Things aren’t looking good for Nancy Pelosi.  For almost the last four years, she has been pounding the gavel, shoving her grand, big-government schemes through Congress.  Even in the midst of a worsening economy, she was able to cut enough backroom deals to garner the votes she and her political allies needed to capture their Holy Grail: American’s health care system.

Pundits and polls, however, are now predicting that Pelosi will lose hold of the speakership in November.  They may be correct.  Her years of political kneecapping and recriminations may have finally taken their toll.  Big government takeovers don’t do well in a deteriorating, capitalistic-based economy.  Still,  do not count her out yet.  Madam Speaker is not going anywhere without a fight.   Her hold on the gavel is firm.  Earlier this year, a Democratic insider was quoted in Politico saying, “[Pelosi] will put a bullet in the head of anyone she needs to.”  That insider went on to say that she would do whatever it took to hold on to her majority.  Now, there won’t be any firing of actual bullets, but she is no doubt digging deep into her arsenal.

What sets Pelosi apart from other national leaders, and specifically other Speakers in modern history, is her ability to strategize and execute like a political boss in the classical sense   Consider this: She has legislated a government takeover of at least one-sixth of the economy, challenged the Catholic Church on abortion, circumvented the White House to meet with a Mideast dictator, and claimed that her liberal agenda is part of a holy calling.  Those are some pretty heady accomplishments for the first female Speaker of the House.

(more…)

While chaos theory has had a place in science since mathematician and physicist Jules Henri Poincare first coined the term in the 1880s, it made its way into pop culture with the introduction of the so-called butterfly effect by fiction writers Ray Bradbury (“A Sound of Thunder,” 1952) and fictional chaotician-in-chief Ian Malcolm with his widely popular “Jurassic Park” in 1993. The idea, of course, is that activity that impacts one part of a system can have wide-ranging, unforeseen (and in the case of government interfering in a free-market economy) unintended and undesirable consequences elsewhere in that system.  While we have had no scarcity over the years of political butterflies in both parties incessantly flapping their wings to, generally, no good purpose, we are currently witnessing a truly historic exercise in chaos theory, Washington style.

As we argued in an earlier column this month, the $2.0 trillion in cash (and growing) that has been accumulating throughout the year in corporate bank accounts is more than enough to jump start the economy out of the doldrums in which it has been languishing for the better part of three years.  All of this capital is locked in irons, as our sea-faring friends like to say, chiefly because a muscle-flexing, game-changing government is piling uncertainty on top of uncertainty with largely unwanted new taxes, new programs, new mandates (mostly unfunded), new regulations and new agencies to enforce them.  What’s a well-intentioned businessman to do?

Rather than stepping aside and giving the marketplace a chance to regain its footing after the financial debacle (also largely the result of government malfeasance) that defined the transition of government nearly two years ago, the Administration, Congress and the Fed have elbowed their way, at great cost, into the commerce of the country with dubious to negative results thus far and, for many, with absolutely devastating impact.

Interest rates have been maintained at ridiculously low rates quarter after quarter and, now, year after year.  The Fed has accomplished its goal and made this a heyday for borrowers. Companies and others who don’t even need the money are borrowing to avoid missing this debtors’ bonanza although in many sectors (notably real estate), banks won’t lend because of marketplace uncertainties.

(more…)

This past week I gave a speech to a group of investors. The organizer of the event e-mailed me the night before, asking that I please try to be optimistic. Well, that’s my usual habitat. But optimism has been hard for me this year. Our muddle-through economy and lackluster stock market, challenged by so many taxing, spending, and regulating problems coming out of Washington, are the reasons why.

In fact, until recently, I’ve been advising people to take profits in the stock market, rather than buy-and-hold. You should keep your money before the Obama IRS takes it from you.

But following the tea-party primary victories in Delaware, New York, and New Hampshire this week, I’m once again getting energized.

