“Reverse-Coronations” No Better; Who, if Anyone, Wins Grassroots Momentum?

by Ben DeGrow | 11:37 pm, August 31, 2009

On Friday Ken Buck was ready to bow out of Colorado’s U.S. Senate race. By Sunday he had received a new boost from more than 200 emails and calls from “activists in Colorado” urging him to stay in — a figure he shared with me in a short phone interview he was gracious enough to [...]

McInnis Bows Out of September GOP Candidate Forum, Cites Biased Straw Poll

by elpresidente | 3:26 pm, August 31, 2009

Chairman Dick Wadhams addressed the strange behavior of gubernatorial candidate Scott McInnis, with the former Representative opting to avoid a GOP candidate forum and fundraiser because of a straw poll that will be conducted that evening (from an email): I am profoundly disappointed that one of the candidates for governor has indicated he will not [...]

Diana Degette to discuss health care reform at constituents

by Mr. Bob | 2:03 pm, August 31, 2009

#redco #tcot #townhall #teaparty

Although, “townhall meetings” are a very small part of it. Seems to be the modus operandi of Democrats these days, avoid questions as much as possible directly from people who do not support you 100%.

Hard to blame her when THESE GUYS showed up last time her friend Nancy was in town. But rather than deal with the dissent with an argument, they attempt to avoid the argument, block it, stamp it out, destroy it.

http://degette.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=823&Itemid=245

MONDAY, AUGUST 31st
2:00PM District Office Hours in Englewood on Health Insurance Reform
and other Issues
Location: Perrin Conference Room, Englewood Library

6:00PM “Join the Conversation” on Health Insurance Reform with CBS,
Channel 4

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2nd
3:00PM Online Facebook Chat
* Log onto U.S. Rep. DeGette’s Facebook fan page

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 3rd
7:30AM Radio Town Hall on the Jay Marvin Show, AM 760
* U.S. Rep. DeGette will take questions about health insurance
reform LIVE on the air

10:00AM “Questions and Answers on Health Insurance Reform”
* U.S. Rep. DeGette will host constituents to discuss health insurance
reform and take questions
* Location: The Molly Blank Conference Center, National Jewish Health

7:10PM LIVE Tele-Town Hall on Health Insurance Reform
* To receive an invitation call prior to event, please sign up here

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 12th
10:00AM “Questions and Answers on Health Insurance Reform”
* U.S. Rep. DeGette will host constituents to discuss health insurance
reform and take questions
* Location: TBD

Defiance: NRSC Rebuffed by Ryan Frazier and Ken Buck

by admin | 1:53 pm, August 31, 2009

Ken Buck issued the following statement:

Ken Buck confirmed today that it’s full steam ahead for his campaign for the U.S. Senate.
Buck said, "While other candidates may still jump in the Senate race, one thing is clear – our party’s nominee will be chosen by Colorado’s grassroots Republicans, not by political operatives in Washington D.C."
Buck said he has been deeply gratified by the strong response to his campaign from literally thousands of Coloradans over the past few months. "We have campaign leadership in every county in the state," he said.
Buck declared that his campaign has never been about him personally but rather about the critical importance of taking back the U.S. Senate seat from Michael Bennet.
Colorado deserves a strong independent Senator who will do the right thing for Colorado. Instead Buck claimed, "the appointed Senator Bennet has turned out to be just another rubber stamp for the big spending, big government liberals in Congress."

Ryan Frazier’s campaign is also undaunted by the NRSC and will continue to push forward.

More details will emerge in the coming days surrounding the circumstances of the NRSC’s meddling. Had Norton and individuals in DC involved succeeded in "clearing the field," Rep. Tom Tancredo was reportedly prepared to enter the race. The reasons for this will become clear as more details emerge.

UPDATE: The Denver Post reports this tidbit:

Buck said it was "Washington, D.C., insiders" who were behind the "shenanigans" to try to influence the race.

Buck said he made a brief phone call to Norton this morning to tell her he was still in the race. He said she said, " ’Thanks for calling’ and that was the extent of our conversation."

UPDATE 2: Tom Wiens is also said to be unswayed by the Cornyn/Beauprez/Owens/McCain putsch.

