I’m guessing the favorite reality show of the radical left is "Fear Factor" or more appropriately, a show called "Scare Tactics," which is shown on one of the cable channels high on the television dial. Either title is appropriate to describe the campaign of misinformation and distortion the alarmist left has pursued against the USA Patriot Act.
The Patriot Act is one of the best laws ever passed by Congress. It gives authorities the tools needed to protect U.S. citizens from terrorism at home by expanding laws that were already available to prosecutors for standard crime fighting to cover cases of suspected terrorists.
Since President Bush signed it into law shortly after the 9/11 attacks, the Patriot Act has been a cornerstone of this country’s war on terror. The proof is in the pudding. There have been no acts of terrorism on U.S. soil since the Patriot Act was signed into law. Terrorist plots have been foiled repeatedly since 2001 and dozens of suspected terrorists are behind bars. And to date, there has not been a single instance where the American Civil Liberties Union and its allies in the liberal media can cite abuse of the Patriot Act by the government.
Can you imagine the coverage in The New York Times or CBS News or CNN if the rights of a single American were violated by the Patriot Act?
More than a dozen key provisions of the Patriot Act will expire at the end of this year if Congress doesn’t renew them. President Bush has urged Congress to act swiftly in renewing the Patriot Act, but the Just Say No Party (formerly known as the Democrats) has lined up against a law with a proven track record of protecting American citizens.
Opponents of the Patriot Act (the usual suspects, including the always-reliable ACLU) have spent millions of dollars on a propaganda campaign to confuse and intimidate the American public. Never letting facts get in the way, the ACLU and its Democrat allies have spread all kinds of rumors about the government agencies keeping track of the library books people check out or Web sites they visit or prying into medical records. None of it is true.
Here are the cold, hard facts: The Bush administration has used the Patriot Act’s powers to listen to cell phone conversations and examine business records of individuals or firms with suspected terrorist ties just 84 times since 2001, according to Congressional testimony.
That’s 84 cases of the thousands of leads or tips the government has received and investigated since the Patriot Act was adopted. And again, not a single complaint has been received, not a single lawsuit filed, not a single American has come forward with any evidence they’ve been harmed by the Patriot Act.
In every case where the government has used surveillance on suspected terrorists, the FBI or other agents had to obtain a warrant from a federal judge. At no point were the Constitutional rights of any American violated.
If you’re not a terrorist, a supporter of terrorism or someone who finances terrorist acts, you have nothing to fear from the Patriot Act. I can see why someone like Professor "Mental" Ward Churchill would oppose the Patriot Act. He cheered when 3,000 Americans were murdered on Sept. 11. But how do you explain Ted Kennedy, John Forbes Kerry and Barbara Boxer? Can they embarrass the Democratic Party any more than they have already?
The USA Patriot Act is a straightforward, commonsense piece of legislation. It gives our government the authority it needs to monitor and prosecute suspected terrorists and their collaborators. Nothing more.
We have a law on the books that works. Do we give in to the Democrats and their "global test" for defending the United States against terrorism? Are you willing to jeopardize the lives of your family members by allowing the ACLU and its big-money Democratic supporters to gut the Patriot Act?
President Bush made the following argument for renewing the Patriot Act at the swearing-in ceremony for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in February:
"We must not allow the passage of time or the illusion of safety to weaken our resolve in this new war. To protect the American people, Congress must promptly renew all provisions of the Patriot Act this year."
Write to your senators and representative and urge them to support renewal of all 15 provisions of the Patriot Act that expire this year.
E-mail Tony Phyrillas at tphyrillas@pottsmerc.com
Thursday, April 28, 2005
Monday, April 25, 2005
What are we doing in the United Nations?
"The United States is the world’s best hope, but if you fetter her in the interests and quarrels of other nations, if you tangle her in the intrigues of Europe, you will destroy her powerful good, and endanger her very existence. Leave her to march freely through the centuries to come, as in the years that have gone. Strong, generous, and confident, she has nobly served mankind. Beware how you trifle with your marvelous inheritance — this great land of ordered liberty. For if we stumble and fall, freedom and civilization everywhere will go down in ruin."
— Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge
In 1919, Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts successfully led the opposition to U.S. entry into the League of Nations. We could use someone like Lodge today.
The dog-and-pony show Senate Democrats have been putting on in recent weeks over the nomination John R. Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations masks the real discussion we should be having.
Namely, what is the U.S. doing in the United Nations? Haven’t we had enough abuse from irrelevant countries over the past 60 years? Why are we paying for the privilege of being abused by tinhorn dictators from unpronounceable nations around the globe?
The U.N. is a bureaucratic nightmare. The U.N. is a haven for spies. The U.N. is the most corrupt organization on the planet. The U.N. is taking up valuable real estate in this country. Is there a crane big enough to pick up the building and drop it somewhere in the vicinity of France?
The whitewash of the massive oil-for-food scandal is just the latest example of corruption inside the U.N. In case you haven’t been following developments, two senior investigators probing the oil-for-food program resigned this week because the so-called independent panel led by longtime Kofi Annan pal Paul Volker downplayed Annan’s involvement in the scandal. What else would you expect when the fox is appointed to investigate why chickens are disappearing from the hen house?
How many wars has the United Nations prevented since 1945? The answer is zero. How many people have died in violent conflict or from disease or starvation since the U.N. was founded? Tens of millions. Millions are suffering and dying today while Kofi Annan and his diplomatic corps live it up in New York. Ironically, many of the people who are being slaughtered or starved to death are in Africa and Asia, where the secretary general of the U.N. is usually picked. So much for helping the people who need it the most.
