define('DISALLOW_FILE_EDIT', true); define('DISALLOW_FILE_MODS', true); No Runny Eggs

No Runny Eggs

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.

July 21, 2009

His Arnold Schwarzenegger Moment

There’s lots of bad news today for President Obama.  Gallup’s recent polls show that by any measure, President Obama’s policies  are now being considered a failure by the American people:

  • By 49%-47%, those surveyed disapprove of how he is handling the economy, a turnaround from his 55%-42% approval in May. The steepest drop came from conservative and moderate Democrats.
  • By 50%-44%, they disapprove of how he is handling healthcare policy.
  • A 59% majority say his proposals call for too much government spending, and 52% say they call for too much expansion of government power.
  • Expectations of the economy’s turnaround are souring a bit. In February, the average prediction for a recovery was 4.1 years; now it’s 5.5 years.

Some are referring to this sudden drop and his chips all in approach to passing health care reform, as being the President’s Waterloo, the moment at which he wins no more.  I’m betting however, that with his enormous ego and narcissism, if asked, President Obama would refer to this as his Arnold Schwarzenegger moment.  If questioned about whether he might need to change his position on some of these issues I have no doubt the President would answer, “I’ll be Barack!”

Can’t or Won’t?

One of my roles with a previous employer was to develop compensation plans for various sales groups.  As I would work with the sales management it seemed that invariably they would tell me that if we paid more for a particular aspect of the plan, they would be able to get the sales team to achieve that goal.  Just as invariably, when I would hear their line, I would respond with a question, “Is the problem that you can’t do it unless you get paid more or is the problem that you won’t do it unless you get paid more?”  I think you can see the dilemma this left the sales management folks in.

As he cranks up his rhetoric in an attempt to save his health care reform initiative, President Obama told us today that we need to pass health care because it’s the only way to reduce costs.  His exact quote was:

We all know there are more efficient ways of doing it..

implying that only with the passage of health care reform would costs be reduced.  Ironically, he said this on the same day that it was found that the Agriculture department had paid nearly double the going rate for plain old ham.

It’s interesting that when President Obama refers to cost savings in health care he is referring to cost savings in Medicare and Medicaid.  As the health care debate got started, President Obama identified three areas where money could be saved: blackmailing drug companies via FDA approvals, to reduce drug prices, ration treatment to patients by forcing “increased productivity” of physicians and not paying for run of the mill issues that are treated in emergency rooms.   By doing just these three things, President Obama claims that $313 billion could be saved!

Medicare and Medicaid are programs that are completely administered by the government.  Rates for physicians are dictated by the government, procedures and drugs covered are dictated by the government.  With complete control over these programs wouldn’t it seem to be simple for President Obama to save his $313 billion simply by saying “make it so?”  In fact, the exact changes that President Obama proposes are changes that these programs have implemented to varying degrees in the past.

Continuing to cry that only the nationalization of our health care is the only way to reduce costs leaves me asking just one question of President Obama; are you telling me that without taking more of my money you can’t or won’t save money in health care?

Hey, GOP, Are You Taking Note?

Census: Voter Turnout in 2008 Lowest in 12 8 Years

For all the attention generated by Barack Obama’s candidacy, the share of eligible voters who actually cast ballots in November declined for the first time in a dozen years. The reason: Older whites with little interest in backing either Barack Obama or John McCain stayed home.

The decline in percentage turnout was the first in a presidential election since 1996. At that time, voter participation fell to 58.4 percent — the lowest in decades — as Democrat Bill Clinton won an easy re-election over Republican Bob Dole amid a strong economy.

Class, what did we learn?

1.  Give us “the next guy in line” again and we’ll sit out again!

2.  Give us someone who looks no different than a Democrat on many issues and we’ll sit out again

Oh and:

Minnesota and the District of Columbia had the highest turnout, each with 75 percent.

3.  If you have a crappy GOP candidate, even if we don’t sit out we won’t vote for them.

Revisions/extensions (8:12 am 7/21/2009; steveegg) – Newsmax didn’t exactly fact-check the numbers, which caused the error struck through above. According to the Census Bureau, the 2000 turnout percentage was lower than 2008’s. It still is, however, the first drop in voter turnout percentage since 1996.

