What Makes Hillary the “Healthcare Expert”?

“Clinton's previous effort gives her a voice of authority on health-care
coverage now, with 65 percent of Americans in a July Gallup poll expressing ``a
great deal'' or ``a fair amount'' of confidence in her on the issue. That's more
than any other White House contender. At the same time, it evokes memories of
the bureaucracy-laden, 1,342-page proposal that critics still call
``Hillarycare.''”

Who are these 65% of Americans that want to give our government control over their access to healthcare? What “authority” does Hillary have over the people that have spent their lives dedicated to healthcare? My wife is a nurse and can tell you that Medicaid and Medicare are not only inefficient, the programs are ripe with potential for fraud, and are inflexible when patients need care outside the programs scope. If you think HMO’s are bad, you’re gonna “love” the government bureaucracy. I would trust my wife over Hillary any day of the week. The government will have no competition therefore will have no reason to listen to their “customers”, so once you agree to hand over the 2.1 TRILLION dollar industry to the government, our (your) healthcare is doomed. The way they will “control” costs will be to reduce access, pay healthcare professionals less, reduce facilities like hospitals and nursing homes, reduce tests and surgery, and after all of this will still increase your taxes to pay for all of this inefficiency. Tell me again, why do you want the government to take over healthcare?

“The proposal proved so complex that it invited ridicule. An insurance industry
group produced a series of television ads featuring ``Harry and Louise,'' a
fictional couple struggling to understand the plan. Her proposal didn't make it
out of committee even though Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress.”

The American people rejected Hillary’s last campaign to socialize American healthcare but will we do it again? Too many people don’t pay attention to the consequences of government intervention into our economy. The MO of the government is to reduce efficiency, crush competition, and raise prices. Exactly the opposite MO of the capitalist system that has made us the richest country in the world. If we were to introduce competition by eliminating insurance for routine doctor visits and common ailments, get the government out of drug benefits and elderly care, we would reduce the cost of healthcare for the average family to be less than what they pay for cable and their cell phone every month.

We need to think really hard here; what does the government do now that makes it deserving of your trust to handle your healthcare? Do you want Hillary, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Arlen Specter, Doug Lamborn, and all the other politicians controlling your life choices so closely? I shudder to think of any politician controlling my access to health; how about you?

Power to the People…

When I hear that phrase I think of the 60’s song that has the line, “power to the people right on!” It is funny how history repeats itself. Back then it was the young people speaking out against the “establishment”, which in general was a push back on deceitful government. We had McCarthy, Watergate, and numerous scandals that undermined the people’s trust in their government. I believe we have never rebuilt the “trust factor”, and there are many reasons for that. Without trust nothing moves forward. One major reason is we have had such little turnover of politicians over the years, and they have continued to use government for their personal gain. They have no interest in fixing a system that works in their favor.

Today the phrase “Power to the People” is the title of a new book by Laura Ingraham, radio talk personality, and a great American. I have not read the book yet (I am reading her first book first, “Shut Up And Sing” right after I finish the “Reagan Diaries”) but I know from listening to her that it will document the lack of trust the people have in their government, and how the people are now rising back up, with the power of the new media, to take back the direction of our government from these entrenched politicians. Laura does not share my view that we have to leave the party to reform the party; she believes the change will come from within. Time will tell who is right.

The most recent issue to prove the “Power to the people” theory is the illegal immigration debate. The people were informed through the new media of the content of the bill and rejected it, flat out. The politicians were caught flat footed and thought they could just push right past the will of the people, but what they found was they were wrong. They under estimated the “Power of the People”.

We as a nation are fed up with the status quo and we want unity on the issues that are important to this nation. We want honest debate and honest leadership. We want to know what our politicians really mean on key issues like National Security, Immigration, Healthcare, and Social Security. We want to trust our government representatives on these issues. Is that too much to ask? I don’t think so. Do you?

Good News on the Mexican Truck Deal…

The senate has voted to stop the funding for the Mexican truck program that would allow Mexican long haul trucks to litter our highway with unsafe vehicles and suspect drivers. Presumptuous maybe, that all Mexican trucks will be unsafe and driver’s suspect but I have spent a lot of years in the trucking business and I have seen the industry up close. To think we need to now monitor Mexican companies is to take the years of progress made on safety and professionalism, and throw it out the window. The other issue is that I want American drivers delivering our goods. They do it for every other country’s goods in the world so why not Mexico’s?

If they want to pilot a program where companies can share trailers, and make the transfer of goods more efficient, I’m all for that. But when are we going to stop selling out our citizens for a buck? Will our goods be cheaper with this program? Maybe, but I doubt it. It will most likely increase profits and keep prices stable. The unforeseen consequence of this is that because of Mexico’s cheap labor and access to our transportation system, other countries will ship their goods to Mexico for delivery in the US, and we will then be looking at all the port jobs going away as well. I am a free trader but not at any cost. This smells like the Dubai ports deal. Giving other countries access to our infrastructure is never a good idea if you care about security and sovereignty. The senate stopping this is a win today but my guess is the issue will return. But today I celebrate with my fellow truckers. Just a thought…

Tribute to 9/11 and how Hillary is hiding $850,000…

First; let’s never forget our fellow citizens and heroes that died on September 11th 2001. Watching some of the coverage this morning there were suggestions that we “move on”. I ask; if we “move on” will we not forget our history and be prone to repeating it? There is also a huge effort to minimize the fact that our enemy is Islamic extremists. One commentator on one of the morning shows said we needed to be careful not to mention Islam in a negative light. Again, I disagree and believe we must face reality and confront our enemies head on. That is the only path to our national security and continued prosperity. God Bless the victims of 9/11 and their families…

Interesting how Hillary timed her fundraising “issue” to hit during the 9/11
coverage. Anyone else suspicious?

