Medicare for All (M4A) retained its prominent place on the stage at the latest Democratic debate. In its purest Bernie Sanders form, concurrent with abolishing private health insurance, U.S. residents would be enrolled in “Medicare.” The program would pay for unlimited “medically necessary” health expenses, including pharmaceuticals, mental health and substance abuse treatment, vision, dental, and hearing services, and long-term care with no out-of-pocket costs. Some supporters were scared off by the $32 trillion over 10 years price tag. Not to be outdone, Elizabeth Warren’s “I’m with Bernie” plan comes with a $52 trillion over 10 years price tag including up to $34 trillion in new government spending. Our country’s entire yearly budget is a mere $3.5 trillion. For perspective, if your salary is $40,000 per year it would take 25 million years to earn 1 trillion dollars. As M4A’s dark side emerged, the candidates distanced themselves from Bernie-care.
Elimination of private insurance? Whoa, Nellie! Over 156 million Americans —half the country—are covered by employer-sponsored health insurance plans and another 23 million have private individual policies. And most of these folks like that arrangement. Then there was pushback from some unions who had excellent health insurance policies for which they had bargained and given up other perks.
In the June debate the candidates raised their hands indicating they would abolish private health insurance. Now Mayor Buttigieg wants to “unify the American people around, creating a version of Medicare, making it available to anybody who wants it, but without the divisive step of ordering people onto it whether they want to or not.” Vice president Biden, noting his desire to keep patient choice stated, “we should build on Obamacare … adding a Medicare option in that plan, and not make people choose.” Of course, Obamacare caused a rise in premiums, a decrease in choice of insurance coverage, and like any large government-run program was prone to mismanagement and waste.
Possible financing mechanisms were screaming for a deep dive. One analysis concluded that most Americans would suffer financially if M4A were implemented as proposed. An analysis by a bipartisan think tank estimated a 32 per cent increase in payroll taxes would be needed to fund M4A. Everyone—even the working poor—would have more payroll taxes extracted from their paycheck. The analysis concluded that most households would pay more in new taxes than they would save by eliminating their current spending on private health insurance and out-of-pocket medical expenses.
Senator Warren tries to hide the ugly truth by railing about the evil rich who would be taxed down to their underwear. Take the deceptively worded “2-cent” annual tax for households with more than $50 million in assets. If you have $51 million in assets, most probably tied up in your business, you’d have to cough up (.02)($1,000,000) or $20,000, not 2 cents. The devil’s spawn, aka our 535 billionaires, would be subject to a 6 percent annual tax on their assets. Who will be the next target when the government has driven the assets to a sunny island in the Caribbean? Finally, raising the corporate income tax back up to 35 percent likely would result in businesses paying lower wages to current employees or cutting back on hiring to compensate for the increased tax burden.
During the latest debate, Senator Warren retreated from her “all-in” approach, asserting she would first provide Medicare at no cost to “everybody under the age of 18, everybody who has a family of four income less than $50,000”—about 135 million people. Second, she would lower the Medicare age to 50 and expand Medicare coverage to include vision, dental, and long-term care. In the third year, “when people have had a chance to feel it and taste it and live with it, we’re going to vote and we’re going to want Medicare for all.”
Senator Sanders owns that payroll taxes would be doubled or tripled and proposes a 4 percent surtax on families earning more than $29,000. So if you earn $60,000, you’d have to pay (.04)($31,000) or $1,240, enough for a whole year’s membership in a private Direct Primary Care plan. Senator Sanders, staying true to his principles, is sticking with unadulterated Medicare for All with its financial warts.
Even those who are numb to government over-spending can see the broader problem of inviting Uncle Sam into their lives in exchange for a Medicare card in their wallet. Any remaining privacy is erased. Our medical records would be furnished to the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. Physicians and patients would be robbed of their autonomy and choice by medical care policies set by the government monopoly. Lack of competition leads to lower quality and fewer services. Coverage becomes an illusion.
