Well, early last week I received a call from the transplant hospital. They said that I was near the very top of the waiting list, so they wanted to schedule me for some procedures. Now before you get too excited, the good people at the transplant hospital have been telling me that I’m at the very top of the waiting list for about six months now. I have pretty much decided to ignore them when they say this, because I am on edge waiting for “the call” as it is; I don’t need to let this drive me insane.

So, in the next week or two, I am going to have a colonoscopy, a nuclear stress test, and a renal ultrasound. From what I have heard, the colonoscopy will be a real ordeal. Apparently, you spend the day before the procedure eating a liquid diet while taking medication to “flush out” your colon. The next day, they stick a giant metal camera into your colon and look around for polyps. About the only good thing about all of this is the verset (sleepy medicine) you get before they start. One of my friends at dialysis suggested I get a “virtual colonoscopy” instead, as it is non-obtrusive, is much more accurate, allows the doctors to see around 99% of your colon (compared to about 70% with the traditional method), and only takes between 12 and 15 minutes. However, the transplant hospital is fighting it. Too bad, because the virtual colonoscopy is also cheaper than the traditional method.

So, I am hoping that this turn of events is indeed indicative of an impending call from the hospital. I have been waiting for more than 8 years now for a transplant, and the waiting has really taken a toll on me. In fact, at the transplant hospital’s suggestion, I have started seeing a therapist once a week to deal with all of the feelings and mental pressures. My therapist describes the waiting process I have gone through like sitting on the edge of your seat in the movie theater during a really suspenseful movie, only doing this for many years instead of a couple hours. That sounds about right, as every time the transplant hospital calls me, and I see the caller ID, I about jump out of my skin.

So, for now, I continue to keep calm and go about my daily activities, while still waiting for the call which will transform my life back to as normal as it can get.

In his latest act of arrogance, President Obama today “warned” the Supreme Court against ruling the Individual Mandate in his signature legislation unconstitutional:

Obama’s comments will be seen as a warning shot to the court, one of the three branches of the US government, and could draw complaints from critics that he is trying to influence the deliberations.

The health care case is the most closely watched Supreme Court deliberation since a divided bench handed the 2000 presidential election to George W. Bush over Al Gore, and could have far reaching political implications.

Obama also argued there was a “human element” to the health care battle, as well as legal and political dimensions.

He said that without the law, passed after a fierce battle with Republicans in 2010, several million children would not have health care, and millions more adults with pre-existing conditions would also be deprived of treatment.

First off, with the Presidential Election in November and Obama badly needing a political victory to bolster his chances for re-election, it’s more than obvious that Obama is trying to influence the Court’s deliberations. If this piece of legislation, which is his legacy,  is ruled unconstitutional, Obama’s re-election is doomed. Obama and the Democrats know this, which is why they are trotting out all of the classic liberal talking points to gin up public support by claiming children will not have health care and sick people won’t have health care, etc., etc. Of course, these claims are patently false, which is why the latest polls still show that a vaqst majority of the American people want this law repealed.

Also, Obama is trying to paint the Conservatives on the Court as “activist judges” if they vote against mandate.

Conservative leaders say the law, which once fully implemented will require Americans to have health insurance or pay a penalty, was an overreach by Obama and the Congress that passed it.

The president sought to turn that argument around, calling a potential rejection by the court an overreach of its own.

“And I’d just remind conservative commentators that, for years, what we have heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law,” Obama said.

“Well, this is a good example, and I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step,” he said.

This statement by Obama pretty much proves that he has no clue whatsoever what the role of the Supreme Court is in our form of government. It is precisely the Court’s job to consider if proposed laws are written to conform with the Constitution, and to reject those laws which do not. In fact, the attempt by the liberals on the Court to expand the reach of the Commerce Clause to include situations where no commerce is taking place is the only activist action taking place.

In the end, all we have here is nothing more than yet another example of how Obama and the liberals in Congress have absolutely no regard for the American People, except for those whose votes they can buy by taking wealth away from those who have earned it and redistributing it to people who didn’t. With about $16 Trillion in debt, the Gravy Train has to stop soon, or the country will become Greece. Hopefully, the Supreme Court’s ruling that Obamacare is unconstitutional will be the first of many actions which bring the Obama Administration to an end.

This is my first attempt to do a political ad type video. Comments welcome.

In what can only be described as the Democrats’ latest attempt to ensure that dead people and non-citizens can continue to support the Democrat Party in the 2012 Election, Eric Holder’s Justice Department has filed an Objection to the Texas Voter ID Law.

A photo ID requirement for voters in Texas could disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of registered Hispanics, the Justice Department declared Monday in its latest move against Republican-led voting changes in many states that have drawn protests from minorities, poor people and students.

