The Cost of Colonoscopies

I've got my insurance authorization to have this procedure done, but I've been waiting for the semester to wind down to schedule it. It's a routine test after the age of 50, apparently, and an expensive one, depending on how doctors bill insurance providers.

See the New York Times, "The $2.7 Trillion Medical Bill: Colonoscopies Explain Why U.S. Leads the World in Health Expenditures."

Democrats for Education Reform

I just came across this piece from April, by Karin Klein, "State Democrats decide who's a REAL Democrat."

Also, "California Democrats blast efforts to overhaul schools." Well, yeah. Overhaul will weaken the death grip of the teachers' union.

Troubling Stories About IRS Continue to Mount

At the Oklahoman:

THE story of Catherine Englebrecht of Richmond, Texas, should put to rest any suggestion that the Internal Revenue Service's targeting of conservative groups was simply the work of overzealous or confused low-level staffers in Cincinnati. It's a story that should give the willies to any American, regardless of political bent.

Engelbrecht and her husband own a small manufacturing business. Through the years, Engelbrecht developed an interest in public policy. She acted on it by forming two groups, called True the Vote and King Street Patriots. The former seeks to ensure the integrity of elections by, among other things, working to clear voting rolls of people who have died.

In July 2010, Engelbrecht sought tax-exempt status from the IRS — and her world started to get turned upside down because, as Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan put it, “The U.S. government came down on her with full force.”

In December of that year, the FBI came to her home to ask about a person who had attended a King Street Patriots function. The following month, in January 2011, the FBI asked more questions and the IRS audited her business tax returns. The FBI came knocking again in May 2011, about King Street Patriots.

One month later, Engelbrecht's personal tax returns were audited and the FBI visited again. Questions about True the Vote came in October 2011, with another FBI inquiry a month later — and again one month after that. In February 2012, the IRS came with another round of questions about True the Vote, and questions about King Street Patriots.

Engelbrecht's business has a license to make firearms, but doesn't. In February 2012, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms did an unscheduled audit of the business. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration did the same in July 2012. Additional IRS questions about True the Vote followed in November 2012, and again in March of this year. In April, ATF conducted a second audit.

Engelbrecht says she and the feds had never crossed paths before her filing for tax-exempt status. “These people, they are just regular Americans,” her attorney, former Oklahoman Cleta Mitchell, told Noonan. “They try to get dead people off voter rolls; you would think that they are serial killers.”

Engelbrecht is fighting back with a lawsuit against the IRS. Brava! Meantime, she still hasn't received the exemptions she sought three years ago.

Continue reading.

Also, "VIDEO: Catherine Engelbrecht of True The Vote joins Bill O'Reilly 5-28-2013."

And at the Hill, "Conservative groups sue Holder, IRS over Tea Party targeting."

Homosexual Parenting Harms Children

The lead letters at yesterday's Los Angeles Times were in response to the coward David Blankenhorn's recent op-ed, "What matters now about marriage."

I'm surprised this one got past the editors:

I would say to Blankenhorn that what matters about marriage is the children. He fails to mention where the children fit into a gay marriage that has either two men or two women living together.

How does a child keep his or her head on straight when there is either no father or no mother? How does a female child living with two women learn the love and protection that only a man can provide? How does a male child living with two men learn the love and softness that only a woman can contribute?

How does the child, living in a lopsided environment, understand that a woman has her role in the marriage and that the man has his role in the marriage? It cannot be duplicated by two men or two women being married partners.

Lori Graham
Los Angeles

After all is said and done, this is the core argument that leftists can never rebut. All they can say is that it doesn't matter, that people have a so-called "human" right to marry whomever they want. Screw the children. It's all about the homosexual narcissists themselves.

And all of this activism won't end with same-sex marriage, because progressives are never satisfied with the status quo. The Kaitlyn Hunt saga demonstrates that reason and decency won't stand in the way of 100 percent license for homosexuals to do whatever they please. See, "The #FreeKate Meltdown Continues," and "Local PFLAG: ‘The Cry of Discrimination …Does Not Seem to Apply’ in Hunt Case."

Topless Femen Protesters Storm 'Germany's Next Top Model'

At the Los Angeles Times, "Heidi Klum ambushed by topless women during 'Top Model' finale," and Der Spiegel, "Crashing the Catwalk: Femen Hijacks 'Germany's Next Top Model'."

RELATED: At the Economist, "Why are feminists going topless?"

U.S. Woman Killed Fighting for Rebels in Syria

At Fox News, "Michigan woman, 33, killed in Syria fight, family says."

And at the Guardian UK, "Nicole Mansfield 'just a regular American', says daughter.'

