Philadelphia Bulletin

August 27, 2010

Despite what feminists might argue, real men don’t wear skinny jeans. Real men also don’t wear V-neck tees, or accessorized scarves, and they avoid purple and pink like the plague. The mere idea of a pedicure or waxing makes a real man nauseous. If a woman hangs out with this kind of girly-man routinely, it’s only because she wants to share his wardrobe and his non-fat caramel macchiato. A woman can’t imagine a man reloading his double barrel shotgun or chopping wood when he’s donned in Donna Karan and drinking an Appletini. Men were meant to wear rugged Wranglers, leather jackets and boots, like they belong in a James Dean movie and not an episode of “Will & Grace.”

When did men in America go from being masculine steak-eating, plaid shirt wearing, Old Spice smelling, cigar smoking cowboys who like football, hunting, and Clint Eastwood movies to skinny jean wearing, satchel carrying, pierced ear metrosexuals who like chick flicks, “The View,” and Bath & Bodyworks? The American man is an endangered species due in large part to the over-feminization of society.

Not surprisingly, the arrow of blame points towards the feminists who have transformed our schools into gender neutral zones of indoctrination. Early on, boys’ innate masculinity is suppressed by banning competitive, rough games like dodge ball and tag on the playground, having co-ed teams, not keeping score in soccer games, and rewarding passive, demure behavior.

Boys learn to subdue their more spirited, intrepid behavior in elementary and middle school, their male instincts of competition and individualism quashed in the interest of what’s best for girls as they walk like lemmings over the edge of the radical feminist cliff by the time they reach high school. Because of the feminist movement, boys aren’t allowed to be boys – society has fenced them in, corralled their adventurous enthusiasm in the name of sexual equality. The end product is pantywaist pushovers who will cry during “Steel Magnolias” and urinate sitting down. This is bad news for America, who will eventually have to reap what the feminists have sown, which will be a paucity of male leaders, entrepreneurs, scientists and heroes.

Phyllis Schlafly, President of Eagle Forum, reports in “Where Are the Men?” that the ratio of males to females on college campuses has swung from 60-40 to 40-60, with 58 percent of women earning degrees from four-year colleges. In the coming years, this will severely impact the American family who have traditionally relied upon the father as the primary breadwinner.

It is simply foolish to think that America can prosper without men, but New York Times columnist and radical feminist Maureen Dowd suggests the opposite. Mr. Dowd is the author of Are Men Necessary? When Sexes Collide in which she opines and whines about the current state of feminism and questions the value of a woman pursuing a male mate.

Hollywood is also doing its part to marginalize and diminish the role of men in this society. In the Academy Award-winning movie “Juno,” a teenage girl is faced with an unplanned pregnancy after a night of casual, meaningless sex with her friend Paulie. Juno not only ignores Paulie after they have sex but overtly excludes him from any decisions about whether or not to choose abortion over life. To the viewer, Paulie is a non-factor, a by-stander incapable of taking charge, unable to rescue Juno and stand firm in his fatherhood, albeit unplanned. Feminists just love a movie that glamourizes teenage pregnancy and deprecates the male role in conception.

In Jennifer Aniston’s new movie “The Switch,” she plays an unmarried 40 year old who decides that she doesn’t need a man to have a baby, and, instead, turns to artificial insemination of a donor’s sperm – even throwing a “Getting Pregnant” party to celebrate with her friends. The male roles in the movie are those of sperm donors, with Aniston’s character firm in her belief that a woman doesn’t need a man to conceive and rear a child. The implicit message of this movie is that men are not important in the raising and nurturing of children. Their biological contribution to conception is where their role begins and ends.

Unfortunately, this kind of thinking has become the norm rather than the exception in American culture. Feminists’ dogged efforts to have society view men and women as being the same instead of different but equal have paid off. The rotten fruits of their endeavors are manifest in statistics recently released by The Heritage Foundation which reports that, in 2008, a record 40 percent of babies born in the U.S. were born to unwed mothers compared to about 3 percent in 1929.

American men aren’t men anymore because feminists have equated maleness with everything that’s repugnant and have molded men to be more like women. Feminists have slayed the real man by suppressing his desires for adventure, beauty, and competition, his yearning for greatness and excitement. John Wayne once said, “I’m the stuff men are made of.” America needs more John Waynes.

