Let's Compare: Obama's Katrina.

There has been a lot of comparisons between the Bush Administrations response to hurricane Katrina and the Obama Administrations response to the DeepWater Oil Leak.  I'd like to do an informal analysis of the media's coverage of these events.  I'll be short on citations (I'm lazy...they do exist but I don't want to take the time to find them) but since most of you lived through both of these events the analysis should still make sense.

First...Bush warned residents of the Gulf States in a Nationally broadcast speech to leave for higher ground.  He had already dispatched National Guard members to ready the evacuation (again three days before landfall).  This is a good example of how urgent the situation was regarded by the administration.  The urgency demonstrated by the Obama group is a little different.  On April 24th evidence of the leak is reported to Homeland Security.  Three days later when updates are showing significantly higher leak issues than on the 24th (from marginal leak on the 24th to potential of over 110000 gallons per day on the 28th) the President...with opportunity to show his administrations response at a Midwest tour decided to ignore it in his speech that day.  Now, nearly 2 months into what will eventually be the biggest oil spill in American history, President Obama is finally out to correct the issue.  Of course his sitting on the sidelines for well over a week while Gov. Jindal begged to get help and approval to set up barrier islands to protect the fragile coastal lands of Louisiana was just one example of laziness, ineptitude, carelessness or general unresponsiveness in general, or quite possibly all of the above.  The Presidents "ass-kicking" is a little late and his search for said "ass" should start and end in the oval office.

But you don't have to take my word for it.  The public has spoken.  The White House in a recent poll on the handling of this tragedy shows that 69% polled rate the response negatively.  Again for comparison purposes that is higher than the 62% rating given to the Bush White House for its handling of Katrina.  Let's see how well President Obama wears that  label.

NOTE:  The crude reference used above is quoting a President of the United States in a broadcast interview at an hour when children may have been present for his speech.  Make you own judgement on the appropriateness of that for yourself.  I'm personally not impressed.

Washington State Senate Seat...Currently Occupied by Patty Murray

So I've been kind of busy the last couple of weeks.  I haven't really invested a lot of time for my blogging.  My other blog gives a rather detailed reason why.  Most recently I spoke of a candidate from Wisconsin.  Scott Walker is an admirable man and certainly deserves the thoughtful consideration of his constituency.  I don't live in Wisconsin though.  So I will refer to the old adage that  says all politics is local.  Living in Washington State I am obliged to comment on the races that matter most to me and the one of most import right now is the one being fought for the seat in the Senate currently occupied by Patty Murray.
The last couple of months a local football hero by the name of Clint Didier has been making massive in roads into the polls in his effort to unseat Murray.  Didier is a relative unknown in the state political arena.  He had not garnered significant Republican party support but had received the endorsement of Sarah Palin, which could be regarded as a bellwether...although it can't be said of what.   In some polls Didier has reached parity in a fight with Murray.   Most recently, however, he has slipped.  What can be attributed to this slip?  None other than two time Gubernatorial nominee Dino Rossi, the GOP party favorite.  Dino Rossi is a great guy.  His stance on the politics of this state are what we needed when he first won the Governors seat before being ousted after three recounts and thousands of illegal votes made Christine Gregiore our Governor.  His time was then and not now.
Dino Rossi has the endorsement and was encouraged by the GOP regulars to enter the race nearly 6 months after others in the field announced their campaign.  People like Clint Didier, who has amassed considerable statewide support, have done the hard and expensive work of gaining recognition.  Now, when much of their support is cementing, Dino Rossi comes in with his state recognition from two failed attempts at the Governors Mansion.  Even before he entered the race he was polled as more than a match for Murray he decided that he would enter the race only after his Primary opponents had spent their time and money building statewide recognition.  I wouldn't fault him this if he could point to legitimate differences in his platform that make him the better candidate.  The problem I have is that, largely, his platform matches Didier's almost plank for plank.  Rather than muddying the waters in a top two primary Rossi had the opportunity to do like Mitt Romney, throw his statewide recognition behind the strongest current campaign and leverage that for future political favors.
I don't have any problems with Rossi winning.  I think it would be a much better option to Murray.  I do, however, think that the ringing endorsements of the GOP entrenched makes his independence somewhat suspect.  I want a straight talking, frank, aggressive tight-end that is humble enough to accept a hand when he needs it but strong enough to never rely on it.  I compare this to a smooth speaking real-estate agent with deep ties to the West-side (read: left-side)of the state .
Sure the Tea-Party has embraced Didier and that may or may not be his biggest leg in but he is not the Tea-Party candidate that the left derides as racist, sexist and anything else -ist they think they can pin on someone with no evidence to support their position.  He is a true outsider with an intimate understanding of the States needs and interests in local, national and world politics.  If our top two primary works the way I want it to work then we'll have the choice between two awesome guys and either answer will be acceptable.  If it gives us a clear choice between Murray and either one of the big name GOP candidates then I hope the result is that the tight-end reaches the end-zone again.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Palin Makes Her Choice in Washington (politicalwire.com)

