Posted by Maggie @ Maggie's Notebook
Showing posts with label Obamacare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obamacare. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
ObamaCare Still Cannot Verify Income - Subsidies Given to Non-Eligible
There are two sides to this story. One that ObamaCare subsidies (lower health care costs) are being given to those not eligible for them. The "system" doesn't have a built-in "way to verify income" and other information. Some of the "other information" includes no way to verify naturalized citizenship or a permanent legal resident status. Some are blocked because the system allows no way to prove citizenship eligibility. Read more at Breitbart...
Posted by Maggie @ Maggie's Notebook
Posted by Maggie @ Maggie's Notebook
Sunday, May 18, 2014
Des Moines Medical Center Layoff Due to ObamaCare - In the meantime...
Remember that Obama took $500 billion up to perhaps $700+ billion, in more recent years, from Medicare? The cuts were made to services rendered to patients, payments made to doctors, and to home health providers. The Des Moines Mercy Medical Center is cutting $38 million from their budget. They are modifying manager pay, reducing pay for directorships, reducing hours for certain jobs and not filling empty positions. Out of a director, two managers and a supervisor managing 75 staffers, one position will be cut with a total of 29 losing their job. It doesn’t sound like a top-heavy situation to me, especially in a hospital environment. The layoffs are due to the low reimbursements for Medicare and Medicaid patients, and changes“associated with the Affordable Care Act.”
In the meantime, those on Medicare continue to pay a monthly premium that increases every year, as well as an additional monthly premium for a supplemental policy to pay for any portion that Medicare does not cover, and another payment for a dental plan.
In the meantime, those on Medicare continue to pay a monthly premium that increases every year, as well as an additional monthly premium for a supplemental policy to pay for any portion that Medicare does not cover, and another payment for a dental plan.
In the meantime, Medicaid patients pay nothing.
In the meantime, what Medicare is left, funds healthcare for illegal aliens.
In the meantime, ObamaCare pays a Medicare subsidy for anyone retiring before the legal retirement age. You see, it “meets their health needs.” Have your “health needs” been met.
In the meantime, Bradley Manning, the U.S. military operative behind Wiki-Leaks, is in prison and the Pentagon just approved his sex-change operation, while at least 40 veterans died waiting to be seen by a physician. Taxpayers foot the bill for Manning’s “gender dysphoria.“
In the meantime, military health care costs increased 345 percent.
In the meantime, taxpayers lost $474 million in failed ObamaCare state exchanges.Now it starts all over again.
In the meantime, as of December 2013, the cost of the “glitchy Obamacare website has topped $1 billion,” and still isn’t completed.
In the meantime, as of March 2014, a critical part of healthcare.gov is still not fixed — at what cost, we don’t know.
In the meantime, unions received a huge tax break, that is not a part of law, it is an Obama “rule,” forgiving $63 for each insured employee, and $63 for each covered family member. Cha-chin, cha-ching. Right out of your pocket, any way you look at it.
In the meantime, 15-year-olds wanting sterilization, needn’t bother with parental consent. Barack Obama says its okay, and you and I will pay for it.
In the meantime, $1 of every health policy, every month, creates the fund to pay for free abortions through ObamaCare.
In the meantime, Senator Ted Cruz says the paperwork necessary to maintain ObamaCare will require more than 190 million hours, annually. How many critical staffers will be cut to process this obscene mess?
In the meantime, Mercy Medical Center in Des Moines is also shutting down it’s outpatient mental health clinic that has 8,000 patients due to a psychiatrist shortage.
In the meantime, one thing never changes, not a single Republican voted for the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as ObamaCare.
Wednesday, January 1, 2014
Happy New Year!
May 2014 be a better year than 2013. May the Republicans NOT screw up the real chance we have to retake the Senate. No former witches, no idiot uncles, no shut downs, and more than just Obamacare. We can do it if they don't screw it up!
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!!
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Is A Guaranteed Minimum Income Next? ~~ J.D. Longstreet
Stolen from Faultline USA
About a year and a half go, I wrote of my concern that the Obama Administration would soon seek a guaranteed minimum income for every American. As we have watched the the unemployment benefits extended and extended and extended again and again, one must wonder if, in the end, that isn't exactly where we are headed. My concern has not slacked one iota.
Below is the article, shortened a bit. I hope you find it informative and enlightening. ... JDL
**************************************
If the Obama Administration and his fellow Socialist/Marxist/Progressives (who camouflage themselves as democrats) in the US government aren't sent packing in November, I fully expect the next step in securing a socialist state in America is a guaranteed annual (minimum) income for every American.
