Opioid Crisis Part II

They had a big meeting about it at Trump's place in NJ.  Lotta talk.  Promises to crack down with law enforcement.  Pleas for more money for treatment and drug rehab. 
   No mention of reforming doctors' prescription policies.  Right now we lack any kinda guideline on what medical conditions justify the use of opoids, how much to prescribe, how to prevent doctor shopping.  A lot of patients actually are suffering from various  mental conditions, often depression.  They find that a good solid hit of opioids makes them feel better.  So they search out a pain pill mill and get a prescription for opioids.  And some time or other they find that street heroin works as well and costs less.    I think we need to tighten up on opioid prescriptions.
   Clamp down on doctors.   Doctors hate this. 

Dealing with the NORKS

It is easier to deal with them BEFORE they get nuclear tipped missiles with the range to strike Japan, South Korea, and America.  Doing regime change on a nuclear armed regime can be very dangerous. 
   And the NORKs are really close to having such missiles.  I don't think they have them today, but it looks like they will have them in a year or two. 

The Wind and the Lion 1975

An oldie but a goodie.  I  popped my video tape into my yard sale VCR and played it last night.  It's still a good flick.  Sean Connery is The Rasuli, "last of the Barbary pirates".  Candice Bergen is Eden Pedicaris, American widow with two young children living in Morocco in 1904.  The movie opens with The Rasuli's horseman galloping along a North Africa beach, gorgeous color, very scenic shots.  He is out to create an international incident to support his cause by kidnapping Candice Bergen and her children.  She is having afternoon tea, in a the formal garden of a plush house in Morocco with a very proper English gentleman.   Very civilized scene.  He is wearing a white suit with tie.  Suit matches his white hair.  They are discussing  the proper wine to drink at this time of day.   Quick change of pace, The Rasuli, followed by a dozen horsemen come crashing thru the garden hedge and start laying about with swords.  Our proper English gentleman turns out to be practical as well as proper.  He produces a large revolver from his shoulder holster and starts blowing Arabs off their horses.  He does pretty well until he runs out of ammunition and is slain.  
    There is a lot of riding and fighting and scenery for the rest of the movie.  Lot's of priceless dialog between Sean Connery and Candice Bergen.   Candice gives as good as she gets.   Where Sean Connery is waxing poetic with quotations from the Koran, Candice Bergen tops each one with a Yankee saying such as "A stitch in time saves nine".
   We get to see the Theodore Roosevelt administration reacting to this outrage.  You get the impression that Teddy has as much pirate blood in his veins as The Rasuli.  Plenty of people have criticized this movie for modifying actual history, but heh, it's movie, not a history lesson.   Shakespeare did the same thing with English history and we like it.  The plot sticks together and makes sense.  The portrait of Teddy Roosevelt is vivid and in accordance with what I know of the period. 
   A fun watch. If you haven't seen it, try it, you'll like it. 

Since the Republicans lack the stones to repeal Obamacare...

Maybe they could take some of the heat off by passing a few less controversial  measures to reduce the cost of healthcare.  Remember the United States spends TWICE as much money on healthcare as any other country in the world.  Perhaps bringing the costs down out of the stratosphere will ease things a bit.  As it is,  the Republican failure to deal with Obamacare will  probably cost them control of Congress in 2018.  Both houses. 
   They could try any or all of the following:
1.  Allow interstate sale of health insurance.  Any health insurance company can sell policies in all 50 states, no state paperwork required.  Insurance companies hate this, but they don't vote.
2.  Allow duty free import of drugs from any reasonable first world country, Canada, Britain, Germany, Japan, and the like.  Any medicine legal for sale in the source country can be imported and sold in the United States.   Drug companies hate this but they don't vote.  The FDA hates this but they don't vote.
3.  Clamp down on medical malpractice suits.  They just enrich lawyers and make health care more expensive for real people.  Lawyers  (congresscritters are mostly lawyers) hate this.  Unfortunately congresscritters do vote.
4.   Ease the airconditioning requirements down from the current plus or minus 2 degrees F to a more reasonable plue or minus 4 degrees F.  This will cut costs on new construction. 
5.   Tighten regulations on opioid prescriptions.  Drug companies and pill mills hate this but they don't vote.