Hope for the Republic

Who's tired of government waste?  Who's tired of government interference?  Who's just tired of government?  Well there's hope.  I just read an article about Scott Walker in Wisconsin.  I now have hope that there are real Republican's with real values that actually act on those values.  I'm not sure I like the endorsements of Newt and Jeb but his actions speak louder than their praise.  This guy actually has returned "$370,000 in salary over eight years because he thought it was wrong for the county executive to be paid more than the state's governor".
That's more than Biden has given to charity over the last decade and nearly as much as Obama gave (as a multimillionaire) for the last two years.  This is the type of person we need running.  Someone who the competition has to resort to toothless comlaints of spending too much on campaign meals (money that I'm sure is donated by people rather than taken from tax payers).  I would like to see more leaders like Scott Walker, principled, disciplined and responsible.  If we can ask for more than that from our politicians it's because they already have these traits.  We need a George Washington and just like George Washington (who refused to be paid as Commander in Cheif durring the Revolutionary War) Scott Walker demonstrates leadership through example rather than rhetoric.

Racial profiling...it exists...now what?

So I'll admit something that I don't want to admit.  Racial profiling does, in fact, exist.  While I wish that this term, along with the concept of race in general, would just disappear, I have to admit that racial profiling exists and that while it's not nice I'm sort of glad for it...except when things like this happen.  In Seattle area (Lake Union) showed up to a 911 call of armed robbery.  They arrived and found someone that they suspected of being involved (he happened to be Hispanic) and they proceeded to treat him inhumanely (beating, kicking, swearing etc). The problem is that they didn't just beat and kick him.  The problem is that they used racially charged slurs and made it clear that they suspected him because of his race.  In the end they were able to determine that the person they beat was not a suspect and not involved in the robbery.  The Seattle police chief has done the right thing by taking them off the streets while they investigate the whole scene.  So now what?  That's the real question here.  Do we fault these officers for making a rash judgment based on experience and trends?  One of the officers is part of the Gang task force, can we blame them for assuming that a Hispanic wearing typical gang garb (rather than polo shirts and designer jeans) at the scene of a potentially violent (armed) robbery might have something to do with them being there in the first place?  (I know, that was a long sentence/question) No we cannot blame them for making judgments about potential suspects.  What we can blame them for is making the judgment that they deserved to be beat, kicked, and otherwise abused before they could determine their full involvement.  Cops detain, they do not execute the sentence. 
Cops have a tough job.  No one is denying that.  They have to make judgments on situations based on little information just to be safe.  They are expected to be the best of humanity while dealing with the worst.  They must remain composed and stalwart in the face of death.  Being a cop is working cleanly in filth, you're bound to get dirty eventually.  This said, as a cop you know this going in and thus should be held accountable when you don't match the standards society sets for you. 
I have called for profiling to be used at borders, airports and in crimes.  Why?  Because it works.  Profiling, in all its forms, works.  As children we learn patterns at a very early age.  We recognize them with no effort and we make assumptions based on those observations.  We are now expecting humans to ignore important skills in the name of being politically correct.  This is not ok.  The actions of the officers in this situation are not to be blamed for their human assumptions but on their inhuman reactions.



http://www.kirotv.com/investigations/23490010/detail.html

Illegal Immigration Mexico Style.

