Cowboy Confessional

I’d rather be writing songs than writing about health care, but some days duty calls.

I was politely challenged by a Democrat and left-leaning to the point of toppling over friend on my assertion that Barack Obama’s proposals, aside from being socialist and thus by definition un-American, were a series of slow motion train wrecks. My alleged friend allowed me to monologue on any single topic. Given that I’m sick of this long presidential race, healthcare seemed like an appropriate subject.

Obama’s proposals (shifting as they do like the sands of the Sahara) are semi-permanently documented on his campaign web site. Ignoring for the moment that there is nearly zero Constitutional authority for any of his schemes (which is odd considering he once taught constitutional law) we see the following logical and economic disasters in waiting (note that the proposals are directly copied/pasted from Obama’s site):

Proposal: Require insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions so all Americans regardless of their health status or history can get comprehensive benefits at fair and stable premiums.

This proposal requires two elements of force: First, it requires insurance companies to cover people with known risks. The modern parallel is the subprime mortgage mess where government required banks to lend to people with known risks (low income, spotty credit histories, etc.) The natural response for any businessman would be to raise prices to cover these risks, but Obama promises “comprehensive benefits” (i.e., everything is covered) at “fair and stable prices” which would require price fixing. So Obama will raise insurance company risk while restricting their revenues which will lead to bankruptcies and people losing their coverage.

Great plan Barry. But Barry was dumb enough to snort coke so his risk assessment skills are pretty low.

Proposal: Prevent insurers from overcharging doctors for their malpractice insurance and invest in proven strategies to reduce preventable medical errors.

Rephrased, Obama will restrict insurance companies from charging the rates they need to survive the onslaught of ambulance chasers. This squeeze will result in companies getting out of the malpractice insurance business. Unable to find malpractice insurance will cause doctors to go out of business and be forced to practice in HMOs … and we all know how popular HMOs are.

Proposal: Make employer contributions more fair by requiring large employers that do not offer coverage or make a meaningful contribution to the cost of quality health coverage for their employees to contribute a percentage of payroll toward the costs of their employees health care.

In other words if you do not provide your employees health insurance then we will force you to provide it anyway, and to provide as much as we tell you to. This could result in employers dropping more than insurance coverage — they’ll drop employees. I’d rather have a job and buy my own insurance than have no job and no insurance to boot.

Proposal: Establish a National Health Insurance Exchange with a range of private insurance options as well as a new public plan based on benefits available to members of Congress that will allow individuals and small businesses to buy affordable health coverage.

Barack foresees a government run exchange (as opposed to the existing public exchanges) with the addition of a set of taxpayer subsidized insurance plans that compete with private plans. This will drive private insurance into the grave because private insurers do not receive subsidies from the taxpayers. This will insure “universal health care” because soon there will be no alternatives to government coverage.

Proposal: Lower drug costs by allowing the importation of safe medicines from other developed countries, increasing the use of generic drugs in public programs and taking on drug companies that block cheaper generic medicines from the market

The problem is that the drug prices in other countries for American designed drugs are lower because foreign countries set the price below market value. To compensate and make back the billions of dollars they spend on R&D, the drug companies raise U.S. prices. If Obama has his way U.S. drug companies will not be able to make back their R&D money and thus will quit inventing new drugs, effectively killing the American pharmaceutical industry and a few Americans in the process.

Proposal: Reform the insurance market to increase competition by taking on anticompetitive activity that drives up prices without improving quality of care.

Problem here is that the government created an anticompetitive insurance industry at the request of … the insurance industry (I’d love to not have competition too). You are not allowed to buy insurance from the state or country of your choice, and states (with Congressional support) mandate the services you must pay for, even if you don’t use them. For example my gay friend David bitches that he has to pay his insurance company for contraceptives and in vitro fertilization service that he obviously will never use.

---

If all this sounds good to you, then you need socialized medicine and need your head examined.

What are they putting in the water in Charlotte County, Florida? Given the serial sexual antics of their elected representatives there is now a movement afoot to rename that turf to Harlot County.

