I find it extremely disappointing that so-called conservatives have jumped on Mitt Romney about a comment he made about firing people. Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and some others took the comment entirely out of context to score some cheap political points. In their attack from the left they are writing the script for Obama, should Romney win the nomination. I can see Ronald Reagan shake his head and mutter, “Did I teach you nothing?”

If you listen to Romney’s comments in context, they are perfectly reasonable and I know of no reasonable person who would disagree with him. He was talking about a better way of delivering healthcare. Here is what he said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSddioKBp9o

How many of you are shocked and disgusted with those comments? Who wouldn’t want the ability to fire a service provider who is giving you lousy service? With ObamaCare, you will not have a choice. It will be government-run healthcare for all and we all know how hard it is to fire the government.

To turn these remarks into Rick Perry’s “vulture capitalism,” and Newt Gingrich’s “predatory capitalism,” is shameful. It’s about ObamaCare, stupid. I want to fire Obama and I would like to do so as soon as possible. If I could recall him along with the Chevy Volt he supported with our tax dollars and he was filmed driving, I would gladly do so.

I do not think Romney is a strong conservative and I am having a hard time liking him as the Republican nominee. But Gingrich has dropped the mask of the genial Uncle Newt and has revealed the Nasty Newt that so many who worked with him in Congress give as the reason they can’t back him. Perry has stumbled and fumbled his way to irrelevancy. He should pack up his tent and go back to Texas. With Republicans like this why have an election?

That’s my opinion; I’d like to know yours. Please comment below.

Photo by boss tweed

Ah, 1922, the Yankees won their second American League pennant and finished up their final season at the Polo Grounds before moving across the river to their new stadium in the Bronx. In the summer, hyperinflation in Germany meant it took 493 marks to equal one dollar. Feature length film Nanook of the North  is released. In the fall the conversion rate in Germany is 1,000 marks to the dollar. Stalin comes to power in Russia, and Mussolini in Italy. By November it takes 3,000 marks to equal one U.S. dollar in Germany. Alexander Graham Bell dies. By year-end it takes 7,000 German marks to equal one U.S. dollar. It was also the last time the 9th Congressional District in New York was held by a Republican.

Printing money was not working in Germany. In 1921, there was a deep recession in the U.S. Unemployment hit 11.7 percent, but the Republican administration did not launch any massive bailout programs nor plaster the economy with new regulations. Business owners had the freedom to react to their circumstances. They could adjust wages and prices as the market demanded. They did and as steep as the recession had been the snap back to full recovery was just as sharp. By 1922 the unemployment rate was down to 6.7% and a year later in 1923, it was down to an incredible 2.4%.

We are now in an economy under this administration where the unemployment rate started at 7.4% and has climbed and is now stuck at around 9%. It has been this way for nearly three years and the projections are that it will stay this way for years in the future, just like it was under FDR. And why not? President Obama is following many of plans of FDR that didn’t work in the 1930s and are not working now.

If a trillion in stimulus spending didn’t work, let’s spend another $500 billion, right? If passing enormous regulations such as ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank, EPA, kills any business desire to hire people, blame the Republicans for saying STOP!

A message went out from New York to Washington last night. In a district with 3:1 Democrat advantage. The people voted for a Republican. A Republican who said stop the spending, support our allies, don’t destroy our social institutions and remember that all Obama’s horses and all Obama’s men and women, are not smarter than the rest of us. Get out of our way. Let us make decisions for our own lives and stand back. We, the American people, not the bureaucrats in Washington who never set foot in the private economy, like Chuck Schumer and Anthony Weiner, will turn this economy around. Give us our lives, our liberty and stop impeding our pursuit of happiness. It is our pursuit and our responsibility to catch up with our happiness. You bureaucrats cannot deliver it to us. Give not, Take not.

That’s my opinion; I’d like to know yours; Please comment below.

Photo by Pargon

We need a vibrant and growing economy, but we are being led by someone who believes in all things that make America mediocre.

We’ve seen it all, “don’t keep score of the game or someone will be sad if they lose”; Pass/fail grading systems; schools banning dodge-ball, kickball, monkey bars and tag because someone might get hurt. Does anyone get excited watching such a contest, or would you rather watch the Packers? We seem to be stuck in a union mindset of propping up the incompetent workers and holding back the good ones.

The Union Mindset

In a union all workers are supposed to act like a uniform group. I can’t tell you the number of people I met in business who quit being in a union because of a common theme. “Hey, slow down, you’re making everyone else look bad!’ I knew one guy working construction at JFK Airport in New York. He wanted to keep busy doing his work because it made the day go by quickly. The shop steward told him to slow down, but he just didn’t get it. So, one day, the shop steward took the time to explain it to him. He called him down off the scaffold and took him outside to walk around the hanger. Around and around they slowly walked as the union guy explained the facts of union life to him. He finally understood. He quit and started his own business.

Progressives have the union mindset. Don’t let competition break out it’s bad. So let’s roll everything up to Washington to run the country. We can’t have Texas going competitive on us and tempting people to move there from Michigan, now can we? Whose going to pay for all the social programs back in Michigan if all the productive workers leave. So let’s add ObamaCare and we’ll latch onto those productive workers no matter where they move.

There are roads and bridges that need repair. Don’t trust the states to handle that, what if they don’t have enough money after paying for all their public sector retirees who retired at 42 years of age? What we need is a national infrastructure bank. That’s it, and we can model it after Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, so that every state can get their roads and bridges repaired and everyone across the country will pay for it.

While we’re at it, let’s have another round of stimulus (what’s that, Nancy? You’ve banned the word stimulus? Okay, okay), er, another round of investment for shovel ready construction jobs. And while it’s true the jobs created by this new round will only last as long as the money does, just like the last time, so we’ll have to do it again. But by that time Obama hopes to be reelected so he won’t care any more.

Never mind the free market working this all out by itself, we need the really, really smart people who only seem to turn up in Washington to generate more great ideas, like “Cash for Clunkers,” “Making Home Affordable,” “Green jobs,” and stimulus dollars for union teachers.

So is it any surprise that Jimmy Hoffa blames the Tea Party and tries to rally the mob to get those “sons of bitches”? What else do they have but the mob? Fire up the crowd with simple slogans, “Racists”, “Terrorists”, “Homophobes”, “Hitler”, while the Tea Partiers quote the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Federalist Papers.

The Way Out of this Mess

There is a way out of this mess and it will take bold action. By bold action I don’t mean to make the same mistakes as what this administration has already done but three times bigger. I mean applying tough medicine like Reagan did to break the back of skyrocketing interest rates he inherited from Jimmy Carter. At the ten month mark of Reagan’s presidency the economy was growing at 9.3% compared to 1% under Obama.

In fact, the economy grew during Obama’s first full year in office, peaked, and started declining steadily. How do you hang that one on Bush?

What is meant by a bold plan is along the lines of the plan put forth by Rand Paul, that would cut spending by $500 billion in the first year. Make no mistake about it, federal worker unemployment will increase, but the government in Washington will get smaller. Some departments that are not authorized by the Constitution would be eliminated; not capped, not trimmed, but gone. The states or local government can decide if they want to continue these programs on the state or local level. States can compete for businesses and citizens rather than just chant, “tax the rich,” and grow government. If a state doesn’t get its house in order, it’s citizens will flee and there will be no bailouts. It is time for responsible and accountable government.

It’s simple, really. Every government program, every regulation has a cost. Government has no money other than what it gets from taxing the people, either directly through income and sales taxes, or indirectly through corporate taxes. Each one taps the brakes on the economy, slowing it down. More and more programs, regulations, taxes, taps and taps and taps on the brakes. As any driver knows, if you tap the brakes enough times eventually you will slow to a crawl. If we want to put America to work again, we need to bust up some of the Washington establishment and use it to fuel the fire of the free market. Do that and stand back, and America will be just fine.

That’s my opinion; I’d like to know yours. Please comment below.

Judging by the two mail pieces I just received from my congressman, Tim Bishop, it looks like he has settled on his reelection strategy. After all, he doesn’t want to run on his record (ObamaCare, bailouts, Stimulus, trillions in deficit spending); with the demise of earmarks he can’t say he’s bringing home the bacon; since he is facing a re-match in his reelection bid, using the same smear tactics this time around will be harder; so let’s scare the bejeezus out of the seniors.

The Medicare system is going broke. Medicare consumes 10% of GDP today and is forecast to consume 15% of GDP in twenty years, that’s growth of 50%. Tim Bishop says we need to cut spending. Okay, Tim, we’re listening, what would you cut? …Tim?…Anyone out there? Nothing.

Seniors will pay more for care – Tim Bishop

Tim Bishop says seniors will pay more for care. If you are currently on medicare or are over the age of 55, nothing will change. So why is Tim Bishop lying about that? Tim Bishop voted for ObamaCare which has already taking $500 billion away from Medicare to pay for ObamaCare. Remember how they were struggling to get the cost of ObamaCare under $1 trillion? This is how they did it. What Tim Bishop, I believe, is trying to say without telling all the facts, is with regard to future generations, starting in 2021. But Tim Bishop doesn’t want to change Medicare at all and as the table below points out, Medicare will be bankrupt by 2021. So other than scaring people what is Tim’s plan?

In his mail piece Tim Bishop says that “according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, a private health plan as good as Medicare will soon cost $30,000 per year.” Wow! But a little math will show how that is ridiculous. Total spending on all health care in the US runs around 16% of GDP. Total GDP for the US is about $14.6 trillion, so total health care spending comes out to about $2.33 trillion. There are 46.5 million people on Medicare. If they each paid $30,000 just for health care premiums, the premiums alone would total $1.39 trillion. So Tim Bishop wants us to believe that private health insurance premiums for seniors would cost 60% of all health care spending. It just doesn’t add up.

One of the techniques from ObamaCare to “bend the cost curve down” is to pay Medicare providers less and less. It is the same static thinking that the government can do what it wants and nobody will react to it. But in fact, here is one of the chief actuaries of Medicare testifying that 40% of service providers will stop serving Medicare patients. That means rationing and long waits. Who will decide? Not you, but a unelected panel of bureaucrats, accountable to no one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1igPowGu6M

Seniors forced onto for-profit insurance market — Tim Bishop

Tim Bishop makes his plug for socialism by quickly pointing out “for profit” insurance companies. Horrors. Just think of all the damage those “for profit” companies have done to us.

Yes those, for profit companies have made our lives hell compared to the altruistic, benevolent government enterprises. But we all know what happens when a free market is allowed to operate. Calculators that used to cost hundreds of dollars when first introduced are now throw away items; mobile phones that hit the market at $4,000 per copy are now $39; GPS systems that used to cost thousands and require a substantial unit be installed in the trunk of your car, are now a standard feature on your phone. Costs come down, features go up, service improves. Here is the actuary Mr. Foster talking about this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z__m5IYoJBg

The True Cost Drivers of Medicare

Despite Tim Bishop’s scare tactics that costs will continue to skyrocket, let’s look at the true drivers of Medicare costs.

• Spending other people’s money. No one is going to spend a lot of time looking int to waste, fraud, and abuse if it is not directly affecting you. But it is about $2,150 per person per year. It is not going to get someone reelected to Congress to fix it, and the individual doesn’t care. If it affects the spending power of their premium and the profits of the evil “for profit” company, you can bet it will be attacked aggressively.
• The Government keeps expanding the goods and services covered by Medicare. I have seen quite enough TV advertisements for “The Scooter Store” telling me how I can get a “free” scooter completely paid for by Medicare.
• The Prescription Drug Plan passed by President Bush had no revenue stream associated with it, so this is all deficit spending. Let drug companies compete for the seniors’ business
• Medicare overpays for many items, because it sets prices higher than the free market would. Are you listening Congressman Bishop?
• Fee for Service – this encourages providers to deliver too many services. When in doubt, add it.

Where “for profit” companies are involved they watch the bottom line. A dollar saved in fraud, waste or abuse, goes straight to the bottom line. The company can decide to either increase profits or cut premiums to grow market share. Medicare is now soviet style centralized planning where a bunch of bureaucrats set prices on 30,000 items and somehow we are to believe they are smarter than all the doctors, hospitals, drug companies, and other health care providers.

Tim Bishop wants to kick the can down the road. Instead of making a contribution and working to fix the problem, he would prefer to scare seniors into voting for him so he can continue to draw his $174,000 salary and keep a low profile. It’s time to retire Congressman.

That’s my opinion; I’d like to know yours. Please comment below.

In article in the New York Times titled, “Squandering Medicare’s Money,” the article itemizes a number of procedures that are routinely perfomed under Medicare, but have little or no medical value. So why are they done? One reason is alluded to in the article while another is not.

The 800 pound gorilla that drives medical costs continually skyward are the personal injury lawyers. Doctors practice defensive medicine because of these lawyers since they don’t want to be sitting in a witness chair answering the question, “Well why didn’t you perform test or procedure X?” Since it wasn’t performed, no one can say what the outcome would have been. In the doctor’s learned opinion he may say that it wasn’t relevant. The lawyer will argue otherwise, but if the doctor can produce negative test results, well, there’s your proof it wasn’t relevant. So the tests get done and billed and medical costs climb.

In Texas, they are reforming the system there. The have put caps on personal injury awards, and are passing legislation that would have someone who brings a frivolous lawsuit pay the legal fees of the winner. Applications for new doctor’s licenses have risen 60% and malpractice insurance premiums have fallen 27%.

The odd thing in the article is it criticizes a number of tests that would be considered preventative. ObamaCare supporters have been pounding the drum for more preventative measures. But sometimes preventative measures are not the best idea. Having a colonoscopy when you are 85 years old, is probably going to be of little value and may actually increase the risk of infection or a perforation of the colon. But when the patient is not involved in the payment process, who cares?

Which brings up the point I make in my book, Liberty’s Lifeline, the need to eliminate third party payers. If you go to a restaurant that has an all you can eat buffet, and you know that someone else is picking up the check, do you not reach for that extra dessert? If you had to lay out the money, or at least part of it, you might question why the procedure was necessary or effective. Gee, that sounds a lot like the Ryan plan. Putting patients in charge of their health and their families, not a nameless, faceless, unaccountable panel of bureaucrats. Just imagine medical care modeled on the Department of Motor Vehicles instead of the doctor’s office that you know today. The former is ObamaCare, the latter is the Paul Ryan plan. Which do you prefer?

That’s my opinion; I’d like to know yours. Please comment below.

The Democrats are banking on the American people returning to the days of voting by sound bite. They believe the Tea Party is an anomaly that will go down as a blip in the history books, rather than a force for educating the electorate on the issues. It is a strategy that has worked for them, even as recently as the 2010 election. In the First Congressional District of New York, Congressman Tim Bishop ran for reelection entirely on bashing his opponent, and not mentioning his record of voting with Nancy Pelosi 97% of the time.

The most recent trial balloon was in New York’s 26th Congressional District special election. There Democrat Kathy Hochul ran on the demagoguery that Paul Ryan’s budget plan, which her Republican opponent Jane Corwin supported, meant the end of Medicare. Hochul said:

“We had the issues on our side—did we not have the right issues on our side?” Ms. Hochul said at her victory party, as supporters chanted “Medicare! Medicare!”

We had the issues on our side? “We can balance our budget the right way and not on the backs of our seniors,” she said. Democrats said the program [Medicare] should be steadied through other measures. Okay, tell us, just what are those measures? Anyone?

Where is balancing the budget on the back of seniors in the Ryan plan? Better yet, how does the Ryan plan stack up against the Democrats plan? Oh, that’s right, the Democrats don’t have a plan. The Democrats want to continue the status quo of spending us into oblivion. They want to take the only real plan on the table, the Ryan plan, and not challenge it with ideas of their own, but try to hang it around the necks of the Republicans.

Senate Democrats were expected to bring up the House Republicans’ 2012 budget plan for a vote this week, but not their own plan, which remains under lock and key.

The Democrats want to get the Republicans in the Senate on record as supporting the Ryan plan as did all but four Republicans in the House. They believe that by pointing to support for the Ryan plan, they are home free to retake the House while retaining the Senate, reelect President Obama and finish the job of destroying America, the America we know and the America our founders envisioned. But don’t take my word for it, listen to Harry Reid.

“There’s no need to have a Democratic budget, in my opinion,” Reid told the Los  Angeles Times last week. “It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this  stage.”

After all if you have a plan, people can look at it and evaluate it and from where the Democrats are coming from it would be suicidal to actually admit through a vote what they are trying to do.

Next to the lackluster economy and a persistently high 9 percent unemployment rate, runaway spending and debt remain among the voters’ greatest concerns. But the Democrats‘ strategy right now is not to grab the deficit by the horns and wrestle it into submission. It is to play political games with the issue and with the American people, to help the Democrats win back control of the House and rebuild their dwindling forces in the Senate. — Washington Times, 24 May 2011

The Democrats who have added $5 trillion to the debt since re-taking control of Congress in 2006, have not passed a budget and have no intention of doing so and as every household and business knows, without a budget spending will be out of control.

While the Democrats draw up their battle plans to smear, lie, and distort the issues, and terrorize seniors in the hope that they will remain ignorant and not question the accuracy of their statements, it will fall upon the Tea Party to ramp up another education effort to spread the truth. I’ll let Mr. Ryan lead off here:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJIC7kEq6kw&feature=player_embedded

That’s my opinion; I’d like to know yours. Please comment below.

We knew it was coming because the situation was so clear. Congressman Paul Ryan introduced a bold plan to deal with out of control government spending and the Democrats had no credible plan of their own. So what does one do in a case like that? Lie, smear, distort, and scare the uninformed into thinking that we should shut up and surrender our liberties to the government. But the level of the latest lies is remarkable if only because of how shameless it is.

Here is the ad in question from the Agenda Project, titled “America the Beautiful.”

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGnE83A1Z4U&feature=player_embedded

The message they want you to belive is simple. Paul Ryan’s would end Medicare, period. Seniors would be pushed to their deaths by Ryan and his “friends.” This is a blatent lie. The Ryan plan says that no one over the age of 55 would see any changes to their plan. Bill O’Reilly thought the ad was so dishonest that he ran a segment on his show, The O’Reilly Factor to address it, and right from the start his guest, Sally Kohn, scoffs when O’Reilly points out that no one under 55 would see any changes, saying perhaps they should put in a disclaimer saying the woman in the wheelchair was 54. Really? Did the woman in the wheelchair look like she was 54? or 84? Kohn said it was not a distortion, it was an exaggeration.

Distort, v. 1) to twist awry or out of shape; make crooked or deformed. 2) to give false, perverted or disproportionate meaning to; misrepresent: to distort the facts

Exaggerate, v. 1) to magnify beyond the limits of truth; overstate; represent disproportionately

Some might call that a distinction without a difference. Either way it is not true and she claims it is harmless. She then tacks hard left and says ads during the ObamaCare debate about death panels was an exaggeration and also a lie. Not even close. It is a fact that Ryan’s plan does not affect people over 55. It is a fact that ObamaCare wanted to install a government panel that would advise doctors on treatments that took into consideration how many years of quality life a patient had remaining. The only exaggeration was that ObamaCare didn’t actually call them death panels.

O’Reilly pressed on with the ads and Ms. Kohn poo-poo’d it away, “It’s a silly ad. I’m not going to defend a silly ad.” So telling outright lies is okay as long as you are silly when you do it? She continued, “We’re having this conversation because of this ad.” What conversation? A conversation about lying and silliness? What about debating what you don’t like in the Ryan plan and what the left has that is better? No chance. The smirk on her face gives it away. She is tickled that such a bold faced lie is out there and it will affect seniors and she knows the famous line from Winston Churchill, “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.”

The tenth rule of ethics of means and ends is that you do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral arguments.– Saul Alinksy, Rules for Radicals

So is the moral argument that someone uncovered the death panels? This is like the Democratic congressional aide that told me there is no such thing as ObamaCare, because there was no legislation that offically carried that name. The left calls it end-of-life counseling, the right calls it death panels. It’s a panel, and what typically happens at the end of one’s life? Death.

But don’t take my word for it, judge Ms. Kohn’s demeanor and truthfullness for yourself.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVAXXeBKOrA&feature=player_embedded

Ms. Kohn claimed that the real purpose of the “silly ad” was to get people talking. Okay, Ms. Kohn, then how about on your next public appearance you talk about this:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMJE9jBroUU

So, Sally Kohn, instead of making silly and stupid videos of grandma in the wheelchair, why not make an intelligent video like this one and make the case for your solution over Paul Ryan’s plan? Or don’t you have a case?

That’s my opinion; I’d like to know yours. Please comment below.

Newt Gingrich may have just killed his presidential bid in less than a week after announcing it. Aside from his support of ethanol subsidies, the old commercial sitting on the couch with Nancy Pelosi, he tops it off by attacking Paul Ryan’s budget that was approved by all but four Republican members of the House of Representatives.

He says the Ryan plan is too radical. Compared to what? ObamaCare?

While Medicare savings under the Democrats’ health care law and pending proposals would come mainly from reduced federal payments to doctors, hospitals and insurance companies, the budget put forth by House Republicans would cut spending by turning Medicare into a system of vouchers for future beneficiaries to buy private insurance, but in amounts that would not keep pace with the projected inflation of health costs.

The Democrats’ plan is to pay doctors, hospitals, and insurance companies less. How does that work in the real world? Doctors will refuse to accept more Medicare patients as will hospitals. So Medicare recipients may have coverage, but won’t have a doctor to serve them. You cannot bring down the cost of medical care by government fiat.

Ryan’s plan actually brings the free market into play by putting the decision making in the hands of the consumer. Of course, the Democrats say that amount Ryan proposes will not keep up with the rising costs of medical care. Aren’t these the same people who said if we did not spend nearly a trillion on the stimulus, unemployment would rise to 9%, wheras if we did, it would go no higher than 8%?

Paul Ryan showed the courage to tackle entitlements and with a credible plan. It may not be perfect, but it is a solid start. The Democrats’ “plan” is just more politbureau control from Washington dictating to the rest of us their failed solutions. It’s time for a change.

As for Newt, he can go back to the think tank, and re-think some of his positions.

That’s my opinion; I’d like to know yours. Please comment below.

When did the distortions start? Was it with Officer Crowley and the Cambridge Police Deparment “acting stupidly”? Was it with the distortions over ObamaCare? How about dressing down the Supreme Court while the camera catches Samuel Alito saying “not true”. His assault on Paul Ryan’s budget blueprint after inviting Congressman Ryan to come hear his speech, brings to mind Joe Wilson’s outburst, “You Lie!” during another Obama address in Congress. It is becoming all to common to hear the lies and distortions from this president, but they keep coming. The good news is that Congressman Ryan is not afraid to counterpunch.

Congressman Ryan takes apart the president’s speech on his budget proposal and injects some truth into the debate. Let us not forget it was President Obama who proposed a budget and without so much as a debate, pulled it back and submitted another. It is still too much spending for too long. The economy is crawling back when, by now, it should be roaring back. But regardless, at least let’s have an honest debate.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yR7dBVM5NvQ&feature=player_embedded#at=140

Now it is time to address the debt limit and some serious scaling back of spending. Congressman Ryan’s budget would be a good start coupled with a Balanced Budget Amendment, because one Congress cannot bind another Congress to its actions. Only a Balanced Budget Amendment would put the discipline in place that we must have.

That’s my opinion; I’d like to know yours. Please comment below.

It wasn’t long after the Paul Ryan budget was released that the disinformation Democrats began trumpeting seniors being starved, being unable to afford health care, and the usual demogogic scare tactics. But doctors are dropping coverage, the key slices of the pie above are growing much faster than inflation, and the Democrats have no plan other than the age old cut benefits (reimburse doctors less) and increase taxes, just enough to kick the can down the road for someone else to deal with. Congressman Ryan had the guts to come up with a plan to actually fix the system by giving seniors a choice and they seem to like the idea. Why?

Obama wants to have yet another commission that will experiment with different ideas and basically control and dictate medicine from Washington. Experiment? Isn’t that the concept behind federalism? Let the fifty different states experiment with solutions that work for their population and geography. But a centralized bureaucracy? How can that experiment without wildly jumping from idea to idea and dragging all of us along with it?

Seniors know what government bureaucracy looks and feels like and they don’t want it to the power of ten. The idea that they could actually control their medical care and not run into some bureaucrat with a clipboard who says you can have this, you can’t have that.

Ryan is being honest with the American people that Medicare is heading for the rocks and a change in course is imperitive. The other point that must be emphasized before the main stream media drowns it out is that seniors, those over 55, will see no change the in status quo. What exists today will continue to exist. So don’t start pricing cat food to see how to fit it into grandma’s diet.

But what is it with this administration and the left when it comes to private enterprise. What is the love affair with the government and the antipathy toward greedy private business? If your life depended on getting a letter delivered tomorrow, who would you turn to, the post office or Federal Express? Who would you rather get a letter from Wells Fargo or the IRS? How many organizations in the book In Search of Excellence are private enterprises and how many are government agencies? We have Securities and Exchange attorneys looking at pornography on their computers all day instead of catching Bernie Madoff; we have air traffic controllers asleep on the job instead of privatizing the whole thing like Canada did. Wake up, America, and realize that life could be a lot better, and you could be a lot wealthier if we took more out of the government’s hands than making Washington bigger and more powerful.

That’s my opinion; I’d like to know yours. Please comment below.