Six months ago we kept hearing that "the other side had no ideas" regarding health care.  I made a brief post in that regard.  Being locked  out of hearings and having the camera pointed the other way all the time results in it APPEARING that there are no other ideas. So when the POTUS suddenly decided to start listen to us “little people” and put out the call for idea, those old ones come back strong … here are a couple of my favorites from over at www.biggovernment.com

Cross-State Purchasing

A loose interpretation of the Interstate Commerce Clause currently prevents the purchase of health insurance across state lines. Virtually all other forms of insurance—car, life, home—can be purchased by customers in a national, wide-open marketplace. If health care consumers were afforded the same freedom, individuals and families who reside in one state would be able to purchase more affordable health insurance domiciled or licensed in another state. Americans would no longer be restricted to the anti-competitive, counterproductive regulations and mandates governing the health insurance markets in many states.

This simple fix would multiply the markets consumers could access by a factor of fifty, allowing consumers to choose policies that fit their needs and budgets.

…..

Tort Reform

Former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean famously admitted medical malpractice reform was left out of the health care reform debate because the authors “did not want to take on the trial lawyers.” But medical malpractice abuse is a primary driver of our nation’s skyrocketing health care costs.  There isn’t a single provision in Democrat’s health care bills to address this.

Malpractice insurance and the need for “defensive medicine” make the practice of medicine unappealing and costly, reducing the number of primary care physicians and increasing costs to consumers. According to the American Medical Association, defensive medicine costs our health care system between $84 and $151 billion every year. In another AMA report, 45 percent of hospitals reported concerns over liability resulted in the loss of physicians or reduced coverage in emergency departments.

The regulatory and spending proposals currently on the table will at best avoid (though more likely exacerbate) the underlying problems of our current health care system. No amount of bureaucratic shell games or grandstanding against special interests will change that.

It needn’t take thousands of words and bitter, partisan battles to enact significant change that will help millions of Americans get affordable health insurance. If the President and his allies in Congress are serious about health care reform, they should start from scratch and consider serious solutions

Saw the movie this weekend in 3-D. Visually it is quite an achievement. It took Jurassic Park, made it 3D and threw in a bunch of bioluminescence. And it didn't rely on the old “spear coming at you” shots of old-school 3D. It was subtle and natural. Very nicely done.

Nice to see that in the future cigarettes are a delivery mechanism for vitamins and nutrition. OK – that's a spoof on all the online kvetching about S Weaver asking for a cig when she comes out of suspended animation. Why COULDN'T they be such a device? Is is after all supposed o be sci-fi.

The cultural anthropological D&D player had a LOT of questions. Why in the world did a culture which survives in a jungle/forest need/have horses? What do they eat? What do the Na'vi eat? Is a large successful civilization conceivable without musical instruments? I kinda get the feeling none of these questions are asked because to answer them makes the aliens less “noble savage” and more “like us.” What's the deal with six legged hammer headed rhinos in a raid forest? No WAY could they forage enough energy to survive long, let alone thrive. Some great further analysis of this nature here.

A couple interesting lines in passing:

"Science is about observing." Really? I thought it was about falsifying data to justify getting buckets of geopolitical cash.

“We'll fight terror with terror” uttered by the psycho former marine. It garnered the requisite chuckles from those ITK. But it presents a false choice as the Na'vi weren't using terrorism.

Why were the humans there? Our planet was dying and we found “Hardtofindium” and we needed it to survive. Is that it? I preferred to think that the element was instrumental in eliminating ignorance, bias and racism from the mainstream media here on earth. So I was cheering for the gyrenes and am convinced that we'll journey back to Pandora, kick Na'vi ass, and render the likes of Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann useful to society.

Go see it. Just don't think too much. It's about the pretty flickering pictures.

I'm beginning to think that the best response would be to just laugh at him. Seriously. The Elphs have been treating the POTUS with the respect the office deserves. This respect has not been returned and neither has it been paid to the co-equal branch, the Judicial. So instead of continuing the charade perhaps the next time he let's loose with a whopper (supported by much serious head-nodding from the DMC)

“if you were to listen to the debate and, frankly, how some of you went after this bill, you’d think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot,” Obama told the GOP about health reform. “That’s how you guys presented it.” Obama finger-shakin at the GOP.

Would that be the transparent debate held behind closed doors instead of on C-Span?