Medicare for All’s beauty is only skin deep and its ugly goes to the bone.
Dr. Singleton is a board-certified anesthesiologist. She is Immediate Past President of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). Her opinions are her own. This is an edited column that originally appeared at www.pennypressnv.com, reprinted with permission.
For a long time, I have mostly written in this space about the ridiculous Democrats in the House who, tilting at left-wing partisan windmills, are heading in the direction of impeaching President Trump thus almost guaranteeing his re-election in 2020 since there is no chance the Senate will remove him.
This week, however, I have stumbled into an equally ridicules situation which has no relationship with what is currently happening in Washington but could have a serious impact on America’s largest employer—small business.
You may have seen some TV commercials for a non-bank lender named Kabbage. It features actor Gary Cole playing a spokesman from 10 minutes in the future talking to some small business people. After they get the funding they needed, Cole pops in as even further in the future after they got the Gundelfinger Account.
My company has used Kabbage for something like three years.
It’s not a huge credit line but we have made every payment on a timely basis and they have never had any problem with us.
On December 2, we made our normal monthly payment. A few days later, I checked to make sure it was recorded properly. It was. But there was a note on the app screen which said, “You are not currently eligible to take a loan. Call us at 88xx-xxxx to fix this issue.”
So I did.
What they told me was that there was a 60 day hold on our account, the computer makes these decisions and there is no appeal because they don’t know the reason that the computer made the decision.
I asked to speak to an executive who authorized the computer to make that decision.
“Sir,” said the young lady, “That team is not customer facing.”
Not customer facing?
Now I need to make two points here. Nobody is obligated to lend you money any more that anybody is obligated to borrow money. This is a business transaction. You lend me money and I pay it back with interest.
But good business practice dictates that if you make a decision like that—which, by the way, you have every right to make—you pick up the phone and FACE THE CUSTOMER! Maybe your precious computer got the wrong—or no—information.
Kabbage is part of a new group of financial institutions called fintech.
It’s the latest new thing.
They have a proprietary algorithm so they can evaluate risk and make loans fast.
That’s all well and good. And, as welcome as that may be to help fund America’s largest employer, a lender you cannot talk to is nobody you want to do business with.
Suppose, as an example, you are coming up on a payroll and are just a bit short—something which is not unusual in the wide world of small business. You know you have that available in your Kabbage line. Only, when you go to use it, there’s a note, placed there by a computer for a reason nobody knows that you cannot use the money. That’s the sort of thing that can break a small business.
What was point number two that I was going to make?
Only that I made it clear that I was not mad at the nice young customer facing lady. I was mad at her company and then only because information is as important as cash in small business and if Kabbage can’t tell you why, it’s very difficult to want to continue to do business with them—even after the 60 day hold is over. Resigning the Gundelfinger account is a real possibility.
Now, we can get back to politics. But I’ll bet that Kabbage CEO Rob Frohwein will see the logic in fixing this problem long before the Democrat morons in the House figure out that they are hamsters making the wheel go around. And I mean no insult to hamsters.
A minister's wife came up to me after seeing my due diligence in seeking out the Scriptures and said, "You're so heavenly-minded that you're no earthly good.”-Bradlee Dean
When I was first saved from my sins (Matthew 1:21) back in 1998, I remember how much the Lord had broken me down to nothing, and I mean nothing. A man of God once said that until a man becomes nothing, God will create nothing out of him (Isaiah 66:2; Psalm 34:18, 51:17). The Lord has definitely taken the time to show me this truth by showing me what I am not, by showing me who He is (Malachi 3:6).
During this breaking process, I also remember feeding on the Word day and night (John 6:35). For me, it was like King David when he said:
“As the deer pants for the water brooks, So pants my soul for You, O God. My soul thirsts for God, for the living God.” -Psalm 42:1-2
I'm also reminded in Matthew 5:6 where Jesus said: “Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.”
