Remember how, as part of the stimulus package, you had less taxes taken out of your paycheck or if you were on Social Security you received $250 (and no cost of living increase) ?  Well, I hope you didn’t celebrate too enthusiastically–the IRS wants their money back! 

My husband does our taxes on Turbo-Tax, and I confess that I really don’t pay a lot of attention to his spouse-type grousings as he is working on taxes.  However, every now and then I am amazed at what he discovers.  Last night was one of those moments.  I retired in February of 2009 and began collecting Social Security.  Because I was not retired in January, I did not receive the $250 bonus paid to Social Security recipients.  Ok.  Fine.  Well, after my husband filed our taxes, the IRS refused our return, asking if I had received the $250.  They even included a phone number in their e-mail, so I called it.  The computer on the other end of the phone confirmed that I had not, in fact, received the $250.  OK.  We agree.  My husband then went back to his computer and confirmed that I had not received that income.  Oddly enough, at that point our tax refund grew by $250!  Had I received the money, I would never have known that they were taking it back.

Evidently, many other people are having rude awakenings about the stimulus tax breaks they received last year.  Walletpop.com (I found the link on AOL.  I am not familiar with them, but they confirm my story.) posted a story yesterday about taxpayers who thought that the change in their withholding that was done as part of the stimulus was actually a tax cut.  There are some serious jolts going on. 

The article reports:

“If you and your spouse both had jobs in 2009, each of you was eligible for a $400 credit — a total of $800 if you filed together (this assumes you made more than $13,000 between the two of you). Well, someone didn’t double-check the math and you and your spouse actually received $600 each for a total of $1,200 in tax credit.

Now you and your spouse owe the government $400 because of the glitch. Not that it’s any consolation, but you’re not alone — 55% of married couples fall into this category.”

Yesterday, Hot Air reported that Senator Max Baucus made the statement on the Senate floor that the “healthcare bill” is “an income shift, it is a shift, a leveling to help lower income middle income Americans”  Baucus continued, “[t]oo often, much of late, the last couple three years the mal-distribution of income in America is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy, and the middle income class is left behind.  Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America.  This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America.”

I wonder how many of our Senators and Representatives who voted for this bill understood that this was one of the purposes of the bill.  I also wonder how many of them actually believe that you help the poor by taking money from people who earned it and giving it to people who did not.  I thought we were just helping people get good healthcare.  This is one of the hazards of passing a bill that has 2000+ pages in three days–no one had read it and analyzed it carefully. 

For a list of the Senators who supported the bill on Christmas Eve, go to Thomas.gov.  For a list of the Representatives who voted for the bill on March 21st, go to Thomas.gov.  Remember these names in the coming months.  The Republicans are going to run on a campaign of ‘repeal and replace.’  In order for them to be successful, everyone needs to get involved.  If you have any ambitions for yourself or for your children to be successful, now is the time to act.  What Max Baucus calls “maldistribution of income”, many of us call the rewards of hard work.  The problem with income redistribution is that it takes away incentive and we all lose.  Today’s Wall Street Journal reported that personal income dropped in 42 states in 2009.  If we do not act now, that is our future for a long time.

Look at the voting lists to see how your Congressman voted.  Then donate, work for, or otherwise support the candidate running against him in 2010.

Yesterday’s London Times posted a more complete report of the recent visit of Israeli President Binyamin Netanyahu to the United States.  To say that President Netanyahu was treated poorly is an understatement.  The article relates that:

“In their meeting Mr Obama set out a number of expectations that Israel was to satisfy if it wanted to end the crisis, Israeli sources said. These included an extension of the freeze on Jewish settlement growth beyond the 10-month deadline next September, an end to Israeli building projects in east Jerusalem, and even a withdrawal of Israeli forces to positions that they held before the Second Intifada in September 2000, after which they re-occupied most of the West Bank.”

