Janet From Another Planet Redeux

I watched Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano say that the

"The system has worked really very, very smoothly over the course of the past several days" (Read it HERE)

yesterday (Sunday) on “This Week” on ABC. She repeated her assurances on other Sunday news shows as well. Apparently she attributed the 'working' part to the passengers that subdued the "alleged" terrorist AFTER he set off his explosive device. The only part that worked in the favor of those passengers was the part where the device did not function as designed.

Today (Monday) is a new day with a new quote from Napolitano on NBC's Today Show.

"Our system did not work in this instance. No one is happy or satisfied with that. An extensive review is under way.” (see it below)

Apparently it's first things first with Janet: Getting correct quote into the airways before any other information is available. Of course, in accordance with current political philosophy, she can always "clarify" her remarks later. The Secretary seems more interested in political fallout than she is about actual security of the country and its people, or the truth. Much like the previous Janet, she is someone who has no demonstrated ability to accomplish the mission at hand.

Speaking of Janet reminds me of the last high ranking Democratic appointee who seemed to believe that international terrorism is a law enforcement problem. She was President Clinton's Attorney General, Janet Reno. Among Janet's many accomplishments were authorizing a SWAT-like raid on a family home in Miami to kidnap a 6 year old child from his family, ordering the burning of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco Texas, causing traffic problems around Florida in a red pickup truck, and addressing international terrorism against this country as a police problem as opposed to a military problem.

In order to support her political and operational position on terrorism, she sent her second in command Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick, over to federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies, primarily the FBI, NSA, CIA and military intelligence, to inform them that communicating between intelligence agents and criminal investigators would hamper her law enforcement operations. The document signed by Ms. Gorelick, known as the "wall", instructed them stop all that communicating with each other concerning foreign investigations. Ms. Gorelick has gone to earn the title of "Mistress of Disaster".


This Janet (Napolitano, pictured left of Janet Reno) is following along in the pre-9/11 Clinton/Reno law enforcement mindset that not only made this country more vulnerable to terrorist attacks, some will argue that it invites and encourages them. This administration, like previous administrations, refuses to acknowledge that we are at war with Muslim extremists and have been since 1979 when our embassy in Tehran was invaded and occupied Iranian for 444 days.

It is my belief and the belief of many others, that Iran declared war on the western nations on that day and have been sending their shadow army of international terrorists to destroy their enemies since that time. From the Marine Barracks in Beirut to today's struggle in Afghanistan and around the world, terrorists and insurgents have been and are being supported with ammunition, funding and supplies that are used to kill our troops and civilians. That is why this is a war and not a "man caused disaster" (more Obama DHS tripe... geez).

It has been very clear to me from 1992 forward that the Democratic Party elites who have no clue about the effects and unintended(?) consequences of anything thing they do. Their mean spiritedness and hatred came boiling out when they lost control of the US House of Representatives in 1995 and it has not slowed down in all that time.

I have to admit that when I see the failure of virtually every liberal/progressive idea that has become the law of the land or an administrative policy, I just have to cringe and tell myself that it will only last 4 years. With any luck, a shorter time for this majority in the US Congress and the DHS secretary.

Are Republicans, Greens, Constitution, and other political parties so awful that you are willing to destroy this country's freedoms and safety to vote for the liberal Democrats? I ask because ultimately, it's the people's choice on the direction of this country and our own safety.

Get Health Reform Right: Anti Reform or Anti THIS Reform.

Over at business insider.com they describe "Get Health Reform Right" (GHRR) as "an anti-reform group" in their article lambasting GHRR's method for gathering information. But that type of Orwellian speech has become common place in this government.

Wouldn't it be more accurate to describe them as "an anti-this reform group". I think so.

As for GHRR's methods, internet game money for taking a poll, it doesn't seem unreasonable to me when considering all the lobbyists and big money that is going into passing the damn thing (Obamacare). The thing that 70% of polled Americans are against. GHRR method doesn't cost anyone.

I am for reform, but specifically not this reform, and I fail to understand how anyone who has looked at any of it could support it in any way.

