The recent revelations about the faulty science behind global warming claims is mind boggling.
What I find amazing is that President Obama still intends to appear at the Copenhagen conference on climate change and he apparently intends to propose drastic cuts in carbon emissions by the US. I cannot believe that the President remains willing to risk our economy to prevent something that is probably not happening (i.e., human induced global warming).
At a minimum, one would think the evidence of conspiracy to "cook the books" on global warming would make everyone take a time out. The fact that President Obama seems determined to go ahead without more review is disturbing.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
KSM Show Trial
I'm a little behind the curve on this story, but its been busy at work.
I am dismayed by the Administration's decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in New York in the Federal Court. There is no good outcome that can be had here. The ACLU lawyers who will be representing KSM and his co-conspirators should have a field day. The Bush Administration and America will be on trial. Our intelligence community and useful anti-terrorism programs may be placed at risk.
And what if a jury finds him not guilty? Well, don't worry about that. President Obama, Atty. Gen. Holder and Sen. Patrick Lahey have all indicated that the evidence of KSM's guilt is overwhelming and that there's no doubt about the verdict. Plus, if he was somehow found guilty, the government just won't release him.
Really? If so, why have the trial? I wonder if the ACLU was taking notes when those officials pronounced KSM guilty. That may be a basis for a change of venue, or a claim that he cannot get a fair trial. All this despite the fact that he has already confessed (oh, but he was water boarded; darn, can't use that confession, can we?).
He begged us to make him a martyr. We should have indulged him.
I am dismayed by the Administration's decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in New York in the Federal Court. There is no good outcome that can be had here. The ACLU lawyers who will be representing KSM and his co-conspirators should have a field day. The Bush Administration and America will be on trial. Our intelligence community and useful anti-terrorism programs may be placed at risk.
And what if a jury finds him not guilty? Well, don't worry about that. President Obama, Atty. Gen. Holder and Sen. Patrick Lahey have all indicated that the evidence of KSM's guilt is overwhelming and that there's no doubt about the verdict. Plus, if he was somehow found guilty, the government just won't release him.
Really? If so, why have the trial? I wonder if the ACLU was taking notes when those officials pronounced KSM guilty. That may be a basis for a change of venue, or a claim that he cannot get a fair trial. All this despite the fact that he has already confessed (oh, but he was water boarded; darn, can't use that confession, can we?).
He begged us to make him a martyr. We should have indulged him.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Health Care "Reform": It is a "Crime" Alright
Heath Care reform (so-called) has moved from the House to the Senate. Regular readers know I think the proposals being debated in Washington are budget-busting abominations. I am quite hopeful that somehow sanity will reign and this effort will be stopped.
I received an essay from a friend on this topic and I wanted to share it with you. The author of this guest essay is local attorney, Patrick B. Naylon.
Why do we have criminal sanctions for certain types of conduct? Is it a crime to make money? Is it a crime to buy a new house, a new car? Is it a crime to go on vacation? Is it a crime to enjoy life? Is it a crime to go to the doctor? People know those things are good for them, and they don’t have to be forced by criminal sanctions to do them! If it is good for you, if you need it, you’ll do it on your own! There is no need for a criminal sanction.
So, in the health care debate, just ask yourself this question: why would the government have to make it a crime for an individual if they fail to sign up for their new government mandated health insurance? If it is such a great improvement, why wouldn’t people be clamoring to sign up? Why would they have to make it a crime not to join? The answer lies of course in the question. Indeed, you might also ask, if that is the solution, why not just leave the present system in place and simply make it a crime to not have insurance? That won’t cost tax-payers anything!
What more do you need to know about this health care reform bill than that it is a crime not to sign up! It means that when you read what you are being given, you won’t want it. Accordingly the only way to get you to sign up, is to make you sign up for fear of criminal prosecution if you don’t. In short, it is just another tax! First the IRS, now the Medical Revenue Service! The fact that it is a crime not to join should tell you all you need to know about this inappropriate government mandate relative to your health care options.
In fact, the manner in which the government has proceeded to “cure” the ailment of our health care system, should serve to demonstrate that the government is not equipped to handle the responsibility for health care for Americans. In health care, before finding a solution, the problem must be identified. What do the Doctor’s do when a patient arrives in the ER? Do they simply start treating the patient before they diagnose the problem? Giving treatment without identifying the issue would be inappropriate, ineffective, and wasteful. When a treatment didn’t work, the physician would repeatedly have to go back to the drawing board, coming up with another treatment regimen until one is found that works. If that were the approach, the patient might very well be dead before the appropriate treatment is identified. Hence, before treating the patient, the ailment is identified.