To act as if the Israelis are dealing with a ‘peace process’ with a country that actually wants peace is to deny reality.  First of all, we need to remember that before the 1967 war, there was not a cry for a ‘Palestinian State.’   My favorite quote on this subject is from Walid Shoebat, a former terrorist, who states, “Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”  During the time that Jordan, Egypt, and other countries controlled the land that the Arabs want as ‘Palestine’, there was never a cry for a Palestinian state.  A two-state solution is a wonderful goal if both states want a peaceful two-state solution.  The actions of the people calling for the state of Palestine do not back up that idea. 

The actions of President Obama in dealing with President Netanyahu were incredibly rude and unproductive.  Israel has been our best ally in the Middle East.  Why are we condemning our ally for building in its own capital while ignoring the progress Iran is making toward nuclear weapons?  We are sending Iran a message that we will not defend Israel when they are ready to attack–much like to misunderstanding that led to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait–because of a conversation with an American diplomat, the Iraqis concluded that if they invaded Kuwait, we would not interfere–so they did it!  President Obama is playing a dangerous game when he treats the President of Israel as badly as he treated President Netanyahu.

This is a quote from John Adams.  It is something we need to remember today.

“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion.  Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net.  Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate for any other.”

As one of the founders of our country, John Adams totally understood what would be needed to keep American strong.

One of the things in the stimulus bill that did not get a lot of attention was the elimination of the school voucher program (D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program) in Washington, D. C.  There was a lot of irony in the fact that Congress was eliminating this program, since very few (if any) Congressmen who live in Washington, D. C., send their children to public schools.  Since that program was terminated (actually Congress simply stated that no new children could sign up for the program), a number of Congressmen have been working to reinstate it.

On March, 10, the Washington Post reported on those efforts.  Senator Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) has been the leader in this fight, but has not been able to get his bill to the floor.  Meanwhile, George Will reported Sunday in the Washington Post that Education Secretary Arne Duncan in speaking to a group this month in Alabama:

“…vowed to unleash on public schools legions of lawyers wielding Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. They supposedly will rectify what he considers civil rights violations, such as too many white students in high school Advanced Placement classes.”

That’s very nice, I guess, but George Will points out:

“No segregationist politician is blocking schoolhouse doors against D.C. children; congressional Democrats are. Until Duncan and the talkative president he serves speak against the congressional Democrats who are strangling the District’s Opportunity Scholarship Program, he should spare us the exhibitionism of explaining problems of social class in the ’60s vocabulary of civil rights violations.”

It seems that one of the places to start providing racial equality in education might be in Washington, D. C.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted an article today that relates the story of a Seattle, Washington, high school student who was given an abortion without her parents’ knowledge.  The story was originally reported by KOMO News in Seattle. 

The mother of the teenager (the mother is pro-choice) signed a consent form for her daughter to visit the Ballard Teen Health Center located within the high school.  She figured her daughter could go there for a sore throat, an earache, etc.  She did not realize it meant her daughter could go there for an abortion without her knowing it. 

Just as a side note, I really don’t like the idea of a “Teen Health Center” located within a high school.  It seems to me that even in high school, a student should not be responsible for their medical services without the input of his/her parents.  The convenience is nice, but without parental input, this is a bad idea.  It almost seems as if the location of the health center is putting a wall between the parent and the child.

Anyway, back to the story.  According to KOMO:

“Jill (the child’s mother) says her daughter, a pro-life advocate, was given a pass, put in a taxi and sent off to have an abortion during school hours all without her family knowing.”

I happen to be pro-life.  I also happen to be the mother of three daughters.  Although I would oppose any one of my daughters seeking an abortion, if she had an abortion, I would want to be there for her.  To take the parents out of the picture at that point is unfair to the parents and to the child (I realize that in certain cases there are extenuating circumstances, but that was clearly not the case here).

There is a related story at Hot Air written by Ed Morrissey in May 2008.  It deals with the events that followed the unintended pregnancy of his son’s girfriend during their senior year of high school.  The story also shows that we need to pay attention to some of the underlying messages given to our children as they attend high school.

