President Obama’s “Health Care Summit” continued at the White House today. From Ted Kennedy to the National Federation of Independent Business, a diverse group was assembled to provide input in the large public forum and in smaller “breakout” sessions.
It is beyond dispute all Americans want consistent access to high-quality and cost-effective medical insurance and care. No one who has ever seen a loved one suffer or who has personally experienced a serious disease or injury wants anything less. How we arrive at this goal is where the division lies. President Obama has asserted that health care is a “right.” Is healthcare itself a “right” or is access to health care a right? These are important distinctions. If it is a fundamental right it must be provided for and that would fall to the government. A government-run monopoly would result in sharp increases in health care costs, rationing of healthcare and a decline in quality.
The British press is a-flutter over President Obama’s gift of 25 DVDs to Prime Minister Brown. In response to criticism that the gift was cheap and vulgar, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs responded that the DVDs represent an American Film Institute selection of classic cinema that accurately portrays aspects of the United Kingdom’s history. Downing Street reportedly will not divulge the titles of the DVDs. The U.K.’s Daily Mail has published a list of the movies, but luckily, we at Family Research Council have obtained the real list of DVDs given to Prime Minister Brown.
Here is President Obama’s selection:
The Wind that Shakes the Barley
A Bridge Too Far
John Adams (HBO Series)
A Man for All Seasons
The Crossing (A&E)
The Bounty (1984)
Churchill: The Hollywood Years
A Passage to India
In the Name of the Father
Joan of Arc (1948)
Now,what subject of the Crown wouldn’t enjoy watching these films?
[Special thanks to my colleagues Michael Fragoso and Michael Leaser, who contributed to the above mischief.]
The Politico reported yesterday “it’s rumored that [Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT)] could face a challenge [in his 2010 Senate re-election race] from CNBC host Larry Kudlow, an opponent who would focus the coming election squarely on the economy.”
Say it ain’t so, Kudlow.
For those not familiar with you, Larry, I provide two links with some fair and balanced info: CNBC, Wikipedia. In short, you are a supply-side economist who served in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Reagan Administration’s Treasury Department, and various Wall Street firms with distinction. You are a happy guy; an optimist. You are a conservative, and, as I have observed over the years, a much-needed media friend of the pro-life cause - something we at FRC appreciate greatly. And, since the financial meltdown you have been hosting a M-F 7:00 p.m. hour-long market analysis program on CNBC - now called The Kudlow Report.
What do you call an American citizen who objects to one of President Obama’s most radical nominees? “Verbal terrorists,” according to “Hardball’s” Chris Matthews. The MSNBC host, who last night addressed the controversy surrounding Kathleen Sebelius, took a gratuitous swipe at the pro-life community for opposing the Governor’s radical positions. “Is she going to get through the anti-abortion people?” Matthews asked. “Yes. I think she’s going to do that. I mean, verbal terrorism? Yeah, she’ll get through that.”
Give me a break! Educating Americans on Sebelius’s record isn’t “terrorism,” it’s activism, no, it’s realism! As a candidate for one of the most influential posts in Obama’s Cabinet, Sebelius’s public positions matter—particularly if they’re as far outside the mainstream as hers have proven to be. Before Sebelius is confirmed, Americans deserve to know where she stands. They should know that the Kansas governor supports late-term abortions, filthy, roach-infested abortion clinics, government as the final authority on children’s health, the killing of innocent abortion survivors, and socialized medicine. Despite what Chris Matthews believes, standing up for the defenseless and the vulnerable is what public officials are supposed to do. This is just an attempt to shift the focus off the extremism of Sebelius’ record.
Maybe, it is time for some around Washington to realize that discriminating against medical providers who decline to perform or refer for abortions is not a good idea. After all, they are standing for their beliefs. The Obama Administration is trying to remove this rule from the books, to which Rep. John Boehner posted this response.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is not just another massive bureaucracy. It is the largest department in the federal government, with a proposed budget of $821 billion for 2010. In contrast, the Defense Department’s budget of $534 seems puny.
Much of the HHS budget is composed of outlays for two “entitlement” programs, Medicare and Medicaid. Yet HHS is a vast federal agency, laden with sub-agencies and programs, most of which are unfamiliar to the American people but many of which have a direct bearing on federal policy regarding pre-born life, in our own country and internationally.
Now, with the nomination of abortion advocate Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D-KS) to be HHS Secretary, President Obama has signaled his willingness to use the nation’s largest Cabinet department as a means of advancing a radical abortion agenda.
In the latest Mapping America, the National Survey of Children’s Health shows that children who live with both biological parents or two adoptive parents are much less likely to repeat a grade than those who do not.