Think about it. It is one of the few steps remaining that would solidify the hold government has on every man, woman, and child in America.
We know from the records that the welfare rolls have increased exponentially under Obama. Recently, changes were made by Presidential Executive Order to redefine "work" allowing even more applicants for welfare to be added to the welfare rolls. Why? Could it be the Obama Administration is deliberately attempting to "crash" the US welfare system? If so -- why?
I contend -- that is exactly what is happening.
If I an correct, then we are actually seeing the "Cloward-Piven Strategy" at work. We are observing the foundation, the groundwork -- if you will -- for establishing a guaranteed annual (minimum) income for American citizens. It is very, very, worrisome. But -- it is only the latest move by our socialist leaders to break America so they can re-mold her in the image of their choosing, which is, unarguably a socialist/Marxist state.
America is in a death spiral, dear reader. If the American electorate doesn't shake itself out of this stupor in which it is currently wallowing and come out swinging like the people we like to think we are, we are going to lose our liberty, our individual freedom, and our country.
What we are talking about here is "a government-ensured guarantee that all citizens unconditionally receive an income sufficient to meet their basic needs." SOURCE
Look around you. Consider the extremely high percentage of Americans already on what we call "Welfare" and consider, too, that nearly half of all Americans currently receive some form of government monetary assistance every month and then -- ask yourself what will happen to America's economy if Americans are guaranteed an annual income whether they work and contribute to our society or not.
Let's look a bit closer: What is a BIG? It is a Basic Income Guarantee. "The basic income guarantee (BIG) is a government insured guarantee that no citizen's income will fall below some minimal level for any reason. All citizens would receive a BIG without means test or work requirement. BIG is an efficient and effective solution to poverty that preserves individual autonomy and work incentives while simplifying government social policy. Some researchers estimate that a small BIG, sufficient to cut the poverty rate in half could be financed without an increase in taxes by redirecting funds from spending programs and tax deductions aimed at maintaining incomes." SOURCE
Here's more: "The Basic Income Guarantee (BIG) is a government ensured guarantee that no one's income will fall below the level necessary to meet their most basic needs for any reason. As Bertrand Russell put it in 1918, "A certain small income, sufficient for necessities, should be secured for all, whether they work or not, and that a larger income should be given to those who are willing to engage in some work which the community recognizes as useful. On this basis we may build further." Thus, with BIG no one is destitute but everyone has the positive incentive to work. BIG is an efficient, effective, and equitable solution to poverty that promotes individual freedom and leaves the beneficial aspects of a market economy in place." SOURCE
OK. So, how would we pay for it? Those who advocate the BIG say (above): " ... could be financed without an increase in taxes by redirecting funds from spending programs and tax deductions aimed at maintaining incomes."
HUH?
That's strange because just a bit lower on the page we find this: "The most commonly cited source of revenue for BIG is the income tax. Most proposals combine a basic income guarantee with a flat tax on income. Charles Clark estimates that a flat income tax rate of less than 40% would be enough to finance all current government spending and a BIG large enough to eliminate poverty." SOURCE
I have to wonder if "less than 40%" means 39.99%?
It's coming. How can I be so sure? Because the next attempt at a BIG for the US will be only the latest iteration. The movement for a guaranteed income has been around for a long time. A quick check for advocates of a guaranteed income at Wikipedia brought some surprises. For Instance: American revolutionary Thomas Paine advocated a basic income guarantee to all US citizens as compensation for "loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property" (Agrarian Justice, 1795).
French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte echoed Paine's sentiments and commented that 'man is entitled by birthright to a share of the Earth's produce sufficient to fill the needs of his existence' (Herold, 1955).
In 1962, economist Milton Friedman proposed a Negative Income Tax coupled with a flat tax in support of a guaranteed minimum income.
In 1963, Robert Theobald published the book Free Men and Free Markets, in which he advocated a guaranteed minimum income (the origin of the modern version of the phrase).
In 1966 the Cloward–Piven strategy advocated "overloading" the US welfare system to force its collapse in the hopes that it would be replaced by "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".
In his final book Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? (1967) Martin Luther King Jr. wrote: "I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective — the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income." -—from the chapter titled "Where We Are Going".
In 1968, James Tobin, Paul Samuelson, John Kenneth Galbraith and another 1,200 economists signed a document calling for the US Congress to introduce in that year a system of income guarantees and supplements.