This is where I am after 21 years of working out my own salvation with fear and trembling and in studying to shew myself approved unto God (Philippians 2:12; 2 Timothy 2:15).
I did not want to have anything to do with the old man.
“That ye put off concerning the former conversation, the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.” -Ephesians 4:22-24
This is what being born again means and looks like (John 3:3-5).
“Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;” -Titus 3:5
We are new creatures in Christ.
“Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.” -2 Corinthians 5:17
I had new desires and my affections were set on Christ (Colossians 3:1). I wanted His will; and how was I to do that if I did not know His Word (John 7:17)?
Now, in the beginning process of growing in grace (2 Peter 3:18) and being rooted and built up in Him (Colossians 2:7), this minister's wife tells me that if I was so heavenly-minded that I would never be any earthly good. I almost fell out of my chair. The first thing that came to my mind was that if I am not heavenly-minded, how is it that His will can be done on earth as it is in Heaven (Matthew 6:10)?
How was I supposed to give the answers to the world that they so desperately needed if I didn’t have them to give? (Matthew 10:8; 2 Timothy 2:6-7)
Furthermore, “our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Philippians 3:20).
Our conversation is to becometh the Gospel of Christ (Philippians 1:27).
For anyone one to say, I care not for whom it may be, that if we are so heavenly-minded that we are no earthly good, it is one of the most backward, as well as, unscriptural things to say (Galatians 1:3-12).
The fact of the matter is if you are not heavenly-minded, you will be no earthly good!
“And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, the will of God.” -Romans 12:2
After all friends,
“You can’t go on heavenly missions without heavenly fire." -D. L. Moody
You finally get your dream and are selected to be a contestant on Wheel of Fortune. You get to see Pat Sajak and Vanna White! You win a vacation to some country that you don’t really want to see. You cannot get the cash equivalent. You have to take 10 days off of work to take the free vacation you did not want. You discover that you have to pay the tax on the free vacation.
Or you win a free car. You have a perfectly functioning 3-year-old car. The free car was not really the car you would have selected. You accepted it because it was free. Then you see that you have to pay tax on the list price of the free car. You also discover that the collision insurance and Department of Motor Vehicles registration for the free car are significantly higher than for the car you currently own.
These are examples of why nothing is “free.” This applies to medical care as well. You may have to see the “health care provider” the government program or private insurer makes available to you. You don’t particularly want to see a nurse, but that’s the way the cookie crumbles with free health care. Oh well, you convince yourself that it’s okay because, just like that car on the game show, it was free.
Here’s a new spin on “free.” Yes, your medical care should be free – free from the restraints of government control. Free from the government rules that have raised the price of insurance premiums. The Affordable Care Act mandated ten essential benefits that all insurance plans must include free of out-of-pocket charges to patients. Of course, this does not include the initial out-of-pocket charge: the insurance premium. Insurance premiums shot up over the post-ACA year because the insurance plan has to cover conditions that the insured persons may not even encounter in their own lives. A glaring example is obstetrics coverage in a menopausal female. Preventive and wellness visits are also labelled as free.
Moreover, a recent AMA study revealed that over the last four years the competition in the commercial insurance market has decreased. In over 50 percent of metropolitan areas, representing about 73 million persons, one insurer has half of the market. The more concentrated the market, the higher the premiums.
Remember that free car? We all know and readily accept that car insurance does not pay for the gas and basic maintenance. So why should maintenance medical care be covered by insurance? Car insurance would be unaffordable for most car owners if it paid for gas, oil changes, new mufflers, radios, and batteries. Most states require drivers to have car insurance. If people can’t afford the insurance, they lose the benefit of owning a car.
Similarly, if you lose your health due to long waits or delayed diagnosis because the CT scan was not authorized or poor medication response because you had to take the formulary drug that was not the doctor’s first drug choice for you, the care is not free, but very costly.
