…that Jesse Jackson is a racist?

So I found this article today, and the money quote is this:

I laid out a very simple principle, which is this is a health care bill, not an abortion bill. And we’re not looking to change what is the principle that has been in place for a very long time, which is federal dollars are not used to subsidize abortions … And I want to make sure that the provision that emerges meets that test — that we are not in some way sneaking in funding for abortions, but on the other hand that we’re not restricting women’s insurance choices.

Didja see that? he doesn’t want to “sneak[] in funding for abortions,” but he also thinks their shouldn’t be restrictions on women’s choices. Read the whole article, and we learn that this refers to federal subsidies for the purchase of private insurance.

Thus we have further evidence (beyond the whole ‘pre-existing condition’ debate) that Dear Leader has no understanding of how private insurance works: specifically, that insurance which covers a particular procedure pays for that procedure from the money paid on the premiums for that insurance. And so, if federal dollars subsidize the premiums of health insurance plans which pay for abortions, federal dollars are paying for abortions.

And thus, every last federal taxpayer in the country is helping pay for the death of a child.

This seems like a spectacularly bad idea to me.

Assuming the mohammedans don’t try to free KSM and his minions, I see two possible outcomes: a nearly endless trial, with the defense repeatedly looking for a change of venue to find an impartial jury – as though there’s anyone in the country smart enough that you’d want them on a jury who doesn’t have an opinion about the events of that day – or else the defense actually finds a bunch of touchy-feely little pussy liberals for the jury and the terrorists get off.

Better to leave them to rot in the tropics, kept there by Marines.

Or maybe given swimming lessons, say, 30 to 40 miles offshore. Someplace where sharks are known to hunt. Maybe a little chum in the water. Bacon chum. And some hams. And maybe a coupla 55 gallon drums of pork blood. And what the hell, throw in some pig’s heads, too, just so there’s no confusion…

It’s interesting to me that, as far as I can tell, only Christians practice a faith. Not to say that those of other spiritual systems don’t have faith; rather, they simply have faith that their actions are what will advance their position within their belief structure.

In Christianity, it’s really very simple: we are saved by the grace of God as a result of our faith in Him and His sacrifice of Jesus in our place. (paraphrase, more or less, of Ephesians 2:8)

For those who follow Mohammed’s teachings, you have to practice the Five Pillars of Submission, which include praying on a set schedule, giving to charity, and making a pilgrimage to Mecca if at all possible (all I can remember right now). And even then, it’s no guarantee you’ll make it.

Hinduism, Buddhism and most of the other Eastern religions, with their cycles of reincarnation, expect you to learn something in each life as you work towards becoming a part of a larger entity. What exactly you need to work on is kind of up in the air.

Historically, Judaism required specific sacrifices and particular rituals at specific points in the year for you to live a righteous life. I’m not sure on how the modern system works, but there is still the focus on very specific procedures for food, I do know that.

Even the Catholics, Orthodox, and some of the older protestant churches get caught up in ritual and process as somehow being necessary for salvation. By which I don’t mean to imply those in these churches can’t possibly be saved. If they believe in Christ’s sacrifice on the cross and His resurrection, and give themselves over to Him, they are just as saved as anyone else. All the rest is fluff added by men.

Faith is the difference. Faith is all you need to be a Christian – to be saved. Religion is just the artifice we build around that, or in place of it.

My condolences to the Kennedy family.

I hope they took advantage of the time they’ve had since his cancer diagnosis to come to terms with his then-impending passing. It’s never easy to lose someone you love, but I would think death as resolution to a long-term illness in a person who’s lived a full life has to be easier to take than, say, having them drown, alone, in a car driven off a bridge. By someone who abandoned them.