Image by Pacoy69 via Flickr

May Day is perhaps the most politically charged "holiday" on the calendar.   This year, as in years past, it was used to protest immigration issues, more specifically the Arizona law.  All of the outrage, from the criminals defiantly walking the streets protesting a law that they are choosing to ignore, is a little disturbing considering several facts.  I was recently made aware of the immigration laws of Mexico. (Thanks Tiffany)  In fact Mexico is particularly brutal in enforcing this law on their Southern borders.

Under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to re-enter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six-year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals.

The law also says Mexico can deport foreigners who are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," violate Mexican law, are not "physically or mentally healthy" or lack the "necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents.

 Now lets compare this to the Arizona law.  First of all you have to be committing a crime that would get you pulled over by a cop and then if you were suspected of being an illegal immigrant you would be asked for your papers.  After producing, or not, your documents, you would be cited for the crime you were pulled over for and then deported.  Now lets look at the Mexico law.   If you enter the country lacking the means to provide for yourself you are eligible for deportation.  In Arizona there is no such clause.  Now who sounds more fascist, a country that can deport you for being physically or mentally ill, or a country who will allow you access to our hospitals and then deport you?  If you enter America and are a drain on the "economic or national interests" we welcome you anyway.  Arizona is simply suggesting that you do it legally.

Again, does anyone see the problem with a President of the United States standing on the side of criminals over the side of the law he swore to execute?  There are some serious problems with the current state of affairs and the fact that a majority of American's support Arizona's movement makes for a very interesting summer as we prepare for the fall elections.  Obama and other Democratic leaders have already said they would not be addressing immigration this year because of the election.  The more outrage by the left over this issue, however, may result in it becoming a major plank on the platform of people running this fall.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Poll: Majority Backs Arizona Immigration Bill (cbsnews.com)
• Mexico Is A Dangerous Place...Third In An Occasional Series (minx.cc)
• Felipe Calderone criticized Arizona's immigration law for being discriminatory. How tough are Mexican immigration laws? (slate.com)
• Some Hispanic Americans hope law deters illegal immigration (cnn.com)
• What if Arizona adopted Mexican immigration law? (tech.bl0x.info)

Stop Immigration. (Period)

So there are many people who are having a hard time with Arizona'z new stance (actual enforcement) on immigration.  Certainly the left has done a magnificent job of making this sound worse than the law actually reads.  I read a piece by Pat Buchanan recently and I started thinking about the immigration issue in bigger terms.  First of all Pat is right.  Arizona's law makes it so that regular police officers can now act on reasonable suspicion of someone being an illegal resident.   This is, actually, the responsibility of the federal government.  It's the reason we pay border agents, FBI, Homeland Security, TSA, etc...  Arizona has simply taken it upon themselves to enforce what Obama has refused to enforce.  My thoughts on the subject are perhaps a little more radical than even Pat's.
I am of the opinion that until there is an effectively zero unemployment rate (frequently considered between 4 and 5%) the immigration both legal and otherwise should be limited extremely or entirely.  Yup.  I said it.  I would rather those immigrants who want to come to America to enjoy our liberties and wealth come here when the nation is prospering.  I want American's to hold jobs enough to support themselves and then be able to provide (if necessary) the support system that a new immigrant may need to be successful in our country of promise and opportunity.  Is that such a  horrible expectation?  Sure.  I'm a greedy bastard.  I don't want someone to come over and make it harder for themselves and everyone else because they're now competing for jobs that are non-existent.  They would be better off in a country that they are familiar with and have some sort of support system.  We need another Eisenhower.  Someone who recognizes the importance of making sure legal citizens should be considered for employment first.  The "jobs that American's won't work" is a misnomer and a lie.  The problem is that its so pervasive that some jobs are stigmatized to the degree that even entry level teenagers are not taking the jobs so they are competing for jobs against more educated, experienced, and capable people and not getting the job.  The effect of this is that young people are becoming more dependent and value work less.  This is could explain the reason so many young voters voted for Obama.  He promised that the Government would take care of them-- just like mommy and daddy.
I'm ok with being called a bigot, racist, fascist, Nazi, etc so long as others are willing to admit that they are dependent on the government in the exact same way they were dependent on their mother when they were born.  I think the latter is far more humiliating. 