Cry me a river, will ya? This law doesn’t impose any greater burden on minorities than anyone else. All anybody has to do is obtain a State-issued photo ID, which doesn’t have to be a driver’s license, and then present said ID when they go to vote. That’s it.

If, as the DoJ alleges, these minorities have been registered to vote, why is it they can’t get a photo ID? They don’t seem to have any trouble finding the welfare office or emergency room, why is this any different?

Justice said Hispanic voters in Texas are at least 50 percent more likely and possibly more than twice as likely as non-Hispanic voters to lack a driver’s license or a personal state-issued photo ID, which the Texas law requires.

Gee, I wonder why that’s true. Could it be that a large number of these people don’t have the proof of citizenship required to obtain a photo ID? Oh no, of course not. All these people are members of a minority group, so their motives are beyond question; they are as pure as your actual driven snow. At least that is what the Democrats would have you believe. They would also have you believe that it is an undue burden upon minorities to require them to visit a State office to apply for their photo ID. I mean, you can’t expect them to go through the same process as anyone else, can you? That’s obviously racist and discriminatory!

And speaking of which…

For the past three months, Attorney General Eric Holder has been especially vocal about voting rights. “We need election systems that are free from fraud, discrimination and partisan influence — and that are more, not less, accessible to the citizens of this country,” the attorney general said recently in a speech at the Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidential Library and Museum in Austin, Texas.

Of course, anyone who remembers how Eric Holder conducted himself in the Voter Intimidation case in Philadelphia knows that Holder only cares about black people; no one else need apply. He believes this so deeply, that he literally can’t see a time when Affirmative Action should end.

Holder expressed support for affirmative action, saying that he “can’t actually imagine a time in which the need for more diversity would ever cease.”

“Affirmative action has been an issue since segregation practices,” Holder said. “The question is not when does it end, but when does it begin. … When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are entitled?”

Notice his use of the word “entitled.” Not “earned”, but “entitled.” If his thoughts represent a majority of the thoughts of minorities (or blacks), one can connect the dots between this mentality and the economic and social status of these people.

Harsh? Yes, but unfortunately true for far too many.

The 2013 Budget that the Obama Administration has submitted to Congress (yes, after more than 1,000 days they have finally gotten around to submitting a budget), will require military retirees to pay higher premiums (in some cases, it will be a 345% increase) for less care, while active duty military will pay higher prescription drug co-pays. On top of that, the Administration has seen fit to leave the premiums for civilian union workers where they are at now. Can there be any reasonable doubt that Obama and his Democrat Syndicate are a wholly-owned subsidiary of Organized Labor?

Worse yet, there is a reason Obama is doing this:

The Obama administration’s proposed defense budget calls for military families and retirees to pay sharply more for their healthcare, while leaving unionized civilian defense workers’ benefits untouched. The proposal is causing a major rift within the Pentagon, according to U.S. officials. Several congressional aides suggested the move is designed to increase the enrollment in Obamacare’s state-run insurance exchanges.

The disparity in treatment between civilian and uniformed personnel is causing a backlash within the military that could undermine recruitment and retention.

That’s right; Obama is screwing our military retirees and active duty personnel in order to force them into ObamaCare and inflate the enrollment numbers to make it look like people are flocking to it. He is trying to create the false impression that the most hated piece of legislation ever forced upon the American People is somehow now popular. In a series of polls of likely voters taken during the year following the Democrats’ midnight passage party for ObamaCare (a total of 53 polls), in each and every poll the majority of respondents favored repeal, and by double-digit margins in all polls except one.

Oh, and in case you thought this was a one-time thrashing:

“Significantly, the plan calls for increases between 30 percent to 78 percent in Tricare annual premiums for the first year. After that, the plan will impose five-year increases ranging from 94 percent to 345 percent—more than 3 times current levels,” the Beacon reported.

That isn’t a typo — the Obama plan will force increases of up to 345% in premiums for retirees, while at the same time allowing his buddies in Organized Labor to continue their coverage without any significant increases.

When these men and women signed up to protect, defend, and maybe even die for this country, we as a country made them a promise. In exchange for literally everything they have, we promised them healthcare for themselves and their families. In light of how much this generation (and past generations) have given for this country, we need to view this promise as sacred.

So, the time has come to make a decision. Will we, as a Nation, allow this thug from Chicago, bent on the destruction of our economy, to rob our retired military brothers and sisters of their right to healthcare, as we promised them so long ago? Will we allow members of labor unions the privilege of low-cost medical insurance, thanks to the American taxpayers’ generosity, and for no other reason than they got Obama elected, while injured Soldiers, Airmen, Sailors, and Marines are forced to pay ever-increasing premiums and are eventually forced to enroll in ObamaCare?

