Taxing Gold Coins Equals Healthcare Reform

It does if you are a tax and spend Democrat. Yet another feature of the health care law monstrosity hit the news today -- the bill no one bothered to actually read all the way through before it became law.

every time a member of the public sells more than $600 worth of gold to a dealer, Piret said, the transaction will have to be reported to the government by the buyer.

Throughout the debate, opponents repeatedly argued that the bill was not about health care reform, but about extending big government control over a large portion of the U.S. economy. The more we know about the new law, the more they are proven correct. What do taxes on the sale of gold coins, or new 1099 requirements have to do with health care? Nothing. 

This provision, intended to mine what the IRS deems a vast reservoir of uncollected income tax, was included in the health care legislation ostensibly as a way to pay for it. The tax code tweak is expected to raise $17 billion over the next 10 years, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.

More taxes and more spending. That's what the Democratic party is all about, their lies to the contrary not withstanding. Knowing that the public in general strongly opposes most new taxes, Democrats can't admit their love of tax hikes. Instead they must find ways to create new ones by burying them in gigantic bills that are rammed through on party-line votes. Yet another reason to vote Republican.

Place in History

Jonathan Chait, of The New Republic occasionally writes something worth reading. But in the aftermath of the health care bill, he has written a piece so laughable it must be noted. It's called, "Obama's Place in History." Chait starts off with this...

Let me offer a ludicrously premature opinion: Barack Obama has sealed his reputation as a president of great historical import.

That's not the only thing ludicrous in the article. Before I comment further, one aside. The word "historic" has been beaten to death with regard to the health care bill. In some quarters, historic seems to be used as a synonym for progress. But history is neutral. It's just as possible for something to be historically bad as to be historically good. Ok, moving on.

Chait, a major fan of big government who has been cheerleading the health care bill, concludes that Obama's success in getting it passed is so significant that he "will never be plausibly compared with Jimmy Carter." He's already been compared to Carter, and may be in the future. Even leaving aside the years to come, it is quite possible that historians might draw such comparisons.

Historians will see this health care bill as a masterfully crafted piece of legislation.

That's possibly one of the dumbest things Chait has ever written. He goes on to rave about how great the bill is, making all sorts of unsupported assertions. I seriously doubt historians are going to see the complicated mess that is this reform bill, which was forced through by sleazy parliamentary tactics, unable to attract the support of a single member of the opposition, barely enacted, and facing multiple lawsuits, as any sort of "masterfully crafted" legislation -- just the opposite. 

Republicans have spent a year chortling over the inevitable collapse of Obama, and they seem to cling even more tightly to that fantasy--"Incompetence"? "Out of his depth"?--as it slips further away.

Chait is the one living in a fantasy world. The entire process involved in the health care reform bill has further demonstrated Obama's incompetence and lack of experience. Chait is blinded by his Obama-worship. The fact that Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic leadership barely saved Obama from a crushing defeat -- despite having an overwhelming Democratic majority in both houses of Congress, is not exactly a sign of Obama's greatness. And if the health care bill helps lead to a major Republican revival in 2010, that repeals significant parts of the legislation, even this narrow victory is going to look pretty hollow.

It's entirely possible that Republicans will gain control of the House in November and block any further domestic progress, unemployment will stay high, and Republicans will win the White House in 2012. Yet he's already left his imprint on history.

So what? Every president leaves an "imprint on history." So far Obama's is more like a stain.

 

A Bad Day for U.S. Freedom

The latest word is that the health care monstrosity will pass. If so, this is one of the worst days for American freedom in quite awhile. Not only is it a massive expansion of government power, a further attack on what remains of the free market in health care, and a huge spending spree we can't afford, it actually forces people to buy something they don't want. This bill is a prime example of why I vote Republican. The GOP has many problems, but Republican congresspeople of all stripes united to oppose this bill. There are plenty of big government Republicans. But there is no chance that the Republican party and a Republican president would ram through a big government bill against the will of the people, and without the support of a single Democrat. Only Democrats are that committed to expanding state power over pretty much all aspects of life. In our supposedly representative government, the representatives of a single party overroad the clearly expressed will of the country in the service of their state-worshipping ideology.