http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=146341

Senseless Census.

        So I started my "trainging" as a Census Enumerator on Saturday.  We met at a fast-food restaurant that has Golden Arches at 8:30 am.  I collected my paper work, messenger bag, and marked the attendance sheet.  I sat down with my paper work and started filling things out before the Crew Leader even called the meeting to order.  By the time he had introduced the schedule I had already filled out half of the paper work.  By the time he had started the actual "training" or "orientation" I had filled out all of the paper work, put it in the order it was supposed to be in and had started reading a book to bide the time.  Six hours later the class was over and we were allowed to leave so long as we had finished having our fingerprints taken.  Just a little math for those who are interested.  I was paid $11.75 an hour for my time which was calculated from the minute I left my house.  So I left my house at about 8:00am and arrived at about 8:30am.  I was also then paid for the time it took me to return home another 30 minutes.  In just travel time I "earned" $11.75.  Oh, but that's not all.  I was also paid $.50 per mile to travel to the restaurant.  It was 24 miles round trip.  So I "earned" another $12 just to get to and from the meeting.  So far so good.  I then sat through the reading of 5 hours of mindless droning about how important it was to make sure you entered everything just so.  In all I "worked" for 6.5 hours and "earned" a total of $88.38 while reading a book, signing my name to a dozen pages, and inking my fingers.  Now lets just go ahead and multiply that by the number of people at this "training" which I will estimate at 25 making the total for just the trainees at $2209.50 that doesn't include the Crew Leader pay for 2 crew leaders and 2 Crew leader assistants.   Keep in mind that I was one of the first to leave after getting my fingerprinting done so this number is actually much higher.   This total of greater than $2000 was for a task that I completed without instruction in less than a half hour.  If this task were to take even an hour for someone to complete on top of an hour for transportation we can assume that 2 hours are needed for the task.  That would make the total savings from this task roughly $1325 for just the first day of training.  Drag that out to the 5 days of 5hour training (remember that I'll also get paid for travel time and miles) and the average savings could be over $5000 in just the training (assuming it takes a third of the time that they schedule). The Census this year will cost roughly 3 times the amount spent on the 2000 Census.  The amount per person counted will have jumped from $15.99 to nearly $46.93, or more than any jump from one census to the next since 1790.  In case you're wondering the price per person has gone down one time census to census in 1890 it cost 18.33 cents per person in 1900 it cost 15.54 cents.  This as a result of an estimated increase of population of about 27 million.  In researching for this blog I found an article that says the costs of this Census would have been $3billion less if the Census Bureau would have approved hand held enumeration devices.  Bringing the estimated cost of the Census to over $14 billion.  I contend that the Census could have cut even more from the costs by not only doing the computerized option but by also eliminating the oft derided "pre-census" mailing.  It's no wonder that the National debt will triple under this administration if this is how they run the Census.  Please for the sake of the country return your Census paperwork so that I don't have to waste your money by knocking on your door to fill out a form that will be processed manually and rechecked manually by at least 4 other people before actually being counted. 