According to a recent AP report Obama told the Republicans, “I am not an ideologue.” This comes after not one single House Republican voted for the gigantic Stimulus Bill, the record Omnibus Bill, and the Son of Stimulus Bill. And, only 5 voted for the democrat’s business-busting cap-and-tax bill and only one voted for Obamacare. Y'see, he's a Centrist. How do I know? Because the DMC keeps telling me he is. I do agree, and appreciate, Obama’s admission that nothing can get done because demonization has become the political norm, in America. Now, if he could also pledge to stop demonizing, himself, maybe we could get somewhere? I mean, I’m trying to understand why Obama will bash lobbyists before the whole nation one night and the next day meet with them. It’s just plain confusing.

And speaking of confusion The POTUS recently questioned one Elph's analysis of the budget mess we're in. A bemused President Obama responded to a claim by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R., Texas) that monthly deficits under the Democrat-controlled Congress exceed the annual deficits accrued by Republican Congresses from 1996 to 2007. Obama calls for "independent fact check" of Hensarling factual statement by claiming “When you say that suddenly, I've got a monthly . . . deficit that's higher than the annual deficit left by the Republicans . . . that's factually just not true. And you know it's not true." and "I am happy to have any independent fact-checker out there take a look at your presentation versus mine in terms of the accuracy of what I just said."

Here we go: the total accumulated deficit from Republican-controlled budgets from FY 1996-FY 2007 (and factoring in the substantial surpluses run from 1998-2001) stands at just under $1.246 trillion. The deficit run by Democratic-controlled Congresses in just three years — starting with FY2008 and including the latest CBO projections for FY 2010 — is already $3.222 trillion.

That means that over twelve years of Republican rule, there was an average annual budget deficit of about $104 billion. Compare that with an average annual deficit since 2008 of $1.074 trillion — or about $90 billion per month.

The CBO has all the data in a handy downloadable spreadsheet.

That's John Stewart on Chris Matthews. How's that post-racism thing working out? Other astute non-racist commentary from that bastion of open-mindedness Keith Olbermann. His “Worst Person” awards following the SOTU? "But our winners, these guys, assessing not the speech, but the president himself," Olbermann said. "Erick Erickson, ‘cocky.' John Stossel said he hoped the president would admit he was, quote, ‘arrogant.' Jay Nordlinger, ‘looks arrogant whether he is arrogant or not.' Marc Thiessen, ‘defensive, arrogant.' John Hood, ‘flippant and arrogant.' Glenn Beck, ‘like a punk.'"

And here's where Olbermann played the role of race hustler. From just those comments, the MSNBC host divined what is in the hearts and minds of these individuals”

“Here's a little secret, gathered, sadly, from witnessing it my whole life, even from some in my own family," Olbermann said. "When racist white guys get together and they don't want to be caught using any of the popular epithets in use every day in this country about black people - and there's a chance one of them, or worse still a white guy who doesn't get it, might wander in and hear the conversation, when there's a risk even in saying "uppity" or "forgetting his place," the racist white guys revert to euphemisms and code words."

Therefore, based on Olbermann's supposed life experiences, criticizing the President for exhibiting a particular character trait earned these six individuals the distinct honor of being labeled Olbermann's "Worst Person in the World" for Jan. 28, 2010.

"And among the code words that they think they're getting away with are cocky, flippant, punk, and especially arrogant," Olbermann concluded. "Mark Thiessen of The Washington Post, Eric Erickson of Red State, John Hood and Jay Nordlinger of the National Review and Glenn Beck and John Stossel of Fixed [Fox] News, today's ‘Worst Persons in the World.'"

Another good take on Matthews: Why ‘Forgot He Was Black’ Comment Spells Trouble for President

I had an interesting albeit too short chat with a left leaning friend last weekend regarding the recent SC decision regarding free speech. I briefly addressed it here last week. Here's a little more, spurred by the Presidents undecorus comments directed at The Supremes in the SOTU recently.

I was in error to concede that foreign donations would be allowed after the recent decision. They are not. They are specifically restricted in other legislation and did not need to be addressed in striking down the M-F Bill. The Court held that 2 U.S.C. Section 441a, which prohibits all corporate political spending, is unconstitutional. Foreign nationals, specifically defined to include foreign corporations, are prohibiting from making "a contribution or donation of money or ather thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State or local election" under 2 U.S.C. Section 441e, which was not at issue in the case. Foreign corporations are also prohibited, under 2 U.S.C. 441e, from making any contribution or donation to any committee of any political party, and they prohibited from making any "expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication... ."

To recap, the President said “"With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests –- including foreign corporations –- to spend without limit in our elections.  (Applause.)  I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities.  (Applause.)  They should be decided by the American people.  And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems."

As one pundit put it “Obama chose to call out the only 9 guys in the room that did their homework in law school. And the rest who ended up settling for politics stood and and cheer[ed] it. That’s the embarrassment.”

Many have made the point that the Justices usually sit like stone. It is EQUALLY true that the Prsident doesn't usually use the opportunity to "call them out" with unequivocally false statements.

