Friday, January 30, 2004

Medicare or Bust

The Washington Post is reporting today that the Medicare drug benefit proposed by President Bush and passed by Congress to the tune of $400 billion over ten years will now increase by another $134 billion over the same ten years. I guess the liberals got their wish that we should be spending even more on the plan. I have another idea: SHUT IT DOWN NOW!! This is getting out of control. A 33% increase in one year! Oh wait, it's not even one year, it's more like 2 months, and, since I'm not eligible for Medicare, I don't even know if the program has gone into effect. At this rate (yearly not monthly which I could have done), Medicare will have cost $6.9 trillion at the end of 10 years. Again, I ask, am I insane?

Here's my plan:

Shut down medicare, medicaid and any other government funded medical "insurance" plan. We need to get back to what insurance was for: catastrophic needs, not oil changes and tire rotations. For example, if you went to your local mechanic for an oil change and used your "insurance" plan for the work and had to make a small co-pay, then you might come out with a new muffler, tires, and curb-scrapers. All unneeded, but what the hell, it makes my car feel good. The same is true in health care. If you go in for a checkup, we should pay for it out of pocket, making the consumer more of a partner in the transaction rather than a third party payor, like we have now. If the doctor suggests or recommends a procedure, you can make a choice on whether you need it based on price and relative health. This plan, of course, would require a revamping of medical liability laws as well to protect the doctors from the consent issues. Also, medical savings accounts, tax free or in a special interest account at your local bank, could be used to pay for the run of the mill procedures. As for the catastrophic needs, we could purchase catastrophic coverage for when we're really sick. I currently pay $4,000 plus a month for me and my 5 other employees, and I haven't been to the doctor in 3 years. I'm throwing away money. I guess I am insane.

Thursday, January 29, 2004

John "Sybil" Kerry

The New Republic has dug up two letters John Kerry wrote to the same constituent concerning his vote on the 1991 Gulf War.

Jan. 22, 1991: "Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition . . . to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war."

Jan. 31, 1991: "Thank you very much for contacting me to express your support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf."

Okay, whatever you say.

Now let's fast forward to today, where David Broder takes on Kerry in an interview with the Washington Post, where he says:

Kerry argued that his record was "entirely consistent." He said that he had made it clear in 1991 that "I believed we should kick Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait" and only wanted to signal with his "no" vote that the first President Bush should delay such action until there was greater domestic support for such a move. And he said that when he voted "yes" on the current President Bush's ultimatum to Iraq, he did not expect -- or intend -- that it be used the way it was. "The vote I cast was not a vote to go to war," he said. "It was a vote based on promises to go to the United Nations, resume inspections, build a coalition and go to war as a last resort."

When I suggested to the senator that it might be difficult to explain to voters that "your 'no' did not mean no, and your 'yes' did not mean yes," he bristled and said, "I completely disagree with that assessment."

I wonder if he knows what the definition of is is. (The rest of the article from Broder is his typical whining about Bush, very forgettable.)

Now that Kerry has toppled the Dean train, it's time to start circling the wagons around him for the blood-letting. This is going to be a fun campaign.
President Hasselhoff

This is too funny: David Hasselhoff claims he had hand in Berlin Wall falling.

I know he was big in Germany, but this takes the cake.

Bush the Liberal?

President Bush, excoriated by leftists as an ultraconservative, is now doing yet another liberal dance by increasing funding for the National Endowment for the Arts. First, education, then medicare, then Mars and the moon, and now the arts. Is this the same ultraconservative that the lefties hate or have I gone insane? Someone's got to get ahold of him and shake him.
Dean the Outsider?

In every interview, Howard Dean touts his "outsider" image, i.e., Washington outsider. But as we now see, Dean has dumped his campaign manager and replaced him an insider, Al Gore's former associate. Dean is finished.