So what now? Over at Big Government, there is a good article that explains that the fight isn't yet over. The unconstitutional provision that forces people to buy insurance will be challenged in court.

In a matter of hours after House passage of the Senate Bill, the state of Virginia will file suit in federal court. The Commonwealth will be joined in the suit by a dozen other states. I expect a flood of additional lawsuits. The suits will be based on the provision that requires every American to purchase health insurance. (This is how the Dems ‘crack down’ on the insurance industry; by requiring everyone to buy its product?) Because this is an individual mandate, virtually every American has standing to file suit against this provision. Also, it is in direct conflict with state law in at least two states, Idaho and Virginia.

It's hard to say what will happen in the courts. I'm not normally a big fan of lawsuits, but these will be well-justified. Overall though, this whole process should be a wake-up call for Republicans, and anyone who opposes bigger government -- including those who were stupid enough to vote for Obama thinking he was some sort of moderate. Republicans need to understand that no lie is too blatant, and no tactic too underhanded, for Obama and the Democrats. If they are willing to force this bill through without regard to popular opposition, they are capable of anything. The GOP should do everything conceivable to block Obama's legislative agenda. Instead of being the "party of no," they should be the "party of hell, no." Start digging through parlimentary procedure rules and find new ways to bring Congress to a crawl. Get us to November so we can throw the Democrats out. 

I have no illusions that a gigantic new expansion of government power can be repealed. But if Republicans can regain control of Congress, it might be possible to eliminate some of the most odious provisions. That's about the most we can hope for.

Wow, a Few Insults and Slurs

I checked Memeorandum to see if anything significant had happened with the health care bill, and instead found leftists hyperventilating about slurs and insults hurled at Democratic members of Congress. You might think people were being lynched. For example, Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo, normally one of the more rational types on the left, titles his post "Menacing."

Far worse happens pretty much any time some prominent conservative attempts to speak on a college campus, but now leftists are upset that congressmen trying to ram through an unpopular bill, using extremely questionable tactics, are getting yelled at. It's just so scary. Of course if these were Republican congressmen being verbally abused by anti-war protesters, or some other leftists, then there'd be no problem. 

Saturday Morning Cartoon

h/t American Power

Medical Update

My wife was finally released from the hospital a little while ago. Apparently they have determined that the blackouts were caused by fluctuating blood pressure, possibly related to a recent change in medications. Hopefully everything is now under control and there will not be a reoccurance.

Medical Update

As I posted a couple of days ago, my wife is in the hospital after passing out a couple of times. She had a cardiac catheterization today, and no artery blockage was found. So that was good. Unfortunately, they still don't know what caused her to pass out, and are reluctant to release her. I'm not sure what the next step is since I haven't gotten to talk to her main doctor today. But it looks like more tests.

Bad News on Health Care

It looks like Senator Ben Nelson, the last Democrat holding up the health care bill, has been bribed into supporting it. It isn't over yet, but things are not looking good. When health care reform was first proposed, I thought it was likely that something would pass, given the strong Democratic majority and President Obama's popularity. But as it languished in the Senate, I began to hope that it might be killed. Unfortunately, it looks like that hope has now been extinguished. Democrats have been determined to ram this massive expansion of government through, despite zero Republican support, and its unpopularity with the public. 

As everyone is aware, the health reform bill is a gigantic piece of legislation. I'm not sure anyone knows all the details. In a bill so large there are no doubt some good ideas that represent genuine reform. But what we do know for sure is that this bill is an attack on free market principles, a huge expansion of government power over private industry, and another government encroachment on personal freedom. Forcing insurance companies to ignore risk in who they insure turns their business model upside down. It is an attempt to replace basic market rules about how insurance works, with a government fiat. And forcing individuals to buy insurance, whether they want to or not, is a direct attack on individual liberty, and yet another expansion of the nanny state. Let's hope all the independents and even Republicans who voted in a Democratic president with a Democratic Congressional majority are happy with these results.

