I Hear Chappaqua Is Lovely This Time of Year

So Mohammar Gadhafi (shown right) wants to bring his traveling circus side show to the States. It's not enough that he swindled the Brits into releasing a dying (I'm feeling much better now!) terrorist. He has to rub it in our face that he's been able to bamboozle two successive administrations into buying that Islam is the religion of peace.

He wants to pitch a tent (the fabric kind, one presumes) on the lawn of the Libyan mission in New Jersey. And the neighbors are really mad about this. Not ObamaCare mad. They are at full, seething "my neighbor painted their front door red when it clearly states in the subdivision bylaws that all doors shall be painted black" mad. Which only proves my theory that nobody really cares what goes on in government as much as what their neighbor does to their yard.

To make matters worse—or better, depending on your point of view— Gadhafi is rumored to travel with a bazillion female "body guards." Which offers the obvious solution. Where on the east coast would a power hungry enemy of the U.S., terrorist, and mass murderer be welcome? Of course, Chappaqua. The body guards are just icing.

"Bill, your guests are here. Please don't let them park their camels in the rose bushes."

Dude, I can totally see your wiener.

As the press sits around marveling at Obama's fantastic new suit of clothes, the rest of us are left gaping at the spectacle of our naked emperor, fooling no one but himself. So I thought I'd do the gent a favor and point him out a few things — speak truth to power, as they say:

1. We know you picked Hillary for Secretary of State just to get her out of your way, but she's really bad at her job. Bring it up at her next performance review.
2. Your wife has horrible fashion sense. I'm just saying.
3. When you start a sentence "Let me be clear," we know you're about to lie. It's like a poker tell.
4. Without your tele-prompter, you're starting to sound erratic and gaff-prone, but...
5. ...good news, not as erratic and gaffe-prone as Joe Biden. Bring him around more.
6. It's possible that Robert Gibbs may be functionally illiterate — probably had someone else fill out the job application for him. You might look into that.
7. If your lefty base finds out Rahm Emanuel is Jewish, they're going to be really pissed.
8. The Supreme Court is not a Gap ad. You don't have to get one of each ethnicity in the photo.
9. Every time you point the finger at Bush, there are three more pointing back at you. They represent the deficit you tripled.
10. Afghanistan's a mess. You may have to soldier-up over there. Don't tell Code Pink.
11. You know that neighbor who's always giving you their unwanted cold remedies? You're kind of like that old lady. Keep your healthcare ideas to yourself.

The Importance of Being Second

One of my favorite blog sites, Flopping Aces, ran a contest. Write the best essay on the relevance of the Second Amendment in 400 words or less and win a t-shirt (shown above) from Ranger Up. I didn't even need 200 words. But then I didn't win either. Second place seems fitting for the subject though. Here's my essay:

Militias. Armed Revolt. The 2nd Amendment was introduced at a time when the founders had fresh in their minds the success of the American Revolution, fought in large part by REAL citizen soldiers armed with their personal hunting rifles. But (thinks the reasonable person) that was a wholly different time. The right to bear arms is outmoded in a stable republic. And he would be right. If there could ever be such a thing as a stable republic.

The 2nd Amendment isn’t a Revolution-era footnote explaining how we got here. It’s a foot in the door of liberty in case that door ever swings closed.

Our Constitution is perishable. The only thing keeping it alive is the active force of the law it details. Undermine the force of law, and the Constitution evaporates. And law is easily undermined. Activist judges. Czars. Legislative creep unchecked by Stare Decisis lethargy. States are threatening to assert their rights against the federal government in a manner unseen since the civil rights era. Is the thought that citizens may need to stand up against tyranny so unthinkable that we would ignore the only physical protection we have to do so?

Ten Great Reasons to Reject ObamaCare

There is a lot of information and misinformation out there about Hr 3200 — the healthcare reform bill. And much of it —the information and the bill — is confusing. I've read a fair amount (admittedly not all) of the bill. It appears to be written with the express goal of being indecipherable to the public. So let's skip a lot of the messy details (what exactly will the health advisory council's task be, will there be rationing or not, etc) and get right to the stuff of which we can be certain. There's a lot of good reasons not to like this plan. Here's my top ten:

1. Government does nothing efficiently. Why do we want them entrenched even more in our healthcare system?
2. The Supreme Court ordained the constitutional right to abortion stating that anti-abortion laws violate the sanctity of the private doctor/patient relationship. How can the Federal Government possibly get entwined in providing healthcare with any specificity? HR 3200 should be constitutionally dead-on-arrival.
3. Obama can't be trusted to play this straight. He's on record strongly preferring universal healthcare. No matter what this bill says, we must assume it moves the ball toward his goal.
4. There is no mention of Tort reform in HR 3200. Any plan that doesn't address the root of all waste in our health care system is worthless.
5. Medicaid/Medicare are about to go bankrupt — and those two quasi-public options are preferable to universal care. How, please tell me, can anyone possibly believe that ObamaCare won't end up costing 10 times the amount anyone is projecting?
6. Congress has repeatedly rejected moving their own plans to the "public option." If it ain't good enough for thee, keep it away from me.
7. This is a huge intrusion on States' sovereignty. No matter how praiseworthy the reform may be, it dramatically shifts healthcare policy to the federal government. And interstate commerce is a weak tool to justify this. The 10th Amendment isn't just a suggestion, folks.
8. It places insurance mandates on small businesses. This will crush profitability and drive up unemployment. There are better ways to get small companies to offer insurance — how about tax incentives instead of penalties?
9. The unions support it—why? Members of the largest unions already have health insurance via their collective bargaining extortion schemes. What's in it for the unions to "fix" the system? Be afraid. Be very afraid.
10. It's being rushed through. We shouldn't accept that any plan must happen in 3 months. The Democrats have been trying to pull this off for almost two decades — where's the crisis? Any problem worth solving is worth taking the time to solve right.

