Over the weekend, three term Republican Senator Bob Bennett failed to win a spot on the GOP primary ballot in Utah. Yesterday, Congressman Alan Mollohan failed to win the Democrat nomination in West Virginia. Over the next few months, at least a dozen additional incumbents could lose their seats in the primaries. Among them are three Senators -- Blanche Lincoln, Arlen Specter, and John McCain.
Specter typifies what's wrong in Congress. The guy has been locked away in the District of Columbia for 45 years. The world was a very different place when Specter got to Congress in 1965. At this point, he's completely clueless about most everything. He also doesn't have any philosophical foundation or moral center. All he cares about is hanging on to power.
McCain is so scared that he recently released a disgusting, disingenuous, and pandering television ad about the border, in which he completely reversed his long held positions on illegal immigration. JD Hayworth is currently behind McCain in the polls, but fortunately the Arizona primary isn't until August. By then, McCain's famous temper will have torpedoed his campaign.
In Kentucky, conservative-libertarian Rand Paul holds a double digit lead over the establishment hand picked candidate Trey Grayson in the GOP Senate primary. Grayson used to be a Democrat, who supported Bill Clinton. That didn't stop former Vice President Dick Cheney, Senate leader Mitch McConnell, and much of the rest of the GOP establishment from endorsing him. Why? Because they are scared to death that Paul will be an independent voice who will not go along to get along.
The slaughter in the general election in November is likely going to be much larger. House Republican Leader John Boehner claims that as many as 100 House seats are up for grabs. I'm not a big Boehner fan, but I agree with him on this -- there is an anti-incumbent furor that could result in as much as 20% of the House turning over this year. All of the losses won't be on the Democrat side.
If unemployment stays around 10%, there will be another slaughter in 2012. This isn't only bad news for Barack Obama. Establishment types like Mitt Romney will likely be causalities as well.
This is all great news. The voters are finally waking up and throwing the bums out.
Unfortunately, Americans usually don't pay much attention to the goings on in the District of Columbia. They are this year and they did in 1994, but generally they don't.
In the absence of a diligent electorate, we need term limits. Unfortunately, regardless of who controls Congress, elected politicians are not going to pass a law, let alone a Constitutional amendment to limit their power in any way. That's the big problem.
I for one am looking forward to seeing large numbers of incumbents in both parties being booted from office this year and in 2012. Those that remain will be so scared that they will clean up their acts and do what we want -- at least for a short period of time.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Jim Bunning endorses Rand Paul and gives him $2,000
It's nice to have a true conservative, who is also one of the great major league pitchers of all time on your side!
Who are the neo-commies and Dick Cheney backing? A ex-Democrat hack who supported Bill Clinton. This demonstrates how f'd up the GOP really is.
Who are the neo-commies and Dick Cheney backing? A ex-Democrat hack who supported Bill Clinton. This demonstrates how f'd up the GOP really is.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Tea Party: All Noise and No Muscle?
The AP is running a story today that paints the Tea Party movement as being largely ineffective. One Republican consultant characterized them as making a lot of noise, but having no no muscle.
The smarmy little Republican operative who said that may very well wind up eating his words. There is still plenty of time between now and 2012 for a new Ross Perot type candidate to emerge and get in front of this thing.
Perot was largely a creation of the media, starting with Larry King. Half way through the campaign he went nuts and quit, and then re-entered the race. However, people were so angry at H.W Bush that Perot won 19% of the vote anyway.
People are every bit as angry today, starting with W. Bush, Wall Street, the Congress, and now Obama. The Tea Party is a ready made movement for a right-of-center populist candidate to leverage. I think Sarah Palin knows this and is paving the groundwork to make it happen.
Palin was the first GOP leader to endorse the third party congressional candidate in NY23. She has endorsed Rand Paul for Senate in Kentucky over the establishment, neo-con candidate. Her husband used to be a member of the Alaska Independence Party. A couple of weeks ago, she stunned GOP sycophant Sean Hannity by saying that third party conservative candidates are a good thing because: A.) they provide us with more choice and B.) they help keep the GOP candidates in-line. After their disastrous performance under Bush, we all know that the GOP needs to be kept on a short leash. Sure Palin made a campaign appearance with McCain, but this was a political payback for McCain putting her on the ticket in 2008.
The GOP has a nasty habit of letting people have their turn at the Presidential nomination. Reagan lost the 1976 primary but wound up as the candidate in 1980. Bush lost in 1980 but was the candidate in 1988. Dole lost in 1988 but was the candidate in 1996. No serious 1996 contender ran in 2000, but McCain lost in 2000 and he was the candidate in 2008. Everyone knows that it's Romney's turn next. Palin knows this too, which is why I think she is laying the groundwork for an independent campaign in 2012.
