Dramatic story of how even the simplest medical devices require government approval

Someone please explain to me why it was necessary to get government approval for a simple tube that allowed this baby to breathe.  Fortunately, it was possible to clear this quickly, but why did they have to go through this process at all?  From Fox News:

. . . In the case of Kaiba Gionfriddo, doctors didn't have a moment to spare. Because of a birth defect, the little Ohio boy's airway kept collapsing, causing his breathing to stop and often his heart, too. Doctors in Michigan had been researching artificial airway splints but had not implanted one in a patient yet.In a single day, they "printed out" 100 tiny tubes, using computer-guided lasers to stack and fuse thin layers of plastic instead of paper and ink to form various shapes and sizes. 

The next day, with special permission from the Food and Drug Administration, they implanted one of these tubes in Kaiba, the first time this has been done. . . .

Read More

Will Democrats blow up the Senate to make it easier to confirm executive branch nominees?

From Politico:

But it’s clear the majority leader wants to get something done and find 51 Democrats to support an unprecedented move to employ the so-called nuclear option — changing the rules so executive branch nominees can no longer be blocked by filibusters requiring 60 votes to break.Judicial nominees and legislation would very likely still face a 60-vote threshold on filibusters. . . .

I have a new book coming out next month, "Dumbing Down the Courts," that ironically shows that Obama has had a relatively easy time getting executive branch nominees confirmed.

An article in the LA Times makes this threat of rule changes all the more explicit:

Senate leaders had considered holding a vote this week to confirm Richard Cordray as head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a nomination Republicans have maintained they would filibuster unless the Obama administration agreed to overhaul the agency. . . . 

Action is also pending on two of Obama’s Cabinet nominations — Thomas E. Perez for Labor secretary and Gina McCarthy for EPA administrator — after party-line votes in Senate committees last week. Two other Cabinet picks face confirmation hearings later this week. 

At his weekly news conference, Reid told reporters that he would not bring those nominations to the full Senate until after it considers two major pieces of legislation, the farm bill and comprehensive immigration reform. 

“So we'll have to look at July,” he said, with the possible exception of a pending nominee for the D.C. Court of Appeals. “We're going to make sure that all the nominees have votes.” 

Reid declined to discuss further changes to the Senate’s filibuster rules Tuesday. But in recent weeks he has been ratcheting up pressure on Republicans over what he has called “blanket, partisan obstruction” of executive agency choices. . . .

The New York Times from May 16th adds this:

. . . Gina McCarthy, Mr. Obama’s choice to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, and Thomas E. Perez, the nominee to be secretary of labor, were approved in committee with only Democratic votes. Their nominations now go before the full Senate, where they face likely Republican filibusters. 

The threat of further Republican attempts to thwart the president’s ability to assemble his second-term cabinet has increased the likelihood of a fight over the Senate’s rules, which allow the minority party to insist on a 60-vote threshold for almost every Senate action. . . . 

Republicans insist they are standing in the way of nominees who merit more scrutiny and pointed to the advancement of two more Obama administration choices on Thursday: Sri Srinivasan, whose unanimous approval by the Senate Judiciary Committee sends him to the full Senate for confirmation to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and Ernest J. Moniz, the president’s pick for energy secretary, who was confirmed on a 97-to-0 vote by the full Senate on Thursday afternoon. . . .

Moniz is fairly radical guy and yet he got through without much trouble.

Read More

Handgun ban in the UK apparently didn't stop two terrorists there from getting guns

It took around 20 minutes for police to arrive on the scene after the terrorists attacked the soldier in London.  Apparently the terrorists were able to get guns. Will the British be willing to allow the gun laws that were in place up until 1920?  Of course, Britain's murder rate was much lower back then, but I assume that people will condemn the idea of this "primitive" solution to this threat.  From the UK Telegraph:

In the first terrorist murder on the British mainland since the 7/7 suicide bombings of 2005, the men attempted to behead the soldier, hacking at him like a “piece of meat” in front of dozens of witnesses, before both were shot by police who took around 20 minutes to arrive. . . . 

Speaking with a London accent, holding a knife and a meat cleaver and with his hands dripping with blood, he said:  . . .  

“We must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. I apologise that women had to witness this today but in our lands our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government, they don’t care about you. Do you think David Cameron is going to get caught in the street when we start busting our guns? Do you think your politicians are going to die?" . . . 

