This is what Andrew Breitbart warned us about and fought so courageously against. The lies of the left to advance their agenda. Do we roll over, or do we take up the torch and continue the fight? Click to read more
health insurance
What do you do when you can’t run on your record? If you watch the Democrats you will find out. The answer is to manufacture bogus issues out of thin air and try to anger and scare people into voting against dismal Democrat policies.
President Obama is trying to walk back from the war he started with Catholics by trying to cram down their throats his dictates that go against their core beliefs. His administration says they are open to work something out. I am glad to hear that. The fix is simple.
Judging by the two mail pieces I just received from my congressman, Tim Bishop, it looks like he has settled on his reelection strategy. After all, he doesn’t want to run on his record (ObamaCare, bailouts, Stimulus, trillions in deficit spending); with the demise of earmarks he can’t say he’s bringing home the bacon; since he is facing a re-match in his reelection bid, using the same smear tactics this time around will be harder; so let’s scare the bejeezus out of the seniors.
As indicated in a previous post, President Obama’s reelection effort depended on him walking a tightrope that required him to stem the hemorrhage of independent supporters while keeping the livid left on his side. His State of the Union address showed him confidently stepping out on the high wire, with lofty language extolling the virtues of America. But by the end of the speech it looked like the aerialist was leaning to one side, sticking his leg out on the other as a counterbalance while starting to pinwheel his arms backwards to avert a fall.
This is from today’s New York Times:
“Fearing that health insurance premiums may shoot up in the next few years, Senate Democrats laid a foundation on Tuesday for federal regulation of rates, four weeks after President Obama signed a law intended to rein in soaring health costs.”
With the ink barely dry on ObamaCare, Democrats in Congress are scrambling to keep their masterpiece from unraveling. As I have pointed out repeatedly, there is nothing in the ObamaCare plan that helps reduce the cost of delivering health care. It is all about controlling what doctors, medical service providers, and insurance companies are paid. All the underlying pressures on health costs (tort reform, 3rd party payer, etc.) are still in place.
“We Have to Pass the Bill to Know What’s In It”
Nancy Pelosi’s stunning but famous words are coming into play. Let’s see what has the senators panicked.
- To hoodwink the American people that this abomination is cost effective, ObamaCare warms up by hitting us with four years of taxes before the expensive benefits come into play.
- Every American will be required to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty. That penalty will initially be $95 per adult in 2014, rising to $695 per adult in 2016 and $2,085 for a family. This money will be collected by the IRS, not by insurance companies
- Americans cannot be denied coverage for an existing condition
So here’s the scenario. If you compare the cost of the penalty of $2,085 for a family vs. the cost of insurance for a family of $10,000, coupled with the inability of insurance companies to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, healthy people will start dropping insurance coverage left and right. Why not? On the way to the hospital, you can call an insurance company and say you want to be covered for the pains in your chest and you cannot be denied. So insurance companies will only have sick people as clients. With only sick people that they constantly have to pay claims on, their only course of action if they want to stay in business is to raise premiums on all those sick people. If they start doing it now, they may be able to raise them less than if they wait until 2016.
So the insurance companies are acting rationally to this mess the Democrats dragged across the finish line and now they are shocked, SHOCKED, that they should do this.
Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, a research center that advocates free-market health policies, said the Democrats’ proposal was unlikely to succeed in lowering insurance costs.
“Capping premiums without recognizing the forces that are driving up costs would be like tightening the lid on a pressure cooker while the heat is being turned up,” Mrs. Turner said.
The Democratic fix is to have a new bureaucracy that will provide a check on unjustified premiums. I think you can look at this in one of two ways, both plausible. The Democrats were stupid enough to believe, as they typically do, that Americans don’t act rationally to their government policies. It’s also why they don’t understand that when they raise taxes they never collect as much money as they thought, and when taxes are cut they can’t believe how much money flows into the Treasury due to economic growth. The second scenario is this new commission will cap premiums to the point of driving private insurance companies out of business and then the Democrats will say, “Geez, we didn’t want to do this, but I guess we have to put in place a public option that, by the way, will be the only option.”
Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, the No. 3 Republican in the Senate, said: “Health insurance companies’ profits for one year equal about two days of health care spending in the United States. So even if we were to take away all the profits of the so-called greedy insurance companies, that would still leave 363 days a year when health care costs are expanding at a rate our country cannot afford.”
Now that I think about it, it is probably the second scenario that is more likely, that is, force the public option. Your government is about to swallow up another big chunk of the economy if we don’t turn them out in November.
The Democrats are currently trying to roll out that old war horse, “class warfare” in a desperate attempt to arrest their freefall in the polls. The myth is that they are for the little guy when they are the party of big government. Businesses, once they get big, are hardly fans of the free market as they would much prefer to settle into a profitable market niche and not have to keep battling against upstarts.
Show Me the Money
An organization known as OpenSecrets.org, has a website that has information on contributions to the 2008 presidential campaign. The list of top contributors is not a list of contributions by corporations but by contributions from those company’s Political Action Committees, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals’ immediate families, but it does give you a sense of where the people who make up these companies see their bread buttered.
If you look at the top 20 donors to Obama compared to the top 20 donors to McCain, the 20th donor on Obama’s list gave 32% more to Obama than the top donor to McCain. As with any large organization there will be individuals who support Republicans and individuals who support Democrats, as well as their PACs wanting hedge bets by giving to both. But the amounts are telling.
What is particularly illuminating is with regard to Wall Street and the Banks. The Democrats are latching onto the sound bite that they want more regulation to protect the little guy, while the Republicans want less regulation so that Wall Street and the banks can get rich at the expense of the little guy.
Who’s Dumber Wall Street or the Democrats?
Does anyone believe that the leaders of Wall Street would give money to a candidate or party without expecting their point of view to be heard? Does anyone believe that the Democrats would take contributions and then turn around and burn those who contributed so generously, particularly before a very tough election? Okay, now that we have that settled let’s look at the numbers.
The top Wall Street and Bank Contributors to Obama’s election were as follows:
- Goldman Sachs — $994,795
- Citigroup — $701,290
- JP Morgan Chase — $695,132
- UBS AG — $543,219
- Morgan Stanley — $514,881
The top Wall Street and Bank Contributors to McCain’s election were as follows:
- Merrill Lynch — $373, 595 (subsequently sold to Bank of America)
- Citigroup — $322,051
- Morgan Stanley — $273,452
- Goldman Sachs — $230,095
- JP Morgan Chase — $228,107
- Wachovia — $195,063 (acquired by Wells Fargo)
- UBS AG — $192,493
- Credit Suisse — $183,353
- Bank of America — $166,026
- Bear Stearns — $117,498 (subsequently sold to JP Morgan Chase in a fire sale)
- Lehman Brothers — $114,357 (Bankrupt)
It looks like four of the companies with people who gave to McCain didn’t survive the meltdown and either disappeared or were swallowed up by the winners. If you look as people from companies that gave to both candidates, the amounts are significantly different:
- Goldman Sachs associates gave $764,700 more to Obama than McCain
- Citigroup associates gave $379,239 more to Obama than McCain
- JP Morgan associates gave $467,025 more to Obama than McCain
- UBS associates gave $350,726 more to Obama than McCain
- Morgan Stanley gave $241,429 more to Obama than McCain
I am not suggesting any quid pro quo for the contributions, but people do things for a reason. Who do you think will be more sensitive to the needs of Wall Street, Obama or the Republicans?
So look for a Financial Reform package that is a lot of smoke and mirrors that actually does nothing constructive. Republicans will oppose it, and Democrats will try to flog them as being for Wall Street and the Banks and against the little guy, but facts are facts. Remember, after passing ObamaCare Democrats tried to paint the picture that they stood up to the insurance companies, when they passed a law that will compel millions of Americans to become customers of those same insurance companies. Do you think that is why the opposition from the insurance companies was muted?