These are the stories that disgust people when it comes to politics and in particular, political campaigns. Hillary Clinton is returning $850,000 worth of donations from Norman Hsu (pronounced shoe). $850,000! Does anyone NOT think there is a problem with this type of fundraising? This screams out INFLUENCE PEDLING! Who honestly believes that Hsu will get the same treatment as me or you if we were to call Hillary’s office with a request to vote a particular way on a bill? Do you think he will be on the guest list of most democratic politicians? Do you think the republicans would love to have his money as well?

Let’s limit contributions from PAC’s to $0.00. Candidates can only receive funding from the residents in their district or state depending on the office. I know the house and senate vote on issues that are national in nature, but business and interest groups can show up in the office of the congressmen and women just like we can. They can pay their lobbyists by raising contributions from interested parties but none of that money should go to any campaign or mention any candidate. They can “sell” their issue just like Wendy’s sells chicken, but it is time to shut off the money spicket from PAC’s to campaign coffers.

Money is free speech; I agree with that premise. But every dollar a candidate can use should come directly from the constituents in his or her district. Individuals only; period. The NRA and Planned Parenthood can splash their issues across the television sets of America but not one nickel of their funds should be allowed to support any individual campaign.

And one final thought; do we need more career politicians like Hillary Clinton or would it be better to recruit some new blood to drive our nation?

United States Defeated by Al Qaeda (in Iraq)…

No matter how our politicians spin our leaving Iraq, the above headline will be the headline in all of the media sympathetic to Islamic extremism and Al Qaeda; period. Even as I wrote this headline I shuttered at the thought of this appearing anywhere for “real”. We need for the Iraqi people to take advantage of the security our military has brought to their country, and form a government that respects the rights of all of the people of Iraq. Freedom is messy and difficult and this is the best framework, today and now, that the Iraqi people will ever have to get a political solution hashed out. They must not squander our generosity and sacrifice. Time and patience is wearing thin here in America.

The Middle East region is too important to leave just because it is difficult. If we leave, Iran and Syria are threatening to “fill the gap”, and we cannot allow the world oil supply to be controlled by maniacs. Not that the oil supply has always been in the hands of stable governments, but when these two countries are threatening the inhalation of Israel and the US, we can’t allow them the access to funds that can support that effort. That is suicide.

The Middle East has always been a hot bed of dictators and terrorists but it is no longer acceptable to support them in any manner. The world has shrunk over the years with low cost travel and internet access, that a strategy of containment and “payola” is not a viable strategy anymore. This makes the stakes higher and more complicated in Iraq.

So the strategies of “stay the course” and “let’s just leave” are over simplified even though easy to understand. Both strategies need to be well thought out and need input from both sides of the argument. Political strategy should be left at the door in these discussions. Our future is too important to be making any decisions about Iraq within a political calculus. It is time to come together and get a cohesive strategy that protects the Iraqi people from outside influences like Iran, protects the world’s oil supply from terrorist control, keeps the terrorists on the defensive, nurtures the fragile democratic seeds in Iraq, and respects the sacrifices our troops have made in the region.

It should not be about the future of any political party, it should be about our future; period. If we don’t want to be reading this headline in the New York Times, we must come together and do what America has always done in the past; rallied together in times of “crisis”. This is the beginning or the end of another “crisis” in the Middle East. Let’s make it the end. Just a thought…

The “Fred” Factor…

No not the book “The Fred Factor” by author Mark Sanborn (good book by the way), but the “Fred Thompson Factor”, and his decision to join the republican presidential contenders seeking the office. Will it be a “factor” at all?

I heard Laura Ingraham interview the Senator this morning and I liked him. Didn’t love him, and he didn’t impress me as a guy that is going to bring the “Reagan Factor” to the race, which is much needed. In all fairness, Fred can never be Reagan. He even stated on the show that Reagan was unique and he has never claimed that he was or could ever be Ronald Reagan. I happen to be reading the Reagan Diaries (an awesome read if you loved Reagan), and he was the real deal. We will be double blessed if we ever uncover another Reagan in our lifetime. But Fred is not that guy.

I think it was a big mistake for Fred to announce on Leno rather than join the NH debate. The debate far outnumbered Leno in viewers, and the viewers watching the debate were the voters Fred needed to connect with to win the primary. Bad choice, yesterday’s news. Moving forward we will see if he makes another bad decision like that. We’ll be watching.

I am still not “jazzed” about the current field although there are a number of good men in the race. I really wish there was a conservative woman in the race. I think we could be served well by a number of the current candidates if elected. I could live with Romney or Huckabee, possibly Rudy but I am already getting NYC fatigue (and I am a native New Yorker!).

Based on Fred’s entrance into the race, we have seen him at his peak. I hope I’m wrong and he starts to ignite some kind of passion in me, but I am not holding my breath. The only thing I know for sure; there is no democrat in the race that I would be comfortable calling president. And for those that would say there is no democrat I could embrace as president; you’re right. So if it is Fred instead of a democrat, then let it be Fred. Just a thought…