There were also questions over why it took around 20 minutes for armed police to arrive on the scene, during which time the killers calmly walked up and down the road, carrying their bloodied knives and a pistol, while members of the public confronted them.
When police did arrive, both gunmen tried to rush at the police and were shot, reportedly by a female officer. . . .

Read More

Washington Post has a hard time believing that Obama didn't know about the IRS investigation before he claims that he did

Ed Rogers writes in the Washington Post:

My personal favorite of all the new revelations from the Obama IRS scandal is that White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler told White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough about the impending IRS inspector general report, but of course the White House chief of staff did not tell the president. 

I sat in a White House chief of staff’s office every day for more than two years. Theonly reason the legal counsel would tell the chief of staff about an impending report or disclosure would be so the chief of staff could tell the president. The legal counsel would assume the chief of staff would know how and when to bring up the matter. The chief of staff would be expected to know if there were additional factors surrounding the issue that needed to be considered before the president was told, or whether or not others needed to be included in the conversation when the information was shared with the president. There are many valid reasons why the chief of staff would tell the president, but I can’t think of a reason why he and the legal counsel would both agree that this news nugget would go no further. It’s very odd. . . .

When even the Washington Post openly scoffs at Obama's claims to be completely out of the loop on these things you know Obama is in trouble.  My own belief is that things are even worse than this. 

1) The investigation into the IRS scandal was completed in May 2012.

'Just yesterday the committee interviewed Holly Paz, the director of exempt organizations, rulings and agreements, division of the IRS,' Issa said. 'While a tremendous amount of attention is centered about the Inspector General's report, or investigation, the committee has learned from Ms. Paz that she in fact participated in an IRS internal investigation that concluded in May of 2012 - May 3 of 2012 - and found essentially the same thing that Mr. George found more than a year later.' . . . 

2) Since this result was known, why wasn't it fixed? Is it credible that people at the top of Treasury wouldn't know about it?  Is it credible then that the Obama White House wasn't informed?  Surely informed simply to give them a heads up in case the study came to light in the middle of the 2012 presidential campaign.  Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin was told about the IG investigation in 2012.  Surely, he would have also known at that same time that this other investigation had been completed.

If the White House or even senior people at Treasury knew about this investigation that was completed in May 2012, Obama is in real trouble.  It is obvious why Obama wants to pretend that he was out of the loop, but the wall is cracking.

Read More

James Rosen's parents were targeting during DOJ probe

From the UK Daily Mail:

The revelations that the Justice Department targeted the emails of a Fox News reporter have become even more disturbing as even his parents were targeted in the probe, documents say. . . .Citing federal documents on Tuesday, Fox News host Bret Baier referred to 'seized phone records that relate to [Rosen's] parents' home in Staten Island.' . . .

Read More

Obama administration leaked information to try discrediting Operation Fast and Furious whistleblower

Contrast what Obama administration did with this guy who leaked information to discredit a whistleblower with what the administration is doing to reporters who obtained information that they are less thrilled by getting out.  From the New York Times:

The Justice Department’s independent inspector general on Monday criticized a former top federal prosecutor in Arizona, Dennis K. Burke, for leaking to Fox News a document in June 2011 about a federal agent who was raising alarms about the gun trafficking investigation known as Operation Fast and Furious. He called the prosecutor’s actions “particularly egregious” misconduct that was “wholly unbefitting a U.S. attorney.” 

The 21-page report, by the office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz, filled in new details about the reaction of the Phoenix prosecutor’s office to the furor over a botched investigation into a gun-smuggling network. Arizona-based agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives allowed hundreds of weapons to reach criminal hands. . . . 

The inspector general’s report cites internal e-mails and testimony that show Mr. Burke was “frustrated” at Mr. Dodson’s criticisms . . . .

Read More

Five Pennsylvania Universities now allowed concealed carry on campus

Five Pennsylvania universities, Kutztown University, Shippensburg, Edinboro, Slippery Rock, and Millersville, now allowed concealed carry on their campuses (though they are still forbidden inside school buildings).  Republican Governor Tom Corbett made a real difference here.

"A spokesperson for the governor's Office of General Counsel explained that “blanket firearms bans were vulnerable to constitutional challenge and exposed the universities [to legal claims].”"

Read More