Granted, none of these measures will do any thing to prevent  a bailout of insurance companies (stabilize is the new word for bailout), but  at least the Republicans could say they did something about Obamacare. 

Is the Wall St Journal going greenie on us??

Yesterday's Journal published six letters to the editor under the headline "Unchecked Climate Change Will Lead to War".  Of the six letter writers, none discussed the science of global warming, things like is it happening, how fast is it happening,  what causes it.  One asserted that CO2 is poisonous, it isn't.  One talked about examining data over the past 21 centuries.  The thermometer wasn't invented until just 4 centuries back.  Lacking thermometers, ancient writer's ideas of hot and cold are pretty subjective.  Tree ring width indicates amount of rainfall, not temperature.  We have a few records of time of planting and harvest but that's about it.  That ain't 21 centuries of data in my book.  One writer thinks Zika, malaria, and dengue are caused by climate change.   That's false. Diseases are caused by germs or viruses (virii?).  One writer is an anti-fracker, and blames global warming and a whole bunch of stuff on fracking. 
    Dunno about that Journal.  They used to be better than this. 

I got spammed.

Some body found my blog and spammed a lot of my recent postings.  First time for that.   So I zapped all the ones I found.  If this keeps up I will have to tighten up on comments.  Right now it's open to everyone.  Spamming should be made a felony, subject to the death penalty.

Gotta stop the leaks

We cannot have the Washington Post printing Trump's phone calls with foreign leaders.  If privacy cannot be assured, and it can't now,  nobody is going to talk to the US president on the phone.  We need to find the leakers and subject them to a bit of cruel and unusual punishment.  Boiling in oil would be good.  Now would be the right time. 

Firing Special Prosecuters (Mueller) is a bad idea

Nixon fired the special prosecutor who was investigating Water gate.  Can't remember the guy's name now.  Watergate was a long time ago.  Firing caused a nationwide furor and resulted in Nixon resigning the presidency before they got around to impeaching him.   I think for Trump to fire Mueller would work out about the same way.  I hope Trump understands this. 

Opioid Crisis?

How much do places like this contribute to the opioid crisis?  They are spreading.  This one is in Littleton NH, which is about as rural as you can get.  Sources at the Littleton hospital tell me that these guys tried to get office space in the hospital.  The accreditation committee looked at the doctor associated with the operation and said "This guy has red flags sticking out all over him".   So they are in a store front on Meadow St.  All they do is write prescriptions for opioids.

Deported 20 times??

TV news is pushing a terrible story of a lowlife that was deported twenty times and now has murdered someone. This should never have happened.  After deporting a guy a couple of times, we know that deportation doesn't teach him anything.  Should have given him five years in jail back about deportation #3 or #4.   Do we just deport them time and again because it's easy to do and fairly low cost compared to a US jail?   Not good.  After a reasonable number of deportations we know this guy is trouble, letting him loose on the other side of the border is not right.   A good solid stretch in jail might get the message across, and at least will keep him off the streets.   

What are all those US diplomats doing in Russia??

We seem to have 1200 "diplomats" inside Russia when the Russians only have 455 "diplomats" inside the US.  More confusing, the State Department is claiming that many of the US diplomats are actually local hires.  How does that work really?  Do local hires get diplomatic immunity?  US diplomatic passports?  And how do we do background checks on Russian nationals in Russia? 
   Leaving that aside,  what are 1200 diplomats doing inside Russia?  Other than drawing their pay that is.  All I can think of is intelligence gathering, which surely the Russians call espionage.   I am surprised that the Russians let the 455 to 1200 diplomat count in our favor last as long as they did.   Maybe CIA will finally stop covering their agents as diplomats,  which has got to be ineffective.  Surely the Russians surveil and target anyone associated with the US embassy.  The CIA would do better and gather more real intel with agents covered as businessmen, reporters, writers, students,  anything other than US diplomats.  And it will make CIA duty a little more sporting (dangerous) for agents lacking diplomatic immunity. 
    Anyhow Putin has given us until September to cut our diplomat count down to parity, 455, which means expelling 750 of them.  That's a lot.

