Another rerun

Another rerun

More free stuff, and making the eeevil rich pay for it. The State of the Union Address was a rerun of so many other speeches by Democratic presidents. So then, what is the state of the State of the Union Address?

There are some extreme medical circumstances that cause women to choose abortion. The latest is really pushing the envelope on the definition of “extreme”.

Harvard professors advised the Obama campaign on many things, including health care. Now that they have Obamacare(tm), their reaction to it is notable.

Episode 100 is coming up in a month or so. I’d like to get your thoughts on how this podcast has made a difference in your thoughts, or how you’ve made a difference in others, and celebrate 100 episodes with your voices. E-mail me at, or call 267-CALL-CT-0, 267-225-5280, and let’s hear how you have considered this.

Mentioned links:

Harvard Ideas on Health Care Hit Home, Hard

Woman Aborts Baby at 28 Weeks Because of Baby’s Deformed Left Hand

5 Facts About the State of the Union Obama Neglected to Mention

Obama calls for civility, then immediately taunts Republicans over his two presidential wins

Obama Knocks ‘Constant Fundraising,’ Then Immediately Asks for Donations

Obama sets record for veto threats in State of the Union address

Getting some shopping done? If you're going to shop at Amazon, please consider clicking on my affiliate link. Thanks!

On Apple devices, you can subscribe to the podcast via iTunes.

If you're on Android, listen with Google Podcasts.

Stitcher Radio is another possibility for both Apple and Android devices. If you do download Stitcher to your phone, please use the promo code “ConsiderThis” to let them know where you heard about it.

Browser-based options are the Blubrry Network and

And if you have some other podcatcher or RSS reader, click here to get the direct feed and paste it wherever you need it.

I would love it if you would spread the word about the podcast! Click the Facebook, Twitter, and other icons (or all of them!) at the bottom of this post to recommend "Consider This!" to your social media audience.

Show transcript

For years, Harvard’s experts on health economics and policy have advised presidents and Congress on how to provide health benefits to the nation at a reasonable cost. But now the chickens have now returned to roost at home. Harvard University itself, in response to the rising costs of health care, are asking professors to pay more for their insurance.

Professors from Harvard were among those who were advisors to the Obama campaign. But now that it’s affecting them, they’re complaining that their own costs are increasing, including the share they pay of the premiums. They had a great plan, no doubt, but if you like your plan, oh well.

In Harvard’s health care enrollment guide for 2015, the university said it “must respond to the national trend of rising health care costs, including some driven by health care reform,” in the form of the Affordable Care Act. The guide said that Harvard faced “added costs” because of provisions in the health care law that extend coverage for children up to age 26, offer free preventive services like mammograms and colonoscopies and, starting in 2018, add a tax on high-cost insurance, known as the Cadillac tax.

And just like it is in the rest of the country, the changes to their insurance because of ObamaCare are making these professors upset. The ivory tower is shaking. Their theories don’t seem to be panning out as planned.

I heard this phrase years ago and it really fits this situation. In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, theory and practice aren’t. The question is, now that they see their theories on government intervention don’t work the way they thought in practice, will they change their theories? Hold not thy breath.

There have been cases where babies have been aborted due to disabilities that doctors believed meant that the child would either not live long or be reliant on extraordinary means to keep him or her alive. That idea – that a child’s potential life was predicted to be difficult – has led us to this point.

The mother said she believed she would feel guilty for allowing a baby to live with a disability. “I grew up with many people who were disabled, and… there was discrimination,” the mother told The Brisbane Times. “I didn’t want my child to be discriminated against. The problem is… obvious because it is the fingers, and I think the child would have a very hard life.”

Well that situation was narrowly averted, eh? A life with deformed fingers…whew. We certainly can’t allow that to continue.

OK, so let’s turn off the sarcasm and take a closer look at this. “I didn’t want my child to be discriminated against.” So that’s the 21st century measure by which we can kill children in the womb? Would he or she be discriminated against? Probably so. It’s a sinful world we live in. But let’s consider some other categories of people who are discriminated against.

The mentally retarded. Dwarves, or “little people” being the term they prefer. Gays and lesbians. Southerners. Girls. Guys who like “My Little Pony”, or “Bronies” being the term they prefer. African-Americans. In one form or another, all these people are discriminated against. Should they all be fair game for being aborted, based solely on that one trait?

It is said that arguing against something because it would be the start of a slippery slope is a logical fallacy. But we are already way down the slope, a slope that pro-lifers could easily predict. So arguing that the trend towards easier and easier abortions is not a fallacy; it’s simply predicting that the clear precedent will continue unabated unless we put on the brakes.

Not a fallacy; an observation of history.

Last Tuesday, many folks in the US watched a rerun on TV. It was called the Presidential State of the Union Address. From a President on the Democratic side of the aisle, it was more of the same; more free stuff, and we’ll make the eeevil rich pay for it all. Well, the eeevil rich and the loans we get from China.

We’re $18 trillion in debt, and if we taxed the rich at 100% we’d barely make a dent in that. The federal government took in a record $739 billion in tax revenue in the first quarter of fiscal year 2015 and still ran a $176 billion deficit. And still people get wide-eyed when they are promised “free” stuff. It isn’t free, we can’t afford it, and we’re handing our grandchildren the bill. Never mind that the government is stifling job growth with the new ObamaCare mandates. Hey look! Free community college! Ooo, shiny!

Look, these wonderful giveaways could be debated under other circumstances, but right now, our fiscal house is not in order. The roof leaks, the foundation is cracking, and we’re having to borrow the tools to keep it standing. But instead of fixing the infrastructure, the President wants to add a 3rd floor.

And then there are these tidbits. Obama called for more civility, and then taunted Republicans over his election wins. (Of course, the recent mid-terms were forgotten, when he said his policies were on the ballot.) He yearned for something different than the constant fundraising, and then asked for contributions. He claimed he wanted to work with the Republican Congress, and then set a record for the most veto threats in a State of the Union speech. What is the state of the union? It’s confused.

Filed under: AbortionBudget & SpendingEducationGovernmentHealth Care