There is so much going on right now in our world that it's hard to stick to one topic, especially when you write one column a week. So let's touch briefly on a few things that are going on right now.

I was listening to some business analysts on one of the liberal cable outlets talking about Apple bringing assembly of their iPhones back to America. CEO Tim Cook said that doing so would add about $50 to the cost of an iPhone. Now Mr. Clark said that tax reform, a.k.a. tax cuts, would be needed in order to keep the cost of the iPhone down. Several of the analysts did not support that position saying that Americans would gladly pay $50 more per phone just to support American jobs. I don't think that's right although there would be some that would do so but the phones are already expensive and I guess if you have a plan that allows you to pay overtime you probably don't mind. But why not look at all the reasons that it cost $50 more per phone to assemble them, not to manufacture them, but assemble them here. It's kind of like the discussion we had last week on the radio show about the cost of cataract surgery.

That also led to the topic of taxing corporate profits on their overseas sales. The United States is the only advanced economy in the world that taxes repatriated money from a corporation's overseas or out of country operations. Yet our political elite and the willfully ignorant liberals think we should tax those revenues and tax them heavily. The fact that companies, many of which are guided by CEOs who donate heavily to Democrat candidates, don't bring that money back to America should be enough evidence to prove that taxing that money is the wrong thing to do. It's a disincentive to bring that money back and invest it in America. Not to mention that we have the highest corporate tax rate and that cutting that rate to 15% would not only make us competitive but it would help small businesses as well. Talk about stimulating the economy and growing American jobs!

How can anyone continue to support any form of the affordable care act, whether it's Obamacare or that conglomeration that was passed in the House yesterday? Humana announced before yesterday's vote in fact, last week I think they announced this, that they had pulled out of 12 of the 16 state exchanges in which they participated and would pull out of the remaining for this year. They were just losing too much money. The stories go on about how this system is not working and while there are some good things in the bill passed by the House yesterday, this is still a government run insurance program that will be inefficient and will not achieve the goals of reducing premiums, reducing the deductibles, and increasing coverage.

Of course I have seen all over the media and in Facebook posts about those with pre-existing conditions being left out in the cold by the bill passed yesterday. That is so far from the truth but the slack-jawed, mouth breathing, Democrat voter believes that lie. The taxpayers will continue to pick up the bill in subsidizing state pools for those with pre-existing conditions. The mechanism for getting them insurance, more accurately called transfer payments, will change under this new iteration. I've also seen claims that this bill will discriminate against women leaving them without the ability to get mammograms, breast cancer treatment, etc. Simply because a line in the bill says that no provision of the bill can be construed to support gender bias or discrimination. Of course that line is taken out of context. But once again it's about obtaining and or retaining power so why tell the truth? Heck, even CNN said the claims about those with pre-existing conditions not being able to get coverage were a lie. If CNN is going to say it's a lie, then you know it's one of the worst lies ever told.

I was listening to a former CEO of Aetna insurance talking about the exchanges as set up under Obama care. He said that in Alaska 40% of the money collected to subsidize those on the exchange was used up by 36 people who had pre-existing conditions. That's why the exchanges do not work as a business model. It's not really insurance, it just has to become a transfer payment and you have to collect dollar for dollar from the taxpayer in order to pay for the medical bills of those with pre-existing conditions. Obamacare had set up a $130 billion fund to subsidize those people and now we've added a paltry $8 billion under the Republican plan.

Very quickly, you may have seen headlines in the fish wraps that claimed Hamas had changed their charter dropping the call for the destruction of Israel. Of course that is not true even though Hamas made an announcement that they along with the Palestinian Authority and other Arab organizations have agreed to remove that type of language from their rhetoric. What she did not see is that in the Arabic language new sources, Mr. Abbas, the leader of Hamas who was meeting with Pres. Trump last night, assured his followers that they still wanted the destruction of Israel and would never allow them to set up government in Jerusalem.

Jimmy Kimmel using his son's illness to speak out against repealing and replacing Obamacare was disingenuous at best. Now many people have criticized Kimmel for crying and getting so emotional and using his son's illness for political purposes. He has every right to do that as far as I'm concerned. What concerns me more is that he is being hypocritical and is not honest with his audience. Jimmy Kimmel makes a ton of money. If he did not have insurance that is his choice and his fault. Even with the outrageously high premiums for individual health insurance programs, he could afford them. To act like his child would not have gotten care if Obamacare was repealed is an outright lie.