Update 4: Charge–Criminal Mischief; Update 3: Recreate 68′s Glenn Spagnuolo–”It was kind of a childish act”; Update 2: Waak Remains Defiant, Schwenkler aka Transgender Anarchist “Ariel Attack”; Update 1: Smash-troturfing Vandal’s Connections, No Apology from Dems’ Waak; Colorado Democratic Party HQ Vandalized, Dems Blame “Hate” from “Other Side”

by elpresidente | 1:09 pm, August 31, 2009

“Clearly there’s been an effort on the other side to stir up hate. I think this is the consequence of it.”–Colorado Democratic Party Chair Pat Waak, before details emerged about alleged bicycle-riding (eco-friendly!) vandal Maurice Schwenkler **Update 16–Maurice “Ariel Attack” Schwenkler has been charged with criminal mischief. **Update 15–Glenn Spagnuolo, Denver’s de facto moonbat spokesman [...]

Debunking Health Care Reform Myths

by Ari Armstrong | 10:18 am, August 31, 2009

The following article originally was published by the August 31 edition of Grand Junction’s Free Press.

Debunking health reform myths

by Linn and Ari Armstrong

Advocates of Barack Obama’s health proposals claim they want to debunk myths surrounding the health reform debate. We’re happy to oblige.

Myth #1: Opponents of Obamacare are the ones creating myths.

True, some have made exaggerated claims about “death panels.” However, rationing is indisputably part of any political health program. More subsidized health care leads to more indiscriminate use of the health system, which leads to skyrocketing costs. The inevitable “solution” is rationing.

If you think that those running a political, tax-funded health system will never deny treatment to those who claim to need it, then you are either a liar or a fool.

Myth #2: Opponents of Obamacare are “anti-health care reform.”

A recent article in the Huffington Post claims that “opponents of Democratic health care legislation” are “anti-health care reform,” which is nonsense.

What Obama offers is not “reform,” but merely more of the same sorts of political controls that caused existing problems in medicine. Continued tax distortions promoting expensive, non-portable, employer-paid insurance. More political controls that jack up insurance premiums. Probably laws outlawing low-cost, high-deductible policies. More forced wealth transfers.

Real health reform means respecting liberty and individual rights in medicine. It means respecting people’s rights to control their own resources and enter into voluntary agreements. Politicians should neither compel interactions, as through insurance mandates, nor forbid them.

The proper role of government is to enforce individual rights, which means to protect people from force and fraud and otherwise leave them free to lead their lives according to their own best judgment.

Real health reform means recognizing the individual’s moral right to his or her own life. Obama’s fake “reform” means politicians and their appointed bureaucrats telling people what to do.

Advocates of real health reform want expanded Health Savings Accounts with low-cost, high-deductible insurance, rolled back insurance controls, containment of health welfare, and tort reform.

Ironically, Obama lied in the very sentence in which he accused his opponents of lying, when he called for “an honest debate, not one dominated by willful misrepresentations and outright distortions, spread by the very folks who would benefit the most by keeping things exactly as they are.”

Don’t let Obama get away with his outright distortion that the only alternative to the existing system is a more-politicized one.

Myth #3: Opponents of Obamacare are criminals, thugs, and mobs.

Early on the morning of August 25, two people smashed eleven windows at Democratic Party Headquarters in Denver. The windows were adorned with posters endorsing Obamacare.

Democratic Chair Pat Waak quickly lashed out: “Clearly there’s been an effort on the other side to stir up hate. I think this is the consequence of it.”

Clearly Waak jumped to conclusions to demonize critics of Obamacare. Unfortunately for Waak, Denver police caught one of the alleged perpetrators.

Police arrested Maurice Schwenkler, a Democratic operative, left-wing radical, and gay-rights activist. During the last election, a Democratic 527 group paid Schwenkler $500 to campaign for a Democratic state-house candidate. Who’s “stirring up hate” now, Waak? (See PeoplesPressCollective.org for details about the story.)

It is true that some Obamacare protesters have gotten overly heated at public forums. That happens among the left and right. It is also true that the vast majority of those who oppose Obamacare are thoughtful, peaceable citizens exercising their First Amendment rights.

Myth #4: We need Obamacare to give everybody health care.

Most Americans already have great access to the best health care in the world. The biggest problem is that, due to political controls that have squashed competition and jacked up premiums, many cannot afford health insurance.

As Cato’s Michael Tanner points out, of the roughly 46 million uninsured, 12 million are eligible for existing health welfare, 10 million are non-citizen immigrants, and “most of the uninsured are young and in good health.”

Is it any wonder that some young, healthy people decline to purchase expensive insurance premiums through which politicians force them to subsidize the health care of others?