Laughable Leftist Whining

The health care mess is driving some on the left over the edge. It's pretty funny to watch. Take a Crooks & Liars post called, "Notes on the Moral and Political Degradation of America." Crooks & Liars is usually good for a laugh, and this post is full of them. It's a non-stop whine about how bad things are here in America.

The news in the last few days has continued the drumbeat of demoralizing events which started in the Bush administration, and with only a few hiccups has continued through the Obama administration. It is clear that Obama is, fundamentally, Bush's 3rd term.

Uh oh, and Bush is pure evil. Comparing Obama to Bush is one of the worst insults a leftist can employ.

spending billions on turning brown people into a fine red mist (a.k.a. the Afghan war) is acceptable, but health care (a.k.a. saving actual American lives) is something which can't cost money. What an interesting--and clearly evil--set of priorities that reveals.

Here we see the typical attitude of the anti-American left, that automatically sees the U.S. effort in Afghanistan as something racist, as if the ethnicity of Afghans had anything to do with the war. And never mind that we are spending, and wasting, massive amounts of money, and the lives of our soldiers to rebuild Afghanistan and improve conditions for the Afghan people. But no, this guy thinks we are just there to kill "brown people."

I guarantee that real healthcare reform would save more American lives than the entire war on terror—assuming said "war" hasn't cost more American lives than it's saved, which is almost certainly the case.

Wow, he guarantees it. It must be true then.

Next we have what Glenn Greenwald is calling the creation of Gitmo North, in which people whom the government judges there is not enough evidence to convict, will be held indefinitely without trial. This is the very definition of tyranny.

Yeah, detaining dangerous foreign terrorists is "tyranny." Let's hope this clown never has to find out the real meaning of tyranny. Here's a guy who wants the government to seize control of health care against the wishes of the population, wants to regulate peoples' pay, and wants confiscatory taxation to punish those whose business practices he doesn't like. Somehow actual tyranny is ok, but taking reasonable security measures isn't.

Any nation which does this is a nation of men, not laws. America has forsaken its fundamental premise and proved its degradation.

Yeah, yeah. America is evil. You'd think the left would come up with a new tune once in awhile.

this started under Bush, but as Obama embraces this, it because a bipartisan project and the new elite consensus. This is now something which has been confirmed as US policy which is extremely unlikely to change no matter who is in power.

The reason that its a bipartisan consensus is that it involves basic common sense, something not present among much of the left.

bankers at the big banks are a net drain on the economy. Their venality and recklessness has wiped out the entire economic gains of the last decade and plunged the economy into its worst crisis since the Great Depression. ... they should be taxed a good confiscatory 90%

Bankers are evil too, and the government should steal their money. But he's worried about "tyranny."

In a healthy, non-degraded society, none of the behavior listed above would be allowed. Not only would there be confiscatory taxes leveled, there would be massive ongoing criminal investigations into what happened.

In his uptopian world, his enemies would be imprisoned and their wealth confiscated.

In a healthy, non-degraded society, saving American lives by making sure they have health care would be a priority

By stealing money from productive groups, and redistributing it to others. Hmm, a sick, degraded society is sounding better all the time.

Americans exist to be looted systematically by their elites

Translation: the wrong Americans are being looted by the wrong elites. 

And, last but not least, in a healthy, non-degraded society, the government is not allowed to lock up people indefinitely without trial. If you don't understand why this is, I can't explain it to you

Somehow I don't think he could explain much of anything to anyone.

any more than it is apparently possible to explain to a plurality of Americans why torturing people is evil, and beyond the pale. The fact that it can't be explained any more to many Americans, of course, is exactly why it is fair to call this degradation.

Those stupid, evil Americans! They don't agree with him. Even though he's out on the fringe, he's right and they are all wrong. That proves they are "degraded."