The purposes of the United Nations, according to its charter, are to maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; to cooperate in solving international economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems and in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.
I don’t know what planet Democrats like Barbara Boxer and John "Global Test" Kerry are living on, but none of that is happening on planet Earth.
The U.N. is just as ineffectual as its predecessor, the League of Nations, which lasted from 1919 to 1946, when it was swallowed up by its "new and improved" version, the United Nations. The U.N. has proven to be the same paper tiger that the League of Nations was. The difference is that the United States had enough sense to stay out of the League of Nations. We’ve been paying the bill for the U.N. for the past 60 years. How much more in U.S. taxpayer dollars should we sink into the rat-hole?
President Bush could nominate singer Michael Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the U.N. It’s not going to make any difference. At least John Bolton is going into the job firmly grounded in reality. He sees the U.N. for what it is — a failed concept.
"There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is an international community that can occasionally be led by the only real power left in the world — and that is the United States, when it suits our interests and when we can get others to go along."
John R. Bolton said that in a 1994 speech. Bolton got it right. The U.S. doesn’t need the United Nations for anything. We should drop out and use the billion dollars we throw away on U.N. dues to help the people of our own country.
E-mail Tony Phyrillas at tphyrillas@pottsmerc.com
— Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge
In 1919, Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts successfully led the opposition to U.S. entry into the League of Nations. We could use someone like Lodge today.
The dog-and-pony show Senate Democrats have been putting on in recent weeks over the nomination John R. Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations masks the real discussion we should be having.
Namely, what is the U.S. doing in the United Nations? Haven’t we had enough abuse from irrelevant countries over the past 60 years? Why are we paying for the privilege of being abused by tinhorn dictators from unpronounceable nations around the globe?
The U.N. is a bureaucratic nightmare. The U.N. is a haven for spies. The U.N. is the most corrupt organization on the planet. The U.N. is taking up valuable real estate in this country. Is there a crane big enough to pick up the building and drop it somewhere in the vicinity of France?
The whitewash of the massive oil-for-food scandal is just the latest example of corruption inside the U.N. In case you haven’t been following developments, two senior investigators probing the oil-for-food program resigned this week because the so-called independent panel led by longtime Kofi Annan pal Paul Volker downplayed Annan’s involvement in the scandal. What else would you expect when the fox is appointed to investigate why chickens are disappearing from the hen house?
How many wars has the United Nations prevented since 1945? The answer is zero. How many people have died in violent conflict or from disease or starvation since the U.N. was founded? Tens of millions. Millions are suffering and dying today while Kofi Annan and his diplomatic corps live it up in New York. Ironically, many of the people who are being slaughtered or starved to death are in Africa and Asia, where the secretary general of the U.N. is usually picked. So much for helping the people who need it the most.
The purposes of the United Nations, according to its charter, are to maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; to cooperate in solving international economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems and in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.
I don’t know what planet Democrats like Barbara Boxer and John "Global Test" Kerry are living on, but none of that is happening on planet Earth.
The U.N. is just as ineffectual as its predecessor, the League of Nations, which lasted from 1919 to 1946, when it was swallowed up by its "new and improved" version, the United Nations. The U.N. has proven to be the same paper tiger that the League of Nations was. The difference is that the United States had enough sense to stay out of the League of Nations. We’ve been paying the bill for the U.N. for the past 60 years. How much more in U.S. taxpayer dollars should we sink into the rat-hole?
President Bush could nominate singer Michael Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the U.N. It’s not going to make any difference. At least John Bolton is going into the job firmly grounded in reality. He sees the U.N. for what it is — a failed concept.
"There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is an international community that can occasionally be led by the only real power left in the world — and that is the United States, when it suits our interests and when we can get others to go along."
John R. Bolton said that in a 1994 speech. Bolton got it right. The U.S. doesn’t need the United Nations for anything. We should drop out and use the billion dollars we throw away on U.N. dues to help the people of our own country.
E-mail Tony Phyrillas at tphyrillas@pottsmerc.com
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Freedom's march arrives in Cyprus
It took the death of Yasser Arafat to clear one of the biggest obstacles on the road to peace in the Middle East.
The Palestinian dictator never wanted to see an end to hostilities between Palestinians and Israelis. That’s what kept him in power all those years. As long as he could blame Israel, he never had to answer for the suffering he brought on his own people.
Something similar is happening on the Mediterranean island of Cyprus. A thug by the name of Rauf Denktash has been the president of the phony Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus since it declared its independence from the rest of the island in 1983. The "Turkish Republic" is recognized by one other nation — Turkey, which has 35,000 troops occupying parts of Cyprus.
Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974 after a failed coup orchestrated by Greece attempted to unite the island with Greece. Although the elected government of Cyprus was restored, Turkey seized the opportunity to invade the island to "protect the Turkish minority." That has led to the illegal 31-year occupation of a sovereign nation. Turkey has ignored dozens of United Nations resolutions calling for withdrawal of Turkish troops from the island, a former British colony that gained its independence in 1960.
Denktash, who rivals Fidel Castro in the Aging Dictators Hall of Shame, is 81 and has lost his grip on power in occupied Cyprus. The election of 53-year-old Mehmet Ali Talat over the weekend as president of the "Turkish Republic" has brought renewed hope that the Cyprus issue can be resolved peacefully.
As Denktash got older and more inflexible in his refusal to work toward reunification of the Cyprus, the world passed him by. The European Union was formed. If you’re not part of the EU, you’re out in the cold. That’s what the Turkish residents of occupied Cyprus figured out. Talat campaigned on a platform of renewing peace talks with the majority Greek Cypriots in the southern two-thirds of the island, withdrawal of Turkish troops and possible reunification of the island, which would allow Turkish Cypriots to participate in the European Union.