USPS "not viable"

Image via Wikipedia

Well DUH!  The USPS has been "not viable" since they made it a quai-Government agency and dictated the way it was run the USPS has not been able to compete with UPS, FedEx and other carriers for the more lucrative overnight and express parcel service.  The reason I'm writing about this is two fold, one, the USPS is one more example of what happens when Government intervenes in commerce and second, the USPS drives me crazy.
I read an article today that detailed the information from a report given by the Government Accountability Office (ironic...Government Accountability) that all but doomed the USPS in a matter of years if they are not released from the absurd restrictions placed on them by the Federal Government.  If they can't cut offices, drop Saturday delivery, and restructure union contracts they will not only continue to offer substandard service but they may also require a bailout.
Bailout is a naughty word these days and its Kryptonite to Democrats seeking re-election.  The problem is that congressmen don't want to be the bearers of bad news when a Post Office is closed and Rural deliveries get cut.  The USPS has nothing to offer in the way of hope for politicians or those who require its services.  With the estimate at $7 Billion (yup that's a B) in losses just this year not only is the USPS not viable its not worth saving.
I have a lot of problems with the USPS mostly because of what I deal with at work.  I work for Amazon.com and handle customer calls as they relate to everything from how to navigate the site to "where's my stuff" calls.  Most (I'd like to say upwards of 80%) of the "where's my stuff" calls are a result of USPS not scanning products or just plain losing them all together.  Some people are already aware of the program call "Smart Post" and it is anything but smart.  It is a cooperative agreement between FedEx and USPS.  It would be a smart move for USPS if they actually made it work.  More often than not when the USPS gets the package they deliver the package with no additional updates.  Occasionally, however, they don't scan the package and fail to deliver it as well.  Most people don't even know that FedEx had anything to do with it unless the package doesn't show up.  So now instead of one carrier getting the blame (in addition to my employer) two carriers share the blame and the both share the consequences of just one carriers ineptitude. I wouldn't care that much except that I get a half dozen calls or more per day that people are upset about their package arriving late or not at all and they get mad at ME.
Well I don't have any solutions for the Post Office other than to fire every lazy Union worker and close down every duplicate post office where another office exists within 15 miles and then either become more efficient or get out of the way for a truly independent universal postal service that doesn't bow to the Government.  I don't ask much.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Post Office needs to cut deeper (money.cnn.com)

They Vote then Vault

Can you say AWESOME!?  I of course mean that in the most sarcastic way possible. Bart Stupak the infamous congressman that "almost" blocked the Healthcare Reform Bill before actually passing the bill. His leaving office puts the Democrats in an awkward position to try and fill his position, a position with a pretty conservative core already.  This is the type of thing that the Democrats are going to have a hard time with in a lot of the races this year.  Of course the other issue at hand is that the Republicans also need to convince Tea-Party folk that they are worthy of their vote.  Not an easy task for incumbent Republican's that helped Bush spend us into a debt that could have been managed much better.  I have nothing in particular against Stupak.  In fact I sort of admire his hard headed style over the run-up to the healthcare vote.  His stance on abortion has been consistent until now and given the pressure to pass from Nancy Pelosi and others it was impressive for him to last as long as he has.  This may be a sign of things to come as polls indicate the hard battles associated with the mid-term elections.  Republican's, if they are smart, will put people on the ballot with zero association with the big spending of the last administration and people that are ready to get America out of debt.  Of course getting people to understand that the only way for that to happen is to cut programs completely.  If you can put a candidate that can communicate the strength of the individual and negate the need of government to provide for them and get people excited about it then you'll have the ideal candidate.  This is the time for "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" rhetoric.  That is what the Healthcare issue is really about.  The candidate that emphasizes personal responsibility and challenges his constituents to be personally responsible for their own lives and not dependent on others is the candidate that will win the Tea Party and very likely the election.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Rep. Bart Stupak won't seek re-election (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Stupak's Exit: How Bad An Omen For Dems? (swampland.blogs.time.com)

