Someone at the WaPo is keeping a candle in the window for Obama's health care reform. Our Saturday is enlivened by a little scuffle amongst the headline writers.
On Google, Twitter, and Memeorandum we can find this headline:
Concerns Over Health-Care Reform's Scope, Price Tag Slow Momentum
However, the links take us to a story with a new headline:
Obama Urges Bolder Action to Shrink Costs
Like any good American I prefer bolder action to hand-wringing about "concerns"; the revised headline is also a space saver, which may be a consideration for the dead tree WaPo. That said, the new headline really does point in a much more Obama-philic direction.
By way of contrast, Andrew Malcolm of the LA Times borders on snarky with his coverage of the latest Obama plea for health care reform:
The president knows his keystone program is in deep trouble and losing momentum. That's why his organization is sending out all those e-mails and organizing local discussion groups to mobilize grassroots support and why he drags the subject into everything he talks about. Why he even dragged it into a speech Thursday night celebrating the NAACP's centennial. And he'll no doubt focus on the same subject in his weekly address tomorrow (Text here as always at 3 a.m. Pacific Saturday).
"Now is not the time to slow down," he pleads.
Which sounds much like winter's successful argument for urgent passage of the economic stimulus bill, whose benefits have yet to appear. We gotta do this now doesn't always work the second time around.
Obama insists Congress get a healthcare reform program drafted before its members leave on....
... Aug. 7 for their next long vacation. Why? Because members may get an earful back home from the 70% of Americans who say they are satisfied with their healthcare plans and the estimated 98% who don't want higher taxes to pay for reforms that benefit others now and maybe them later someday, who knows.
And if Obama doesn't get his beloved healthcare reforms this year when his party has such firm control of both chambers of Congress, 2010 is a midterm election year when such immense spending will be even more controversial and when, historically, the White House party loses members in Congress. (And unemployment rates are predicted to continue rising.)
Trouble in paradise.
First post OT?
I looked quickly at the June housing numbers. Although June numbers are up, they are still down 50% from a year ago. Off the top of my head, Residential construction is around 530,000 units. According to Rick Ballard, replacement is around 650,000 units. Doesn't this imply a much smaller domestic housing industry going forward than what we had from 2001-2006?
Posted by: Pofarmer | July 18, 2009 at 10:50 AM
Be very careful about those housing numbers being up. I read yesterday a comment from the Cheif Economist of Metrostudy, a group that focuses on the homebuilding industry and counts lots on the ground and new homes built and for sale ( even going to the trouble of noting when drapes and window covering go in to confirm sales of previously on the market homes). His comment was basically " Who knows" based on the report the MOE and confidence levels were so low that even at 90% confidence they did not know if housing starts were up or actually down. And given Obama needs good news, dont put it past them to have dropped the confidence level and even fiddled with the data a bit.
Metrostudy will have a report out soon, I would wait for that, its what the homebuilders rely on.
Posted by: Gmax | July 18, 2009 at 11:04 AM
I vote for the LAT version. There is a recolt brewing on the Hill as the members realize their constituents are PISSED OFF. They even voted yesterday to undo the Administrations closing of the Chrysler and GM dealerships.
Pq--that's why the Administration is pitching a variety of retrofitting bills--including making you hire their chosen thugs to weatherstrip your house etc before you can sell it.
Posted by: clarice | July 18, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Pofarmer,
The .5%/650K units is replacement for physical degradation. It does not address demographic shifts. The fact that more than half of the current starts have been in the south for some time is evidence of a demographic shift - Flight from Blue Hell.
The Ogabe Regime retrofitting which Clarice notes is a fruitless attempt to slow the flight from Blue Death by imposing Green Death "standards" to dumps to be awarded to the "winners" of 40 acres and a 3BR 2BA reparations.
I don't believe that the Great Escape from Blue Hell will be slowed for an instant by the Regime programs. I believe that the limitations of the Regime are going to be exposed by the current "organizing" effort. I don't see it as being effective at all outside of the Blue Hell dung heaps and I have real reservations about its effectiveness even within the Bluest of Hells - think CAC squared.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 18, 2009 at 12:06 PM
--Doesn't this imply a much smaller domestic housing industry going forward than what we had from 2001-2006?--
Po,
">http://www.forecast-chart.com/graph-housing-starts.html"> Here's a chart of housing starts going back to about 1959. And Here's a confirming one of the same period.
As you can see they have been remarkably constant for fifty years, only dipping slightly below 1 million during recessions.
Some of the interesting questions are
1)how many excess housing units (not just SFH) were built between 2002-07
2)how long will it take that inventory to be worked out of the system and
3) how effective will Barry and congress be in making matters worse and how much will they delay the inevitable and necessary working off of inventory.