The underlying message of free “health care” is disempowering. The message is that we are incapable of taking care of ourselves. Empowerment is having control over our own lives. First, we take charge of our own health by thinking about the choices we make. We choose to not smoke, overindulge in food or drink, or engage in foolhardy behaviors. Second, we decide what is important for our own health. If you do not want insurance coverage for obstetrics or fertility treatment because you are 50 years old and do not want children, there should be a less expensive insurance product available to you. Third, we need to be free to choose our own doctor as well as the treatment the doctor—not the invisible third-party payer—recommends.
The promised free health care would increase the payroll taxes on all workers, even if that worker does not want that particular brand of free medical care. The next time you hear that medical care is free, just think about that “free” car that is the wrong color, is too small, has uncomfortable seats, inadequate headroom, and overall is not what you really want.
Dr. Singleton is a board-certified anesthesiologist. She is Immediate Past President of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). Her opinions are her own. This is an edited column that originally appeared at www.pennypressnv.com, reprinted with permission.
When I was Nevada controller, my deputy James Smack had an inspired idea.
On the Transparent Nevada web site of the Nevada Policy Research Institute, he searched pay levels of state employees with “controller” in their job titles. After eliminating air traffic controllers, he found he was ninth and I was tenth.
We knew his pay was higher than mine because our salaries were dictated by statute. What was surprising was that eight state employees with a controller job title made more than us. They were all employed in the colleges, universities and Desert Research Institute.
This illustrated that non-academic pay in Nevada higher education is above market levels, as we already knew. Full-time academic pay is also high because it competes with only the bloated levels at other colleges. Throughout academe, full-time faculty and administrative compensation is very high, while that for part-time (adjunct) faculty is very low.
I don’t raise this matter to complain that our pay was too low. Even if it should be higher, no one forced me to run or James to take his job.
However, Nevada local government pay, especially in the two large counties and in public safety, is unduly high due to very powerful unions. In higher education, the problem is the board of regents is as weak as local governments. Thus, costs – and taxes – continue to rise due to ever-increasing staffing, especially in administrative areas, and very high compensation.
Total compensation for Nevada state employees is closer to private market levels and in the mid-range for state employees around the country.
Now, however, state employees can bargain collectively for compensation. So, we can expect their compensation and staffing levels to soar too – unless governor Steve Sisolak and his successors make good use of their statutory power to restrain the results of collective bargaining. I commend my former regent colleague the Governor for insisting that a gubernatorial veto be included in the legislation allowing state employee collective bargaining.
I also commend his two other recent thoughtful actions on related fronts. First, reining in the excesses, overreach and illegal actions of state boards and commissions, especially those regulating occupations. Second, taking on the use by such agencies and others of outside lobbyists to get more funding from the legislature, often contrary to the governor’s proposed budget and usually at very high fees. (They also spend too much staff time lobbying an d on public relations.)
All these costs contribute to raising our taxes.
And to making state government ever more opaque and less accountable.
Government at state and local levels, just as much as the federal government, has shifted from limited and enumerated powers, spending restraint, and resulting accountability to unlimited powers, wanton spending and tax increases, and an uncontrollable administrative state.
While state and local governments may not yet have developed the really sinister Deep State “intelligence,” spying and police powers now being exposed in Washington, they are working on creating such a nationwide swamp with extensive police powers.
None of this should be surprising, because it’s all in the nature of government and public employee unions.
The people who run and staff public agencies, just like those in the private sector, want more pay, power, perks and prestige. And less work for each of them to do, less accountability and fewer restraints on their actions and prerogatives. They’re only human.
This leads them to seek ever higher pay rates and benefits, more people to work with and for them, and higher expenses and capital budgets. And especially less accountability to voters, taxpayers, governors and legislatures.
People in the private sector have the same instincts. This isn’t a matter of better or lesser folks in either sector.
