The "Right" To Healthcare is a Threat to Life and Liberty

Ross Kaminsky for The American Spectator here gets close to making a point which needs to be made more often, more forcefully, and more primary, namely, that one man's right to healthcare comes at the expense of another man's right not to provide it if he doesn't wish to:

[I]f health care is a right, that means that an American who for whatever reason does not have access to a doctor must be provided that access, whether that means redistributing taxpayer money to the would-be patient or even the potential of forcing a doctor to provide his services in an area "underserved" by health care professionals. ...

In other words, when one person's right is forcibly taken away for the benefit of someone else, it can no longer be a right any more than taxes extracted for the benefit of the poor may be deemed charity.

A doctor practices medicine by choice, not by compulsion, so we can no more force him to provide care than we can force people to become doctors. But, of course, if the courts decide that government can compel expenditure for health insurance, then it is a short distance to compelling other things, indeed anything, at which point this country is finished, if it isn't already.

Quibbling about how the inherent limitations accruing to conceptions of positive rights shows that they are not rights, such as that Obamacare under Berwick's rules will be provided as a right only

up to a certain age, a certain degree of sickness, or a certain cost,

has utilitarian value but is really beside the point.

A different contract governs the relations between a doctor and his patient, which Obamacare would overthrow, as full of negative pledges as the Bill of Rights is full of negative rights, the most famous of which people remember as "to do no harm."

The real offense of Obamacare is the compulsion at the heart of it, as real as the oppression of any tyranny.

What we need to stop it is a Hippocratic Revolt.

Admiral Says Obama's Motive in START was not National Defense

“If Obama wanted to save some money and improve national defense, he should have gotten out of the nuke negotiations and acted unilaterally. START is simply a political victory for Obama.”

-- Vice Admiral Jerry Miller, USN (Ret.), here

Senate Traitors Enshrine Doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction 71-26

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse than George Bush's immoral doctrine of pre-emptive war, 16 Republicans helped, HELPED!, the Senate's Democrat majority turn back the clock to the bad old days of mutually assured destruction and ratified THE NEW START, which is just the old madness. 13 actually voted for the thing. 3 didn't bother to show up.

From The Washington Post:

The final vote came after Senate Democrats accepted two amendments designed to placate Republicans who had qualms about the treaty. The amendments, which passed on voice votes with bipartisan support, emphasized the administration's commitment to a limited missile-defense program and to continued funding to modernize the aging US nuclear weapons complex.

The amendments were to the resolution of ratification accompanying the treaty, a nonbinding statement that codifies the Senate's understanding of the pact but does not directly affect its language. Republican efforts to alter the treaty language were defeated, with supporters of the pact arguing that such changes would have forced new negotiations with Moscow and effectively killed the treaty.

Thirteen Republicans joined all of the Senate's Democrats in voting for ratification, helping to exceed the 67 votes required. Three senators - all Republicans - were not present.

The amendments are meaningless, pure mental gestures by the effete for the effete.

Charitable observers will nevertheless say the US Senate ignored Russian threats to embark upon a new arms race if we didn't ratify, when the truth is this country under Barack Obama doesn't have the stomach to defend itself and couldn't declare its independence from the inside of a paper bag. It doesn't even know what it stands for, and couldn't articulate it if it did.

The moral center of America has melted, as the passage of repeal of DADT makes plain.

What are we fighting for? The right of Afghan men to parade their adolescent lovers as they do, to the disgust of every frontline soldier in arms?

Are we really in such a state of decline that we fear the Russians' ability to outspend us? The answer in truth is No. But what we do have is a population fed up with the protracted wars of nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan and consequently now incapable of understanding the pressing need to rise above this squandering of resources and build up America's deteriorating strategic defenses. Barack Obama is a man made for just such a time as this.

The Russians will use the opportunity to build anyway, and cheat and lie about it as they always have done, which suits the Bolshevik in Chief Barack Obama just fine, a traitor to everything this country has stood for, who will get us all killed if something isn't done soon to stop him.

Clearly the Republicans are not the party to do it. The Stupid Party has struck again, snatching another defeat from the jaws of a victory won just weeks ago, and the Democrats are laughing all the way to New Year's Eve with feathers of healthcare, another year of stimulus spending, repeal of DADT, and this treaty in their caps. The corks will be a-poppin' on Nancy Pelosi's last flight as Speaker. 