In 1973, Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote The Politics of a Guaranteed Income in which he advocated the Guaranteed Minimum Income and discussed Richard Nixon's GAI proposal.
We encourage you to read the article at Wikipedia
There are references to other advocates of a national guaranteed income in the article at Wikipedia, but I think you get the idea.
Oh, and while you are on the Wikipedia page, scroll down and check out the list of suggested means of funding for a national guaranteed income. But -- be sure you are sitting down before you do.
A guaranteed income for all Americans is the worst idea for America since, well, Obamacare!
Item number two in the The Black Panther Party: Platform and Program includes the following statement: "We believe that the federal government is responsible and obligated to give every man employment or a guaranteed income." SOURCE
As I mentioned above -- I have to wonder if the massive increase in the number of Americans on Welfare under the Obama Administration is in keeping with the Cloward–Piven strategy which suggests overloading the US welfare system forcing it to collapse and setting the stage for a guaranteed income for all Americans. You can read more on the Cloward-Piven strategy here.
I cannot even begin to tell you how deeply, deeply, opposed to the entire idea of a guaranteed annual income for all Americans I am. The American republic would be crushed and wiped out by internal rot!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The only way to make this work is to tax everyone at a 70% rate. Not just the rich, but everyone. Think how that would go over.
We can laugh now, but Moonbat ideas like this one has a way of becoming reality. And after the debacle of Obamacare do we really want this to be enforced upon us? And if the Democrats get the House back they will do this. Just a warning.
About a year and a half go, I wrote of my concern that the Obama Administration would soon seek a guaranteed minimum income for every American. As we have watched the the unemployment benefits extended and extended and extended again and again, one must wonder if, in the end, that isn't exactly where we are headed. My concern has not slacked one iota.
Below is the article, shortened a bit. I hope you find it informative and enlightening. ... JDL
**************************************
If the Obama Administration and his fellow Socialist/Marxist/Progressives (who camouflage themselves as democrats) in the US government aren't sent packing in November, I fully expect the next step in securing a socialist state in America is a guaranteed annual (minimum) income for every American.
Think about it. It is one of the few steps remaining that would solidify the hold government has on every man, woman, and child in America.
We know from the records that the welfare rolls have increased exponentially under Obama. Recently, changes were made by Presidential Executive Order to redefine "work" allowing even more applicants for welfare to be added to the welfare rolls. Why? Could it be the Obama Administration is deliberately attempting to "crash" the US welfare system? If so -- why?
I contend -- that is exactly what is happening.
If I an correct, then we are actually seeing the "Cloward-Piven Strategy" at work. We are observing the foundation, the groundwork -- if you will -- for establishing a guaranteed annual (minimum) income for American citizens. It is very, very, worrisome. But -- it is only the latest move by our socialist leaders to break America so they can re-mold her in the image of their choosing, which is, unarguably a socialist/Marxist state.
America is in a death spiral, dear reader. If the American electorate doesn't shake itself out of this stupor in which it is currently wallowing and come out swinging like the people we like to think we are, we are going to lose our liberty, our individual freedom, and our country.
What we are talking about here is "a government-ensured guarantee that all citizens unconditionally receive an income sufficient to meet their basic needs." SOURCE
Look around you. Consider the extremely high percentage of Americans already on what we call "Welfare" and consider, too, that nearly half of all Americans currently receive some form of government monetary assistance every month and then -- ask yourself what will happen to America's economy if Americans are guaranteed an annual income whether they work and contribute to our society or not.
Let's look a bit closer: What is a BIG? It is a Basic Income Guarantee. "The basic income guarantee (BIG) is a government insured guarantee that no citizen's income will fall below some minimal level for any reason. All citizens would receive a BIG without means test or work requirement. BIG is an efficient and effective solution to poverty that preserves individual autonomy and work incentives while simplifying government social policy. Some researchers estimate that a small BIG, sufficient to cut the poverty rate in half could be financed without an increase in taxes by redirecting funds from spending programs and tax deductions aimed at maintaining incomes." SOURCE
Here's more: "The Basic Income Guarantee (BIG) is a government ensured guarantee that no one's income will fall below the level necessary to meet their most basic needs for any reason. As Bertrand Russell put it in 1918, "A certain small income, sufficient for necessities, should be secured for all, whether they work or not, and that a larger income should be given to those who are willing to engage in some work which the community recognizes as useful. On this basis we may build further." Thus, with BIG no one is destitute but everyone has the positive incentive to work. BIG is an efficient, effective, and equitable solution to poverty that promotes individual freedom and leaves the beneficial aspects of a market economy in place." SOURCE
OK. So, how would we pay for it? Those who advocate the BIG say (above): " ... could be financed without an increase in taxes by redirecting funds from spending programs and tax deductions aimed at maintaining incomes."