Palin may or may not be the best choice. It's still not clear that she has what it takes to go the distance. Who else is there? Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson looks set to run, but he has little national exposure. I like the idea of having a successful business person like Perot in the race. Unfortunately, most high profile technology executives are liberals. We certainly don't want anyone from Wall Street in front of this movement. Donald Trump? He made some noises about running a few years ago, but then bailed out.
So unless someone emerges from the ether over the next year, it's probably Palin or no one. If it's no one, we're going to get stuck with RINO Romney and nothing much will change.
The smarmy little Republican operative who said that may very well wind up eating his words. There is still plenty of time between now and 2012 for a new Ross Perot type candidate to emerge and get in front of this thing.
Perot was largely a creation of the media, starting with Larry King. Half way through the campaign he went nuts and quit, and then re-entered the race. However, people were so angry at H.W Bush that Perot won 19% of the vote anyway.
People are every bit as angry today, starting with W. Bush, Wall Street, the Congress, and now Obama. The Tea Party is a ready made movement for a right-of-center populist candidate to leverage. I think Sarah Palin knows this and is paving the groundwork to make it happen.
Palin was the first GOP leader to endorse the third party congressional candidate in NY23. She has endorsed Rand Paul for Senate in Kentucky over the establishment, neo-con candidate. Her husband used to be a member of the Alaska Independence Party. A couple of weeks ago, she stunned GOP sycophant Sean Hannity by saying that third party conservative candidates are a good thing because: A.) they provide us with more choice and B.) they help keep the GOP candidates in-line. After their disastrous performance under Bush, we all know that the GOP needs to be kept on a short leash. Sure Palin made a campaign appearance with McCain, but this was a political payback for McCain putting her on the ticket in 2008.
The GOP has a nasty habit of letting people have their turn at the Presidential nomination. Reagan lost the 1976 primary but wound up as the candidate in 1980. Bush lost in 1980 but was the candidate in 1988. Dole lost in 1988 but was the candidate in 1996. No serious 1996 contender ran in 2000, but McCain lost in 2000 and he was the candidate in 2008. Everyone knows that it's Romney's turn next. Palin knows this too, which is why I think she is laying the groundwork for an independent campaign in 2012.
Palin may or may not be the best choice. It's still not clear that she has what it takes to go the distance. Who else is there? Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson looks set to run, but he has little national exposure. I like the idea of having a successful business person like Perot in the race. Unfortunately, most high profile technology executives are liberals. We certainly don't want anyone from Wall Street in front of this movement. Donald Trump? He made some noises about running a few years ago, but then bailed out.
So unless someone emerges from the ether over the next year, it's probably Palin or no one. If it's no one, we're going to get stuck with RINO Romney and nothing much will change.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
A Constitutional Convention to overturn Obamacare?
South Carolina Lieutenant Governor Andre Bauer is asking the state legislatures to call a Constitutional Convention to overturn Obamacare.
34 State Legislatures would have to agree to call the Convention. State Legislatures would appoint delegates to the Convention. Each state would get one vote. Any amendments drafted by the Convention would have to be ratified by 38 State Legislatures.
Healthcare isn't the only issue that the states have with the federal government.
5 states have passed the Firearms Freedom Act which declares that the federal government has no authority to regulate firearms that are produced and solid within their states. Several other State Legislatures have introduced the bill.
Most of the states in the west have thumbed their noses at the federal government by passing medical marijuana in spite of federal drug laws.
In addition, unfunded federal mandates have become a rallying cry for several states, who are sick and tired of the federal government's unfunded orders. 49 states have introduced or already passed 10th Amendment resolutions which affirms the states's sovereign rights under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution.
The government has been using the Interstate Commerce clause to trample on the 10th amendment since at least the Roosevelt administration. In recent years it has gotten significantly worse.
The Interstate Commerce Clause was originally created to ensure that states didn't erect protectionist barriers against other states. Unfortunately, it has become the statists' main method of usurping power from the states and the people.
Lieutenant Governor Bauer is right. It's time for the states to call a Constitutional Convention, which at the very least drafts an amendment that clarifies the powers that the federal government has under the Interstate Commerce clause. Those powers are limited to ensuring open trade between the states.
Until this done, the states can bellyache all they want but they aren't going to make any headway with the growing Leviathan in the D.C.
