The Ministry of Truth fires Juan Williams. Welcome to the ranks of the Thought Criminals, Juan. Your decade of civil rights journalism and attempts to rationally explain liberal policy makes no difference. They know what you are really thinking now and you must be silenced like the rest of the Thought Criminals.
I love his thoughts on the matter. I further love the fact that Fox News just gave him a two million dollar contract. You see, that is free market capitalism in action.
"This is an outrageous violation of journalistic standards and ethics by management that has no use for a diversity of opinion, ideas or a diversity of staff (I was the only black male on the air). This is evidence of one-party rule and one sided thinking at NPR that leads to enforced ideology, speech and writing. It leads to people, especially journalists, being sent to the gulag for raising the wrong questions and displaying independence of thought."
"Daniel Schorr, my fellow NPR commentator who died earlier this year, used to talk about the initial shock of finding himself on President Nixon’s enemies list. I can only imagine Dan’s revulsion to realize that today NPR treats a journalist who has worked for them for ten years with less regard, less respect for the value of independence of thought and embrace of real debate across political lines, than Nixon ever displayed."
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/10/21/juan-williams-npr-fired-truth-muslim-garb-airplane-oreilly-ellen-weiss-bush/
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Thought Crime
Here's the situation we now find ourselves in. The mainstream media has decided to serve their political puppet masters and smear political dissent as "racism" or "bigotry" or any other thought crime they can think of. In their minds, if you do not support the liberal agenda, you must be deranged. Something must be wrong with you if you disagree.
A dangerous road to go down for American politicians, but now that the mainstream media has joined in, it could be a very slippery slope.
I'll just add that it should never be considered a crime to disagree with government officials. Political dissension is not racism... it is patriotism. The minute the people of this country do not believe that to be true is the minute we give in to tyranny.
Here's the video I made on the subject:
A dangerous road to go down for American politicians, but now that the mainstream media has joined in, it could be a very slippery slope.
I'll just add that it should never be considered a crime to disagree with government officials. Political dissension is not racism... it is patriotism. The minute the people of this country do not believe that to be true is the minute we give in to tyranny.
Here's the video I made on the subject:
Update
Sorry for the lack of posts for the past two days. I've been working on a new video. Funny how the upcoming video ties in nicely with the just-issued confession of David Brooks of the New York Times about how the president told him a year ago that were no shovel ready jobs.
You didn't think such an alarming confession of dishonesty on the part of the president was news-worthy, Mr. Brooks? Of course you didn't. He's the "One". He only lied because it was "for our own good".
Thanks, Mr. Brooks. You and the rest of the stooges in the mainstream press are partly responsible for the massive debt and devaluing of the currency that all Americans are now burdened with.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/10/16/brooks_obama_told_me_shovel-ready_jobs_dont_exist_last_year.html
You didn't think such an alarming confession of dishonesty on the part of the president was news-worthy, Mr. Brooks? Of course you didn't. He's the "One". He only lied because it was "for our own good".
Thanks, Mr. Brooks. You and the rest of the stooges in the mainstream press are partly responsible for the massive debt and devaluing of the currency that all Americans are now burdened with.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/10/16/brooks_obama_told_me_shovel-ready_jobs_dont_exist_last_year.html
Thursday, October 14, 2010
How you Were Lied to About the "Obscene Profits" of the Insurance Industry
A while back, I read this article which came as no surprise to me. Yet another industry being demonized by the president and liberals.
The president counted on the mainstream media not asking follow up questions or calling into question the truthfulness of his allegations, and they did not disappoint.
I’ll try to explain what the media has not in simplified terms. Insurance companies are not massive evil corporations whose only purpose is to bilk as much as they can from their members. In fact, most insurance companies are either non-profit or co-ops (the customers or members are the stock holders). Even the insurance companies who are for-profit must compete with the ones who are non-profit so if their premiums are not low enough to compete, they usually go out of business.
Every year, the insurance company’s actuarial staff estimates the coming year’s claims and administrative costs based on historical data, trends, new technology, new governmental regulations and other statistical variables. Good actuarial professionals have gotten very good at this and are rarely off by more than a few percentage points. This is important because it is those estimates upon which the members have their premiums set. The insurance company also negotiates the total amount hospitals and medical professionals can charge their members in order to try to keep costs down for the members. The larger the insurer, the more bargaining power they have.
In addition, groups are allowed to buy a pre-defined plan or essentially build their own benefits packages that include or exclude benefits in order to balance maximum value while maintaining desirable premium levels. When you hear someone complaining that their insurance company doesn’t cover this or that, it’s actually because their employer actually chose not to cover it. Preexisting conditions are always one of the things not covered, because it really would punish the current members and cause their premiums to sky-rocket. Allowing someone to buy into an insurance plan AFTER they get sick really isn’t insurance at all. It’s unfair to the people who have responsibly paid into the system all along.
Furthermore, most states have regulations preventing insurance companies from charging premiums that account for more than 70-80% (up to) of the "pool" of claims paying funds I mentioned earlier. This means they cannot use that percentage of collected premiums to do anything other than paying claims. The rest usually goes to administrative costs or cash reserves. Very few plans make any money and the ones who do only do so because they have a huge number of members and groups. The insurance industry as a whole posts about a 2.2% profit margin... that's lower than congress's last pay raise.
http://www.qando.net/?p=5439
On top of all this, government regulations require insurance companies maintain a certain amount of cash holdings to make sure medical catastrophes can be covered.
Yes, believe it or not, that was the simplified version. In summary, an insurance company is really nothing more than a collection of groups and those groups are a collection of individuals who are choosing to pool their money to offset medical risk. Almost all insurance companies have no profit motive to speak of and the ones that do are forced to keep their premiums competitive or face being rejected by the market.