Class schedule was such that I didn't get a chance to actually see the speech so I've watched re-edited excerpts thereof. The following is a composite of MY observations combined with other (IMHO) pertinent observations from around the net.

First take: my class felt that this was the speech that will get Obama re-elected in 2012. I think that says a lot more about my class than it does about the President. And there are a LOT of them.

Second: Was I the ONLY one listening? The President said “We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution:  the notion that we are all created equal, that no matter who you are or what you look like, if you abide by the law you should be protected by it; that if you adhere to our common values you should be treated no different than anyone else.

Um. No. That's in the Declaration of Independence. Keep in mind this was a prepared speech delivered by someone we're repeatedly told is one of the great legal minds on the planet and was presumably proofread by SOMEBODY. And NONE of the people who read it knew the difference. Had it been an off the cuff remark I MIGHT be a little forgiving but is there anyone out there who thinks that if GWB misspoke in such an inaccurate manner the media would have let it slide?

AP did a “nice” job listing the 10 Whoppers of the speech and Ed Morrisy found an eleventh. Not gonna spend time on it. Read them all here. When are we allowed to start laughing and pointing when he does this?

A question I first asked here months ago to which none of my left-leaning friends have ever given an answer: Is there a statute of limitations on blaming GWB? Still just curious.

Was a little surprised there was no mention of victory in Iraq. … Stop laughing.

Here's a rundown of other takes

Gatewaypundit has John McCain mouthing “Blame it on Bush”.

I'll be discussing the Supreme Court “snub”, the legal decision and Chris Matthews' racial component in following posts.

"In 1984, Ronald Reagan won every Northeastern state. Since then, the leadership of the G.O.P. has systematically shed its idealists in favor of ideologues, reducing itself to the current Cheney-Limbaugh illusionati whose strategy is to exploit faith and ignorance by fanning fear and hatred. But, Northeasterners are not so easily duped. Voters there tend to be wealthier, better educated, less religious and more progressive than those in other regions." -- New York Times columnist Charles Blow, writing on May 23, 2009.

"Welcome to the mob: an angry, wounded electorate, riled by recession, careening across the political spectrum, still craving change, nursing a bloodlust." -- Charles Blow in his January 23, 2010 column, after Republican Scott Brown's victory in a special Senate election in Massachusetts.

Learning Resources sells plastic/fake money to schools so they can teach financial responsibility.  No problem. However, when perusing heir product offering we found 100 plastic pennies for the low, low price of $4.50. Yes, that's four cents per penny, and even more than the U.S. Mint pays to make real pennies. And schools are BUYING these!!!

Obama Administration Steers Lucrative No-Bid Contract for Afghan Work to Dem Donor

Despite President Obama's long history of criticizing the Bush administration for "sweetheart deals" with favored contractors, the Obama administration this month awarded a $25 million federal contract for work in Afghanistan to a company owned by a Democratic campaign contributor without entertaining competitive bids, Fox News has learned.

The contract, awarded on Jan. 4 to Checchi & Company Consulting, Inc., a Washington-based firm owned by economist and Democratic donor Vincent V. Checchi, will pay the firm $24,673,427 to provide "rule of law stabilization services" in war-torn Afghanistan.

.... As a candidate for president in 2008, then-Sen. Obama frequently derided the Bush administration for the awarding of federal contracts without competitive bidding.

"I will finally end the abuse of no-bid contracts once and for all," the senator told a Grand Rapids audience on Oct. 2. "The days of sweetheart deals for Halliburton will be over when I'm in the White House."

.... The records show Checchi has given at least $4,400 to Obama dating back to March 2007, close to the maximum amount allowed. The contractor has also made donations to various arms of the Democratic National Committee, to liberal activist groups like MoveOn.org and ActBlue, and to other party politicians like Sen. John F. Kerry, former presidential candidate John Edwards and former Connecticut Senate candidate Ned Lamont.

I seem to recall that the "sweetheart deals" for Halliburton were often sole-sourced because Halliburton was the only company that could credibly claim to have the capabilities required. Rosen's report indicates that this clearly isn't the case with the work awarded to Checchi (home page; "about" page; "scope of services" page).

When will Keith Olbermann dedicate 10-15 minutes to a rant on this “abuse?”

Last week in a Massachusetts speech on behalf of candidate Martha Coakly President Obama exhorted the voters of that very Blue state that “bankers don’t need another vote in the Senate.”

THIS week the Democrat Party of the State of Illinois has announced their candidate to fill the President's former Senate seat: a 33-year-old who spent almost all of his adult life working for the bank that his family owns.

Hope. And Change.