Congress swung Democrat in 2006 due to the perversions of former 16th District Republican Mark Foley. Don’t take my word for the damage Foley wrought during that election cycle. According to Election projection, whose results are spooky accurate, the House and Senate were still in Republican control until the Foley scandal broke, their lead dropping nearly 20 points shortly thereafter.

Foley had a thing for teenage boys, and in his quest for twinkies had the bad judgment to leave electronic trails of his seductions via email and text messages. Foley’s attempt to mate with underage men ran somewhat counter the GOP’s family values manta.

Now his successor has been implicated in serial affairs.

Enter stage left Tim Mahoney, a Democrat who dashed into Foley’s former job on a campaign promising to return morals and family values to Washington. You have to give Mahoney credit for taking on a task that would make Sisyphus flinch. Evidentially Harlot County morals include not only seducing teenage boys but also committing serial infidelity.

Mahoney’s hardship now lay in his damaged brand. When your actions are contrary to your brand, people respond with rejection. A brand is a promise, and since trust is the foundation of all relationships, when one violates their personal brand they violate trust. Foley broke his “family values” brand and was chased out of office. Now Mahoney has broken his “morals” brand.

Naturally the Republicans are dancing down every Charlotte County street today, sensing an opportunity to reclaim what Foley threw away.

What neither my Republican nor Democrat friends will admit is that there is not a dime’s worth of difference between their candidates. Politicians are in the game for power. People who crave power are by nature corrupt or corruptible. We should be thankful that their sexual appetites keep them too busy to steal even more money from us.

I best contact the Charlotte County water management district. I have a sibling who lives near by and I want to make sure she isn’t suddenly desiring to run for office.

Much has been said about Barack Obama’s association with William Ayers, a certified terrorist who in the 1960’s sought to blow up offices and employees of the U.S. government. Most speculation has been about Obama and his views on Ayers.

Obama claims he knew nothing about Ayers unsavory past despite having sat on boards of directors together and Ayers having made his own living room available to launch Obama’s initial campaign into politics. It is conceivable (though barely) that Obama was ignorant of Ayers’ violent past and revolutionary disgust for the U.S. Obama’s assertion is greatly diminished by the fact that there are no strangers in Chicago politics. Everyone advances through connections. A Chicago candidate doesn’t stand a Chinaman’s Chance of winning an office without connections.

What pundits and politicos have failed to articulate is that it is Ayers’ view of Obama that is important. Ayers gave his time, money and home to insert Obama into the political mainstream. Ayers wanted Obama to succeed. This says much about Obama because Ayers would not risk his Chicago political credibility on someone that wasn’t going to push Ayers’ agenda.

Ayers hates America, tried to violently overthrow it, and from all reports has not materially changed his attitude in 40 years. This means Ayers’ believes Obama will help achieve what Ayers and the Weathermen were unable to do with explosives.

Obama might not know Ayers … but Ayers knows Obama. Now we know the game in play.

Who would have thought that the Vice Presidential debate would have been the most entertaining and civil of this election cycle.

I did not have high hopes for civility. Joe Biden threw the first firebomb of the debate on the second question asked. Worse still his firebomb was an out-of-context parrot point of a sound bite that made Old Joe look trite. Palin parried with the ease she failed to show when chatting with Katie Couric. Palin countered Biden’s assault with kindness. She then hijacked the Obama campaign’s “change” theme repeatedly using the word “new”.

I think this opening rhetorical artillery exchange shook Biden and he never recovered.

Palin then did something Biden can’t, namely play the Mom card. She spoke at a personal level that likely connected with average people despite sounding a bit canned. The topic in this round was how the sub-prime mortgage mess came about, and Palin exposed the foolishness of some home buyers who purchased houses and chose mortgages that were way beyond their means. Biden countered claiming that a lack of government regulation was the cause. This tiny tit for tat clearly demarked their political philosophies — the divide between individual responsibility and government paternalism.