34 State Legislatures would have to agree to call the Convention. State Legislatures would appoint delegates to the Convention. Each state would get one vote. Any amendments drafted by the Convention would have to be ratified by 38 State Legislatures.
Healthcare isn't the only issue that the states have with the federal government.
5 states have passed the Firearms Freedom Act which declares that the federal government has no authority to regulate firearms that are produced and solid within their states. Several other State Legislatures have introduced the bill.
Most of the states in the west have thumbed their noses at the federal government by passing medical marijuana in spite of federal drug laws.
In addition, unfunded federal mandates have become a rallying cry for several states, who are sick and tired of the federal government's unfunded orders. 49 states have introduced or already passed 10th Amendment resolutions which affirms the states's sovereign rights under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution.
The government has been using the Interstate Commerce clause to trample on the 10th amendment since at least the Roosevelt administration. In recent years it has gotten significantly worse.
The Interstate Commerce Clause was originally created to ensure that states didn't erect protectionist barriers against other states. Unfortunately, it has become the statists' main method of usurping power from the states and the people.
Lieutenant Governor Bauer is right. It's time for the states to call a Constitutional Convention, which at the very least drafts an amendment that clarifies the powers that the federal government has under the Interstate Commerce clause. Those powers are limited to ensuring open trade between the states.
Until this done, the states can bellyache all they want but they aren't going to make any headway with the growing Leviathan in the D.C.
Friday, March 26, 2010
NATO rejects Russian appeal to eradicate opium fields in Afghanistan
This is the dirty little secret of the Afghan war. When they were in power, the Taliban almost completely eradicated the opium trade. Since the U.S. government deposed them, Afghanistan has once again become the largest exporter of heroin in the world.
In rejecting the Russian request, U.S. officials stated that the "Afghan drug problem had to be handled carefully in an effort to avoid alienating local residents".
When was that ever a concern in Columbia or Mexico???
In rejecting the Russian request, U.S. officials stated that the "Afghan drug problem had to be handled carefully in an effort to avoid alienating local residents".
When was that ever a concern in Columbia or Mexico???
Friday, February 26, 2010
How Your Government "Protects" You
There was segment on this on Stossel (Fox Business Channel) last night. It was about an experimental implant for a degenerative eye disease that has shown great promise in helping some bind people see.
The doctor who created the implant has already spent 7 years and $50 million conducting FDA trials which have demonstrated that the implant works. Now the FDA wants more – another $100 million and trials that will last another 3 years.
There are too few customers for the treatment to warrant spending another $100 million on trials. So, investors won't fund the effort. The doctor is going to stop pursuing it.
A potential patient, Stephen Lonegan, was on the show who has an eye disease that could be helped by the implant. He said he wants the treatment and will take whatever risk is involved. Some FDA bureaucrat said no. They said that their restrictions are for his own safety. Stephen said: "There's nothing safe about going blind. I don't want to be made safe by the FDA. I want it to be up to me to make the decision myself."
So this poor guy is going to go blind as a result of the decision of some mindless government bureaucrat following the rules of some impersonal, uncaring government bureaucracy.
In the meantime, all we heard from the Democrats at yesterday's so-called healthcare summit is how evil insurance companies are forcing little old ladies to do things like use their dead friend's false teeth (seriously, this was a topic of discussion).
Joseph de Maistre once said that "every nation has the government it deserves". Well, here it is...
The doctor who created the implant has already spent 7 years and $50 million conducting FDA trials which have demonstrated that the implant works. Now the FDA wants more – another $100 million and trials that will last another 3 years.
There are too few customers for the treatment to warrant spending another $100 million on trials. So, investors won't fund the effort. The doctor is going to stop pursuing it.
A potential patient, Stephen Lonegan, was on the show who has an eye disease that could be helped by the implant. He said he wants the treatment and will take whatever risk is involved. Some FDA bureaucrat said no. They said that their restrictions are for his own safety. Stephen said: "There's nothing safe about going blind. I don't want to be made safe by the FDA. I want it to be up to me to make the decision myself."
So this poor guy is going to go blind as a result of the decision of some mindless government bureaucrat following the rules of some impersonal, uncaring government bureaucracy.
In the meantime, all we heard from the Democrats at yesterday's so-called healthcare summit is how evil insurance companies are forcing little old ladies to do things like use their dead friend's false teeth (seriously, this was a topic of discussion).
Joseph de Maistre once said that "every nation has the government it deserves". Well, here it is...
