If you’re wondering what sort of valuable services the Senate health care bill could be providing this time next decade, see the future in the leftist bastion that is California’s state government:

The six-member California Division of Occupational Safety and Health standards board voted unanimously on the advice of staff to create an advisory committee to report back on whether to change state law to require safe-sex protections for adult-film actors and actresses.

This is an article from the LA Times, not The Onion. I’m sure. I double-checked.

Should porn “actors” use protection when “performing” their “acts?” Probably, unless they’re in the mood for some sexually transmitted diseases. This is obvious even to a science-hatin’ Christian with a running total of zero “partners.” But, the sort of thing that’s clear to a loser in Ohio is cause for a new advisory committee in California, where unionized state workers have run the government into the ground even without a committee to study whether it’s wise to have copious amounts of unprotected sex.

“We believe the state of California has a responsibility to regulate these workplaces as they do every other workplace,” AIDS Healthcare Foundation President Michael Weinstein told the board.

The state of California has a responsibility to regulate everything, as far as the state of California is concerned. Small wonder the vote to form a committee was unanimous. Imagine being asked this question: Should we form a new committee that will help justify the existence of your cushy job? Not many people would answer “No,” which is why the size of government trends in only one direction.

A former porn star points out that they don’t go into this business due to an abundance of brains:

“You think you’re safe but you’re not; in between scenes, you don’t know what other actors are doing,” James told the board.

While filming a porno, it’s difficult to be sure whether the people you’re having promiscuous sex with for money might be making unhealthy decisions off camera. The nanny-staters want you to know your concerns will be tended to, and as they venture into uncharted regulatory waters it’s clear that even a stupid law like mandated STD testing for the porn industry means a convoluted, money-burning process.

The Senate health bill creates dozens of federal boards, councils, and committees. Think these will be staffed entirely by health care and insurance professionals who know what’s best? Certainly only rational, fiscally sound decisions will be made by these new government employees. Decisions like the rational, fiscally sound decisions Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid make on a daily basis.

Congressman Boehner shared a graph last November displaying the mess of bureaucracy created by the House version of the bill as it stood at the time. Add one, subtract one, change a name here and there – this is what the leftist elites running Washington want. Countless new boards with the power to form committees with the power to impose regulations. All of their salaries coming out of our paychecks. Few of them producing anything of value.

Call. Your. Representatives.

The Washington Post engages in a bit of light cheerleading for President Obama’s speech south of Cleveland this week:

It is difficult to judge, amid one of the most intense political battles in recent memory, whether Obama is moving the needle toward greater acceptance of his health-care ambitions. But his reassurances about Medicare and other issues found support among skeptics in Strongsville.

“I was against it. I feel more positive for it now. Hopeful,” said Mary Jo O’Toole, another local retiree, after Obama spoke at a community center here.

Forgive me if I suggest the possibility that the sort of Ohioan who attends an Obama rally and believes his platitudes after more than a year of audaciously broken campaign promises was never much of a skeptic.

Still, not everyone has a firm opinion, and many admit they have a limited understanding of the details. Voters often say they are not sure whom to believe, offering a version of a comment by Patrick O’Toole, Mary Jo’s husband: “You hear this from one side and that from the other side, and you don’t know what’s right.”

We cannot afford the Democrats’ health care plan. We can’t. If you’re an optimist or have had few interactions with elected officials, I can understand leftist policies sounding good. Until you compare them to existing entitlements (bankrupt) or ask how we’re going to pay for them (taxes, taxes, and more taxes). President Obama saying we can get something for nothing doesn’t suddenly make it possible to get something for nothing.

…Obama’s task is tough. After Patrick O’Toole thought about it overnight, he had second thoughts. “He’s a great salesman, but I still would’ve walked out of the showroom without a car,” he said.

I think the car salesman analogy is appropriate – unfortunately, not all Americans are as reasonable as Mr. O’Toole. When Rep. Pelosi, Senator Reid, and President Obama sell a car, they go right to the flagship model; and don’t worry about the price! They’ll arrange for the fat cats in the corporate office to foot your bill.

