McCain as POW

Idiotic lede to story on video:

The video portrays the Republican as a hero but the message may be tarnished as he is filmed smoking a cigarette.

Scheduling conflicts

They've really gotta stop holding the Summer Olympics during Presidential election years. Two conventions, 24 hour Phelps-a-thons, spunky athletes who beat the odds to win the gold, Ted Kennedy ...

How much more can the American people take?

Bereft of ideas

Mark Hemingway watches Barack Obama ads made by MoveOn members so you don't have to.

I bet Obama's cursing the day

He met Jeremiah Wright. Or maybe just wishing that the good Reverend would quietly drop dead?

The company he keeps

Barack Obama's newest supporters--Jane Fonda and Jimmy Carter--aren't the kind of people I'd want to be associated with.

Heartbreak

If a "good liberal woman" loses out to a man--even a black man.

Hillary pulls it out

Exciting, isn't it? Geez, the Dems are strange. A primary and a caucus in Texas. Superdelegates. Stripping states of delegates--Florida and Michigan.

My big, fat Super Tuesday

Meh. I've got cable news on to get myself in the mood, but so far it's not doing anything for me.

I'm marginally disappointed that Rudy sputtered out of the race.

I don't like Huckabee. All that psalm singing.

Romney? Why aren't conservatives who are so hot and bothered by McCain-Feingold not incensed by Romney's mandatory health insurance thingy in Massachusetts? Don't get me wrong: I hate McCain-Feingold; I think it's not only un-Conservative, but un-American. But that health insurance thing really, really bothers me.

The case of the missing liver transplant

Scott Gottlieb looks at the story of Nataline Sarkisyan, a 17-year-old girl who was denied a liver transplant by her health insurer and subsequently died.

John Edwards used the girl's story as a morality tale in which the big, bad insurance company allowed an innocent child to die out of greed. The implication being that the poor girl would have been saved had we the single-payer plan Edwards supports. Not so, says Gottlieb, who looks at data from the US and the UK, which has a single-payer system.

A study published in 2004 in the journal Liver Transplantation compared the relative severity of liver disease in transplant recipients in the U.S. and U.K. The results were striking. No patient in the U.K. was in intensive care before transplantation, one marker for how sick patients are, compared with 19.3% of recipients in the U.S. Additionally, the median for a score used to assess how advanced someone's liver disease is, the "MELD" score, was 10.9 in the U.K. compared with 16.1 in the U.S. -- a marked gap, with higher scores for more severe conditions. Both facts suggest even the sickest patients are getting access to new organs in the U.S.

On the whole, the U.S. also performs more transplants per capita, giving patients better odds of getting new organs. Doctors here do far more partial liver transplants from living, related donors, but also more cadaveric transplants (where the organ comes from a deceased donor). In 2002 -- a year comparative data is available -- U.S. doctors performed 18.5 liver transplants per one million Americans. This is significantly more than in the U.K. or in single-payer France, which performed 4.6 per million citizens, or in Canada, which performed 10 per million.

The truth is that liver transplants are costly and outcomes aren't always certain. In any given "system" someone must make the decision as to whether a transplant--or other costly procedure--should be performed. Edwards would merely replace an insurance company executive with a government official as the ultimate arbiter. Most of us would rather rely on our doctor.

The Sarkisyan case is particularly poignant because the insurance company eventually changed its mind about the transplant, but not in time to save her. Who thinks it would have been approved faster if a government agency was making the decision?

I would have put Rudy higher

83% John McCain
77% Mitt Romney
72% Fred Thompson
71% Rudy Giuliani
70% Mike Huckabee
63% Tom Tancredo
52% Ron Paul
46% Bill Richardson
40% Chris Dodd
37% Barack Obama
37% Hillary Clinton
35% John Edwards
34% Joe Biden
25% Mike Gravel
23% Dennis Kucinich

2008 Presidential Candidate Matching Quiz

Congratulations, John McCain

He wouldn't be my first choice, but he ranks high above Huckabee on my list.

McCain's win--and Hillary's--make this whole race a lot more interesting.

So whaddaya think:

Did Hillary's tears give her the edge?

Will Edwards drop out before Super Tuesday?

Will Thompson?

What about Rudy?

Fearmongering

Optimism

Apocalyptic megalomanics who want change

I've been thinking about the election and the supposed referendum for change.

As one of you pointed out, '"I'm the candidate of change" [is] one of those obligatory statements that all candidates make.' That's true--when the incumbent isn't running. I suppose what annoys me is the country's-going-to-hell-in-a-handbasket tone.

The day after Iowa all the talk was about change. And fear. I heard NPR's two Davids opine about middle class malaise. How everyone's afraid they're going to lose their house. Or their job. Or their health insurance. Or all three in one fell swoop. At first I wanted to slap all the whiny middle class crybabies. Then I got to thinking: They only repeat what they hear on the campaign trail. And what they hear is gloom and doom.

OK, you can't run an effective campaign whose theme is "It's not that bad." Bush I tried it to counter the Clintonian double whammy of "It's the economy, stupid" and what I like to call Health Insurance Scare I. But the truth is that it isn't that bad. And even if it were, who would trust any of these change artists to actually fix it?