Free-market capitalism is on the comeback trail. That’s one of the key tea-party messages. And make no mistake about it: The free-market power of the tea-party political revolt is totally bullish for stocks and the economy.

In short, this is a revolution.

(more…)

It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to realize that Americans reject rationing of medical care. The Obama Administration denied it would ever happen. They lied. The effort to ration late stage cancer drugs based upon their costs is underway in the case of Avastin. 60 Plus is rightly concerned about the impact that this decision will have down the road on the availability of any and all treatment options for seniors.

And apparently most of America shares their concern.

60 Plus and Logos Communications has just come out of the field with an extensive survey about health care and rationing. The results are extraordinary. In fact, opposition to rationing is so deep, swing voters — both seniors and women — are in open revolt over the pending FDA decision.

This is an issue that cuts across party lines. It cuts across race, age and philosophy. Look at these numbers:

– 47% of registered American voters oppose the recently passed healthcare reform law, compared to 41% who support it. (Note: the sample is much more favorable to ObamaCare than most national polls).

– 56% of registered American voters believe the new healthcare reform law will lead to so-called “rationing” of care. 26% disagree. Even 2008 Obama voters have their doubts: 39% believe it is likely to lead to rationing; 39% do not.

– 82% believe that cost-effectiveness is NOT a justification for rationing, agreeing with the statement, “As a matter of principle, the government should not ration care or deny treatment options based on what it calls “cost-effectiveness.” I don”t trust the government to put a cost on human life.”” Only 7% disagree.

(more…)

Conservative author Dinesh D’Souza recently published an insightful, much-discussed article in Forbes, “How Obama Thinks.”

Drawing upon Obama’s writings and history, D’Souza concludes that his policy agenda—so at odds with traditional American values and principles—is rooted chiefly in the anti-colonialist intellectual influence of his Kenyan-born father:

What then is Obama’s dream? We don’t have to speculate because the President tells us himself in his autobiography, Dreams from My Father. According to Obama, his dream is his father’s dream. . . .

[T]o his son, the elder Obama represented a great and noble cause, the cause of anticolonialism. . . . Anticolonialism is the doctrine that rich countries of the West got rich by invading, occupying and looting poor countries of Asia, Africa and South America . . . .

Obama Sr. was an economist, and in 1965 he published an important article in the East Africa Journal called “Problems Facing Our Socialism.” Obama Sr. . . saw state appropriation of wealth as a necessary means to achieve the anticolonial objective of taking resources away from the foreign looters and restoring them to the people of Africa . . . . As he put it, “We need to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now.” The senior Obama proposed that the state confiscate private land and raise taxes with no upper limit. In fact, he insisted that “theoretically there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed.”

Like father, like son, says D’Souza:

It may seem incredible to suggest that the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. is espoused by his son, the President of the United States. That is what I am saying. From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America’s military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father’s position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America’s power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe’s resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet.

(more…)

Under pressure from a barrage of bad midterm-election polls, President Obama has gone on the campaign trail to blame Pres. George W. Bush for all our economic problems, and to bash House Republican leader John Boehner as nothing more than a Bush retread.

In Friday’s dreary news conference, Obama acknowledged that economic progress is “painfully slow,” and that voters may blame him for the economy. Yet he nonetheless continued to finger Bush “for policies that cut taxes, especially for millionaires and billionaires, cut regulations for corporations and for special interests, and left everyone else pretty much fending for themselves.”

“Millionaires and billionaires” has become Obama’s favorite phrase as he calls for tax hikes on the wealthy and renews his attacks on Bush. In Cleveland last week, Obama actually blamed the Bush tax cuts for the financial meltdown and severe recession. Now that’s a reach. A big reach.

While Mr. Bush made plenty of economic mistakes, his 2003 reductions of marginal tax rates led to more than 8 million new jobs in the next four and a half years. Under Bush, the unemployment rate dropped to 4.6 percent.

And almost all economists agree that the 2007-08 financial meltdown was a housing-bubble and credit event. It had nothing at all to do with cutting taxes.