HUH?
That's strange because just a bit lower on the page we find this: "The most commonly cited source of revenue for BIG is the income tax. Most proposals combine a basic income guarantee with a flat tax on income. Charles Clark estimates that a flat income tax rate of less than 40% would be enough to finance all current government spending and a BIG large enough to eliminate poverty." SOURCE
I have to wonder if "less than 40%" means 39.99%?
It's coming. How can I be so sure? Because the next attempt at a BIG for the US will be only the latest iteration. The movement for a guaranteed income has been around for a long time. A quick check for advocates of a guaranteed income at Wikipedia brought some surprises. For Instance: American revolutionary Thomas Paine advocated a basic income guarantee to all US citizens as compensation for "loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property" (Agrarian Justice, 1795).
French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte echoed Paine's sentiments and commented that 'man is entitled by birthright to a share of the Earth's produce sufficient to fill the needs of his existence' (Herold, 1955).
In 1962, economist Milton Friedman proposed a Negative Income Tax coupled with a flat tax in support of a guaranteed minimum income.
In 1963, Robert Theobald published the book Free Men and Free Markets, in which he advocated a guaranteed minimum income (the origin of the modern version of the phrase).
In 1966 the Cloward–Piven strategy advocated "overloading" the US welfare system to force its collapse in the hopes that it would be replaced by "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".
In his final book Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? (1967) Martin Luther King Jr. wrote: "I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective — the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income." -—from the chapter titled "Where We Are Going".
In 1968, James Tobin, Paul Samuelson, John Kenneth Galbraith and another 1,200 economists signed a document calling for the US Congress to introduce in that year a system of income guarantees and supplements.
In 1973, Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote The Politics of a Guaranteed Income in which he advocated the Guaranteed Minimum Income and discussed Richard Nixon's GAI proposal.
We encourage you to read the article at Wikipedia
There are references to other advocates of a national guaranteed income in the article at Wikipedia, but I think you get the idea.
Oh, and while you are on the Wikipedia page, scroll down and check out the list of suggested means of funding for a national guaranteed income. But -- be sure you are sitting down before you do.
A guaranteed income for all Americans is the worst idea for America since, well, Obamacare!
Item number two in the The Black Panther Party: Platform and Program includes the following statement: "We believe that the federal government is responsible and obligated to give every man employment or a guaranteed income." SOURCE
As I mentioned above -- I have to wonder if the massive increase in the number of Americans on Welfare under the Obama Administration is in keeping with the Cloward–Piven strategy which suggests overloading the US welfare system forcing it to collapse and setting the stage for a guaranteed income for all Americans. You can read more on the Cloward-Piven strategy here.
I cannot even begin to tell you how deeply, deeply, opposed to the entire idea of a guaranteed annual income for all Americans I am. The American republic would be crushed and wiped out by internal rot!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The only way to make this work is to tax everyone at a 70% rate. Not just the rich, but everyone. Think how that would go over.
We can laugh now, but Moonbat ideas like this one has a way of becoming reality. And after the debacle of Obamacare do we really want this to be enforced upon us? And if the Democrats get the House back they will do this. Just a warning.
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
Monday, November 18, 2013
President Pinocchio’s War of Distraction
From The Blaze
Once upon a time, the Prince of Hope-N-Change stomped angrily around the White Castle. He jumped on the furniture, and kicked his golf bag so hard he snapped the shaft of his favorite putter.
Why was he so filled with rage?
Because, for the first time ever, he had been caught in his gollywhomper lies.
“Like your doctor? Keep your doctor. Period.”
“Like your health care plan? Keep your health care plan. Period.”
Being nailed as a “mis-spoken teller of incorrect truth” had caused the Prince of Hope-N-Change’s popularity and job approval ratings to plummet. Even his media lap dogs had turned against him. Instead of being cheered as the “Chosen One,” he was mocked and called “The Lying King,” and “President Pinocchio.”
All those years of campaigning for his healthcare plan, traveling hither and yon, toughing it out in five-star golf resorts, accompanied by teleprompters, valets, drama coaches, and food tasters…all that effort had been expended for nothing. His adoring public had lost that lovin’ feeling.
