Search This Blog

Friday, December 27, 2013

Tips in navigating the system

I found a most practical article yesterday, detailing options that average Americans are not aware of as they consider health care options. It is written by a doctor, who contributes to Breitbart.

Here are the headings, but read the details using this link to Eight Ways to Opt Out of Obamacare. I'll hazard a guess that you, like the average Americans including myself, are not aware of all these options let alone what they mean.

1. Join a health care sharing ministry
2. Purchase a short-term health insurance policy
3. Buy alternative insurance plans
4. Visit cash-only doctors and retail health clinics for primary care.
5. Sign up for a telemedicine service
6. Use generic prescription drugs whenever possible, and compare prices between pharmacies.
7. For surgery, Parnell recommends going to a facility that offers up-front “package” prices for self-pay patients
8. When a hospital visit becomes necessary, Parnell suggests working with amedical bill negotiation service

Relevant Drudge headlines:

New ObamaCare fees coming in 2014...
'After Month of Trying, I Still Can't Sign Up'...
Ads hit vulnerable Dems...
Confusion grows...

Deadlines Slipping...
KRISTOL: Gift keeps giving...
Hospitals Seek Savings as Mental Health Costs Soar...

Tuesday, December 24, 2013

Merry Christmas!

What are you doing here? Go enjoy the season!

Monday, December 23, 2013

Obamacare Exposed!

Charles Krauthammer wrote an excellent article explaining in detail what Obamacare is and does. I knew all these things myself, but he does the topic justice. I found his column here. I wish I could copy and paste the entire thing because I literally can't cut any of it out for you - it's that important. Please use the link.

Thursday, December 19, 2013


Netflix has this documentary premiering at Sundance in January (trailer available here), shortly after which it will be available to the public. One of Romney's friends was in charge and I'm excited to watch it.

Here's what the Washington Post had to say about it:
“If Romney had released a video like this, perhaps things would've turned out differently,” The Washington Post’s Brian Fung wrote. "In 138 seconds, Whiteley's trailer somehow manages to make Romney more of a real person than all the stumping he did."
Now, Washington Post. Let's not forget your job in 2008 and again in 2012 - it was to make sure Obama was elected. You could have made Romney more "real" if that was truly your object - just as you and other media made Obama "messianic" in both campaigns - feeding his now apparent narcissism.

Therefore what you, media, focused on during the Romney campaigns was not his many strengths and good character and experience, but his "failures" both real and imagined. If similar attention had been paid to Obama, we would have noticed Obama's lack of experience as a leader and his close ties to Saul Alinsky, and by 2012 could have paid much more attention to his many failures in office such as Fast and Furious, Benghazi, annual trillion dollar deficits, more troops killed in Afghanistan under Obama than under all of Bush, Obamacare (which was written before, even if it was written to be implemented after the election so people who hadn't read it wouldn't know how bad it is... ). I could go on. But I won't.

We missed a great opportunity to have a president who is strong in character, leadership skills, budget cutting skills, and is compassionate all wrapped up into one.

Wednesday, December 18, 2013


Ann Coulter's weekly column touches on my favorite topic, as well as battling the idiocy of the "logic" of liberal postures - please read it. Here's the intro:
Instead of always taking incoming fire, how about Republicans start sending some back? It's great that they stopped HillaryCare, but if they had actually fixed health care by forcing health insurance plans to be sold in a competitive free market, there would have been no opportunity for shyster Democrats to foist Obamacare on us. 

Drudge headlines from last night to be aware of:

Monday, December 16, 2013

Beating them at their game

*Written last Thursday but apparently the publishing failed? Sorry.

As you read and hear more about Obamacare, keep the leanings of the media in mind - conservative or liberal. Why? Because both sides leave stuff out. Generally speaking, liberals write what makes them looks good, and conservatives fill in the blanks to their defense or even reporting the bad liberal behavior that the liberal media ignores. Ann Coulter gives an excellent description of this process in her column this week. Keep in mind, if you are not already aware, she's the conservative calling out the liberal media here.
Knockout Game-debunkers place great significance, for example, on the fact that the assailants have not signed affidavits calling it a "game."


Until the assailants admit they're playing a game, liberals say the Knockout Game is a "hoax."

Obviously, it doesn't matter what the participants call it. I don't know anyone who calls himself a "pundit," but that doesn't mean people don't go on TV and give their opinions. Every liberal denies he's a liberal, but that doesn't mean "liberals" don't exist. (Would that it were so!)

While we're on the subject, I can't think of a single instance in which someone has admitted to committing a "hate crime," but liberals are always calling things "hate crimes."