I'm sure others have lots more interesting questions to add.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | July 18, 2009 at 12:09 PM
I guess that "bolder action" is to kill us off quickly instead of suffering death by a thousand new, higher taxes.
Posted by: Frau Gesundheit | July 18, 2009 at 12:21 PM
Continuing OT,
Here's an interesting article I had missed at Ritholz's place on the Fed's role in our present circumstances and a pretty funny one about GS in talks to acquire the Treasury dept.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | July 18, 2009 at 12:35 PM
Here is the post from my Metrostudy economist:
Housing starts just came out today. NOTE: the release says starts went up 3.6 percent... PLUS OR MINUS 11.3%!! Read the fine print in the Census Bureau's release --- http://bit.ly/DBbHS They explicitly state in the footnote that if the confidence band crosses zero, the change was not statistically significant. Translation, they can't be 90% sure whether the number went up or went down. I'll post some of OUR results here in a couple of weeks (and we do a 100% count, not just a sample, so there is no confidence interval)...
You'll also find some of our data on www.twitter.com/bradleyhunter
Posted by: Gmax | July 18, 2009 at 12:50 PM
LA Area Port Traffic in June 2009 (LUN)
Inbound traffic was 22.2% below June 2008.
Outbound traffic was 19.2% below May 2008.
Posted by: cathyf | July 18, 2009 at 01:14 PM
Oh and while it does not show at the graphics at RAS, when the rounding is removed, Obama is net +2. Its literally a .05 difference being rounded up to a whole 1.
That ought to make DOT's day!
Only one percent more to zero goes to zero. September seems like a long ways away, will I have been too liberal in my prediction? The horror of the thought!
Posted by: Gmax | July 18, 2009 at 01:18 PM
Matt--the blog:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/a_paktika_province_fourth_of_j.html
Posted by: clarice | July 18, 2009 at 01:32 PM
In the comment section of the last Ignatz link from Ritholtz is this really wonderful video of a reprise of Toto's "Africa".
A very nice trip down memory lane:)
Posted by: glasater | July 18, 2009 at 01:44 PM
Clarice,
I love that you honored Matt's article. That's one of the coolest things about JOM.
Posted by: Jane | July 18, 2009 at 01:45 PM
Thanks. It's the least I ould do for someone who so honored those young men. (Mind you, not all my blogs get published. Pbviously the editor shared my high opinion of Matt's work.)
Posted by: clarice | July 18, 2009 at 01:48 PM
Matt, it is a very moving piece. I hope many people will read of your friends' valor. May they rest in peace.
Posted by: Elliott | July 18, 2009 at 02:00 PM
It made my day indeed, Gmax. And he's at minus eight among those with strong feelings. Perhaps there is a growing awareness that this man repeatedly says things that are manifestly untrue.
I am now bordering on the obsessive in my desire to see the public option go down.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 18, 2009 at 02:08 PM
I am now bordering on the obsessive in my desire to see the public option go down.
Join the club!
Posted by: Jane | July 18, 2009 at 02:17 PM
Hearts will soar like eagles if the whole thing goes down.
Posted by: Extraneus | July 18, 2009 at 02:34 PM
The CBO confirmed that all the crazy stuff Obama has been saying about driving down the cost of health care with his reform ideas, is just that, crazy.
That does make sense though, since Obama's idea to make the U.S. more energy independent by producing less energy, is also crazy.
Don't let me forget Obama's other crazy ideas. One was to stimulate the economy by giving money to Democrat special interest groups, not now but around the time campaign season starts next year.
Another crazy idea Obama had was to reform Chicago schools by giving Annenberg Foundation money to community organizer. It may be hard to believe but that didn't work either!
Who'd a thunk that?
Posted by: Original MikeS | July 18, 2009 at 02:49 PM
thank you clarice. I'm very humbled.
Posted by: matt | July 18, 2009 at 02:49 PM
You're entirely welcome.
Posted by: clarice | July 18, 2009 at 02:51 PM
I've been thinking about the House plan making new health care insurance policies illegal and have begun to think that it is unconstitutional.
Frankly, it's time that all opponents of Obamacare embrace "Roe v Wade". Don't think of it as having anything but a cursory attachment to abortion, but rather think of it as a proven endorsement of health care privacy from the intrusion of the government into your health care decisions.
Posted by: Neo | July 18, 2009 at 02:52 PM
Re: Housing starts. You're still looking at 18-24 months supply of unoccupied residences. It's particularly bad in the upper bracket, especially for luxury condos, which were tremendously overbuilt from about 2000 on. So they can "green shoot" the numbers all they want, but adding to unsold inventory isn't going to do diddly for the economy.