Mary Jo O’Toole summarizes the problem for small-government proponents:

“He sounded convincing.”

I finally got around to listening to a Ricochet podcast, which I’ve been seeing recommended around the webs for a month or so. Episode 5, recorded on Friday 02/26, features Rob Long, Peter Robinson, Mark Steyn, and Andrew Breitbart. They discuss – among other things – last week’s health summit, and humorless institutionalized leftism.

Ricochet’s a great listen if you’re into that sort of thing. It’s the perfect accompaniment to a game of Filler 2 on Kongregate.com! Or to a commute, if you have one of those Empee-three Players and a car that knows how to talk to it…

The New York Times confirms that, after President Obama’s Thursday Theater proved a helpful showcase for ideas Republicans have been touting since last summer, Nancy Pelosi is readying spoonfuls of sugar:

Seeing no prospect of a bipartisan agreement on health care, Congressional Democrats said Friday that they would make another effort to pass sweeping health care legislation on their own.

The Grand Old “Party of No” came prepared to a production that Obama’s people thought would make the same idiotic scam look less idiotic (or at least new), but don’t expect the left to retreat from their weak rhetorical position! It’s interesting that the Republican ideas which burst from the ether yesterday have already been deemed incompatible with the Pelosi & Reid definition of bipartisanship. Almost… almost as if the outcome was predetermined.

Throughout 2009 voters grew increasingly disgusted by the dishonest accounting and shameless favoritism Republicans criticized in the House and Senate bills… and Democrats, naturally, blamed the Republicans. Since Boehner et al didn’t have union-boss level access to the legislative process, the only way to do this was by drawing attention away from the awful legislation and towards the angry old white guys fighting Progress^TM.

Then Scott Brown took their seat in Massachusetts, and the leftists in control of Congress were suddenly not so in control. It was time for Obama to dust off a few old saws about bipartisanship, repeat them each a thousand times, and schedule a TV appearance wherein his rapier wit would disarm Republican opposition. That sounded like a good idea to someone, I guess?

Since that didn’t buy them any credibility, it’s RAMMIN’ TIME!

Ms. Pelosi described the steps she had in mind, saying: “What is the substance? That’s what we will be putting together, and we didn’t want to do that before we could hear from our Republican colleagues yesterday. Secondly, what is the Senate able to do with a simple majority? And then we will act upon that.

“I believe that we have good prospects for passing legislation,” said Ms. Pelosi, of California.

I believe you have got to lay off the recreational drugs, Nancy. With all the sugar in the world, it’d take far smoother operators than yourself and Harry Reid to make this medicine go down.

Yesterday’s Washington Times has a story from Mark Steyn about the increasing ridiculousness of government regulations, contrasted with America’s refusal to do anything about the threat from Iran:

It is certain that Tehran will get its nukes, and very soon. This is the biggest abdication of responsibility by the Western powers since the 1930s. It is far worse than Pakistan going nuclear, which, after all, was just another thing the CIA failed to see coming. In this case, the slow-motion nuclearization conducted in full view and through years of tortuous diplomatic charades and endlessly rescheduled looming deadlines is not just a victory for Iran but a decisive defeat for the United States. It confirms the Islamo-Sino-Russo-everybody-else diagnosis of Washington as a hollow superpower that no longer has the will or sense of purpose to enforce the global order.

Sure, there are people who insist the Iranian mullahs are saving their oil for later in order to focus a huge portion of their crappy economy on nuclear power. This is based, apparently, on little other than the cute way Iran follows every insane Ahmadinejad rant about nuclear enrichment with a speech by some diplomat about their peaceful intentions.

Oh, right, like the guy in a $4,00-dollar suit is gonna nuke anyone. COME ON!

So long as there are a few isolationist libertarians and pantywaist liberals insisting Iran’s just trying to keep up with the Joneses and not trying to incinerate the Joneses, Obama and the State Department seem content to mix the occasional harsh word in with their flowery diplomatic rhetoric. That would be totally fine, if dictatorships always meant the peaceful things they said and were only kidding about the violent stuff.