It’s time to drive home the point that this Administration is allied with Wall Street, GE, health insurance companies against us. It should not be hard to do. People are listening closely like never before.
In an article titled, “An Article of Faith,” Charles M. Blow of the New York Times explains about Obama and Health Care. I am glad he took the time to set down the statist’s case. It much easier to expose them when they step into the sunlight.
“The Apostles of Anger {that’s us} in their echo chamber of fallacies have branded him the enemy. This has now become an article of faith. Obama isn’t just the enemy of small government and national solvency. He’s the enemy of liberty.”
Enemy, noun, persons that are hostile to one another.
Sounds like Mr. Blow is onto something there. Let’s see poll after poll has the American people opposed to ObamaCare by around 55% to 60%. President Obama shows his hostility to the American people by saying he doesn’t care what they think, he, President Obama, knows what’s best for them and will ram this thing through by gimmicks such as reconciliation rather than the normal approval process. Yes, I guess that makes him an enemy, but it was accomplished through his own actions, not by talk radio or Fox News.
Liberty, noun, freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control.
Again, it looks like Mr. Blow nails it. We have the government under ObamaCare telling us we have to buy insurance or pay a tax or go to jail for non-payment of taxes. Sounds pretty arbitrary and despotic to me. So President Obama has decided to act in a way that makes us his enemy. I guess Mr. Blow is trying to say we are to be faulted for recognizing it?
“This underscores the current fight for the soul of this country. It’s not just a tug of war between left and right. It’s a struggle between the mind and the heart, between evidence and emotions, between reason and anger, between what we know and what we believe.”
Uh-oh, here it comes folks the statist is about to point out how stupid we are for not going along like sheep to slaughter. Notice the word order first it’s left then right. If you follow that order Mr. Blow is trying to say that the left stands for the mind, the evidence, reason and what we know, while the right stands for heart, emotions, anger, and beliefs. I am sure Mr. Blow will now use his superior intellect to explain this all to us knuckle dragging troglodytes.
“This conflict was captured in a tit-for-tat between Obama and Rush Limbaugh. In an interview with CBS this week, Obama complained about the “vitriol” coming from the likes of Limbaugh: ‘I think the vast majority of Americans know that we’re trying hard, that I want what’s best for the country.’
“Limbaugh shot back on Friday, “I and most Americans do not believe President Obama is trying to do what’s best for the country.”
That’s pretty weak. So despite 55% to 60% of the American people, for months on end, saying or should I say screaming NO! this is not what we want, Mr. Obama is saying as if to a small child, “There, there now, take your medicine, I know what’s best for you.” Where Mr. Limbaugh is humble enough not to claim god-like omniscience that he knows what people think, just that based on his observations of the polls, what he believes they think. It sounds like Mr. Blow is making a case for Mr. Obama being the most arrogant president in our history. Please continue.
“And there it was. Obama’s language focused on what people “know,” or should know. He seems to find comfort in the empirical nature of knowledge. It’s logical. Limbaugh’s language focused on what he thinks people “believe.” Beliefs are a more complicated blend of facts, or lies, and faith. And, they can exist beyond the realm of the rational.”
Really? Is Mr. Blow serious? Does he believe this or does he know this? Of what knowledge are you speaking Mr. Blow, in which President Obama takes warm comfort? Is it the empirical knowledge that estimates of what Medicare would cost when it was passed turned out to be understated by 700%? Is it the empirical knowledge that the model for ObamaCare up in Massachusetts has not stopped costs from increasing and health care is being rationed? Of course, when Mr. Blow speaks of the right and their beliefs he has to work “lies” into the formula of the “complicated blend of facts, lies and faith.”
“According to another Quinnipiac poll released last week, Republicans were far more likely than Democrats to say that they follow public affairs most of the time. But how? They listen to people like Limbaugh, and they’re more likely than others to watch Fox News.”