How did this happen? Increasing numbers of citizens learned what was in the 2,000+ pages of his healthcare law. They discovered what he had known all along. Obamacare would force millions of citizens to lose their healthcare plans and doctors and be shoved into insurance programs they couldn’t afford and didn’t want.
Obamacare had been exposed for what it was: redistribution of wealth in America, a yellow brick road leading to single-payer socialized medicine.
Medicaid for all. Quality for none.
Desperate to escape the mantle of responsibility, the Prince snuck into a basement vault to consult his most trusted oracle.
“Mirror, mirror on the wall, am I still beloved by all?”
“Poof!” The image of the magic mirror lady, Ezmerelda, floated into the mirror.
“Hello Dearie. You might want to rephrase? Begin with a question I can answer in a positive manner.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change thought for a moment.
“Mirror, mirror, on the wall, can I still out snooker all?”
Ezmerelda nodded. “Of course you can. Simply launch a distraction or two.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change asked, “You mean, like a war with Iran or Syria? Maybe Israel?”
“Pray tell, why would you attack your one and only ally in the Mid East?”
“I told Israel to shift their border back to where it was in 1966, but they won’t do it, and I gotta’ teach ‘um a lesson about . . .”
Ezmerelda interrupted. “Dearie, you are the least qualified person on the planet to advise or demand anything from any country. Your foreign policy track record is exactly 100 percent failure. You gave the Mid East to Russia; betrayed your Brotherhood pals in Egypt; backed out of Libya; lost Yemen to terrorist control; armed Al Qaeda in Syria, and dumped Saudi Arabia and Israel under the bus. Better you should focus on distractions at home.”
“Start by hopping back onto the women’s rights bandwagon. But, beware. The right-to-life voices are louder than ever. It’s time to rewrite your history of infanticide support when you were in the Illinois State Senate. And bury those stubborn statistics about the one million babies murdered by your beloved abortion mill, Planned Parenthood, since you came into office.”
“Then, focus on how America’s children must be our #1 priority. Assign your journalists to plant Public Service Announcements about how Obamacare not only supports vital health services for women, but also covers prenatal, pediatric, and dental care for children.”
“And then there’s immigration reform. Sign an executive order to bring millions of your illegal amigos out of the shadows. Give them healthcare, food stamps, ballots printed in Spanish, a $15 minimum wage, and a fast track to citizenship.”
“You’ll love the opposition’s predictable reaction. They’ll jump on the you-can’t-do-that bandwagon and stop beating the drum to repeal Obamacare.”
“Last, but not least, bring gun control back into the national discussion. And for heaven’s sake, DO NOT mention your Fast and Furious gun running debacle. (Pardon my French, but that was a friggin’ stupid program! What were you thinking?) Round up survivors of various mass shootings for another show ‘n tell victim parade. Serve lunch and Kool-Aid to ensure a big media turnout.”
“Republicans are so predictable. They always chase after every diversion…like ferrets pursuing bright, shiny objects.”
Ezmerelda lowered her voice. “Dearie…you need to be aware that the illogical (and juvenile) advice from Michelle and Valerie has turned Obamacare into an industrial-strength train wreck. Those apology speeches? Totally lame. Irritated everybody. If you refuse to apologize, at least ask the most trusted man in America to teach you how to look remorseful.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change looked puzzled.
Ezmerelda explained. “Invite Tom Hanks for lunch and a coaching session.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change asked, “What will happen if Obamacare implodes or is repealed by my own democrats?”
“No problemo. Hillarycare’s single-payer system will finish the take-over program you botched.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change whined, “But, but, but…her plan is just like mine. It’s not fair to name it after her instead of me.”
Ezmerelda replied, “To the whinner go the spoils.”
“Oh, and one more thing, Dearie. Plan a private dinner party for your most important democrat Senators. Ply them with artery-clogging steaks, French wines, and Cuban cigars. And for dessert? Their just rewards. Promise to destroy the political future of any one of them who does not support the Obama team distraction strategies on women’s rights, amnesty, and gun control.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change protested. “But, but…they won’t want to come for dinner, or even be seen in the same room with me. Especially the senators coming up for reelection in 2014.”
Ezmerelda gave him a squinty-eyed look. “You need to convince them to go along with what you propose.”
“How can I do that?”
“Make them an offer they can’t refuse.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change was puzzled. “What would that be?”
Ezmerelda smiled, “Threaten to campaign for them on their home turf.”