Here are the names of the disreputable lot of Republican cowards:

Alexander-TN

Bennet-UT

Brown-MA

Cochran-MS

Collins-ME

Corker-TN

Gregg-NH

Isakson-GA

Johanns-NE

Lugar-IN

Murkowskie-AK (heh, heh, heh)

Snowe-ME

SPECTRE-D, PA (heh, heh, heh)

Voinovich-OH

The Republicans not bothering to vote on something so momentous:

Bond-MO

Brownback-KS

Bunning-KY.

Useless men and women, all.

A pox on them, and on their states.

I'm Barack Insane Obama, and I'm Full of Bolshevik

Effete Senate Republicans Rest on A Letter and A Resolution on START

The news that a resolution of understanding will be attached to the START treaty along with a letter from President Obama to address the misgivings of Republicans reminds one of the Executive Order on abortion the president provided when healthcare reform passed in March.

The language of the treaty will be the law, not the resolution nor the letter from the president, as surely as abortions will be paid for under Obamacare despite the Executive Order.

Fill your boots, men, and stop acting like the sissies everybody thinks you are.

Story here.

Obama's FCC Internet Commissars Impose Doctrinaire Anti-Capitalism

In other words, Marxism masquerading as "net neutrality," as John Fund for The Wall Street Journal makes plain here:

Over 300 House and Senate members have signed a letter opposing FCC Internet regulation, and there will undoubtedly be even less support in the next Congress.

Yet President Obama, long an ardent backer of net neutrality, is ignoring both Congress and adverse court rulings, especially by a federal appeals court in April that the agency doesn't have the power to enforce net neutrality. He is seeking to impose his will on the Internet through the executive branch. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, a former law school friend of Mr. Obama, has worked closely with the White House on the issue. Official visitor logs show he's had at least 11 personal meetings with the president.

The net neutrality vision for government regulation of the Internet began with the work of Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor who founded the liberal lobby Free Press in 2002. Mr. McChesney's agenda? "At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies," he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. "But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control."

A year earlier, Mr. McChesney wrote in the Marxist journal Monthly Review that "any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself." Mr. McChesney told me in an interview that some of his comments have been "taken out of context." He acknowledged that he is a socialist and said he was "hesitant to say I'm not a Marxist."

"You'd think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot." -- Barack Obama, January 29, 2010

Pretty Boy Hannity Gets a Lesson in the Constitution

From the American Thinker, here:

Dear Sean:

Concerning the 17th amendment, the argument for its repeal absolutely centers around states' rights.  If Senators are elected by elected reps and senators, they are more likely to defend their state against federal encroachments (upholding the 10th amendment), than they are if elected by the general population.  Any federal program - ObamaCare, the financial reform bill, etc., -  which increases burdens on state budgets would not sit well with Senators answerable to congressional bodies in their state.

Greg Halvorson

Judge Objects to Obamacare Bait and Switch: The Mandate Became a Tax

From Peter Wehner at Commentary Magazine:

Judge Hudson writes, “Despite pre-enactment representations to the contrary by the Executive and Legislative branches, the Secretary now argues that the Minimum Essential Coverage Provision is, in essence, a ‘tax penalty.’”

That’s a polite way of saying that the Obama administration willfully misled the public during the health-care debate. In fact, President Obama repeatedly denied that the mandate was a tax — but now, in order to pass constitutional muster, his administration is insisting it is. I urge you to watch ... [w]hen ... Obama scolds Stephanopoulos. “That’s not true, George,” the president says. “[It] is absolutely not a tax increase.”

Now the president and his administration are arguing exactly the opposite.

This is a deeply cynical maneuver on the part of the man who promised to put an end to cynical political acts. Like so much of what Obama said, this promise was fraudulent.

The complete entry is here, with links.

Obamacare is Not Just Un-American, It's Anti-Human

In a story at TheHill.com here, reporting on the ruling of a Virginia judge that the individual mandate in Obamacare is unconstitutional, we are met with the following bizarrerie:

The Obama administration argues healthcare is different from other commercial markets, because — illness being both inevitable and involuntary — everyone ultimately requires some form of care.

By this reasoning, government should mandate that the baby pay for his own birth, and the corpse for his own burial, the first and the last of the involuntaries which bookend human existence. 

Obamacare is not just un-American. It's anti-human.

Obama's Senate Tax Plan Will Outspend the 2009 Stimulus: $858 Billion in New Spending

A veritable Christmas tree for programs which would die in the free market without federal help, like ethanol, commuter trains, and wind and solar energy.

Conservative Republicans should help the Socialists like Senator Sanders filibuster it.

The story is here.