As for me, as always, I’ll stand with the men and women who sacrificed so much to protect me, my family, my freedom, and the rights of all Americans. I do so proudly, and hope that I can do something which will make a difference. If you all will join me at the polls in November 2012, we can make sure that we bring an end to this madness the Democrats and Liberals have wrought upon us. Together, we can right this ship and get America back onto the course of greatness for which she was intended.

Here is the translation:
Today, Dimitry Medvedev, became a chairman of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), earlier, this position was taken by an american president, Barack Obama (flip off). During the press conference that took place in the? capital of Hawaii, Honolulu, Medvedev spoke on this matter as well as cooperating with Americans on anti-missile defense system.

Hat Tip: Knowledge Is Power

Yesterday, 40 Republicans sent a letter to the President asking him to ask for Eric Holder’s resignation. The fact that no Democrats signed the letter shows you how uninterested the current administration is about accountability.

The letter, spearheaded by Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.), highlights Holder’s role in the botched gun-tracking operation known as Fast and Furious, which was run under the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

Republicans have been investigating who authorized and had knowledge of Fast and Furious, which oversaw the sale of thousands of weapons in the Southwest region to known and suspected straw buyers for Mexican drug cartels. The majority of the weapons were never tracked, and two of the guns were found at the murder scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry last December.

“We call on you today to hold Attorney General Eric Holder accountable for Operation Fast and Furious — and urge you to ask for his immediate resignation,” the letter reads.

“In intentionally letting over 2,000 firearms ‘walk’ across the border into Mexico,” it continues, “the [ATF] — under the leadership of Attorney General Holder — carried out an operation that left a U.S. Border Patrol agent dead, broke federal law and attempted to build a case for gun control. Operation Fast and Furious has proved to be one of the most serious errors in judgment carried out in recent history by a federal agency.”

At first, Holder didn’t even admit that he knew about this operation, despite having received several operational memos from the field office conducting the operation. Instead, he claimed that he never saw the memos because they go to his underlings first, so they can make sure that he only sees the important stuff. Under tough questioning from the Senate Judiciary Committee, he “clarified” this claim to mean that he really meant that he heard about it when it started appearing in the press.

Its easy to see how Holder can claim ignorance of these things. He has constructed a circle of  “plausible deniability” around him by having the information sent to him filtered by underlings. This way, he can claim that he never heard about it because someone else decided it wasn’t important enough to pass on. Seems to me, that if a field office sends information to the Attorney General, it is because he thinks that the Attorney General needs to know about something. If Holder’s people are preventing him from being fully informed about the government agency he is in charge of, then they need to be held accountable along with Holder.

Of course, after the whole Black Panthers episode after the 2008 Election, it isn’t surprising to see Holder’s incompetence on display like this. Apparently, he’s more interested in “social justice” than real justice, which is troubling given that he is in charge of the Department of Justice.

Milton Friedman lays waste to the basis of the “Occupy” movement in under three minutes.

So, protesters decide that its time to gather together and protest corporate greed. What better place to put on this protest than on Wall Street, the center of the financial universe. So, the typical collection of bored, out of work college students, 60′s protest rejects, and every other victim of “the Man” show up with tents, laptops, and drums and “occupy” a park.

Of course, these people failed to bring other necessities, such as provisions for restrooms or provisions for trash disposal. Thus, after a few weeks of their “protest,” the park reeks of urine and crap, while the garbage is piling up so high as to constitute a health hazard. When the owner of  the park, concerned about public health and safety, decided to remove the protesters to clean the place up, the mob howled and threatened all kinds of mayhem. Finally, the city made a deal with the owner to leave them alone. As far as I can tell, the place still reeks and the garbage is just getting piled higher.

So, what exactly is it that these people want to accomplish with this demonstration? Several reporters from several different news operations have all gone down to the protest site and asked protesters this question, and have failed to get a coherent answer from anyone, even the “organizers.” Say what you want about the 60′s hippie protesters, they at least had an identifiable goal (to end the war, to end the draft). This group says they are against corporate greed. OK, while I don’t particularly agree that a corporation that makes a lot of money is greedy, I can certainly see that some in the corporate world have clearly crossed the legal line in their dealings. So, how exactly will this occupation/ protest/ demonstration/ camp out do anything to end corporate greed? Sure, they have brought a lot of attention to Wall Street, but most of that attention is focused on the lack of sanitation in the park and smorgasbord of fringe liberal groups infiltrating the protest for their own ends. Nothing these people have done during the past month and a half has accomplished anything worthwhile.

As more and more time passes, the various occupation groups across the country are starting to break down and become violent. This was seen most recently in Oakland, where the police had to resort to tear gas and rubber bullets to remove protesters from the area they were set up on because they were pelting officers with rocks and bottles. If the mob in New York decides to get violent, there’s no telling how bad it will get.