More video at Euro News, "Westerners 'killed in government ambush' in Syria," and CNN, "Daughter grieves mom killed in Syria."

Orange County Woman Wins $1 million on 'Wheel of Fortune'

This was last night. My wife was watching.

At London's Daily Mail, "Woman becomes second contestant EVER to win $1 million on Wheel of Fortune (and she did it with just four letters)."

Video here.

Celebrating 65 Years of Defense

The Israel Defense Forces, via Theo Spark:

Restoring Public Faith Will Require Full Investigation of IRS Politicization

From Peggy Noonan, at WSJ, "An Antidote to Cynicism Poisoning":

The Benghazi scandal was and is shocking, and the Justice Department assault on the free press, in which dogged reporters are tailed like enemy spies, is shocking. Benghazi is still under investigation and someday someone will write a great book about it. As for the press, Attorney General Eric Holder is on the run, and rightly so. They called it the First Amendment for a reason. But nothing can damage us more as a nation than what is happening at the Internal Revenue Service. Elite opinion in the press and in Washington doesn't fully understand this. Part of the reason is that it's not their ox being gored, it's those messy people out in America with their little patriotic groups.

Those who aren't deeply distressed about the IRS suffer from a reluctance or inability to make distinctions, and a lack of civic imagination.

An inability to make distinctions: "It's always been like this." "Presidents are always siccing the IRS on their enemies." There's truth in that. We've all heard the stories of the president who picked up the phone and said, "Look into this guy," Richard Nixon most showily. He got clobbered for it. It was one of the articles of impeachment.

But this scandal is different and distinctive. The abuse was systemic—from the sheer number of targets and the extent of each targeting we know many workers had to be involved, many higher-ups, multiple offices. It was ideological and partisan—only those presumed to be of one political view were targeted. It has a single unifying pattern: The most vivid abuses took place in the years leading up to the president's 2012 re-election effort. And in the end several were trying to cover it all up, including the head of the IRS, who lied to Congress about it, and the head of the tax-exempt unit, Lois Lerner, who managed to lie even in her public acknowledgment of impropriety.

It wasn't a one-off. It wasn't a president losing his temper with some steel executives. There was no enemies list, unless you consider half the country to be your enemies...

Continue reading.

Teen Driver Hit Speeds of Over 100 MPH in Fatal Newport Beach Crash

Lots a new details on the crash.

At LAT, "Teen driver in fatal O.C. crash may have been going 100 mph."

Also, "Teen driver in fatal Newport Beach wreck was unlicensed":

The 17-year-old high school student who was at the wheel when his car spun out of control in a horrific Memorial Day crash in Newport Beach did not have a valid driver's license, according to DMV records.

The crash left five teens dead, all high school students from Irvine. Two sisters were among the casualties.

Police said speed was a contributing factor to the wreck. Investigators didn't say how fast the teen's Infiniti was going, but the mayor in the beach city said he was told the car may have been traveling at 100 mph or faster.

The driver of the car, identified as Abdulrahman M. Alyahyan, received a citation in April for violating his provisional license, among other offenses, court records showed.

The high school junior, records show, was pulled over just blocks from his Irvine home and cited for making a prohibited modification to the exhaust system of his gray 2008 Infiniti — which bore the personalized license plate "KHASONA" — and having tinted windows that obstructed the driver's view.

Although the citation lists a driver's license number, a DMV official said that number actually corresponded with Alyahyan's application for a license.

The single-car crash occurred on a downhill stretch of Jamboree Road where the posted speed limit is 55 mph. It's less than a mile from the spot where the co-founder of mixed martial arts apparel company TapouT was killed in 2009 when his Ferrari was struck by a Porsche traveling at 100 mph.

Four in 10 Households Now Have Women as Primary Breadwinner

The fact that women are primary breadwinners is non-controversial, in itself. What's controversial is the number of women who are single parents, so that children are denied the benefits of a stable two-parent family with one mother and one father.

At the New York Times, "U.S. Women on the Rise as Family Breadwinner":

Women are not only more likely to be the primary caregivers in a family. Increasingly, they are primary breadwinners, too.

Four in 10 American households with children under age 18 now include a mother who is either the sole or primary earner for her family, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of Census and polling data released Wednesday. This share, the highest on record, has quadrupled since 1960.

The shift reflects evolving family dynamics.

For one, it has become more acceptable and expected for married women to join the work force. It is also more common for single women to raise children on their own. Most of the mothers who are chief breadwinners for their families — nearly two-thirds — are single parents...