The Huffington Post concluded that the Knockout Game was "fabricated" based on one of the most famous victims, James Addlespurger, denying that it was a game. Instead, he calls his knockout an "assault," saying "game" is just a "label."

Hey, you know what else is just a label? The word "assault." "James Addlespurger" is a label. Another expression for "label" is "word" -- meaning, "something liberals try to blow up whenever they're about to be trapped into admitting the truth." 
What about the other way around? Yes, the liberals correct mistakes that the conservatives make in their reporting. The thing is that the liberals are more likely to lie to cover up their own flaws thinking they will get away with it (think Benghazi, as one of many possible examples), whereas the conservatives know that they can't do that because the liberal media would jump down their throats, being the top dogs. So. Keep that in mind as you read and listen, because it explains the very existence of headlines like these:



White House Works to Draw Younger Users...

New Obamacare taxes hike cost of children's braces, prescription eyeglasses...

REPORT: Taxpayers Shell Out $14,000 per 'Enrollee'...

WSJ: Admin. continues to manipulate, bury real statistics...

Red Flags

If you don't have warning bells sounding in your heads about Obamacare yet, just keep being a loyal reader. And please send links of these articles to your friends whose warning bells have not yet sounded. The more people we can inform, the more likely that we can modify this monstrosity. Drudge has some great headlines people of things Americans should be aware about besides Obamacare so check that out too.

Issa: Obamacare 'ineptness' puts lives at risk...

REPORT: 'Navigators' caught lying, encouraging patients to lie...

'Fiasco' for Senator's Wife...

Team Sebelius seeks media help...

Confidential Obamacare Navigator training manual uploaded online...

A few Breitbart headlines:


Friday, December 13, 2013

Mormons in India

Yes, there really are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in India. There are congregations in most but not all countries, because not all countries allow the church in their borders. We are law abiding. However, in India, there have been a handful of members since the late nineteenth century. The availability of Church materials in native languages and perhaps also local laws has limited the growth of the Church in India in comparison to say Africa or South America. Despite this, India is making some headlines as their growth picks up - 1000% growth in the last twenty years from 1,000 to over 10,000 members. That's a rate of 450 per year if it was linear growth, though exponential growth is more likely.  Read the links if you're interested in more detail.

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Chicago typifies the road we're on as a nation

Chicago has dug itself into a huge hole of its own making. There just isn't sufficient money to pay for everything anymore - yet no one seems willing to cut back. Firing teachers, fire fighters, police officers, and other city employees obviously does not begin to alleviate a budget problem of this magnitude. Pensions are simply too much of that budget.
"Chicago sticks out for all the wrong reasons," said Rachel Barkley, a municipal credit analyst at Morningstar Inc. (MORN), referring to a public pension system that is only 35 percent funded, compared to New York's 60 percent and San Francisco's 88 percent.
(...) Just raising taxes, which could cause businesses to leave, or cutting services, which would penalize residents, won't be enough, said Michael Pagano, dean of the College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
"I don't think either one is even a possibility," he said. "Everybody's going to have to give something."
Put another way, this is what the budget problem looks like.
The shortfall amounts to about $7,100 per Chicago resident. That's nearly eight times the per person cost of the unfunded pension liability in Detroit, a city that saw its population plummet in the years before it went into bankruptcy earlier this year. Add in the unfunded liability for Chicago teacher pensions, and the total shortfall jumps to about $27 billion.
City officials say the shortfall is due largely to investment losses during recent economic downturns, to workers and retirees living longer and to increases in benefits. The city's annual contributions to the funds, set by state statute, also were well below what was necessary for meeting its obligations, according to a Morningstar analysis.
Under state statute, those contributions are now scheduled to more than double next year, to about $1.07 billion. Emanuel, a former White House chief of staff who is up for re-election in 2015, says the increase is about equal to the annual cost of having 4,300 police officers on the beat or resurfacing 16,000 city blocks.
If the city doesn't cut services and pension benefits aren't changed, he says, the annual payment would require a 150 percent hike in property taxes - an increase he calls "unacceptable." Chicago Public Schools' payment to the pension fund for Chicago teachers also is slated to increase next year, from $196 million last year to $600 million. 
You begin to see the problem. Liberalism is expensive and doesn't pay for itself - it spends money while generating none. Government can't (well, shouldn't) grow itself beyond the private sector's ability to pay for it. Even though this happens all the time on all levels of government, the burden and ultimately responsibility still falls back on the taxpayer when the bills come due.