Daily Local News

August 27,2010

Why is anyone a Democrat or Republican these days? Between the partisan atmosphere and seemingly nothing getting done these days in the world of politics, why does anyone consider themselves Democrats or Republicans? Honestly, most of the country agrees that neither party is helping anyone but themselves. Both parties are just as responsible for the economic mess we are in. Neither party is proposing good ways of getting out of it either, so if both parties are causing the trouble and can’t fix it, then why do we keep giving them power? As an Independent with no party affiliation, I see bad in both parties and hardly any good. I want this country to start moving in a positive direction just like everyone else and I see these two parties as the obstacle in the way of moving us in that path. All they do is bicker at one another, call each other names, and run hate-filled campaigns against each other. Neither party truly listens to the people they represent and simply vote by party lines. With all the anger at the way politics is right now, why don’t we aim it at both parties simultaneously? All I hear is the left bashing the right, then the right bashing the left. The way politics is in Washington, Harrisburg, and everywhere else in this country is just horrific. Nobody can get anything accomplished unless they add a few million dollars for their private helicopters, planes, and money for researching the mating of pigs. Apparently, nothing gets done without these money-wasting pet projects that all of them do. So, what can we do with all of the anger we have with the state of politics? We have to actually stop complaining and do something about it. We have to form groups in our communities, then reach out to other communities. We need to all work together, regardless of political views, religious views, race, ethnicity, or anything else. If the people actually become informed, group together, and then go out and vote, I guarantee that things will start to change. The political elites and the people in power want us to remain fragmented so they stay in power, but if we unite and put aside all of our differences, then we can start to change the entire structure of power in this country. 

Scott is a student at West Chester University

Daily Local News

August 27, 2010

Karen Porter writes that the Iraq War is over and somehow she does not feel elated. Well let me offer a possible explanation … we won the war, it was a victory for America and a victory for the Iraqi people. A victory for the women who now have opportunities they have never had …. a victory especially for the young women who were the playthings of Saddam Hussein’s maniac sons.

The far left may not feel elated with victory because they all said victory in Iraq was all but impossible. Harry Reid said the war was lost. Vice President Biden said on “Hardball” that no one seriously believes that Sunni, Shia and Kurds would sit down at a table together … Biden wanted to divide the country into three parts. But George Bush showed the resolve and the courage to support the troops and bring this war to a victorious end … proving all the Democrat naysayers and the elite media types wrong. A fact which prompted Biden to claim that a Democratic Iraq may very well be the most significant accomplishment of the Obama administration … an unbelievable comment from the king of unbelievable comments.

And Ms. Porter keeps throwing out the “lie” thing as if it were true … there were no lies. We all know that every intelligence agency in the world was saying that Iraq had WMDs. It’s not a lie when you act on bad intelligence … Bush lied to no one and John Kerry and Hillary Clinton all supported giving Bush the authority to go to war … they too made statements about the threat posed by Iraq’s WMDs, WMDs if you remember were used on their own people.

And for Bush to have ignored the intelligence reports from around the globe in a post-9/11 world would have been a gross dereliction of duty.

So yes, I understand why Ms. Porter and her group may not feel elated at the victory in Iraq … they were all wrong, and it’s hard to feel elated when you have been proven wrong.

But you have to look no further than the other side of the corner in West Chester every Saturday to see a group of patriots who supported the troops every inch of the way. Those proud Americans are elated with the victory in Iraq, both for America, for our brave troops and for our new Democratic allies in the Mideast … compliments of a steadfast commander in chief who never gave up.

Letfreedomring.org

August 18, 2010

 A recent CNN poll shows that 68% of Americans oppose the construction of the mosque and Islamic center planned near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan. Most Americans don’t know that the mosque’s proposed name is Cordoba House, nor do they realize that the first Cordoba Mosque was built by Muslims in Cordoba, Spain after they conquered the Spanish kingdom. Many historians see the mosque there as a symbol of the conquest of Spain by the forces of Islam.

Recent public outcry in print and on talk shows demonstrates that many Americans instinctively oppose the construction of a mosque anywhere near Ground Zero. A mosque near Ground Zero is seen as an intentionally provocative act, a declaration of triumph and supremacy over a symbol of America by the forces of Islam. Many of the victims’ families view the potential 15 story mega-mosque as an affront to their suffering and sorrow. Arguments against the mosque arise out of this innate sense that it is simply inappropriate in that location, religious freedoms notwithstanding.