Temperance and Vengeance

So lately there has been some really heated political rhetoric and even some violence from both sides of the political rainbow.  I want to express my feelings on the way that this has been covered and also on how it has been executed.  There is no question that the political climate is as divided as it has ever been in any living person's memory.  There are talks by some groups of a complete government coup and others are silently trying to marginalize populist movements in hopes that they can continue a coup of their own.  Here's the deal.  Neither of these groups is right.  It seems to me we have two choices when it comes to our political activism.  We can either choose temperance or vengeance.  Temperance will bring everyone closer.  It will give those, who don't have anything to do with the process because of the insanity of both sides, a chance to feel like the can get involved without feeling like they're part of the insanity.  The country was built on temperance.  I know, some of you will point out that it took a violent revolution to create this country.  The premise of this country is built on temperance.  The founders foresaw what could (would) happen if we allowed the political process to be defined by the margins.  They created a Constitution that is at once simple and complex enough to embody the basic tenets of free society.  The process that was used to develop this document was rife with political posturing and grandstanding and philosophical debate.  The end result was that all of the vastness of opinion were distilled and, dare I say it, tempered, into a document that has founded the greatest nation of civilization.  The type of give a little take a little temperance that created this country is the very thing that we are in need of now.  The problem is that one party has took while another party gave for nearly a century now.  Progressivism has given America some very important things namely woman's rights, Civil Rights, and Environmental Protections.  The problem with Progressivism is that it also created things that are not fundamental rights like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, and Education.  These things were seen as for the good of the country and, indeed, it can successfully be argued that some of these contributed to our success as a country (ie Education).  I have a different opinion of some of the entitlements and what they have done to our country.  I see entitlements as being explicitly against the Constitution or at the very least explicitly against the Founder's intent to create a country that enabled liberty and the pursuit of happiness but did not guarantee happiness or anything else for that matter.  We are free to govern ourselves and the government guarantees that freedom by preventing invasion and in all else they should have no power.  By starting entitlements the Progressive movement has created an environment whereby they can subtly change the culture of America.  The heat of the current debate hinges on this very notion.  Many of the most virulent right-wingers view the left as bringing about a socialist/communist/Marxist government that is heavy handed and oppressive just as Stalin, Lenin, Castro, Mao and others have been.  They may have a point.  The problem is that they are so lost in the heat of their passionate distaste that they fail to think and just strait to action, or what I am terming vengeance.  This is no different than those from the left that did similar acts in the 60's.  The difference should be that we temper our resolve to act according to our beliefs and not to our passions.  This is how America should work and how it can work if we choose temperance over vengeance.