(more…)

Now that elections are around the corner members of Congress who voted for the healthcare reform bill are spending a lot of time back-peddling, avoiding the topic all together or digging themselves in a deeper hole by claiming that Americans will have better healthcare with choice of doctors, and expanded coverage at an affordable price.

Let’s look at the facts:

• The bill was written by and for Big Pharma and the medical insurance industry. Senator Max Baucus a member of the congressional brain trust who brought us the healthcare reform bill admitted he never fully read it and has no idea what is even in it. Now he admits to having no clue what was in the bill he helped shove down our throats…. Unbelievable? Surprising? No just business as usual.

• Those on Medicare were told that they would see no change in their benefits and would be able to keep their physician. In fact, 11 million senior citizens will see premiums go up because of cost cutting including the removal of Medicare advantage. Furthermore, since there has been a decline in the number of physicians who currently are accepting new Medicare patients or who take Medicare at all, it is likely that seniors will not be able to keep their doctor and will pay more for less.

• The nomination of Donald Berwick to head CMS means a philosophical shift of our healthcare system to the British model of medicine that puts a premium on cost and not the needs of the individual. An example of this is the decision by the FDA remove Avastin from the medication available to treat advanced cancer because it is deemed that the good of extension of life is outweighed by the cost of the medication. Medicare has already stopped covering the use for Avastin to treat  ovarian cancer in Colorado.

It is clear that the relentless drive to reform the health care system was a cynical political push for a win at all costs. We were told what we wanted to hear and there was no attention paid to the consequences. Every single card was played – from the class card to the race card, and getting us to fight among ourselves achieved the goal of distraction. Now that the smoke has cleared it is pretty obvious that in the name of expanding healthcare to approximately 30 million more people, we have sacrificed what is best about our healthcare system – individualized patient care, the doctor patient relationship, and the drive towards innovation. However, the costs have not changed.

(more…)

With the setting of the sun this Wednesday night, Jews across the world will begin the observance of the Yomim Noraim (Days of Awe), a ten day period book-ended by the High Holy Days of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. This year’s High Holiday period comes at an interesting time for America as the first night of Rosh Hashanah comes a mere fifty-four days before the United States goes to the polls to between two radically different directions, one which emphasizes personal responsibility, the other emphasizes a reliance on government. Only one of those directions is compatible with the true meaning of the High Holidays.

Political prognosticator Charlie Cook’s latest column in National Journal:

Labor Day is almost here and Democrats are still waiting for the cavalry to arrive. An exhaustive scan of the horizon reveals no rescuers and none of the things Democrats badly need to save them from tough midterm election losses on Nov. 2.

There are few signs of any meaningful recovery, and indeed there is more talk of a double-dip recession, plunging the country back into economic trouble between now and the end of the year. Unemployment seems stuck at 9.5 percent, reinforcing the view that last year would have been better spent focusing on the economy than on health care reform.

Democrats also needed a public re-evaluation of the new health care reform law. They needed the public to decide that it wasn’t so bad, that it was a good idea after all. That hasn’t happened, as pointed out by the Kaiser Family Foundation’s health care monthly tracking poll released this week. Favorable attitudes toward the new law dropped from 50 percent last month to 43 percent this month, and unfavorable views climbed from 35 percent to 45 percent. Twenty-nine percent of Americans believe that they and their families will be better off under the new law, while 30 percent say they will be worse off and 36 percent say it will not make much difference.

(more…)

From today’s Politico:

Now, HCAN’s [Health Care for America Now] field crews are finding that the best way to support reform-friendly lawmakers is to talk about something else: jobs, the economy or other issues likely to resonate with voters more.

“We want to be flexible in talking about what is most relevant to constituents, whatever issues are most motivational,” says HCAN’s national field director, Margarida Jorge, who organizes a daily call with their partner organizations. “We can have a high level of focus on health care but also understand at times the focus is going to shift.”