Proponents of Cordoba House claim that it will heal wounds and build bridges between America and the Islamic world; they also claim that the guarantee of religious freedom in the First Amendment to our Constitution trumps all arguments against building it. However, there are Constitutionally-sound limitations on the freedom of religion, just as there are limits on freedom of speech. For example, slander, libel and disclosure of classified information are not protected by the First Amendment.

Similarly, freedom of religion has its limits. For example, human sacrifice in the name of religion is not protected by the First Amendment. Neither is rape or physical abuse. These acts are criminal regardless of what exemptions a religious group might claim. One religious group cannot attempt to annihilate another religious group and still be protected by the First Amendment. The First Amendment does not protect the incitement to treason, such as jihad. Therefore, a fair question to ask is whether or not incitement to treason is likely to take place at Cordoba House.

While most American Muslims are peaceful and patriotic, there are radical Muslims whose goal is to incite treason in the U.S. When radicals use mosques to breed their anti-Western, anti-Christian, anti-Jewish doctrine, those buildings lose any claim to First Amendment protection. In a recent survey by the Washington-based Center for Security Policy called “Mapping Sharia,” former FBI, CIA, and members of the U.S. military conducted undercover investigations of 2,300 mosques across America. Their findings were alarming.

The study revealed that “Some of the 9/11 hijackers, in fact, received aid and counsel from one of the largest mosques in the Washington, D.C. area. Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center is one of the mosques identified by undercover investigators as a hive of terrorist activity and other extremism.” Interestingly, leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood currently run the Dar al-Hijrah mosque. Investigators concluded that Dar al-Hijrah’s ultimate goal is to turn America into an Islamic state governed by Sharia law. Dar al-Hijrah is a perfect example of extremists cloaking treason in religious clothing.

Hasan al-Bannain formed the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928 to spearhead the radical Islamist movement and its violent campaign against the West. Out of the Brotherhood were born al-Qaeda and Hamas. In a 1991 memo to the Brotherhood, radical Mohamed Akram explains that members “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.” Do those words meet the definition of inciting treason?

Potential ties to radical Islam are what make opponents of the Cordoba mosque skeptical of its purported benevolent intent. Cordoba Initiative leader Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf unabashedly supports Sharia law as a “supplement” to our Constitution and refuses to condemn Hamas, recognized by the U.S. as a terrorist organization. According to Pamela Geller of Stop Islamization of America, Imam Rauf also has ties to other terrorist organizations including al-Qaeda and the anti-Jewish Perdana Organization.

The more radical forms of Islam combine both church and state into a theo-political construct known as a Caliphate. The Caliph, or successor to Mohammed, exercises both spiritual and temporal sovereignty—a stark contrast to our tradition of separation of church and state.

The Cordoba Mosque controversy became more political within the last few days. After having initially tried to duck the issue, President Obama plunged himself fully into the controversy on Friday. In a clumsily-worded address that he has already partially retracted twice, he took what the Los Angeles Times called “a strong stand in favor of building” the mosque. On Monday, the New York Post quoted Mahmoud al-Zahar, a co-founder of Hamas, as saying that Muslims “have to build it.”

If there are national security implications to the Cordoba Mosque, then it is not merely a local matter; it is a national matter that involves the President directly. For Obama to find himself on the same side of a raging controversy as a confirmed terrorist is a political disaster of the first order. It will confirm the suspicions of many that he is naïve or worse when it comes to understanding the national security threat posed by radical Islam and its call to jihad against America.

Colin Hanna is president of Let Freedom Ring

Daily Local News

8/16/10

We have just witnessed the beginning of the end for Obamacare. Living up to its nickname, the “Rocket Docket,” the U.S. District Court in Virginia recently gave the attorney general a green light to launch a constitutional attack upon the health care law. That lawsuit has now cleared the tower and has begun its inevitable journey to the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge Henry Hudson rejected the federal government’s attempt to shoot down the challenge before it took flight, noting that “no specifically articulated constitutional authority exists to mandate the purchase of health insurance or the assessment of a penalty for failing to do so.”

The constitutionally offensive part of the statute is found in the “Minimum Essential Coverage Provision,” which Judge Hudson states “literally forges new ground and extends the Commerce Clause [i.e. federal power] beyond its current high water mark.” Reading between the lines, this means that no previous administration or Congress has ever made such a bold attempt to consolidate absolute regulatory power over commerce.

With the denial of the government’s motion to dismiss Virginia’s lawsuit, Americans may finally get a glimpse behind the government’s curtain and see, for the first time, its alleged justification for such a power grab.

Arguing that a citizen’s decision not to purchase health insurance equals “economic activity” that may be regulated by Congress, the government claims “without full market participation, the financial foundation supporting the health care system will fail, in effect causing the health care regime to ‘implode.’”

The government further contends that, without a “minimum coverage type provision … the market will be driven into extinction.”

My fellow Americans, we need to drive this law into extinction … or our rights and liberty will implode!

This debate should not focus on politics or whether the law is well-intentioned. As Virginia’s attorney general argued before the court, “even if a congressional enactment is noble and legitimate, the means adapted to enforce it … must be within the letter and spirit of the Constitution.” While the law’s intended effect of providing health care to everyone is laudable, the Court notes that it “cannot be employed as a vehicle to enforce an unconstitutional exercise of Commerce Clause power, no matter how well-intentioned.” Finally, we have heard from a learned jurist on the issue, not just political pundits who may be easily dismissed by supporters of the law.

A legal revolution is under way. Under the leadership of our attorney general, Tom Corbett, the voices of Pennsylvanians will be heard in the District Court of Florida, where 20 states attorneys general have joined together in a similar challenge. Moreover, 70 percent of people who voted in a recent referendum in Missouri registered opposition to the health care law, by passing Proposition C, which denies the government the authority to penalize citizens for refusing to buy private health insurance.

I can envision President Obama in the Oval Office when Judge Hudson’s opinion was issued: pacing nervously amongst his advisers, quoting Shakespeare’s Henry VI: “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.” Well, Mr. Obama, you should recall that lawyers drafted the Constitution in the first place and made certain that the federal government may not exercise power that was never given by the People.

We should be thankful that the founders had the foresight to create checks and balances — for it is quite clear that this Congress and Executive Branch are out of balance. The rule of law and free enterprise form the foundation of our greatness. Hopefully, our judiciary will reaffirm these most sacred American principles.

August 17, 2010
 

Once again United States citizens are being duped by Congress’ old “smoke and mirrors” routine which perverts this most serious issue of illegal immigration by calling supporters of immigration enforcement  racists who lack compassion.  The programs for illegals are hidden so deeply inside various legislative bills and social entitlement programs that the general public has a difficult time understanding the economic impact of illegal immigration.  My friends, you are in for a rude awakening!

Total: $88 BILLION.
  
Education:  Over $29 BILLION dollars are spent for the direct cost of educating the children of illegal aliens for primary and secondary school and most of them cannot speak a word of English⁴!  This also includes over $17 BILLION dollars for the education of American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.  Add to that, approximately, $2.2 BILLION dollars a year is spent for illegal aliens to take part in food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches⁵.   

Total: $31.2 BILLION

Health Care:  This is where the numbers really get confusing.  The estimated cost of health care to illegal aliens averages about $2.5 BILLION dollars per state.  In addition to that at least another $2.7 BILLION dollars a year is spent so that illegal aliens can be given additional services through Medicaid each year⁶.

Total: $127.7 BILLION

Crime:  Currently, the illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that’s two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens⁷. That number is expected to rise as their children grow older.   

It has been reported that in 2005 there were anywhere between 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. MILLIONS of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the US from the Southern border alone.

On a daily average, 12 Americans are murdered by an illegal alien. Another 13 Americans are killed by uninsured drunk illegal aliens, and 8 American children are victims of a sex crime committed by an illegal alien each day! Local cops, acting in error, sometimes “forget” to annotate nationality on reports. The numbers may be worse. Unlawful immigrants and their children make up over 29 percent of our local, state and federal prisons at a cost of $2.2 BILLION annually⁸.  That is an average cost of $60 MILLION per day!

Total: $2.2 BILLION

Other Items: Each year over $200 BILLION dollars in lost American wages are a result of employing illegal aliens⁹. In 2006, it is estimated that illegal aliens sent home over $45 BILLION in US dollars to their countries of origin…and it is believed that there is another $35 BILLION unaccounted for as well¹⁰.