In its approach to health care reform, the government has not bothered identifying the conditions in need of reform; instead choosing to treat the patient for everything and anything, simply because they have identified the health care “patient” as sick. The treatment is “reform”, of everything and anything, the entire system, rather than identifying the area of need. They have simply identified the patient of “health care” as sick, acknowledged it needs treatment , that is “health care reform.” They have come up with a treatment plan, via their “health care reform bill.” Unfortunately, they have not adequately or appropriately identified exactly what part of the health care system is in need of reform. The solution they propose is therefore inappropriate, ineffective and wasteful.
Is the patient “health care” in perfect condition? No. Is there a need for correction, or treatment, yes. The patient, however, is not in extremis. In fact the patient, happens to be the best health care system in the world! That is an absolutely undeniable fact. So why are the politicians calling a health care system “code blue,” placing it on a ventilator, and transplanting all of its organs? That is government malpractice that will undoubtedly kill an otherwise healthy patient, which is merely in need of a physical exam and recommendations for a better future.
Tell your congressmen and senators to stop with the “cure” until they identify the exact problems and come up with appropriate solutions for the best health care system in the world. Why don’t they identify the exact problem and take appropriate steps toward a solution? Ultimately, you must ask yourself why the government is suggesting and pushing so hard for head to toe surgery on a healthy patient. It is clearly not for the patient’s benefit.
Your senators and congressmen claim to be the physicians ready to cure the health care patient. Demand a diagnosis, consider a second opinion, before they put you under anesthesia and start cutting!
I think Pat has the question right; why are we completely overhauling (at incredible expense) a system that the vast majority of Americans say works fine for them? Clearly, we need to cut the costs associated with health care, but the current legislation will only shift the cost burden to taxpayers.
No, it seems clear that the real reason for this monster is the general left/liberal belief that government should control every aspect of our lives. Between health care reform and cap and trade, the liberals are poised for a take-over of monumental proportion. Our only hope is that the American people wake up to the threat before its too late.
I received an essay from a friend on this topic and I wanted to share it with you. The author of this guest essay is local attorney, Patrick B. Naylon.
Why do we have criminal sanctions for certain types of conduct? Is it a crime to make money? Is it a crime to buy a new house, a new car? Is it a crime to go on vacation? Is it a crime to enjoy life? Is it a crime to go to the doctor? People know those things are good for them, and they don’t have to be forced by criminal sanctions to do them! If it is good for you, if you need it, you’ll do it on your own! There is no need for a criminal sanction.
So, in the health care debate, just ask yourself this question: why would the government have to make it a crime for an individual if they fail to sign up for their new government mandated health insurance? If it is such a great improvement, why wouldn’t people be clamoring to sign up? Why would they have to make it a crime not to join? The answer lies of course in the question. Indeed, you might also ask, if that is the solution, why not just leave the present system in place and simply make it a crime to not have insurance? That won’t cost tax-payers anything!
What more do you need to know about this health care reform bill than that it is a crime not to sign up! It means that when you read what you are being given, you won’t want it. Accordingly the only way to get you to sign up, is to make you sign up for fear of criminal prosecution if you don’t. In short, it is just another tax! First the IRS, now the Medical Revenue Service! The fact that it is a crime not to join should tell you all you need to know about this inappropriate government mandate relative to your health care options.
In fact, the manner in which the government has proceeded to “cure” the ailment of our health care system, should serve to demonstrate that the government is not equipped to handle the responsibility for health care for Americans. In health care, before finding a solution, the problem must be identified. What do the Doctor’s do when a patient arrives in the ER? Do they simply start treating the patient before they diagnose the problem? Giving treatment without identifying the issue would be inappropriate, ineffective, and wasteful. When a treatment didn’t work, the physician would repeatedly have to go back to the drawing board, coming up with another treatment regimen until one is found that works. If that were the approach, the patient might very well be dead before the appropriate treatment is identified. Hence, before treating the patient, the ailment is identified.
In its approach to health care reform, the government has not bothered identifying the conditions in need of reform; instead choosing to treat the patient for everything and anything, simply because they have identified the health care “patient” as sick. The treatment is “reform”, of everything and anything, the entire system, rather than identifying the area of need. They have simply identified the patient of “health care” as sick, acknowledged it needs treatment , that is “health care reform.” They have come up with a treatment plan, via their “health care reform bill.” Unfortunately, they have not adequately or appropriately identified exactly what part of the health care system is in need of reform. The solution they propose is therefore inappropriate, ineffective and wasteful.