Re: CathyF's shipping data. That aligns with Rick's famous Railfax report, which shows the freight activity down between 17 and 26 percent year over year.
I'm increasingly believing that even when the bulk of the Porkulus funds begin circulating that there will be little impact as they are spread over too wide a time period and through too narrow a labor channel. I can further see a situation where executives start to see a recovery next year but choose to wait out the elections in the fall to see whether the madness continues. If they do this, uncertainty will cause as much a drag on economic activity as anything.
Posted by: Fresh Air | July 18, 2009 at 02:57 PM
I see a Congress growing increasingly worried about protecting their own seats. And I smell flop sweat beading off The Won as the world catches on to his charade of intelligence and competence.
Posted by: clarice | July 18, 2009 at 03:02 PM
The bottom line on State healthcare is rationing. The State will decide what drugs you can have,what treatment,whether you live or die.
That is a lot of power to give those whose only virtue seems to be getting elected.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 18, 2009 at 03:02 PM
Keep the heat on Congress. If this isn't passed by the time of the recess, it never will be.
Posted by: clarice | July 18, 2009 at 03:10 PM
I. Thou shalt have no God in America, except for me. For we are no longer a Christian nation and, after all, I am the chosen One. (And like God, I do not have a birth certificate.)
II. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, unless it is my face carved on Mt. Rushmore.
III. Thou shalt not utter my middle name in vain (or in public). Only I can say Barack Hussein Obama.
IV. Remember tax day, April 15th, to keep it holy.
V. Honour thy father and thy mother until they are too old and sick to care for. They will cost our public-funded health-care system too much money.
VI. Thou shalt not kill, unless you have an unwanted, unborn baby. For it would be an abomination to punish your daughter with a baby.
VII. Thou shalt not commit adultery if you are conservative or a Republican. Liberals and Democrats are hereby forgiven for all of their infidelity and immorality, but the careers of conservatives will be forever destroyed.
VIII. Thou shalt not steal, until you've been elected to public office. Only then is it acceptable to take money from hard-working, successful citizens and give it to those who do not work, illegal immigrants, or those who do not have the motivation to better their own lives.
IX. Thou shalt not discriminate against thy neighbor unless they are conservative, Caucasian, or Christian.
X. Thou shalt not covet because it is simply unnecessary. I will place such a heavy tax burden on those that have achieved the American Dream that, by the end of my term as President, nobody will have any wealth or material goods left for you to covet.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 18, 2009 at 03:15 PM
I placed Matt's compelling story as a tweet last night/early morning.
Never know how much folks who follow a person on twitter read the "tweets" but is a little effort somehow.
Posted by: glasater | July 18, 2009 at 03:15 PM
Never know how much folks who follow a person on twitter read the "tweets" but is a little effort somehow.
I read about a third of them. My guess is that is typical.
Posted by: Jane | July 18, 2009 at 03:41 PM
--The State will decide what drugs you can have...--
A funny thought just occurred to me. I have a friend who is a pharmicist at a state prison here in CA.
They are actually prevented from supplying generic drugs to the prisoners; they have to have the expensive originals lest they sue the state.
It is entirely possible that in a few years California's taxpayers will be compelled to take generic drugs while the rapists and killers among us are not.
Since it's a bit of a seperate story, I won't bore you with the details of how he is compelled to supply any inmate who desires them female hormones to enhance their feminine attributes for the other inmates.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | July 18, 2009 at 03:53 PM
Neo, the Roe v. Wade angle is outstanding!
Posted by: scott | July 18, 2009 at 03:58 PM
That's a scary vision you put up there, Peter, is there anyone in the UK who is really that out there; Benn, Foot, et al, but the media was never so resolutely in their pocket. I don't recall even the early Labor party being so extreme in it's nature, except possibly the Clause 4 people
Looking over the cursory list of stimulus projects, in our area, like beach
resurfacing, to use one local exampleI don't see too much good coming out of the stimulus either. They have had to slash government payrolls in the South Florida region, pretty strongly. I don't know which rose colored glasses are governor is looking through to say 'that the stimulus is working'.
Posted by: narciso | July 18, 2009 at 04:01 PM
--thank you clarice. I'm very humbled.--
Let me give you a belated thanks for beautifully honoring the two young warriors Matt.
Probably doesn't make any difference to the story except possibly for googling purposes, but PFC Casillas' hometown is spelled Dunnigan.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | July 18, 2009 at 04:02 PM
The most important thing of all is to stop "healsth care reform'. Nothing else is as important as that!!
Posted by: bio mom | July 18, 2009 at 04:12 PM
healthcare.