That brought him 56 percent of the vote in weekend balloting, much of the support from young people who weren’t alive when Denktash took power and who don’t care to reopen 30-year-old wounds. Denktash’s hand-picked successor, Dervis Eroglu, who wanted to maintain the status quo, received just 23 percent of the vote.
What young people living in occupied Cyprus see is a lack of opportunity in the police state that Denktash has ruled over. They see a prosperous Cyprus to the south and want to share in the booming tourism and trade industries.
Cyprus, at least the internationally recognized Democratic southern part of the island, joined the EU last year. The Turkish Cypriots in the north are not part of the EU and rely on the charity of mainland Turkey to keep their economy going, much like the old Soviet Union system that has kept basket-case economies such as Cuba, alive. Many Cubans living on the island or in exile in Florida, are certain that Cubans will overthrow its Communists oppressors the day Fidel Castro rolls his last cigar.
Greek Cypriots welcomed the change in regimes in the occupied north. The "Cyprus government expresses the hope that the Turkish Cypriot leadership around Mr. Talat will ... contribute ... to the achievement of a just and viable settlement the soonest possible," according to a statement by Cypriot government spokesman reported by The Associated Press.
Talat quickly extended an olive branch to the south.
"I am also calling on the Greek Cypriot leaders that I am extending my hand for peace and this hand will be there until it is held," Talat was quoted by the Associated Press. "I sincerely believe that one day this hand will be held."
There are many hurdles ahead, not the least of which is fair compensation for the 200,000 Greek Cypriots driven from their homes and ancestral lands by the Turkish army in 1974. Although many Greek Cypriots rebuilt their lives in the southern half of the island, some of them may want to return to their homes. The problem is that their homes are now occupied by Turkish Cypriots or by tens of thousands of "colonists" sent by Turkey from the mainland to distort the population of Cyprus.
But for the first time in three decades, there is light at the end of the tunnel. Just as in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon, it’s amazing what a little Democracy will do in a part of the world where people have been denied fundamental rights to freedom for so long.
E-mail Tony Phyrillas at tphyrillas@pottsmerc.com
The Palestinian dictator never wanted to see an end to hostilities between Palestinians and Israelis. That’s what kept him in power all those years. As long as he could blame Israel, he never had to answer for the suffering he brought on his own people.
Something similar is happening on the Mediterranean island of Cyprus. A thug by the name of Rauf Denktash has been the president of the phony Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus since it declared its independence from the rest of the island in 1983. The "Turkish Republic" is recognized by one other nation — Turkey, which has 35,000 troops occupying parts of Cyprus.
Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974 after a failed coup orchestrated by Greece attempted to unite the island with Greece. Although the elected government of Cyprus was restored, Turkey seized the opportunity to invade the island to "protect the Turkish minority." That has led to the illegal 31-year occupation of a sovereign nation. Turkey has ignored dozens of United Nations resolutions calling for withdrawal of Turkish troops from the island, a former British colony that gained its independence in 1960.
Denktash, who rivals Fidel Castro in the Aging Dictators Hall of Shame, is 81 and has lost his grip on power in occupied Cyprus. The election of 53-year-old Mehmet Ali Talat over the weekend as president of the "Turkish Republic" has brought renewed hope that the Cyprus issue can be resolved peacefully.
As Denktash got older and more inflexible in his refusal to work toward reunification of the Cyprus, the world passed him by. The European Union was formed. If you’re not part of the EU, you’re out in the cold. That’s what the Turkish residents of occupied Cyprus figured out. Talat campaigned on a platform of renewing peace talks with the majority Greek Cypriots in the southern two-thirds of the island, withdrawal of Turkish troops and possible reunification of the island, which would allow Turkish Cypriots to participate in the European Union.
That brought him 56 percent of the vote in weekend balloting, much of the support from young people who weren’t alive when Denktash took power and who don’t care to reopen 30-year-old wounds. Denktash’s hand-picked successor, Dervis Eroglu, who wanted to maintain the status quo, received just 23 percent of the vote.
What young people living in occupied Cyprus see is a lack of opportunity in the police state that Denktash has ruled over. They see a prosperous Cyprus to the south and want to share in the booming tourism and trade industries.
Cyprus, at least the internationally recognized Democratic southern part of the island, joined the EU last year. The Turkish Cypriots in the north are not part of the EU and rely on the charity of mainland Turkey to keep their economy going, much like the old Soviet Union system that has kept basket-case economies such as Cuba, alive. Many Cubans living on the island or in exile in Florida, are certain that Cubans will overthrow its Communists oppressors the day Fidel Castro rolls his last cigar.
Greek Cypriots welcomed the change in regimes in the occupied north. The "Cyprus government expresses the hope that the Turkish Cypriot leadership around Mr. Talat will ... contribute ... to the achievement of a just and viable settlement the soonest possible," according to a statement by Cypriot government spokesman reported by The Associated Press.
Talat quickly extended an olive branch to the south.
"I am also calling on the Greek Cypriot leaders that I am extending my hand for peace and this hand will be there until it is held," Talat was quoted by the Associated Press. "I sincerely believe that one day this hand will be held."
There are many hurdles ahead, not the least of which is fair compensation for the 200,000 Greek Cypriots driven from their homes and ancestral lands by the Turkish army in 1974. Although many Greek Cypriots rebuilt their lives in the southern half of the island, some of them may want to return to their homes. The problem is that their homes are now occupied by Turkish Cypriots or by tens of thousands of "colonists" sent by Turkey from the mainland to distort the population of Cyprus.