Dear Leader Barama said in his townhall the other day

…let’s take the example of something like diabetes, one of — a disease that’s skyrocketing, partly because of obesity, partly because it’s not treated as effectively as it could be. Right now if we paid a family — if a family care physician works with his or her patient to help them lose weight, modify diet, monitors whether they’re taking their medications in a timely fashion, they might get reimbursed a pittance. But if that same diabetic ends up getting their foot amputated, that’s $30,000, $40,000, $50,000 — immediately the surgeon is reimbursed. Well, why not make sure that we’re also reimbursing the care that prevents the amputation, right? That will save us money.

Okay. I assume you would have already seen the controversy over the numbers, so let’s not get into that. My interest is on this part: “…if a family care physician works with his or her patient to help them lose weight, modify diet, monitors whether they’re taking their medications in a timely fashion…”

Seriously?

Do they not do that now?

Doctors are all over everyone I know about saying “You need to lose so many pounds” or “you should eat less of this and more of that” and “you have to start exercising more.”

All the time. To the Same poeple. Over and over again.

It’s almost as if the patients have the information, and for whatever reason, aren’t implementing the changes their doctors have told them they need to bring about. Which suggests that, in order for the PCP’s to get their “pittance” for prevention, their gonna have to start going over to people’s houses to drag ‘em to the health club, call them every night at 6:15 to remind them to take the light gray pill, and again at 8:30 for the sorta minty-green one, and follow them to the grocery store to make sure they put the saltines and Oreos down, and get a bag of apples instead.

Don’t see that happening.

I found an article on Yahoo news called “The Democrats’ senior problem“. The authors are clearly trying to spin the massive opposition to the government takeover of health care as really only being the older citizens, who vote more regularly than all the other demos. The Democrats should have made a better case from the beginning that those on Medicare wouldn’t be harmed by this massive expansion of Federal power. It implies that there would be much smoother sailing for the socialist agenda if the senoirs were happy.

It’s almost as if the article didn’t include this paragraph:

A July 31 Gallup Poll found that just 20 percent of Americans aged 65 and older believe health care reform would improve their own situation, noticeably lower than the 27 percent of 18- to 49-year olds and 26 percent of 50-to-64-year-olds who say the same.

Basically, the authors seem to think that, if they could just get it so a little over a quarter of all seniors liked the plan, instead of a little under a quarter, we’d easily move into the Grand Worker’s Paradise of the Obamanation. No matter that that would mean something like 170 million people still opposing the plan, compared with less than 80 million supporting (figures based on the Wikipedia article on US Demographics and the poll numbers in the above paragraph).

Please, all liberals, listen up: The People Do Not Want You Running Our Lives. We Want To Make Our Own Choices. Shut Up, Crawl Back Into Your Little Enclaves In Berkeley & Boulder & Hollywood & Manhattan, And Let Us Do What’s Actually In Our Own Best Interests. We Know What That Is. You Don’t.

Want to lower costs and get more people insured?

1. Tax credit for private purchase of insurance.

2. Require coverage of any pre-existing condition for those moving from one policy to another, if it’s covered under the old plan. Assuming you still have coverage available under the old plan.

3. Continued (expanded?) availability of tax -free health care funding accounts – for co-pays, meds, deductibles.

4. Either:

a. Encourage small-business pooling to purchase health insurance  as a block, to generate leverage equivalent to what major corporations enjoy, or

b. Phase-out health care as a benefit of employment, and move to a fully individual insurance system, much like auto insurance.

5. Set caps on malpractice lawsuits, at least if the plaintiff fails to prove extreme negligence, and/or institute loser pays for legal fees/court costs.

People need to see what their care actually costs, so they will look to find better values for themselves. People say the market isn’t working, and they’re right; it can’t work when the true costs are hidden from the consumers. If everything looks free, you just keep using it, so demand is unnaturally high relative to where it would be if you paid out of pocket. If you actually see the bills, you make less expensive choice, and suppliers – insurance companies, hospitals, doctors, pharmacies – get signals to lower their costs and/or improve quality to attract more customers.

I freaking LOVE this.

See more, including a reaction round-up, here.

Also, I want this shirt.