Posted by: bio mom | July 18, 2009 at 04:13 PM
--The State will decide what drugs you can have...--
Under "Rove v Wade", the government is prohibited from doing anything that may interfer with anything that may produce less than protection of the "life of the mother" (i.e. the chooser).
How can the government decide anything less for a patient of another aliment ?
Posted by: Neo | July 18, 2009 at 04:16 PM
If your doctor says you need these drugs to protect your life, the government may not step in and say "no."
Posted by: Neo | July 18, 2009 at 04:25 PM
Narciso,
The present government is out there,way beyond Alpha Centauri.
Read this and weep.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 18, 2009 at 04:27 PM
Neo,
Here under State healthcare,doctors can only prescribe what the National Institute for Clinical Excellence(NICE,you couldn't make it up) allows them to prescribe.
Local Health Authorities decide what they will spend.If a drug is too expensive for the budget then you won't get it. Further if try to buy a drug,which,say extends the life of a cancer patient, the NHS will refuse to treat you.
Send someone to the UK to study the NHS before Obamacare drags you down.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 18, 2009 at 04:34 PM
--How can the government decide anything less for a patient of another aliment ?--
Four legs good, two legs bad?
Some are more equal than others?
Got inspired by the Amazon thread.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 18, 2009 at 04:56 PM
The notion that if the govt refuses to pay for a specific treatment, you may not purchase it on your own is particularly odious.Canada has ar least ceased the prohibition on private practice.
Posted by: clarice | July 18, 2009 at 05:00 PM
A beautiful tribute from Matt.
This morning,I was looking online at Civil War records for men from Lawrence Co PA which then took me to information about Camp Parole near Annapolis, MD. Some of the men, like Matt's friends, were young and died soon after enlisting. It is disheartening to think that many today do not value the courage and sacrifice of such young people.
PUK - the criminal incident could have happened in other so-called enlightened countries.
Posted by: Frau Gesundheit | July 18, 2009 at 05:06 PM
Ignatz,
"A funny thought just occurred to me. I have a friend who is a pharmicist at a state prison here in CA.
They are actually prevented from supplying generic drugs to the prisoners; they have to have the expensive originals lest they sue the state."
Just some info for the conversation. Because of my job I am frequently in India and China. Last year in North Carolina went with a relative as she filled an Ambian sleeping pill prescription at the local Rexall or whatever. $40.00 for 30 pills. That surprised me. I hardly ever use the stuff, but In India, its 10 cents a pill, same packaging, no prescription required, simply purchase over the counter.
2 years back had a bad cough/cold and the local Doc prescribed Zithromax. The 6 pill package cost me I believe around $75 at our local Safeway Pharmacy. Same thing exactly at Hong Kong costs $11, same packaging, etc, OTC, and is even cheaper in India.
I am not a big self-medicator, though it sort of comes with the business when we're flung around the world in iffy places and you wake up with a hacking cough and don't want to trust yourself to the local witch doctor, so you sort of wind up carrying a traveling emergency kit.
As for knockoffs, generally the word gets passed as to where to get reputable stuff, so in my industry folks know where to go and who to purchase from around the planet. I do not know the particulars of why some medications are so inexpensive in some locations yet so expensive states-side, though I'm sure you guys can tell me.I suspect copywriting and cost of development and legal stuff etc, but just thought I would toss this out there for discussion.
Posted by: daddy | July 18, 2009 at 05:23 PM
P'UK,
My guess is that if that family converted to Islam and rallied the local Mullah's the government would cave and they'd have their child back within 24 hours. Simply frightening.
Posted by: daddy | July 18, 2009 at 05:33 PM
They just duplicate by reverse engineering a drug on which millions and millions has been spent to create, test, pass regulatory standards, Doc. I know you are telling the truth about how little it costs in India because when I was there i saw it myself.
Posted by: clarice | July 18, 2009 at 05:34 PM
Yeah daddy, you can get pretty much anything in Hong Kong without a prescription. You do have to register to buy certain cough medicines, though.
As for India, even 10 cents a pill is a lot for Indians, who have an average per capita income of under $1000 US.
Posted by: MayBee | July 18, 2009 at 05:36 PM
daddy.
Looks like you could start a public service and make a fortune,"Care America".
Posted by: PeterUK | July 18, 2009 at 05:40 PM
It is surprising Clarice. I would actually be happy to try an experiment for DrJ or anyone else interested. Simply list a particular pharmaceutical and its stateside cost, and I would be happy on my next India or China trips to find out the OTC cost of that selfsame pharmaceutical, or its closest equivalent.
Posted by: daddy | July 18, 2009 at 05:44 PM
I also wouldn't be surprised if the government supplements the cost of drugs in Hong Kong, maybe in part to keep cheap knockoffs from making it over from China.