So, when this movement has passed and the protesters have all gone home, what will they have accomplished? What will be different? What difference will they have made?

None.

All this energy, enthusiasm, and effort will have been spent for nothing. Corporations will still be conducting business and making tons of money doing it, Wall Street will still be trading stock and making tons of money doing it, and those protesters who are unemployed will still need a job. Nothing done by these protesters has done anything to address the problems they are complaining about.

Maybe that says more about the protesters than anything else.

One of my colleagues at work told me about this guy he saw on cable TV who had predicted several of the last Presidential elections accurately. Having never heard of him before, I was naturally skeptical. After all, if this guy is that accurate, why isn’t he a household name? I doubted my colleague’s recollection of what he saw, but it turns out that I will owe him an apology tomorrow for doubting him. Turns out, the gentleman’s name is Professor Allan Lichtman, a history professor at the American University in Washington, DC.

Professor Lichtman has come up with what he says are the “13 Keys to the White House” (one of the reasons I had trouble tracking this down was because my colleague had said their were 12 categories). According to Lichtman, if an incumbent President “wins” at least 6 of the 13 keys, he will be re-elected. Also according to him, President Obama wins 9 of the 13 keys. A complete list of the 13 keys is here, as well as Lichtman’s interpretation of the keys. You should go and read this now before I tear it to shreds. Go ahead, I’ll wait.

<insert Muzak here>

OK, here we go. The absolute first thing you should notice is how subjective many of the keys are. In fact, only 6 of the keys could be said to be based solely on fact:

1) Incumbent party picks up seats in preceding mid-term.
2) There is no serious challenger for the incumbent party nomination.
3) The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.
4) There is no significant third party challenger.
6) Real per capita economic growth during the past term is at least equal to mean growth during the previous two terms.
7) The incumbent administration pushes through major national policy changes.

Based on facts, Obama wins 4 of these keys, leaving the GOP 2. The remaining 7 keys are almost completely subjective, and depending on your opinion of them, could arguably be scored either way.

Key 5: The economy is not in a recession during the election campaign. Lichtman rates this key a “Push” or tie, and I find that very questionable. The August 2011 jobs report said zero new jobs were created in the national economy, gas prices continue to soar, and unemployment has been over 9% for a period longer than any other since the Great Depression. On top of that, even the Union rank and file are starting to doubt Obama’s ability to improve the job outlook. Smart money says the GOP wins this key.

Key 8: There is no sustained social unrest during the previous term. Depending on how you define social unrest, a good argument could be made that the Tea Party movement, along with the Labor Unions’ violent responses to it, is social unrest. In fact, this social movement may well turn out to be responsible for the single term Obama will serve as President. GOP wins this key.

Key 9: The incumbent administration has no major scandals. Again, Lichtman gives this one to Obama, apparently totally ignoring the entire ATF/Justice Department Selling guns to Mexican drug lords situation. Also, exactly how many of his cabinet appointees had significant tax problems? Lichtman says that the Obama Administration was “squeaky clean.” He’s either insane or delusional. GOP wins key 9.

Key 10: The incumbent administration suffers no major foreign/military affairs failure. Obama rates good as far as military matters, but foreign affairs is another matter. The disrespect he has put on display to old and trusted allies (Great Britain and Israel come to mind) has done nothing to enhance our reputation abroad. Also, Obama’s World Apology Tour has done nothing but make us look weak in front of our enemies. In fact, I can’t think of a single foreign policy achievement of this administration which isn’t military in nature. This key is a tie.

Key 11: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign/military affairs. Again, the Obama Administration, by largely ignoring the military strategies it trumpeted during the 2008 Election and continuing the majority of the Bush Administration’s military policies has achieved a lot of good in military affairs. However, as previously pointed out, I can’t think of a single non-military based foreign policy achievement. This key is also a tie.

Key 12: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic. Lichtman gave this key to the GOP, recognizing what the media and press have been lamenting for the past several months: that whatever magic Obama had in his speeches prior to Election has lost its power This is an obvious win for the GOP.

Key 13: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. Apparently candidates like Romney, Perry, and Bachmann, who draw thousands to their speeches, qualifies as “uncharismatic”. Hell, even Palin outdraws Obama on the campaign trail, and she doesn’t have the labor unions inflating the attendance figures for her. The GOP wins Key 13.

So, my interpretation of these 13 keys has the GOP at 7, and Obama at 4 with two ties. A much closer race than Lichtman predicts. Also, I hope I’ve shown the folly of his “never wrong” claim. Speaking of which, Don Surber puts the lie to this claim as well.