The difference is that in the private sector there are inherent restraints, especially on spending, pay and staffing levels. Businesses can’t just raise their prices willy-nilly, as governments do taxes, because they’ll lose sales, customers and revenues. And their powers are restrained by law and government.
That’s why, in general, the private sector works better than government, which keeps metastasizing and burdening us further. Government and public employee unions are, by their very natures, predatory upon the public, interest and taxpayers. And little restrained.
Whenever I hear some left-wing wacko spewing moronic hatred for President Trump, I think, Wow! If this President can make a whack-job like that hate him, he must be doing a pretty good job.
Think about it.
Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, Jerrold Nadler, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Juan Williams, Chris Matthews, Joe Scarboro, Mike Brezinski, Rachel Maddow, Chris Cuomo, Peggy Noonan, George Conway, Peter Strozk, Lisa Page, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Hillary Clinton, Max Boot, Jennifer Rubin, Michael Gerson, Bill Kristol, Peter Wehner, Trevor Noah, Tom Hanks, Shakira, Russell Simmons, Rosie O’Donnell, Ricky Martin, Miley Cyrus, Mac Miller, Louis CK, John Oliver, John Legend, JK Rowling, George Clooney, Eva Longoria, Demi Lovato, Chrissy Teigen, Chris Brown, Joe Walsh (not the Eagles’ Joe Walsh, the phony politician Joe Walsh.)
Whew! And that’s mostly the rookie league. (Maybe Pelosi is AA.)
We haven’t yet gotten to the Democrat politicos running for the Democrat nomination. (Triple A)
There, you have one billionaire (Tom Steyer) who called Trump a “failure” in a TV spot he’s paying for himself, hopefully to get past 1 percent.
Then you have another billionaire, a former New York Mayor who just “apologized” for the stop and frisk policy he inherited from his predecessor—Trump’s personal lawyer—but cannot otherwise explain the dramatic drop in violent crime during his term.
If you look at just the list above, there are some common threads.
First are the overstuffed Hollywood types—some of whom I’ve only briefly heard of—who just know so much about politics that we should be overwhelmed by their intelligence quotients. Then we have the writers and TV personalities who fall into the category of “pundits”. They are trying to make a living by badmouthing the President. And, finally, we have the politicians who are green with envy. They should have his political skills.
Why do they hate this guy so much?
Well, he stands for the concept that this is the United States of America, as my father used to say, and any little boy or girl can grow up to be President or accomplish anything they want to accomplish by simply putting one foot in front of the other and moving forward.
Contrary to what the clowns on the list above would have you believe, Donald Trump is not successful because his father was rich. In fact, he went against the wishes of his father when he went into Manhattan real estate.
He’s successful because he took some giant risks.
Not everything he did worked.
His experience in Atlantic City as an example. Hillary Clinton famously asked in a debate, “I mean, ask yourself, how can anybody lose money running a casino? Really.”
Of course, she demonstrated her ignorance of that business because she asked that question without knowing that one of the two largest casino companies in the nation, Harrahs, was almost two years into Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. That’s right, the company now known as Caesars Entertainment because, yes, it happened to own Caesars Palace in both Las Vegas AND Atlantic City.
Caesars today operates approximately 47 casinos in 13 U.S. states and five countries, including the Caesars, Harrah’s, Horseshoe and Bally’s brands. When stupid people ask stupid rhetorical questions, they often get they asses handed to them.
I mean, ask yourself, how can you take any of the clowns I have listed above seriously?
The fastest growing addiction in the US is online shopping. Ads pop up on our social media, news feeds and email. Boxes pile up in your closet of unopened packages. And then one day you notice you purchased the same item twice! Are you addicted to online shopping or any shopping for that matter? Let’s break down this latest epidemic.
A “Compulsive Buying Disorder (CBD)” was first described in the early 20th century as a compulsive disorder that left the patient with debt. Later in the century its classification was debated and eventually included with the personality disorders.
