MUST-SEE: Steven Crowder’s undercover expose of single-payer health care in Canada!

UPDATE: Welcome Canadian visitors from Blazing Cat Fur! Thanks for the link! I am going to tell you all straight – I have seen Canadian Football and it is twice as exciting as American Football. Please allow us to have CFL teams (again)!

Hilarious, and totally un-scripted, totally undercover!

How long must you wait for FREE HEALTH CARE in Canada?

You can leave a comment at his blog here. (H/T

Hot Air summarizes the lessons of the video:

The big lesson from Steven Crowder’s undercover look at the single-payer health-care system in Canada? “Don’t get sick on Sunday.” Actually, we can probably narrow that to, “Don’t get sick,” because Steven demonstrates that the only thing reliably covered in CanadaCare is the bill.

What would Obamacare do to us?

Check out this assessment by Chapman university law professor Hugh Hewitt. (H/T The Heritage Foundation)

Some of my law firm’s clients and some executives in my broadcast audience are quietly preparing for the necessary analysis that will follow the passage of Obamacare by asking their personnel departments the obvious question: Will it make economic sense to discontinue health care coverage for my employees and instead push them into the government plan?

These employers –manufacturers, builders, entrepeneuers of all sorts– cannot yet get an answer to this question because they don’t have any specifics about costs from which they can make an informed decision.

But they all know they will have to “do the math” if the “government option/public plan” makes it into law. They cannot not do so for they owe shareholders and investors an objective assessment of what will improve their bottom lines.

If the “government option/public plan” costs $300 per employee per month and private sector insurance costs $350 per employee per month, the choice to push their workforce into the waiting arms of President Obama’s new bureaucracy will make itself.

Under Obamacare, your employer will decide whether you are on the private or public option – by dumping everyone that costs them too much. That’s Obama’s public option – it’s not your option.

Obamacare will run huge deficits

The latest report from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is out. (H/T The Heritage Foundation)


For the past half-century, federal spending has averaged about 20 percent of GDP, federal taxes about 18 percent of GDP and the budget deficit 2 percent of GDP. The CBO’s projection for 2020 — which assumes the economy has returned to “full employment” — puts spending at 26 percent of GDP, taxes at a bit less than 19 percent of GDP and a deficit above 7 percent of GDP. Future spending and deficit figures continue to grow.

[T]he major causes of the budget blowout are well-known: an aging population and rapid increases in health spending. In 2000, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — the main programs providing income and health care for those 65 and over — totaled nearly 8 percent of GDP. In 2020, CBO projects that will reach almost 12 percent of GDP. But the deeper source of our predicament is a self-indulgent political culture that avoids a rigorous discussion of government’s role.

…Obama would make matters worse. He talks about controlling “entitlement” spending (mainly Social Security and Medicare) but hasn’t done so. He’s proposing just the opposite. His health-care proposal would increase federal spending. He says he will “pay for” the added outlays with tax increases or other spending cuts, but what people forget is that every penny of this “payment” could be used (and should be) to close the long-term deficit — not raise future spending and taxes.

As if we were not already spending too much!

Previous posts on health care

Verum Serum has more Canadian horror stories:

Canadian visitors, please leave a comment with your worst health care story so that we can understand what you are going through.

UPDATE: Gateway Pundit reports that Obamacare will provide taxpayer funding for abortion just as polls show that the country is more pro-life than ever.

UPDATE: But there’s hope! Obama’s teleprompter has been smashed! Perhaps this will be an end of Obamacare now that the evil genius is no more.

Audio debate: Muslim and Christian converts debate their former religions

This is one heck of a good debate. I really liked the Christian guy, who is a former Muslim from Pakistan. He speaks as though he had a lot of experience debating this topic, and he is a medical doctor, too. I like it when people have the calm, experienced tone that comes from having had lots of debates and being very confident about what you believe. If only we Christians all sounded like Nabeel.

Description of the debate:

Unbelievable? 11 Jul 2009 – Islamic & Christian converts debate – 11 July 2009

Nabeel Qureshi converted to Christianity from Islam after being convinced that the weight of evidence was in favour of Christian faith.
Yahya Seymour’s story is the opposite – he became a Muslim after having a Christian upbringing.

They discuss the issues in advance of debates coming up in London.

For more information on the debates from Sun 12 Jul 09 to Sat 18 Jul 09.
See or

The MP3 file is here.

Podcasts featuring Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse

Dr. J integrates fiscal conservatism with social conservatism
Dr. J integrates fiscal conservatism with social conservatism

I have become increasingly impressed with Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, so imagine my joy when I saw that she is being regularly featured on the Lutheran radio show “Issues, Etc”, with Todd Wilken. Check out these short podcasts on your lunch break, I listened to them TWICE.

Is Marriage Worth It? (MP3 file, 10 minutes)

This is a very good primer on marriage, and whether narcissistic men and women have what it takes to be married. Dr. J also explains what the purpose of marriage is.