Sunday, January 25, 2004


On ABC Friday night, John Stossel reported on the 10 Myths of popularly held beliefs and debunks them. A couple of doosies right here:

Myth No. 5 — The Rich Don't Pay Their Fair Share of Taxes

We've all heard this one during the presidential campaign. When it comes to income taxes, the Democratic presidential candidates keep telling us, the rich don't pay enough. That's a widespread belief, but do the politicians even know how much of the income tax burden the rich pay now?

According to presidential candidate Al Sharpton, "The top one percent in this country pays very much less than ten percent, very much less than five percent."

Sharpton said he thinks the wealthy should pay "somewhere around 15 percent."

But that's so silly because — and I bet most of you don't know this — the IRS says the richest 1 percent of taxpayers already pay 34 percent of all income taxes. Twice what Sharpton wanted them to pay.

Still you may feel the rich should pay even more. It's a tempting thought, since they have so much.

But let's remember the facts: the top 1 percent of Americans — those who earn more than about $300,000 a year — pay 34 percent, more than a third of all income taxes, and the top 5 percent, those making over $125,000, pay more than half.

I can't believe ABC let that on the air. It's about time.

Myth No. 3 — Guns are Bad

... public service announcements and news stories make it seem as if the accidents kill thousands of kids every year.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, however, fewer than 100 kids 15 and under are killed in gun accidents every year. Of course that's horrible, and I understand why demonstrators say we need more gun control.

But guess what? The Centers for Disease Control recently completed a review of studies of various types of gun control: background checks, waiting periods, bans on certain guns and ammunition. It could not document that these rules have reduced violent crime. The government wants to say things like the Brady Gun Control Law are making a difference, but they aren't. Some maximum security felons I spoke to in New Jersey scoffed at measures like the Brady law. They said they'll have no trouble getting guns if they want them.

A Justice Department study confirmed what the prisoners said. But get this: the felons say that the thing they fear the most is not the police, not time in prison, but, you, another American who might be armed.

It's a reason many states are passing gun un-control. They're allowing citizens to carry guns with them; it's called concealed carry or right to carry. Some women say they're comforted by these laws.

Many people are horrified at the idea of concealed carry laws, and predict mayhem if all states adopt these laws.

But surprise, 36 states already have concealed carry laws, and not one reported an upsurge in gun crime.

Believe me, I won't be giving up my guns or my carry permit anytime soon.

Saturday, January 24, 2004

Blame Game:

Slate has an good analysis of the fingerpointing going on in the investigation of the leaking of memos from the Senate Judiciary Committee. If you're unfamiliar with the issues, it involves alleged republican staffers going into computer files and finding democrat memos discussing strategies for dealing with particular Bush nominees, like Miguel Estrada. The most inciteful passage in the Slate article is the final paragraph:

Clearly, whenever the Senate investigates itself, it's news. Likewise, the identity, motivations, and modus operandi of these leakers is news, too. But, like York, I can't help but think there's a journalistic double standard operating here in which partisan leaks to conservative journals and journalists (the Novak-Plame incident, for another example) are treated as capital crimes, but partisan leaks that wound Republicans are regarded the highest form of truth telling.

You won't hear that on NBCCBSABCPBSCNN, now will you.

Friday, January 23, 2004

Clinton's Recession?

The National Bureau of Economic Research may be recalculating when the most recent recession actually started and may find that it started under Clinton. I don't expect the press to let up on Bush at all just like they continue to give credit to Clinton for the recovery of Bush 41, which started in 1991 before Clinton even declared for the presidency. Oh well.
Happy Days are Coming

A new website called Election Projection is predicting the electoral results based on current polling dating. Without a democrat nominee, take it with a grain of salt.

Wednesday, January 21, 2004

Pipe Off

In college the rugby team routinely participated in something called a "pipe off", which involved a comparison of their manlihood to determine who would start the match. It was certainly infantile, but apparently Wesley Clark and John Kerry are engaging in their own pipe off.

Clark, who didn't compete in Iowa, told campaign workers in Manchester, N.H., that Kerry, a decorated former Navy officer, had a military background "but nobody in this race has got the kind of background I've got."

"It's one thing to be a hero as a junior officer. He's done that, I respect that," Clark said. "But I've got the military experience at the top as well as at the bottom."

I don't want to judge their pipe off, but if you ask me, they're both losers.

Monday, January 19, 2004

Dennis "The Kingmaker" Kucinich

Edwards may also be able to bank some support from backers of Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who has been consistently pulling only 2 percent in Iowa tracking polls. MSNBC Campaign Embeds have confirmed that Kucinich and Edwards have struck a deal to have their respective supporters throw their votes in favor of the campaign that is closest to achieving the 15% threshhold needed to be considered a "viable" candidate at a caucus.

Apparently, Kucinich supporters are going to go for Edwards if Dodo Dennis doesn't get 15%, which is likely. I guess that would give Edwards, Kucinich's dog and cat. I guess Edwards will get the quadraped vote.

Saturday, January 17, 2004

Iowa Tightens

Here are the latest tracking poll numbers from Zogby for the Iowa Caucuses:

John Kerry - 23%
Howard Dean - 22%
Dick Gephardt - 19%
John Edwards - 18%
Wesley Clark - 3%
Dennis Kucinich - 2%
Joe Lieberman - 1%
Al Sharpton - 0.2%
Undecided - 11%

Kerry is surging after a dreadful campaign on all fronts. I suspect it's not due to his captivating delivery but more due to Dean's flame-out. I think Dean peaked a little too early in late December, giving both Democrats and the media time to punch the daylights out of him. Dean, himself, gave them fodder as well with his penchant for inserting his foot in his mouth and his head in his ass.

I'm still hoping that Dean pulls this off. He does have a lock on the younger, motivated, angry Bush-hater forces that no other candidate can tap. In fact, many of them live at home with their parents and are unreachable by the other candidates, due to their unlisted cell-phone numbers. I'm sure Dean has secured those numbers and will be getting them to the caucuses on Monday. I'm pretty sure that he will be sending a car for the 2 voters that Carol Moseley Braun threw his way as well.

Thursday, January 15, 2004

General Franks Cleared

The Belgians finally came to their senses and dismissed the lawsuit accusing US General in Iraq Tommy Franks of war crimes. They repealed the actual law last summer, but this case was filed before then so it had to go through the normal procedures. I still don't trust the Belgians.


Wesley Clark's Congressional testimony from September 2002 concerning the Iraq War resolution has been outed.

There's no requirement to have any doctrine here. I mean this is simply a longstanding right of the United States and other nations to take the actions they deem necessary in their self defense.

Every president has deployed forces as necessary to take action. He's done so without multilateral support if necessary. He's done so in advance of conflict if necessary. In my experience, I was the commander of the European forces in NATO. When we took action in Kosovo, we did not have United Nations approval to do this and we did so in a way that was designed to preempt Serb ethnic cleansing and regional destabilization there. There were some people who didn' t agree with that decision. The United Nations was not able to agree to support it with a resolution.

There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we.

And, I want to underscore that I think the United States should not categorize this action as preemptive. Preemptive and that doctrine has nothing whatsoever to do with this problem. As Richard Perle [Ed note: !] so eloquently pointed out, this is a problem that's longstanding. It's been a decade in the making. It needs to be dealt with and the clock is ticking on this.

I think there's no question that, even though we may not have the evidence as Richard [Perle] says, that there have been such contacts [between Iraq and al Qaeda]. It' s normal. It's natural. These are a lot of bad actors in the same region together. They are going to bump into each other. They are going to exchange information. They're going to feel each other out and see whether there are opportunities to cooperate. That's inevitable in this region, and I think it's clear that regardless of whether or not such evidence is produced of these connections that Saddam Hussein is a threat.

All we see from Clark is that he's been consistently against this war from the beginning, as he even said yesterday on Good Morning America:

"Well, has [Joe Lieberman] ever named the six different positions, Charlie? I meant that's just -- that's old-style politics. You can go back to my record. I've even been on your show - while I couldn't t when I was on CNN. But, I was consistently against this since the guys from the pentagon told me two weeks after 9/11 we were attacking Iraq. It didn't make any sense to me. And I have been very, very consistent on this. This was a war we didn't have to fight. It was an elective war. I have said it at almost every opportunity."