In the United States, each citizen's share of the federal debt is roughly $193,000. What do we do? Realize that new government programs - no matter what they promise - are things we can't afford as a country. We should have elected Romney the budget cutter when we had the chance. Yet repealing Obamacare certainly comes to mind as a priority! Don't take any "budget deals" that don't actually cut spending lying down - get on the phone. We need to be so loud collectively that the government can't ignore us, knowing we'll boot them from office if they don't.

Monday, December 9, 2013

There's more

And after a slow news weekend with a lot of winter for most of the United States (and I hope you've all been safe and warm), we're back on topic. Pass the word along, especially at this time of year, though you may think otherwise. Holidays are the time that the government works hardest to pass unpopular measures precisely because American citizens are not paying attention.

Obamacare Architect: If You Like Your Doctor, You Can Pay More...

Group Brings 'Opt-Out' Message to College Students...

Medicaid time bomb...

Budget negotiators -- looking at military pensions...


Cruz slams 'lawless implementation'...

Major firms study Obamacare -- for how NOT to do it...

Even though Obamacare itself was passed by design at a time that people of the United States were not paying attention to the government - Christmas Eve, 2009 - let us also not forget good holiday cheer. For you Christians or others interested in how Mormons celebrate Christmas, here is the Christmas Devotional by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Friday, December 6, 2013

A voice of reason

Streiff over at Redstate posted Obama Offers the GOP Distractions. He certainly does, since he and the Democrats would love for the focus of our national attention to be anywhere but on the failures of Obamacare. Take it away, streiff:
Some weeks ago I wrote about how the Democrats were attempting to use a three-pronged strategy. First, they were conflating Obamacare with the website ( Beware the Shiny Object). Second, they intended to challenging us to “fix” it (See Obamacare and the Governing Trap). Third, they are attempting to change the national conversation from Obamacare to some other shiny object. The first strategy is deadly because even the feckless gits in the White House will eventually figure out how to get the website running. No matter that they are giving your personal information to the Russian Mob or anyone else with the ambition to crack their non-existent security protocols. The second is positively lethal because it would make the GOP complicit in the insurance meltdown and give the GOP a vested interest in saving Obamacare. The third is equally lethal in that it results in us fighting 2014 and 2016 on turf of the Democrats’ choosing, not the ground we wish to fight on.
Good points. If you're interested in hearing more of what he says, use the link up top.

Thursday, December 5, 2013

Cause and effect

I'll take a little break from Obamacare today, to do a mind exercise with you. Maybe you've already thought this through before. Kudos if you have.

Here's the problem (Drudge headlines):

OK. So people receiving minimum wage aren't happy, because they don't have much to live on. That's understandable. They want higher wages. Nothing wrong with that. However, if their wages are raised, what will happen? Will they actually be any better off? Has raising minimum waged helped in the past?
First, if minimum wage is raised in any sort of significant way, the companies who pay them will be in a financial bind themselves: either cut some jobs to pay fewer people or raise prices on their products and services to make up for it. There is no precedent for a company to raise wages but not make up for it elsewhere. Doesn't happen. 

This is the same as with anyone's personal budget: if you have a relatively fixed income (as many companies do or try to do - sometimes they take losses, sometimes they have big gains but it's never forever) then if you spend more money in one area then you have to make cuts in expenses elsewhere or find a way to earn more money.

Second, if prices are raised, that hurts everyone. Inflation. Our dollars buy less, including the dollars of the recently raised wages. Meaning they're no better off. On the other hand, if a company cuts jobs instead of raising prices then obviously that hurts employment rates of those who are presumably underemployed to begin with.

Now, I understand that the people working these jobs are in a no-win situation. They literally can't win in an economy like this one. Education is the key to a better income but they need money to get it or the credit to get a loan. It used to be that the kind of people in minimum wage jobs were predominantly high school students, not people paying rent and grocery bills, etc. How do we fix this? I have no idea. A robust and growing economy (meaning more net profits and not losses) would go a long way, though, because then there would be so many jobs as companies expand that trained workers would be scarce and employers would provide training to those normally considered underqualified, thus circumventing the problem for the minimum wage earner.

How do we achieve a robust and growing economy? To a large degree, the government can lighten the load on businesses (employers) with lower tax rates, less of a regulatory burden which require time and money with which to comply, and fewer laws about things that employers *have* to do for full-time employees. Is getting rid of Obamacare sounding good to anyone else right now?