Lots of luck General Kelly, you are gonna need it.

General Kelly, yanked away from being secretary of Homeland Security, where he was doing good, is now White House chief of staff.  The job description is to run the White House staff,  decide who gets in to see the president (there are not enough hours in the day for the president to see every one who wants to see him) and make sure every one on the staff knows what the party line is, and when featured on the TV news, to support said party line.  And suppress leaks.   You do that by firing leakers when you catch 'em.
   Trump makes this difficult, he tweets messages that no one in the White House knew were coming, he trashes people who are best left alone, like Jeff Sessions, and he changes his mind from day to day.  At Trump's age, he isn't gonna change much, if at all.   It will take all the cooperation that Trump can manage AND solid support for any personnel actions Kelly might want to take, to give Kelly a chance at straightening things out.   Personnel actions is management speak for hiring and firing.
   Kelly is doubtless pretty good at talking people into doing it his way, and is loyal to the President.  I hope the president will show loyalty to Kelly.  With Trump, you never know. 

Stabilize what we have

So saith Maggie the Hassan, NH junior senator, about Obamacare.  Is this fancy language that means give insurance companies more taxpayer money?  

Why the New Yorker??

Scaramouchi called someone on the New Yorker to unload on everyone in the White House.  What was he thinking?  The New Yorker is in the tank for the Democrats, and will use what ever Scaramouchi said to trash the Trump administration.   And he must has known this.   Any Republican with with two brain cells firing isn't gonna talk to the New Yorker.  Talk to one of the few remaining Republican papers, like the Washington Examiner instead.

So what was in that "skinny" Obamacare bill?

What ever it was, it got all but three Republican senators to vote for it.  Best vote yet, a couple of previous bills lost by more.   One of 'em, Susan Collins of Maine is a long time  RINO flake,  Another, Murkowski from Alaska I don't know much about, but the third, and decisive vote that killed it, came from John McCain.  Surprise to me.  I never did hear just what McCain disliked about the bill, but I have a lot of respect for McCain built up over many years.  If he objected to the bill,  there might have been something wrong with it.   I wonder what it was.
   Another odd thing.  Someone put out the word that it was OK to vote the skinny bill thru because the House promised to kill it later.  What was that about?  
   As it is now, we voters are highly disappointed that despite a Republican House, Senate, and presidency we are still stuck with economy killing Obamacare.   We need to do something about that in 2018.  Maybe we can primary some RINO's.  I fear that a lot of unhappy Trump voters will vote for Democrats for Congress.   Republicans may well loose one or both houses of Congress.  The Stupid Party rides again. 

Net Neutrality What is it really?

And who is it aimed at?   Obama's FCC  issued some directive about it a year ago or so.   Never bothered to read it, but web surfing claims that Obama prohibited blocking of websites, and required all packets to be treated the same. especially in regard to delivery speed.   
   Some big companies have complained  Obama's policy prevents them from offering higher speed premium cost services.   Does any one care about that? I can already stream movies in real time, no stuttering, halting, good 30 frame per second video on a backwoods broadband cable service.  That's fast enough for most legal civilian uses. 
   As far as blocking websites, I thing we ought to block Islamic terrorist websites any time we find them.  They get people killed. 
   The new Republican chairman of the FCC is talking about repealing the Obama policy.  Some time, may, if he has the votes and the stones.   Do I care?  I have not heard protests from any just plain internet users like me.  Are there any out there?
    Anyone know anything more? 