Compulsive buying is known as “oniomania” where one buys impulsively and excessively to the point that it leaves them in financial hardship. And despite their financial issues they continue to make purchases. We’ve used the term “shopaholics” to describe those addicted to shopping but compulsive buying connotes the lack sense of financial ruin that can ensue. The spending is an attempt to satisfy a need that never gets fulfilled.
Compulsive buying disorder may be seen in those who suffer from mania and bipolar disorder. During manic episodes excessive spending may occur. Additionally we may see CBD co-morbidly in those who suffer from eating, gambling, substance use, and mood disorders.
Compulsive online shopping occurs when purchases are made online, without much thought or planning, and at a frequency where it may interfere with one’s life. People who might have never become a compulsive shopper in a traditional store may become easily addicted to online shopping. Those who are compulsive online shoppers may exhibit any of the following:
So compulsive online shopping, as well as compulsive buying disorder, can affect relationships, employment, finances and health.
Various sources have put the range at 5-8% of the US population.
When one is able to shop from the comfort of one’s desk or work station, the “ease” factor drives more shopping. Avoiding the need to leave work or home to battle traffic and weather and long lines, is one of the biggest draws. Moreover, those who hate going into a store or dressing room, concerned others will see the sizes of clothes they are trying on, can now shop in the privacy in their own home. Additionally shopping allows one to fight the boredom they have at work or home and give one a sense of accomplishment. And once one has a successful and satisfying purchase, the reward centers of the brain are activated making one want to shop more.
Hence, shrewd marketing will appeal to the human psyche by any of the following:
Don’t give in to the ads. People must realize they are being bombarded with some of the most creative marketing manipulation known to mankind. We can’t fall for it. Why are we letting our smart devices dictate to us what we need in our closets, pantries or garages?
But to fight the urge to shop online excessively, we must:
If needed, compulsive shopping can be treated with therapy as well as medications including SSRI’s, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, which are efficacious in those with impulsive personalities or obsessive-compulsive disorder.
“Where the roots of private virtue are diseased, the fruit of public probity cannot but be corrupt.” -Felix Alder
Let me start off by acknowledging that since the inception of this ministry 22 years ago, I have never based my opinion on the things that I highlight either on radio or in my articles, never once. Yet, those that have disputed or have attempted to debate me on whatever topic that I may be highlighting have given their opinions and that without fail.
I have always based every topic in correcting the errors of opinion on the Word of God and that of the United States Constitution (Psalm 119:89; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 1 Peter 1:25). By doing so, it becomes the stumbling block or the rock of offense to their opinions (1 Peter 2:8). These topics that I highlight usually apply to those in the Church and to those in government, which Jesus told us to beware when it comes to their leaven-doctrine (Mark 8:15).
“They that forsake the law praise the wicked: but such as keep the law contend with them.” -Proverbs 28:4
As for me and my house, I AM FOR THE LAW (Biblical and Constitutional - Joshua 24:15)!
Remember that “political language is designed to make lies sound truthful” and yet, these are the games in which these men that debate with me are caught up.
One example of this is how many people have been led to believe that when the unconstitutional Republican Party is in power that they are a law unto themselves; or how about when the unconstitutional Democrats are in power that they are a law unto themselves. This is merely a con system to further divide the American people (Mark 3:25). We are ruled by law, not by an unconstitutional party system.
How far can this go if we let it?
Just the other day, I heard a preacher that I like, speak of how thankful he was that the president lets him do the things that he does (Hosea 4:6). This preacher needs to understand that he is to have the law of truth in his mouth, which is to turn men from iniquity and bondage (Malachi 2:6).
This preacher has it backward and upside down. Little must he know of his own history. This is what our forefathers exhibited in throwing off tyranny in 1776.
It is absolutely astounding to see how people will praise administration after administration based on what a candidate may be running on (promises made), or what a president may say and yet, Scripture commands that we are to judge them by what they do.
“ Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree brings forth good fruit.
Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” -Matthew 7:16-20
Again, the foolishness of men praise a man for what he says, and that to their own demise rather than what that man does (Isaiah 30).
“And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.”
I can just hear someone say, "We should praise our leaders for the good that they do, not the wrong that they do" (Romans 7:9-12). They are servants, not leaders.
That public servant is entrusted with delegated authority from “We the People” to do what they swore that they would do, which is to uphold the enumerated laws found within the United States Constitution.
Let me say it this way: when you are driving down the highway abiding by the laws of the land, the police officer does not pull you over to tell you how wonderful a driver that you are, does he? However, he will pull you over for driving erratically or dangerously? So it is with us, the Bible teaches.
“Doth he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I trow not.” -Luke 17:9
Son of Liberty Patrick Henry said that Americans are to “guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel.”
And so should we.
I end with this: How many politicians have run for office, regardless of capacity, where we have found what they promised to do what was right, and what they actually did when they won the office, they instantly turned on the people by doing the opposite of what they promised to do?
Yet, it falls to the people that tolerate this.
How true it is what Joseph de Maistre said: “Every country has the government it deserves.”
After a period of silence, Dr. Bandy Lee and her committee of mental-health “experts” have again burst onto the scene, angling to participate in the impeachment of President Trump. They are defying the Goldwater Rule, which holds that it is unethical for physicians to diagnose patients they have not personally examined. They claim that President Trump is a such a serious threat to the nation that they are allowed to violate rules.
“We don’t believe there is the need for any further evaluation, and we are making ourselves available for the impeachment hearing because we believe that mental health issues will become critical as pressures from the impeachment hearings mount,” Dr. Lee told the Washington Examiner. “In other words, the more successful the impeachment proceedings become, the more dangerous the psychological factors of the president will become.”
Obviously, the thing to do is to increase the psychological pressure on a person you declare to be unstable.
Dr. Lee’s “medical assessment” of the President’s “mental capacity to fulfill the duties of his office” includes the examination of tweets, public appearances, and the 448-page Mueller report. “There is very little that a personal examination will add,” Lee said.
She denies that she is actually making a diagnosis. Indeed, “unfitness for office” is an opinion, a conclusion that is not in the DSM, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of currently defined psychiatric diagnoses.
Regardless of one’s opinion about President Trump, this self-appointed “Independent Expert Panel for Presidential Fitness” should concern all Americans. Where does a group of academic experts get the ability or the authority to determine whether the President is “capable of keeping the country safe”?
The U.S. Constitution provides several methods of “regime change,” which is what Congressional Democrats, the mainstream news media, and this Panel seem
determined to achieve. The first is elections. In 2016, Americans voted for a change from the policies of Obama and Clinton and the imbedded bureaucracy. Ever since then, the losers have been seeking to nullify this result. Attacks on the President by the press have been unrelenting. Unlike Abraham Lincoln or Woodrow Wilson, this President has not imprisoned any journalists or shut down any newspapers. But he does make sarcastic remarks—and his opponents would like to deny him the forum of social media.
Second is the 25th Amendment, which provides for the removal of a President for incapacity. This might have removed Woodrow Wilson after a devastating stroke had it been in existence at the time. It requires action by the Vice President and a majority of executive officers or a body appointed by Congress—not a few activist academics. This has so far been a non-starter.
Finally, there is impeachment, for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” In American jurisprudence, proceedings are supposed to be triggered by a crime—not by the Soviet KGB method of “show me the man, and I will name his crime.” Or worse, “KGB Plus”—show me the man, and I will invent his crime.
In a world where there are so many ever-changing rules that everyone might be inadvertently committing “three felonies a day,” anyone could be prosecuted. But one is at least supposed to have certain rights: confronting the accuser, assistance of counsel, access to all the evidence, the right to call and cross-examine witnesses. And knowing exactly what the charges are.
