Friday, November 16, 2012

Healthcare: Rise of Surgery Centers in Oklahoma

Surgery Centers in Oklahoma have become more prevalent. They have a very different business model from the large hospitals. They are more efficient, they do not exorbitantly overcharge like larger hospitals do, and they have all their prices for different operations listed and available to the public right on their website.

They often charge half or even 6 times less than what the large hospitals charge! How do they do it? Insurers are eliminating employee healthcare deductibles if they choose to go to the surgery centers. It is so efficient, everyone saves money, the insurer and the patient.

Great video below describing the healthcare process below. Video by

Insurance has no market controls. Hospitals have every incentive to be wasteful, to over-prescribe, over care, and over recommend for costly surgeries. This isn't good for patients, who often have to pick up a large portion of the tab.

read more about this here.

Thursday, November 15, 2012



I am a patriot. I love the United States. I would get goosebumps when the national anthem played before my high school football games. I have an American flag with the name of every person who died in the 9/11 terrorist attack, I have a Gadsden flag hanging proudly next to my bed. I dressed in a full-body blue spandex suit and wore an American flag as a cape for Halloween. I am a patriot. Every time I walk into Suffolk University Law School, I look up at a massive American flag which hangs in the atrium and am filled with pride.

I do not say these things in an attempt to say "I am more of a patriot than you," or to imply that there is something wrong or un-American about not having six American flags at your house. I get frustrated when ad-hominim attacks are made on people saying they are not patriots, it is often a tool used by people to diminish other people's arguments without actually addressing the argument.

I say these things to you to say that I am a patriot even though I do not support President Obama, I am a patriot even though I do not support the wars, the bombing of Yemen, Libya, or Pakistan, I do not support the our government killing American citizens or torturing Bradley Manning. The United States flag does not represent blind nationalism to me, although that seems to be the typical view it invokes. 


PATRIOTISM is defined as "love for or devotion to one's country." What is our country? Our country is not President Obama and was not President Bush. Our country is not our elected representatives. Our country is not the physical land upon which we all live. Our country is not government. Our country is "we the people." Our country is the Constitution. The Constitution which ended monarchy and oppression, and gave the people the right to rule themselves instead of be ruled. Patriotism is devotion to "we the people" under the Constitution.

The highest form of patriotism is dissent. The government is not "we the people." Patriotism is is not allowing your rights to be violated, patriotism is voting, patriotism is speaking the truth when the truth is ignored and criticized. 

A professor at my law school sent out an email to the University and student body opposing donations to the troops. It was a large public relations mess and made national news. People lambasted the letter for being unpatriotic. Also, in the letter the Professor mentioned his views on displays of nationalism and patriotism.

"We need to be more mindful of what message we are sending as a school. Since Sept. 11 we have had perhaps the largest flag in New England hanging in our atrium. This is not a politically neutral act. Excessive patriotic zeal is a hallmark of national security states. It permits, indeed encourages, excesses in the name of national security, as we saw during the Bush administration, and which continue during the Obama administration. Why do we continue to have this oversized flag in our lobby?" Source

The Professor's opposition to a national security state is patriotic. He also cited nationalism as being dangerous. Indeed, a blind support for the "nation," i.e. the government, no matter what actions the nation takes, is not patriotic. It is dangerous. It is how "we the people" become ruled by the nation, not the other way around. Do not let this view of patriotism, this "patriotic zeal," be what patriotism is defined as. You do not have to agree with someone for them to be a patriot. A patriot is not an ally, a patriot is not someone whose views align with the majority or align with your views or mine. A patriot fights for "we the people."


Congressman Ron Paul is a patriot. A patriot who has dedicated 26 years of his life to make this Country freer and more prosperous. Congressman Ron Paul exhibited brave patriotism when he spoke of peace and non-interventionism in the Republican primary debates for the 2008 Republican presidential nominee. He was booed by the crowd and attacked by the other nominees for speaking the truth. (go to 1:40)

Senator Sanders, the independent (socialist) senator of Vermont is a patriot. He fights for the people. His 9-hour filibuster speech on the Senate floor was patriotic.

"So the first point I would make is that it seems to me to be unconscionable--unconscionable--for my conservative friends and for everybody else in this country to be driving up this already too high national debt by giving tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires who don't need it, and in a number of cases they don't even want it." Transcript found here.

I believe every Occupier who takes time out of their lives to fight corporatism and crony politicians is a patriot. They fight for "we the people."

Those joining together under the Tea Party movement are patriots. They are fighting for all our civil liberties, thy are fighting against the over-expansion of the government ruling over "we the people."