Today’s Worcester Telegram posted an article praising the Democrat Party for passing the healthcare reform bill and chastising the Republicans for not being part of the destruction of the American economy.  My Congressional Representative, Jim McGovern, voted for the bill.  That is one of the reasons I am collecting signatures for Marty Lamb, who hopes to run against him for Congress in November.  The New York Times stated yesterday: “The bill that President Obama signed on Tuesday is the federal government’s biggest attack on economic inequality since inequality began rising more than three decades ago.”   It is not up to the government to attack economic inequality.  Where is that in the U. S. Constitution?  All of the Massachusetts Congressmen voted for the bill except for Stephen Lynch (who was probably allowed to vote no because Nancy Pelosi did not need his vote).

As was previously reported on this site (rightwinggranny.com), one Massachusetts company will already be negatively impacted by this bill.  Zoll Medical Corporation in Chelmsford (which made a profit of $9.5 million in 2009) is expecting to be hit with a new tax of between $5 million and $10 million a year under the new healthcare reform.  None of the options available to them as a company to stay in business will be good for the State of Massachusetts.  I know that Congressmen have a reputation for bringing home the bacon–I didn’t realize they were also good at taking the bacon away from their own states!

I have two direct quotes about the bill from Townhall.com (via Associated Press) about the claim that all children with pre-existing conditions will be immediately covered:

“Under the new law, insurance companies still would be able to refuse new coverage to children because of a pre-existing medical problem, said Karen Lightfoot, spokeswoman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee, one of the main congressional panels that wrote the bill Obama signed into law Tuesday.

“…Full protection for children would not come until 2014, said Kate Cyrul, a spokeswoman for the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, another panel that authored the legislation. That’s the same year when insurance companies could no longer deny coverage to any person on account of health problems.”

There is also a ten percent tax on tanning salons.  How many small businesses in Massachusetts are going to close because of that tax increase?  How many people will lose their jobs?  I also wonder what the funding for 17,000 IRS agents is doing in a healthcare bill.  Why is the government takeover of the student loan program in this bill?

I strongly suggest that you donate to every opposing candidate of any Congressman in Massachusetts who voted for this bill.  Voting for this bill was not brave–how many Congressmen read the 2,000+ page bill before they voted for it?  We don’t need Congressmen who blindly follow the orders of the Washington Democrat Party; we need Congressmen who will pay attention to the needs of their state.  I will be voting for Marty Lamb in November.

Yesterday The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room reported that thirteen states have filed lawsuits against the recently passed healthcare reform bill.  Attorneys General from Florida, South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Michigan, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Utah, Washington, Idaho and South Dakota have all filed suits.  They have filed these suits on the basis that the bill is unconstitutional.  This is the link to the pdf file of the lawsuit.

The article states:

“The suit specifically claims that the Medicaid expansion, individual mandates to buy health insurance and several tax provisions violate various clauses in the Constitution. They say that the measures run roughshod over guarantees of state sovereignty and limitations on the scope of taxation.”

This could be a very interesting lawsuit.  One of the problems at the root of states not wanting to see this bill go into effect is the unfunded mandates.  A lot of the financial burden of this bill will fall on state budgets–Medicare and Medicaid expenses can be expected to increase very rapidly as many more people are added to the programs.  Some of the states which will be greatly affected by this bill are already in serious financial difficulty.

If I may presume to give advice to the Republicans as they deal with the passage of this bill, my advice is very simple–repeal is a good idea, but repeal and replace is a better idea.  There are many ways to make sure all Americans have access to affordable health insurance without a government takeover of the health insurance industry.  Please draft a bill of less than twenty pages that all Americans can read and understand that will help low-income people afford insurance and allow the free market to function in the healthcare insurance industry.