Anderson's Law of Racist Claims

You've heard of Godwin's Law which more or less says that most online discussions will boil down to a comparison of someone or something to Hitler/Nazi's.  I'm here to start a new law.  It's called Anderson's Law of Racist Claims.  All discussions of Tea Party proponents will result in the claim that all white people or more specifically all people against Obama or the Democrat party are intrinsically racist, regardless of their political, social, racial, and cultural affiliations.  I recently read an article by Pat Buchanan about some recent accusations by Frank Rich.  This article seemed to point out how the Left levies Godwin's Law (and now Anderson's Law) when they see Republicans/Conservatives/Tea Party Activists speaking out against the Government and whatever abuses they are lamenting.  What the left seems to forget is that the cries of racism and hatred are pale when placed against the actual criminal (en masse) behavior that Liberals exhibited in the 1960's.  While Democrats hunker down and send the FBI to arrest "militant Christians" the fact remains that very few actual instances of violence or documented proof of hatred or racism actually exists within the Tea Party movement.  It's a shame that racism is the tool of the left.  The Conservative/Tea Party Movements are anything but racially motivated.  The Tea Party has it's roots in the Rick Santelli Feb. 19th 2009 rant that was in response to the stimulus bill.  These types of issues are the glue that binds the Tea Party and results in a "Big Tent" that encompasses all parties and strata of thoughtful electorate.  The keyword being thoughtful.  It's the people who attempt to quell dissent by trumpeting claims of racism that are the real racists.  They seem to think that people of color are foolish enough to buy into the claims and that they will be the constituency that keeps them in office.  The problem is that all it will take is someone savvy and simple enough to communicate the real reason for the dissent to blow holes all over their claims of racism.  The right is fighting for "equal opportunity not equal outcome" and that means that what the left is saying is that people of color need the Government because they aren't capable of achieving without them.  This is the most insulting political stance I can imagine.  If someone with half a brain runs for office on the argument that the Left is continuing to "coddle" the minorities because the Left doesn't believe that minorities can make it against the rest of the world  I really think that things could change.  If honor alone wouldn't open the eyes of the typical electorate of the Left then perhaps shame would.  If you are a minority and you're voting for someone who believes that they need to give you a handout because of your minority status then you should really ask yourself why.  Why would they want me to come to them for money, food, healthcare, retirement, housing, etc?  Is this because white people are better than me and the only way I can have a chance is if the Government provides me with other peoples money as support?  There are some in the academic world that think African American's should get reparations.  Well if welfare, food stamps, and free healthcare don't count as reparations then I don't know what they want.

As Social Security Goes So Goes Healthcare "Reform".

Here's some information that you might find a little frustrating, disturbing, or just plain maddening. "This year, the system will pay out more in benefits than it receives in payroll taxes, an important threshold it was not expected to cross until at least 2016, according to the Congressional Budget Office.*"  So here's the deal. The CBO, yes that CBO-- the CBO that gave Nancy Pelosi the illegitimate estimate of a 'trillion dollars saved' in the second decade of health reform, they estimated that the deficit between income and payout wouldn't be for another 6 years.  If their estimates are that far off no doubt the limited information that the CBO received on the Health Care plan (particularly after all the 'fixes') is more than likely even further off.  As with all socialist schemes such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaide, Education, and now Health Care, the money put in will almost always inevitably exceed the value taken out.  Notice that I didn't say that the money out is what is exceeded, I said the value.  This distinction is important. Education is arguably funded adequately but the value received for the taxes spent is not equivalent and that is not something anyone would argue.  Medicare and Medicaide are currently in just as bad of shape as Social Security.  I can't blame any of this exclusively on Democrats because Republicans have had their involvement in making these "benefits" available and expensive over the decades.  This means that both parties are culpable in the mess that we are in right now.  The only way to correct the corruption is to require responsibility.  The problem is that American's are too irresponsible to comfortably ask our politicians to be responsible.  At least half of us are torn on the health care handout and that's not good.  If your great-great grandparents could see the mess that we're in now they'd cry.  To them a hard days work was the only thing that earned you good health.  It was not a right.  To them an education was something that was worthwhile...if you could afford it.  It was not a right.  Our great-great grandparents didn't think it was a burden to take in their agin parents when they could no longer care for themselves.  Retirement was not a right.  Today, however, we see people screaming that it's their right to go to school and get a college education.  They seem to think that the college owes them an education instead of them earning an education.  It seems we are fine with giving politicians the power to be responsible for us...who's responsible for them?  This post started with Social Security and it's failing to be solvent 6 years earlier than projected.  This is fair warning for those of us who are more than 6 years from collecting Social Security.  We owe those who earned Social Security and we should pay in until the program fails.  It was them who saved us from Fascism, even if we invite it in today, it was them who built the platform for our prosperity, even if we squander it, and it was them who were promised this benefit, even if they didn't ask for it.  For this reason we pay in until the system breaks us.  But we should be ashamed of ourselves if we expect to get this or any other benefit that the Government means to enslave us with.  Today we should look at the course the last bastion of freedom is on and save it from doom by taking responsibility when noone else will. 