Trial lawyers (who are massive supporters of democrats) on the other hand...
The president counted on the mainstream media not asking follow up questions or calling into question the truthfulness of his allegations, and they did not disappoint.
I’ll try to explain what the media has not in simplified terms. Insurance companies are not massive evil corporations whose only purpose is to bilk as much as they can from their members. In fact, most insurance companies are either non-profit or co-ops (the customers or members are the stock holders). Even the insurance companies who are for-profit must compete with the ones who are non-profit so if their premiums are not low enough to compete, they usually go out of business.
Every year, the insurance company’s actuarial staff estimates the coming year’s claims and administrative costs based on historical data, trends, new technology, new governmental regulations and other statistical variables. Good actuarial professionals have gotten very good at this and are rarely off by more than a few percentage points. This is important because it is those estimates upon which the members have their premiums set. The insurance company also negotiates the total amount hospitals and medical professionals can charge their members in order to try to keep costs down for the members. The larger the insurer, the more bargaining power they have.
In addition, groups are allowed to buy a pre-defined plan or essentially build their own benefits packages that include or exclude benefits in order to balance maximum value while maintaining desirable premium levels. When you hear someone complaining that their insurance company doesn’t cover this or that, it’s actually because their employer actually chose not to cover it. Preexisting conditions are always one of the things not covered, because it really would punish the current members and cause their premiums to sky-rocket. Allowing someone to buy into an insurance plan AFTER they get sick really isn’t insurance at all. It’s unfair to the people who have responsibly paid into the system all along.
Furthermore, most states have regulations preventing insurance companies from charging premiums that account for more than 70-80% (up to) of the "pool" of claims paying funds I mentioned earlier. This means they cannot use that percentage of collected premiums to do anything other than paying claims. The rest usually goes to administrative costs or cash reserves. Very few plans make any money and the ones who do only do so because they have a huge number of members and groups. The insurance industry as a whole posts about a 2.2% profit margin... that's lower than congress's last pay raise.
http://www.qando.net/?p=5439
On top of all this, government regulations require insurance companies maintain a certain amount of cash holdings to make sure medical catastrophes can be covered.
Yes, believe it or not, that was the simplified version. In summary, an insurance company is really nothing more than a collection of groups and those groups are a collection of individuals who are choosing to pool their money to offset medical risk. Almost all insurance companies have no profit motive to speak of and the ones that do are forced to keep their premiums competitive or face being rejected by the market.
Trial lawyers (who are massive supporters of democrats) on the other hand...
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Why the Health Care Reform Bill is Unconstitutional
Watch this liberal politician show just how ignorant she is on constitutional law.
Her answer: "where in the constitution does it say we can mandate social security and Medicare".
Actually... the Supreme Court DID rule those unconstitutional. It wasn't until the FDR administration threatened the Supreme Court (funny how... liberal presidents seem to do that a lot) and changed the legislation from "insurance" (Medicare) and "trust fund" (social security) to a "tax" that it was ruled constitutional. Congress has the constitutional power to levy taxes, you see. My follow up question to her would have been "so is it your position that the mandate is a tax?" She would have scrambled on that question too... remember the no tax for middle class or poor promise?
In actuality... the Health Reform mandate isn't the least bit comparable to SS or Medicare. Those fees are collected by the federal government. The government is trying to MANDATE that every citizen of this country enter into a contract with a third party... non-government private company to buy insurance. That has never been done and and is absolutely 100% unconstitutional. Unless "tax" now means private companies can now tax us instead of just the government.
Some people try to claim "but vehicle insurance is mandated!!!", but that is not the same thing at all.
1. You do not HAVE to buy vehicle insurance unless you want a government issued drivers license. A person could go their whole lives without having to buy car insurance.
2. Vehicle insurance mandates are passed and enforced at the state government level. The constitution says "those powers not enumerated here" are entrusted to the states.
3. The roads belong to the government so if you wish to use them with motor vehicles, you must have a drivers license. Are we going to have licenses for hospital visits now too?
4. Furthermore, the IRS (a federal agency) will not come after you if you do not have car insurance.
Her answer: "where in the constitution does it say we can mandate social security and Medicare".
Actually... the Supreme Court DID rule those unconstitutional. It wasn't until the FDR administration threatened the Supreme Court (funny how... liberal presidents seem to do that a lot) and changed the legislation from "insurance" (Medicare) and "trust fund" (social security) to a "tax" that it was ruled constitutional. Congress has the constitutional power to levy taxes, you see. My follow up question to her would have been "so is it your position that the mandate is a tax?" She would have scrambled on that question too... remember the no tax for middle class or poor promise?
In actuality... the Health Reform mandate isn't the least bit comparable to SS or Medicare. Those fees are collected by the federal government. The government is trying to MANDATE that every citizen of this country enter into a contract with a third party... non-government private company to buy insurance. That has never been done and and is absolutely 100% unconstitutional. Unless "tax" now means private companies can now tax us instead of just the government.
Some people try to claim "but vehicle insurance is mandated!!!", but that is not the same thing at all.
1. You do not HAVE to buy vehicle insurance unless you want a government issued drivers license. A person could go their whole lives without having to buy car insurance.
2. Vehicle insurance mandates are passed and enforced at the state government level. The constitution says "those powers not enumerated here" are entrusted to the states.
3. The roads belong to the government so if you wish to use them with motor vehicles, you must have a drivers license. Are we going to have licenses for hospital visits now too?
4. Furthermore, the IRS (a federal agency) will not come after you if you do not have car insurance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)