We estimate that there are about 12,000,000 illegal aliens currently in this country; and if we take the low end estimated cost of $50,000 per year/per illegal alien. 

12,000,000 X $50,000 = $600,000,000,000

Therefore, we need to ask ourselves this question:

Why should we be complacent regarding the issue of illegal immigration? 

The way out is to speak-up and make this a critical issue in the November 2^nd elections.  Question your candidates and vote for those who will enforce the rule of law and protect our borders. 

1. http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecenters7fd8  
2. http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html
3. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.HTML
4. http://www.usillegalaliens.com/impacts_of_illegal_immigration_education.html
5. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
6. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.HTML 
7. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html 
8. http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/ia05_king/col_20060505_bite.html
9. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html   
10. http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/nation/15795654.htm?source=rss&channel=cctimes_nation         

Wall Street Journal

It is, obviously, self-referential to quote yourself, but I do it to make a point. I wrote the following on New Year’s day, 1994. America 16 years ago was a relatively content nation, though full of political sparks: 10 months later the Republicans would take the House for the first time in 40 years. But beneath all the action was, I thought, a coming unease. Something inside was telling us we were living through “not the placid dawn of a peaceful age but the illusory calm before stern storms.”

The temperature in the world was very high. “At home certain trends—crime, cultural tension, some cultural Balkanization—will, we fear, continue; some will worsen. In my darker moments I have a bad hunch. The fraying of the bonds that keep us together, the strangeness and anomie of our popular culture, the increase in walled communities . . . the rising radicalism of the politically correct . . . the increased demand of all levels of government for the money of the people, the spotty success with which we are communicating to the young America’s reason for being and founding beliefs, the growth of cities where English is becoming the second language . . . these things may well come together at some point in our lifetimes and produce something painful indeed. I can imagine, for instance, in the year 2020 or so, a movement in some states to break away from the union. Which would bring about, of course, a drama of Lincolnian darkness. . . . You will know that things have reached a bad pass when Newsweek and Time, if they still exist 15 years from now, do cover stories on a surprising, and disturbing trend: aging baby boomers leaving America, taking what savings they have to live the rest of their lives in places like Africa and Ireland.”

I thought of this again the other day when Drudge headlined increasing lines in London for Americans trading in their passports over tax issues, and the sale of Newsweek for $1.

Our problems as a nation have been growing on us for a long time. Their future growth, and the implications of that growth, could be predicted. But there is one thing that is both new since 1994 and huge. It took hold and settled in after the crash of 2008, but its causes were not limited to the crash.

The biggest political change in my lifetime is that Americans no longer assume that their children will have it better than they did. This is a huge break with the past, with assumptions and traditions that shaped us.

The country I was born into was a country that had existed steadily, for almost two centuries, as a nation in which everyone thought—wherever they were from, whatever their circumstances—that their children would have better lives than they did. That was what kept people pulling their boots on in the morning after the first weary pause: My kids will have it better. They’ll be richer or more educated, they’ll have a better job or a better house, they’ll take a step up in terms of rank, class or status. America always claimed to be, and meant to be, a nation that made little of class. But America is human. “The richest family in town,” they said, admiringly. Read Booth Tarkington on turn-of-the-last-century Indiana. It’s all about trying to rise.

Parents now fear something has stopped. They think they lived through the great abundance, a time of historic growth in wealth and material enjoyment. They got it, and they enjoyed it, and their kids did, too: a lot of toys in that age, a lot of Xboxes and iPhones. (Who is the most self-punishing person in America right now? The person who didn’t do well during the abundance.) But they look around, follow the political stories and debates, and deep down they think their children will live in a more limited country, that jobs won’t be made at a great enough pace, that taxes—too many people in the cart, not enough pulling it—will dishearten them, that the effects of 30 years of a low, sad culture will leave the whole country messed up. And then there is the world: nuts with nukes, etc.

Optimists think that if we manage to turn a few things around, their kids may have it . . . almost as good. The country they inherit may be . . . almost as good. And it’s kind of a shock to think like this; pessimism isn’t in our DNA. But it isn’t pessimism, really, it’s a kind of tough knowingness, combined, in most cases, with a daily, personal commitment to keep plugging.