At the clip, Erick Erickson makes the extremely politically incorrect statement that men should be the "dominant" partner in the family relationship, and this has folks in a fit at Memeorandum. See Amanda Marcotte especially, "Watch the Men of Fox News Freak Out Over Female Breadwinners."

More at the link.

The Fiscal Cost of Amnesty to U.S. Taxpayers

From Robert Rector, at the Heritage Foundation, "The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer":

The governmental system is highly redistributive. Well-educated households tend to be net tax contributors: The taxes they pay exceed the direct and means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services they receive. For example, in 2010, in the whole U.S. population, households with college-educated heads, on average, received $24,839 in government benefits while paying $54,089 in taxes. The average college-educated household thus generated a fiscal surplus of $29,250 that government used to finance benefits for other households.

Other households are net tax consumers: The benefits they receive exceed the taxes they pay. These households generate a “fiscal deficit” that must be financed by taxes from other households or by government borrowing. For example, in 2010, in the U.S. population as a whole, households headed by persons without a high school degree, on average, received $46,582 in government benefits while paying only $11,469 in taxes. This generated an average fiscal deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of $35,113.

The high deficits of poorly educated households are important in the amnesty debate because the typical unlawful immigrant has only a 10th-grade education. Half of unlawful immigrant households are headed by an individual with less than a high school degree, and another 25 percent of household heads have only a high school degree.
Some argue that the deficit figures for poorly educated households in the general population are not relevant for immigrants. Many believe, for example, that lawful immigrants use little welfare. In reality, lawful immigrant households receive significantly more welfare, on average, than U.S.-born households. Overall, the fiscal deficits or surpluses for lawful immigrant households are the same as or higher than those for U.S.-born households with the same education level. Poorly educated households, whether immigrant or U.S.-born, receive far more in government benefits than they pay in taxes.

In contrast to lawful immigrants, unlawful immigrants at present do not have access to means-tested welfare, Social Security, or Medicare. This does not mean, however, that they do not receive government benefits and services. Children in unlawful immigrant households receive heavily subsidized public education. Many unlawful immigrants have U.S.-born children; these children are currently eligible for the full range of government welfare and medical benefits. And, of course, when unlawful immigrants live in a community, they use roads, parks, sewers, police, and fire protection; these services must expand to cover the added population or there will be “congestion” effects that lead to a decline in service quality.

In 2010, the average unlawful immigrant household received around $24,721 in government benefits and services while paying some $10,334 in taxes. This generated an average annual fiscal deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of around $14,387 per household. This cost had to be borne by U.S. taxpayers. Amnesty would provide unlawful households with access to over 80 means-tested welfare programs, Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare. The fiscal deficit for each household would soar.

If enacted, amnesty would be implemented in phases. During the first or interim phase (which is likely to last 13 years), unlawful immigrants would be given lawful status but would be denied access to means-tested welfare and Obamacare. Most analysts assume that roughly half of unlawful immigrants work “off the books” and therefore do not pay income or FICA taxes. During the interim phase, these “off the books” workers would have a strong incentive to move to “on the books” employment. In addition, their wages would likely go up as they sought jobs in a more open environment. As a result, during the interim period, tax payments would rise and the average fiscal deficit among former unlawful immigrant households would fall.

After 13 years, unlawful immigrants would become eligible for means-tested welfare and Obamacare. At that point or shortly thereafter, former unlawful immigrant households would likely begin to receive government benefits at the same rate as lawful immigrant households of the same education level. As a result, government spending and fiscal deficits would increase dramatically.

The final phase of amnesty is retirement. Unlawful immigrants are not currently eligible for Social Security and Medicare, but under amnesty they would become so. The cost of this change would be very large indeed.

Continue reading.

And at WaPo, "What amnesty for illegal immigrants will cost America."

Pakistan Says U.S. Drone Killed Taliban Leader

Well, so much for that war on terror reset.

At the New York Times:

WASHINGTON — Less than a week after President Obama outlined a new direction for the secret drone wars, Pakistani officials said that a C.I.A. missile strike on Wednesday killed a top member of the Pakistani Taliban, an attack that illustrated the continued murkiness of the rules that govern the United States’ targeted killing operations.

The drone strike in Pakistan’s tribal belt, along the Afghan border, was the first since Mr. Obama announced what his administration billed as sweeping changes to the drone program, with new limits on who would be targeted and more transparency in reporting such strikes.

But in the days since the president’s speech, American officials have asserted behind the scenes that the new standards would not apply to the C.I.A. drone program in Pakistan as long as American troops remained next door in Afghanistan — a reference to Mr. Obama’s exception for an “Afghan war theater.” For months to come, any drone strikes in Pakistan — the country that has been hit by the vast majority of them, with more than 350 such attacks by some estimates — will be exempt from the new rules.

American officials refused to publicly confirm the drone strike or the death of the Pakistani Taliban’s deputy leader, Wali ur-Rehman, even as Pakistani government and militant figures reported that he had been killed. Thus, the promise of new transparency, too, seemed to be put off.

Still, by one measure, Mr. Rehman would seem to fit the new road map for drone strikes: the threshold laid out by Mr. Obama that the target of the strike pose a “continuing and imminent threat” to United States citizens...

Yeah, that's a pretty convenient exception.

More from Max Boot, at Commentary, "Taliban Strike Exposes Flaw in Proposed Drone Guidelines."

Western Cultural Suicide

From VDH, at National Review:

Multiculturalism — as opposed to the notion of a multiracial society united by a single culture — has become an abject contradiction in the modern Western world. Romance for a culture in the abstract that one has rejected in the concrete makes little sense. Multiculturalists talk grandly of Africa, Latin America, and Asia, usually in contrast to the core values of the United States and Europe. Certainly, in terms of food, fashion, music, art, and architecture, the Western paradigm is enriched from other cultures. But the reason that millions cross the Mediterranean to Europe or the Rio Grande to the United States is for something more that transcends the periphery and involves fundamental values — consensual government, free-market capitalism, the freedom of the individual, religious tolerance, equality between the sexes, rights of dissent, and a society governed by rationalism divorced from religious stricture. Somehow that obvious message has now been abandoned, as Western hosts lost confidence in the very society that gives us the wealth and leisure to ignore or caricature its foundations. The result is that millions of immigrants flock to the West, enjoy its material security, and yet feel little need to bond with their adopted culture, given that their hosts themselves are ambiguous about what others desperately seek out....

At no time in our history have so many Americans been foreign born. Never have so many foreign nationals resided in America, and never have so many done so illegally. Yet at just such a critical time, in our universities and bureaucracies, the pressures to assimilate in melting-pot fashion have been replaced by salad-bowl separatism — as if the individual can pick and choose which elements of his adopted culture he will embrace, which he will reject, as one might croutons or tomatoes. But ultimately he can do that because he senses that the American government, people, press, and culture reward such opportunism and have no desire, need, or ability to defend the very inherited culture that has given them the leeway to ignore it and so attracted others from otherwise antithetical paradigms.

That is a prescription for cultural suicide, if not by beheading or by a pressure cooker full of ball bearings, at least by making the West into something that no one would find very different from his homeland.

RTWT.

Michelle Fields Just Eviscerates Tamara Holder Over Idiot Adam Levine's 'I Hate This Country' Comment

I love it!

And Sean Hannity bet Holder $100 to name one conservative how said "I hate this country."

Also at Twitchy, "Adam Levine caught on hot mic: ‘I hate this country’; Responds to backlash with douche-tweets; Update: Blames ‘frustration’ for comments."

Chinese Baby Flushed Down Toilet

This story is so unbelievably depraved...

At Mirror UK, "Chinese baby flushed down toilet: Mum tells police miracle boy FELL into sewage pipe."

And at the Washington Times, "Chinese mom who flushed newborn down toilet won't be charged."

Stop Drinking the 'Haterade'

Via Theo Spark:

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell Slams Obama With Epic New Campaign Ad

Via Legal Insurrection, "IRS targeting — Remember it in November 2014."

GOP Already Tried the Bob Dole Paradigm

From Jonathan Tobin, at Commentary:

To say that Dole passed his best-used date is not to mock him for his age or infirmity. The fact that he is wheelchair-bound and losing his sight should grieve us all. He is the exemplar of the “greatest generation” veteran who nearly died as a result of his wounds and then spent nearly four decades in public life in the postwar era. He deserves every possible honor that his country can give him. But let’s get real. Dole was also an apt symbol of the failures of the self-proclaimed Eisenhower Republicans in Congress. His get-along-to-go-along style in which compromise always seemed to be the keynote was never going to fix the out-of-control growth of the federal government, it just managed it. As much as the abrasiveness of Ted Cruz makes many of us long for the more easygoing style of partisanship Dole practiced, there was a reason the GOP abandoned it: it didn’t work.

Continue reading.

The Dems, of course, cream on that kind of pathetic concern trolling, at the clip, for example.

Saint Kate Updates

Robert Stacy McCain reports, at the American Spectator, "#FreeKate Insanity Intensifies: Is Teen Lesbian the Rosa Parks of Jailbait?"

And at the Other McCain, "Quite Possibly the Most Eloquent Sentence of My Entire Journalism Career."