I don't think the leftie loons will be flocking to him now. If this gets good airtime, they will stick with Dean.
Errr, I'll Have Another Chivas Barkeep

Ted Kennedy is apparently off the wagon again and
blasting Bush about a political war in Iraq. As long as he stays out of his Oldsmobile, we should be okay.
Is It Cold In Here?

Al Gore is set to give a policy speech today on global warming sponsored by in New York City. In other news, the National Weather Service has issued a Wind Chill Warning for NYC.

Could this guy have worse luck.

Wednesday, January 14, 2004

Unilateral Action

Oh, this is too good. Apparently, in 1995, Howard Dean wrote a letter to President Clinton imploring him to take action in Bosnia. I still hope this stuff hasn't come out too early in the process so Dean gets defeated in the primaries. This is the guy Bush needs to face in November, unless Kucinich could somehow break out of the pack.

Tuesday, January 13, 2004

Self Defense Not Allowed

Apparently you can't defend yourself in the Netherlands, even if you're wheelchair bound and confronted by five armed thugs trying to rob you. This is what you get when you have a country that worships boneheaded pacifists like Michael Moore.
Dean Goes on Offensive in Iowa

This is getting fun and funny.

PELLA, Iowa, Jan. 12 -- Former Vermont governor Howard Dean opened the final week of campaigning before next week's crucial Iowa caucuses with a sharp attack on his leading rivals Monday, charging that they are part of a Washington establishment that failed to hold President Bush to account and that they cannot bring change to the capital or the country.

The campaign in Iowa remains extremely fluid, with many undecided voters. Dean's decision to push back against his opponents underscored concerns among his advisers and supporters that he has spent too much time on the defensive in recent weeks and that he has sometimes appeared rattled by rivals' attacks and lackluster in debate.

Washington establishment? Then who the hell are all those people endorsing Dean: Al Gore, Tom Harkin, Bill Bradley, Paul Simon (on his deathbed), Jim Jeffords (I) Nutville, Pat Leahy (D) Nutville, Jim McDermott (D) Saddamite, and Major Owens (D) Kookland.
Powerline blows former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's "Secret documents" out of the water in his attack on his former employer.

"But that is not a Pentagon document. It's from the Vice-President's Office. It was part of the Energy Project that was the focus of Dick Cheney's attention before the 9/11 strikes.

"And the document has nothing to do with post-war Iraq. It was part of a study of global oil supplies. Judicial Watch obtained it in a law suit and posted it, along with related documents, on its website at:


So the "smoking gun" documents that Suskind and O'Neill claim prove that the administration was planning to invade Iraq in March 2001 are part of a package that includes identical documents relating to the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. Does Paul O'Neill claim the administration was planning on invading them, too? Or, as Mylroie says, was this merely part of the administration's analysis of sources of energy in the 21st century?

Nevertheless, the left is still fuming at the mouth. Next up, they'll start comparing the speed at which Treasury opened an investigation and how long it took Justice to open an investigation in the Wilson affair. Don't listen to them, however, because the CIA opened an investigation immediately after the Novak article appeared in July 2003. It took the Justice Department time to deal with the referral because of questions they asked to the CIA. The same may occur here, but for the time being the comparison is a red herring.

Friday, January 09, 2004

Bush Lied?

All we ever hear in the media are rants accusing Bush of being disengenuous (I'm being nice), like this CNN article that accuses Bush of exaggerating the wmd threat in Iraq or this one in the WaPo claiming that Iraq's weapons existed on paper only. Of course, the CNN article claims the anti-war Carnegie Endowment is non-partisan, now there's a stretch, while the Washington Post quotes named and unnamed sources for its claims. Interestingly, they both ignore the story that Iraq's arms may have been hidden in Syria. If they believe the other guys from Iraq why don't they believe this guy? Because it doesn't fit into their agenda.