But for the first time in three decades, there is light at the end of the tunnel. Just as in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon, it’s amazing what a little Democracy will do in a part of the world where people have been denied fundamental rights to freedom for so long.
E-mail Tony Phyrillas at tphyrillas@pottsmerc.com
Monday, April 11, 2005
When the left starts getting it right
Legend has it when Lord Cornwallis surrendered his army to Gen. George Washington after the British defeat at the battle of Yorktown, a British band played a song called "The World Turned Upside Down."
If true, it was a fitting selection. What else could best describe the October 1781 defeat of Great Britain, the world’s reigning superpower at the time, by a rag-tag militia of Colonists? The world truly had turned upside down.
I’ve been thinking about that tune as more evidence surfaces that liberals (well, not all, but some) are coming to their senses. I’m not sure what to make of this. Maybe it’s part of a left-wing campaign to lull the majority of Americans into a false sense of security while the left and its cronies (the ACLU, the Hollywood elite, radical college professors, activist judges and the few Democrats left in Washington) continue their assault on the country from within.
Or maybe, just maybe, people who have been wrong so many times about so many things have finally seen the light. I submit the following evidence to support my theory:
Exhibit A: The Philadelphia Inquirer, a newspaper that published 21 consecutive editorials endorsing John Forbes Kerry for president last fall, criticized Democrats in a recent editorial about Social Security. I can’t recall ever reading an editorial critical of the left in this newspaper. But just about every day, you can read about how George W. Bush/Karl Rove (they’re interchangeable in this newspaper) are responsible for bad weather, traffic jams, reality television, obesity and the fact your kids won’t listen to you.
The Inquirer’s editorial board, all charter members of the Michael Moore Fan Club, blasted Democrats for obscuring the debate about the future of Social Security by flooding the country with inaccurate information, much of it promulgated by the Democrats left-wing propaganda machines. The editorial also pointed out, correctly, that the Democrats have yet to offer a single alternative to the proposals advanced by President Bush.
Exhibit B: Nat Hentoff, a card-carrying member of the ACLU and one of the most liberal columnists in the country, went after his own kind for their coverage of the Terri Schiavo case. Hentoff described the behavior of the established news media (the networks, CNN, the big city newspapers) as "the worst case of liberal media bias I’ve ever seen." Hentoff said the network coverage was politically motivated, with the established media painting Republicans as villains and liberals as saints during the agonizing two weeks that Schiavo starved to death.
Exhibit C: The New Republic, a small circulation magazine that is the gospel for many left-wingers, recently published a column by its editor-in-chief, Martin Peretz that praised George W. Bush for his handling of the Middle East, which is erupting in Democracy, just as Bush predicted. Peretz goes a step further and blasts his fellow Democrats for their do-nothing stance on major issues facing the country. The election is over and Bush won, Peretz argues. It’s time for Democrats to get over their superiority complex and stop the knee-jerk opposition to everything the Republican majority puts on the agenda. In other words, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid, put the country first and let your partisan prejudice go until 2008.
Exhibit D: The Washington Post, one of the big five liberal newspapers in the country, ran a front page article last week proclaiming to the world that yes, as those right-wing fanatics have been telling us for years, college campuses are littered by left-wing professors. "By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative," The Post reported as it detailed the findings of a study conducted by political science professors at two universities. Surveys have found a similar left bias in the mainstream news media. So what you have is a minority of liberals controlling the dissemination of information in this country and indoctrinating our next generation of leaders.
What’s wrong with having so many liberals in academia? Here’s the problem. Liberals represent a splinter group within the minority governing party in this country. Why should they be allowed to indoctrinate so many young minds? Why can’t college students be exposed to alternative viewpoints?
Even if you labeled all Democrats as liberals, that would still be 49 percent of the population based on the outcome of the November election. Why shouldn’t conservatives make up 51 percent of college faculties? Suppose you showed up for a baseball game and one of the teams could field only six players while the other team put nine men on the field. Is that fair?
This growing evidence that liberals have come to their senses is unnerving. What am I going to write about if everybody starts getting along and treating each other with respect? It’s almost as unsettling as the sight of George H.W. Bush holding hands with his new best pal, Bill Clinton.
E-mail Tony Phyrillas at tphyrillas@pottsmerc.com
If true, it was a fitting selection. What else could best describe the October 1781 defeat of Great Britain, the world’s reigning superpower at the time, by a rag-tag militia of Colonists? The world truly had turned upside down.
I’ve been thinking about that tune as more evidence surfaces that liberals (well, not all, but some) are coming to their senses. I’m not sure what to make of this. Maybe it’s part of a left-wing campaign to lull the majority of Americans into a false sense of security while the left and its cronies (the ACLU, the Hollywood elite, radical college professors, activist judges and the few Democrats left in Washington) continue their assault on the country from within.
Or maybe, just maybe, people who have been wrong so many times about so many things have finally seen the light. I submit the following evidence to support my theory:
Exhibit A: The Philadelphia Inquirer, a newspaper that published 21 consecutive editorials endorsing John Forbes Kerry for president last fall, criticized Democrats in a recent editorial about Social Security. I can’t recall ever reading an editorial critical of the left in this newspaper. But just about every day, you can read about how George W. Bush/Karl Rove (they’re interchangeable in this newspaper) are responsible for bad weather, traffic jams, reality television, obesity and the fact your kids won’t listen to you.