But when you’ve authorized successful mob hits on Salman Rushdie’s publishers and translators, when you’ve blown up Jewish community centers in Buenos Aires, when you’ve acted extraterritorially to the full extent of your abilities for 30 years, it seems prudent for the rest of us to assume that when your abilities go nuclear, you’ll be acting to an even fuller extent.

Read the full Steyn article, and remember that President Obama is busy trying to resurrect a leftist health insurance plan that a majority of Americans don’t want and zero Americans can afford. Foreign policy? He’s already not George W. Bush; what do you people want?!

Good news for anyone thinking about watching President Obama’s first State of the Union address at 9:00pm – you can skip it. How have I reached this conclusion? Obama’s speech will be followed by a Thursday announcement of $8billion in ’stimulus’ funds being devoted to another idiotic liberal pet project:

President Obama is going to Florida on Thursday to reveal how his administration will divvy up $8 billion in high-speed rail funding, but the good news will whistle all the way up to the Buckeye State, say Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Rep Mary Jo Kilroy, D-Columbus.

Passenger rail is wonderful, because it gets citizens into government subsidized trains and out of those terrible, Gaia-killing automobiles. Amtrak has a proven, storied history and should be grown with taxpayer money at every opportunity… except that it doesn’t, and it shouldn’t:

According to a U.S. Department of Transporta­tion (USDOT) report in December 2004, Amtrak is by far the most heavily subsidized mode of travel in the U.S. Between its huge federal subsidies and its minuscule share of the intercity passenger market (less than 1 percent), Amtrak costs $210.31 per passenger per 1,000 miles, compared to $4.66 for intercity buses and $6.18 for commercial airlines in FY 2002.

Ok, so Amtrak makes a business of suckling at the public teat. But it’s for a good cause! Think of how many citizens will benefit from the several hundred million in pocket change our elected betters want to throw at this project!

An Amtrak study last fall said about 478,000 passengers would ride medium-speed trains connecting Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati. The line would require about $17 million a year in subsides.

Based on the Amtrak estimate, a number of people less than 5% of Ohio’s population would use the system. 478,000 / 11,485,910 = 4.16%. Senator Sherrod Brown could not be happier with his ability to bring home the bacon:

“This is some of the best news we have had in a long time,” Brown said. “If I put my ear down to the rail I think I hear a train coming.”

If I put my ear down to the rail I think I hear a senator giddy about blowing taxpayer funds on something 95% of Ohioans won’t use. I’m sure it will create enough jobs to be worth $17,000,000 a year in subsidies, because liberals always carefully justify every expenditure.

Brown contends the federal stimulus spending on rail is evidence that the Obama administration wants to spend more on the nation’s infrastructure needs and less on “tax cuts for the rich and the war in Iraq.”

This is extremely encouraging. Put photos of his posterior, a hole in the ground, and a viable business plan in front of the Senator, and he can’t identify a single thing. He can, however, puke up some liberal boilerplate about that horrible George W. Bush cutting taxes and killing terrorists.

Famous last words:

You always double down on an eleven.

And:

“The same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office,” Obama said. “People are angry, and they’re frustrated. Not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.“

Massachusetts elected a Republican senator for the first time in decades, after a year of backroom deals and hapless foreign policy from Democrats. Clearly it’s a sign that people still haven’t stopped fuming about that doggone George W. Bush! Of all the ways President Obama could have responded to Scott Brown’s victory, this is the dumbest.

But wait, there’s more! Obama, who has subjected all the galaxy to a nearly constant barrage of his face and voice, needs to communicate more so we understand the things he’s doing for us. To help with that effort, the White House is bringing on Obama ‘08 campaign manager David Plouffe. It’ll be just like old times! It’s not at all ridiculous for a leftist empty suit to renew his focus on marketing rather than shifting towards the electorate.

My favorite commentary on President Obama’s reaction to the loss of Ted Kennedy’s seat comes courtesy of Mark Steyn, for the Orange County Register:

Got it. People are so angry and frustrated at George W. Bush that they’re voting for Republicans. In Massachusetts. Boy, I can’t wait for that 159th interview.