They're all running against something. But they're not for anything.

Obama's big claim to fame is that he didn't vote for the war. That he wasn't in any position to vote for the war, having not yet been elected, is beside the point. Edwards, the filthy rich ambulance chaser, is against the rich. Hillary is for ... Huckabee is against Mormons.

I'm not talking about so-called negative campaigning. I'm all for attacking the other guy's record. Or his rhetoric. An individual's words and actions are fair game. I'm talking about rallying people to reach for better things rather than treating them like victims.

But I believe the times demand new invention, innovation, imagination, decision. I am asking each of you to be pioneers on that New Frontier. My call is to the young in heart, regardless of age--to all who respond to the Scriptural call: "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed."

For courage--not complacency--is our need today--leadership--not salesmanship. And the only valid test of leadership is the ability to lead, and lead vigorously. A tired nation, said David Lloyd George, is a Tory nation--and the United States today cannot afford to be either tired or Tory.

Who calls upon the American people's courage today? Or believes in that courage? Or in the country?

I've seen America from the stadium press box as a sportscaster, as an actor, officer of my labor union, soldier, officeholder and as both a Democrat and Republican. I've lived in America where those who often had too little to eat outnumbered those who had enough. There have been four wars in my lifetime and I've seen our country face financial ruin in the Depression. I have also seen the great strength of this nation as it pulled itself up from that ruin to become the dominant force in the world.

To me our country is a living, breathing presence, unimpressed by what others say is impossible, proud of its own success, generous, yes and naive, sometimes wrong, never mean and always impatient to provide a better life for its people in a framework of a basic fairness and freedom.

Someone once said that the difference between an American and any other kind of person is that an American lives in anticipation of the future because he knows it will be a great place. Other people fear the future as just a repetition of past failures. There's a lot of truth in that. If there is one thing we are sure of it is that history need not be relived; that nothing is impossible, and that man is capable of improving his circumstances beyond what we are told is fact.

It's not Hillary's tears that get me

It's the early Christian martyr complex:

It’s not easy. It’s not easy. And I couldn’t do it if I just didn’t passionately believe it was the right thing to do. I have so many opportunities for this country. I just don’t want to see us fall back.

The faux apocalyptic concern:

And so, when we look at the array of problems we have, and the potential for getting, it spinning out of control, this is one of the most important elections America has ever faced.

And the megalomania:

This is very personal for me. It’s not just political, it’s not just — I see what’s happening. We have to reverse it. And some people think elections are a game. It’s like, who’s up or who’s down. It’s about our country. It’s about our kids’ futures. And it’s really about all of us, together.

And some of us who do this put ourselves out there and do this under some pretty difficult odds. And we do it, each one of us, because we care about our country.

What's with this clamor for change?

For one thing, neither Bush nor his VP are running. So change is inevitable, anyway.

For another, with the exception of the very recent housing bubble, the economy has been chugging along at a not-bad pace for the past seven years.

And the war? The surge is working.

When I want a change, I cut my hair or rearrange the furniture.

I don't get it

Fred Thompson and Bill Richardson leading the Pajamas Media Presidential Straw Poll. Why?

Via Instapundit.

My first 2008 prediction

The day after Hillary loses the nomination to the Obama/Oprah ticket, she files for divorce.

Members of Congress love their insurance plan

At least the Democratic ones running for President do.

Readers will note that of the candidate health plans outlined so far, all have based their plan on the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. So what is it about his plan?

The FEHBP is a voluntary plan open to federal civilian employees. Actually it's a group of health insurance plans, 190 in all, from which federal civilian employees can choose. Employees can choose between fee-for-service plans and HMOs. There are also organization-specific plans and a government-wide program available. Some features:

coverage is provided without a medical examination or restrictions because of age, current health, or pre-existing conditions;

there are no waiting periods for benefits to kick in after the effective date of enrollment;

there is catastrophic protection against unusually large medical bills; and

you have an opportunity, during annual open seasons, to enroll in a health benefits plan if you are not already enrolled, or if you are enrolled, to change to another plan or option.

The government also offers workers a choice of dental and vision plans. A flexible spending plan is also available.

Employees and the government split the cost of the premium. Rates change each year and are negotiated by the Office of Personnel Management with the individual carriers:

• 2008 premiums for non-postal employees in fee-for-service plans.
  
• 2008 premiums for non-postal employees in HMOs.
  

Congress's health care insurance program has been touted by some as the Rolls Royce of plans, but not everyone is thrilled with their coverage.
In fact, each individual plan is not unlike other plans offered by employers in the private sector, but government employees have more choices than most workers in the private sector.

Cross-posted here.

What they're selling

Stephanie Rosenbloom take a look at what the Presidential candidates are selling online.

BARACK OBAMA is the only presidential candidate selling ribbed baby-doll T-shirts. John Edwards and Mitt Romney are the sole contenders offering “support the troops” stickers. Mr. Edwards is the one candidate hawking a button with a photograph of his spouse. Only Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd and Mr. Edwards have gay-friendly rainbow gear.