The Hong Kong government supplements most things, including home purchases (for about 95% of people) and health care. Ditto Singapore.
As for many of the other places, including India, you can't forget the incredibly low yearly income of the people who live in those countries (Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Philippines) etc. What seem like great deals to us aren't necessarily to them.
Posted by: MayBee | July 18, 2009 at 05:46 PM
OT,
Woke up to late for the British Open today (rats) so watched a Tour de France Stage. I was unable during the 30 minutes of watching to get any idea of who was winning or leading, or what teams are in the running, or anything of substance at all. The announcer's were constantly talking and some Russian guy won the stage, but as for figuring any of it out, the entire thing made zero sense to me, and I couldn't tell you who was winning if my life depended on it. For anyone else who was watching, is it just me?
Anyhow, off for a bike ride now. Very pretty day up here.
Posted by: daddy | July 18, 2009 at 05:51 PM
The average yearly household income in China is around $2500 US.
Things are cheap (to us) because most people there don't have money.
Posted by: MayBee | July 18, 2009 at 05:52 PM
MayBee,
Was with a guy last year in Singapore who went to buy that stuff for joints, fish-oil sort of Condrosin whatever. Sorry I don't have the entire name at hand.At the store he discovered it was way too expensive, state-side prices, so he decided to wait till he got back to China. Perhaps in Singapore with the high standard of living and the excellent Medical care available, that pharmaceutical cheapness doesn't exist as in India etc.
Posted by: daddy | July 18, 2009 at 05:57 PM
Well, limousine liberals and MSM “elites”, you had your fun… and probably almost broke your arm patting yourself on the back after you got the Dear Leader elected.
-
Now you are getting the taxes you deserve, as Barack Obama is going to BLEED YOU DRY. And you can forget writing off your local taxes on your overpriced eastcoast/leftcoast home… you’ll be paying more on that, too.
-
And here’s the kicker: you’ll be sending alot of that money to people in red states… to people whom you can’t stand.
-
New Yorkers, Californians, residents of the Northeast and the D.C. Corridor, you elected Obama… so step-up and pay those absurd taxes without complaining. You wanted bigger government.. so try THIS on for size.
-
Those who live in places with more rational state tax structures will welcome you when you want to move there… well not really, LOL.
-
So head-out first-thing Monday morning and jump in your Prius with the “Change” bumper-sticker on the back and GET TO WORK… Chairman O needs your money.
-
http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com
Posted by: Reaganite Republican | July 18, 2009 at 06:11 PM
Mickey Kaus says the card check provision may be dumped but not the mandatory federal arbitration which will allow unions to correctly claim that if they've got a majority they can get the workers a better deal than they have without a strike
One dumb move after another --strap on your fighting gear again.
Posted by: clarice | July 18, 2009 at 06:25 PM
--2 years back had a bad cough/cold and the local Doc prescribed Zithromax. The 6 pill package cost me I believe around $75 at our local Safeway Pharmacy. Same thing exactly at Hong Kong costs $11, same packaging, etc, OTC, and is even cheaper in India.--
My daughter just had a Zithromax six pill prescription for $55 last month when she had a sinus infection.
One of the reasons for the price differential is the "OTC" that popped up in your comparisons daddy.
Prescription drugs by definition have a more limited distribution than they do when OTC. Artificially limited supply creates higher prices. FDA routinely keeps a lot of drugs prescription only in the US that are OTC elsewhere.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | July 18, 2009 at 06:40 PM
Just a thought, but shouldn't the Republicans vote against Sotomayor because she didn't meet the Presidents standards?
The President rejected Alito because he said the man lacked empathy. Judge Sotomayor testified for two full days under oath that she would never use empathy in a case and would strictly follow the law and the facts.
Given her under oath statements, Obama himself would have no choice but to reject her nomination.
The republicans should challenge their colleagues to join them in voting no, because you either have to believe Sotomayor will not use empathy - and is thus unqualified in the Presidents eyes, or she perjured herself for two days - thus also disqualifying herself from the bench.
Posted by: Pops | July 18, 2009 at 06:42 PM
Clarice.
"One dumb move after another".
Be fair,the unions helped buy the Presidency fair and square for Obama. At least the man stays bought.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 18, 2009 at 06:45 PM
OT and it has already been posted but if you didn't take a look at African thunderstorm, you really should.
LUN
Posted by: Jane | July 18, 2009 at 06:49 PM
Obama is helping married couples stay together at LUN.
Posted by: peter | July 18, 2009 at 07:05 PM
Excellent point, Pops.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | July 18, 2009 at 07:08 PM
peter.
"The family that pays together,stays together".