Here is what the current health care reform in the US congress does not do:

1. No tort reform (thank you lawyer lobby)

2. No income tax deductions for medical insurance (just the opposite)

3. No expanded area coverage to increase competition.

4. Does not lower insurance premiums.

5. Does not cover over 30 million uninsured. (the advertised target of reform*)

What it does do:

1. It cuts reimbursements to Medicare contracted doctors.

2. It adds a new income tax as a penalty for not acting the way the central government wants you to act.

3. This "reform" raises the before-you-can-claim-it deduction from 7.5% to 10%. Currently you can only claim medical expenses that are over 7.5% of your AGI (adjusted gross income).

5. Increases premiums for those who pay for their own insurance.

6. Influences employers to drop coverage.

7. Makes millions more Americans dependent on government instead of themselves.

Keeps the poor poor.

8. Stifles medical innovation.

9. Reduces the number of medical personnel per patient.

10 Slashes Medicare and Medicaid (except Medicaid in Louisiana and Nebraska).

11. Lowers the value of the US dollar thus making those products that Americans need, such as food, housing, clothing and transportation, more expensive and less affordable to lower and middle income Americans.

This healthcare reform is about bankrupting the middle class for generations to come in order to make them more dependent on the political class. The political class that promises to keep the "freebies"** coming.

*Much like TARP that was advertised as help for Americans to keep their homes and their retirement accounts, but did none of that. It only helped politicians and the CEOs that support them, the so-called "stimulus package" that did nothing for anyone except politicians and the Unions that support them, and Auto industry bailouts hat did nothing for anyone except politicians and the Unions that support them, the current US House and Senate Health care reform bills will do nothing for anyone other than politicians and the CEOs, unions, Big Pharma, and Big Insurance that support them (with lots of dollars). All the while it's going to cost you a fortune.

** More Orwell: There is nothing free about these "freebies". They will cost you your freedom, your earnings and your ability to make choices to guide your own life and those of your children.

GOP Health Care Alternative

I would say "finally, a GOP plan". Except there have been GOP plans submitted along with all the Democratic Party health care reform plans and for many months now. The fact that many Americans do not know of these plans calls for investigations if you ask me (something ain't right in the legacy media). Even Fox News Channel doesn't report on the GOP's plan, and they are supposed to be slanted conservative.

It's their alternative to the the new, expanded and improved HR 3200, renamed to HR 3962. The big news here is that is saves $68 billion over 10 years rather spending an additional $3 Trillion as Democrat plan does. And it is a mere 219 pages, as opposed to the 2079 pages in the Pelosi bill.

It has become news since Nancy Pelosi has allowed the GOP plan to be brought to the floor and be voted on. Of course, she does not allow any amendments or debate, but still. This the first and only of around ten Republican plans that she has allowed. She reveals the new Democratic Party version of "bipartisan". You know, the bipartisanship and equality they demanded of the "mean spirited" and "corrupt" GOP in the US Congress when Democrats were swept out in 1995?

The GOP bill is titled, "Common Sense Health Care Reform and Affordability Act". Their summary can be read HERE.

The main points are: interstate competition zones, individual access to group rates (by forming groups), expansion of health savings accounts (HSA's), children can remain on parent's policy until age 25, tort reform, insurance companies must accept preexisting conditions and cannot drop customers who become expensively ill.

Of course, there are already some of these consumer protections in place where preexisting conditions are concerned. Employer based insurance programs allow preexisting after a waiting period (usually 6-12 months). This has been the law for many years (did you know that? I'll bet not). What needs to happen to improve the options for the insured is to make this law available to anyone who buys insurance, instead of just being available through employers.

What it lacks are removal of the 7.5% income tax penalty Americans are charged for getting sick (the Democrat bill raises it to 10%) and no income tax incentives for purchasing insurance.

The Democratic public option is compared to Medicare in application, but Medicare is bankrupt and has been broke for decades. Over 40% of Medicare's funding comes from the general revenue (Part B subsidized at 75%). The copays, payroll taxes and monthly premiums fall short. The government cannot pay for the Democrat plan nor should we want them to.

The GOP health care reform plan looks much better than the Democrat plan due to its lower cost and no individual penalties (Dems want to tap you for 2.5% of your taxable income). Their plan relies more on expanding markets rather than government subsidized, meaning taxpayer subsidized, health care that is the public option.

If you want health care insurance reform, I suggest getting behind the Republicans on this one.