Just Six More Reasons Why I'll Never Buy Another GM

From Gary Jason at The American Thinker, here:

The Obama administration rigged the [GM] bankruptcy to favor the union, rigged the IPO to favor the union, and has purchased much of the inventory unsalable in the free market, again to benefit the union (and the environmentalists). But of course, the unions (and the environmentalists) pumped many millions of dollars into Obama's campaign. They also pumped many millions into trying to keep Democratic candidates in office in the last election.

This is corrupt, crony car capitalism, all paid for by coerced taxation, from an administration that promised a new era of transparency and honesty in government.  But at the end of the day, the cabal at the top behaves just like the dirty Chicago machine that spawned it.

Final Uncalled House Race Update: NY-1 Remains a Democrat Hold

The Republican challenger has conceded to the Democrat incumbent. The story is here.

The net gain for Republicans in the US House in 2010 remains at 63, putting the Republicans in the majority with 242 seats to the Democrats 193.

No one foresaw such an eventuality two years ago when the Democrats decisively swept Republicans aside on Obama's coattails and acquired an overwhelming majority numbering 256 seats. That tide wasn't completely reversed in this election, but for a party deemed dead for all intents and purposes the comeback is a remarkable thumping, thanks in part to the activism of the Tea Party movement, which was created spontaneously out of thin air in February and March of 2009 in response to Democrat stimulus spending and mortgage modification programs.

The battle to stop and reverse Obama's programs designed to transform American culture and institutions has now been joined.

Beware Obamao's red guards.

The New National Security State Under Obama Progresses to Houston

In another installment in Aristotle's meme that tyrannies are abetted by women, we learn that the next city to fall to the transformation of America into the national security state is Houston.

The Houston Chronicle is reporting here that the Department of Homeland Security is helping fund the installation of 300 surveillance cameras there:

Judith Hanson, who was visiting downtown to watch her daughter's performance at the Wortham Center, said the cameras could provide comfort to women who come to the area.

"Just knowing that there is a camera just makes me feel a little bit safer," she said.

Obama To Transform Bush's TSA Into National Security Force

How do you spell Gestapo? KGB? How about TSA?

Remember how Obama said on July 17, 2008 (video here) that he wanted a national security force as powerful, strong and well-funded as the US military? Here are his words:

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

People on the left went ballistic when conservatives and Republicans suggested that those words could be construed as sinister and ominous. Some on the right were upset enough about the tone that they grasped at anything that fit them as Obama's regime unfolded. Some even thought they discovered a "health care army" buried deep in the weeds of the Senate healthcare bill.

But now with Homeland Security's decision to go full steam ahead with scanners in airports after last Christmas' Fruit of Kaboom bomber incident, we're getting a clearer picture of Obama's commitment to the national security state, and that picture centers around a radical expansion of the role and scope of the TSA. How else do we explain these comments from the new head of the TSA, John Pistole, made in July and reported here in USA Today?

Pistole said he wants TSA workers, including 47,000 screeners at 450 airports, to operate as a "national-security, counterterrorism organization, fully integrated into US government efforts."

"I want to take TSA to the next level," Pistole said.

In other words, Obama's vision for a national security force is going to come to fruition through the expansion of the TSA George Bush created after 911.

We now know that that expanded scope will involve putting scanners everywhere. TSA's mandate covers all modes of transportation, not just those over which the federal Department of Transportation has jurisdiction. Train and subway stations and points of maritime embarkation immediately come to mind. But also federal highways, where the feds use scanners to detain and inspect truck traffic. In fact, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano just recently went on the record saying as much:

“I think the tighter we get on aviation, we have to also be thinking now about going on to mass transit or to trains or maritime. So, what do we need to be doing to strengthen our protections there?”

Think also of stationary federal jurisdictions: all federal buildings. Scanners have already been deployed in a Colorado courthouse according to this report, and expanded use of them has not been ruled out:

"Although we have no current plans for deployment, the US Marshals Service believes in the technology," said Washington-based Michael Prout, assistant director for judicial security for the US marshals. "We will continue to explore the use of body scanners as a security measure for the federal judiciary."

Can you imagine reporting for jury duty but being treated like a common criminal having to submit to a full body naked scan?

Being a surveillance enthusiast whose installation of cameras everywhere on Phoenix highways was rebuffed by its freedom-loving population, Janet Napolitano as head of DHS has made it a priority to fund cameras in New York, which is nearly half way to its goal of 3000 cameras in the city, 90% funded by DHS. She made a high profile visit to Chicago last summer to praise its commitment to camera surveillance.

Will introduction of small, silent 3' spy drones be next?

TSA's mandate currently involves security "in all modes of transportation." Obama appears to be concentrating his efforts on the "all." Expect to see thousands and thousands of new federal hires by the TSA to man the national security state. They will interfere with your every movement, unless you stop this now. Today is a good day to begin.