HCAN activists say they are not dodging their key issue; rather, they want to keep pace with voter concerns, which have markedly shifted over the past year.

(more…)

On the national level it seems as if the Unions have changed priorities. No longer is their primary objective to protect the rights of their own rank and file, their objectives has moved into politics and selling the progressive and/or Marxist agenda. Hence their support of many of the Administrations policies such as Obamacare, the auto bailout and the financial regulation bill in some cases (such as Obamcare) over  the objections of their membership.

Fresh from their recent wins, the unions are moving into building the base of Marxist, Communist and progressive voters, as evidenced by the AFL/CIO joining a get out the vote effort run by United for Peace and Justice, an origination established to promote an agenda which is both socialist and anti-war.

The announcement the AFL-CIO move was made in People’s World a magazine for the Marxist and Communist movements in the United Sates:

The AFL-CIO executive committee voted unanimously this morning to join One Nation, Working Together, a new national coalition of labor and civil rights groups that has as its purpose to “reorder America’s priorities by investing in the nation’s most valuable resource – its people.”

The labor, civil rights, environmental, faith and other organizations that have formed the new coalition intend to replace unemployment and economic crisis faced by the country’s majority with “nothing less than a future of shared prosperity for all our people,” the AFL-CIO said in a statement after it voted to join One Nation.

“None of us alone have been able to achieve our priorities,” said Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO.

One Nation’s first official act as a coalition will be a march on Washington on Oct. 2, which unions say will energize an army of tens of thousands who will return to their neighborhoods, churches, schools and voting booths to prevent a Republican takeover of Congress in November and begin building a new permanent coalition to fight for a progressive agenda.

The AFL-CIO joins groups such as The NAACP, SEIU 1199, Green for All, National Council of La Raza, US Student Association, and the Center for Community Change in the One Nation, Working Together effort.

(more…)

Back in February 2010, Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised the American people that approximately 400,000 jobs would be created due to the passage of the healthcare bill.

Remember Pelosi promised this:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi at the health summit: “It’s about jobs. In it’s life, it [the health bill] will create 4 million jobs — 400,000 jobs almost immediately.”

Well, it’s almost November and the economy still hasn’t gotten any better and we have no evidence of those jobs being created.  I can only assume that she didn’t mean this either:

The irony of accountability indeed.  Americans are still asking and the rhetoric is not resonating.  So, Speaker Pelosi, where are the jobs?

It’s not a matter of rhetoric, it’s a matter of the American dream being shattered for so many hard-working Americans as a direct result of Obama’s entitlement-laden, job-killing policies.  Such a boastful result when the Democrats fight for “working Americans” as they say–specifically referencing unions.

(more…)

ObamaCare expands coverage to millions of Americans, but, warns Professor Shirley Svorny, without stronger measures to expand the supply of healthcare providers and contain costs, we can expect a physician shortage and soaring premiums.

The California State University, Northridge economist suggests options for lowering costs and dismantling state-level regulations that restrain competition and innovation.

(more…)

From the Washington Post:

The FDA is not supposed to consider costs in its decisions, but if the agency rescinds approval, insurers are likely to stop paying for treatment.

“It’s hard to talk about Avastin without talking about costs,” said Eric P. Winer, director of the Breast Oncology Center at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. “For better or worse, Avastin has become in many ways the poster child of high-priced anti-cancer drugs.”

Avastin is the world’s best-selling cancer drug, with global sales of $5.8 billion, and it is the top-selling product for Roche, whose Genentech unit makes it. Its use to treat breast cancer brings in about $855 million in annual revenue in the United States.

Avastin is approved for use in treating several cancers, including those of the colon, lung, kidney and brain. So doctors could continue to write prescriptions for it for breast cancer, as an “off-label” use. But in addition to prompting insurers including Medicare to stop paying for Avastin, an FDA revocation of approval for its use in breast cancer treatment might mean that breast cancer patients would lose eligibility for a program in which Genentech caps the annual cost of the drug at $57,000 for women with annual incomes of less than $100,000.

