Good Intentions

Sitting on flight back home from Orlando. Attended my nephew Michael's HS graduation at the Amway arena. He overcame some serious adversity to finish high school. He's now off to FAMU to pursue an engineering degree. I am so proud of him. He's going to do great things.

Halfway home and reading "A Patriots History of the United States". Came across an interesting passage on the impact of the  early 1800's railroad boom on mail distribution and political power that provides some interesting context for the recent moves by the FCC to protect "real journalism".

Largely due to the growth in railroads and the appearance of special mailing privileges, the distribution of political newspapers grew dramatically in the early 1800's:

"Congressman shipped speeches and other election materials to constituents free, thanks to franking privileges. Partisan concerns also linked post office branches and party-controlled newspapers by reducing the cost of distribution through the mails. From 1800 to 1840, the number of newspapers transmitted rose from 2 million to almost 140 million at far cheaper rates then other printed matter...if the newspapers had paid the same rates as others mails, the transmission costs would have been 700 times higher.

The meeting party system, by 1840, had thus compromised the independence of the mails and a large part of the print media, with no small consequences. Among other defects, the subsidies created incentives to read newspapers rather than books. This democratization of the news produced a population of people who thought they new a great deal about current events, but who lacked the theoretical grounding in history, philosophy, or politics to properly ground their opinions."

It's no wonder the decline of the "mainstream media" causes palpable sense of fear amongst amongst the leftist political elite. They need to control the message lest people discover the true impact of their destructive agenda. The FCC's motives with respect to net neutrality and so-called journalistic integrity has nothing to do with fairness and the public good. They have everything to do with keeping the masses numb and malleable.

At Bon Jovi concert... he stops action to say "this should no longer be the decade of me...this will be the decade of we!"

Such pathetic collectivist bullshit. I honestly don't think BJ is a serious thinker but, man, can you please give me a break.

Shut up and sing!

Your health information will never be private again. Hidden in the healthcare bill we find a provision for the implantation of RFID chips. How long will it be before monitoring what you eat in your own home becomes a national healthcare crisis requiring government surveillance?  Hope and Change, baby!

Required RFID implanted chip

Sec. 2521, Pg. 1000 – The government will establish a National Medical Device Registry. 

What does a National Medical Device Registry mean?

National Medical Device Registry from H.R. 3200 [Healthcare Bill], pages 1001-1008:

(g)(1) The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device that— ‘‘(A) is or has been used in or on a patient; ‘‘(B)and is— ‘‘(i) a class III device; or ‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining.”

Then on page 1004 it describes what the term “data” means in paragraph 1,

section B:

‘‘(B) In this paragraph, the term ‘data’ refers to information respecting a device described in paragraph (1), including claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary”

What exactly is a class II device that is implantable? Approved by the FDA, a class II implantable device is an “implantable radio frequency transponder system for patient identification and health information.” The purpose of a class II device is to collect data in medical patients such as “claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary.”

See it for yourself:http://www.fda. gov/downloads/ MedicalDevices/ DeviceRegulation andGuidance/ GuidanceDocument s/ucm072191. pdf

This new law – when fully implemented – provides the framework for making the United States the first nation in the world to require each and every one of its citizens to have implanted in them a radio-frequency identification (RFID) microchip for the purpose of controlling who is, or isn’t, allowed medical care in their country.

Don’t believe it? Look it up yourself. Healthcare Bill H.R. 3200: 

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf/111/AAHCA09001xml.pdf

Pages 1001-1008 “National Medical Device Registry” section.

Page 1006 “to be enacted within 36 months upon passage”

Page 503 “… medical device surveillance”

Why would the government use the word “surveillance” when referring to citizens? The definition of “surveillance” is the monitoring of the behavior, activities, or other changing information, usually of people and often in a secret manner. The root of the word [French] means to “watch over.”

In theory, the intent to streamline healthcare and to eliminate fraud via “health chips” seems right. But, to have the world’s lone superpower (America, for now) mandate (page 1006) a device to be IMPLANTED is scary!

Microchiping included in Healthcare Bill?

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/105079

Coverage under Obamacare will require an implantable microchip?

http://current. com/items/ 90842279_ coverage- under-obamacare- will-require- an-implantable- microchip. htm

The healthcare bill has some good things but at what cost. The whole issue of cost is what has kept most people out of the insurance market in the first place. This bill does nothing to address cost and adds millions more to a broken system.  Spending will skyrocket eventually. The ultimate effect will be either rationing (See Canada, UK, etc.), more tax increases, and/or massive debt.  


So, at some point we will be left with the dilemma of sacrificing either the quality of care we are accustomed to or the economic opportunity of our children.  We might feel better about the "moral implications" in the short run, but in the the long run, the bill will eventually come due and someone will have to pay. 


And, let's not forget about the unfunded liabilities of Medicare and Social Security.  We're talking tens of trillions of debt that has to be paid back with those two programs alone.  


Scary times.

First off, please don't buy the straw man argument that because conservatives are against the current Democratic offering they want to do nothing. This could not be further from the truth. We DO want to improve the healthcare system. The question is how do we do it without bankrupting the country, lowering the quality care, and giving up our right to choose the doctor or plan we want.

Laser eye surgery has the highest patient satisfaction ratings of any surgery, it has been performed more than 3 million times in the past decade, it is new, it is high-tech, it has gotten better over time and... laser eye surgery has fallen in price. In 1998 the average price of laser eye surgery was about $2200 per eye. Today the average price is $1350, that's a decline of 38 percent in nominal terms and slightly more than that after taking into account inflation.

Another example of how the government establishment chooses to fight it's battles. From the CourierPostOnline:

Why of course.... we should just change the law!!!!!

All is not lost. Tea party protests are only the beginning.

Or so Steve Baker, spokesman for the New Jersey Education Association, says in today's Star Ledger:

The economist panel's consensus is that unless we get our medium to long term house in order, we are going to end up with higher interest rates, low growth, huge tax increases, and draconian cuts to Medicare and Social security.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/292015-1

This view was parroted by both the Dems and Reps on the committee.

Why are we not seriously considering Paul Ryan's plan?

http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/