Youngest son has a brand-new, bright red, Dodge Challenger, 5.7 liter Hemi, 400 hp. Wednesday night we (me, my brother, and Jon) went to the NE Drag Way in Epping to see how fast the Dodge really is. It was Wednesday night, so the crowd was pretty thin, but it was warm, Jon got in 25 runs, best time of 14.5 seconds, better than the 14.9 he turned last time. Cars were various, from 60's classics, thru some riceburners, crew cab pickup trucks, 'Vettes, 'Stangs, and Dodge Challengers. Couple of 60's Olds sedans. And a snow machine that turned 11 seconds. No all out dragsters, Chargers, or funny cars. Looked like locals, mostly amateurs, out to practice and exercise their cars. Most cars drove to the meet, not many trailered in. Fun evening.

What are they voting about for Healthcare?

If they do nothing, never come up with the votes to pass anything, and things are looking that way, then we are stuck with Obamacare.  Which has doubled and tripled everyone's premiums, jacked up deductibles to $6000 which makes the insurance pretty much useless, and driven insurance companies out of the Obamacare market due to horrendous losses.   If Obamacare offers subsidies to anyone I never saw an explanation of how much, and who was eligible.  There is probably some handouts to insurance companies but I don't know anything about that.
   They ought to pass a simple one page bill that repeals every single jot and tittle of Obamacare.  Then pass separate bills to re instate  any features of Obamacare that voters like, if there are any.
   They are talking about an insurance company bailout bill.  Pay the insurance companies more money if they keep writing Obamacare policies.  I don't like that.  If we are going to give my tax money away, it ought to go to individuals, not companies. 
   They are talking about  funding a gravy train to the states.  Give the states a big check (block grant is the DC jargon) and let the states do what ever they like with it.  I don't like that much either.  Give a state a handout, and they will spend all of it every time.  If the state has to raise the money thru taxation, they will be more frugal.  
    They are talking about $40 billion to fight opioid abuse.  Is this really health care, or is it law enforcement?  Surely having the cops out catching drug dealers is a serious part of anything  about opioids?   Is drug rehab medical treatment or an alternative to jail?  Does drug rehab even work?  I heard NPR saying that it doesn't.   Good old lefty NPR is usually in favor of things like drug rehab. So if even they say it doesn't work, I can believe them.  
    And the Republicans need to know that if they cannot get their act together and pass something, they are toast in 2018.  We have about 10 RINO senators that ought to be replaced. 

Tort lawsuits down substantially in ten years

Piece in the Wall St Journal yesterday.  They show some graphs with the number of tort lawsuits down by nearly half.  This is good news.   The Journal says state laws have been tightened up, and caps on tort recovery, even $250,000 caps,  have discouraged contingency fee lawyers,  $250,000 isn't enough to pay court costs and leave enough money for the lawyers, and the plaintiff gets peanuts.    All this sounds good, and we need more of it.  Doctors still have to buy malpractice insurance for $100,000 a year to protect themselves from lawyers.  That $100,000 per doctor comes out of our medical bills and health insurance premiums.
   Interesting tort case discussed.  A little girl at a WMCA summer camp was badly injured when a storm blew a tree down on her tent.  Parents felt she should have been in a cabin.   Times change, when I went to summer camp all of us campers spent the whole summer sleeping in tents.  

Prosecuting Hillary is a bad idea

The newsies are talking about Trump wants his AG, Jeff Sessions, to prosecute Hillary over her private email server.   Dunno if this is fake news or not. 
   But prosecuting Hillary is a bad idea.  She lost the presidency, that's enough grief to serve as adequate punishment for anyone.  Enough already.
   Worse, it amounts to criminalizing running for public office.   American law allows indicting of anyone at anytime for any thing.   Glenn Reynolds once said "You can indict a ham sandwich"  Public prosecutors work for the executive.  When the executives pleases they can jump on any one, and charges can always be trumped up.   In Hillary's case, her email server has gotta be in violation of US national security laws.  In a future case, a vindictive winner could invent some charge, and by picking the right judge, make it stick.  Pretty soon running for office, or even just posting to Facebook could become too dangerous for all but the richest individual's to do.
    I think we should just drop the Hillary matter.  Besides, prosecuting her will give her barrels of free media. 