Thursday, February 25, 2010
McCain Trying To Regulate Nutritional Supplements Once Again
John McCain has introduced yet another bill to get the FDA to regulate nutritional supplements. The Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321) could deny Americans freedom of access and mandate a doctor’s prescription for many dietary supplements.
Nutritional supplements have been under attack for a couple of decades. Every few years there is a push to regulate them. Fortunately, those efforts have always failed in the past.
Suzanne Somers has been fighting FDA control of suppliments for some time. As she correctly points out, the FDA did an internal study of themselves a couple of years ago and basically came to the conclusion that they lack the scientific capability and competence to evaluate new drugs and medical devices. A big reason why prescription drugs are so costly in America is because the pharmaceutical companies are at the mercy of the incompetent FDA, who takes too long to conduct drug trials.
Mandating that the FDA regulate nutritional suppliments will drive up their cost, as it has for pharmaceuticals. It will also deny Americans the freedom to do what they think is best to keep themselves healthy.
Obviously, we do need an independent body to verify the safety of potentially dangerous prescription drugs and the claims made by their manufacturers. However, that doesn't mean that we need the government to do it.
Have you ever looked at a piece of equipment or a label on an electrical chord and seen the letters UL? Underwriters Laboratories is private company that certifies products for safety and compliance with standards. Manufacturers pay UL to certify their products so that both the manufacturers themselves and their customers know that the company has delivered a safe, quality, product that is compliant with the relevant standards. The range of things they certify is stunning -- appliances; building materials; chemicals; equipment related to the production and distribution of food, water, and energy; high tech equipment; medical devices; and more.
If a product UL certifies turns out to be unsafe, the consumer can seek redress from both the manufacturer and UL. So, UL has every incentive to ensure that the products they certify are safe. Can you sue the FDA for allowing a dangerous drug on the market? Not really.
We could apply the same type of model to pharmaceuticals. Yes, require pharmaceutical companies to get certification for their new drugs. But allow private companies like UL and others to compete to provide that certification. The certification companies would complete by keeping up with the science and latest testing techniques, which would streamline the certification process, speed time to market, and lower drug costs. In the end, we'd also be safer with competing private certification companies than we are with the incompetent bureaucrats in the FDA.
The answer to the the mess the FDA created is right in front of us, but once again, neither political party is willing to make any real changes to the system at all.
In the meantime, we all need to tell the politicans to keep their sticky fingers off of our vitamins.
Nutritional supplements have been under attack for a couple of decades. Every few years there is a push to regulate them. Fortunately, those efforts have always failed in the past.
Suzanne Somers has been fighting FDA control of suppliments for some time. As she correctly points out, the FDA did an internal study of themselves a couple of years ago and basically came to the conclusion that they lack the scientific capability and competence to evaluate new drugs and medical devices. A big reason why prescription drugs are so costly in America is because the pharmaceutical companies are at the mercy of the incompetent FDA, who takes too long to conduct drug trials.
Mandating that the FDA regulate nutritional suppliments will drive up their cost, as it has for pharmaceuticals. It will also deny Americans the freedom to do what they think is best to keep themselves healthy.
Obviously, we do need an independent body to verify the safety of potentially dangerous prescription drugs and the claims made by their manufacturers. However, that doesn't mean that we need the government to do it.
Have you ever looked at a piece of equipment or a label on an electrical chord and seen the letters UL? Underwriters Laboratories is private company that certifies products for safety and compliance with standards. Manufacturers pay UL to certify their products so that both the manufacturers themselves and their customers know that the company has delivered a safe, quality, product that is compliant with the relevant standards. The range of things they certify is stunning -- appliances; building materials; chemicals; equipment related to the production and distribution of food, water, and energy; high tech equipment; medical devices; and more.
If a product UL certifies turns out to be unsafe, the consumer can seek redress from both the manufacturer and UL. So, UL has every incentive to ensure that the products they certify are safe. Can you sue the FDA for allowing a dangerous drug on the market? Not really.
We could apply the same type of model to pharmaceuticals. Yes, require pharmaceutical companies to get certification for their new drugs. But allow private companies like UL and others to compete to provide that certification. The certification companies would complete by keeping up with the science and latest testing techniques, which would streamline the certification process, speed time to market, and lower drug costs. In the end, we'd also be safer with competing private certification companies than we are with the incompetent bureaucrats in the FDA.
The answer to the the mess the FDA created is right in front of us, but once again, neither political party is willing to make any real changes to the system at all.
In the meantime, we all need to tell the politicans to keep their sticky fingers off of our vitamins.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
