the rights of gays to eat in white diners.

I know, that last one confused me, too, but chairman of the NAACP Julian Bond was the keynote speaker, comparing gay rights to the Civil Rights struggle of the last century. I've never seen a homosexual refused service in a diner because he was gay, and I'm pretty sure blacks were allowed to marry, even prior to the Civil War. I know that homosexuals get looked down upon in certain social situations, but then, so do rednecks, bikers, lawyers, and Star Trek fans. As far as I can tell, the biggest deal in the protest was gay marriage. I just don't understand the homosexual fascination with marriage.

Look, that was not a prejudiced statement. I really couldn't care less if homosexuals want to get married or not: I'm heterosexual and I'm married, so I think it's too late for the existence of same-sex marriages to affect which category I'm in. I'm solidly pigeonholed by this point in my life. Besides, why would I care what someone else wants to do with their life? I know many fellow conservatives are pretty mad at that last statement, telling themselves and anyone within earshot that I am naive in my position. I'm not, and you're wrong.

Homosexuals can already have children. They can do it the natural way with a very understanding partner, or a cooperative Hippy Claus through artificial insemination, or just buying a few like Rosie O'Donnell did. By opposing gay marriage you are not going to keep kids out of the hands of gay couples. And besides, as far as child welfare is concerned, there are a lot worse things you can be than gay.

Others will argue that same-sex marriage will give gay partners all the benefits as spouses when it comes to insurance. No it won't. Insurance will or will not give them the same rights, and most are already doing it. And if the market demands it, the rest will follow suit. And shouldn't that be the way you'd want it, letting the market, rather than the government, decide how insurance benefits are paid for and distributed? I would rather have as many people as I could get in the group that shares expenses with me.

And as far as other "benefits," like estate planning: how many of you 'conservatives' were looking forward to raiding Elton John's closet when he bites the big one? I say let his significant other have at it. I'm not interested.

Now, to the gays out there who are fighting for legalized same-sex marriage: Are you dumb? Listen to a divorced man who has been rung through Family Court: there is absolutely no reason on earth to get married. Listen, marriage carries with it tax penalties, alimony, joint property, shared credit, sorrow, hatred, and madness. Why do we straight men get married? Because we legally can and we eventually run out of excuses. Oh how so many of us would love to be able to say, "Honey, you know I want nothing more than to marry you, but Sarah Palin won't let me."

If you want to get married religiously, go find a church that will do it... they're out there. If you're looking for legislation-mandated marriage penalties, pull your head out of your rear, quit marching on Washington, and enjoy your ability to walk away! Besides, Barack Obama just got paid $1.4 million for doing nothing. Do you really think your Sunday afternoon walk is going to get him moving?

HELTHКAЯE ЯEFORM (Part 5)

Barack Obama pulled it off: The Full Ginsburg. This little maneuver is named after William Ginsburg, Monica Lewinski's lawyer, who once took a damage-control tour of the five big Sunday morning talk shows. (It should be noted that The Full Ginsburg is very different in nature from The Full Lewinski.) So, Obama hoped to match the success of that tour - who doesn't have the utmost respect for M.L. today? - by attempting the same. Last weekend he hit ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and... Univision. Okay, so maybe it was ¿todo el Ginsburg?

This conspicuous absence from Fox News came as a surprise to some and a shock to none. It seems no one wanted to come to terms with Obama's blatant avoidance of the Republican-leaning network, but he really had no choice. For weeks the administration and media had built up the importance of his joint address to Congress in the fight to turn the reddening tides of Health Care Reform. Representative Joe Wilson put an end to that effort with just two words: You lie. Say what you will about decorum, tradition, and self-control, his outburst took every bit of the hot air out of the Helthkare Яeform balloon. I am not defending Joe Wilson because I don't know him and he is a politician, but I will state this move was - intended or not - brilliant.

So when Uncle Barack hit the airwaves he wanted to make sure no one had the opportunity to take away from his agenda by shouting out anything like the truth. [A little explanation here: In his joint speech to Congress Obama stated: The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally. This was untrue and that is why Wilson shouted you lie. The media reported that the President's plan does not endorse insurance for illegal aliens and therefore Wilson was wrong. Perhaps they are playing semantics like the President, but in a speech to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute he... well, I'll let him speak for himself (as reported by The Washington Times):

"Even though I do not believe we can extend coverage to those who are here illegally, I also don't simply believe we can simply ignore the fact that our immigration system is broken," Mr. Obama said Wednesday evening in a speech to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. "That's why I strongly support making sure folks who are here legally have access to affordable, quality health insurance under this plan, just like everybody else."

Mr. Obama added, "If anything, this debate underscores the necessity of passing comprehensive immigration reform and resolving the issue of 12 million undocumented people living and working in this country once and for all."

It appears that in politicospeak both Wilson and Obama were right. People in this country illegally right now are going to be insured; people in this country illegally right now will be legal by that time. There - no illegal aliens will be provided insurance because there will be no illegal aliens. Gee, no wonder he chose Univision to round out his Modified Ginsburg.]