Blatant Lies About Costs

In today's Washington Post there is an article called, "Administration insists health-care reform bills contain costs." It includes such claims as,

White House budget director Peter Orszag told reporters via conference call that the $848 billion bill now pending before the Senate contained important cost-cutting tools. AND the Medicare savings in both bills -- about $500 billion under the Senate approach and $400 billion in the House version -- as the first serious effort to restrain the entitlement program's growth since the 1997 Balanced Budget Act.

You have to wonder if they actually expect anyone to believe such blatants lies. Somehow we are supposed to believe that a massive increase in the government's role in health care, all the new bureaucracy, new regulations, and new taxes are going to lower costs. 

John Stossel has an excellent article at Real Clear Politics accurately titled, "We Pay Them to Lie to Us." It's a useful counteractive to the  weak propaganda coming from Congress and the White House in support of health care reform. Read the whole article. But here's his response to the supposed cost reductions in Medicare.

Obama has promised to pay for half the "reform" cost by cutting Medicare by half a trillion over 10 years. ... his is an administration that will pay seniors $250 to make up for the fact that they didn't get a Social Security cost-of-living increase this year (because the cost of living didn't increase). And Congress is in the process of repealing a scheduled increase in Medicare premiums."

Stossel goes so far as to say,

I will chew on razor blades when Congress cuts Medicare to keep the deficit from growing.

I don't think his mouth is in any danger. Cutting Medicare is political suicide and everyone knows it. But that doesn't stop politicians from blatantly lying about it.

Typical Big Government Reasoning

This time from Bill Clinton, speaking in favor of health care reform. What about the details of the bill? They don't matter, according to the former president.

"It's not important to be perfect here. It's important to pass, to move, to start the ball rolling," Mr. Clinton said. "And whatever they can get the votes for, I'm going to support."

Nothing is more important than just enlarging the size of the government, and getting its fingers deeper into the health care system. According to Clinton, "doing nothing was the worst outcome." How typical is that? It doesn't matter that the bill has all sorts of problem, or that there may be far better ideas for reform, to big government types, the government "doing something" is always the answer.

Fortunately there are a few Democrats with the rudimentary logical reasoning power to point out the obvious flaw in that sort of thinking. Senator Ben Nelson noted, "failure could be passing a bad bill." For some reason, the possibility (and often the high probability) that government intervention could make a bad situation worse just doesn't register. Unfortunately, things can always get worse. It's far easier to cause new problems than fix existing ones.

Candid Interview With President Obama - Part 1: Health Care

The Unreligious Right has obtained an exclusive transcript of an unusually candid interview with President Obama, conducted by veteran reporter John Maddup. According to Maddup, the only explanation for Obama's surprisingly straightforward answers was that the president began by saying,

Look, I'm sick of political speech today. You ask whatever you want, and I'll tell you how I really feel. Seriously, I know this is off the record anyway.

[Begin Transcript]

Maddup: Ok, Mr. President. Why don't we start with health care? What do you think of the current version of the bill?

Obama: [Laughs] Well, John, like most Americans, I don't have the slightest idea what all is in that bill. Even most of the people in Congress haven't read the whole thing. You think I'm going to read it? Like I have that kind of time. Please.

Maddup: But sir, how can you support reform if you aren't clear on the details?

Obama: It's very simple. First, I do know that this bill will increase the role of the federal government. Naturally, as head of the federal government, I'm strongly in favor of any expansion of government power. Who wouldn't be? Second, if we pass this bill, I'll get credit for doing something to solve a major problem. People want their government to do something. Passing a big piece of legislation makes it look like we are on the job, taking care of the public, and not just sitting around.

Maddup: But what if it doesn't solve the problems? What if it makes them worse, or creates new problems?

Obama: That could happen. But if it does it'll be the fault of Republicans.

Maddup: How's that? They aren't writing the bill.

Obama: Exactly.

Maddup: I don't understand, Sir. 

