Was John Roberts’ ObamaCare ruling a curse or a blessing for Republicans?

by Doug Book,  editor

Though Coach is Right published this piece in early January, the subject matter may be even more pertinent today as countless doctors refuse to treat ObamaCare patients, hospitals deny them admittance and the negative impact of the law has moved from talking point to reality.

When Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the Supreme Court’s Marxist bloc in ruling the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate constitutional, stunned conservatives immediately accused him of committing an “act of judicial cowardice.”  “It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices,” wrote the supremely hypocritical Roberts as he shattered one of the first rules of judicial restraint by rewriting sections of ObamaCare from the bench. Although he refused to “protect” the people, it seems he was more than willing to protect DC lawmakers from the consequences of passing unconstitutional legislation.

But did Roberts manufacture his creative penalty-is-really-a-tax revision of ObamaCare for the purpose of bailing out the lawmakers who wrote the Act? Or was it actually his intention to help destroy them! American Thinker contributor Bill Dunne believes Justice Roberts used his ObamaCare ruling to set a “diabolical trap” designed to imperil Democrats even as it “saved the Republican Party from going into a death spiral…”

It is Dunne’s contention that Justice Roberts’ decision spawned a “Great Awakening” of the American people by making it clear that “…ObamaCare [was] a civics lesson from hell, with vast implications for America’s future.” Had the Chief Justice sided with court “conservatives,” the disastrous effects of the Affordable Care Act would have disappeared with the law itself. The largest tax increase in American history would not be taking place. Millions would still have healthcare insurance which has since been cancelled by the ACA; premiums would not have doubled–or worse–thanks in part to unwanted coverages; family doctors would still be available to longtime patients; a non-functioning, $600 million website would not threaten to transform average citizens into “skofflaws.” Moreover, identity theft would not run rampant and some semblance of a right to medical privacy might still exist for the American public.

Perhaps the most important consequence of Roberts’ ruling is that millions of Americans finally understand that “…[ObamaCare] has less to do with insuring the uninsured than with one political party’s lunge for unprecedented power and control over people’s lives.” The utter contempt for individual rights which is the hallmark of DC Democrats has at last been clearly revealed to any interested American. And the fact that healthcare may no longer be affordable or available interests one Hell of a lot of Americans.

Did John Roberts assume the role of visionary in finding the ObamaCare mandate constitutional? In spite of the happy faces assumed by party loons such as Nancy Pelosi and Debbie Wasserman Shultz, Senate Democrats like Mark Udall (Co) and Mary Landrieu (La) are facing Election Day 2014 with the dread of THEIR vote being advertised as the one which passed ObamaCare into law.

Was John Roberts a gutless traitor to the American nation and people? Was he blackmailed into finding the Act constitutional? Was he hoping to become an important part of history? Or did his presumed prescience help to save the Republican Party from an historic collapse?

Whatever Justice Roberts motivation, it certainly IS the Court’s job to “protect the people” when the passage of unconstitutional legislation threatens to result in an historic abuse of political power.


Glycemic Control For Fun And Profit

According to the American Diabetes Association, 25.8 million children and adults in the United States–8.3% of the population–have diabetes (90-95% are type 2).  This includes 18.8 million who are diagnosed and 7 million who are “undiagnosed.”  And, if that weren’t bad enough, the ADA estimates that there are also 79 million so-called “prediabetics” in this country.  Much more statistical information–and some elucidation of the dubious methodology behind it is available here.

Why dubious?  At best, these widely touted statistics are pedal to the metal extrapolations from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data, which examines “a nationally representative sample of about 5,000 persons each year.”  Given the mind-boggling complexity of human pathophysiology, does anyone actually believe that such a small sample could produce meaningful results?

Evidently, the brain trust behind NHANES, as it is affectionately known, believes it, and offers as proof its “biggest success story.”  That would be getting people scared about high cholesterol and its alleged connection to coronary heart disease.  Great work, guys!  Your biggest success has been disproved a thousand times over, and led to the currently recommended high carb/low fat diet, which causes diabetes, and in turn increases the risk of heart disease.  Or, maybe, since 80% of type 2′s are overweight or obese, it is this corpulent state, of which type 2 is merely an adaptation, that is increasing the risk.

Sadly, such loopy number games are not limited to big picture statistics.  In fact, the quintessential number game in diabetes is glycemic control–the maintenance of designated blood glucose levels.  Newly diagnosed type 2′s are given a litany of complications that can occur, absent glycemic control.  And herein lies the rest of our story.

A curious aspect of internal medicine is its obsession with target blood titer values.  To be sure, such figures can be important guidelines, but should they be primary goals in themselves?  A few years ago, an IM doc of my acquaintance appeared very depressed.  One of his patients had died the previous evening, and he was at a loss:  “Her numbers were all OK, I just don’t understand it.”  In deference to his mental state, I refrained from replying, “Did you think death was optional?”

Given the millions afflicted with diabetes, you’d think there would be plenty of data establishing the importance and validity of glycemic control.  Not exactly.  A frequently cited study from 1995 examined various morbidities in type 2′s on insulin therapy.  The cohort was relatively young and not obese.  This work compared the results of a “conventional” insulin therapy group (1-2 injections per day) with a “multiple” injection group (3 or more per day).  The multiple group had better outcomes over the six year period.

The authors acknowledged that their findings were contrary to many earlier studies whereby intensive glycemic control in sicker patients was detrimental.  Indeed, the famous 2008 ACCORD study (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) was stopped when too many of the intensive control group (using oral meds and insulin) died.  In the 2008 ADVANCE study, although issues with participants going hypoglycemic were observed, the results here were at least partially positive for the intensive group.  Notably, the primary financial support for ADVANCE came from Servier, a major supplier of oral hypoglycemics, and no stranger to drug scandals.

The UKPDS 34 study of 1998 involved overweight type 2′s and did compare intensive drug therapy with diet alone, with respect to microvascular endpoints.  The drug group fared better, but the diet was high carb/low fat.   The NICE-SUGAR study (2009) showed that ICU patients under intensive glycemic control fared worse, contradicting the Leuven Surgical Trial (2001) although the groups studied were not exactly comparable.  There are also studies showing the value of tight glycemic control on type 1′s, usually involving sick patients.

As to type 2′s, the trend of the research is that there is no benefit to tight glycemic control.  Bear in mind, though, that virtually all the literature involves patients who already have vascular conditions, and are complicated by polypharmacy issues (patients on several concurrent drugs).

In other words, if you seek a longitudinal study of normal weight otherwise healthy type 2′s, who maintain tight glycemic control versus those who do not, you’d be out of luck.  And really, why should anyone run that sort of study?  Sales of insulin, oral hypoglycemics, and testing supplies are skyrocketing without such data.

The Kelo Decision and Barack Obama’s BLM land grabs

by Kevin “Coach” Collins

What stops the federal government from merely deeding private lands to foreign governments “because we can?” Actually nothing stops the government from doing anything, certainly not the Kelo Decision.

Without a doubt the Supreme Court’s Kelo Decision is one of the most potentially destructive weapons a tyrant like Barack Obama has at his disposal. 

We’ve heard that Dirty Harry Reid, Nevada’s real life Senator Geary, was possibly preparing to steal some of the Bundy ranch land to give it to a Chinese company to run another fake “green scam.”

This begs the question: Why couldn’t the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) merely re-deed the land in question and cite the Kelo Decision as its legal grounds?

The Kelo Decision was a 2005 case in which the Supreme Court overturned the honest use of the eminent domain doctrine, which had previously allowed confiscation of private land only for purposes of direct government use, and allowed for such confiscations to be used to transfer ownership of land from one private citizen to another. The 5 to 4 vote saw Justice Anthony Kennedy join the majority and help shred the Constitution.

Now nine years later the lawless Barack Obama stands in a position to use Kelo as a way to act like he is our Sovereign and arbitrarily strip Cliven Bundy or anyone else of property he wants to use in his next scheme.   

The Bundy ranch showdown is not over. The fight might move to Texas or another Western State, but the issue remains essentially the same. Both the government and private land owners have to ask themselves whether Kelo can be used as a way for Barack Obama to declare victory and move on. If he does he can get all those nasty videos to stop and use a show trial to crush the Tenth Amendment and the security of private land ownership forever.

After Kelo what does your name on a deed mean besides the fact that you get to pay taxes on the land until the government decides to steal it and give it to a crony?  This has never been so true as it is today.




A message from Pastor Saeed Abedini, imprisoned in Iran for the crime of being Christian

commentary by Bill Martinez, CiR staff writer

In reading this message from an imprisoned Pastor Saeed Abedini, your perspective can find a true focus on the significance of this Resurrection/Easter Holiday. 

Pastor Abedini is suffering imprisoned in Iran under, you could say unjust and incredible circumstances.  He has been sentenced to eight years in one of the most cruel prisons in Iran. Does he pray for himself? No. Like Jesus he prays for everyone else, that we would know the true and total freedom found only in Jesus Christ.

As Ted Cruz describes, “Our fellow American, Pastor Saeed Abedini, is being imprisoned in Iran for simply practicing his Christian faith. He is serving an eight-year sentence and has been so badly treated he is currently confined to a hospital bed. Despite the brutal darkness he faces in Iran, he has found comfort in the Kingdom of Light.”

Like Paul (over two thousand years ago), Pastor Abedini gives us a message of encouragement most fitting for this Resurrection Day.  In the midst of his suffering he chooses to rejoice.  Instead of complaining for his circumstances he encourages.  Setting aside his loneliness for his wife and family, by God’s grace he elevates the name of Jesus.

What else but the hope and high calling of Christ, allows one to endure such suffering?  Be blessed by the Pastor Abedini’s message.

A Message from Pastor Saeed Abedini:

Crucifying the resurrected “self” with Christ and resurrects our death faith with Christ.

Happy Resurrection Day.

