I is smarter than a Harvard professor!

Or maybe I’m just not as big a hypocrite!

Your Editor has stated, on numerous occasions, that we can’t add 30 or 40 or 50 million people who couldn’t pay for insurance themselves to the insurance rolls without either increasing costs or decreasing services, or both.  All of those statements were on the old Common Sense Political Thought, and that’s just what they were: common sense.  But it seems that the learned professors at Harvard have a problem with common sense; from Zero Hedge:

Obamacare Architects At Harvard Furious After Learning They Are Not Exempt From Obamacare
Tyler Durden's picture Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/05/2015 21:28 -0500

The brain incubator at Harvard, the place which according to legend, and certainly the US News and World Report’s annual paid college infomercial, is the repository for some of the smartest people in the world, is furious.

The reason – Harvard’s illustrious faculty has learned that they too will be subject to their own policy recommendations as relates to Obamacare, which they themselves helped conceive. As the left-leaning NYT reported earlier today, “for years, Harvard’s experts on health economics and policy have advised presidents and Congress on how to provide health benefits to the nation at a reasonable cost. But those remedies will now be applied to the Harvard faculty, and the professors are in an uproar.

Because Harvard’s brilliant ivory tower economists and public policy wonks know precisely how to fix the world… as long as said fix never applies to them.

Kind of like the way the Congress exempts itself and its members from the legislation it passes . . . .

And sure enough, the faculty did everything in its power to make sure it never had to suffer the consequences of its own brilliance…

“Members of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, the heart of the 378-year-old university, voted overwhelmingly in November to oppose changes that would require them and thousands of other Harvard employees to pay more for health care. The university says the increases are in part a result of the Obama administration’s Affordable Care Act, which many Harvard professors championed.

… But it was too late:

The faculty vote came too late to stop the cost increases from taking effect this month, and the anger on campus remains focused on questions that are agitating many workplaces: How should the burden of health costs be shared by employers and employees? If employees have to bear more of the cost, will they skimp on medically necessary care, curtail the use of less valuable services, or both?

And it just gets better:

“Harvard is a microcosm of what’s happening in health care in the country,” said David M. Cutler, a health economist at the university who was an adviser to President Obama’s 2008 campaign. But only up to a point: Professors at Harvard have until now generally avoided the higher expenses that other employers have been passing on to employees. That makes the outrage among the faculty remarkable, Mr. Cutler said, because “Harvard was and remains a very generous employer.”

Ah, hypocrisy: exactly the same whether it is at the lowliest of community colleges or the leading bastion of liberal thought.

In Harvard’s health care enrollment guide for 2015, the university said it “must respond to the national trend of rising health care costs, including some driven by health care reform,” otherwise known as the Affordable Care Act. The guide said that Harvard faced “added costs” because of provisions in the health care law that extend coverage for children up to age 26, offer free preventive services like mammograms and colonoscopies and, starting in 2018, add a tax on high-cost insurance, known as the Cadillac tax.

The faculty is enraged, ENRAGED that what it hoped would only apply to the plebian peasantry is just as applicable to the self-appointed smartest people in the world. Here’s Dick:

Richard F. Thomas, a Harvard professor of classics and one of the world’s leading authorities on Virgil, called the changes “deplorable, deeply regressive, a sign of the corporatization of the university.”

And here’s Mary:

Mary D. Lewis, a professor who specializes in the history of modern France and has led opposition to the benefit changes, said they were tantamount to a pay cut. “Moreover,” she said, “this pay cut will be timed to come at precisely the moment when you are sick, stressed or facing the challenges of being a new parent.”

There’s more at the original; all emphases are from the original.

Full professors at Harvard University averaged $198,400 in salary in 2012,1 Associate Professors averaged $120,900, and Assistant Professors $109,800.  One would think that all of those PhDs, all of those learned intellectuals, should have been able to figure out what was obvious to a lowly concrete plant manager with just a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Kentucky,2 that you cannot add millions more people who cannot pay for insurance to the insurance rolls via subsidies, and you cannot require insurance companies to accept people who would have been previously denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions, and not have the costs of both private insurance and government spending — meaning: taxes! — increase.  It’s simple math, but, evidently, simple addition is too simple for the august professors at Hahvahd.