The beautiful child in the picture below is one of the children our military helped when they were deployed in Afghanistan in 2002 – 2003.  It is the lead picture in an article by Michael Yon about what American military medical teams are doing now to provide medical care for the children of that country.  The child in the picture became known to the soldiers as Princess Salerno. 

Michael Yon concludes in his article:

“Princess Salerno recovered from her broken leg and became a favorite memory of the 909th after their return home in 2003. There is no way of knowing what has become of her over the ensuing 7 years. The team would rather just simply think of her just as she remains in these photos. A beautiful, innocent, princess child.

This is the Afghanistan that we should focus upon. The children are growing up under generations of war. It is no wonder why it is so easy for them to be turned into radical Islamists. They are indoctrinated via the madrassas that had exploded in numbers during the 1980s through 1990s. This country has been manipulated into this radical culture from outside influences. In my humble opinion, if we are to win the battle against radical Islam and terrorism, then we will need to invest in multiple generations. This is a marathon, not a sprint. Anything less than this full, long-term effort will only result in what we have now. History will repeat itself.”

Please follow the link to the article to read the stories and see the pictures of the medical help that our military is bringing to the people of Afghanistan.

I have no problem with extending healthcare to people who cannot afford insurance.  There are a number of very practical and cost-effective ways to do this without impacting the health insurance or economic situation of those already insured.  Unfortunately, this is not the law that passed Congress last Sunday.

Yesterday, the New York Times ran a story about the recently passed healthcare reform bill.  The story points out that one of the aims of the bill is to redistribute wealth by adding taxes on the wealthiest Americans.  They seem to forget that the ‘weathiest Americans’ generally run the businesses that provide the jobs for the rest of us. 

On July 30, 2009, the New York Times reported:

“The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 40.42 percent of total federal income taxes in 2007, according to the most recent data from the Internal Revenue Service.”

These are the people who do not work forty-hour weeks.  They are people who studied hard and worked hard to get where they are.  If we are going to tell our children to work hard and study hard to succeed, we need not to punish the people who have succeeded.

The gripe in this article is that for the past thirty years, the taxes on the wealthy have decreased more than the taxes on the less wealthy.  Has it occurred to the writer that since the tax burden on the wealthy was disproportionally higher, logically, it would decrease more?

As can be expected from the New York Times, the article blames Ronald Reagan for the inequality of income in the United States.  Has it occurred to the writer that when you begin to tax success (as was done in the Clinton years), you slow down economic growth (although the results are not immediately obvious)?  When you offer people a free lunch (free health care, lower taxes for lower achievement, longer term unemployment insurance which lessens incentive to find a new job or possibly take one that is less than ideal), the level of achievement will go down.  You have taken away incentive.  Why work sixty hour weeks if you aren’t going to be allowed to keep what you earn? 

The healthcare bill represents a cultural change in America–hard work and success will now be punished–not rewarded.  This will not mean good things for our future.

On Sunday, Investors.com (The editorial page of Investor’s Business Daily) posted an article entitled “20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms.”  Please follow the link to the article, but I will try to highlight it here.

You no longer have the option of whether or not to buy insurance.  If you are young and healthy or starting up a business, you have to pay for health insurance, or pay a fine.  (Section 1501).  Section 2701 of the bill states that the insurance companies will no longer be able to underwrite on the basis of a person’s health status.  Section 2711 says that you cannot buy a cheaper policy that has limits on payout.  Section 2712 says that you cannot buy certain pollicies if they do not have the proper preventive coverage.  Section 2714 says that as an employer you have to insure your employees children up to age 26.  (Whose idea was this?  Are we trying to keep our children dependent forever?) 

Section 1302 says that if you are a single male, your policy must cover pediatrics, a non-drinker must have substance abuse coverage.  A woman who cannot have children must have maternity coverage.

The list continues.  Hospital expansion is subject to major limitations if the hospital is doctor-owned. 

This is a nightmare.  It needs to be repealed either by lawsuits or by Congress as soon as possible.  A number of State Attorneys General are preparing lawsuits to challenge to basic mandate of requiring everyone to buy health insurance.  Stay tuned.