Why should psychiatrists be intruding themselves into this legal process? Are there Thought Crimes that they have a special ability to discern?
Ordinary Americans should be very concerned. If this can happen to the President, it can happen to them. And it does.
One alarming example is the “fitness for duty” evaluations to which physicians may be subjected by people who for some reason want to destroy them. There are virtually no due-process rights. The examiner has the status of a physician, but no obligation to act in the “patient’s” (target’s) best interest. Some psychiatrists may presume to have god-like power to judge a person’s emotions, intentions, and capacity—asserted in the name of safety or “security.” “Red flag” laws are another example.
President Trump may be right in saying: “They’re not coming for me. They are coming for you. I’m just in the way.”
Bandy Lee and associates are showing us a method to remove undesirables if legal process fails.
Jane M. Orient, M.D. obtained her undergraduate degrees in chemistry and mathematics from the University of Arizona in Tucson, and her M.D. from Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons in 1974. Her views are her own. This is an edited version of her column that originally appeared in pennypress.com. Reprinted with permission.
f the Democrat jihad against President Donald Trump has shown us anything about the so-called Deep State it is that there is a class of professional bureaucrats—so called “experts”—who think they're accountable to…nobody.
Certainly not the President.
And they think of us as “the American People” in the pejorative. Not that they work for us. No, they work for some mythical country in which “the people” don’t get a vote because we’re far too stupid to have any actual say in things like foreign affairs, or military issues or trade or the law.
They populate the Departments of State, Justice, Defense and, even the White House itself.
And many of these people don’t have the common sense that God gave a goose.
That was all on display during the Schiff Show, the last two weeks. The question you need to answer, now that the arrogance of these people has been fully on display is where do we go from here?
There is still some question—not much—as to whether or not Nancy Pelosi is willing to endure the inevitable results of an impeachment. Assuming she is—or just cannot avoid it—Donald Trump will most likely be re-elected for the same reason he won in the first place. That is, to drain the swamp of the arrogance exhibited by the so-called deep state.
A swamp that the House Democrats put on full display through their patron saint Adam Schiff.
And, like the Kremlin, this group of governmental super studs has their own newspaper. Only, instead of Pravda, theirs is the Washington Post. With headlines like “Trump’s GOP support hardens despite damning impeachment testimony”.
Had I written a headline like that DURING WATERGATE, I would have been hustled off to a public relations firm if I wanted to continue my career in the media. The writers and editors at the Post have become nothing but pimps and pimpettes (call them “presstitutes” like they do in the Phillipines) for the group of deep staters and Democrats I have described above.
But, again, they all seem to have forgotten that this is a very large nation with a huge silent majority that has simply had enough.
You can take a map of the United States and find the WalMarts where you can “smell the Trump support” West of the Hudson River, South of the Cook County line and East of the Los Angeles County line. In the last election that produced 63,000,000 votes AFTER NBC leaked a private conversation with Billy Bush which would have certainly disqualified most candidates.
How bad a light does that cast the deep state?
The fact is that you, I and our neighbors have had enough. We are tired of being called stupid and not well educated. We are tired of a world where common sense is derided as “impeachable” by geniuses like Schiff and his little buddy Eric Swalwell.
And to put the cherry on top of the sundae, the President saw that the rules of engagement for the wars we are fighting in the Middle East were being used to ruin the lives of service members (but never those with stars on their shoulders) who actually killed the enemy. We wanted to have a war but make actually killing the enemy illegal.
So, he issued two complete pardons and a commutation.
Immediately upon those actions, some two star pissant admiral in the Navy told a Navy Seal who had his sentence overturned by the President that he would face a board to remove him from the Seals.
That board will convene shortly. Or not. What do you think will happen?
Can you say “military-industrial complex”? Well President Trump can say “civilian control” and did. Ask the now former Secretary of the Navy.
Want to try and remove him? As they used to say on a game show—which is what this really is—COME ON DOWN!