The Inquirer’s editorial board, all charter members of the Michael Moore Fan Club, blasted Democrats for obscuring the debate about the future of Social Security by flooding the country with inaccurate information, much of it promulgated by the Democrats left-wing propaganda machines. The editorial also pointed out, correctly, that the Democrats have yet to offer a single alternative to the proposals advanced by President Bush.
Exhibit B: Nat Hentoff, a card-carrying member of the ACLU and one of the most liberal columnists in the country, went after his own kind for their coverage of the Terri Schiavo case. Hentoff described the behavior of the established news media (the networks, CNN, the big city newspapers) as "the worst case of liberal media bias I’ve ever seen." Hentoff said the network coverage was politically motivated, with the established media painting Republicans as villains and liberals as saints during the agonizing two weeks that Schiavo starved to death.
Exhibit C: The New Republic, a small circulation magazine that is the gospel for many left-wingers, recently published a column by its editor-in-chief, Martin Peretz that praised George W. Bush for his handling of the Middle East, which is erupting in Democracy, just as Bush predicted. Peretz goes a step further and blasts his fellow Democrats for their do-nothing stance on major issues facing the country. The election is over and Bush won, Peretz argues. It’s time for Democrats to get over their superiority complex and stop the knee-jerk opposition to everything the Republican majority puts on the agenda. In other words, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid, put the country first and let your partisan prejudice go until 2008.
Exhibit D: The Washington Post, one of the big five liberal newspapers in the country, ran a front page article last week proclaiming to the world that yes, as those right-wing fanatics have been telling us for years, college campuses are littered by left-wing professors. "By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative," The Post reported as it detailed the findings of a study conducted by political science professors at two universities. Surveys have found a similar left bias in the mainstream news media. So what you have is a minority of liberals controlling the dissemination of information in this country and indoctrinating our next generation of leaders.
What’s wrong with having so many liberals in academia? Here’s the problem. Liberals represent a splinter group within the minority governing party in this country. Why should they be allowed to indoctrinate so many young minds? Why can’t college students be exposed to alternative viewpoints?
Even if you labeled all Democrats as liberals, that would still be 49 percent of the population based on the outcome of the November election. Why shouldn’t conservatives make up 51 percent of college faculties? Suppose you showed up for a baseball game and one of the teams could field only six players while the other team put nine men on the field. Is that fair?
This growing evidence that liberals have come to their senses is unnerving. What am I going to write about if everybody starts getting along and treating each other with respect? It’s almost as unsettling as the sight of George H.W. Bush holding hands with his new best pal, Bill Clinton.
E-mail Tony Phyrillas at tphyrillas@pottsmerc.com
Tuesday, April 05, 2005
Are you paying too much for health insurance?
Did you know that Pennsylvania and Hawaii are the only states that place no limits on how commercial insurance companies base their premiums for small employers?
That means for-profit insurance companies can charge whatever they want. They can raise their rates 10 times higher than the rate of inflation at time of renewal. And guess what? That’s what these companies have been doing in Pennsylvania over the past five years.
Since 2000, more than 330,000 non-elderly Pennsylvanians have lost their health coverage. Others have been forced by employers to pay a bigger share of the cost of health insurance, while at the same time, paying higher deductibles and co-pays. Some employers are reluctant to fill vacancies because they will have to pay so much in health insurance premiums for new workers.
State Sen. Rob Wonderling, R-24th Dist., wants to help small companies and their workers by placing the same regulations on for-profit firms that the state already imposes on non-profit insurance carriers like Blue Cross and Blue Shield and HMOs.
In the next few weeks, Wonderling will introduce Senate Bill 671 to reform health insurance rating practices for small employer groups. The bill, and its companion legislation in the state House, would restrict how insurance carriers assess companies with workers at an average age of 45 or firms that have too many women working there or places of employment where the group’s medical questionnaires showed possible health needs.
Senator Wonderling’s legislation would implement a uniform modified demographic rating requirement that would be used by all health insurers writing health insurance for small employers in the Commonwealth.
In plain language, it would level the playing field for small employers and allow companies to continue offering health coverage to workers at reasonable rates.
The proposed legislation would prohibit the use of "medical underwriting" to adjust the rate of a small group policy. Insurers could not use medical questionnaires to identify employee and dependent health status, physical or mental conditions, genetic information or disability when setting rates. "Pre-existing condition" standards could be used for the first 12 months of policy coverage. Renewal of small group plans would be guaranteed.
"My biggest reason for being the prime sponsor of a bill to lower the cost of health insurance is the number of people in my Senate district who work very hard but do not have health care coverage," Wonderling said. "During my campaign, I talked to both employers who wanted to provide health care coverage but couldn’t because of the cost, and employees who don’t have health insurance provided by their employers. I knew that the problem existed but I was struck by how common the problem was."
As Wonderling looked into the issue, he found a shocking statistic — 80 percent of the people who don’t have health insurance have jobs.
"Think about that. These are hard working people trying to feed their families but are terrified that they will get sick or hurt because if they do, the money needed to pay for health insurance has to come from some other important priority," Wonderling said. "I want to help hard working people get ahead, not just get by. This is part of making the American dream a reality for more people in Pennsylvania."
Small group health insurance reform is long overdue in Pennsylvania. The continuation of the current practices that discriminate against groups based on age, gender and health status will only lead to the creation of a large group of uninsured and uninsurable Pennsylvanians.
And if you’re currently enrolled in a Blue Cross plan, don’t think this doesn’t affect you. The higher insurance premiums go for small companies, the more workers will be left without private insurance. That means they will go on Medicare, which is funded by taxpayers.