Today at the Washington Examiner, Byron York posted a story about a Chelmsford Massachusetts company named Zoll Medical Corporation.  The company manufactures heart defibrillators, which are used throughout our nation to save thousands of heart attack victims every year.  The healthcare bill passed in the House of Representatives Sunday levies a tax on the makers of medical devices in order to pay for the new healthcare program.

The tax will cost Zoll Medical Corporation somewhere between $5 million and $10 million a year according to Richard Packer, the company’s chairman and chief executive officer.  He adds that the company profit in 2009 was $ 9.5 million.

The article points out that the company has a few options in handling this increased expense.  It can raise the price of its product, not really a good idea as they are coming under pressure to cut their price.  The company could shift jobs overseas in order to lower production costs.  This would not help the unemployment rate nationally or in Massachusetts.  Also, the company can also cut back on research and development. 

Cutting back on research and development is a choice many medical device companies will be forced to make.  It will hurt them down the road in terms of competition, but there is also another aspect to this.  America has (up until now) led the world in developing medical technology.  We can expect to see innovation in medicine decline sharply as the companies that manufacture medical devices are more heavily taxed.

This is a picture of sunset in Afghanistan.  It is part of an article by Michael Yon.  The article has some beautiful pictures of the helicopters and airplanes the Air Force is using to support our troops and the stories of the men who fly them.  Michael Yon is probably the most reliable source on the war in Afghanistan.

Yesterday Fox News reported that a federal judge has ordered the release of Mohamedou Ould Slahi, a man named by the 9/11 Commission as a recruiter for Al Qaeda who helped put together the team who carried out the attacks on September 11, 2001. 

The article states:

“Military prosecutors suspected Slahi of links to other Al Qaeda operations, and considered seeking the death penalty against him while preparing possible charges in 2003 and 2004.

“U.S. District Judge James Robertson granted Slahi’s petition for habeas corpus, effectively finding the government lacked legal grounds to hold him. The order was classified, although the court said it planned to release a redacted public version in the coming weeks.”

This detainee was not tried in a military commission because he is said to have been tortured.  When you read the article, you learn that torture included death threats and harm to his mother.  You will note that no bodily injury occurred and that lives were probably saved by the information obtained.

Would someone please tell this judge that if he releases this prisoner, American soldiers will die.  Does he understand that this man is a threat to all Americans, including him?

A $50 Lesson

Her parents still aren’t speaking to me.

A close relative of mine has been diagnosed with Parkinson’s Disease at a young age.  She is actively raising money for research into the disease.  This is the link to her website, Team Bettina Home Page.  Please feel free to follow the link and show your support.

I know it passed, and I apologize for the fact that we are still going to be talking about the healthcare reform bill for some time.  Today, the editors at National Review posted a really good analysis of where we are and where we go from here.

The editors point out what is obvious to many of the voters:

“Almost nothing about this legislation is free of dispute, but we are convinced that it will increase taxes, increase premiums, and increase debt, while decreasing economic growth, job growth, and the quality of health care.”

The editors also point out that during the Presidential campaign, President Obama pledged not to force people to buy health insurance and not to tax their healthcare benefits.  Both promises will be broken when he signs the healthcare reform bill.  He has also broken the promise of bipartisanship–the only bipartisanship was against the bill! 

The article points out that repeal of the entire bill is not likely–the closing of the ‘doughnut hole’ in senior citizens drug benefits will probably be with us forever.  It is possible, however, as the unpleasant aspects of the bill become apparent, Congress will be pressured to undo them.  I wonder about that, though, considering the amount of pressure that was put on Congress not to pass the bill. 

The only way the Republicans gain anything by the passage of this awful bill is to promise not only to repeal it, but to replace it with something that will actually work and actually save the taxpayers of America money.  Unfortunately, the next ‘big thing’ to come down the pike will be an immigration reform package that will make all illegals legal and then put them on government healthcare.  This will, in fact, backrupt the country.  The only logical reason to make illegals legal is to have them pay into Social Security (with the hope of delaying the demise of the system).  That is a true ponzi scheme and hopefully Americans will be smart enough and loud enough to stop it!

Yesterday’s U.K. Times reported that Iceland is bracing for another more severe volcanic eruption.  The article reports that tremors around the volcano near the Eyjafjallajokull glacier, which erupted Sunday, were first recorded in early March.  About 500 people have been evacuated from near the volcano.  The volcano is about 75 miles southeast of the Icelandic capital Reykjavik.  The fear is that a nearby volcano, Katla, beneath Myrdalsjoekull, a large glacier, will also erupt.  If a volcano erupts beneath a glacier, the risk is flooding and mudslides as well as the risk from the eruption itself.

Iceland is a beautiful country, built on volcanic rock where the North American and Eurasian tectonic plates meet.   The picture below was taken at Reykjanes where the plates meet.  They are pulling apart at a rate of about 2 centimeters a year.  The white spot toward the right side of the bridge is me wearing a white winter hat!  The dark gray under the bridge is not water–it is lava dust.  That section of Iceland (the southwestern section) is lava rock (covered with green moss in spots).  The picture is a color picture.  That is the color that things looked in February 2007!

The volcanoes under iceland provide the country with true ‘green’ energy.  The place that we stayed while we were there had radiant heat in the floors that was provided by the local hot spring.  There were huge pipes all along the roads going away from the Blue Lagoon that carried hot water throughout the country.  There were greenhouses throughout the country heated by geo-thermal activity.  There are, however, risks involved in living on an island with continuing volcanic activity.

For a larger version of the picture below, click on the same picture on the right.

Are you tired of hearing about healthcare reform yet?  I know I am, but the issue is not going to go away.  If it passes tonight, which I expect it to, that will be only the beginning of the fight.  I have watched and listened all day, and (as usual) I have a few throughts (and a good link).

The Democrats who support the bill are touting the provision that allows children to remain under their parent’s health insurance policies until age 26.  Now, my youngest child is in her mid-thirties, so admittedly I am not affected by this, but wait a minute.  Isn’t the whole idea of parenthood to teach the bird to fly out of the nest at some point?  I realize these are difficult times and there may be cases where this is necessary, but do we really want to make it the rule?  I love my children, but my worst nightmare would be to have them dependent on me at age 26.  To set up that situation routinely troubles me.

The other thing being touted by the people who support the bill is the immediate insurance for pre-existing conditions.  Look at that one closely–for the first year or two, it only applies to children.  Also, are the insurance companies going to have to raise their rates to pay for this? There are such things as actuary tables that are used to assess risk in providing insurance coverage.  Are we throwing those tables out the window?

Now to the link.  In an article in today’s Washington Examiner, Michael Barone points out that the healthcare reform bill will vastly increase government spending. 

 “Over the last 40 years federal government spending has hovered around 21 percent of the gross domestic product. The Obama budgets have pushed that up to 25 percent. The health care bill threatens to keep it in that vicinity indefinitely. And that, as the CBO has said, means deficits around 5 percent of GDP as far as the eye can see — or higher taxes. Pelosi and other Democrats have been eyeing a value-added tax, i.e., a national sales tax.”

Some of the taxes coming our way–3.8 percent more in Medicare tax, from 35 to 39.6 percent in income taxes, a 3.8 percent tax on interest and dividend levels beginning in 2013.  These tax increase will in no way help the coming problems in Medicare and Social Security–they will be used to fund the new healthcare reform.  This bill is a fiscal nightmare and a job killer.  Hopefully it will be repealed before it can do any serious damage.

This article is based on a story in Power Line today, which in turn linked to a story yesterday in the Jerusalem Post.  Caspian Makan, the fiance of Neda Agha-Soltan (whose murder during the protests in Iran was filmed and the video shown around the world), is visiting Israel and has released a statement.  Mr. Makan was taken prisoner and tortured by the Iranian government after Neda’s death and fled to Canada. 

According to the article in the Jerusalem Post:

“In trembling voice, Makan said there was hope for change in Iran. “The Iranian people is aware of the rights its being denied. Today the Iranian people is steadfast to achieve victory and to overthrow the current regime.”

“Makan said he hoped for an Iran “where no man comes against his fellow man, with no more executions, no more war, no more murder.””

While Mr. Makan is in Jerusalem hoping for freedom from tyranny for his country, President Obama is trying to make peace with Iran. 

Power Line reports:

“In his message Obama acknowledges Iran’s right to peaceful use of nuclear energy. He purports to be mystified by the beliefs of “Iran’s leaders.” He must not be paying close attention.”

Meanwhile Iran’s response to the President’s message is pretty simple.  According to Thursday’s U K Telegraph, border officials in Afghanistan report a large amount of weapons and materials for making weapons seized on the Afghan border with Iran.  It is a shame our President is too busy criticizing Israel for building an apartment building within the city limits of its own capital to deal with the threat of Iranian nuclear weapons.

AOL News posted an Associated Press story earlier this week about a Holocaust survivor named Berthe Meijer, now 71.  Mrs. Meijer (at age 6) was an inmate at the Nazi concentration camp Bergen Belsen for 13 months until it was liberated in April 1945.  Yad Vashem, the Israeli Holocaust memorial authority, has confirmed this.  Her memoir, which will be published in Dutch later this month, recounts a memory of Anne Frank telling stories to the younger children in the camp to take their minds off their surroundings.

The article points out:

“Around 140,000 Jews lived in the Netherlands before the 1940-45 Nazi occupation. Of those, 107,000 were deported to Germany and only 5,200 survived.

“The Meijers and the Franks were acquaintances before the war: members of both families had fled Germany during the rise of Hitler’s regime and found a place in the tightly-knit Jewish community in Amsterdam. The Meijers lived on the same street where Anne attended a Montessori elementary school.”

Please follow the link to the article to read the entire story.  It is an inspiring story.  I will admit that I didn’t realize that there were children in the concentration camps.  I was under the impression that they were sent to the gas chambers as soon as they arrived.  I can’t imagine the imprint an experience like the concentration camps would leave on a young child.  It is comforting to know that there were people in the camps that tried to protect the young and vulnerable from the reality around them.

Yesterday was the seventh anniversary of the beginning of the Iraq War.  There were a lot of things we miscalculated going into that war and a lot of mistakes made in those seven years, but Iraq has voted as a democracy more than once since the beginning of that war. 

Yesterday CNSNews posted an article about the forgotten anniversary of the beginning of the Iraq war. 

The article points out:

“The White House made no comment Friday on the anniversary of the start of the war. The U.S. military said there were no ceremonies or special events to mark the day, which saw five Iraqis – but no Americans – die in violent incidents.”

Meanwhile, on Monday, March 15, CNSNews reported that the preliminary results of the recent Iraqi election showed that the political parties that support Iran seem to be weakening.  I hope this is an indication of things to come.  The biggest danger in telegraphing our plans to leave Iraq on a specified date is that the pro-Iran forces in that country can simply wait us out and then take over the country.  Meanwhile, Iraq is having elections and beginning to function as a democracy.  Remember, we did not get everying 100 percent right at the beginning of our own country–we didn’t deal with slavery, women were not allowed to vote, and there were other things the founding fathers avoided addressing in order to preserve unity within their new union.  We need to remember that as we watch Iraq grow into a democracy.

Meanwhile, thank you to all of our military who made the beginnings of democracy in Iraq possible.