Posted by: PeterUK | July 18, 2009 at 07:44 PM
Obama foreclosure plan isn't working.
Those couples that stay together wiil have to share a cardboard box.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 18, 2009 at 07:51 PM
It is entirely possible that in a few years California's taxpayers will be compelled to take generic drugs while the rapists and killers among us are not.
Imagine being told you're going to die because an inmate received the heart you needed?
Posted by: Rocco | July 18, 2009 at 08:25 PM
There he goes again: Today the president said that passing the health care bill was essential to economic recovery. That's simply false, and surely he knows it to be false.
Are there people out there who continue to believe this nonsense? It's brazen...
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 18, 2009 at 08:33 PM
((One was to stimulate the economy by giving money to Democrat special interest groups, not now but around the time campaign season starts next year. ))
And much of that will go to ACORN which will only serve to stimulate the Central/South American economy for pot, crack, and cocaine.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | July 18, 2009 at 08:39 PM
Would Tom Watson have been able to get hip replacement surgery under Obama's public option?
Posted by: Elliott | July 18, 2009 at 08:40 PM
yes
Posted by: Old Lurker | July 18, 2009 at 08:40 PM
my "yes" was to Dot...not Elliott's!
Posted by: Old Lurker | July 18, 2009 at 08:41 PM
The bottom line is,if Obama tries to constrain health care costs,whilst expanding the coverage,tho only thing tat will work is rationing.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 18, 2009 at 08:51 PM
When the Won talks, 2+2 seems always to =7. He was supposed to be magic. If the trajectory of the economy gets any worse, it will be like Broom One's trajectory since last summer.
The Blue Dogs will soon be leaving the sinking ship like bilge rats.
And many of the independents will be pining for W's stolidity under fire after the Clinton internet recession and 9/11 hit the country with a 1 - 2 punch.
The Won's Regime seems to be a lot like the Third Reich during the Battle of the Bulge. Advancing towards in a headlong charge towards cut-off and certain defeat from the flanks. I wonder if Sarah feels this instinctively and is readying herself to lead the attack at the shoulders of the salient. We can only wish, since no one else seems to want to lead that charge where it will do the most good.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | July 18, 2009 at 09:07 PM
One too many "towards" in that last paragraph. Should be:
Advancing in a headlong charge towards cut-off and certain defeat from the flanks.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | July 18, 2009 at 09:10 PM
Surely he knows it to be false.
I suspect you can say that about anything Obama says. Remember him saying 90% of the guns in Mexico came from the US.
I'd really be surprised if he has made many truthful statements.
Posted by: Pagar | July 18, 2009 at 09:16 PM
Driving in the car today, I heard this brilliant senior analyst at the Reason Foundation. Her name is Shikha Dalmia and she rips IWON apart:
President Obama's Top Five Health Care Lies
(Sorry if someone already linked this but it is quite good)
Posted by: Ann | July 18, 2009 at 09:44 PM
Oh my, how did that happen!
Try this: President Obama's Top Five Health Care Lies
Posted by: Ann | July 18, 2009 at 09:53 PM
Wow, Shikha just kicked a girlyman's ass. You go girl. Dont let him get up, he will just lie to you again.
Posted by: Gmax | July 18, 2009 at 09:59 PM
All my adult life, I've held the opinion that Liberals suffer from an irrational disregard for the facts. By this I mean any facts; all facts.
Obama has not only embraced this trait. He has turned it into a religion.
Posted by: Original MikeS | July 18, 2009 at 09:59 PM
Would Tom Watson have been able to get hip replacement surgery under Obama's public option?
Sure.
Because it will all be about who you know.
Posted by: Jane | July 18, 2009 at 10:04 PM
Jane,
Your LUN goes to a Facebook login page which gives a warning.
Posted by: Ann | July 18, 2009 at 10:13 PM
Pops---good comment.
Rocco,
I seem to recall a case a few years back from I think Texas where an illegal alien got the heart lung kidney transplant organs ahead of similarly critical US citizens on the waiting list. Now it's prisoners? Next thing you know, it'll be illegal alien prisoners getting first dibs. Wonder if that'll piss off legal citizen inmates.
Clarice,
A good news anecdote. Just stopped in at my favorite New/Used Book store in town. We really only have 1 such store, Title Wave, a huge, decent place in an old grocery store, with adjoining coffee cafe's, health food sprouts restaurant's, etc. A little bit of Berkeley in Anchorage. Anyhow, walked thru the front door, and there on the big table that always greets you, not a single Obama book. Not one. First time in forever. Instead, front and center, top shelf, was Mark Levin's new Conservative bestseller, surrounded by Horse Soldiers (about the mounted US troops in Afghan) 2 other Afghan books, a couple science and economic paperbacks, 4 or 5 forgetables, a new "how something or other 'Made Us Human'", and a Henry Kissinger. Amazing. Not even a Clinton or the halcyon days of JFK's Camelot within shouting distance. Walking around the backside did see a Harry Reed something way down low, and Carville's new "Fourty More Years" screed, also way down out of eyeball range, but as for The Won, nada.
