Charges of racism, crying wolf

John Stossel has succinctly pointed out that anyone who criticizes the President, or his proposals, is promptly called a racist. It's sort of a new version of the "vast right-wing conspiracy", simply the latest effort to distract us from what the angry outrage really is: legitimate concerns from right and center Americans who ain't buyin' what the liberals are sellin'.

The problem is that everyone knows that genuine dissent doesn't equal racism. I'm pleased to see that the dissenters aren't cowering away from false accusations of bigotry. I don't care what color skin the President has, socialism is NOT what America needs or wants.

How uncreative to simply revert to racism! What cowardice to hide behind racial identity!

At some point, you've probably been the target of "the guy" who tried to get you to join AmWay. Whenever "the guy" comes around, you know that you're going to have to endure a sales pitch. "The guy" each time may have a revised approach, and the name of what he's trying to sell may have changed, but you know it's the same darn thing, and you don't want it.

President Obama and his liberal supporters in Congress have become "the guy" who keeps trying to sell some undesired product, hoping the latest version of their sales pitch will be the one that is convincing.

The more they talk, the madder we get. And a growing number of folks are seeing through their efforts. Charges of racism prove, not that the accused are racist, but that the accusers can't seem to get the issue of race off their mind.

The pot calls the kettle black...

So Democrats in Congress, tired of getting beat over the head over how they badly mismanage a plethora of federal programs, are deflecting our attention to those homicidal health insurance companies. Politico is reporting that an investigation has been launched into compensation and spending practices of the nation's largest health insurers.

I hope if you're reading this, you're not stupid enough to fall for it.

What business does the government have in telling a private company how to spend their money? There aren't any allegations of criminality. It's just the latest incarnation of class warfare waged by those whose political careers depend on, well, class warfare, to survive.

I'm certain there are highly-paid executives in insurance companies. Just like there are in every other major industry. And I'm sure that they've treated employees to nice retreats -- like they do in every other industry. So don't be surprised when these Congressional thugs drag insurance executives through a torture chamber of public ridicule, because, well, they made a lot of money.

Furthermore, the hypocrisy couldn't be more vivid. This is the same bunch of congressmen who were forced to back away from purchasing extra private jets to hop around the country. Something about a pot calling a kettle black comes to mind.

So they're worried about how much money the insurance companies are charging? Why don't they attend to how much money the government is charging us. And our kids. And our grandkids.

I don't pretend to think that the insurance companies don't need to change the way they do business. They do, if we want to have lower health care costs, but I hardly think the geniuses who have racked up a massive deficit, driven Social Security into near insolvency, and continue to fund inefficient and astronomically expensive entitlement programs ought to be telling a private company how they should spend their money.

I'm just sayin'.

A health care Mulligan may not be a bad idea...

I always am amazed at those on the left who express selective frustration that we can't have a reasonable dialogue about the issue du jour. Seems civility is a one-way street.

At the core of of their argument is an insistence that we spend precious time and energy discussing and debating an issue in which no substantive common ground exists. Constitution-loving patriots could never condone a government-funded communal health system, just as leftist utopians will not be satisfied until they get one. I simply don't believe that there's a place of compromise on nationalized health care. Medicare and Medicaid are both extremely expensive, and near bankruptcy. I'll skip reciting the lengthy list of other bloated and ineffective government programs that lawmakers are great at starting but horrible at operating. On some issues, you compromise. On others, the really important ones, you just have to win.

While I would concede that some of the town hall disruptors from our side may have violated Miss Manners' Guide to Town Hall Etiquette, their behavior is no more offensive than the proposal they are opposing. The simple fact is, we don't want more government. America is seeing ginormous and unprecedented deficits, with an economy still sputtering despite spending hundreds of billions we didn't have to get it moving. We see government taking over the banking and automotive industries. For good reason, it's scaring the crud out of us to think that the government wants to take control of medicine.

Now there's discussion of a "do-over", a Mulligan. I have mixed feelings about it. America has already shouted a collective "hell no!" and I generally get indignant when politicians have a deaf ear. But on the other hand, I largely credit the health care debate for sending President Obama's approval ratings into the tank. And if another round of "just give socialism a chance" discussions can produce similar results... I'm open to the idea. The only thing better than one Waterloo, would be two.

I can see this Congress and President getting booted. Now that would be the change I could believe in.

Shooting dogs in Shelley

There's a story that KIDK has been following out of Shelley about a policeman who shot an aging dog, to put him out of his misery.

Since I don't know everything about this case, let me hurry up and say that the cop acted stupidly.

OK, that was just a cheap shot on my part. But, now that we have a cop and an angry victim we can move forward with an awkward beer summit. (It'll have to be a root beer summit, since I don't do beer.)

Actually I think we do know enough to substantively comment...

Old dog wandering around a neighborhood, so old it looks sick.
Resident calls the police to report the wandering sick-looking dog.
Three officers arrive on the scene of this dire emergency.
One of them decides the sick-looking dog needs to be put out of its misery.
Cop pulls the gun, and fires FOUR shots into the canine. (This cop must be a great shot. Most of the time it takes ten or fifteen rounds to kill an old sick-looking dog).
Dog dies.
Owner is angry.
Community is upset.
A meeting is held.
Cops stand by their decision.

So... there's the story. I feel badly for the owner of the dog. And, frankly, I think the cops messed up. If a dog is acting viciously -- or is a pit bull -- shoot it immediately. But if it's just sick looking, for heaven's sake, find the owner first.

Similar logos?

Bad precedent?

I've been watching with interest the news of former POTUS Bill Clinton making a "surprise" trip to North Korea to negotiate the release of the two Current TV journalists -- Laura Ling and Euna Lee -- caught trespassing into the North a few months ago.

ABC News says this trip has been in the works for weeks, and I think it's probably clear that Clinton made sure the two journalists would be freed before he ever agreed to make the trip. All the rest, it appears, will be a formality, and in a few days -- hopefully sooner rather than later -- Lee and Ling will return home to the states.

While I'm happy to see two fellow citizens come back, spared more than a dozen years in a hard labor camp, I can't help but worry about the precedent this trip may set. North Korea loves the attention this has been getting for them. To attract a former president, and "benevolently" release two prisoners who admitted to trespassing, makes us look a little foolish.

According to ABC's report, North Korea wanted two things: 1. An apology. 2. A high-profile dignitary to make a visit.

As for the apology. That's clearly not a problem for the Obama Administration. They've been selling apologies at Wal-Mart on the clearance rack all year.

And the high-profile dignitary? Bill Clinton needed something to inject himself back into the public scene as a hero and win a foreign policy victory for the Obama Administration. So I guess it all worked out.

I'm just not convinced that other rogue nations won't think they can pull our chains in a similar fashion in the future.