Then again, in 2001, right before Bush came into office, Clinton apparently warned the Bush administration about Saddam restarting his weapons programs. Imagine if Saddam's weapons had made their way into the hands of some terrorists, the left would be crowing for Bush's impeachment because he ignored this. Moreover, there's a report that Clinton was convinced Saddam had wmds based upon the years of intelligence that piled up on the issue. Of course, the leftie whiners don't base their conclusions on classified intelligence (because it's classified) but rather on "analyses" from leftie think-tanks who interviewed some people and read some news articles. In the words of Lionel Hutz: "Now that's believable testimony."

Just be happy that we have Bush as president. Without him, the left wouldn't be able to whine because we'd all be dead.

Thursday, January 08, 2004

Professors Have Nothing Better to Do

Right after Christmas, the Marxist, ahem err, Modern Language Association held its annual convention in San Diego. I'm not one of them, but my wife is. We didn't go this year, but now I wish we had seeing that many of the leftie nuts were there spewing their anti-Bush rants disguised somehow as discussions of literature. I typically bite my tongue at any get togethers so as to not get my wife in trouble, but this would have been too much for me. I know I would gone ballistic if I sat in on one of these talks. No wonder our campuses are so screwed up.
Dean has Small Hands

I wish I had as much time as this guy apparently has to spend on my blog. Take a look, it's pretty funny.

Wednesday, January 07, 2004

And the Double Standard Continues...

You'll see very little mention of this Hillary joke about Gandhi in the mainstream press. In fact, the Washington Post has it on page C3 in the Style section. If Trent Lot said it, it would be above the fold on A1.
And They Thought Quayle Was an Idiot

Kucinich Shows Pie Chart During Radio-Only Debate. Maybe he should have just brought a pie and thrown it at someone.

Tuesday, January 06, 2004

Republican Babe of the Week

The New Jersey GOP ocassionally posts a Babe of the Week. Here's this week's babe. She's also known as Belly Girl. The dems' babes are here and here (be careful, your screen may crack). Ewwwwww.
PNAC Crowd

David Brooks at the New York Times has a nice commentary today concerning the loopiness of the left and their fixation over the neocons. Some of these neocons organized a think-tank in 1997 called the Project for the New American Century, or PNAC for short. Their website is here. I've argued ad nauseum with liberals about the group because most of them think it's some conspiracy to take over the world and they've somehow infected the Bush administration. If you read the site thoroughly, rather than reading articles from the British press or leftie sites like IndyMedia, you will realize that PNAC is a think-tank only, with some pretty good ideas, I might add.

Monday, January 05, 2004

Lefties Show Their True Colors

I didn't have a chance to get to this yesterday, but it's important that everyone see what the lefties at are up to. They've been running a contest for amateur anti-Bush ads, a contest to be decided by a cavalcade of idiots like Michael Moore, Janeane Garofalo, Jessica Lange, and Al Franken. Another one in the group is Tony Shaoub. I used to like his show Monk, until I saw his name on this website. So much for watching that show.

If you have any spare change, send it to the folks at moveon. By continuing to support crap like this, the lefties and the dems they sponsor will disappear like the Whigs. We can only hope.

Here's the transcript of the ad, as posted by Drudge:


GRAPHIC: Pictures Of Hitler
HITLER: (Speaking In German)
CHYRON: We have taken new measures to protect our homeland,

GRAPHIC: Pictures Of Hitler
HITLER: (Speaking In German)
CHYRON: I believe I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator,

GRAPHIC: Pictures Of Hitler
HITLER: (Speaking In German)
CHYRON: God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them,

GRAPHIC: Pictures of President Bush
HITLER: (Speaking In German)
CHYRON: and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did.

BACKGROUND: Cheering German Crowd

Sunday, January 04, 2004

Another Triumph for US Tech Knowhow

It looks like we've done it again with the Mars landing and the Comet Wild 2 flyby in the last day. A toast to everyone involved.

Oh, by the way, where the hell is my Beagle?
Dean: Security? What Security?

Apparently, Howeird Dean is caught in his own security flap about Vermont Yankee after his constant ranting about Bush and how the capture of Saddam has not made us safer.

During Dean's final year in office in 2002, an audit concluded that despite a decade of repeated warnings of poor safety at Vermont Yankee, Dean's administration was poorly prepared for a nuclear disaster.


Security was so lax at Vermont Yankee that in August 2001, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staged a drill in which three mock terrorists gained access to the plant. The agency gave Vermont Yankee the worst security rating among the nation's 103 reactors.

This is the kind of stuff that Dean is going to get in the general election from the Republicans. They are going to tear him a new one, if he gets the nod.
Oh No!

It looks like Britney's tied the knot in Las Vegas. I remember a couple of years ago when I was in Vegas, Billy Bob and Angelina Jolie got married down the street, and we all remember what happened with them. I suspect Britney's marriage will crash on those same rocks.

Saturday, January 03, 2004

And You Liberals Complain about Freedom Under Bush

Take a look at what they're doing in Boston for the Democrat National Convention. You might as well call out the Gestapo to handle this:

The tightest security will be in the immediate area of the FleetCenter. A perimeter extending for five blocks on Causeway Street and encircling the arena, North Station, and the Thomas P. O'Neill Federal Building next door will admit only delegates, working media, and employees involved in the convention. They will have to pass through metal detectors and X-ray machines at tightly guarded checkpoints. Even Boston police won't be allowed inside the perimeter unless they have been authorized in advance.

With the exception of police cars and shuttle buses, Causeway Street near the FleetCenter will be closed to vehicles. There's also talk of closing down all or part of the new underground southbound tunnel of Interstate 93, though organizers say they'll probably only have major traffic disruptions on the highway while the presidential nominee is in the FleetCenter.

Cars will be barred altogether from the 11 blocks of storefronts and rowhouses known as the Bulfinch Triangle, bounded by Merrimac, Market, Beverly, and Causeway streets. Trucks delivering food, mail, and other supplies will be restricted to day trips before 2 p.m. To prevent the trucks from getting too close to the FleetCenter, police officials said, the vehicles might be required to park on Valenti Way, where the deliveries can be carried to the businesses throughout the area.

Why bother with delivies to businesses, no one can get to them. How this is going to benefit the city is beyond me. This is the most absurd thing I've ever seen. And the whiners on the left keep complaining about how the PATRIOT Act signed by Bush (but passed overwhelmingly in Congress) has taken away their rights. Well, it's done nothing of the sort, but head up to Boston in July and you'll see how your rights get taken away.
Only in San Francisco

I used to have quite a bit of business in San Francisco and all through the 90's I noticed a distinct increase in homelessness. I later found out it was due to the generous cash payments of almost $400 they give to them just for having some loathesome disease, smelling like feces or urine, and living on the street. Well, this guy takes the cake. I wonder if he still collects the money from the city because heaven forbid they have some type of means testing for the homeless.

For years, there have been rumors among the homeless downtown that a drifter in North Beach was sleeping in the gutter while he had all the money he needed in the bank.

It's true. That drifter is 68-year-old Lou Dinarde.

Dinarde is homeless, he often sleeps in the gutter or on the sidewalk, and he has plenty of cash -- a trust fund that at one point was worth nearly $700,000. He draws $2,500 a month from the fund plus $500 a month in Social Security.

I wonder how I can get him to give it to me?

Friday, January 02, 2004

Note to self: Don't travel to Brazil.

Brazil joins a long list of countries (almost all of Africa and the Middle East) that I will not be traveling to after a judge, in retaliation for American fingerprinting of Brazilians, will require that all Americans be fingerprinted:

A Brazilian judge furious at U.S. plans to fingerprint and photograph Brazilians entering the United States has ordered Brazil to do the same to U.S. citizens, police said on Tuesday.
"I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," said Federal Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva in the court order released on Tuesday.

That's interesting that the judge accuses the US of acting like Nazis, yet he goes and does the same thing. What an idiot. I guess the next time I want to be kidnapped or surf trains, I'll go to Brazil. For the time being, however, I'm staying home.