Wonderling needs our help. If you’re fed up with the high cost of health insurance, you need to impress on your state senator or representative that his or her job depends on whether they support Senate Bill 671 and its companion bill in the state House.
I urge to call, write or e-mail your state senator today with a simple message: Support Senate Bill 671 to curb skyrocketing health insurance costs. Be sure to include your full name and your home address so they know you’re a registered voter and you’re serious about holding them accountable.
For all the talk about politicians catering to special interests and being wooed by industry lobbyists, the bottom line is that a politician can be fired by the voters. Without your vote, they can’t go back to Harrisburg and enjoy those very generous perks of public office.
So let’s call in a favor and get our representatives in Harrisburg to do something in the best interests of hard-working Pennsylvanians.
E-mail Tony Phyrillas at tphyrillas@pottsmerc.com
That means for-profit insurance companies can charge whatever they want. They can raise their rates 10 times higher than the rate of inflation at time of renewal. And guess what? That’s what these companies have been doing in Pennsylvania over the past five years.
Since 2000, more than 330,000 non-elderly Pennsylvanians have lost their health coverage. Others have been forced by employers to pay a bigger share of the cost of health insurance, while at the same time, paying higher deductibles and co-pays. Some employers are reluctant to fill vacancies because they will have to pay so much in health insurance premiums for new workers.
State Sen. Rob Wonderling, R-24th Dist., wants to help small companies and their workers by placing the same regulations on for-profit firms that the state already imposes on non-profit insurance carriers like Blue Cross and Blue Shield and HMOs.
In the next few weeks, Wonderling will introduce Senate Bill 671 to reform health insurance rating practices for small employer groups. The bill, and its companion legislation in the state House, would restrict how insurance carriers assess companies with workers at an average age of 45 or firms that have too many women working there or places of employment where the group’s medical questionnaires showed possible health needs.
Senator Wonderling’s legislation would implement a uniform modified demographic rating requirement that would be used by all health insurers writing health insurance for small employers in the Commonwealth.
In plain language, it would level the playing field for small employers and allow companies to continue offering health coverage to workers at reasonable rates.
The proposed legislation would prohibit the use of "medical underwriting" to adjust the rate of a small group policy. Insurers could not use medical questionnaires to identify employee and dependent health status, physical or mental conditions, genetic information or disability when setting rates. "Pre-existing condition" standards could be used for the first 12 months of policy coverage. Renewal of small group plans would be guaranteed.
"My biggest reason for being the prime sponsor of a bill to lower the cost of health insurance is the number of people in my Senate district who work very hard but do not have health care coverage," Wonderling said. "During my campaign, I talked to both employers who wanted to provide health care coverage but couldn’t because of the cost, and employees who don’t have health insurance provided by their employers. I knew that the problem existed but I was struck by how common the problem was."
As Wonderling looked into the issue, he found a shocking statistic — 80 percent of the people who don’t have health insurance have jobs.
"Think about that. These are hard working people trying to feed their families but are terrified that they will get sick or hurt because if they do, the money needed to pay for health insurance has to come from some other important priority," Wonderling said. "I want to help hard working people get ahead, not just get by. This is part of making the American dream a reality for more people in Pennsylvania."
Small group health insurance reform is long overdue in Pennsylvania. The continuation of the current practices that discriminate against groups based on age, gender and health status will only lead to the creation of a large group of uninsured and uninsurable Pennsylvanians.
And if you’re currently enrolled in a Blue Cross plan, don’t think this doesn’t affect you. The higher insurance premiums go for small companies, the more workers will be left without private insurance. That means they will go on Medicare, which is funded by taxpayers.
Wonderling needs our help. If you’re fed up with the high cost of health insurance, you need to impress on your state senator or representative that his or her job depends on whether they support Senate Bill 671 and its companion bill in the state House.
I urge to call, write or e-mail your state senator today with a simple message: Support Senate Bill 671 to curb skyrocketing health insurance costs. Be sure to include your full name and your home address so they know you’re a registered voter and you’re serious about holding them accountable.
For all the talk about politicians catering to special interests and being wooed by industry lobbyists, the bottom line is that a politician can be fired by the voters. Without your vote, they can’t go back to Harrisburg and enjoy those very generous perks of public office.
So let’s call in a favor and get our representatives in Harrisburg to do something in the best interests of hard-working Pennsylvanians.
E-mail Tony Phyrillas at tphyrillas@pottsmerc.com
On cows and politics
Don't know the origin of this, but it's too funny not to share.
DEMOCRAT: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. You feel guilty for being successful. You vote people into office who put a tax on your cows, forcing you to sell one to raise money to pay the tax. The people you voted for then take the tax money, buy a cow and give it to your neighbor. You feel righteous. Barbra Streisand sings for you.
SOCIALIST: You have two cows. The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor. You form a cooperative to tell him how to manage his cow.
REPUBLICAN: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. So?
COMMUNIST: You have two cows. The government seizes both and provides you with milk. You wait in line for hours to get it. It is expensive and sour.
CAPITALISM, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of cows.
DEMOCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. The government taxes you to the point you have to sell both to support a man in a foreign country who has only one cow, which was a gift from your government.
BUREAUCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. The government takes them both, shoots one, milks the other, pays you for the milk, then pours the milk down the drain.
AMERICAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You sell one, lease it back to yourself and do an IPO on the 2nd one. You force the 2 cows to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when one cow drops dead. You spin an announcement to the analysts stating you have downsized and are reducing expenses. Your stock goes up.
FRENCH CORPORATION: You have two cows. You go on strike because you want three cows. You go to lunch. Life is good.