On the Eve of Good Friday and Easter I was praying from my hospital room for my fellow Christians in the world. What the Holy Spirit revealed to me in prayer was that there are many dead faiths in the midst of Christians today. That Christians all over the world are not able to fully reach their spiritual potential that has been given to them as a gift by God so that in reaching that potential, the curtain can be removed and the Glory of God would be revealed.

Some times we want to experience the Glory and resurrection with Jesus without experiencing death with Him. We do not realize that unless we pass through the path of death with Christ, we are not able to experience resurrection with Christ.

We want to have a good and successful marriage, career, education and family life (which is also God’s desire and plan for our life). But we forget that in order to experience the Resurrection and Glory of Christ we first have to experience death with Christ and to die to ourselves and selfish desires.

Jesus said to His Disciples: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. (Matthew 16:24)
This means that we should not do things that we like to do (that God does not want us to do) and to do things that we do not like to do (but God wants us to do) so that He may be glorified.

So in addition to spending our days and night in doing the works of faith as described above, we should also transform our death faiths into living and active faiths through the resurrection of Christ which is an active and constructive love that is effective.

In conclusion, let us resurrect our Dead faiths to living faiths by first dying to our selfish “resurrected” self and experiencing the cross of Jesus. Then we are able to experience the Glorious resurrection with Christ.

A Glorious life with Christ starts only after a painful death (to self) with Christ.

We will start with Christ.

Pastor Saeed Abedini
Prisoner in the Darkness in Iran, but free for the Kingdom and Light

Your Republican Senator wants a $1000 donation to act like a Democrat

by Suzanne Eovaldi,  staff writer

A very deceptive ploy is being used by the National Republican Senatorial Committee that is at least rather unfair, at most a bit too over the top for establishment senators who might be getting the message that Republican voters do NOT want what they’re selling.
This writer received an official looking letter with a return address of “Saint Lucie County Area Assessment.” It had a black, bold type warning “Do Not Tamper or Destroy” above the homeowner’s address. Naturally, this letter was the first one to be opened because, frankly, it looked like some notice from the county assessor’s office.  But on closer look, the return address was the National Republican Senatorial Committee, 424 Second Street, NE, Washington DC, 20002.
“The National Republican Senatorial Committee has commissioned this AREA ASSESSMENT in order to get a detailed, highly accurate evaluation of GOP voter attitudes in every County, City, Borough, and District nationwide,” says page one of this letter. “You are the only citizen living in your unique Voting District to receive the enclosed ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT, so your participation and timely response are very important.”
The loaded verbiage and the slanted four page voter “assessment” are really just a money raising ploy asking for a $1,000 donation. BTW, if $1,000 is a little too steep after you’ve paid your Obamacare tax collection fees, you could give $500, or even $250.  An “other” box lets you put in a smaller amount.
Here are some of the slanted questions that any Conservative voter would recognize as some out-of-touch pollster’s attempt at exploitation:  “Do you think President Obama’s government-centric economic policies have slowed job growth?” Talk about a non sequitur! How about asking these pollsters just where Republican politicos were when our citizens’ wealth was flushed down the toilet in the failed, 2008 stimulus rape of our individual retirement funds?
Or how about this rhetorical chestnut: “Do you support a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?” Huh? Maybe, I’d check their “Undecided” box if I felt like sending them a bag of pennies, because this old canard has been trotted out to prod Conservatives for decades now, and NO ONE does anything about it!  Or how about this nutty question in their list of 31: “Generally, is there too much government involvement in our free enterprise system?”  Can you answer who is buried in Grant’s tomb?
And what have your GOP senators been doing while President Obama and his in-country, bureaucratic SWAT teams have been weakening our US military? “Is it important for the United States to maintain the strongest military in the world?” seems like a question these people need to ask themselves. Filling up the positions of our rank and file and top generals with politically correct, social justice-seeking “fighting” men, and oh, women, too, may look great to the Muslim Brotherhood but maybe not so much if China decides to use its own military to collect on the debt we owe them!
This question is so stupid and so insulting, no box should be checked:  “Do you believe White House operatives (including possibly the president) are covering up how much they knew about the Justice Department’s spying on journalists and the premeditated terrorist attack on our diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya?”
Well, as their questions get more and more loaded with jabs to purposely provoke the reader into popping for a $1,000 donation, the National Republican Senatorial Committee closes with this: “”Will you help the NRSC achieve its goal by participating in this LOCAL AREA ASSESSMENT for Saint Lucie County and by making a special financial gift?” Sure I will, after you seat warmers refund to me what I lost six years ago when you kept warming your seats.  Sure, I will when you get your butts in gear and go out along the Southern Border and stand there with guns pointed south to stop illegal incursions into our once safe country, just as the Bureau of Land Management and other feds stood eye ball to eye ball, weapons at the ready to shoot American ranchers. You were silent when the BLM took aim at privately owned cows, just as you can’t bring yourselves to ask why Obama won’t take aim at our open borders?

So how about this for a question 32:  “Do you believe your actions speak louder than your words?”  How about you answer that one, then ask me for a $1,000 to keep your seat warm for another six years of empty words but no action from US Senate Republicans?

Conservative Blogging from Coach Kevin Collins