This is great news. Unlike Border's etc, this is not a chain store, so it actually has to sell stuff locally to survive. And it's not even under new management! Off to the right on the big 6 or 7 stacks of overall new stuff, I did find 2 Obama's, "Dream's of who wrote the Audacity of Hope", but both just paperbacks, small in size, and basically down low and out of the way. So when I walk into the most comfortable Berkingstock-type Used Book joint in Anchorage and Obama has vanished and Levin is in the ascendent, I am hugely hopeful.
Posted by: daddy | July 18, 2009 at 10:19 PM
That's simply false, and surely he knows it to be false.
If you tried to convince Dali Obama that something is not true just because he made it up. He couldn't possibly understand. He'd probably think you were speaking Austrian.
Posted by: Original MikeS | July 18, 2009 at 10:22 PM
Jane,
That a' capella TOTO tune was amazing. But didn't anybody like my tribute to Michael Jackson from ">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1gnvKZFCq0"> moondancing mosquito biologists from above the Arctic Circle? Not even for the mosguito's? Bah, I'm off to drink beer.
Posted by: daddy | July 18, 2009 at 10:26 PM
Ann, Jane's link eventually goes to Kim Komando.
Posted by: caro | July 18, 2009 at 10:45 PM
daddy, I loved it! I see that it is close to the Gates of the Arctic where I have done two trips.
Posted by: caro | July 18, 2009 at 10:47 PM
I see my LUN goes to something I was trying to post last night, contrasting to the Roam HR 1018 ridiculous mustang counting
billbull.Posted by: caro | July 18, 2009 at 10:50 PM
daddy , that is good news unless the owners of the Obama books are still sleeping with them under their pillows with no intention of reselling them.
Posted by: clarice | July 18, 2009 at 11:08 PM
daddy-
after your cups, look up Tesla: Man Out Of Time .
I'll start with that, and then we'll avoid the blind alley of string theory.
Anybody hear anything from DrJ?
I'm getting a bit concerned.
G'Night all.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | July 18, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Daddy -
I'll be in Alaska for the next two weeks, so I'll be sure to pay a visit to Title Wave (great name for a book store!!!).
Posted by: flodigarry | July 18, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Melinda,
I stop in and read, but I'm really, really busy at the moment. I was away for the better part of a week (got back very late Wednesday), and there's a huge pile to plow through.
Daddy,
I'm afraid I'm not the right person to talk about particular drug costs. I don't take anything myself, and my intent is to provide tools to the business. That is far removed from the market-level pricing you are talking about.
It is true, though, that pharma prices their products for the local market. Ethical pharmaceuticals made by conventional synthetic chemistry cost almost nothing. The cost is in the discovery, development, clinical trials and marketing. That is about a $billion per new drug.
Biologicals are much more expensive to manufacture, but there are not a lot of these on the market yet. But they are the expensive ones. The expense still is in the whole process, and not what it costs to manufacture.
This is a common misperception, actually. I rejected a proposal for funding that claimed that synthetic chemistry costs are important, and their method would help to reduce those costs. Those costs really don't matter much.
Needless to say, I don't think much about reimportation to reduce drug costs.
Posted by: DrJ | July 18, 2009 at 11:49 PM
From Ann's linked article:
By that token, Obama's stimulus bill has set in motion rationing on a scale unimaginable in the land of the free. Indeed, the bill commits over $1 billion to conduct comparative effectiveness research that will evaluate the relative merits of various treatments. That in itself wouldn't be so objectionable--if it weren't for the fact that a board will then "direct financing" toward approved, standardized treatments. In short, doctors will find it much harder to prescribe newer or non-standard treatments not yet deemed effective by health care bureaucrats. This is exactly along the lines of the British system, where breast cancer patients were denied Herceptin, a new miracle drug, until enraged women fought back. Even the much-vilified managed care plans would appear to be a paragon of generosity in comparison with this.
For the past 40 years, I have extensive experience with our health care system. So far, my outcome has been far better than my family genetics predict. I have lived at least 10 years longer than any male on my dad's side of the family going back four generations. My problem was not diagnosed properly until I underwent very sophisticated testing by Berkeley Heart Lab in 2001. I have a rare genetic profile which causes my body to manufacture low density lipoproteins (bad cholesterol) irrespective of my diet or exercise.