But do our political leaders have any sense of what people are feeling deep down? They don’t act as if they do. I think their detachment from how normal people think is more dangerous and disturbing than it has been in the past. I started noticing in the 1980s, the growing gulf between the country’s thought leaders, as they’re called—the political and media class, the universities—and those living what for lack of a better word we’ll call normal lives on the ground in America. The two groups were agitated by different things, concerned about different things, had different focuses, different world views.

But I’ve never seen the gap wider than it is now. I think it is a chasm. In Washington they don’t seem to be looking around and thinking, Hmmm, this nation is in trouble, it needs help. They’re thinking something else. I’m not sure they understand the American Dream itself needs a boost, needs encouragement and protection. They don’t seem to know or have a sense of the mood of the country.

And so they make their moves, manipulate this issue and that, and keep things at a high boil. And this at a time when people are already in about as much hot water as they can take.

To take just one example from the past 10 days, the federal government continues its standoff with the state of Arizona over how to handle illegal immigration. The point of view of our thought leaders is, in general, that borders that are essentially open are good, or not so bad. The point of view of those on the ground who are anxious about our nation’s future, however, is different, more like: “We live in a welfare state and we’ve just expanded health care. Unemployment’s up. Could we sort of calm down, stop illegal immigration, and absorb what we’ve got?” No is, in essence, the answer.

An irony here is that if we stopped the illegal flow and removed the sense of emergency it generates, comprehensive reform would, in time, follow. Because we’re not going to send the estimated 10 million to 15 million illegals already here back. We’re not going to put sobbing children on a million buses. That would not be in our nature. (Do our leaders even know what’s in our nature?) As years passed, those here would be absorbed, and everyone in the country would come to see the benefit of integrating them fully into the tax system. So it’s ironic that our leaders don’t do what in the end would get them what they say they want, which is comprehensive reform.

When the adults of a great nation feel long-term pessimism, it only makes matters worse when those in authority take actions that reveal their detachment from the concerns—even from the essential nature—of their fellow citizens. And it makes those citizens feel powerless.

Inner pessimism and powerlessness: That is a dangerous combination.

August 5, 2010

Let me introduce you to Dr. Donald Berwick.  He has been in the news because Barack Obama circumvented the Senate confirmation process and granted a recess appointment to Dr Berwick, who is now the director of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).  This federal agency runs Medicare and Medicaid; the same federal agencies that are slated to oversee the government run health care system.

Dr. Berwick is a professor at the Harvard Medical School and the President and CEO of the think tank, Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI).  He has openly expressed his disdain for free-market health care and opening expressed his support for Great Britain’s health care system. He is an advocate of health-care rationing and supports using the health-care system as a vehicle to redistribute wealth.

In April 2010, Obama sent Berwick’s name to the Senate for confirmation and it was assigned to the Senate Finance Committee for scheduling and approval.  The Senate Finance Committee is chaired by Sen. Max Baucus (D- MT), who had worked with the Obama Administration to develop the national health care program.  The directorship of the CMS normally requires a Senate confirmation, which Sen. Baucus had not yet scheduled when Obama made Berwick  a “recess appointment” on July 7, 2010.  It should be noted that every president uses recess appointments. But by a wide margin, the overwhelming majority of recess appointments come after hearings have been held and a nominee thoroughly vetted.  But, this was not the case with Berwick.

In May 2010, Dr Berwick was quoted in the Health Care News as saying; “You could have protected the wealthy and the well, instead of recognizing that sick people tend to be poorer and that poor people tend to be sicker and that any health care funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized and humane must, MUST redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent health care is, by definition, redistributional.” 

Berwick advocates cutting health costs by adopting some of the approaches of Great Britain’s National Health Services (NHS) and its National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). NICE evaluates the costs and effectiveness of medical therapy that is covered by the NHS, as guidance for local authorities to decide what to cover.  Conservative American critics claimed in the June 4, 2010 issue of The Weekly Standard that, “NICE decides which healthcare people will get and which they won’t.”  Philip Klein in The American Spectator dubbed him “Obama’s Rationing Man.”  The chairman of NICE refuted these statements.  On May 14, 2010 in the Boston Globe, Sen. John Kerry (D- MA) defended Dr. Berwick against “phony assertions” and accused Republicans of using an “attack machine [to] make his nomination a distorted referendum on reform.”  