Are Fathers Necessary? (MP3 file, 21 minutes)

One of the best things about Dr. J is that she understands men and values men. She talks about same-sex marriage in this podcast, as well.

The Future of Marriage (Mp3 file, 10 minutes)

She explains how the secular left would like to be the ones raising your children, so they would love to break up the family unit. You can really see her libertarian economics streak coming out in this one.

I once e-mailed her to get her thoughts on no-fault divorce, and she mailed me a hardcover book featuring a book chapter where she argued against no-fault divorce. It was a great chapter because she understands men and defends us capably. She’s brilliant and she’s a stay-at-home mom! I just ordered her “Smart Sex” book last week. When you e-mail her, she takes time to talk with you back-and-forth.

My previous post on Dr. J featured a lecture on love and economic policy and a great paper on feminism that she presented to university students.

By the way, there was a pretty good fight on the blog about marriage and sex between me and theobromophile, a pro-life feminist. Leave a comment! The wonderful Andrew and Jen, as well as Madeleine from MandM in New Zealand all left comments.

About the speaker

Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, Senior Fellow in Economics at the Acton Institute and regular contributor to National Review Online and The National Catholic Register, received her Ph.D. in economics from the University of Rochester. Until recently, she was a Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution. She has been on the faculty of Yale University and George Mason University, and is the author of Love and Economics: Why the Laissez-Faire Family doesn’t work.

Does legalized abortion reduce crime rates?

One of the reasons given by pro-choice people for legalized abortion is that it reduces crime rates. But does it really reduce crime rates?

Let’s take a look at a two-part series by economist John Lott, writing for Fox News.

Here is the first article.


Academic studies have found that legalized abortion, by encouraging premarital sex, increased the number of unplanned births, even outweighing the reduction in unplanned births due to abortion.

In the United States from the early 1970s, when abortion was liberalized, through the late 1980s, there was a tremendous increase in the rate of out-of-wedlock births, rising from an average of 5 percent of all births from 1965 to 1969 to more than 16 percent two decades later (1985 to 1989).

Here is the second article.


What happened to all these children raised by single women? No matter how much they want their children, single parents tend to devote less attention to them than married couples do. Single parents are less likely than married parents to read to their children or take them on excursions, and more likely to feel angry at their children or to feel that they are burdensome. Children raised out of wedlock have more social and developmental problems than children of married couples by almost any measure — from grades to school expulsion to disease. Unsurprisingly, children from unmarried families are also more likely to become criminals.

This material is exposited more fully in Lott’s book “Freedomnomics“, which is one of my favorite books. I bought it for 3 of my friends as part of their Christmas present bundle, including Andrew and Jen, the smartest married couple in the world!

About the author

John R. Lott, Jr. is a Senior Research Scholar at the University of Maryland. Lott has held positions at the University of Chicago, Yale University, Stanford, UCLA, Wharton, and Rice and was the chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission during 1988 and 1989. Lott has published over 100 articles in academic journals. He is the author of six books including: “More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws”, “The Bias Against Guns”, and most recently “Freedomnomics.” Opinion pieces by Lott have appeared in such places as The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, USA Today, and The Chicago Tribune. He has appeared on such television programs as the ABC and NBC National Evening News broadcasts, The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, and the Today Show. He received his Ph.D. in economics from UCLA in 1984.

MUST-SEE: Michael Coren blasts moral equivalence in a debate against leftists

MUST-SEE Video from the Michael Coren TV show. (H/T Blazing Cat Fur, Vlad Tepes)

Topic: Is there such a thing as Islamic fundamentalism? Is it a concern?

Michael Coren’s opponents say there is no threat of Islamic violence:

Well, what about this violence?

This CNN report documents Muslim terrorists bombing churches in Iraq. (H/T Vlad Tepes)


At least four people were killed and 32 wounded as six Baghdad-area churches were bombed within 24 hours, officials told CNN.

The first bombing took place Saturday night at St. Joseph’s church in western Baghdad, according to an Interior Ministry official. Two bombs placed inside the church exploded at about 10 p.m. No one was in the church at the time of the attack.

Sunday afternoon, three bombs exploded outside churches, wounding eight civilians, the official said. The bombs detonated within a 15-minute span, between 4:30 and 4:45 p.m. Two of the churches are in central Baghdad’s al-Karrada district, and the third is in al-Ghadeer in eastern Baghdad.

Sunday evening, a car bomb exploded outside a church on Palestine Street in eastern Baghdad just after 7 p.m., the official said. Four people died, and 21 were wounded.

If the secular left and the radical Islamists want to talk about “fundamentalism”, then might I suggest that they begin with the events of the day, rather than by desperately grasping at examples of “Christian fundamentalism” that, on closer inspection, have nothing to do with Christianity. Christians are commanded love their enemies and do not murder them. A fundamentalist Christian obeys those commandments.

UPDATE: Jihad Watch reports that a Christian leader has been assassinated in Iraq, in front of his own daughter.

…integrating Christian faith and knowledge in the public square

%d bloggers like this: