Impossible. As the movie began, the characters brought to life the grief of an untimely and inexplicable death. The suicide of a teen is at the heart of the movie To Save A Life and the lives that are dramatically affected by it, are followed through out the two hour film. The lead character, Jake Taylor, played by Randy Wayne, of Dukes of Hazard fame, is a senior in high school, with the world as his oyster. The handsome star has the beautiful girl, the letter of intent to his dream university and popularity stemming from his basketball career. But his life is shattered when his childhood friend kills himself in the high school hallway. He begins his search for answers and carries around the “what-ifs” that haunt him.

The movie deals with the raw makings of a high school campus.  The popular kids get invited to the parties, the loners get mocked, and one day, a lonely boy has had enough, and takes his life.  There is nothing sugar coated in this Christian film, but a reality based look at what teens across this nation deal with as they walk out their front doors.  Topics like suicide, cutting, drinking, sex, pregnancy, and divorce are not what one would expect from a Christian film, yet they are dealt with in a manner that will in fact save a life.

Not only are the harsh realities of the secular world explored, but also the realities of Christian hypocrisy found in the youth group of the church that Jake Taylor seeks answers and solace.  He boldly stands up, during a youth event and asks the teens in the youth group if they really give a “damn” or if they are going through the motions.  He is convinced that there has to have been something he could have done to stop his friend Roger from taking his life. He begins to live for others, specifically reaching out to the loners on campus, in spite of the hostility he gets from his former friends.

I, at this point, must admit, that I was a very proud, card carrying Christian.  The movie was living up to what the trailer had enticingly promised and doing an artful job as well.  But perhaps the most authentic aspect of the film is found in the end, when the star isn’t found riding off into the sunset living happily ever after, but is shown living with the consequences of pre-marital sex and an un-planned pregnancy.  His dreams are sacrificially laid aside for his girlfriend, as he stands by her side through the pregnancy, delivery and adoption of their baby.  This is where real life meets real Christianity.

The producer and writer of the To Save a Life is Jim Britts, a pastor at  New Song Community Church in Oceanside, California and a film major from Biola University.  He states in an interview for Biola Magazine,

“It only came from this real experience of working with teens,” Britts says, “Looking back on it, I think He (God) had a plan for me being a screen-writing major and to get a heart for that and then to go into ministry and get a heart for that….The two really connected.   I don’t think I could have written the script if I didn’t do both.”  Brittany McComb

Britt’s love for God, for teens and his passion to see lives saved through the acceptance of God’s love during incomprehensible pain is deeply portrayed in this film.  As much as I tried to remain set apart and unbiased, I was unable to remain unmoved.  The God that is so boldly proclaimed in the movie, is the God that has boldly showed His love for this world by sending His Son Jesus Christ to die for sinful man.  This fact alone moved me to tears and cheers at the end of the showing.

The reviews may be mixed, but the Miami Herald said, “It features good acting, excellent production values and even a solidly eclectic musical score that ranges from rap to alternative.  Gary Goldstein wrote in the Los Angeles Times, “…appealing, poignant and inspiring in ways that are gentle and quite real…. not only potentially healing and elevating, but also kind of cool…. deftly acted, generally absorbing cautionary tale…” Others were not as generous, Andy Webster wrote in the New York Times, “Teenage martyrdom — the piety of it all…. But forget the lame performances and arch, preachy sentiment; the movie’s sham hip-hop and spurious alternative music alone should keep teenagers away. Thank goodness.”

The most important reviews however don’t come from news men sitting alone in a dark theater, but rather from those lives that are truly changed.  One girl stated on the To Save a Life website,

Rachel - Posted on January 31, 2010  ”Just saw this movie yesterday, and I cried so hard! I am somewhat depressed, and have considered suicide in the past. This movie expressed how I felt…alone, like no one cared. I loved the part where Jake is in the youth group and starts telling the kids not to be judgemental! I felt like it was so true. Thanks for impacting my life! Thanks to God and His redeeming love! Save a life!”

Another young man shared,

Geoff (Name changed for privacy) - Posted on January 31, 2010  ”I am 17 years old and I am a recovering cutter. For the longest time I relied on cutting as a crutch to keep me going; even though I was slowly killing myself along the way. Without all of the prayers, my scars would mean nothing but a sign of hatred and depression. But today, I see that they’re trophies that say God can help anyone through anything. Even a sexually confused, depressed, 17 year old outcast like me. God Bless.”

Finally, a young girl’s decision to not settle, but to live a changed Christian life,

Camille - Posted on January 30, 2010  ”I saw this movie with my youth group, and was litterally bawling by the end. This movie absolutely changed my life. Ya, I thought I was a good Christian before, but after seeing this, I know I can’t settle. There is always something more to do that will help in this world. The part that moved me the most was when Jake is in the youth group, and everyone is whispering and Jake stands to say something. My absolute favorite part of the movie is when he says, “What’s the point of all this if you’re not gonna let it change you?” and to me it is totally true. I also love the part when Jake brakes free from the security guard saying, “I have to make things right!”. These quotes inspire me. Don’t pass up the chance to make a difference. By tomorrow, it may be too late.”

These are the reviews that truly matter, because these are the ones who heard the message of the movie and decided to let it save a life.   Don’t let poor press keep you from taking a teen to this film; it will, in fact, impact your life.

For around a decade in the 1970s and early 80s, 30 Chileans who had studied under the University of Chicago’s Milton Friedman transformed their economy. Later known as the “Chicago boys,” these economists instituted policies of free trade, stable monetary policies, and deregulating the markets. They essentially de-politicized the economy and put Chile on the fast track of development.

As a result of these policies and the incredible economic turn around of this country, Chile is now poised to join the OECD. It struggled for years in the political and civil liberties front during the Pinochet years (although he drove, in a dictatorial fashion, the policies of economic reform that the nation enjoys today); but Freedom House now gives the country its top rating when it comes to political and other freedoms.

According to the Legatum Institute’s Prosperity Index, Chile tops the list of South America’s largest countries (those with populations over 10 million), supported by its high scores in governance, safety and security, and the contribution of its policies to economic growth. When you see the combination of change towards both political and economic freedom, you see a country that has created a situation in which the economy is significantly depoliticized, it is one ruled by law, and one in which the people are free to choose their destinies.

Chile has become a beacon of hope for countries that have suffered for generations under despots and demagogues and is a source of inspiration for Western countries that longed enjoyed freedom, but are now choosing a path towards serfdom. Chile could be a country to watch in the 21st century.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Is Costa Rica Really the Happiest Nation on Earth? (freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com)

“If you want to see a place where Christmas is as non-existent as you can get, come to prison,” Steve wrote to me from California’s Avenal State Prison.

“There are no lights, no trees, no gifts, no nativity scenes, no family gatherings, and no signs that say ‘Merry Christmas.’”

How Steven came to spend Christmas at Avenal, alas, tells us all we need to know about the skewed sense of justice in progressive America.

In brief, as an 18-year old sailor in March 1996, Steven got drunk on shore leave in San Francisco and ended up at a co-ed dance club for the under-25 set.

There, a sexual predator with several priors offered him a ride back to the ship across the Bay Bridge, tricked him into coming to his apartment, likely drugged Steven, tried to rape him, refused Steven’s pleas to stop, and died in the fight that followed.

When I first learned about the case, I thought that if Steven were my son there is no way he would ever have been convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison, even in San Francisco, even if the predator proved to be gay and a leading Hispanic activist.

In recent months, as I have come to understand Steven’s family history, I have seen how this tragedy unfolded, and it only reinforces my initial assessment of the trial.

Shame on San Francisco.

When Steven was born in Biloxi, Mississippi, his mom had just turned sixteen. In that time and place, men did the honorable thing: they married the mother of their child.

My sense is that Steven’s working class father did so grudgingly. He would always keep his son at arm’s length. Steven ran away from home at least once, and his father turned his back on him after Steven’s arrest.

The father did not tell his brothers about Steven’s predicament until after he was convicted. The brothers to this day fail to understand why the father behaved as he did. Had they known, they would have done everything they could have to help.

The Navy turned its back on Steven as well. This was 1996, an election year. Bill Clinton was in the White House. The “victim,” Juan Pifarre, was gay, ethnic, and politically wired. The city of San Francisco would name a building after him.

The “killer,” on the other hand, was white, poor, powerless, and alone. He made for an easy and nicely symbolic notch on a progressive prosecutor’s belt.

The judge set bail at $1 million. The figure shocked Steven’s public defender because, as the San Francisco Chronicle would report, “The suspect called police voluntarily and asked to be picked up.”

Besides, Steven had “defensive wounds,” and the bail for first time defendants in a passion crime almost never exceeded $250,000.

“I felt my life was over, nonexistent,” Steven told me. “I was an 18-year-old kid who was scared, alone, and hopeless. I had no contact with my parents or anyone else. The military at the time just abandoned me.”

Steven’s mom has recently tried to enlighten me as to what happened in those days before the trial. I use her own language not to embarrass her, but to suggest the unevenness of the conflict.

“I was told by the Navy and all these Lawyer that the worest could happen was involtary manslaughter,” she writes. When Steven’s attorney moved for a plea bargain, Steven dismissed him. He could not understand what he was guilty of.

His mom sensed the danger at hand. “We were told by many people that he would not get a fair trail and that they were going to send a message to the President and the Navy,” she adds.

“We asked for the trail to be moved but no they would not do this they had to make a statement.”

That they did. The prosecutors timed this appalling show trial for March 1999, just a week before the start of Russell Henderson’s trial in Laramie for the notorious murder of gay college student, Matthew Shepard.

Steven never stood a chance. On one occasion, members of the audience stood up and faced the jury wearing large bright orange lapel tags saying “Recuerda [Remember] Juan,” “Stop Homophobia,” and “Stop Immigrant Bashing.”

“Where is that rage coming from?” the prosecutor asked the jury of Steven’s desperate struggle to stop from being raped.

The prosecutor then arbitrarily wrote the word “faggot” on a black board and insinuated that it was not the attempted rape but the military’s presumed anti-gay ethos that had stoked Steven’s rage.

Ill-educated and inarticulate, Steven was nonetheless made to stand as proxy for a presumably homophobic military establishment that had long since thrown him to the wolves.

“Ill-educated and inarticulate, Steven was nonetheless made to stand as proxy for a presumably homophobic military establishment that had long since thrown him to the wolves.”

“The day the verdit came in was a Mothers nighmare,” writes his mom. “I can’t say it is as bad as losing a son but not ever being able to see him again just was the end of all my hopes.”

After thirteen years in prison, Steven came up for parole this past June. In his favor, he had some two-dozen letters of support, offers of jobs and places to live. His psychiatric report was among the best anyone had seen.

He had all but completed his AA degree, had gotten five certificates from Microsoft, had “laudatory” marks in program after program, and had taught himself to write better than the average college senior.

“He’s a model inmate,” said the appointed attorney. “He has proved that the rehabilitation system really does work.”

“I don’t know when you had time to sleep,” said the deputy commissioner to Steven. “You’ve done an awful lot. I want to just acknowledge that.”

That much said, at the urging of San Francisco’s prosecutor, the parole board nixed his release for at least five more years: “The panel feels that you haven’t fully explored the totality and magnitude of this commitment offense.”

Shame on San Francisco.

Still, Steven remains undaunted, even at Christmas. “There may be no trees or decorations,” he wrote recently, “but there is paper and glue that can be turned into anything. This year I made a three foot Christmas tree with lights, bulbs, candy canes, and a star.”

He concluded, “I am grateful for all the wonderful people who have come, gone, and stayed in my life, and all have saved me with small and big gestures. To all Thank you and Merry Christmas!!”

Steven Nary can be reached at:

Steven Nary
P-61614
A.S.P. , 210-1-76 Low
P.O. Box 9
Avenal, CA 93204

© Jack Cashill
WND.com – January 7, 2010

Related articles by Zemanta

• Golden State a flop (hotair.com)
• Horror in Knoxville update: Cobbins gets life without parole (michellemalkin.com)
• And now, Barack Obama is afraid of…San Francisco? (michellemalkin.com)
• Protesting Pelosicare in her own backyard (michellemalkin.com)
• Could Recession Prompt San Francisco to Rethink Anti-Chain Policies? (blogs.wsj.com)

So we are starting a new year.  All of us have our personal aspirations.  Some are seeking a new job, others want new business opportunities, others still want to make major purchases for their home or companies.  Than there are those who simply want good things for themselves and those they love.  I also think that people, more than we have seen in years, have hopes and dreams for this country.  That is certainly the case with me.  Below are some of my personal desires for the country this year.  It is a really small list in light of how great our national need, but it would be an excellent beginning.

• That members of Congress would get a healthy sense of fear starting right now.  The Democrats seem like people in a trance, with no sense of reality or consequence.  Their agenda seems more important to them than their careers and, certainly, their constituents.  Meanwhile, the Republicans blindly see the conservative revolt as its movement, when many of these angry voters would be likely to vote for a candidate under the “Tea Party” banner than the GOP.  The Democrats need to come to their senses and weigh the damage they are doing to both the country and themselves.  Meanwhile, the Republican party should be made up of people in repentance because they have been a part of the problem and not the solution.
• That there is a major shift in the US House and Senate races to candidates who support liberty.  This does not seem likely in the US Senate because of the number of states that lean towards smaller government being up for reelection and are more vulnerable.  However, I expect the US House to actually have a new Speaker.  It is my hope that leader is not just another Republican.
• That more Americans hold their elected officials accountable.  There is an old adage that seems to be true that “people hate Congress, but love their elected member of Congress.”  For the vast majority of people their members of Congress are the problem.  If your member of Congress is not honoring his or her oath of office to defend the Constitution, make that person have to look for other employment.
• That the states demand for the restoration of its rights.  We are seeing more states argue against the national government’s rapid and unconstitutional expansion.  Thirteen state Attorneys General, led by South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster, have recently notified US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and informed them that the Obamacare proposal is unconstitutional and that they intend to fight it every step of the way.  Specifically, they warned in the letter to the congressional leaders that legal action may result if they do not remove the unconstitutional “Cornhusker Kickback” Medicaid provision inserted into the senate health care bill to secure the vote of Nebraska US Senator Ben Nelson.  That provision allows Nebraska to have the benefits of the socialized health care program without paying for it.  We have also had governors cite Article I, Section 8 and the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution to remind the federal government of its proper role.  In addition to states fighting back, I would love them to win these battles in the courts.
• That America’s international prestige would be restored and our troops would be protected.  As Obama tried to figure out the US strategy in Afghanistan, we saw our troop casualties double last year.  This President is far more dangerous to our friends and our armies than to its obvious enemies.  I hope that does not remain the case in 2010.

This is a short list, but imagine if we could accomplish these few things alone?  2010 could be remembered as a very good year.  One that set the ground work for the restoration of this great Republic.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Cornhuckster Sen. Ben Nelson: We shoulda waited on Demcare (michellemalkin.com)

Michael Tanner, a Senior Fellow with the Cato Institute recently noted that the primary highlights of Obama’s health care program as it leaves the Senate mirrors the Massachusetts program that has become a nightmare. In particular, the final bill will likely include an individual mandate, a weak employer-mandate, middle-class subsidies, and increased insurance regulation.

The sweeping legislation passed in Massachusetts in 2006 set the stage for a dramatic shift in the role of government when it comes to health care. Critics warned at the time that the program would become more bureaucratic, more expensive, and less user friendly. Tanner believes that, three years later, that is exactly the case today.

Tanner notes that the problems with the program are significant and numerous:

• In spite of practically bankrupting the state in order to get maximum participation among residents to get health insurance, 200,000 people remain uninsured.
• The state requires every resident to have health insurance, yet that mandate seems to play only a small role in the number who get covered (evidenced by those who still remain without coverage). The real force behind insurance enrollment is due to the state’s generous subsidies for the middle class.
• If cost containment was an objective, Massachusetts has failed miserably because health care costs continue to rise much faster than the national average. In fact, since 2006, total state health care spending has increased by 28 percent. An increase in demand that comes with expanded numbers of those covered always leads to either higher costs or greater shortages (or both).
• Insurance premiums have actually risen by eight to 10 percent annually. This is nearly double the national average. The “lower rates” we hear about in the political debate today are driven by smoke and mirrors and promise to be very short term.
• New regulations and government controls are actually reducing consumer choice and adding to health care costs. The government found itself in a powerful position once Massachusetts passed this measure. With that power the government only continued to expand controls at the expense of consumers.
• Program costs have exploded in spite of significant tax increases. To counter this, the state is considering a freeze on insurance premiums, reductions in reimbursements to providers, and even the possibility of implementing a program that would essentially ration health care. This promises to chase insurance companies and doctors out of the state, which only leads to higher prices and more shortages. A vicious cycle for the people of Massachusetts.
• As a result, there has been a shortage of providers, combined with an increase in demand, leading to increasing waiting times to see a doctor. As physicians find it more profitable to practice elsewhere, this situation will only increase.

Anyone seriously considering the health care bill navigating through the Congress should do so with great caution in light of the lessons that we have learned from Massachusetts.

Related articles by Zemanta

• ObamaCare Amendment (girlpundit.com)
• Will Health Care Reform Tip Senate Race to GOP in Massachusetts? (pajamasmedia.com)
• Is it 2013 (or 2014) Yet? (thehealthcareblog.com)
• Pro-Life Group Launches Billboard Truck Campaign (deaconforlife.blogspot.com)
• Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Pelosi Has Back Pedaled Just as Fast as Obama (huffingtonpost.com)
• Can Government Contain Health Care Costs? (girlpundit.com)

—————————–

SNIPS from:  “Analysis: Many question ’system worked’ comment”
By Jennifer Loven – Dec 29, 2009

Obama is dealing with … Friday’s attempt by a 23-year-old Nigerian to blow up a Detroit-bound flight from Amsterdam. … Though it ended with only a fire that was quickly put out, no lives lost and the man in custody, it has raised alarm about the government’s performance.        – How did airport security, improved at much cost after the 2001 terrorist attacks, miss the explosives concealed on the bomber’s body?        – How did the terrorist watchlist system allow Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to both keep his American tourist visa and avoid extra flight screening despite his father telling authorities his concerns about the younger man’s radicalization?        – Why didn’t Abdulmutallab’s lack of luggage, and cash purchase for an international flight, raise suspicions?        – Why was the plot thwarted only by an apparent explosive malfunction and fellow passengers’ aggressive action?   Amid those questions, administration officials’ repeated statements Sunday that “the system worked” were jarring. They made it sound like the administration doesn’t get it, like it is paying too much attention to political fallout and too little to public fears.   For Obama, still short of one year in office, his narrative, critical or otherwise, isn’t set yet. … Rumblings keep resurfacing about emotional distance, even coldness. Whether it’s Wall Street bonuses or terrorist near-disaster, people wonder whether he feels as they do or ever acts out of passion.

Until Monday, the president had not been heard from publicly since the Christmas Day scare. He was ordering stepped-up security measures and after-action reviews behind the scenes, but also enjoying his Hawaiian vacation with games of golf, basketball and tennis and trips to the beach.   He drew questions about his level of involvement by not getting his first briefing on the incident until two hours after it was all over – and then only for 15 minutes, when he departed for the gym. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091229/D9CT6TE80.html

Related articles by Zemanta

• Some Thoughts on the Latest Man-Caused Disaster Attempt (pajamasmedia.com)
• Do the ACLU and privacy activists share the blame for Christmas Day attack? (hotair.com)

Innovation in health care, particularly in the area of developing new drugs, is one of the crowning achievements of US health care. According to Forbes Magazine, 80 percent of all new drugs are developed in the United States and one of the primary reasons for this is because companies still have an incentive to do such in this country. The profit motive creates the desire and provides the incentive to over come the fear of risk that comes with bringing new medicines to market.

“The fully capitalized cost to develop a new drug, including studies conducted after receiving regulatory approval, averages $897 million,” according to a study by the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development. The expenditure of almost $1 billion to bring a product to market can only be done with some hope of reward. Thr hope businesses are looking for is a period of time of being able to sale that medicine without competition. Seven years is the standard period of time for such intellectual property to be protected. During that time, medicines can vigorously pursue recouping the cost of bringing a drug to market before other players can legally come along. This may be expensive, but that is a small price to be paid for innovation.

Policy makers who do not understand the economic dynamics of drug innovation want to fight the problem through reimportation, which is the US purchasing medicines from countries that receive them at a lower cost because they have less personal incomes and the drug companies change the cost accordingly. With reimportatin the drug companies would have to compete against themselves. Although the practice is currently illegal, many states have pursued the policy and now it has become front and center of the current health care debate.

Jack Calfee of American.com observes “This week, the Senate is expected to vote on an amendment to the healthcare overhaul bill that would incorporate the chief features of Senator Byron Dorgan’s drug importation bill. The Dorgan amendment would essentially require U.S. pharmaceutical manufacturers to supply importers from foreign nations with unlimited quantities of low-priced drugs, which could then be resold in the U.S. market.” It is interesting because I am sure the foreign companies that resale it to the US will do so for a profit, so our policy makers are sending these jobs to foreign countries. The question is, for how long? With these companies being forced to compete against themselves, the development of new drugs will be hindered. Simply put, there may not be new drugs to export in the future.

The economics of this are bizarre, Calfee notes ‘The central feature is ‘forced sales,’ not in the sense that any sales are literally required, but because a manufacturer that sells to any particular nation has to sell as much as buyers want at whatever price those buyers pay in that nation. The implications are bizarre. If Lipitor is 40 percent cheaper in Germany, a German importer could order enough to supply not only Germany but also the entire U.S. market. The manufacturer (Pfizer) could try to meet domestic German demand and no more, but the Dorgan bill includes provisions to make that difficult. But why worry about Germany? Prices are certainly cheaper in, say, Greece, Portugal, or one of the Eastern European nations (the Dorgan bill includes a list of acceptable nations). A lot of drugs could flow through Portuguese seaports, assuming that anyone bothered to ship them back and forth instead of directly to the United States.

“US health care certainly has problems. Most of them are created by excessive legal rewards, government mandates, and bureaucracy. Innovation is one of the crowning achievement of our system. If this amendment passes, innovation will certainly suffer.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Which Doctors Are Getting Paid By Glaxo, Lilly and Merck? (blogs.wsj.com)
• Health Care: Wrangling Over Drug Prices (swampland.blogs.time.com)
• WaPo: Hey, did you know Obama’s statements had expiration dates? (hotair.com)
• Olbermann: I’ll go to jail before I comply with health-insurance mandate (hotair.com)
• Obama’s Support Collapses (rightpundits.com)
• Friday Open Thread (conservatives4palin.com)

I first visited Hillbuzz when one of their postings was cross-linked at American Thinker, my favorite stop for meaty conservative think pieces. It seems the boyz at Hillbuzz had experienced a 180 degree change of heart about Dubya after the Fort Hood shooting and had written a long and passionate piece apologizing for all the rotten things they’d said about him during the previous decade.

I really respect that they could change their minds and apologize. IMHO, it shows a greatness of character, so I stayed to read some other stuff they’d written and discovered that they’re really thoughtful and often very funny guys. The more often I went back, the often I wanted to go back and yesterday … brag brag … I got honored ))) by them!

Here’s the post:

The Frog Princess Discussion Thread by Hillbuzz – Dec 11 2009

http://hillbuzz.org/2009/12/11/the-frog-princess-discussion-thread/

Today Disney releases “The Frog Princess”, its latest hand-drawn fairytale, and first featuring a black princess. …

Disney movies become instant parts of our pop culture, and because of the Race Industry in this country, this cartoon in particular is going to take on all sorts of unintended meanings on all sides. Who knows what those will be, because none of us have seen the film yet, but we’re sure it’s going to make a big impact (if not a lot of money at the box office).

Already, we see so many parallels between the current president and the film’s main villain, Dr. Facilier. Maybe when we see the movie, those similarities will disappear, but the way Disney drew its villain, he’s just a SPOT-ON send up of Dr. Utopia … as created below by a reader who was kind enough to create this photoshop for us:

Thanks again to Chrissy-the-Hyphenated for doing the Photoshop. We hope it inspires many, many more in a similar vein.

COMMENTS

TheJane Says: Great Photoshop!

Buttered Says: Hip! Hip! Hooray! for Chrissy-the-Hyphenated!

garlicnosedho Says: CHRISSY THE HYPHENATED: Bravo to you!!! Wow, it’s brilliant. Thank you!!!!

Related articles by Zemanta

• Disney Gets Buttilicous? (harlemworldblog.wordpress.com)
• Porkulus paid Hillary aide $6 million, saved three jobs (hotair.com)
• White House Visitor List Stolen! (rightpundits.com)
• The Princess and the Frog: Disney goes back to the drawing board (nationalpost.com)
• Moreland at the Movies: The Princess and the Frog (harlemworldblog.wordpress.com)

The entire debate on health care seems to be focusing on costs and covering the uninsured. The latter group is almost a misnomer because one can argue that our “uninsured” are better protected than many under socialized medicine in Europe and the former cannot be contained through government controls without sacrificing quality and fostering rationing health care system.

The United States is the only major nation with health care that is still (to some extent) market driven. There is an impetus in US health care towards innovation that other countries simply do not enjoy. The Cato Institute noted in a recent study that innovation should be the number one concern in the health care debate, according to Glen Whitman, an associate professor of economics at California State University, Northridge and Raymond Raad, a resident in psychiatry at New York Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center.

They make this case by examining four categories of innovation — basic science, diagnostics, therapeutics, and business models. They found:

* In the areas of basic science diagnostics, and therapeutics, the United States has contributed more than any other country, and in some cases, more than all other countries combined.
* In the last category, business models, the researchers lack the data to say whether the United States has performed better. What is interesting is that other countries have their own problems in this area. Government bureaucracy has replaced business bureaucracy, how can that be better? “Government” is the common thread in all of these inefficient systems (including our own) and one should argue that should be the point of focus. We should look at reducing the role of government and increasing the role of the market.

The US approach, with all of its costs and inefficiencies, has provided the greatest innovations in health care for its patients, according to the authors. These include:

* The quick adoption and broad use of new treatments and technologies, which in turn create an incentive to develop those techniques in the first place.
* When the American people “subsidizes” medical innovation through higher costs, the whole world benefits; that is a virtue of the American system that is not reflected in comparative life expectancy and mortality statistics. It is almost humorous that the rest of the world is not denouncing the US for moving away from a system that other countries are benefiting from.
* Medical treatments must be invented before costs can be reduced and its use extended to everyone. Becuase of that, innovation remains critical. If the incentive for innovation is not there, everyone (including those who are suppose to benefit from socialized medicine) will suffer.

Innovation has had virtually no role in the current health care debate and this shows how myopic supporters of socialized health care are. They too will find themselves suffering from the lack of options that are common in systems that are not market driven.

For more information I suggest Glen Whitman and Raymond Raad, “Bending the Productivity Curve: Why America Leads the World in Medical Innovation,” Cato Institute, November 18, 2009.

ELEVEN years ago.

Over the intervening years, global warming alarmists have sought to stifle debate about whether or not anthropogenic global warming (AGW) was threatening the planet. (Anthropogenic means man-made, in this case supposedly by carbon dioxide emissions.)

We’ve watched with disgust as AGW alarmists shoved their beliefs down the throats of little school children with mandated screenings of Al Gore’s propaganda film “Inconvenient Truth.”

We’ve listened to them argue that there was no point in debating, because the “science was settled.”

“There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition.”
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT

We’ve cringed at reports of them bullying dissenting scientists, getting them ex-communicated from important panels and publications, killing research funding and destroying careers.

We’ve been ridiculed and reviled by believers for trying to speak the truth even as reports emerged of alarmists hiding, lying about and even destroying data that didn’t support their claims.

And just a few weeks ago, President Obama hit out at “the naysayers, the folks who would pretend that this is not an issue” and warned that they (we) would surely turn to “underhanded tactics” to try and stop climate change legislation from passing in the Senate.

FINALLY, mainstream news organizations have begun to report what a lot of us have known for some time — i.e., that global warming may not be caused by man. In fact, it may not be happening at all. And even if it is happening, so what? The climate has been warmer in the past and all evidence points to those centuries having been very productive and healthy ones for humans.

Last June, the House narrowly passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act. The 1,200 page Waxman-Markey bill is commonly referred to as the “cap and trade” bill. If the Senate passes it and Obama signs it, it will have a devastating impact on the American economy. For example, it will damage the coal industry which supports some low-income rural areas of the country.

It will also markedly raise energy costs for all Americans. The Heritage Foundation sets the cost per household at $1,870 per year; the Treasury Department sets the number at $1,761 per household. A lot of the increase is expected to come in the form of a rise in the cost of electricity, directly in your home electric bill and indirectly in higher prices as businesses pass on their increased electric costs to consumers.

These higher costs will hit lower, working and middle class folks much harder than those making six figures … like our representatives in Congress or those who make more than $250,000 a year and therefore “need” to be taxed more and more and more … because the fact that they’re already footing the bill for nearly half of all taxes paid is somehow not good enough to satisfy the class-envy of Democrat voters.

What a shockeroo that this legislation would also happen to result in Democrats grabbing more power for the federal government, steering even more porky tax dollars to their own pet industries and campaign donors, and further eroding the country’s free economy and industrial landscape.

We’re talking about 1,500 regulations and mandates over at least 21 federal agencies that would require thousands of new federal employees and cost BILLIONS to implement. It is to energy what ObamaCare is to health care.

Just one of the odious regulations buried in the bill would require EVERY HOMEOWNER to get APPROVAL from the GOVERNMENT before they could put their house on the market! You want to upgrade, downgrade, retire or just sell because you’ve got a job opportunity elsewhere? You desperate to sell because you need the money for urgent expenses? Tough.

Before you could even list your house, some government bean counter would first have the absolute power to decide if your house met federal energy efficiency regulations and what you would have to do to make up any short-comings. You could easily be required to replace windows, doors, insulation, appliances etc. with more energy efficient models BEFORE you would be ALLOWED to sell your own home.

Let me just think how rife THAT plan is for corruption and graft … or how lengthy and burdensome any supposed appeal process might be. On second thought, let me not. My head might explode. I mean … what if you couldn’t afford all those improvements and couldn’t get a loan and really had to sell … well, gosh. That would be too damn bad.

Because OHMYGODGLOBALWARMING!!!!

But what if ALL of this evil power mongering is in the name of something that isn’t happening. Talk about your Inconvenient Truths.

Where the heck is global warming – Oct 16 2009
One of the hacked emails remarks on the record breaking COLD we had in October. These are pics I took out our back door.

Meanwhile, Environmental Eugenicists (like the “good” folks at the United Nations) are using “preventing climate change” as their latest big excuse to push birth control and abortions on women around the world. Last year for Mother’s Day, the London Times ran an article entitled “Having Large Families Is An Eco-Crime!”

According to the “think tank” called Optimum Population Trust, “The effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do, such as switching off lights. An extra child is the equivalent of a lot of flights across the planet. The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet would be to have one less child.”

To which JavelinaBomb wisely remarked, “So you’re saying that for every child we have, we have to kill one of the liberal sacred cows to balance out our carbon footprint? That’s silly, most of them have HUGE carbon footprints. Al Gore by himself is worth like a peewee football league. And who says we can stop when we get just one? We’ll be hav

Related articles by Zemanta

• Thomas Fingar on the Politics of NIE/NIAs (emptywheel.firedoglake.com)
• Tea Party has Climate Bill in its crosshairs (green.venturebeat.com)
• Gore to Obama: Don’t Skip Copenhagen (blogs.wsj.com)
• Hacked Emails Reveal: “Scientists” Faking Data to Establish Global Warming They Know Isn’t ThereAnd Conspiring to Delete Emails They’re Supposed to Retain for FOIA Purposes (minx.cc)
• Richard Ellis Takes on Polar Bears with On Thin Ice (takepart.com)
• Al Gore entertains the supercomputer troops (theregister.co.uk)
• Gore: U.S. has lost its lead in solar, wind technology (seattlepi.com)
• Apocalypse fatigue: Losing the public on climate change (guardian.co.uk)
• William Drayton: Want to Fight Climate Change? Hire Somebody (huffingtonpost.com)