Related to that, I’m sifting through the Census Bureau’s turnout numbers going back to 1980.

July 20, 2009

Senate Doctors

by @ 19:22. Filed under Health Care Reform.

No, this isn’t a new ABC prime time show!

The only two trained physicians in the Senate have been holding video conferences for the past few weeks.  Senator Coburn of Oklahoma and Senator Barrasso of Wyoming have been discussing the various “health care reform” proposals and answering questions sent in by people via email, youtube and other means.

You can see past episodes of the Senate Doctors here.

You can watch tomorrow’s edition live at 3 PM Central here:

Streaming live video by Ustream

President Obama is feeling the heat on this issue. Make sure and stay atop of the issue and the facts by watching the Senate Doctors!

Monday must-read – Ken Lamke’s “Walker vs. Neumann”

by @ 17:06. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

(H/T – Charlie Sykes)

In the current issue of WPRI’s Wisconsin Interest, Ken Lamke makes the case that a primary battle between Scott Walker and Mark Neumann would actually be good for the GOP’s chances of retaking the governor’s office in November 2010.

The prospect of a primary contest between Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker and former Congressman Mark Neumann for the Republican nomination for governor in 2010 greatly enhances the GOP’s chances of defeating Gov. Jim Doyle next year.

At least the historical record of the past 45 years of Wisconsin elections leads to that conclusion.

Each of the six times that incumbent governors or U.S. senators were defeated since 1962 occurred when the nominee of the out party emerged from a contested primary rather than having the nomination handed to him by running unopposed in the primary.

Lamke goes on to point out that the major advantages of having a contested primary is that the participants get near-monopoly media coverage, and that they get to hit the incumbent without the incumbent getting to hit back. While the latter isn’t quite true, the return fire is necessarily split between the primary participants.

Of course, winning a contested primary does not always translate to success in the general election.

Sometimes these party leaders are not so much interested in having their party nominee knock off the incumbent as they are in having the specific candidate they support win the nomination.

They really don’t care if their party wins in November—that is, that the primary candidate whom they haven’t backed goes on to beat the incumbent. In fact, they sometimes strongly oppose that outcome, although they won’t say so. Almost by definition, they are not really “party” leaders as much as they are supporters of a particular candidate.

The state GOP leadership, as well as the vast majority of the county party leaderships, changed significantly since 2006, to the point where the 2009 convention was “All Walker All The Time”. However, I’m already starting to see a similar dynamic. The old guard, while officially in the minority among the leadership, is still quite infuencial outstate, while a lot of Walker supporters are already firing “I’ll never support you” broadsides at Neumann.

Who Forgot to Pack the Plunger?

by @ 16:28. Filed under Miscellaneous.

Astronauts deal with flooded toilet in orbit

The bathroom lines at the already crowded space shuttle and space station complex got a lot longer Sunday because of a flooded toilet.

One of two commodes aboard the international space station broke down, right in the middle of complicated robotic work being conducted by the two crews.

Update:  All sphincters can relax now!

The Natives are Getting Restless

by @ 16:24. Filed under Politics - National.

Falling personal approval ratings, falling support ratings for major initiatives, falling confidence for the party he leads all should give President Obama some pause when considering whether he is representing the interests of the American people.

The attached clip seems pretty representative not necessarily of the issue but of the passion and concern, that generating amongst many folks of all political persuasions, that I talk to.  While only one incident, this did occur in Delaware.  Last I looked Delaware wasn’t close to being a Red State.

If We Fail to Learn From History….

by @ 14:01. Filed under Health Care Reform.

Folks, here are a couple of the original “Harry and Louise” ads that ran showing the problems with the original “health care reform” proposed by the Clintons.  If you watch the ads, you’ll note that the issues haven’t changed.  What was common sense then still holds true today:

PSA from the cartoonist

by @ 7:17. Filed under Miscellaneous.