All of this debate over this “recess appointment” makes it very clear that the White House knew that Berwick may not survive the Senate confirmation hearings, which would have turned into a debate over health care reform.  White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer wrote on the White House blog; “There is no time to waste with Washington game playing.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and other Republicans contend that the White House wants to muzzle any debate over Berwick’s views. McConnell said in a statement that, “As if shoving a trillion dollar government takeover of health care down the throat of a disapproving American public wasn’t enough, apparently the Obama Administration intends to arrogantly circumvent the American people yet again by recess appointing one of the most prominent advocates of rationed health care to implement their national plan.  Democrats haven’t scheduled so much as a committee hearing for Donald Berwick, but the mere possibility of allowing the American people the opportunity to hear what he intends to do with their healthcare is evidently reason enough for this Administration to sneak him through without public scrutiny.”

The reality of all of this is that, much like Obama, Berwick has little management experience and is about to head an agency that has more funds to “redistribute” then all but the top 15 economies in the world!  This “recess appointment” is a demonstration of this administrations unwillingness to have any debate about Berwick’s views as it pertains to health care.  It is a disgrace that thanks to the White House’s decision, the people of this country will not get the answers they deserve.  Where is the transparency in government that was promised…What happened to “No Back Room” deals? Remember, Berwick’s position as the head of the CMS gives him the ability to apply his views on Obamacare with reckless abandon.  He will not have to answer one question before he takes over a position where his socialistic and radical views will impact each and every American.

‘My Fellow Americans: As you all know, the defeat of the Iraq regime has been completed. Since Congress does not want to spend any more money on this war, our mission in Iraq is complete. This morning I gave the order for a complete removal of all American forces from Iraq. This action will be complete within 30 days. It is now time to begin the reckoning.

Before me, I have two lists. One list contains the names of countries which have stood by our side during the Iraq conflict. This list is short. The United Kingdom, Italy, Bulgaria, Australia, and Poland are some of the countries listed there. The other list contains every one not on the first list. Most of the world’s nations are on that list. My press secretary will be distributing copies of both lists later this evening.

Let me start by saying that effective immediately, foreign aid to those nations on List 2 ceases indefinitely. The money saved during the first year alone will pretty much pay for the costs of the Iraqi war. THEN EVERY YEAR THEREAFTER IT WILL GO TO OUR SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM SO IT WON’T GO BROKE IN 20 YEARS.

The American people are no longer going to pour money into third world Hell holes and watch those government leaders grow fat on corruption. Need help with a famine? Wrestling with an epidemic? Call France. In the future, together with Congress, I will work to redirect this money toward solving the vexing social problems we still have at home. On that note, a word to terrorist organizations…Screw with us and we will hunt you down and eliminate you and all your friends from the face of the earth. Thirsting for a gutsy country to terrorize? Try France or maybe China.

I am ordering the immediate severing of diplomatic relations with France, and Russia. Thanks for all your help, comrades. We are retiring from NATO as well. I have also instructed the Mayor of New York City to begin towing the many UN diplomatic vehicles located in Manhattan with more than two unpaid parking tickets to sites where those vehicles will be stripped, shredded and crushed. I don’t care about whatever treaty pertains to this. You creeps have tens of thousands of unpaid tickets. Pay those tickets tomorrow or watch your precious Benzes, Beamers and limos be turned over to some of the finest chop shops in the world. I love New York.

A special note to our neighbors: Canada is on List 2. Since we are likely to be seeing a lot more of each other, you folks might want to try not pissing us off for a change. Mexico is also on List 2. Its president and his entire corrupt government really need an attitude adjustment. I will have a couple thousand extra tanks and infantry divisions sitting around. Guess where I am going to put ‘em? Yep, border security. Oh, by the way, the United States is abrogating the NAFTA treaty – starting now.

We are tired of the one-way highway. Immediately, we’ll be drilling for oil in Alaska -which will take care of this country’s oil needs for decades to come. If you’re an environmentalist who opposes this decision, I refer you to List 2 above: pick a country and move there.

It is time for America to focus on its own welfare and its own citizens. Some will accuse us of isolationism. I answer them by saying, ‘darn tootin.’ Nearly a century of trying to help folks live a decent life around the world has only earned us the undying enmity of just about everyone on the planet. It is time to eliminate hunger in America. It is time to eliminate homelessness in America. To the nations on List 1, a final thought. Thank you guys. We owe you and we won’t forget. To the nations on List 2, a final thought: You might want to learn to speak Arabic.

God bless America… Thank you and good night.’