A Tea Party to Nowhere

Former CIA counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer Philip Giraldi points out the terrible Tea Party conundrum: Tea Partiers want smaller and cheaper government, but most also want a strong, assertive national defense and support an aggressive foreign and security policy.

He points-out they have been fed a line of hokum by politicians, aided and abetted by mainstream media. Giraldi then explains they fail to understand that it is precisely the interventionist defense and foreign policies that are driving the things they detest in government.

A Tea Party to Nowhere | Philip Giraldi, Campaign For Liberty

Justin Raimondo Says It All

I disagree with his politics, but I've always liked Joe Biden - he's a good man. Bumbling, but good. His latest bumble on "Charlie Rose" reminds me of how General Powell was sucked in to do Bush's WMD dirty work at the UN. The Vice President should be ashamed. I'm so angry, I could write pages right now, but . . .

This Says It All | Antiwar.com

Remember the USS Liberty!


UPDATE:
For shame, for shame. From Philip Giraldi, see also:

More Spin from Israel | Antiwar.com

You can pay me now, you can pay me later - but you ain't gettin' it free

While searching for news of the financial crisis at Miami Jackson Memorial Hospital, I ran into a well written and informative August, 2009, article by John Dorschner of the Miami Herald:

"End-of-life dialogue stifled in healthcare reform debate"

The inspiration for this post was NOT John's excellent article, but the ignorant comments, which followed. You've heard them all before, but read the article to fully appreciate my point. To me, that illogical mentality, venomously critical of John's apolitical argument, gets to the sad crux of the larger problem impeding reform of our broken system - we have largely become an uneducated, misinformed mob.

As a litigating elder law attorney I have consulted with the medical profession, written and lectured on end-of-life decision-making issues, and can vouch for the accuracy of John's assessment. Apart from large financial cost savings to family and state, a major benefit of advance end-of-life decision making is the emotional relief usually afforded immediate family and close friends. You would think we would know better after the Terri Shiavo matter, but our collective memory is short.

After introducing some facts, John correctly stated "[M]any doctors can't afford to spend time discussing end-of-life desires. The main reform bill before the House of Representatives proposes to change that by requiring Medicare to pay physicians for an end-of-life consultation, if the patient wants to discuss the issue." He then logically supported his uncontroversial thesis. Yet, as if by involuntary reflex, seven of the ten commentators, seemingly oblivious to what they just read, sling mud at the House HCR draft with foolish attacks such as:

- "This is the core of the democrat healthcare destruction plan . . .",
- "[m]aybe the Obama administration requires medical schools to add "The kevorkian 101" class to their curriculum!",
- "[f]or all of you who want the kevorkian way out . . .",
- ". . . require our elected representatives who create it to have to use it",
- ". . . you uniformed Obama sheep are still blaming the GOP for the health care bill's failure", and
- "[w]hen cast primarily as an issue of cost, this discussion loses its dignity and indeed can become the first step on the slippery slope that leads to euthanasia and other evils."

Even the two clearly pro-HCR commentators offered no hint they understood Dorschner's thesis, and ONLY one of the ten commentators "got it," though his comment seemed to address the ignoramuses, not John's article:

"That area of the bill which was to give counseling for end of life decisions will be taken out. There wasn't anything to it and a lot of nonsense ensued because of it. We need a method to save Medicare and Medicaid. If people don't offer a solution how do we expect our public figures to come up with a health care reform that will work. It is difficult and it is too bad that Rush Limbaugh has brought the uninformed down to his level in opposition to this reform."

So, because I am not registered with the Miami Herald, and because I haven't posted for a while, I will comment here:

The cost of an "end-of-life consultation" with a doctor (because you haven't visited an attorney or the library) is usually nominal compared to the financial and emotional cost of the alternative. (After consultation, most people choose to forgo extraordinary life support in futile cases; and, no major religion requires extraordinary life support in futile cases.)

I don't care what Beck, Limbaugh or Palin tell you; on this one, we could have had the cake and ate it too! Fact is: If you don't educate yourself now, you can pay the doctor then, or your family (and, likely, the state) will pay the hospital later - but someone will pay. Clearly, as regards end-of-life realities, we continue to forge ahead unreformed, uneducated and misinformed.

Getting to the Crux of Rising Health Care Costs

This week on CNBC's Squawk Box, Warren Buffett cited a New Yorker article written by Atul Gawande as one of the best he's read regarding the increasing economic burden caused by rising health care costs (now near 17% of GDP). Of course, I immediately found & read the article.

Atul Gawande is a surgeon, who completed his surgical residency at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, in 2003, and joined the faculty as a general and endocrine surgeon. He's also an associate professor of surgery at Harvard Medical School, an associate professor in the Department of Health Policy and Management at the Harvard School of Public Health, and the associate director of the B.W.H. Center for Surgery and Public Health.

Mr. Buffett is right. Given all the recent political hype floating about regarding health care reform, Dr. Gawande's article seems to cut right through the muck and "zero-in" on the likely crux of the problem. We could use more journalism like this, and I thought you might find the article useful. If so, please pass it/this on to your friends/colleagues.

Toyota Fiasco is Out of Control and You Should Know Why

This interdisciplinary double header intends to shed more light on the most recent government/corporate SNAFU, and to possibly inform fellow techies as to what's really going on around here. First, is some excellent reporting from the WSJ - journalism like this will actually sell newspapers:

Secretive Culture Led Toyota Astray - WSJ

You might note that Bush's last NHTSA Administrator, David Kelly, left office on (or about) Inauguration Day (January 20, 2009). David Strickland, Obama's first Nominee as Administrator of NHTSA, wasn't confirmed and appointed until January 4, 2010.

I also found useful and want to share a wonderful piece of Toyota gas pedal analysis from a more "techie" point of view - "the web’s only complete guide to Toyota’s gas pedals (so far)":

TTAC’s Complete Guide To Toyota’s Gas Pedals: Teardown, Pictures, Toyota’s Fix, Analysis, Commentary | Truth About Cars

Enjoy!

Reagan Budget Chief David Stockman on Bank Reforms

Pay attention, Larry Kudlow: Even former "Supply Sider" conservatives reluctantly agree with the tough financial system reform choices, which must be made - including the politically unpopular reality that it's time to start raising taxes. This is a "must see" interview (the transcript is just below the video):

Reagan Budget Chief Offers a 'Gunslinger' Defense of Obama's Bank Reforms | PBS NewsHour

In a recent NYT Op-Ed on the matter, Stockman states: "To argue, as some conservatives surely will, that a policy-directed shrinking of big banking is an inappropriate interference in the marketplace is to miss a crucial point: the big Wall Street banks are wards of the state, not private enterprises."

Please! Don't miss the entire FANTASTIC article:

Op-Ed Contributor David Stockman - Taxing Wall Street Down to Size - NYTimes.com

Brzezinski: Richard Haass' Tip for Obama

Richard Haass’ account of the policymaking leading up to both Iraq wars -- one a "war of choice," the other a "war of necessity" -- raises questions regarding past United States performance in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Take a look:

A Tale of Two Wars - Foreign Affairs