PS. Government wants more and more taxpayer money rather than making cuts in their budgets. They are not living by the simple rule of not spending what you don't have. Instead we have annual $1 Trillion deficits which is obscene. Cut spending! Cut bloated federal budgets which still grow annually even though Americans who pay the taxes aren't making more annually!  Cut programs! If we can't pay for it, we shouldn't have it!

Tuesday, December 3, 2013

Time for Action

Get a load of these recent headlines. Feel the anger. Welcome it. Let it burn within you. Then contact your representatives and your friends! We need to shout so loudly that our politicians can no longer ignore it.

(Drudge) Still Crashing...
Obamacare Site Malfunctioned With 30,000-Some People On It, Far From 50,000 Goal...
IRS Auditing Cancer Patient Who Lost Coverage, Spoke Out...


Polls Show ObamaCare Wave Building Against Senate Democrats



WH Claims Obamacare Will Make Healthcare System More 'Rational, Sane'

NYT: Obamacare Website Still Busted

I contacted my representatives. Again. I told them this, which you are welcome to use or modify yourselves:

Popular support against Obamacare is higher than ever, yet you politicians who we elected are not doing the will of the people and repealing it or even delaying it. Obamacare is a lost cause and needs to go. All it is doing is adding financial hardship to millions of Americans as they lose jobs, insurance, premiums go up, and doctors start taking cash.  The only group who gains from Obamacare is the government, and that's a pretty good sign right there that it has no business staying in business. Nothing that government does is done more effficiently or cost effectively than in the private sector.

Monday, December 2, 2013

Where we're at with Obamacare

Welcome back after what I hope was a lovely Thanksgiving break. Mine was.

I know, you'd rather forget all about Obamacare. I would too - but that would require its repeal. That hasn't happened yet nor is it likely to happen in the immediate future, so stay focused and keep the pressure on the politicians responsible for doing the will of the people who still ignore us! Keep sharing links and stories with your friends and family.
Here's the latest Drudge headlines:


Neighbors call cops on 'non-partisan' workers pitching Obamacare door-to-door...

Democrats combat stigma among seniors...

Enrollments fall 700,000 short of 800,000 goal...

Inside Race to Rescue Healthcare.Gov, and Obama...

Plouffe: 'Will Work Really Well' By 2017...


Media attacks 'Soviet-style' publicity policy... 

And some Breitbart headlines:

Did Obamacare Kill Black Friday?

Despite Promises, Relaunched Still Proves Dysfunctional

Upgraded ObamaCare Website Crashes During CNN Live Demonstration

Thursday, November 28, 2013

Happy Thanksgiving!

Remember the freedoms we share in this country and be grateful for them. When I traveled overseas and became ill, I became tremendously thankful even for the FDA and EPA, as incredulous as it sounds.