In case you haven’t noticed the subtle messages in the Day By Day cartoons lately (or you’re visiting the mobile version of this place), Chris Muir is holding the 2009/2010 Support DBD Event. There’s 5 levels this time around instead of 4, and a Sam In Red figurine that’s a $67 option for the bottom 4:

– The Jan Level ($1-19) gets you pdfs of 3 ‘Gang of 4’ Posters and jpgs of 3 Propaganda Posters.
– The Zed Level ($20) gets you that plus pdfs of 7 ‘SmallMatters’ trial strip (c1998) and
pdfs of 2 ‘PaintedWomen’ Posters.
– The Sam Level ($40) gets you that plus a third ‘PaintedWomen’ Poster.
– The Damon Level ($125) gets you all that plus a Signed Original Toon Script & Toon (for the first 365 only with the toon on heavy stock suitable for framing), 8 Signed Prints of ‘PaintedWomen’ Posters printed on heavy stock, signed, and ready for framing, and 4 Magnet Full-Color Cards of all 4 Characters.
– The new Su excelencia Don Manuel Luciano de la Portago y Verrillo Level (starting at $150) gets you everything except the toon script/toon combo, but adds a Sam in Black figurine.

If only I could do triple figures, I would’ve moved up from the Sam Level I did last year. Instead, I stayed at the Sam Level. If I can kick in to keep the best daily comic strip out there around another year, you can too!

Roll change – guest-blogger edition

by @ 6:39. Filed under The Blog.

Phineas decided that, with the shrinking amount of money being left for the non-public-sector economy, he couldn’t pay TypePad anymore for his blogging. That means Public Secrets has a new home – http://pubsecrets.wordpress.com/.

July 18, 2009

Commonality

by @ 17:49. Filed under Health Care Reform.

What do the Health Care Reform Act, the world’s oldest profession and this picture have in common?

weiner

A: In each case, someone is slipping someone the wiener!

H/T Olbroad

July 17, 2009

Slim, None and Nil

by @ 21:17. Filed under Politics - National.

Between joining the climate change bandwagon with Nancy Pelosi

And now, positing that Sotomayor may be a moderate:

“The person who has testified this week is dramatically more moderate than the person who made those speeches,” he said before delivering a speech at the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council. “It will be very interesting to see how she winds up as a justice.”

Newt Gingrich has lost all credibility with me as understanding any part of the Democrat’s modus operandi. 

Is Newt really so out of touch that he doesn’t understand that liberals like Obama and Sotomayor have no compunction about saying anything necessary to get themselves elevated to the role they seek?  Does Newt not understand that “I didn’t say that,” “I didn’t know” and “I’m sorry if anyone felt offended” are standard phrases that have been accepted by the left as absolving all members of any responsibility, at least momentarily, of anything that they had done or said in the past?

Newt, to be clear, the likelihood of Sotomayor being moderate is the same likelihood that man is responsible for climate change.  In case you can’t do the math, it is zero!

If We Don’t Learn From History…

by @ 16:12. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

We are doomed to repeat it…

From the 1934 Chicago Tribune. The Names have changed, the issues haven’t!
Cartoon

The Friday Freefly is back

by @ 6:55. Filed under Politics - National.

There’s no Kev with the change of venue to DC, but Uncle Jimbo launches into a douchebag of an Army major, a linguini-armed CinC who is a baseball poseur, and various Socialist hits. For those of you with weak ears, you may not want to play the video because of more than a few vulgarities. The rest of you – enjoy!

[youtube width=”560″ height=”340″]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lduW_u7qlcw[/youtube]

I Agree With Joe Biden!

For those who have read this blog for a while, I’ll give you a moment to put your teeth back in and pick yourself up off of the floor.

Ready?

In a speech to AARP about the proposed national health care plan, Joe Biden said:

“And folks look, AARP knows and the people with me here today know, the president knows, and I know, that the status quo is simply not acceptable,” Biden said at the event on Thursday in Alexandria, Va. “It’s totally unacceptable. And it’s completely unsustainable. Even if we wanted to keep it the way we have it now. It can’t do it financially.”

For once, I absolutely agree with Joe.  The current course is unsustainable.  We need to make changes soon or we’re going to be in a whole heap of trouble!

