| |
On Presidential Leadership and Health Care "Reform" Legislation: |
|
| |
"Barack Obama's quest for historic health care legislation has turned into a parody of leadership. We usually associate presidential leadership with the pursuit of goals that, though initially unpopular, serve America's long-term interests. Obama has reversed this. He's championing increasingly unpopular legislation that threatens the country's long-term interests. ‘This isn't about me,' he likes to say, ‘I have great health insurance.’ But of course, it is about him: about the legacy he covets as the president who achieved ‘universal’ health insurance. He'll be disappointed…
"So Obama's plan amounts to this: partial coverage of the uninsured; modest improvements (possibly) in their health; sizable budgetary costs worsening a bleak outlook; significant, unpredictable changes in insurance markets; weak spending control. This is a bad bargain. Benefits are overstated, costs understated. This legislation is a monstrosity; the country would be worse for its passage. What it's become is an exercise in political symbolism: Obama's self-indulgent crusade to seize the liberal holy grail of ‘universal coverage.’ What it's not is leadership." |
|
| |
— Robert J. Samuelson, Newsweek and Washington Post Contributing Editor
|
|
|
— Robert J. Samuelson, Newsweek and Washington Post Contributing Editor
|
|
Posted December 21, 2009 • 08:20 AM
|
|
|
| |
On the Truth Behind the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference: |
|
| |
"When you slice through the blather about marooned bears and melting ice caps, oceans rising and cities sinking, global warming is a racket and a crock. It is all about money and power.
"Copenhagen has always been about an endless transfer of wealth from America, Europe and Japan and creation of a global bureaucracy to control the pace of world economic and industrial development." |
|
| |
— Pat Buchanan, Syndicated Columnist and Founding Editor, The American Conservative Magazine
|
|
|
— Pat Buchanan, Syndicated Columnist and Founding Editor, The American Conservative Magazine
|
|
Posted December 18, 2009 • 09:00 AM
|
|
|
| |
On the Democrats' December Rush: |
|
| |
"Rushing to lock the nation into expensive health care and climate change commitments, Democrats are in an understandable frenzy because public enthusiasm for both crusades has been inversely proportional to the time the public has had to think about them. And the president pushing this agenda has, with his incontinent hunger for attention, seen his job approval vary inversely with his ubiquity." |
|
| |
— George F. Will, Nationally Syndicated Columnist
|
|
|
— George F. Will, Nationally Syndicated Columnist
|
|
Posted December 17, 2009 • 09:01 AM
|
|
|
| |
On the (Hidden) Need for Speedy Passage of the Democrats' Health Care Reform Legislation: |
|
| |
"It is symbolic of the Senate's health-care bill that the section titled 'No lifetime or annual limits' would allow insurance companies to impose annual dollar limits on medical care -- meaning that patients in need of expensive cancer treatment, for example, could still be bankrupted.
"Democratic health reform legislation promises everything to everyone while imposing a series of hidden burdens to make a massive new entitlement affordable, at least on paper. So its authors are in a game of beat the clock: Pass the legislation before those burdens are fully disclosed to the public." |
|
| |
— Michael Gerson, Institute for Global Engagement Senior Research Fellow and Washington Post Op-Ed Columnist
|
|
|
— Michael Gerson, Institute for Global Engagement Senior Research Fellow and Washington Post Op-Ed Columnist
|
|
Posted December 16, 2009 • 08:32 AM
|
|
|
| |
On History-Making Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV): |
|
| |
"Harry Reid can rightly claim to be making history.
"If he passes health-care reform, he'll depend on a series of historic 'firsts.' It'd be the first time Congress had passed a major new entitlement program without bipartisan support; it'd be the first time it passed such a program without popular support; and the first time it passed such a program without knowing or particularly caring what's in it." |
|
| |
— Rich Lowry, National Review Editor
|
|
|
— Rich Lowry, National Review Editor
|
|
Posted December 15, 2009 • 08:41 AM
|
|
|
| |
On the Senate Minority's Power to Derail Health Care Reform Legislation: |
|
| |
"The Senate, unlike the House of Representatives, has parliamentary rules and procedures that give the minority the ability to stall legislation. In fact, unlike the House, the minority have the ability to virtually paralyze the Senate. Doing so is not something we would want or expect for every bad bill that comes through Congress, but the proposed healthcare legislation is probably the worst piece of legislation ever considered by the United States Congress. It is the most intrusive, most damaging, most costly, most dangerous bill to the economic and personal freedom and liberty of individual Americans that Congress has ever considered. If there is any bill that deserves being stopped by shutting down the Senate, it is this one." |
|
| |
— Erik Erickson, RedState Editor-in-Chief
|
|
|
— Erik Erickson, RedState Editor-in-Chief
|
|
Posted December 14, 2009 • 08:31 AM
|
|
|
| |
On EPA Regulation of Carbon Emissions: |
|
| |
"On the day Copenhagen opened, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency claimed jurisdiction over the regulation of carbon emissions by declaring them an 'endangerment' to human health.
"Since we operate an overwhelmingly carbon-based economy, the EPA will be regulating practically everything. No institution that emits more than 250 tons of CO2 a year will fall outside EPA control. This means over a million building complexes, hospitals, plants, schools, businesses and similar enterprises. (The EPA proposes regulating emissions only above 25,000 tons, but it has no such authority.) Not since the creation of the Internal Revenue Service has a federal agency been given more intrusive power over every aspect of economic life." |
|
| |
— Charles Krauthammer, Syndicated Columnist
|
|
|
— Charles Krauthammer, Syndicated Columnist
|
|
Posted December 11, 2009 • 09:26 AM
|
|
|
| |
On a Disenchanted Electorate: |
|
| |
"In a recent Annenberg focus group, pollster Peter Hart asked Philadelphia suburbanites to write the name that came to mind when they thought of Congress. A retired auto executive and 2008 Obama voter wrote, 'Satan.' When asked why, he said, 'Because I wasn't sure of the correct spelling of 'Beelzebub.'" |
|
| |
— Michael Barone, Principal Co-Author, The Almanac of American Politics and U.S. News & World Report Senior Writer
|
|
|
— Michael Barone, Principal Co-Author, The Almanac of American Politics and U.S. News & World Report Senior Writer
|
|
Posted December 10, 2009 • 08:50 AM
|
|
|
| |
On President Obama's Trip to Copenhagen: |
|
| |
"In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to 'restore science to its rightful place.' But instead of staying home from Copenhagen and sending a message that the United States will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices, the president has upped the ante. He plans to fly in at the climax of the conference in hopes of sealing a 'deal.' Whatever deal he gets, it will be no deal for the American people. What Obama really hopes to bring home from Copenhagen is more pressure to pass the Democrats' cap-and-tax proposal. This is a political move. The last thing America needs is misguided legislation that will raise taxes and cost jobs -- particularly when the push for such legislation rests on agenda-driven science." |
|
| |
— Sarah Palin, Former Alaska Governor and GOP Vice Presidential Nominee
|
|
|
— Sarah Palin, Former Alaska Governor and GOP Vice Presidential Nominee
|
|
Posted December 09, 2009 • 08:40 AM
|
|
|
| |
On Climate Change Perceptions, Beliefs and Reality: |
|
| |
"Climate alarmists have become brilliantly adept at changing their terms to suit their convenience. So it's 'global warming' when there's a heat wave, but it's 'climate change' when there's a cold snap. The earth has registered no discernable warming in the past 10 years: Very well then, they say, natural variability must be the cause. But as for the warming that did occur in the 1980s and 1990s, that plainly was evidence of man-made warming. Am I missing something here?" |
|
| |
— Bret Stephens, Wall Street Journal
|
|
|
— Bret Stephens, Wall Street Journal
|
|
Posted December 08, 2009 • 09:01 AM
|
|
|
|