Is the patient “health care” in perfect condition? No. Is there a need for correction, or treatment, yes. The patient, however, is not in extremis. In fact the patient, happens to be the best health care system in the world! That is an absolutely undeniable fact. So why are the politicians calling a health care system “code blue,” placing it on a ventilator, and transplanting all of its organs? That is government malpractice that will undoubtedly kill an otherwise healthy patient, which is merely in need of a physical exam and recommendations for a better future.
Tell your congressmen and senators to stop with the “cure” until they identify the exact problems and come up with appropriate solutions for the best health care system in the world. Why don’t they identify the exact problem and take appropriate steps toward a solution? Ultimately, you must ask yourself why the government is suggesting and pushing so hard for head to toe surgery on a healthy patient. It is clearly not for the patient’s benefit.
Your senators and congressmen claim to be the physicians ready to cure the health care patient. Demand a diagnosis, consider a second opinion, before they put you under anesthesia and start cutting!
I think Pat has the question right; why are we completely overhauling (at incredible expense) a system that the vast majority of Americans say works fine for them? Clearly, we need to cut the costs associated with health care, but the current legislation will only shift the cost burden to taxpayers.
No, it seems clear that the real reason for this monster is the general left/liberal belief that government should control every aspect of our lives. Between health care reform and cap and trade, the liberals are poised for a take-over of monumental proportion. Our only hope is that the American people wake up to the threat before its too late.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
How Much Is That?
Governor Paterson made an impassioned speech to NY State Legislators yesterday, as they gathered for the special session he called to deal with the State's $3.2 billion deficit.
He said he was willing to take the heat for proposing unpopular budget cuts. Paterson emphasized the point by saying that he was willing to "mortgage his political future" over the steps needed to close the deficit.
Someone should tell him that given his current re-election chances, his political future won't qualify for a mortgage.
He said he was willing to take the heat for proposing unpopular budget cuts. Paterson emphasized the point by saying that he was willing to "mortgage his political future" over the steps needed to close the deficit.
Someone should tell him that given his current re-election chances, his political future won't qualify for a mortgage.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Arrogance In Washington
The Democrat leadership in the House of Representatives rammed through the health care reform bill last night. They did so despite the fact that a substantial and growing majority of Americans opposed the bill. They just do not care what we "little people" think.
Democrat leadership rushed the vote fearing defections by Democrats who might worry that a vote for this bill could cost them re-election next year. I hope voters have a long enough memory.
It is quite clear that the current Congress and Administration are led by the most left/liberal Democrats who have been in power in America for a long time (perhaps, ever). Nancy Pelosi and her Democrat leadership team, are fearless because they operate from safe districts of like-minded liberals. They are apparently willing to sacrifice some of their less secure members re-election chances on legislation like the health care bill and cap and trade, which will fundamentally change the country, or, at least, fundamentally alter the role and power of government in our every day lives.
While it is clear that Americans are more and more coming to understand the risks, and are increasingly in opposition to these liberal efforts, much of what is being done now may prove difficult or impossible to undo, even if the Democrats are thrown out of power in 2010 and 2012.
The "hope and change" crowd included a lot of people who should have known better. They cast cavalier votes for Obama so they could show that they were post-racial, socially astute people. They jumped on the anti-Bush, anti-GOP bandwagon despite the fact that most of them were both safe and prosperous during the Bush years.
I feel sorry for my kids. The costs of the left/liberal agenda that we have empowered will erode America's prosperity and preeminence. The next few generations will look back and wonder what we were thinking.
Democrat leadership rushed the vote fearing defections by Democrats who might worry that a vote for this bill could cost them re-election next year. I hope voters have a long enough memory.
It is quite clear that the current Congress and Administration are led by the most left/liberal Democrats who have been in power in America for a long time (perhaps, ever). Nancy Pelosi and her Democrat leadership team, are fearless because they operate from safe districts of like-minded liberals. They are apparently willing to sacrifice some of their less secure members re-election chances on legislation like the health care bill and cap and trade, which will fundamentally change the country, or, at least, fundamentally alter the role and power of government in our every day lives.
While it is clear that Americans are more and more coming to understand the risks, and are increasingly in opposition to these liberal efforts, much of what is being done now may prove difficult or impossible to undo, even if the Democrats are thrown out of power in 2010 and 2012.
The "hope and change" crowd included a lot of people who should have known better. They cast cavalier votes for Obama so they could show that they were post-racial, socially astute people. They jumped on the anti-Bush, anti-GOP bandwagon despite the fact that most of them were both safe and prosperous during the Bush years.