None of the "standardized" treatments would benefit my condition. But a combination of niacin and Lipitor now controls those clot causing LDL's.
The point is that "standardized" treatment would have been counterproductive, and I would have died young like the rest of the men on the Rhoads side of my family.
The Won's "plan" will be my death sentence, which is why I am vehemently against it.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | July 18, 2009 at 11:50 PM
Thanks, Caro! Loved it!
daddy,
I had no idea there were so many giant mosquitoes at the Arctic Circle. That was awesome but I'm itchy all of a sudden. I am so glad you came to JOM and stayed. You are a
walkingflying encyclopedia.Posted by: Ann | July 19, 2009 at 12:01 AM
I've been to Alaska just once, and those mosquitoes are pretty impressive. They have stripes on their legs. But they fly pretty slow, so they aren't too hard to kill.
Posted by: cathyf | July 19, 2009 at 12:21 AM
I saw the clip of Zero's speech before the NAACP where he makes this statement:
What a divisive jerk he is for saying something like that. And it is largely untrue. If someone suffers that kind of discrimination there is recourse to be taken.Daddy--I loved the mosquito laden video of Killer. Biting/stinging bugs are not high on my list right now 'cause I get nailed all the time when I'm on a job and the recent episode was a hornet doing a tap dance on my ankle. The area still looks like hamburger a week later.
Those kids did a heck of a job!! And they had practiced to get the moves down right. Really fun to watch!
Posted by: glasater | July 19, 2009 at 01:02 AM
Debt and deflation.
LUN
Good read.
Posted by: Pofarmer | July 19, 2009 at 01:13 AM
Credit money system
LUN
From the same thread as the last one.
Posted by: Pofarmer | July 19, 2009 at 01:20 AM
Texas Congressman Calls Obama a "Fascist Dictator"
Interesting article. Had not heard about Larouche for a time but can't disagree with the writer.
Posted by: glasater | July 19, 2009 at 03:27 AM
Jim Rhoads,
I'm glad you are with us thanks to our health care system. Praying that we as a country stay on track and that you continue to get the treatment you need.
Posted by: Porchlight | July 19, 2009 at 03:32 AM
Well--as I've discovered in reading some of the Larouche site--they did not like W either.
Spengler at one point in his life spent some time in the Larouche camp and since I enjoy reading his articles from time to time that led me to go down memory lane to recall what Larouche is all about.
They sure don't like Zero over there:)
Posted by: glasater | July 19, 2009 at 03:42 AM
My only "On Topic" post of the day:
When I lived in London 1997-2003, the number one story measured by the press association was health care or rather The National Health Service. It was very dominant. Something like over 40% of all front page news stories (no matter what paper) were about or concerned or mentioned the NHS. And it isn't getting any better now that I am back and reading the Telly, Times and Evening Standard as well as "old Pinky". Now if Obamacaresless passes, do you think our vaunted and hallowed newspapers like the WaPo and NYT's will follow suit and hold the bureaucracy's feet to the fire like the press does in the UK?
OT: My money is with Watson today. I think after the first day he was going - well that was a nice round. But now after 3 rounds against the flat bellies and bombers he has to be feeling that this is his for the taking. No one knows Turnberry like Watson and no one is a better links golfer than Tom. He has the shots and he knows where to place the ball and his putting has been unbelievable. 59 years old and on the verge of sports history. If you don't watch, you are cheating yourselves of a once in a lifetime (maybe 20 lifetimes) story.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | July 19, 2009 at 04:07 AM
I saw the clip of Zero's speech... "the pain of discrimination is still felt in America."
I'm somewhat opposed to the pain of this on-going sexual discrimination myself. We got 25 different species of mosquito's here in Alaska, and the only ones getting a square meal off my blood is women:
">http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art32941.asp"> "Ten Interesting Facts about Mosquitoes
Guest Author - Kimi Ross
There are at least twenty-five species of mosquitoes in Alaska. Since they are present from April to September in most places, they are an inescapable part of the Alaska experience. So why not learn a few facts about these interesting insects?
1. Only females bite. Yes, it’s true. Actually, they don’t bite, per se, but stick a complex apparatus into the target’s skin to pump a small amount of blood out of the “patient.” The protein in blood is necessary for egg development, not for nutritional needs of the adult mosquito."
And actually, updated research by the moonwalking MJ Mosquito Breakdancers of Toolik, has shown we have 35 species up here, not 25. And yes, Obama is a divisive jerk.
Posted by: daddy | July 19, 2009 at 04:18 AM
"Obama is a divisive jerk". Indeed he is,but Obama is also proof that it isn't just the females that suck blood.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 19, 2009 at 04:45 AM