Obama: Let's see if I can explain. Democrats control Congress, and of course I'm the president, so you'd think anything that went wrong would be our fault, right? Wrong! We control Congress, true. But Republicans can block things. Plus we have those conservative and moderate weasels in our own party; but let's focus on the GOP. If it weren't for the GOP I could do what I really want, and that's to just nationalize the whole health care system.

Maddup: So you would like to have single-payer national health insurance?

Obama: Of course! But I can't get it because of the GOP. If this bloated monstrosity of a bill screws things up it will ultimately be the fault of Republicans.

Maddup: Ok, Mr. President, I think I see where you are coming from now. Thanks for the explanation.

Obama: No problem, John. One other point I should mention. No matter what else happens with this bill, if we get it passed it will increase government control over health care, as I said before. That's a first step to single-payer. You've got to take a first step before you can reach the finish line. Oops, sorry about that. I slipped back into political speech mode there for a second.

Maddup: That's ok, sir. I know it must be hard to turn it off. Before we move on to other issues, let me ask you one final question regarding health care.

Obama: Hit me.

Maddup: What do you say to those who already have good insurance, and are worried that reform will actually lower the quality of their policies, increase costs, and cause their taxes to rise?

Obama: I say, come on now. When has more government ever lowered quality and efficiency or increased costs? Let's be serious. Who doesn't think that government insurance bureaucrats won't do a better job than private insurance bureaucrats? As for taxes, since when are higher taxes a bad thing? I know I have to pretend to be against higher taxes, but the higher the taxes, the more money we have to work with. And that's a good thing.

Maddup: Alright, Mr. President. That about wraps up the health care issue. Let's turn to another topic.

[End Part One] 

Concise Breakdown of Obama's Speech

Don Surber has the best short review of last night's presidential speech.

1. Everybody must carry insurance.

2. Insurance pays for everything.

3. Insurance costs less.

4. Pass it immediately.

The man’s an idiot.

It probably will pass.

Sigh.

I'ts hard to improve on that summary.

Delaying Bad Health Care Proposals Helps in Other Ways

According to the Wall Street Journal, the contentious, time-consuming debate on health care is having one major positive effect. It is keeping economy-wrecking climate legislation on the "back burner."

if the health care debate drags on, the energy bill could get stalled by the 2010 congressional midterm elections

Right now the best-case scenario is exactly that. Health care reform and climate legislation both get stalled, Republicans pick up seats in 2010,  a more reasonable health care package gets passed with some useful reforms, and the climate bill is scrapped entirely.

Naturally climate bill supporters, just as with health care, are claiming the president needs to be more involved personally. They haven't noticed that his popularity has dropped like a rock, and that many people just aren't buying what he's selling any more.

observers say that Mr. Obama has so far failed to engage on the issue in basic ways, giving opponents an opportunity to define a climate bill as a large tax on consumers

Maybe because it will be a large tax on consumers. Obama's lying ability isn't good enough to cover up all the negative aspects of his proposals.  

Republican strategy right now should be block if possible, otherwise delay. Get to 2010, pick up seats, and then reassess what can be done.

Left-Wing Nonsense at The Atlantic

I know, big surprise. I stumbled across an article by Wendy Kaminer that illustrates how many on the left mistake their own assumptions and assertions for indisputable facts, delusions that poison any attempt to understand or even accurately analyze people on the right. Kaminer starts off complaining about town-hall protesters, apparently incorrectly assuming that they all represent conservative Republicans.

Having openly applauded, tacitly supported, or simply ignored the Bush/Cheney national security state and the unprecedented expansion of unaccountable executive power, the right wing now defends freedom against the spectre (and it is only a spectre) of universal health care?