This man videotaping police officers pulling people over without any probable cause to believe they are doing anything illegal is a patriot. (at 4:10 the police bring in DA's to tell him to stop filming and the person shows them up)


Patriots are the final check on government, the check to ensure the government does not stray too far from the Constitution. Patriots are those who embody the second paragraph of the declaration of Independence, who fight for our rights and from time to time, when it becomes necessary, revolt. Patriotism is dissent, not blind support for the military, not a word for FOX News to employ to discredit opposing viewpoints. 

Thursday, November 8, 2012

Hodgepodge of political pictures

Why Did Mitt Romney Lose: What Should 2016 Republican Party Look Like

President Obama has won the 2012 election against Mitt Romney. He won 303 electoral college votes compared to Mitt Romney's 206 electoral votes. Obama received 50% of the popular vote, Romney 48%. Mitt Romney lost in every single battleground state except for North Carolina. He lost in Iowa, Nevada, Virginia, New Hampshire, Florida, Ohio, etc.

Mitt Romney was not a good candidate. He did not appeal to the electorate, he was not looked upon favorably, he had no pizazz or oomph! He flipped his position on every issue imaginable. He was the ultimate politician.

Yet, Mitt Romney could have won. How? By courting the libertarian element of the Republican party. Libertarians are a vibrant group of young and passionate voters who wanted a candidate. Mitt Romney, instead of adopting them, shunned them. Ron Paul, the most libertarian candidate running in the Republican primary, was ignored by Republicans. His name was not allowed to be mentioned at the Republican Convention! Ron Paul delegates were kicked out of the convention and had their signs torn up before their eyes. Romney adopted no libertarian ideals or principles. Libertarians were left without someone to vote for as a result.

Well, take a gander at this graph below.

As you can see, the number of people who voted for Ron Paul in the primaries is greater than the difference between those who voted for Obama and Romney in the general election in several battleground states. If Romney had won these states listed above, i.e., New Hampshire, Virginia, Florida, and Ohio, Romney would have more electoral votes than Obama and would have won the election.

Note that this assumes a two facts in order to state this shows Ron Paul supporters could have changed the outcome of the election.

1) Assumes all Ron Paul primary voters did not vote for Romney.

2) Assumes significant portion of the Ron Paul supporters would have voted for Romney, ranging from around 45% to almost 100%.

The fact is that a very significant portion of Ron Paul primary voters did not vote for Romney. No way no how. Source? This is the best I could find, stating 66% of Ron Paul supporters intend to vote for Johnson. I will be looking for more data on that though. But, . . . they didn't. Trust me.

See this video of Ron Paul supporters speaking of their future voting intentions.

Furthermore, not many people vote in primaries, and although libertarians are active, many, many libertarians did not vote in the primary. How many? I do not know. But there are more libertarians than just those that voted in the primary for Ron Paul who could have been persuaded to vote for a Republican appealing to their mission of Constitutionally limited government.

Another interesting note. It would appear that other Republicans lost due to their inability to garner libertarian votes. One example would be Representative Guinta (R) of New Hampshire losing to challenger Shea-Porter (D). Former Rep. Guinta lost by 3%, while the Libertarian candidate in that race, Kelly, garnered 4.3% of the vote. Source. (Interesting side-note  The governor, all US reps, and the two US Senators of NH are all women). (source= Google it.)


The Facts:

The Republican party needs to adopt libertarianism principles. Otherwise they cannot win. The Republican party platform is dying. They garnered about 6% of the black vote and 29% of the Latino vote. They virtually give up the entire East and West coast. They have lost credibility.

This video by is spot-on. 3 libertarian principles Republicans should adopt to appeal to more people. 1) Welcome immigrants, don't shun them, 2) end the failed war on drugs, and 3) stay out of social issues such as reproductive rights and homosexuality. That is a winning platform.

Here is a video of Rudy Giuliani, former Republican Mayor of New York City and all-around imbecile, admit that the Republican party needs to adopt libertarianism in order to win. Note, he is an idiot, but it shows that even elements of the party know what it must do.

I highly recommend reading Doug Wead's short article on why the Republican party should adopt libertarianism in their 2016 run for the President. Doug Wead is a New York Times best selling author, presidential historian, and motivational speaker. Wead's article. Wead recommends Rand Paul. We will have to see what kind of a Senator he establishes himself as but it is a real possibility.

-- The Republican Party has a dying platform; Libertarians have enthusiasm, far-reaching appeal, and are without a party to vote for. A 3rd party will never win. The conclusion is apparent. The Republican Party can adopt a libertarian-leaning message, and they can win.

Wednesday, November 7, 2012