Opt out!

I-90 Will Be Closed Tomorrow Across South Dakota

A 200 ton lump of coal is headed for Mt. Rushmore for some reason.

Massive Social Security Hearings Backlog: Millions Waiting, Many More Than Two Years

Sure that Obamacare thing will be different. You won't have to wait that long. Maybe only half as much! You can live with that hernia for a year, right?

As reported here:

A Senate subcommittee is expected to hear testimony on Monday at a field hearing in Akron, Ohio, about the rising number of threats, as well as the status of the massive backlog in applications for disability benefits, which are available to people who can't work because of medical problems.

Nearly 2 million people are waiting to find out if they qualify for benefits, with many having to wait more than two years to see their first payment.

The Time to Get Serious About Coastal Defense is Long Past

In the summer of 2009, after Russian nuclear submarines were detected only 200 miles off our East coast, one commentator on the subsequent news story which bragged about our ability to detect  two  boats thought saying nothing about it would have been smarter in the absence of an official recommendation that the US actually beef up its coastal defenses with conventional defensive submarines. The reason? They're might have been three Russian subs.

The US military's response to the California mystery missile incident 35 miles off the coast of Los Angeles on Monday hardly inspired more confidence. We should have said nothing at all. Instead we said we didn't know what it was. Piling on to the airplane contrail theory a day later only made that worse, giving the impression the military was grasping at straws.

Unfortunately, from the commander in chief on down our government and military give the impression of being run by un-serious people. From the delay measured in days in responding to the Christmas Day underwear bomber to telegraphing our disengagement schedules in Iraq and Afghanistan, it's as if matters of war and peace are at best distractions from the really important matters like Obamacare, repealing DADT and defending the Ground Zero Mosque.

We could learn something about coastal defense from the Chinese, who understand the realities of American forward air, surface and submarine operations off their waters all too well. They have embarked on an ambitious naval modernization to counter our activities, which includes a commitment to robust coastal defense and power projection with submarines of varying designs. One such submarine, a Song, punked the USS Kitty Hawk in October 2006 over there, and it may be that Monday's incident over here was the work of a lately launched submarine of more recent design:

As other nations continue to develop naval capabilities we need to recognize that the operation of submarines off the US coast is going to become more common, not less. Indeed, what is the first thing China will do when tensions at sea rise over Taiwan or some other matter? Most likely, the deployment of submarines off the coast of Guam, Sasebo, Pearl Harbor, and if the PLA Navy has any strategic thinking at all, San Diego. ...

But this is what the US Navy needs to think about... the submarines off Guam, Sasebo, and Pearl Harbor can be Yuan class, because Yuans appear to have much better endurance for submerged operations than Song class submarines do, but for west coast operations it will be nuclear submarines.

Whether or not a missile was fired off the California coast this week to send such a message to America, we'd better get busy and start preparing for defensive submarine operations ourselves. Because sooner or later, Chinese boomers will come calling on the west coast just like the Russians do on the east.

 But we'll have to get serious first.

Another Guy Goes on the Record that it was a Missile

According to National Journal here:

Naval expert Norman Polmar, a long-time consultant to the Navy and Pentagon, said he believes the missile was almost certainly launched by the US military. “From the video it’s clearly a land- or sea-launched ballistic missile, and it couldn’t have come from a French or British submarine, because they are only deployed in the Atlantic and Mediterranean,” he told National Journal. “Chinese submarines have never ventured farther east than Hawaii, nor have they ever successfully test fired a ballistic missile. That only leaves the Russians, but for the life of me I can’t fathom why Moscow would have a submarine sail 5,000 miles to launch a missile off the coast of California.”

I can fathom why a North Korean submarine would do it, or a Chinese submarine, especially just ahead of Obama's arrival in Seoul for the G-20 meeting.

But the capability question is still there in both cases.

Do the North Koreans have a blue water submarine, let alone the technology?

Do the Chinese have the technology?

And why would the US government lie about a test of its own?

Obama Bows to Indian Parliament

The guards of a tyrant are foreigners.

Net Republican Pickups 61

Republican pickups number 64 gross, but the net must subtract Democrat pickups, which were 3: the at-large seat in Delaware vacated by primary defeated Mike Castle in the Senate race, Abercrombie's seat in Hawaii only very temporarily occupied by a Republican, and Cao's seat in Louisiana, who lost as the only Republican voting for Obamacare.

So net 61 Republican pickups, as shown at Real Clear Politics, with 8 races still not called.