A few days ago, Democrats in Congress were praising the healthcare reform bill as a deficit-reducting necessity.  This was based on a preliminary report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).  There are always a few things to keep in mind when evaluating a CBO report.  The CBO is politically neutral–they are neither Democrat nor Republican, but their estimates are based on the figures and parameters that they are given.  If they are told that the government is going to collect $100 in taxes and spend $80, they will see a $20 savings in a bill.  Again, their figures are based totally on what they are told.

Earlier this year, the heathcare reform bill included something known as the ‘Doc fix’.  This has to do with adjusting the amount of money Medicare pays to doctors for the services they provide.  The ‘Doc fix’ was taken out of the healthcare reform bill in order to make it appear that the bill would be cost-cutting measure.  The only problem is that the ‘Doc fix’ is needed to insure that doctors will continue taking Medicare patients and will continue treating current Medicare patients.  The ‘Doc fix’ will be (if it hasn’t already) passed under separate cover.

Yesterday, Yahoo News posted an Associated Press story which confirmed the obvious.  The ‘Doc fix’ or Medicare fix (as it is called in the article) would cause the healthcare reform bill to be $59 billion in the red. 

The thing to remember when estimating the cost of the current healthcare reform legislation is that the increased taxes start immediately; most of the benefits do not start until about four years into the program.  Therefore, in order to appear to be a cost-saving bill, you have to compare six years of expenses with four years of taxes.  What happens when you have to compare ten years of spending with ten years of taxes?  The bill becomes an expense, no a cost-saver.

Today’s Washington Examiner is reporting that Caterpillar, Inc., has sent a letter to the House of Representatives asking them not to pass the current healthcare reform bill, stating that the bill will increase the company’s healthcare costs by $100 million in the first year alone.  The provisions in the bill that were of the most concern were the expansion of Medicare taxes and the requirement to provide health insurance for all employees.  The increased costs will make it very difficult to expand the business or hire new employees.

Caterpillar, Inc., believes that this bill is a job killer.  They are not alone.  Yesterday 130 economists said in a letter to President Obama that the healthcare reform bill is a job killer.  (Frankly, I am amazed that 130 economists could agree on anything!) 

The article points out:

“The Peoria-based company (Caterpillar, Inc.) is one of many hard-hit employers in Illinois, which has an unemployment rate of 12.2 percent. It’s delusional to think that adding $100 million to their operating costs won’t make it more difficult to hire.”

If the top priority of the Obama Administration is to create jobs, this is definitely a move in the wrong direction.

Today biggovernment.com posted a story told by a man who was calling his Congressman to attempt to ask him to vote against the current healthcare reform bill and to explain to his Congressman why he is opposed to the bill.  The Congressional staffer who answered the phone explained that the Congressman felt that it was a good bill and planned to vote for the bill.  When the constituent began to explain his objections to the bill, the staffer explained that she was very busy and hung up on him.  The caller called back to attempt to finish his point.  Each time she hung up on him, he called back.  Eventually, the caller asked to speak to the staffer’s supervisor and was put on hold.  Eventually the line was picked up by a Capital Police Agent who charged the caller with harrassment under a specific law.  Fortunately, the caller was a lawyer who was able to check on the law.  After researching the law, the caller called the Capital Police Agent back and explained why he was not guilty of harrassment.  The Policeman agreed and said that he would explain that to the Congressman’s staff.   When the caller again contacted the Congressman’s office, he was told that the Congressman was going to vote for the bill regardless of the arguments made.

The caller points out:

“While I’m fortunate enough to be able to legally challenge what happened today, others aren’t. The sad part is the democrats know this. They know that Americans unfamiliar with federal jurisprudence can easily be silenced when threats to involve federal agents are made. They know that most Americans don’t want trouble and they’ll go away rather than face the possibility of having to explain themselves to federal agents. That’s why I found this tactic appalling, as a Marine, as an attorney and as a proud American.”

The willingness of a Congressman to ignore the wishes of the people he is supposed to represent is troubling.  The fact that he attempted to scare away someone who disagreed with his vote by threatening police action is just wrong.