Dunkirk, the movie, the real thing

I haven't seen the movie yet but it is getting good reviews.  Dunkirk was one of the decisive moments of WWII.  Hitler could have won the war that day.  As it was, Guderian's panzers had broken British resistance and were closing in for the kill until Hitler, fearing that his panzer spearhead was getting too far in front of the bulk of the German army, ordered Guderian to halt for two days.  That gave the British time to retreat to the small fishing port of Dunkirk and get evacuated back to England by the Royal Navy and a fleet of small civilian craft, yachts and fishing boats.  The British Expeditionary Force (BEF)  was 250,000 strong, the flower of the British Army.  Had they been captured by the Germans, it would have been a horrendous blow to British morale, and would have deprived the British of the experienced men needed to train up a new British army. 
   British morale was pretty low in the summer of 1940.  The British establishment, MP's, the press, academia, business, the aristocracy, even some members of the royal family, feared doing the trench warfare of WWI all over again, feared that the Germans were stronger than they were, and were ready to cut a deal with Hitler.  Something like, "We keep our fleet and empire, you keep all of Europe".  Hitler made noises about accepting such a deal that summer. 
   Churchill, newly elected Prime Minister, faced a lot of up hill sledding to convince the British to resist Hitler.  He just barely made it.  Had the men of the BEF been lost in 1940, the resulting downer for England might well have made Churchill's task impossible.  Had Britain signed some sort of pusillanimous deal with Hitler, the United States would stayed out of Europe, and minded its own business.  Pearl Harbor would have set our country on a path to annihilate Japan.  Without a friendly Britain to serve as a base,  it would have been difficult-to-impossible to apply American military force again the Third Reich. 
   So it's good to have a heroic movie about Dunkirk, even though the Wall St Journal criticized it for lacking any shots of Churchill. 

The City is the Battle Field of the Future

Title of an Op-Ed in Thursday's Wall St Journal.  The author, John Spencer,  an Army infantryman and deputy director of the West Point Modern War Institute, is calling for specialized training in urban warfare, and implies that the month battle for Mosul would have gone better if the troops had been trained in  specially built exercise city where they could practice tossing grenades in windows and shooting their way up stairways.  Mr. Spenser argues much of the world's population lives in big cities so the Army ought to train to fight in big cities.
   I gotta wonder if Mr Spenser has any knowledge of history at all.  Cities have been highly defensible strong points since ancient times.  Although modern cities lack walls (the invention of artillery made city walls obsolete) they still offer zillions of strong and hidden firing positions, stout masonry buildings that can resist all but the heaviest artillery fire, basements and subways and sewers and all kinds of bomb proof underground places, tall building from which to throw Molotov cocktails on enemy tanks, which are confined to city streets, and more. 
   The traditional way to subdue a city is to starve it out.  Surround the place, cut off all food and supplies, water if you can manage it, and wait them out.  Siege it's called.  In ancient times, siege was undependable, the besiegers often ran out of food before the besieged city did.  In modern times, with trucks and rail to bring up besieger's supplies, the siege can last longer than the city's supplies will. 
   The German's tried to take Stalingrad by frontal assault.  They spent six months at it.  A mere 60,000 Russians managed to hold off 250,000 Germans, and their tanks, artillery and aircraft.  The Russians fought house to house, floor to floor with grenades and sub machine guns.  When the Germans seized a building by daylight, the Russians counterattacked at night and took it back.   Paulus, the German commander, should have put his army across the Volga River, surrounded Stalingrad and starved it out.  He didn't, he threw his men into the teeth of Russian defenses and lost.
   No amount of special training in urban warfare is going to change the facts, cities are tough strong points, and assaulting them is very costly, and often fails.  Don't do frontal assault.  Surround the place and starve it out.