Back to Fox News. The President skipped appearing on Fox News to send a message to all you Red County rural people out there: The Democratic Party doesn't care what you think, what you believe, or what you have to say. We have the power and we will do what we want, and you slow-witted, homophobic, racist dirtballs are gonna take it.

I know it sounds as though I'm putting words in their mouths now, but consider these:

1. 
   
   Robert Gibbs on Presidential School Speech
   
   
   
2. Nancy Pelosi on Conservative Dissent
3. Jimmy Carter on Joe Wilson
4. Department of Health and Human Services on Free Speech

And that last one takes us to the main subject of Part 5 in this series: Medicare and Medicaid. The purpose of this health care reform initiative (aside from using U.S. taxpayer money to buy votes from the uninsured) is to eliminate Medicare and Medicaid... or rather, shift it to private insurance carriers. How do I know this as a fact? The central stated objective is to provide (read: force) EVERYONE in this country to have health coverage. Medicaid is coverage for the very young and the destitute. Medicare is for older folks who can’t afford the expenses associated with their advancing years. Private health insurance policies are for, seemingly, the people in the middle who can work and pay for coverage in the event of illness.

Currently, this is optional, as it should be. A healthy 22-year old single male really has no major reason to carry health insurance. Can bad, expensive things happen to him? Yes. Statistically, is that possibility worth him spending cash that could otherwise be used for education, professional training, or career advancement? No. Yet he will be forced to have health insurance. Why? Because that's the only way the system will work.

This same 22-year old will no longer need Medicare when he gets older: his employer-provided, mandatory health insurance will be there... into perpetuity. (Yes, employers, get ready to provide health insurance as a permanent - i.e.: post-retirement - benefit.) And his kids? They will have mandatory coverage under his employer’s policy as soon as they come out of the shoot. And if he isn’t employed? The government will ultimately assign coverage from a private insurer. [Please see Part 1 where I compare it to auto insurance, or listen to Obama's own recent comments where he confuses it with auto insurance (4 minutes and 16 seconds mark).] Why? Because Medicaid and Medicare are doomed and Congress knows this. For that matter, anyone with a smattering of mathematical knowledge should also know this. Let me explain:

There are approximately 8 billion Baby Boomers out there right now, steadily approaching the age of incontinence, with only about 47 Gen-X’s to pay the tab. (The totals may be a little off, but I stand behind the ratio.) There is no way for the members of Generation X to provide enough tax revenue to pay for the demands on the Medicare system of so many Baby Boomers. Turn the numbers any way you want. Have the GAO shift the columns in any magical way it chooses. Ask Congress to retroactively shift fiscal-year dates up and down. (These are all tricks the Federal Government regularly uses to convince Joe Public that the balance sheets are legitimate.) No matter how you stack it the system is grossly top heavy. But Medicaid and Medicare in particular are untouchable.

Remember when George W. Bush wanted to shift Medicare to private insurers? The AARP talked about marching on Washington with walkers and torches. “You want us all to die!” they shouted. Yes, actually, that’s what they are waiting for. But you refuse to comply. No politician will touch these programs because they fear reprisals from the voting block that the AARP represents. But if they shifted the burden onto insurance companies and employers, why, you'd have insurance coverage throughout your career and retirement, your kith and kin would also be covered, and only big, bad corporations would have to pay for it. [I've already covered the fallacy of taxing corporations - please go back and reread the second half of Part 4.]

There is a lot here to digest... and my lunch hour is over... so I will stop at this time and continue Part 5 over the next several days.

The Marvel of Disney

By now everyone has heard the news: The Walt Disney Company has purchased Marvel Comics for $4 billion. Actually, I don’t know that any teenaged girls knew about it, but I’ll bet every dateless Iron Man fan did… down to the last pocket protector. I don’t see any way on earth that this marriage is going to work. How are they going to combine a bunch of androgynous mutants dressed in bizarre costumes with these guys?

Now, calm down before you panic… Miley Cyrus isn’t trying on Wonder Woman costumes just yet. The boards of both companies have to approve, as well as the Marvel stockholders. Of course, that shouldn’t be a problem as stockholders are people who look at the profits and bottom lines, not at tights and storylines. The odd thing is that the whole affair has to get the okay from the federal government under the guise of anti-trust law. ANTI-TRUST of what??!! Cartoon characters? Children’s entertainment? Aren’t all of these things optional? How can you… what is the purpose of… in a... just…WHY??!!

And speaking of anti-trust conflicts, the government just spent $3 billion to bailout the entire auto industry through the Cash for Clunkers Program, on top of the $27 billion given to GM and Chrysler earlier. And what have we gotten for our $30 billion dollar investment? The 2010 Sebring? That’s it??!! Marvel Comics was for sale. The Spider-man, Hulk, and X-Men movies made $4.5 billion. Why couldn’t Obama have purchased a company actually worth something?

Anyway, this deal could create some interesting results. Infusing the mind of Stan Lee into Disney could result in Mickey Mouse cartoons I’d actually watch. Donald Duck with a rage-induced transformation. Goofy with laser emitting cuffs. Bambi with adamantium antlers. Yeah, now THAT’s a Disney movie I’d watch. But these three guys? I don’t even want to know what their super powers would be.