JAPANESE CORPORATION: You have two cows. You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk. They learn to travel on unbelievably crowded trains. Most are at the top of their class at cow school.
GERMAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You reengineer them so they are all blond, drink lots of beer, give excellent quality milk, and run a hundred miles an hour. Unfortunately they also demand 13 weeks of vacation per year.
ITALIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows but you don't know where they are. While ambling around, you see a beautiful woman. You break for lunch. Life is good.
RUSSIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You count them and learn you have five cows. You have some more vodka. You count them again and learn you have 42 cows. You count them again and learn you have 12 cows. You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka. You produce your 10th, 5-year plan in the last 3 months. The Mafia shows up and takes over however many cows you really have.
TALIBAN CORPORATION: You have all the cows in Afghanistan, which is two. You don't milk them because you cannot touch any creature's private parts.
POLISH CORPORATION: You have two bulls. Employees are regularly maimed and killed attempting to milk them.
FLORIDA CORPORATION: You have a black cow and a brown cow. Everyone votes for the best looking one. Some of the people who like the brown one best vote for the black one. Some people vote for both. Some people vote for neither. Some people can't figure out how to vote at all. Finally, a bunch of guys from out-of-state tell you which is the best looking one.
NEW YORK CORPORATION: You have 15 million cows. You have to choose which one will be the leader of the herd, so you pick some fat cow from Arkansas.
DEMOCRAT: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. You feel guilty for being successful. You vote people into office who put a tax on your cows, forcing you to sell one to raise money to pay the tax. The people you voted for then take the tax money, buy a cow and give it to your neighbor. You feel righteous. Barbra Streisand sings for you.
SOCIALIST: You have two cows. The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor. You form a cooperative to tell him how to manage his cow.
REPUBLICAN: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. So?
COMMUNIST: You have two cows. The government seizes both and provides you with milk. You wait in line for hours to get it. It is expensive and sour.
CAPITALISM, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of cows.
DEMOCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. The government taxes you to the point you have to sell both to support a man in a foreign country who has only one cow, which was a gift from your government.
BUREAUCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. The government takes them both, shoots one, milks the other, pays you for the milk, then pours the milk down the drain.
AMERICAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You sell one, lease it back to yourself and do an IPO on the 2nd one. You force the 2 cows to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when one cow drops dead. You spin an announcement to the analysts stating you have downsized and are reducing expenses. Your stock goes up.
FRENCH CORPORATION: You have two cows. You go on strike because you want three cows. You go to lunch. Life is good.
JAPANESE CORPORATION: You have two cows. You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk. They learn to travel on unbelievably crowded trains. Most are at the top of their class at cow school.
GERMAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You reengineer them so they are all blond, drink lots of beer, give excellent quality milk, and run a hundred miles an hour. Unfortunately they also demand 13 weeks of vacation per year.
ITALIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows but you don't know where they are. While ambling around, you see a beautiful woman. You break for lunch. Life is good.
RUSSIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You count them and learn you have five cows. You have some more vodka. You count them again and learn you have 42 cows. You count them again and learn you have 12 cows. You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka. You produce your 10th, 5-year plan in the last 3 months. The Mafia shows up and takes over however many cows you really have.
TALIBAN CORPORATION: You have all the cows in Afghanistan, which is two. You don't milk them because you cannot touch any creature's private parts.
POLISH CORPORATION: You have two bulls. Employees are regularly maimed and killed attempting to milk them.
FLORIDA CORPORATION: You have a black cow and a brown cow. Everyone votes for the best looking one. Some of the people who like the brown one best vote for the black one. Some people vote for both. Some people vote for neither. Some people can't figure out how to vote at all. Finally, a bunch of guys from out-of-state tell you which is the best looking one.
NEW YORK CORPORATION: You have 15 million cows. You have to choose which one will be the leader of the herd, so you pick some fat cow from Arkansas.
Friday, April 01, 2005
Blame it on the Democrats
I’ve come to the conclusion that everything that goes wrong in the world can be traced back to the Democrats. Here’s proof:
Choking on bus fumes
Every time I see an empty bus driving around town — and I see at least one every day — I want to smack Gov. Ed Rendell for diverting $900 million of Pennsylvania’s tax dollars into his favorite lost cause: Bailing out mass transit in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. This money was supposed to go into fixing Pennsylvania’s highways and bridges, but Rendell decided to use the money to buy votes in our twin basket-case cities at opposite ends of the state. We have to keep those unions happy (and voting for Democrats). I don’t hear the liberal outcries about wasted energy resources when empty buses are riding around our cities, guzzling up gasoline. No wonder we need to drill for oil in Alaska. We have to make up for the gas these buses waste. Don’t forget that Rendell is up for reelection in 2006.
Liberal hypocrisy, you say?
Remember when the Clintons were in power and their masculine attorney general, Janet Reno, defied the courts and sent her stormtroopers on a midnight raid into a private home in Florida to seize Elian Gonzalez, the little boy who escaped Fidel Castro’s island prison? The liberals danced in the streets at the prospect of returning the boy to the clutches of the Cuban dictator. Imagine what would have happened if Gov. Jeb Bush or President George Bush sent armed officers to save Terry Sciavo. California and Massachusetts would have seceded from the union and declared war. The TV networks and their left-leaning newspaper cousins would have called for lynching both Bush brothers if they had pulled a Clinton move. That’s just one of the many examples of liberal hypocrisy in American society.