I feel sorry for my kids. The costs of the left/liberal agenda that we have empowered will erode America's prosperity and preeminence. The next few generations will look back and wonder what we were thinking.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Election Messages
A review of this morning's newspaper and the local political blogs, reveals that the D&C's Editorial Board and Joe Morelle appear to be unsure about the message sent by voters in yesterday's election. I'd like to help them understand.
Joe: The voters wanted you to know that a campaign consisting of nothing but scandal-mongering is not going to cut it. You need to at least appear to have a plan of action for governing if you want to get elected.
D&C Editorial Board: The voters wanted you to know endorsements ought to amount to more than just cheer leading for folks who share your "progressive" perspective. You really should not use the same criteria (e. g., length of time in office) as a good point for candidates you favor and a disqualifier for those you do not.
Other messages:
To Sue Swanton: Harold Stassen called. He wants you to replace him on Wikipedia as the candidate who defines "political also-ran".
To Mark McIntee: You can't fire the Town Attorney (Actually, that was a message from me, not the voters.)
To the D&C Editorial Board: Get a new Ouija Board. Your endorsements made "Dewey Beats Truman" look prescient.
To President Obama: Please don't spend another trillion dollars. We are paying attention. If you stay on the path you are currently on, Election Day 2010 will make last night look good for Dems.
Joe: The voters wanted you to know that a campaign consisting of nothing but scandal-mongering is not going to cut it. You need to at least appear to have a plan of action for governing if you want to get elected.
D&C Editorial Board: The voters wanted you to know endorsements ought to amount to more than just cheer leading for folks who share your "progressive" perspective. You really should not use the same criteria (e. g., length of time in office) as a good point for candidates you favor and a disqualifier for those you do not.
Other messages:
To Sue Swanton: Harold Stassen called. He wants you to replace him on Wikipedia as the candidate who defines "political also-ran".
To Mark McIntee: You can't fire the Town Attorney (Actually, that was a message from me, not the voters.)
To the D&C Editorial Board: Get a new Ouija Board. Your endorsements made "Dewey Beats Truman" look prescient.
To President Obama: Please don't spend another trillion dollars. We are paying attention. If you stay on the path you are currently on, Election Day 2010 will make last night look good for Dems.
The Esposito Era
Last night's election was the first in over 20 years that did not include Ralph Esposito on the ballot.
As most of you know, Ralph is stepping down at the end of the year, after a fabulous 20 years as Gates Supervisor. The Democrat & Chronicle called him "a legend" and they did not know how right they were. Ralph guided Gates through both good and bad times and he is leaving the Town in better shape than he found it.
His greatest work was during the past several years, dealing with fiscal difficulties caused by Kodak's departure from the Elmgrove facility. Ralph and the Town Board managed to right the Town's finances while preserving all of the vital services that Gates' residents are accustomed to. His critics went after him over the past eight years; Ralph and Gates were prime targets for the Democrats. They never beat him, and they never got the best of him.
In fact, Ralph's legacy of good government was so powerful, that this year's crop of Democrats had no issues to raise against the Gates GOP team. The crushing defeat inflicted on the Democrats was, to a great extent, a message from Gates' voters that we should stay the course charted by Ralph and his administration. Ralph is leaving the way a superstar should, at the top of his game.
Message to Ms. Swanton, Mr. Gillette, Mr. Landers, and Mr. Asam; you never laid a glove on him!
As most of you know, Ralph is stepping down at the end of the year, after a fabulous 20 years as Gates Supervisor. The Democrat & Chronicle called him "a legend" and they did not know how right they were. Ralph guided Gates through both good and bad times and he is leaving the Town in better shape than he found it.
His greatest work was during the past several years, dealing with fiscal difficulties caused by Kodak's departure from the Elmgrove facility. Ralph and the Town Board managed to right the Town's finances while preserving all of the vital services that Gates' residents are accustomed to. His critics went after him over the past eight years; Ralph and Gates were prime targets for the Democrats. They never beat him, and they never got the best of him.
In fact, Ralph's legacy of good government was so powerful, that this year's crop of Democrats had no issues to raise against the Gates GOP team. The crushing defeat inflicted on the Democrats was, to a great extent, a message from Gates' voters that we should stay the course charted by Ralph and his administration. Ralph is leaving the way a superstar should, at the top of his game.
Message to Ms. Swanton, Mr. Gillette, Mr. Landers, and Mr. Asam; you never laid a glove on him!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