Let me call your Quinnipiac poll and raise you one. In its daily poll on the president Rasmussen finds that while 53% of likely voters disapprove of the job President Obama is doing, 55% of the media write favorable articles about him and that is on a downward trend! So if people want the truth, who should they turn to for their news, the New York Times perhaps? I think your article just answered that question.
“But invectives are not information. For example, a poll released on Wednesday by the Pew Research Center found that most Republicans say that they still don’t understand how the new health care reform will affect them and their family.”
Republicans still don’t understand??? Nobody understands it, Mr. Blow, because nobody read it before it passed Congress. At over 2,500 pages, if you did nothing else but read the bill in the seventy two hours it was posted in the internet, it is not likely you could have read it. No sleeping, no eating, no lavatory breaks, just three straight days of reading it and you would be hard pressed to get all the way through. Since you are such a fan of empirical evidence, when major companies announced billions in write-offs because of the bill and the legal requirement to so report, Congressman Henry Waxman appeared shocked and called for hearings. When Congressman Anthony Weiner said the IRS would not be checking on whether or not you had health insurance, he couldn’t explain why the law funds 16,000 more IRS agents. This circus is only starting my friend.
And so, my fellow imbeciles, Mr. Blow has spoken with a scathingly inept defense of all things Obama, making the case for a strong turnout at the Tea Parties on April 15 at the very same time. If you want to know the news watch Fox, if you believe you want to house train your dog, get the New York Times.
That was the famous “Pottery Barn” analogy that Colin Powell used regarding the war in Iraq. Now that ObamaCare + Reconciliation is done, all the ugly details that come crawling out of the health care bill like cockroaches when you turn the lights on, will all come to you courtesy of the Democrats.
Because they chose to go the reconciliation route, the Senate could not dare change a word in the House bill of “fixes” so they could approve what the House sent them with less than 60 votes. Here’s a sampling of what the genius of government brings you, wrapped in arrogance, with a bow of disdain for the people, as reported by Kimberly Strassel in the Wall Street Journal:
“Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) offered language to bar the government from subsidizing erectile dysfunction drugs for convicted pedophiles and rapists. Democrats voted . . . No! Orrin Hatch (R., Utah) proposed exempting wounded soldiers from the new tax on medical devices. Democrats: No way! Pat Roberts (R., Kan.) wanted to exempt critical access rural hospitals from funding cuts. Senate Democrats: Forget it! This was Republicans’ opportunity to lay out every ugly provision and consequence of ObamaCare, and Democrats—because of the process they’d chosen—had to defend it all.
And so it went, into the wee Thursday hours. All Democrats in favor of taxing pacemakers? Aye! All Democrats in favor of keeping those seedy vote buyoffs? Aye! All Democrats in favor of raising taxes on middle-income families? Aye! All Democrats in favor of exempting themselves from elements of ObamaCare? Aye!”
Now doesn’t that just make you warm and fuzzy inside?
Bill O’Reilly and Congressman Anthony Weiner had a debate on O’Reilly ‘s show that was jaw-dropping to listen to. Weiner said that O’Reilly and others were blatantly misstating the facts about the health care bill. O’Reilly questioned Weiner about the IRS learning details about people such as whether or not they had health insurance. Weiner said that was untrue and that if you wanted to get a tax credit for health care, you had to say on your tax return that you had health insurance. He said it is just like if you claimed a tax credit as a first time homebuyer (I won’t get into all the fraud taking place on the homebuyer credit, even by IRS employees). So according to Weiner it’s all voluntary reporting, just as takes place every year when we file our taxes. How can Weiner stand there and make such a statement? A key requirement is that everyone has to be covered by health insurance according to the law and the law provides for hiring 16,000 more IRS agents! Well what are those agents going to be doing if not following up with you if you don’t say you are covered? Weiner danced and dodged and at one point stood silently pouting when O’Reilly tried to pin him down.
This is ugly and it is going to get uglier as we learn what is in this cancer on our economy. But Nancy Pelosi warned us. “We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.” Well, they passed it, now we get all the bad news.