The idea of a Bush/Cheney "national security state" is nothing more than a leftist myth. If there was a national security state under Bush, we still have one. But I guess it's not a big problem now that Obama is in charge. Calling anything Bush did an "unprecedented expansion of executive power" just reveals historical ignorance. Bush's minor expansion of executive power pales compared to presidents such as Lincoln and FDR. And opposition or lack thereof to Bush's policies is irrelevant to whether someone is opposed to different current policies.

the fury directed at "Obamacare" is partly fueled by angst about cultural and demographic changes (from gay marriage to the emergence of a non-white majority

The fury directed Obamacare is based on a dislike for the known, suspected, and feared provisions of Obamacare itself. Kaminer is basically just accusing opponents of racism and bigotry -- because that's a typical mode of argumentation on the left. It's much easier to demonize your opponents than actually deal with the substance of their arguments, or to recognize that your own positions could be mistaken or at least open to question. 

it also reflects a very limited understanding of repression and the role of government in everyone's life.

This assertion applies very well to Kaminer herself. This is a person who apparently doesn't understand that people oppose various aspects of Obamacare for differing reasons, or that conservatives are not opposed to all forms of government. She makes a big deal about the supposed paradox that conservatives support Medicare, a government program, while opposing the expansion of government control over health care at large. But there's no paradox. Kaminer doesn't even grasp the basics of conservatism -- in this case conserving an established institution while opposing radical change.

The rest of her article is more of the same false analogy about how conservatives supported the evil Bush/Cheney police state, yet fear Obama's health care initiatives, which of course she sees as innocuous at worst. Even accepting her ridiculous BDS-driven assertions and characterizations at face value reveals that she doesn't understand that people could possibly take a differing view of national security issues, and domestic policies such as health care. I guess it is just too difficult to grasp that someone could support certain restrictions on freedom in the interests of national security, while at the same time oppose encroachments on freedom in other areas. This is pretty amusing because the same leftists hysterically shrieking about a supposed loss of freedom caused by Bush's national security policies, couldn't care less about freedom when it comes to imposing tighter government controls on health care, industry, and almost every other aspect of people's lives. 

Forcing Thru a Health Care Bill

According to the New York Times, Democrats are going to stop negotiating with Republicans on health care, and focus on just getting a purely Democratic measure passed.

Top Democrats said Tuesday that their go-it-alone view was being shaped by what they saw as Republicans’ purposely strident tone against health care legislation during this month’s Congressional recess, as well as remarks by leading Republicans that current proposals were flawed beyond repair.

This is pretty funny.Somehow I doubt we'll notice any actual changes, since Democrats haven't exactly been negotiating in good faith with Republicans anyway. They've already decided what they want to do, and the main fights have been with moderate and conservative Democratic resistance. The administration and its allies in Congress see their vision of health care reform as a holy crusade. They hold their positions with the fervor of religious fanatics. Anyone disagreeing with their supposed "facts" is "lying." Anyone who opposes them is evil and un-American. Ask them. They'll tell you.

Unfortunately for Democrats, opposition to these health care reform efforts is not just a minority Republican phenomenon. Opposition runs deep throughout the country, as the latest polls have shown. But the Democratic leadership apparently believes its own propaganda that protests are just a political effort generated by Republican operatives to damage the president.  

The officials said the White House hoped to make the case to the American people that it was Republicans who had abandoned the effort at bipartisanship.

I know President Obama is a skilled liar, but I seriously doubt whether people are going to swallow that one. The Obama administration's definition of bipartisanship is: I won the election, that means we are going to do it my way. 

My initial position on health care reform was that something would be passed, therefore Republicans should work with moderate and conservative Democrats to minimize the damage. But it now appears that opposition to the current reform proposals has significant public support. The GOP should do everything possible to defeat the administration's plans outright and try to send the whole thing back to the drawing board. If Democrats ram through a partisan bill by radically altering Senate tradition with "reconciliation," they will be cutting their own throats politically. 

Hypocrite-in-Chief

According to the Washington Post, the president actually criticized "scare tactics" by opponents of health reform. But in the second paragraph, we find that Obama asserted that Americans are "held hostage by insurance companies." Sounds a little like a scare tactic, doesn't it? Obama's entire pitch on healthcare involves scaring the American people about the current system. His ridiculous whining about opponent scare tactics just reveals him to be a gigantic hypocrite.