Think I’m just some two bit blogging hack who’s just throwing another opinion to the ether?  Don’t think my opinions is that valuable?  Well, don’t trust me then, trust the head of the Congressional Budget Office. 

In his testimony to Congress and in his blog, the Director of the CBO said:

the federal budget is on an unsustainable path, because federal debt will continue to grow much faster than the economy over the long run. Although great uncertainty surrounds long-term fiscal projections, rising costs for health care and the aging of the population will cause federal spending to increase rapidly under any plausible scenario for current law. (emphasis mine)

That’s right, shocking isn’t it.  The federal budget is on an unsustainable path.  The CBO goes on to explain what the problem with the budget is….take one guess at what is causing the unsustainable problem:

Measured relative to GDP, almost all of the projected growth in federal spending other than interest payments on the debt stems from the three largest entitlement programs—Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. For decades, spending on Medicare and Medicaid has been growing faster than the economy. CBO projects that if current laws do not change, federal spending on Medicare and Medicaid combined will grow from roughly 5 percent of GDP today to almost 10 percent by 2035. By 2080, the government would be spending almost as much, as a share of the economy, on just its two major health care programs as it has spent on all of its programs and services in recent years.

And this is before putting another $1.5 Trillion minimum of additional costs into the budget for the national health care program!

Later in his speech, Joe went on to lie again telling the folks that they would be able to keep their existing health plan if they wanted:

They’ll be a deal in there so there’s competition, so what you’ll have in there is you’ll have the ability to go in there and say, ‘Now look, this is the policy I want. This is the one,” Biden said.

Someone should get Joe a copy of the House bill or a subscription to Investors Business Daily.  If he had either, he would note the following:

When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee

It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage,” the “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the bill clearly states

“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day” of the year the legislation becomes law.

Joe did have one last comment that I agree with him on:

“We’re going to go bankrupt as a nation,” Biden said.

Yes, Joe.  If we continue down this path and are lucky, we may only go bankrupt as a nation.  My bet is that if we follow the advice of you and yours, we’ll commit national suicide!

July 16, 2009

If Microsoft did this…

by @ 20:15. Filed under Business.

Yesterday, Apple broke the ability of Palm’s Pre smartphone to sync with iTunes. It would be as if Google had somehow figured out how to fully-implement MSHTML in Google Chrome, and then Microsoft shut that off in Chrome to protect the elements of MSHTML that are only available in Internet Explorer.

Of course, the Apple fanboys, the same ones that would be the loudest whiners (yes, even louder than the Google fanboys) if Microsoft did that, are happier than pigs in wet shit that their company is making the mistake it did with MacOS – namely, shutting out any and all third-party developers. I hope they’re happy with a 10% market share for iTunes/iPhone in 5 years.

Someone Didn’t Get The Memo!

by @ 16:13. Filed under Miscellaneous.

Senator Barbara Boxer attempted to use the traditional Democrat tactic of identity politics on Black Chamber of Commerce CEO, Harry Alford.  Unfortunately for Babs, Harry hadn’t gotten the memo that said that all US Citizens of African heritage must think alike and that all US Citizens of African heritage must support all policies posited by the first President with African heritage.  Fortunately, Mr. Alford called Babs on her racist remarks.  Unfortunately, she’s either too dense

Enjoy!

Soon, at a Medical Provider Near You!

Massachusetts is the state whose health care model that is being used for much of the Democrat’s plan.  When Massachusetts plan was proposed, it was supposed to cost the State a few hundred thousand dollars each year.  It is now costing more than twice what it was proposed to cost.

From the NY Times:

BOSTON — A hospital that serves thousands of indigent Massachusetts residents sued the state on Wednesday, charging that its costly universal health care law is forcing the hospital to cover too much of the expense of caring for the poor.

The central charge in the suit is that the state has siphoned money away from Boston Medical to help pay the considerable cost of insuring all but a small percentage of residents. Three years after the law’s passage, Massachusetts has the country’s lowest percentage of uninsured residents: 2.6 percent, compared with a national average of 15 percent.