(more…)

From the UK’s Daily Telegraph:

Can it get any worse for President Obama? Undoubtedly yes. Here are 10 key reasons why the Obama presidency is in serious trouble, and why its prospects are unlikely to improve between now and the November mid-terms.

1. The Obama presidency is out of touch with the American people

In a previous post I noted how the Obama presidency increasingly resembles a modern-day Ancien Régime, extravagant, decaying and out of touch with ordinary Americans. The First Lady’s ill-conceived trip to Spain at a time of widespread economic hardship was symbolic of a White House that barely gives a second thought to public opinion on many issues, and frequently projects a distinctly elitist image. The “let them eat cake” approach didn’t play well over two centuries ago, and it won’t succeed today.

2. Most Americans don’t have confidence in the president’s leadership

This deficit of trust in Obama’s leadership is central to his decline. According to a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, “nearly six in ten voters say they lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country”, and two thirds “say they are disillusioned with or angry about the way the federal government is working.” The poll showed that a staggering 58 per cent of Americans say they do not have confidence in the president’s decision-making, with just 42 per cent saying they do. (more…)

Big Government.com alerted it readers weeks ago about the emerging model for rationing health care at the FDA.  The FDA is considering “de-listing” the drug Avastin for use with breast cancer patients– not because it doesn’t work, but because of its cost.

With a new government health care regime paradigm being established, cost to insurance companies and government health care services will play a critical role in whether patients will have the option of life extending drugs.

The Susan G. Komen Foundation and the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance has joined the Avastin fight and is pushing back on behalf of patients.

In a letter to the FDA and congressional lawmakers, OCNA and Komen for the Cure express concern for the impact on patients who are currently benefitting from the drug, concern for the impact on future drug development and cite concerns about fundamental fairness problems with subjective determinations that limit access to treatments.

(more…)

In the fight to retain his Congressional House seat, North Carolina U.S. Rep. Bob Etheridge (NC-2) emailed and mailed letters and newsletters from his House account last week. Observant voters noted that Etheridge used taxpayers dollars to underwrite the mailings, sending the pieces just ahead of the franking 90-day deadline before the election. Etheridge is the politician who pushed a student journalist when he was queried by the young man on a D.C. street.

Challenger Renee Ellmers, clinical director of a wound care center in Dunn, NC, is calling him on it. In an August 10th letter sent to Etheridge, Ellmers wrote:

“In every way these mailings resembled typical campaign ads, except they were paid for by taxpayers and not by your campaign.

In the text of one pamphlet you mailed you told voters you are “reducing the deficit and restoring budget discipline” in Washington. How much did this mailing (and your emailings) cost taxpayers? How many people received the mailings and emails? How can you explain writing taxpayers that you are “reducing the deficit” when you are wasting thousands of dollars of their money on political mailings to help you get reelected?”

Rep. Etheridge has more than a million dollars in his campaign account.

According to a poll of Second District voters done in June by Survey USA , 55% to 38% voting in Etheridge’s district disapprove of the job Barack Obama is doing as president. Yet Etheridge voted with Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama 97% of the time, voting for every major item of the Obama agenda, including ObamaCare.

A majority of voters – 53% — in his district disapprove of the Healthcare reform legislation. Etheridge also voted for the Wall Street bailout, despite voter disapproval of 61%.

Etheridge supported Obama’s so called “stimulus” bill and trillion dollar deficit. The result: North Carolina’s employment figures are some of the bleakest in the country. Last February North Carolina’s unemployment hit a record high 11.2%, ranking 10th among States in unemployment.