Presumably, the president isn’t stupid enough actually to believe what he said. But it’s dispiriting to discover he’s stupid enough to think we’re stupid enough to believe it.

Maybe this touchy whining is a knee-jerk reaction, to be smoothed over by a sleek, centrist State of the Union address on Wednesday. Or maybe I’m a bigger lightweight than I realized, and I’m completely soused after the single High Life I had with dinner.

Good news for conservatives from an unlikely locale, as Scott Brown wins the Senate seat vacated at death by Ted Kennedy! This is something few could have predicted as recently as several weeks ago, but it turns out even Massachusetts voters have their limits where big government is concerned. The great thing about Brown’s victory, of course, is the Democrats’ loss of a guaranteed vote for Obamacare. The aftershocks should also be positive, as squishy Dems in states far less blue than Massachusetts pause to reflect on their political mortality.

Hot Air has some thoughts on a Politico story wherein the White House tacks a characteristically arrogant course. If there were any chance the national implications of Brown’s victory could have been overlooked, Obama went ahead and thrashed those over the weekend with a halfhearted last-minute speech. What now for the left’s health care, cap & tax, open borders, and more-rights-for-terrorists endeavors? Nancy Pelosi isn’t worried about the current project:

“Let’s remove all doubt,” Ms. Pelosi said. “We will have health care one way or another.”

“One way or another” is a reassuring promise (threat?), coming from the most transparent Congress in history. While the White House gets serious about digging themselves deeper and Nancy Pelosi talks like the Cheshire Cat on crystal meth, prominent lefty Arianna Huffington mopes about Obama’s failures:

On the eve of the first anniversary of President Obama’s inauguration, it’s become painfully obvious that elected officials are not going to save us. The 2008 election was all about “Hope.” But Hope is simply not cutting it.

No kidding. See, I have never bothered to read anything from the Huffington Post before, so at this point I was optimistic that Arianna might come to a sane conclusion, if not one I’d agree with. Hah!

One year later, wracked with conflict and discord, and battered by petty grievances, false promises, and worn out dogmas, we stand on the verge of passing a giant boon to health insurance companies and calling it “reform.”

The reason we are given? What else: the votes just aren’t there for a real reform bill.

That’s where Hope 2.0 comes in. If the votes aren’t there, the people need to create them. Just like King did. They need to build a movement. And to make that happen, we need to adopt another of the great lessons of Dr. King’s life: elevating the role empathy must play in our society.

Arianna Huffington is sad that the Progressives in Congress are ruining her government health care dreams by catering to special interests (e.g., groups lobbying furiously to secure their place in a rigged system). Somehow she thinks a majority of Americans agree that unaffordable state-run health care is a right we must force down Washington’s throat, which indicates she doesn’t talk to many people who live outside her head. Even among public option supporters, how many would be cheering for government intervention if Congress were remotely honest about the costs?

Here’s hoping the John McCains and Lindsey Grahams of the GOP don’t swoop in on gilded bipartisan unicorns to help the leftists salvage their shell game. Congratulations to Senator Brown (R-MA)! “R-MA” – now there’s something new.

President Obama’s approval rating has been suffering, so he’s falling back on what comes natural to a Chicago politician: taxation and demagoguery.

“My determination to achieve this goal is only heightened when I see reports of massive profits and obscene bonuses at some of the very firms who owe their continued existence to the American people,” Obama said at the White House. “We want our money back, and we’re going to get it.”

Yeah! Stick it to those money-lending SOBs!

Even companies that didn’t receive TARP funds would face the fee. The administration is using the argument that that [Typo in original - Ed.] every major financial firm in the U.S. is a beneficiary of government steps to bolster the industry.

“The tax will penalize the firms who repaid TARP with interest and those who never even accepted it to begin with,” said Scott Talbott, senior vice president of government affairs for the Financial Services Roundtable, which represents large banks. “It will decrease the availability of loans and limit economic recovery.”

