About Me

Name: Laura L. Hollis,...
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

They ARE covered, unless...

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Friday, August 28, 2009 3:20:45 PM
... there are any provisions in the bill requiring proof of citizenship, and creating sanctions for violations.  Which there aren't.  In other words, add this to the many lies being spun by Obama about Obamacare: "It won't cover illegal immigrants!"  Why?  "Uh, 'cause we say so."

Really?  Then why isn't there a provision in the bill requiring proof of citizenship to get non-emergency medical services?  And why did every Democrat vote against an amendment which would have required it?

Because if there is no enforcement provision in the bill, then any prohibition in it is meaningless.  And they know it.

Don't take my word for it.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Which only shows she needs to get out more

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Friday, August 28, 2009 3:17:25 PM
Uh, yeah, sure.  And Hitler appreciated art.  Mussolini made the trains run on time.  Andropov ran a mean (literally) KGB.  People like this idiot don't appreciate freedom and liberty; they admire totalitarianism as long as it's done with style.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why CAN the government simply take your property?

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Friday, August 28, 2009 3:14:34 PM
Your house?  Your car dealership?  And give it to someone else?  Put you out of business?  Put all your employees out of a job?

All of this is so d@mned unconstitutional, it is a wonder that the bones of the Founding Fathers haven't risen from their graves to haunt us.  How devastated they would be to see what we tolerate now.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What's wrong with capitalism? Nothing. It's what's wrong with US.

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Thursday, August 27, 2009 9:56:53 PM
Great article here.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Question: What do Massachusetts, Tennessee, Hawaii, and Maine have in common?

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Friday, August 21, 2009 4:23:09 PM
Answer: State-provided health care programs that drastically exceeded their initial budget estimates.

It doesn't matter how well-intentioned the programs' drafters are, human nature being what it is, the costs of these kinds of programs always soar out of control.  And there is, contrary to what Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid might think, an upper limit to what you can confiscate in taxes.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Andy McCarthy understands why the term "death panels" resonates

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Friday, August 21, 2009 2:08:50 PM
with the American public.  To my way of thinking, too many conservative writers are trying too hard to look "fair."  It's one thing to refrain from ascribing malevolent motives to someone (à la, "Barack Obama wants old people to die.")  It is quite another to pretend that, when (not "if") rationing happens, government bureaucrats aren't going to make decisions pursuant to which real people actually die.  They will.

Read the whole thing here.  It's refreshing in its honesty, and I like it when conservatives take on other conservatives!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (8) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

And the specifics are even more frightening

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Thursday, August 20, 2009 11:59:15 PM
When you go from talking about "health care" or "medical treatment" generally, and start talking about the specifics of actual medical specialties, the implications become even more grave.

Compelling article here by Dr. Ronald Dworkin.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

This kind of thing is EXACTLY what people fear.

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Thursday, August 20, 2009 6:56:39 PM
It's one thing to initiate an end-of-life conversation with your doctor, your spouse, your attorney, your children.  It's quite another when the entity that is paying your medical bills starts asking, "Have you ever wondered when life wouldn't be worth living anymore?"

It's called being railroaded.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's God complex

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Wednesday, August 19, 2009 10:36:46 PM
"We are God's partners in matters of life and death"??????  What kind of unsurpassed arrogance is this?  I swear, maybe some of the people who think B.O. is the Antichrist are onto something here.  Has any other politician in modern memory claimed to be a "partner" (and thus "equal") with God, and in matters of who lives and who dies?  And he says this as the country erupts with angry citizens, terrified at the prospect of a federal bureaucracy set in place by Obama to decide who gets what care - if any?

And I don't want to hear any blather about how he "misspoke."  There are dozens of things he could have said.  He could have said that God asks us all to aid each other through life and death.  He could have said that our faith requires that we assist those who are sick and dying.  His particular phraseology, however, says something very different. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Yet another reason not to emulate Sweden

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Wednesday, August 19, 2009 7:28:11 PM
More nonsensical governmental interference with parents' rights to raise their children.
 
Every study I have seen has shown that homeschooled children do better on virtually every single metric that matters - yes, including "social" skills. How ironic that government schools suck not because of the teachers or administration, but because of the problems at home (problems that no school or teacher can solve), while the families who are doing an excellent job of raising and educating their children at home are being told they have to be in government schools.
 
Ridiculous.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

In honor of Woodstock...

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Monday, August 17, 2009 11:31:22 PM
... well, "honor" is probably not the right word, but still, this amused me to no end.

Here is Part One.

And Part Two.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

While Obama wants to imitate Canada, the Canadian Medical Association...

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Monday, August 17, 2009 10:50:52 PM
... admits that their system is "imploding."  Here's an excerpt:
The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.

Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country - who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting - recognize that changes must be made.

"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing [sic] said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"We know that there must be change," she said. "We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands."

Even better:

The pitch for change at the conference is to start with a presentation from Dr. Robert Ouellet, the current president of the CMA, who has said there's a critical need to make Canada's health-care system patient-centred. He will present details from his fact-finding trip to Europe in January, where he met with health groups in England, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and France.

His thoughts on the issue are already clear. Ouellet has been saying since his return that "a health-care revolution has passed us by," that it's possible to make wait lists disappear while maintaining universal coverage and "that competition should be welcomed, not feared."

In other words, Ouellet believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system.

Read the whole thing here.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Rationing by price" is ONLY better if the price is FAIR

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Monday, August 17, 2009 8:07:18 PM
I agree with the editors of National Review Online that rationing - by which they mean personal decision-making - by price, is far better than rationing by government policy.  The potential recipients of the care should be the ones deciding what they can afford and what makes sense under the circumstances.  NOT some government bureaucrat or "health care panel."

BUT ...

Rationing by price is only fair and sensible if the prices are fair and sensible.  As I wrote in my column today, the problem with our health care "system" now is that it isn't really a private exchange anymore, and too many Americans could never afford to pay for the care they receive.  Of course new and experimental treatments will be expensive - at least initially.  But, unlike so many other commodities and services, the price never seems to go down as more people have access to these treatments.

We have GOT to get the root of the skyrocketing costs.  Otherwise, not only will single-payer health care be inevitable, the collapse of the health care system - with or without a single-payer system - will be inevitable as well.  And that is the real looming crisis.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Yup, yup, and yup.

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Monday, August 17, 2009 7:50:53 PM
Victor Davis Hanson lays it on the line, as usual.  And I was gratified to read this line:
"Nothing is worse for a president than a growing belief among the public that it has been had."
True.  But there were those that warned Americans about who Obama is and what his viewpoints are.  (And I was one of them.) And then:
"...there is a growing fear that Obamism is becoming cult-like and Orwellian. Almost on script, Hollywood ceased all its Rendition/Redacted–style films. Iraq — once the new Vietnam — is out of the news. Afghanistan is “problematic,” not a “blunder.” Tribunals, renditions, the Patriot Act, and Predators are no longer proof of a Seven Days in May coup, but legitimate tools to keep us safe. Words change meanings as acts of terror become “man-caused disasters.” Hunting down jihadists is really an “overseas contingency operation.” Media sycophants do not merely parrot Obama, but now proclaim him a “god.” New York Times columnists who once assured us that Bush’s dastardly behavior was proof of American pathology now sound like Pravda apologists in explaining the “real” Obama is not what he is beginning to seem like."
Uh ...yeah.  And I've been calling them the "Pravda press" for over a year now.

VDH ends today's piece, as he usually does, with a modulated tone that avoids any predictions.  Probably sensible.  But I would go further (surprise, surprise) and argue that those who oppose Obama's big government takeovers must see to it that the public knows exactly what Obama has planned (since the media sure as hell won't).  If that happens - as it has with health care - Obama's popularity will continue to drop.  A majority of this country does not want a socialist country.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

More from Deroy Murdock at National Review

Posted by Laura L. Hollis, JD on Monday, August 17, 2009 9:22:28 AM
Ok, here's a lovely coincidence.  If you read my column today, you will note that I said this:
 

The only thing tempering insatiable human demand is the fact that the person providing the wanted item expects something of value in exchange – usually money. As much as liberals love to denounce the profit motive, it is precisely the insistence upon an exchange of value that keeps what would otherwise be limitless human demand in check.

Government purports to be “above” mere money-grubbing profit motives, and people assume this is an improvement.  But it is actually the problem ... Without the checks and balances inherent in the “my-wants-versus-your-profit-motive” dynamic, demand will skyrocket, supplies will shrink, and shortages will occur. Why must supplies shrink? Because the government cannot command doctors to work more than 24 hours in a day. It cannot command that complex surgeries take less time. It cannot command the chemical reactions in pharmaceutical manufacturing to occur faster. All it can do is ration what there is.

 
And here's an excerpt from Deroy Murdock's article online at National Review today:
 
What triggers these cost overruns? The Joint Economic Committee’s report explains that “initial public estimates appear simply to have underestimated the level of demand for the proposed new benefits, perhaps due to insufficient data or a lack of experience administering benefits of that sort.”

Also, government lacks the profit motive, which generally forces private-sector managers to control costs, lest they get fired. Private supervisors also have incentives to boost profits: bonuses, corner offices, stock options, and promotions. In government, carefully stewarding taxpayer dollars might advance one’s career. But because bureaucrats rarely earn bonuses, and there are no stocks to option in public agencies, government workers lack the accountability that pay-for-performance brings. And they rarely get sacked.
 
Criminy, are they kidding?  "Insufficient data?"  "A lack of experience administering benefits of that sort?"  While some of us shout it from the rooftops?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12…789101112131415…2627Next »