(more…)

Sound familiar? Most everyone has heard it time and time again. It’s the way many TV sales pitches end after seeming to give the viewing audience something for nothing.  It’s a sucker’s pitch. It usually works like this: you are offered the gadget of the moment for the bargain price (typically) of $19.95, and you get an additional gadget for free.  Then comes the addendum (very quickly and often in a whisper) “just pay separate processing and handling.” The fee is never disclosed, but it’s always there (typically $9.95 for each gadget, or another $19.90 for both which brings the total to $39.85 exclusive of shipping charges) proving there are no free lunches.  This deceitful advertising used by television pitchman works so well that its equivalent has become the new Obama-Pelosi-Reid pitch to disguise the true cost of their programs.

And while this may not be a precise analogy for the way things are done in Washington, it’s close enough.  “Just pay processing and handling” is our metaphor for the entire panoply of Washington speak that produces programs, the costs of which are often orders of magnitude more than originally represented.  We are, almost daily it seems, pitched free lunches or  “benefits” by our government.  And while the seemingly irreversible debt we are currently piling on our children and grandchildren is truly unprecedented in American history, this administration did not invent the government “free lunch” shell game; they’ve simply refined and extended it with complete abandon.  As Ronald Reagan so aptly warned, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”

Let’s count a few of the ways American consumers and taxpayers have been sold a bill of goods whereby the bill for the goods is, or will be, much higher than the assurance given in the Obama-Pelosi-Reid sales pitch.

Everyone can recall the “deficit neutral” healthcare reform bill.  It wasn’t going to add a dime to the deficit “now or in the future.”  Then, no sooner than you could transfer a bill into an Act (a law) the essential quarter-of-a-trillion dollar “doc fix,” which had been yanked from the original healthcare reform bill to make it “deficit neutral,” was, a short time later, enacted separately blowing the deficit neutral promise to smithereens — just pay separate processing and handling.

The Pelosi-Reid-led Congress established new high-risk pools in the new legislation and allocated $5 billion to take care of the chronically ill and uninsured until the government-controlled insurance exchanges, which are to be set up under the new law, are up and running in 2014.  But no sooner, it seems, was the legislation signed into law than the Chief Actuary for Medicare estimated that the tax-payer funded high-risk pools would run dry in 2011 or 2012, “resulting in substantial premium increases to sustain the program” — another new, hidden and unexpected cost compliments of Obamacare.  Just pay separate processing and handling.

(more…)

In response the sharp rebuke of Obamacare sent by voters in Missouri, Senator Harry Reid says that voters in Missouri just don’t know enough about the new law yet and when they do, they will change their minds. Well Senator, Missouri is after all the Show Me State and apparently Missourians don’t like what they have seen so far.

The simple truth is: You can’t get something for nothing and someone has the pay the bill.  Nothing in Obamacare creates more health care. It is merely injects government into the equation in order to take what we have currently and redistribute it.  So naturally, the government will need to find ways to cut costs.

Soon to be former director of the OMB, Peter Orzag believes that we can save money “…if costly new medical services were adopted more selectively in the future than they have been in the past, and if the diffusion of existing costly services was slowed. “

Well, how does the government go about doing that? How do they tell people that a life saving or life extending treatment exists, but it just costs too much so patients can’t have it?

Well, they don’t. They utilize control over the system to manipulate the availability of the treatment and then lead people to believe that it just doesn’t work. Problem solved.

We’ve already begun to see this operation in action with the FDA’s recent attempts to de-label the cancer drug Avastin for use with Stage 4 breast cancer patients.

The FDA was created and designed to protect citizens from products that are inherently unsafe or that make claims of effectiveness that cannot be substantiated.  There is no authority to consider drug pricing when evaluating a drug.

(more…)

MISSOURI VOTERS REJECT OBAMACARE!

Prop C passes in Missouri!

Over 70% of voters reject the democrat’s nationalized health care plan.

WOW! The Show Me State showed Obamacare the door tonight.

Over 70% of Missouri voters rejected Obamacare by passing Prop c.

It’s too bad local KMOV St. Louis Channel 4 could not find any one who voted for the proposition.

Missouri rejects the Pelosi-Obama Rationed Health Care Plan

All eyes were on Missouri today. The Show Me voters were voting for or against the new federal health care law.

(more…)