Americans understandably don’t want to let people die in the streets without care. That’s why we should expand Health Savings Accounts and roll back insurance controls — then more people could afford insurance without busting the budget. We wouldn’t need nearly as much charity if politicians would stop interfering with people’s ability to get health care.

Extensive health welfare programs exist now. Government spends nearly half of all health care dollars, especially through Medicare and Medicaid. Cover Colorado subsidizes high-risk insurance.

Ultimately, we advocate a return to voluntary charity, which remains a strong force in America even though political welfare has largely displaced it. If you think others should donate to a health charity, then persuade them, don’t hide behind armed IRS agents and threaten to throw people in prison if they don’t pay up.

We want everybody to be able get good health care. We want politicians to respect people’s rights. That is why we reject Obama’s health reform myths.

[Update: Cato's Michael Tanner debunks a fifth myth, Obama's claim that "If you like your private health insurance plan, you can keep your plan. Period." Among other things, Obamacare would outlaw high-deductible plans.]

Haditha Marine will NOT be Retried- after all charges dropped

by Mr. Bob | 9:27 am, August 31, 2009

#hhrs #tcot #murtha

This is not a huge surprise. the evidence that these Marines committed murder was pretty much non-existent from the get-go. The traction was all political, all Bush Hating, all liberal and all John Murtha. Looks like the final chapter has been written.

I think someone should write another chapter and retire Murtha since he can’t be put in jail for this (which is too bad.) If you aren’t familiar with the story;

Marines were fired on from a house, they fired back, people inside were killed, it was a tragedy, things like this do not happen often thank God, but not surprising because Insurgents hide among women and children…in HOPES that the our side will kill them so it can be used against us for propaganda purposes. We just don’t expect a US congressman to be the propangandist.

Pennsylvania senator John Murtha used the tragedy and went on the attack, (evidence be damned) to try and hurt the Bush administration and said they committed cold blooded murder. This was all said prior to ANY investigation. Murtha has skated the consequences of his politically motivated sacrificing of the members of his former service. ALL charges against all members involved have been dropped after the investigation but careers derailed.

The Marine Corps has decided not to seek to reinstate criminal charges against a former battalion commander at Camp Pendleton for a 2005 incident in which his troops killed 24 civilians in Haditha, Iraq.

Instead, the Marine Corps will convene a Board of Inquiry to hear testimony and recommend whether Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani should be demoted to major for purposes of retirement.

Even if such a recommendation is made and then accepted by the Secretary of the Navy, Chessani’s retirement pay would still be based on being a lieutenant colonel.

The Marine Corps had sought to try Chessani for dereliction of duty for not ordering a war-crimes investigation when his Marines killed the 24, including three women and seven children. Chessani, who was not present when the killings occurred, reported to his superiors that the deaths, while tragic, were the result of fighting between Marines and insurgents.

A court-martial judge threw out the charges after ruling that it was improper for a Marine lawyer who investigated the Haditha shootings to sit in on meetings with the general who decided to bring the charges.

The Navy-Marine Corps Court of Appeals agreed with the judge’s ruling and rejected prosecutors’ requests to reinstate the charges. The court, however, said the Marine Corps could begin a new criminal investigation into Chessani’s conduct and then bring new charges.

But Lt. Gen. George Flynn, assigned by the commandant, Gen. James Conway, to decide what course the Marine Corps should take, decided against a new investigation and a resumption of a crime. From Michelle Malkin

More Astroturfing in Denver: Organizing for America and Rep. Ed Perlmutter, Last Minute Venue Change Doesn’t Impede Real Grassroots

by elpresidente | 4:48 pm, August 30, 2009

El Marco of Looking at the Left has an exclusive report from the astroturfing that took place next to North High School in Denver on Friday, with an appearance by Rep. Ed Perlmutter and the guy on the right: El Marco notes the substantial presence of anti-Obamacare folks who navigated a last-minute venue change and [...]

Anti-NRSC Backlash Grows, Many Supporters Urging Ken Buck to Stay In

by Ben DeGrow | 4:32 pm, August 30, 2009

Word is spreading about the new online petition calling for the National Republican Senatorial Committee to butt out of Colorado’s primary election and call for a fair and open process. Night Twister makes a strong statement.
Yesterday I reported that Ryan Frazier has decided to stay in despite the pressure to bow out. And now I’m [...]

Replaying Discussion of Colorado Political Developments: Jeff Crank Show

by Ben DeGrow | 2:34 pm, August 30, 2009

For my handful of fans out there, yesterday morning I was honored to appear as a guest on the Jeff Crank Show to discuss developments in Colorado’s governor’s race and the U.S. Senate race. The podcast of the August 29 episode is available compliments of AM 740 KVOR in Colorado Springs. I join the show [...]

NRSC: Rototiller

by Night Twister | 12:44 pm, August 30, 2009

Much has been made about the recent surge of grassroots activism. Tea Parties, organizations such as the American Liberty Alliance, Rebuild The Party, and others, and online activist websites such as RedState.com, The Minority Report, and The Peoples Press Collective have either come into existence or had a significant increase in membership and participation. [...]

Atlas Shrugged Reading Groups in Denver, Longmont, Colorado Springs

by Ari Armstrong | 11:23 am, August 30, 2009

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

WHO IS JOHN GALT?
SURGING INTEREST IN AYN RAND’S ATLAS SHRUGGED SPURS STUDY GROUPS

In response to record-breaking sales of Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged, readers will form study groups in Longmont, Denver, and Colorado Springs this fall.

Sales of Atlas Shrugged topped 300,000 for the first half of 2009, a 250 percent increase over that period last year (see http://bit.ly/1aT1r6). Readers see eerie similarities between the 1957 novel and recent events, particularly with government take-overs and bail-outs.

While Barack Obama said “I am my brother’s keeper,” Rand renounces such claims and champions the individual’s moral right to his own life.

One participant of a summer group in Lakewood said, “The novel offers rich moral and political themes, and reading it during this ‘interesting’ period of our nation’s history sheds light both on the novel and on the culture in which we live.”

The Denver group, sponsored by the Auraria Campus Objectivist Club, starts September 15th.

The groups in Longmont and Colorado Springs, sponsored by Front Range Objectivism, start October 1st. These two groups assume that participants are already fans of the novel.

The groups will meet for twenty weeks from the fall through the spring. A person knowledgeable about the novel and Rand’s ideas will moderate each group. For details see http://bit.ly/BuuaJ

Front Range Objectivism is an organization dedicated to understanding and advocating Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism along the Front Range of the Colorado Rockies.

Colorado Petition to NRSC: Just Say No!

by elpresidente | 9:45 pm, August 29, 2009

**Update 4–Ken Buck is not dropping out of the race for US Senate (via Facebook): Hey all I wanted to reassure everyone that it’s full steam ahead for my campaign for the U.S. Senate. While other candidates may still jump in the Senate race, one thing is clear – our party’s nominee will be chosen [...]

Colorado Senator Betty Boyd Speaks at Denver ObamaCare Rally

by Live Free | 7:53 pm, August 29, 2009

The ObamaCare bus rolled into Denver yesterday and stopped long enough for a pro-ObamaCare rally at Denver’s North High School in the afternoon.
In addition to Ed Perlmutter talking about our current health care system being unconstitutional, Colorado Senator Betty Boyd (D – CO 21st District), presented remarks to the progressive crowd, emphasizing the need for [...]

Tens of Thousands Greet Returning Troops in Colorado Springs

by elpresidente | 2:18 pm, August 29, 2009

Michelle Malkin has pics from Colorado Springs: Thousands of people in Colorado Springs turned out this morning for the Red, White & Brave parade to welcome home the troops. The Colorado Springs Gazette put the crowd estimate at 45,000 downtown. It was a privilege to be among the throngs and throngs shouting “THANK YOU!” as [...]

It Looks Like NRSC Can’t Talk Ryan Frazier Out of U.S. Senate Primary

by Ben DeGrow | 10:12 am, August 29, 2009

With word spreading that Ken Buck will drop out of Colorado’s U.S. Senate primary on Monday, there is very good reason to believe the NRSC’s effort extends to trying to push Ryan Frazier out of the race as well.
However, a trusted source has directly contacted the Ryan Frazier campaign this morning and tells me that [...]

Friday Night US Senate Primary Fights: Buck Out, Romanoff to Challenge Bennet

by elpresidente | 10:31 pm, August 28, 2009

Well well well! The battle for Senator Who?/Michael Bennet’s US Senate seat just got a whole lot more interesting, in less than 2 days. Over the past 48 hours: –the National Republican Senatorial Committee stirred a hornet’s nest of commentary and reaction from the grassroots when it was first rumored and then revealed that the [...]

Ed Perlmutter Says Our Health Care System is Unconstitutional

by Live Free | 9:38 pm, August 28, 2009

Yep, I heard a new line in the health care debate today while out at the Obama care rally that passed through Denver today at North High School.
It’s little wonder we’ve lost touch with the Constitutionality of taking property and liberty away from citizens using the force of government to subsidize other individuals.
Representative Ed Perlmutter [...]

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold appearing Saturday August 29th on Jeff Crank Radio Show (KVOR 740 AM)

by CTBC Director | 6:21 pm, August 28, 2009

Multitasking mania…
Calling in from the road while attending the Steamboat Institute’s inaugural Freedom Conference – Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold joins Jeff Crank on his “Crank It Up!) radio show Saturday morning during the 8:30 AM segment (KVOR 740 AM or www.kvor.com ).
From the station promo:
“Have you heard about Governor Ritter’s new “gun [...]

Rationing IV: Politically-Controlled Insurance and Rationing

by Ari Armstrong | 5:45 pm, August 28, 2009

This is the fourth of a four-part series on rationing.
Rationing I: Price Distribution Is Not Rationing
Rationing II: The Definition and Application of Rationing
Rationing III: The Harm of Conflating Price Distribution with Rationing
Rationing IV: Politically-Controlled Insurance and Rationing

The Big Lie in the modern health policy debate is that the current system represents a free market and that our choice is between the status quo and more political controls. The modern system is emphatically not a free market, and advocates of liberty in medicine call for free-market reforms as the only just and practical alternative to existing and proposed political controls.

Not only do politicians spend nearly half of all health-care dollars today, but they extensively control the so-called “private” insurance market. Health care, and particularly health insurance, is already mostly controlled by politicians; proposed “reforms” such as those offered by Obama threaten merely to expand those controls.

Yet Obama repeated the lie, ironically, in the very sentence in which he accused his critics of lying. Obama said health policy “should be an honest debate, not one dominated by willful misrepresentations and outright distortions, spread by the very folks who would benefit the most by keeping things exactly as they are.”

Obama steadfastly refuses to acknowledge those who seek to reform health care by restoring free markets and individual rights in medicine.

In today’s mixed economy, health insurance companies are neither entirely private nor entirely controlled by politicians. Thus, health insurance is not characterized by the price distribution and firm contracts of a free market. It is characterized by political distortions. This significantly complicates the question of whether insurance companies ration care and whether this rationing is political in nature.

Before turning to particular claims about insurance rationing, it is useful to briefly review some of the major political distortions of the insurance market. (Many of these points are covered by Lin Zinser and Paul Hsieh.)

* Through tax policy, the federal government drives the expensive, non-portable, employer-paid insurance system.

* Because most people are locked into the insurance program offered by their job, there is very little market competition for health insurance.

* The federal government imposes various other controls restricting entry into the health insurance market.

* State controls also impede a competitive insurance market.

* Because of the tax distortions, employer-paid insurance has moved away from real insurance (see my previous article) and toward pre-paid health care, leading to exploding costs.

* Because politicians have driven “insurance” into pre-paid health care, today most people rely on a third party to pay for all or nearly all of their health expenses, rather than pay health providers directly for routine care.

* Federal and state politicians significantly control whom insurance companies must cover and which benefits they must finance. This again helps turn insurance into pre-paid health care, contributing to exploding costs.

* Because of political controls, some people wait to get insurance until they get sick, or they change to more costly insurance once they get sick. This drives up costs to insurance companies and premium payers.

* Because politicians have forced insurance into a pre-paid health model, insurance is increasingly used to pre-pay minor expenses but not cover (or not entirely cover) major ones. Thus, in some respects insurance has been turned on its head. Rather than cover only high-cost, unexpected costs, now insurance covers low-cost, routine care and not all emergency care.

* Because of ever-changing political controls at the state and federal level, insurance companies simply cannot offer long-term or stable insurance contracts. Stable contracts have effectively been outlawed. One result has been that insurance contracts have become partly vague and ambiguous. (See also my article on pre-existing conditions.)

* One consequence of the host of political controls on health insurance is that, to control skyrocketing and unpredictable costs, insurance companies have sometimes turned to capricious methods of rationing care. Insofar as they do so, they do so because they are, in effect, agents of political controls, not part of any free market.

Despite the fact that political controls have largely destroyed the free market in health insurance, Obama and his supporters use existing insurance as their foil to advocate more political controls.

Downplaying the many cases of overt political rationing of health care, such as Jacob Appel describes, and ignoring existing political controls on health insurance, Obama and his supporters pretend that the way to overcome the partial rationing of the mixed economy is to adopt the total rationing of politicized medicine.

Of course, Obama is coy about the rationing his proposals would entail. On June 24, Obama said, “Maybe you’re better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller.”

By August 11, Obama was pretending that everybody can get all the “free” health care they could possibly desire, an impossible promise. Yet, rather than outright deny the rationing of politicized medicine, Obama tried to turn the debate by tarring the status quo with rationing:

The underlying argument I think has to be addressed, and that is people’s concern that if we are reforming the health care system to make it more efficient, which I think we have to do, the concern is that somehow that will mean rationing of care, right? — that somehow some government bureaucrat out there will be saying, well, you can’t have this test or you can’t have this procedure because some bean-counter decides that this is not a good way to use our health care dollars. And this is a legitimate concern, so I just want to address this. …

Another way of putting this is right now insurance companies are rationing care. They are basically telling you what’s covered and what’s not. They’re telling you: We’ll cover this drug, but we won’t cover that drug; you can have this procedure, or, you can’t have that procedure. So why is it that people would prefer having insurance companies make those decisions, rather than medical experts and doctors figuring out what are good deals for care and providing that information to you as a consumer and your doctor so you can make the decisions?

Here Obama conflates clear insurance agreements, by which consumers agree ahead of time which services insurers will cover, with arbitrary decisions by insurers to deny care in some cases. Thus, Obama attempts to treat any sort of distribution system, including the price distribution of a voluntary market, as “rationing.” Only decisions that are ad hoc, and not specified by contract, plausibly count as rationing, and these are precisely the sorts of decisions driven by political controls.

An August 22 article by Michael Booth and Jennifer Brown of the Denver Post describes some examples of health-insurance rationing. The title of the article illustrates the strategy of Obama’s “reformers:” “Health care reform advocates say insurance companies already ration coverage.” The journalists write:

All health insurance plans, whether privately run for profit or financed by the government, rely on a structure where some services are not covered. From prescription drugs to experimental surgeries, patients face limits in a plan’s fine print or from people paid to make choices in a process called “utilization review.”

“No system is wealthy enough to pay for every single request that comes from doctors and hospitals,” said Wendell Potter, a former national vice president with insurance giant Cigna who now argues in favor of sweeping reform.

“Insurance companies have corporate bureaucrats on staff who many times will deny coverage for something recommended by a doctor. It happens all the time, in the name of ‘not medically necessary,’ ” Potter said.

The Denver Post article contains not a single mention of how existing political controls have fostered such problems, nor how true free-market reforms would restore competitiveness and accountability to health insurance companies. Instead, the “debate” is summarized as the (ill-defined) “rationing” of the status quo versus the rationing of Obamacare.

On a truly free market, health insurance companies would compete, in part, on clarity of contract (as Brian Schwartz suggested to me). Moreover, the government would resume its proper role of ensuring enforcement of contract and resolving contractual disputes.

However, on a free market, insurers and their clients have every right to voluntarily agree to terms. As with the fictitious Twentieth Century Motor Company, people could voluntarily agree to enter a system of rationing, such as one involving ad hoc decisions about medical necessity. Significantly, on a free market, people would also be free to exit such a system. No doubt practically everyone would prefer a stable, long-term, well-defined insurance contract — if only insurance companies were free to offer one. Such contracts would involve no rationing when insurers declined to cover care explicitly not covered by the contract.

Today health rationing is carried out by government agencies that control vast tracts of health care. To a minor degree, it is carried out by insurers acting under severe political controls. A free market features no political rationing. Any rationing in a free market must involve people voluntarily entering into contracts that allow it, and in such cases people are free to exit the system.

The advocates of politicized health care ignore the nature of rationing. They try to turn any sort of distribution into “rationing,” and they ignore the fact that existing rationing in health care is caused by political controls. Their goal is to promote the notion that health care is collectively owned by the nation and properly distributed by politicians, rather than owned by its producers and properly distributed through voluntary exchange.

Those who value their lives, their health, and their liberty won’t let such “reformers” get away with their distortion of the language or their political take-over of health care.