Sound Familiar?

One of the state’s reimbursement rates to Boston Medical, dropped from $12, 476 in 2008 to $9,323 by 2009, the suit says.

Folks, this is one way that government rations.  By reducing their payments to providers, for no reason other than they can, providers begin reducing the number of patients they will see or reduce the care the patients get.  Is it lost on the D.C. crowd how many providers no longer accept Medicaid patients?

State officials have suggested that Boston Medical could reduce costs by operating more efficiently. The state has also pointed out that the hospital has reserves of about $190 million, but Tom Traylor, the hospital’s vice president of federal and state programs, said the reserves could only sustain the hospital for about a year.

Translation:  You have money, therefore you can afford to get paid less or pay more to be a part of the program.

If the State is so good at identifying where cost reductions can be attained, why is it that they have a budget shortfall of $5 Billion?  Can’t they state turn their own folks inward to find the waste and inefficiency in the State’s budget?

Deja Vu All Over Again

by @ 5:34. Filed under Economy, Health, Politics - National.

President Obama along with many Democrats, are trying to push a health care overhaul before the August recess. Amidst arguments of the cost ($1.6 Trillion to over $4 trillion), how to pay for it (taxes, taxes, taxes) and who it would provide political payback for (planned parenthood amongst others), most folks, including those in Congress, have no idea how this plan (at 3,000 pages) would actually work.  To help show the complexity of what is being proposed the Republicans have released a chart that shows all of the bureaucratic snarling that would occur if the proposed plan is passed.  Can you make sense of it?

Dem med

It’s hard to believe that this mess can possibly provide better health care than what we have today. The funny thing is that I seem to remember seeing a similar plan to this as a kid. As a kid I remember seeing a plan that had fewer bureaucratic involvement yet had the same exact end result.

While almost 40 years old, I believe this chart would have just as much success as the one the Democrats are proposing:

Mouse_Trap_Board_and_Boxjpg

Either way, we end up trapped at the end!

July 15, 2009

Reagan-era whiz-kid says the tax war is lost

by @ 10:03. Filed under Politics - National, Taxes.

Peter Ferrara, who served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, had an intriguing piece that appeared in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal. In it, he tries to make the case that the NewConservative™ position on taxes should be not that everybody should have a low tax bill, but that the bottom 60% of wage-earners should have an explicit 0% federal tax rate with an end to refundable tax credits. He argues that we’re already at the point where said bottom 60%, which earns 25% of the total income, paid less than 1% of total federal taxes in 2006 (the last year figures were available), and will likely have a net 0% federal tax liability come April, 2010. He further argues that the reason that Steve Lonegan lost the Republican gubernatorial primary in very-high-tax New Jersey was because he advocated a flat 3% income tax, which would have raised taxes slightly on the bottom half of wage-earners.

K Street, we have a disconnect. If it is true that Lonegan lost because of the tax issue, then that plan is doomed to failure. Ferrara notes that, in 2006, the bottom 40% of wage-earners received an aggregate net 3.6% of their income in refundable tax credits. If that gets taken away, there goes an aggretate 3.5% (no, not 3.6%) of their income.

What is worse is Ferrara’s leaps-of-faith regarding the 40% of those who will now be explicitly hitched to the bloat known as the federal government and its effect on the size of said bloat. He seems to think that, by explicitly taking the majority out of the tax burden entirely, a rational, low-tax policy can be put in place for the “rich”, with the phantom “middle-class tax cut” taken out of political play. What is more likely is that both halves of the bipartisan Party-In-Government will redouble (and in the case of the GOP, retriple) their efforts to buy Paul’s vote by robbing Peter to grow government since there would be far more Pauls than Peters.

The one part of his analysis that is correct is that the Peters would find ways to go Galt. Now, what was that saying about the great experiment in governance known as America ending when half the people realize that they can use the power of government to rob the other half blind?

July 14, 2009

Drinking Right – NOW!

by @ 18:41. Filed under Miscellaneous.

This is the Emergency Blogging System. It has been activated because Steve is over at Papa’s Social Club, 7718 W. Burleigh in Milwaukee, for the July Drinking Right. You are instructed to head there now.