In case you'd like a good read this Thanksgiving about the first Thanksgiving with more context and perspective, read on! Here's an excerpt.
"Life improved for the Pilgrims, but they did not yet prosper! This is important to understand because this is where modern American history lessons often end" in the teaching of Thanksgiving. Pilgrims poor, desolate, starving, homeless, new place, not knowing anything, Indians came along and saved 'em. That is where most kids' story of Thanksgiving stops. But it really hadn't even yet begun. "Thanksgiving is actually explained in some textbooks as a holiday for which the Pilgrims gave thanks to the Indians for saving their lives, rather than as a devout expression of gratitude grounded in the tradition of both the Old and New Testaments," the Bible.
"Here is the part that has been omitted: The original contract the Pilgrims had entered into with their merchant-sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, and each member of the community," every pilgrim, "was entitled to one common share. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belonged to the community as well. They were going to distribute" everything they owned and everything they built "equally. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belonged to the community as well.
"Nobody owned anything. They just had a share in it. It was a commune, folks. It was the forerunner to the communes we saw in the '60s and '70s out in California -- and it was complete with organic vegetables, by the way." There's no question they were organic vegetables in the fertilizer back then. Monsanto didn't exist.  There was no Archer Daniels Midland corrupting and polluting our food.  There was no Van de Kamp's or Heinz or any of that. There was no John Kerry. There was no Teresa Forbes Kerry, whatever, Heinz Kerry.  It was just the Pilgrims and the land. 
William "Bradford, who had become the new governor of the colony, recognized that this form of collectivism was as costly and destructive to the Pilgrims as that first harsh winter, which had taken so many lives. He decided to take bold action. Bradford assigned a plot of land to each family to work and manage," and it was theirs. He assigned it, but they owned it, "thus turning loose the power of the marketplace. That's right. Long before Karl Marx was even born, the Pilgrims had discovered and experimented with what could only be described as socialism. And what happened? It didn't work!"
They nearly starved!
"It never has worked!" Do you know why it didn't work? "What Bradford and his community found was that the most creative and industrious people had no incentive to work any harder than anyone else," because everybody had an equal share, "unless they could utilize the power of personal motivation!" They were not going to be able to change anything. "But while most of the rest of the world has been experimenting with socialism for well over a hundred years -- trying to refine it, perfect it, and re-invent it," spend more money on it, "the Pilgrims decided early on to scrap it permanently.
"What Bradford wrote about this social experiment should be in every schoolchild's history lesson. If it were, we might prevent much needless suffering in the future," such as that we're enduring now, trying the same thing over and over. This is Bradford. "'The experience that we had in this common course and condition. The experience that we had in this common course and condition tried sundry years...that by taking away property, and bringing community into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing -- as if they were wiser than God,' Bradford wrote.
"'For this community [so far as it was] was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort," meaning, nobody worked any harder than they had to because they didn't get to keep anything that they made. It all went into a common store. There was a bunch of laziness that set in, and some people didn't do anything.  They got an equal share of everything anyway, so why work?  It's human nature.
Bradford wrote, "For young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children,'" without being paid for it, meaning they finally figured out: Why are we doing this? The ones who were working, the ones who were creative and industrious, while others were sitting around doing, asked: Why should we do this?  It was "'thought injustice.' Why should you work for other people when you can't work for yourself?" That's what he was saying. "The Pilgrims found that people could not be expected to do their best work without incentive. So what did Bradford's community try next? They unharnessed the power of good old free enterprise by invoking the undergirding capitalistic principle of private property."
Bradford again. "Every family was assigned its own plot of land to work and permitted to market its own crops and products. And what was the result? 'This had very good success,' wrote Bradford, 'for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.'" It's trickle down here, folks. The Pilgrims discovered it. It existed well before the 1980s. "Now, this is where it gets really good, folks, if you're laboring under the misconception that I was, as I was taught in school. So they set up trading posts and exchanged goods with the Indians." The Indians had saved their lives earlier, but now they had all of this bounty that their foray into capitalism had produced.  "The profits allowed them to pay off their debts to the merchants in London.
"And the success and prosperity of the Plymouth settlement attracted more Europeans and began what came to be known as the 'Great Puritan Migration.'" The word of prosperity spread back across the Atlantic Ocean.  That's how big it was.  "But this story stops when the Indians taught the newly arrived suffering-in-socialism Pilgrims how to plant corn and fish for cod. That's where the original Thanksgiving story stops, and the story basically doesn't even begin there.
"The real story of Thanksgiving is William Bradford giving thanks to God for the guidance and the inspiration to set up a thriving colony. The bounty was shared with the Indians." There was a thanks to the Indians. They had so much, they had the Indians over. They did sit down, and they did have free-range turkey and organic vegetables. But it was not the Indians that save the Pilgrims, and "it was not the Indians who saved the day. It was capitalism and Scripture which saved the day," as acknowledged by George Washington in his first Thanksgiving Proclamation in 1789. 

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

My point exactly

I'm not near as dedicated to researching my posts as Ann Coulter is to her column, so she makes my point from my last post for me, and makes it better. The point: what the media says isn't near as important as how they say it and what they leave out.
Back in September, The New York Times promoted Bill de Blasio's mayoral candidacy with an editorial titled, "Don't Fear the Squeegee Man." The editorial informed readers that crime wouldn't get worse under de Blasio because "policing is far better than it used to be, thanks to innovations by Mayor David Dinkins." (Emphasis added -- the Times was not being sarcastic.) 

Under the policing "innovations" of Mayor Dinkins, the annual murder rate in New York City rose to an all-time high of 2,245 in Dinkins' first year in office. After four years of hard work, the murder rate had dropped by about 10 percent, to a merely astronomical 1,995 per year. 

In Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's very first year in office, the murder rate fell 20 percent. The Times acknowledged the dramatic drop in crime with an article titled, "New York City Crime Falls But Just Why Is a Mystery." By Giuliani's last year in office, there were only 714 murders in the entire city, a drop of 64 percent from Dinkins' personal best. By continuing Giuliani's aggressive crime policies, Mayor Michael Bloomberg got the murder rate for 2012 down to 419 in a city of 8 million people. 

But at the Times, they think we've been living in hell since Giuliani's election, and the most urgent priority for the next mayor is to get back to Dinkins' New York. 
You can read the rest by using the link.

The point: what the media says isn't near as important as how they say it and what they leave out.