To the Congress . . .

by Joss Armstrong | 4:31 pm, August 28, 2009

Awesome post brought to my attention by Mike at ColdFury.com: To the Congress: The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775 – you have had 234 years to get it right; it is broke. Social Security was established in 1935 – you have had 74 years to get it right; it is broke. Fannie Mae [...]

NRSC Explains Domain Registrations, Opposition To Endorsement Grows

by elpresidente | 2:37 pm, August 28, 2009

The Denver Post has picked up Complete Colorado’s potential substantiation of rumors first reported by blogger Ben DeGrow: A Washington group that works to get Republicans elected to the U.S. Senate reserved two Internet domain names for former Lt. Gov. Jane Norton, who will announce soon whether she is entering the race. A spokeswoman for [...]

Funny Friday

by Mr. Bob | 12:16 pm, August 28, 2009

#tcot #crowder #comedy #teaparty

“How American Health Care Killed My Father”

by Joss Armstrong | 11:57 am, August 28, 2009

Writing for The Atlantic, Dave Goldhill uncovers the source of the flaws inherent in our current health care system. After the needless death of his father, the author, a business executive, began a personal exploration of a health-care industry that for years has delivered poor service and irregular quality at astonishingly high cost. It is [...]

Friday’s Smack-down

by Jon Caldara | 10:20 am, August 28, 2009

Thanks to Rossputin, I just got to view this incredible video. This Marine took no prisoners (pun intended) with his tough questions. I get the feeling that this type of health care hostility is more prevalent than the major news outlets are telling me….

Ronald Reagan on Socialized Health Care

by Mr. Bob | 10:02 am, August 28, 2009

#tcot #redco #socialism #obamacare #teaparty

A must hear for all Americans. Glen Beck is really not that crazy.

Pat Waak on Vandalism: “I Never Said Which End of the Other Side It Was”

by Ben DeGrow | 9:54 am, August 28, 2009

The morning of this week’s deplorable attack that shattered windows at the Democratic Party Headquarters in Denver, state Democratic chairwoman Pat Waak took advantage of the occasion to launch an outrageous broadside against Obama Care opponents:
“We ought to be having a serious, conscientious debate about what’s best for the country,” Waak said. “Clearly there’s been [...]

Colorado to the NRSC: Stay Away

by admin | 9:00 am, August 28, 2009

As we previously alluded to, there does indeed appear to be a plot underway among a tiny group of elitists (namely Bill Owens, Bob Beauprez, and John Cornyn) to silence every Republican activist in the state of Colorado by coronating Jane Norton (who has been absent from grassroots events and silent on running for Senate until only days ago) as the candidate for U.S. Senate. CompleteColorado.com has unearthed evidence that the NRSC is actively helping pro-tax candidate Jane Norton and appears to be preparing to meddle in Colorado’s Senate primary.

This isn’t entirely without precedent for NRSC chairman John Cornyn and Co.. Cornyn’s decision to back Florida Gov. Charlie Crist over conservative Marco Rubio set off a massive backlash from outraged conservatives nationwide. Only weeks ago, the NRSC made fools of themselves in an oddly familiar story from the New Hampshire primary. Cornyn and the NRSC attempted to back Kelly Ayotte, an untested candidate who has never actually stood for election (sound familiar?) and had to back away after stronger than expected backlash from New Hampshire Republicans.

Ben DeGrow points out that Jane Norton’s fundraising record isn’t exactly stellar which somewhat undercuts the rationale for Norton’s candidacy being put forward in some quarters. This leads to the question of what John Cornyn felt was missing from our Senate race. Was he afraid we would pick a fiscally conservative candidate and felt to need to seek out and recruit one of the small handful of Republicans that endorsed Referenda C and D? Given the NRSC’s past track record in Florida and Pennsylvania, this may very well be the case.

John Cornyn has managed to accomplish the impossible. He has become an even bigger train-wreck as NRSC chairman than John ‘What Happens in Vegas’ Ensign. If their intention was to paint a giant bullseye on Jane Norton, they have accomplished their goal in a most exemplary fashion.

Obama Care, special interests, & big business

by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, August 28, 2009

From John Stossel on Obama Care & big business:
Although President Obama and big-government activists demonize health-insurance companies, the companies “are still mostly on board with the president’s effort to overhaul the U.S. health-care system,” the Wall Street Journal reports; and …
Although the activists criticize Big Pharma, “The drug industry has already contributed millions of dollars [...]