But, perhaps they are very much like former Harvard professor, Elizabeth Warren,3 now the junior Senator from Massachusetts, who championed raising taxes on higher earners,4 but who, after criticizing then-Senator Scott Brown (R-MA), against whom she was running, for voting against the “millionaire’s tax” proposal, admitted that she chose not to use the voluntarily pay higher rates option on her state income taxes.  The left can always support all of these great programs, but when it comes to paying for them, when it comes to doing what they say others should do, it’s  “What?  Who, me?  Surely you can’t mean me?”  

And the left wonder why conservatives have so little respect for them.
____________________

  1. Though, interestingly enough at that oh-so-liberal-and-feminist school, male full professors averaged $201,600 while female full professors averaged $187,500. With a total of 1,084 full professors at Harvard in 2012, the disparity in salaries cannot be explained away by small sample size.
  2. Class of 1977.
  3. As a Harvard Law professor, she was paid $350,000 a year.
  4. Benen, Steve (September 21, 2011), “The underlying social contract”. Washington Monthly, and Smerconish, Michael (July 30, 2012). “The context behind Obama’s ‘you didn’t build that’”, The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Four Tips That Can Help You Organize a Personal Injury Claim Efficiently

Four Tips That Can Help You Organize a Personal Injury Claim Efficiently:
Finding efficient ways to organize a personal injury claim is worthwhile because it can help your attorney simplify the process of presenting your claim in court. As a result, please read these tips that can help you organize personal injury claims efficiently.

Organize Your Correspondence:
Organizing any correspondence that you have written while creating a personal injury claim is worthwhile because it can help your lawyer simplify the process of organizing your personal injury claim. An easy way to do this is to list in chronological order any notification letters, demand letters and medical correspondence that you have written or received after you were injured.

Organize Your Medical Records and Bills Into Readable Sections:
Organizing your medical records into readable sections can make organizing a personal injury claim easier because it can help your lawyer list your injuries and medical costs in a concise way that is easy for judges and insurance representatives to read and analyze.

One way to divide your medical records into readable sections is to ask your lawyer to help you divide your medical records into sections that list information about medical procedures, doctors’ narratives, exam results, hospital stays, prescriptions and medical expenses separately. Asking for this assistance should be easy because most reputable personal injury claim attorneys offer case organization services that make organizing your medical records which pertain to your personal injury claim simple.

Clearly List Property Damage Claims:
It is a good idea to clearly list property damage claims because it makes estimating the total cost of these claims easier. An easy way to do this is to ask your lawyer to create a chronological list of property damages that occurred while you were injured.

List Lost Wages:
Listing information about lost wages is worthwhile because it can help your lawyer obtain a fair estimate of any lost wages you could be entitled to that is easy to verify in court.

One way to clearly list your lost wages is to attach a written letter from your employer to your claim that clearly lists how long you have been out of work and any forms of compensation you receive or could receive while working.

As you might have noticed, organizing a personal injury claim requires a lot of time and effort to do correctly. As a result, feel free to use these tips to organize your personal injury claim efficiently.

€urosclerosis: Well, wahhh! The Greeks don’t want to pay their own bills!

It’s been a while since we’ve noted the economic problems of the eurozone, but those problems never really went away. From The Wall Street Journal:

France and Germany Push Athens on Bailout Commitments
French President Francois Hollande Raises Possibility of Greece Leaving Eurozone
By William Horobin in Paris and Andrea Thomas in Berlin | Jan. 5, 2015 11:58 a.m. ET

France and Germany on Monday stepped up pressure on Greece to meet the terms of bailout programs, returning to the brinkmanship of the eurozone debt crisis as the 19-nation currency dropped to a nine-year low.