They done gone and done it.

I will forever remember the day that America was attacked by terrorists. I will forever remember the birth of my children. I will forever remember the day that I left for a mission. I will also forever remember the day that American Government turned it's back on the voice of the people and decided to bind us with a system that attacks the most sensitive aspect of our lives...our actual lives.
The Democrats of the House passed a bill with 219 votes to 212. No Republican's supported the bill and enough Democrats objected to make it this close. If the representation of the House had gone the way of the polls the bill would have died 259 - 172 and the people of the United States would have won. Apparently the Democrats care nothing for the thoughts of the people who they represent.
One of the things that I find absent from many of the punditry is simple communication. They want to spend time on the things that most American's haven't spent time caring about. They talk about "deem and pass" they talk about "publicly funded abortions" "CBO ratings" "Medicare de-funding" and of course "tax hikes". In the end most people have no idea what these things mean and more to the point they don't care. So I think I've distilled the most important fact of this bill into something that any American from any party can understand. They are trying to MAKE me buy health insurance. The choice to have health care or not is a lot more important than being forced into having it when you don't need or want it. Liberty is the freedom to make even stupid choices and suffer the consequences good or bad. Tyranny is being forced to do something and then forcing everyone else to join you in the consequences. That is the simple and direct meaning of this bill. If I chose not to get insurance I will be fined. This is intrinsically wrong. I don't believe health insurance is a basic human necessity or right.
If this country wants to get back into a position of legitimate power and true liberty we will stick to the tenets that got us here. Limited government and individual freedoms. That means individual responsibility. That means get rid of Social Security, Welfare, Food Stamps, Medicare, Medicaid, and dare I say it...the educational system. I guarantee that our country would benefit from the cuts in taxes and the increased individual freedom/responsibility. A nation that goes to the government for a handout is a nation that is too weak to exist. This bill enforces that weakness and makes us fiscally, mentally, socially, and generally weaker and that is NOT the America that we want. You can argue the finite points of this bill but the reality is that in the end no argument can be made that removes personal responsibility from human existence.
Some would argue with me that the government makes us have auto insurance. Fine lets have that argument. In an auto I can kill or maim a person. If I neglect to purchase insurance I am not hurting you. The next argument is that I'm costing you money because I will inevitably have to go to a Doctor and you will assume that I will not be able to pay my bill and thus will be a burden on society as they pick up the bill for me. What a cop out argument. For the sake of argument lets assume I won't pay my bill. The Doctor would send me to collections of which I would not likely pay and the Doctor would then write off the expense and reduce his tax burden and in order to recoup the loss he would increase the cost of his services. Theoretically this would increase your premium. In reality the increase is minuscule relative to the cost of the malpractice insurance that the Doctor has to pay for in order to protect him from sue-happy liberals that think they deserve a huge payout because a Doctor made an honest mistake that resulted in them suffering for a week or two because he left some gauze in an incision. I can understand the cases of legitimate criminal neglect but even this should be limited in payout. This bill doesn't address this problem. The Republican opposing bill that was shot down last summer cost the American tax payer about $250 Billion and could be completely implemented within a year of passing. This bill gets paid for starting now but doesn't actually have a benefit of tangible value until 2014. I won't even begin to venture what it's going to cost the tax payer because most of us know that it's going to cost more than the slightly less than a trillion dollars that the Democrats weaseled out of the CBO and the fact that we get to pay for that for the next several years makes it even worse.
As a note. I don't have health insurance. My wife doesn't have insurance. My children have state provided insurance (which gives some people reason to call me a hypocrite). To make matters even more interesting...I make less than half the mean income of my community (<$20K/yr.). If I can manage my life, health, and finances, as limited as they are, then anyone can. I am not exceptional. I am not heroic. I am the average Joe. Most important. I am responsible. Let's make America strong. Let's make American's responsible.