vote

Stiffing Stupak

by Bill O'Connell on March 5, 2010

Share and Recommend:

Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak stood next to Greta Van Susteren on her program last night with several small stacks of paper.  Each one of those stacks represented an existing federal law that banned using public money for abortion.  He said anyone of them, pick one, is acceptable to him to get him to vote for the Senate version of the health care bill.  He said President Obama signed a law, just ten weeks ago that had similar language.  He was baffled as to why he could not get an answer from the President or his committee chairman, Henry Waxman, why they would not just continue existing federal law.  Let me put forth my hypothesis.

The Real Healthcare Objective

President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of the statists have as their goal one, national health care provider, and that is the federal government.  I know that the “public option” has been in and out of the bill, and that the stated plan is for private insurers to continue to provide heath care insurance, but here is what I see as the real game plan:

  1. Do whatever it takes to cajole health insurance companies to sign on or at least shut up.
  2. Make sure that individuals do not take control over their health care purchasing decisions through high deductable plans and Health Savings Accounts.  Keep the 3rd party payer as the primary choice, which will allow health care costs to continue to rise.
  3. Put in a federal oversight panel to make sure health insurance providers do not make “excessive” profits.  In other words, price controls.
  4. With steps 2 and 3 in place health insurance providers will eventually leave the business or go bankrupt.  The federal government will have no choice but to step in so that all Americans continue to be covered.
  5. Eventually, the federal government is the last man standing and the de facto public option, or should I say, public mandate is in place. Voila.

The Stupak Problem

If the scenario unfolds as I have described, then the only way to pay for an abortion is through your federal health care insurance provider.  If the language Mr. Stupak wants is in the bill, abortions will be near impossible and Roe v. Wade will be dead.  Do you think President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, NOW, or other pro-abortion groups are going to stand for that?  Not a chance.

So the Democrats have to find a way to either hoodwink Stupak into voting for the bill without the language he wants or find a way to peel off the 29 or so other Democrats who agree with Stupak.  Watch closely what happens.

Share and Recommend:

Fair is Fair

by Bill O'Connell on March 23, 2009

Share and Recommend:

President Barack Obama is now proposing that shareholders should be allowed to vote to limit executive pay. After all they own the company, right? If that is such a good idea shouldn’t all of us vote on the pay of President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd, Charlie Rangle? And I don’t just mean within their districts, the whole country should vote on each of their salaries. After all they work for us, no? It would be interesting to see how much the American people would cut their $175,000 salaries since their approval ratings are abysmal.

If we did this, then many of these incompetent bloodsuckers would leave Congress and do something else. Then maybe we could replace them with real talent, who would be well paid because they do a good job: close the budget gap, shrink the size of government, cut taxes and let the economy grow.

I think Nancy Pelosi should work for $1 per year and see how fair that is. What do you think?

Share and Recommend:
© 2010 Liberty's Lifeline. All Rights Reserved.