This fat cat clearly knows nothing about economic recovery – that’s what the stimulus bill is for! I’m as disgusted by huge banking exec bonuses as the next guy, and I’m sure some percentage of those executives are genuine scumbags. However, if our options are industry-leading scum or government scum, I’m much more comfortable with the former making the business decisions. Please keep in mind that the Democrats’ go-to guy for financial policy is Barney Frank, a terrible little man who redefines hypocrisy anew each day.

This photo has been altered, but only slightly.

While many banks repaid the money, “in almost every case, they engaged in practices that made this all necessary,” Frank said. “Every one of those institutions was engaged in the kind of activity that led to the problem.”

And how could I forget the favoritism, a vital ingredient of intelligent governance? This is actually another UAW bailout, masquerading as populism:

General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC, which also got aid from the bailout fund, would be exempt, as would smaller banks. As such, the fee will leave the country’s largest financial firms to cover losses from the government’s bailout of the automakers.

The levy also won’t be assessed on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-supported companies seized by regulators in 2008. The administration concluded charging Fannie and Freddie the fee wouldn’t be in taxpayers’ interest.

Emphasis mine. Lenders and the government made a long series of bad decisions. Some private companies screwed up so horribly that they had to come to Uncle Sam, hat in hand. Surprise! There were strings attached to the money they borrowed – and, mysteriously, strings attached for those who didn’t need a bailout. No strings, of course, for the UAW or leftist pet banks.

A parting word from White House press secretary Robert Gibbs. He always knows what to say to cheer us up!

“Americans have a choice in where they bank,” Gibbs said, suggesting that consumers who face higher fees move their money “to any number of small and community banks throughout this country that somehow got by all these years playing by the rules.”

The messages, while mixed, are shockingly clear. Private banks will be punished with a new fee, even though it wasn’t part of the TARP agreement; even if they’ve repaid their TARP loans; even if they weren’t involved in TARP at all. This fee’s costs will not be passed on to customers, because President Obama says so. But if the fees are passed on to customers, screw those banks, because they didn’t play by “the rules” according to Barney Frank and the White House. Companies run by the government will, of course, be exempt, because companies run by the government are good.

Together now: Private bad. Government good.

I read something this fall about the possibility of a “Cash for Clunkers” sort of racket for buying Energy Star appliances starting early 2010. After talking about it a little with my family over Christmas, I thought I’d poke around The Webs to see what the story was.

Lowe’s has some info on their website, but nothing very useful…

Each state will run its own rebate program and will be free to select which ENERGY STAR® appliances qualify along with the rebate amounts. Plus, any state or local utility district rebates will be added to the federal Cash for Appliances rebate, which could add up to even greater savings for you!

States will submit their application for funding along with their appliance recycling plan to the Department of Energy (DOE) by October 15, 2009. The DOE plans to have funds available by November 30, 2009, so start planning and selecting your new energy-efficient appliance from Lowe’s today.

So at this point we know there’s federal money set aside from that oh-so-successful stimulus bill, but the rebate amounts, processes, and eligible products will vary by state. Or in other words, we know nothing. To the Dispatch! They provided a helpful update in a Consumer 10 report from 12/27:

This month, the agency approved Ohio’s proposal for using its share of the funds: about $11 million.

The state’s program won’t be finalized until the first quarter of 2010, but some details are available:

Ohio will give almost 90,000 rebates to residents who buy qualified refrigerators, dishwashers, washing machines and water heaters from Ohio retailers.

To be eligible for a rebate, an appliance must bear the federal government’s Energy Star label.

Sounds like a decent deal, if you’re in the market for new appliances – rebates for Ohioans will range from $100 to $250. I’m assuming my appliances have been around for as long as my kitchen, which would make them all 14 years old. Will I be “lucky” enough for something to break during this latest ingenious government plan, or will what I’ve got keep on tickin’ for a few more years?

I’d love if we could keep more of our money, instead of being invited into the shifting miasma of loopholes that high earners must constantly navigate. What will the government reward me for buying or selling this year? How can I take advantage of a maximum number of government programs that are paid for with my money, whether I use them or not? These are questions we should never need to ask, but here we are…