In Paris, French President François Hollande said the government that will emerge from Greece’s Jan. 25 snap election will have to stick to the commitments Athens made when it received European Union aid. The warning comes three weeks ahead of a Greek election that could yield a leftist government opposed to European-imposed austerity.

Departing from the traditional stance that euro membership is irrevocable, the French leader raised the possibility of Greece exiting the bloc. Laying the responsibility for the unity of the eurozone on the Greek people, Mr. Hollande told French radio: “Regarding Greece’s membership of the eurozone, it’s up to Greece alone to decide.”

In Berlin, German economics minister Sigmar Gabriel hammered a similar message, saying that while Europe aimed to keep Greece inside the eurozone, it wouldn’t tolerate any threats to stability rebuilt over the past few years.

More at the link. But part of the problem is that even President Hollande doesn’t want to do what is necessary:

While Mr. Hollande stressed that Greece must meet debt-reduction commitments, he also said there is a limit to the capacity of European people to endure austerity.

The rise of far-left parties such as Syriza in Greece, he said, stems from the heavy price the country has already paid to remain in the euro. “Whatever the vote, Europe must no longer be synonymous with austerity,” Mr. Hollande said.

Yes, actually, Europe should be synonymous with austerity, because the Europeans have to pay their bills! The Europeans have lived beyond the means justified by their production for decades now, and the mountain of debt has continued to grow; eventually those bills have to be paid, and that means that the Europeans will have to, for a while, live less well than their production supports, to pay down their debts.

Politicians don’t like that, politicians certainly don’t like doing something really radical like telling their constituents a hard and uncomfortable truth, but eventually the truth will come out.

The Greeks may well vote in a leftist government, but they can’t vote in prosperity; governments cannot change the laws of economics. If the go broke, well then, they go broke. It won’t be pleasant, but maybe, just maybe, it will send a message to the Republicans in Washington that the same thing could happen to us.

How can the left be this stupid?

From Donald Douglas:

Violent Leftists Shut Down Ron Wyden Town Hall in Portland

All they want to do is shut things down.

Damn thugs overran the place, and that was it.

At Oregon Live, “Wyden town hall disrupted by ‘hands up, don’t shoot’ protests.

And at Progs Today, “CHAOS ERUPTS As #Ferguson Protesters Shut Down Sen. Wyden Town Hall – Threaten to Beat Security Guard (VIDEO).”

As security tries to gain control and close the door, a big black mofo rams his foot inside as a door stop and threatens, “I’ll Break Your Jaw Old Man!

Well, so much for MLK-style civil disobedience. These people are violent anarcho-communists!

Uhhh, Senator Wyden is a Democrat, a liberal Democrat,1 a Senator who is much more likely than not to agree with their agenda, so, naturally, the right thing for them to do is to persuade the Senator that they are nothing but a bunch of uncivilized hooligans.

Then there was this story:

#BlackBrunchNYC Is #WarOnBrunch And White People

 

Yesterday a group of hooligans entered a number of eateries in Oakland and Los Angeles and disturbed patrons eating breakfast, brunch and shopping at the Apple Store. Today it’s on to NYC where they’re doing the same thing.

The irony is the woman in the green hat here is a legal observer with the National Lawyers Guild. I wonder what law they believe allows them to enter an establishment, disrupt business and harass customers.

The left really need to read this book!

The left really need to read this book!

There’s more, including a couple more photos, at the original. But what, I have to ask, makes these fine people think that they will persuade others to sympathize with their cause by annoying them, by disrupting their meal or their free time? I cannot speak for anyone else, but I can tell you how I would react: I’d tell them, straight out, that they’re nothing but a bunch of pigs, and that they could count on me never supporting their worthless cause.

They are simply this year’s version of the Occupy protesters, who made an initially favorable impression on some foolish people, the Editor definitely not among them, but quickly proceeded to wear out their welcome.