The former won, or at least that is what a live focus group hosted by Fox News indicated. This group of equally divided Blues and Reds wielded devices they dialed to express their (dis)agreement with the speaker. When Palin spoke on personal and government responsibility, everyone in the room agreed with her in the 90% range.

That will be very dangerous to the Obama campaign.

The Democrat perspective showed through again as Biden lobbied for their “rob the rich” tax plan expressing nearly open anger (I may be reading too much into this moment of the debate — Biden always looks angry). Joe appeared nasty while Palin came across as sympatric to the condition of The People, poor and rich. Biden responded by diving headlong into a convoluted number-dump on health care costs. He lobbed scare tactic statistics like verbal hand grenades in a blunt attempt to frighten swing voters.

Anger, fear, and robbery. What a winning combo. Obama may be dialing Hillary’s cell phone to ask if it is too late to reconsider his choice in running mates.

One recurring observation: Biden is spooky. He has sudden facial expression changes, switching from a snarl to an overplayed smile, to a frown in less time than it takes Bill Clinton to unzip. He came off looking schizophrenic and manic, two qualities nobody wants in a man with his a finger on the ICBM launch button.

Palin spent time discussing solutions and political philosophy. Biden spent his time slinging mud. Palin was able to rattle off world leader names and articulate foreign policy talking points with ease, which is counter to the pre-game analysis by politicos. She surprised many people, especially Biden.

The big shock was that Palin distanced herself from the Bush administration, flatly stating that the Bushies made massive blunders. No nuance — Bush bumbled. Biden repeatedly tried to tie McCain to Bush but his attempts were ham-handed and fell flat. Joe delivered these lines in the same way that linebackers dance ballet. When Biden claimed the U.S. General in charge of the Afghanistan campaign said a “surge” would not work, Palin debunked and dunked Biden — and he was visibly shaken.

Palin’s only tactical error was closing the debate by saying that the main stream media would filter the debate results. This may well be true but even if the MSM is in the tank for Obama, it never helps to pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel and own satellite uplink ground stations.

I won’t claim that Palin won the debate, but she held her own and showed that she is more than ready to be a Vice President. Joe proved nothing. You do the scoring from there.

As talking heads franticly attempt to lay blame on one political party or another for the current financial market meltdown, all have avoided asking what or who ignited the problem. They blame deregulation (wrong), Bush (wrong), the Democrat Congress (wrong, which may be a first).

The mark of Cain is on Alan Greenspan, former head witchdoctor of the Federal Reserve.

For whatever reasons Alan’s alleged mind concocted, Greenspan gathered the firewood, lit the kindling and blew on the flame that now engulfs the global financial markets. Feel free to reserve your place in the long line of people who will queue to piss on his grave.

Greenspan lowered the Federal Funds Rate to historic lows for an extended period of time. From 1954 through 2000, the average Federal Funds Rate was 6.1%. From 2001 to the time Greenspan left office, the average rate was 2.2%. In other words, Greenspan put money into the lending stream at 1/3rd the historic rate, and he did so for more than four years.

Every person and institution (and institutionalized persons including your Congressman) performs risk/reward analysis. Even muggers ponder the odds of being shot by an armed citizen before picking their target. Banks do the same thing. Before they lend money, they assess the risk. Part of the risk equation is “what is the cost of the money I’m lending?” If the cost of money is low, the risk is lowered and thus banks are willing to take bigger chances, including lending to people they otherwise would not.

This is the essence of the sub-prime “let’s lend money to anyone regardless of their credit worthiness” mortgage market. With plenty of cheap money available, lenders took increasingly larger risks. With each new home owner in the market, the housing supply shrank and thus home prices rose. This encouraged banks to lend to even riskier new home owners for even more inflated properties. This reinforcing cycle continued until the riskiest of loans started to default and a reverse chain reaction occurred.

In short, government caused the problem by creating a purely artificial situation. Money cost less than it would in a free market. Cheap money makes people stupid (look at any trust fund child). The Fed was stupid which made banks stupid enough to lend to people too stupid to otherwise risk lending money to.

There is no telling where this fiasco will end, but let history name it well: Greenspan’s Disaster.