When the president isn't being intellectually dishonest or hypocritical about the health care issue, he's blatantly lying or spouting doubletalk.

"I don't want government bureaucrats meddling in our health care - but the point is I don't want insurance companies' bureaucrats meddling in our health care either,

What's that supposed to mean? He wants far more government involvement, which obviously necessitates government bureaucrats "meddling," plus he's been working with insurance companies to get their support for his "reform" efforts, even while he demonizes them. 

Hypocrisy, intellectual dishonesty, scare-tactics, doubletalk, and lies -- that's President Obama on healthcare.

Harsayani on Healthcare

David Harsayani of the Denver Post has an excellent article up that eviscerates Democratic whining and hysteria about protests.  He points out the obvious, that Democrats control the entire government, and could pass anything they want without the help of a single Republican.

If the government-run health bill doesn't pass, it won't be the result of anyone's voice being quashed. In fact, I would be curious to meet the herculean life-form that has the capability to "drown out" either President Barack Obama or Pelosi

Harsayani also comments on Pelosi's assertion that healthcare reform opponents are afraid of the facts.

Many protesters are terrified of fact. Because the fact is every iteration of health care "reform" in Washington is intended to lead us to a single-payer system, which would not only wreck innovation and competition but also inject bean-counting bureaucrats into our health care decisions, from zygote to cremation.

And his conclusion is right on the mark,

The problem for government-run health care proponents isn't that debate is being "drowned out" by fanatical mobs. Quite the opposite. Their problem is that too many people are finally listening.

Check out the whole article.

Top Democrats Think Half the Country is Un-American

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and House Majority leader Steny Hoyer have an amazingly clueless op-ed up at USA Today. It starts with the first line.

Americans have been waiting for nearly a century for quality, affordable health care.

What kind of nonsensical statement is that? The U.S. has had quality, affordable healthcare for a long time. The vast majority of people in this country have health insurance, the quality is the best in the world, and the poorest Americans are covered by government plans. Any American can show up at an emergency room and get treatment. That opening assertion illustrates why people like Pelosi and Hoyer are so unhinged by opposition. Liberal Democrats are operating from a set of assumptions not shared by at least half the country. Yet they hold their ideological positions with religious fervor. Anyone daring to disagree isn't just mistaken, they are evil and un-American.  

We believe it is healthy for such a historic effort to be subject to so much scrutiny and debate.

Really? That's why they are demonizing the opposition as un-American, pretending that grassroots protests are manufactured political operations, and trying to ram through massive changes to healthcare with little or no input from non-Democrats. Like most on the left, when Democratic leaders say they welcome debate, what they actually mean is: as long you as you accept all our major assumptions and preconditions, we'll entertain your objections to a few of the less important details.

Pelosi and Hoyer repeatedly describe healthcare reform as some sort of holy crusade. They quote Truman calling for the "right to adequate medical care and protection from the economic fears of sickness." They describe their efforts as "a defining moment in our nation's history," a "century-deferred goal," and a "historic effort." But at least half the country doesn't think healthcare is a "right," or some sort of progressive goal we've been waiting for. Instead they see this reform effort as a threat to what we already have. Everyone recognizes that the current system has problems. But that doesn't mean that major changes will be beneficial, or that massive government intervention is the answer. But if you fall within the half of the country that feels that way, the Speaker of the House and the House Majority leader think you should just keep your un-American mouth shut. Hopefully people will remember that when they go to the polls next year.

I Saw a Protester Today

Political protesters and activists, whether concerned with national or local issues, were nothing unusual when I lived in the urban northeast corridor of New Jersey. But since moving to rural South Jersey, I haven't seen any political activism. But today, as I was turning at what passes for a busy intersection around here, there was a man on the corner waving a sign that said "Stop Obamacare." If you listen to leftists, he was no doubt some sort of "political terrorist," a racist, or both. Or he could be someone that's just tired of Obama trying to ram through another big government program.