What do you think? Did I leave anything off the list?

A Message President. It's Just Not His Message.

I spoke with my first, genuine Obama remorse voter last week. When I asked her what she thought about Barack's healthcare reform plans, she shook her head and said "It's all just too much. We can't afford all of this." She said, "I voted for him because I thought it was time for a change. But what's going on now is not what he presented himself as during the election."

This woman is one of Barack's "sweet spot" swing voters. Evangelical Christian. Suburban mom. One of the "more feel than think" voters. And he's already losing her 6 months into his presidency.

Obama came into office after winning the election handily. Most of the mainstream media refrained from using the word mandate, but you did hear a bit of it. The mandate was for hope and change. The electorate had bit on his message: hook, line and sinker. And Obama opened his first term like he had a genuine mandate on the end of his line. Jerking legislation through Congress - hinted-at ideas from lightly-covered town hall campaign stops. Reeling in votes for dramatic policy changes that the media had hardly noticed.

But did the public really give his policies a mandate? Polls show that just weeks into office, people largely supported Obama much more than they supported any of his policy proposals. And that was his peak. Support has dropped off the cliff since.

This disparity seemingly makes no sense. How could the public support a man but not his policies? The only logical explanation is that their vote was sending a message. It just wasn't Barack Obama's message.

Obama, the man and what he symbolized, was the electorate's message. They still like Obama because they still like the message they sent to the world by voting for him: It's time for change. Anyone can be president. We're beyond the racism. It's that same old song: "Look at how open-minded I am. I voted for Obama." And that sentiment is still valid as long as Obama doesn't undo it pushing policy people don't like. In fact, if Obama were to accomplish nothing at all in his first term, he would probably end it with a 65% approval rating.

As Obama remorse grows (currently 63% of independent voters are against ObamaCare) the electorate has been sending another message. I wonder if they'll hear it in the White House over the braying of the mobs?

Democrats: A Party for the Risk Averse

Growing up we all knew one of those over-protected kids: the 12 year-old left standing on the other side of street because his mom wouldn't trust him to cross the street by himself; the kid wearing the ski hat with earflaps in 50 degree weather. Remember that kid? He grew up to become the Democratic Party voter.

Everything about the Democratic Party (probably since FDR) is about limiting risk for helpless and stupid American voters. Terrified that your retirement might tank? Don't worry, mama's here with your Social Security blanket. Afraid that shiny new condom might fail? Papa will dump that fetus in the garbage pail. Worrying your shares in GM might crash? Daddy Tim's here with some bailout cash. Fear you might get sick and your insurance won't pay? Berry's gonna take all the fear away.

Life's full of risk. That's why we have insurance in the first place. Something horrible may happen to you, and it may be expensive. So smart consumers buy insurance for — as the ads go — "Justin Case."

Health insurance isn't healthcare. It's a hedge against the risk of costs associated with becoming unhealthy. The fact that health insurance has become too expensive, or that some people can't get it, doesn't mean they will get sick. Or even that if they do get sick, they won't get treatment. Nobody in this country can be turned away for lifesaving treatment.

So really the whole healthcare debate ( and frankly the entire agenda of the DNC ) is about nothing more than the cushy, feel-good coddling of the American electorate. If Joe Voter is so sheltered from risk and harm that he can't contemplate the idea of crossing the street without holding Harry Reid's hand, he'll never vote to remove Reid from political office. This strategy is depressingly effective.

Imagine if the founding fathers had wanted someone to protect them from the risks of revolt against the King. We'd still be sipping over-taxed British tea on the docks of Boston Harbor.

As Benjamin Franklin might say, "He that's secure is not safe."

Why Isn't Clinton Smiling?

Bill Clinton was called in for pinch-hit diplomacy to rescue two American journalists imprisoned in North Korea on trumped-up charges. The result of his trip was seemingly a miracle. The message from the State Department is that the very presence of Clinton (along with a healthly dose of Obama's favorite medicine: apology) secured the women's release in record time. So why isn't Clinton smiling in ANY of the photos? Perhaps he knows something we don't.

Clinton's "miracle" trip to North Korea is clearly anything but a miracle. Does anyone really think that he would have gone over there if the journalists' release wasn't already a done-deal? Of course not. Bill Clinton isn't Jesse Jackson or Jimmy Carter — shameless self promoters who believe that there's no such thing as bad PR. Clinton, the king of "triangulation" is all about getting bang for his buck. He does not tilt at windmills — having learned that lesson the hard way early in his presidency. Someone high in government certainly had already secured the release of those women long before Clinton got on the plane to North Korea. Bill was diplomatic "cover" for Obama — used to make it appear that our State Department wasn't negotiating with Kim Jong Il, and hide what the price was.

I long ago gave up expecting our press to be curious when it comes to unexplained phenomena related to the Obama administration. But come on! Why isn't anyone seriously asking what we GAVE to that pot belly dictator in order to secure a bit of largess from one of this nation's most hostile enemies? Clearly Bill knows it will come out soon enough. And he's not happy about it.