The Occupods were then followed by the Ferguson rioters, who thought that it was a good idea to protest the killing of a drugged-up thug who attacked a policeman by burning down businesses mostly in their own neighborhoods, and now, when even the dullest among them ought to have enough sense to shut up while funerals are going on for New York police officers murdered in the line of duty, the continue to demonstrate — pun intended — to law abiding and sensible people that they are rude, crude, and just plain stupid.
_______________________

  1. From Roll Call, from February 11, 2014:

    On Thursday the Oregon Democrat will become the most liberal chairman in the modern history of the Finance Committee, the most powerful panel in the Senate.

    Notwithstanding his many well-publicized feints toward Republicans — on health entitlements reform and tax simplification, trade liberalization and clean energy, foreign surveillance and domestic civil liberties, senatorial secrecy and campaign financing — Wyden remains among the senators most loyal to the mainstream American political left.

    His voting record has earned him a 94 percent annual average support score during his Senate career from Americans for Democratic Action and an 88 percent approval level from the AFL-CIO. He’s voted the way President Barack Obama wanted 97 percent of the time in the past five years, CQ Roll Call’s congressional vote studies found. And he’s stuck with his side on 97 percent of votes that fell mostly along party lines during his 18 years as a senator — a time period when the annual Senate Democratic party unity score was 11 points below that.

I’m pretty sure that we’ll win!

Rule 5 Blogging: Italians

It’s the weekend and time, once again, for THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL’S version of Rule 5 Blogging. Robert Stacey Stacy McCain described Rule 5 as posting photos of pretty women somewhat déshabillé, but, on this site, our Rule 5 Blogging doesn’t put up pictures of Claudia Romani in her summer clothes, but women, in full military gear, serving their countries in the armed forces. The terribly sexist authors on this site celebrate strong women, women who can take care of themselves and take care of others, women who have been willing to put their lives on the line in some not-so-friendly places, women who truly do have the “We can do it!” attitude. Since my darling bride (of 35 years, 7 months and 15 days) is planning on a family vacation in Italy in 2016, this seems like a good time to note Italian soldiers!

military_woman_italy_army_000063

Continue reading ‘Rule 5 Blogging: Italians’ »

From Around the Blogroll

From William Teach at the Pirate’s Cove:

Washington Post Very Upset That GOP Controls So Much Of State Government
By William Teach January 3, 2015 – 7:30 am

And that they might look to pass Republican/Conservative policy agendas!

(WP) Legislators in the 24 states where Republicans now hold total control plan to push a series of aggressive policy initiatives in the coming year aimed at limiting the power of the federal government and rekindling the culture wars.

The unprecedented breadth of the Republican majority — the party now controls 31 governorships and 68 of 98 partisan legislative chambers1 — all but guarantees a new tide of conservative laws. Republicans plan to launch a fresh assault on the Common Core education standards, press abortion regulations, cut personal and corporate income taxes and take up dozens of measures challenging the power of labor unions and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Before Election Day, the GOP controlled 59 partisan legislative chambers across the country. The increase to 68 gives Republicans six more chambers than their previous record in the modern era, set after special elections in 2011 and 2012.

How horrible for Democrats! The GOP might actually propagate a Conservative legislative agenda at the state level, just like they were elected to do. At the state level, it’s quite clear that the voters have tired of the hardcore leftism that is destroying our country and states. This is also quite apparent by the number of Liberals moving out of deep Democrat states and to Republican states, due to the actual horrible results of the Democratic policies in those Democrat states.

More at the link. But it seems that the editors of The Washington Post are just terribly upset that the voters, in free and fair elections, chose to give a majority of their votes to Republican candidates, and Heaven forfend! the Republican majorities are threatening to do something really radical like keep their promises!

The editors of The Washington Post are very much in favor of democratic elections . . . as long as they produce Democratic victories.

And now, on to the blogroll!

  1. Nebraska’s unicameral state Senate is officially non-partisan, but unofficially Republicans outnumber Democrats by a wide margin.

