Sunday, February 21, 2010

Cruising the Web

Mark Steyn summarizes the ludicrousness of our society today when the government will protect us from the untold dangers of a pancake race, but can't seem to to anything about the Iranian mullahs getting the bomb.

George Will captures
the state of "consensus" scientific wisdom these days.

The Los Angeles Times, happy to survey a state that actually did something worse than California, looks at the unintended consequences resulting from New York's health care "guaranteed issue" reforms requiring insurance companies to give insurance benefits to anyone applying for insurance regardless of their health. And to top if off, companies couldn't differentiate costs based on an applicants health or habits. The result was that, as you might expect, the costs of insurance skyrocketed while many people decided not to get insurance and wait until they actually got sick. Lessons for everyone in what has happened to New York.

Here's an interesting tale of how the federal government was responsible for poisoning of thousands of people in the 1920s as they inserted poisons into industrial alcohol to prevent people from using it to make moonshine.

I'm sure that few people care, but it's rather fun to read the piling on directed at Sally Quinn for taking her newspaper column to talk about her personal problems in having scheduled her son's wedding the same day as her husband's granddaughter's wedding.

Jake Tapper notes the incongruity of the Obama administration's blasting the profit-seeking of evil insurance companies while including non-profit companies such as Blue Cross/Blue Shield. If the non-profits are issuing rate increases, might it be because their expenses are increasing?

Just in case you're totally confused about all the talk of using reconciliation to push through health care, here is a brief tutorial on how reconciliation would work.

The National Journal interviews Charlie Cook on election prospects for the Republicans this year. Note this quote:
I've spent the last couple of days talking to some of the brightest Democrats in the party that are not in the White House. And it's very hard to come up with a scenario where Democrats don't lose the House. It's very hard. Are the seats there right this second? No. But we're on a trajectory on the House turning over....
I'd like to think that Charlie knows whereof he speaks. If the Democrats insist on talking about health care reform and trying to cram through an unpopular bill instead of performing Obama's promised shift to focusing on the economy, Charlie's prediction will come true.

Jay Ambrose does a good job of exposing the malarkey in Obama's supposed jobs stimulus public relations push.

Byron York notes that just recently Obama and the Democratic leaders were touting all that they had accomplished in the past year. Now they're whining about how the system is broken because it is supposedly impossible to get anything done. As York concludes,
The fact is, when you hear the president and Democrats in Congress complain about not being able to get anything done, or about Washington being broken, they're talking about one thing: their inability to pass a national health care reform bill. Congress can do, and is doing, lots of things -- just not sprawling, omnibus "comprehensive" bills that are unpopular with the American people. (The same can be said for cap-and-trade legislation, now dead in the Senate.) If you put aside enormous bills that would re-order the American economy in ways the public does not want, Congress can do things just fine.
It's more of Obama's attempt to make sure that the spin is always heads I win, tails you lose.

Rich Lowry advises Obama to try governing from the center rather than the left and he'll amazingly find that the system is no long as broken as he's moaning about these days.