This concludes this activation of the Emergency Blogging System.

Tuesday Hot Read – Mortimer Zuckerman’s “The Economy Is Even Worse Than You Think”

by @ 14:36. Filed under Economy.

So, you think that 9.5% June unemployment is bad? In today’s Wall Street Journal, US News and World Report editor-in-chief Mortimer Zuckerman makes the case that we are in a second Great Depression:

The Bureau of Labor Statistics preliminary estimate for job losses for June is 467,000, which means 7.2 million people have lost their jobs since the start of the recession. The cumulative job losses over the last six months have been greater than for any other half year period since World War II, including the military demobilization after the war. The job losses are also now equal to the net job gains over the previous nine years, making this the only recession since the Great Depression to wipe out all job growth from the previous expansion

He also includes 10 items that back that up, as well as what happened to the Porkulus.

Let’s Call It “Employment Change”

by @ 13:53. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

It always seems that liberals use words or phrases until the words don’t support their view of the world any longer.  When that happens liberals typically change the definition of the words or come up with description changes that fit their new view of the situation.

Do you remember how “Climate Change” used to be called “Global Warming?”  Yeah, global warming up until it became clear that all the claims being made about increasing global temperatures….made by man….we’re blown up by nearly 10 straight years of global temperature flattening or even cooling.  Voila, “Global Warming” was changed to “Climate Change.”  It really didn’t matter that the world wasn’t warming any more, the fact that something is changing that is not in line with the liberals desire is what the true catastrophic issue is.

When President Obama proposed the Stimulus plan he had his economic experts sell the plan by saying that without it, unemployment would go to nearly 10%.  In contrast, by implementing the stimulus plan, Obama argued that unemployment would cap at 8%.

Over the past weekend President Obama told us that the stimulus plan was working swimmingly and that while unemployment was a “lagging indicator”, all would be well if we were just patient:

“We’re moving in the right direction,” Obama said. “We must let it work the way it’s supposed to, with the understanding that in any recession, unemployment tends to recover more slowly than other measures of economic activity.”

While in Michigan today, President Obama said that he really doesn’t have a clue what is happening with unemployment:

“How employment numbers are going to respond is not year clear. My expectation is that we will probably continue to see unemployment tick up for several months.”

Clearly, this is what Obama and his team expected to see.  Clearly they had expected that by doing the man made adjustments all would become right with unemployment.  Clearly they are now frustrated that things are not going along the path they prescribed in February.  What should they do now?  I know, let’s not call it “unemployment” anymore, let’s call it “employment change.”  There, they were never wrong.  Problem solved!

Past Performance is not Indicative of Future Results

by @ 10:11. Filed under Politics - National.

Newsmax.com is reporting that President Obama is shattering all previous presidential travel records.

In the first 171 days of his presidency, Obama spent 22 days — the equivalent of one full month of working days — out of the country. That means 13 percent of Obama’s time in office has been spent abroad.

The amount of time that Obama is spending abroad may be a bit suprising when you consider that Obama is dealing with significant domestic issues including “… the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression,” cap and trade legislation and a  health care agenda.  In addition, Obama still has those nagging little issues in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

Together, one would think that Obama has more than enough things to keep his attention at home rather than grand standing across the globe.  For someone who campaigned on bringing efficiency to government, Obama’s travels would seem to be counter intuitive.  Well, now that I think about it, maybe not so counter intuitive.  Remember, Obama has a history of avoiding focus on the things he ought to be focused on:

From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That’s how many days the Senate was actually in session and working.

And before that:

In the end, Mr. Obama chose neither to vote for nor against the bill. He voted “present,” effectively sidestepping the issue, an option he invoked nearly 130 times as a state senator.

Every commercial for every investment fund or firm has a disclaimer that reads:

Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Unfortunately for President Obama, past performance, or the lack of focus on it, is exactly what we should expect in future results!

July 13, 2009

Server issues

by @ 22:40. Filed under The Blog.

Sorry about that; something odd happened to the php server. I basically ended up nuking the entire php handling routine.

[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]