Reality bites for Democrats
The story didn’t get the kind of play it deserved, with many major newspapers burying it on inside pages when they’ve been running liberal propaganda about Social Security on their front pages for months. The headlines should have screamed: "Social Security to go broke in 2017." That’s just 12 short years from now. Turns out President Bush was right. Social Security needs to be addressed sooner, rather than later. And it appears that the Democrats got caught in another lie. Shame on you, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. You’ve been telling us there’s nothing to worry about and we should go about our routines so we wouldn’t notice that Democrats in Congress have driven the Social Security Trust Fund into the poor house. Social Security will begin paying out more in benefits than it receives in taxes in 2017. That announcement didn’t come from the White House. It came from the trustees of the Social Security Administration. They’re the people who run the program. "The numbers leave nothing to doubt about the financial condition of the Social Security system," Treasury Secretary John Snow, chairman of the six-member trustees’ board, told the Associated Press. "The report underscores the fact that we need to do something." Despite the cold hard facts, Sen. Harry "The Ostrich" Reid, the leader of the Democrats in the Senate, stuck his head out of the ground long enough to proclaim: "Today’s report confirms that the so-called Social Security crisis exists in only one place: the minds of Republicans." Sure, Harry, keep saying that and you’ll be minority leader for a long time.
Sen. Byrd-brain is running again
With the likes of Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer, it’s tough to settle on one person for the distinction of being the biggest embarrassment in the United States Senate, but my money is on Sen. Robert Byrd, the former Ku Klux Klan member who has been representing West Virginia since 1958. The 87-year-old former Klansman, who has trouble telling what day of the week it is most of the time, is running for re-election in 2006. Already, the left-wing propaganda machines like MoveOn.org (affectionately referred to as Moron.org by some) is working hard to keep Byrd in the Senate. These left-wing organizations vilified President Bush because he dared to say that he believes in God, but wouldn’t think of criticizing a Democrat who not only was a member of the KKK, but also served as a recruiter for the organization. Byrd was once quoted as saying the Klan was an "effective force" in "promoting traditional American values." And Democrats wonder why more blacks are switching to the Republican Party?
E-mail Tony Phyrillas at tphyrillas@pottsmerc.com
Choking on bus fumes
Every time I see an empty bus driving around town — and I see at least one every day — I want to smack Gov. Ed Rendell for diverting $900 million of Pennsylvania’s tax dollars into his favorite lost cause: Bailing out mass transit in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. This money was supposed to go into fixing Pennsylvania’s highways and bridges, but Rendell decided to use the money to buy votes in our twin basket-case cities at opposite ends of the state. We have to keep those unions happy (and voting for Democrats). I don’t hear the liberal outcries about wasted energy resources when empty buses are riding around our cities, guzzling up gasoline. No wonder we need to drill for oil in Alaska. We have to make up for the gas these buses waste. Don’t forget that Rendell is up for reelection in 2006.
Liberal hypocrisy, you say?
Remember when the Clintons were in power and their masculine attorney general, Janet Reno, defied the courts and sent her stormtroopers on a midnight raid into a private home in Florida to seize Elian Gonzalez, the little boy who escaped Fidel Castro’s island prison? The liberals danced in the streets at the prospect of returning the boy to the clutches of the Cuban dictator. Imagine what would have happened if Gov. Jeb Bush or President George Bush sent armed officers to save Terry Sciavo. California and Massachusetts would have seceded from the union and declared war. The TV networks and their left-leaning newspaper cousins would have called for lynching both Bush brothers if they had pulled a Clinton move. That’s just one of the many examples of liberal hypocrisy in American society.
Reality bites for Democrats
The story didn’t get the kind of play it deserved, with many major newspapers burying it on inside pages when they’ve been running liberal propaganda about Social Security on their front pages for months. The headlines should have screamed: "Social Security to go broke in 2017." That’s just 12 short years from now. Turns out President Bush was right. Social Security needs to be addressed sooner, rather than later. And it appears that the Democrats got caught in another lie. Shame on you, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. You’ve been telling us there’s nothing to worry about and we should go about our routines so we wouldn’t notice that Democrats in Congress have driven the Social Security Trust Fund into the poor house. Social Security will begin paying out more in benefits than it receives in taxes in 2017. That announcement didn’t come from the White House. It came from the trustees of the Social Security Administration. They’re the people who run the program. "The numbers leave nothing to doubt about the financial condition of the Social Security system," Treasury Secretary John Snow, chairman of the six-member trustees’ board, told the Associated Press. "The report underscores the fact that we need to do something." Despite the cold hard facts, Sen. Harry "The Ostrich" Reid, the leader of the Democrats in the Senate, stuck his head out of the ground long enough to proclaim: "Today’s report confirms that the so-called Social Security crisis exists in only one place: the minds of Republicans." Sure, Harry, keep saying that and you’ll be minority leader for a long time.
Sen. Byrd-brain is running again
With the likes of Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer, it’s tough to settle on one person for the distinction of being the biggest embarrassment in the United States Senate, but my money is on Sen. Robert Byrd, the former Ku Klux Klan member who has been representing West Virginia since 1958. The 87-year-old former Klansman, who has trouble telling what day of the week it is most of the time, is running for re-election in 2006. Already, the left-wing propaganda machines like MoveOn.org (affectionately referred to as Moron.org by some) is working hard to keep Byrd in the Senate. These left-wing organizations vilified President Bush because he dared to say that he believes in God, but wouldn’t think of criticizing a Democrat who not only was a member of the KKK, but also served as a recruiter for the organization. Byrd was once quoted as saying the Klan was an "effective force" in "promoting traditional American values." And Democrats wonder why more blacks are switching to the Republican Party?
E-mail Tony Phyrillas at tphyrillas@pottsmerc.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)