Since I wear only one contact lens . . .

. . . this might be a good look for me!

Democrats just can’t tell the truth!

From The American Thinker:

Wendy Davis comes clean on her fake gun rights election position
By Thomas Lifson

Wendy Davis, the crushingly defeated Democrat nominee for Texas governor, should go down in the history books as the ultimate expression of the fakery and hype that characterize the Democratic Party of the early 21st century.  But considering the bias that pervades academia, it is more likely she will be lionized, just as FDR is credited with fighting the Depression his policies extended and aggravated.

Still, explaining away her admission this week that she faked her position on open carry (the ability of Texans to wear firearms visible to others) in order to get elected, even though she doesn’t believe it is the right policy,  will require some contortions.

Asche Schow if the Washington Examiner writes:

Former Texas gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis, in her first interview after losing by 20 points to governor-elect Greg Abbott, admitted she only claimed to support an open-carry gun law in order to win votes.

“There is one thing that I would do differently in that campaign, and it relates to the position that I took on open-carry,” Davis told the San Antonio Express-News on Monday. “I made a quick decision on that with a very short conversation with my team and it wasn’t really in keeping with what I think is the correct position on that issue.”

Davis added that she does support “people’s right to own and to bear arms in appropriate situations,” but fears that open carry would be used “to intimidate and cause fear.”

Remember when Democrats were excited about the glamorous crusader who was going to turn Texas blue? Now she is just a phony Joanie who turned out to be not above slyly reminding voters he opponent is wheelchair bound, and who claimed to advocate gun rights policies she didn’t believe in.

Moving day: State Senator Wendy Davis (D-TX 10) is out of office. Click to enlarge.

Senator Davis ran for Governor as her state Senate term was running out, and thus she is out of public office completely. I’m guessing that she sees little hope in Texas politics now, or she wouldn’t have admitted that she was taking a position on the right to keep and bear arms with which she really didn’t agree, just to get votes; she has exposed herself as a liar!

Perhaps even more damaging is her admission that she took “a quick decision on that with a very short conversation with my team and it wasn’t really in keeping with what I think is the correct position on that issue.” She basically stated that she didn’t lead her own campaign team, and that she couldn’t get quick decisions right.

I am reminded of Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes’ campaign for the United States Senate, and our story noting that James O’Keefe caught her own campaign staffers saying that they believed she was lying concerning her position on the use of coal, simply to win votes.1 I was unable to find, through a Google search, any evidence that Mrs Grimes has said anything which would indicate that her pre-election positions on coal or gun control were in any way not what she believes, which means, at the very least, that she has kept her mouth shut; perhaps she is planning on another election at some point.2

Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes (D-KY). Click to enlarge.

Several Democrats facing election in 2014 ran away from President Obama and his positions, including soon to be former Senators3 Kay Hagan (D-NC), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Mark Begich (D-AK) and Mary Landrieu (D-LA). Your Editor wonders just how many of their constituents just flat didn’t believe those Democrats when they took positions setting themselves apart from the President. But, whether many of their constituents believed them or not, concerning the Kentucky election, we pointed it out previously: even if Mrs Grimes believed exactly what she says she believed, even if she really did mean everything she said in her campaign, if she had been elected, her very first votes would have been to give greater power to those Democrats who do not believe the things she claimed she does, who would work to curtail our Second Amendment rights, and who would work to harm the coal industry.

Maybe, just maybe, the Democrats would be better served by doing something really radical, and telling the truth about themselves4 and their positions; fudging their positions or just flat out lying hasn’t seemed to help them very much.
________________________________

  1. Neither Mr O’Keefe nor anyone else was able to catch Mrs Grimes saying these things personally.
  2. Mrs Grimes’ term as Secretary of State, an electoral position in the Bluegrass State, comes up for election in 2015.
  3. Their terms officially end on January 3rd.
  4. Wendy Davis seriously misrepresented her own biography.