Once upon a time, the Prince of Hope-N-Change stomped angrily around the White Castle. He jumped on the furniture, and kicked his golf bag so hard he snapped the shaft of his favorite putter.
Why was he so filled with rage?
Because, for the first time ever, he had been caught in his gollywhomper lies.
“Like your doctor? Keep your doctor. Period.”
“Like your health care plan? Keep your health care plan. Period.”
Being nailed as a “mis-spoken teller of incorrect truth” had caused the Prince of Hope-N-Change’s popularity and job approval ratings to plummet. Even his media lap dogs had turned against him. Instead of being cheered as the “Chosen One,” he was mocked and called “The Lying King,” and “President Pinocchio.”
All those years of campaigning for his healthcare plan, traveling hither and yon, toughing it out in five-star golf resorts, accompanied by teleprompters, valets, drama coaches, and food tasters…all that effort had been expended for nothing. His adoring public had lost that lovin’ feeling.
How did this happen? Increasing numbers of citizens learned what was in the 2,000+ pages of his healthcare law. They discovered what he had known all along. Obamacare would force millions of citizens to lose their healthcare plans and doctors and be shoved into insurance programs they couldn’t afford and didn’t want.
Obamacare had been exposed for what it was: redistribution of wealth in America, a yellow brick road leading to single-payer socialized medicine.
Medicaid for all. Quality for none.
Desperate to escape the mantle of responsibility, the Prince snuck into a basement vault to consult his most trusted oracle.
“Mirror, mirror on the wall, am I still beloved by all?”
“Poof!” The image of the magic mirror lady, Ezmerelda, floated into the mirror.
“Hello Dearie. You might want to rephrase? Begin with a question I can answer in a positive manner.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change thought for a moment.
“Mirror, mirror, on the wall, can I still out snooker all?”
Ezmerelda nodded. “Of course you can. Simply launch a distraction or two.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change asked, “You mean, like a war with Iran or Syria? Maybe Israel?”
“Pray tell, why would you attack your one and only ally in the Mid East?”
“I told Israel to shift their border back to where it was in 1966, but they won’t do it, and I gotta’ teach ‘um a lesson about . . .”
Ezmerelda interrupted. “Dearie, you are the least qualified person on the planet to advise or demand anything from any country. Your foreign policy track record is exactly 100 percent failure. You gave the Mid East to Russia; betrayed your Brotherhood pals in Egypt; backed out of Libya; lost Yemen to terrorist control; armed Al Qaeda in Syria, and dumped Saudi Arabia and Israel under the bus. Better you should focus on distractions at home.”
“Start by hopping back onto the women’s rights bandwagon. But, beware. The right-to-life voices are louder than ever. It’s time to rewrite your history of infanticide support when you were in the Illinois State Senate. And bury those stubborn statistics about the one million babies murdered by your beloved abortion mill, Planned Parenthood, since you came into office.”
“Then, focus on how America’s children must be our #1 priority. Assign your journalists to plant Public Service Announcements about how Obamacare not only supports vital health services for women, but also covers prenatal, pediatric, and dental care for children.”
“And then there’s immigration reform. Sign an executive order to bring millions of your illegal amigos out of the shadows. Give them healthcare, food stamps, ballots printed in Spanish, a $15 minimum wage, and a fast track to citizenship.”
“You’ll love the opposition’s predictable reaction. They’ll jump on the you-can’t-do-that bandwagon and stop beating the drum to repeal Obamacare.”
“Last, but not least, bring gun control back into the national discussion. And for heaven’s sake, DO NOT mention your Fast and Furious gun running debacle. (Pardon my French, but that was a friggin’ stupid program! What were you thinking?) Round up survivors of various mass shootings for another show ‘n tell victim parade. Serve lunch and Kool-Aid to ensure a big media turnout.”
“Republicans are so predictable. They always chase after every diversion…like ferrets pursuing bright, shiny objects.”
Ezmerelda lowered her voice. “Dearie…you need to be aware that the illogical (and juvenile) advice from Michelle and Valerie has turned Obamacare into an industrial-strength train wreck. Those apology speeches? Totally lame. Irritated everybody. If you refuse to apologize, at least ask the most trusted man in America to teach you how to look remorseful.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change looked puzzled.
Ezmerelda explained. “Invite Tom Hanks for lunch and a coaching session.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change asked, “What will happen if Obamacare implodes or is repealed by my own democrats?”
“No problemo. Hillarycare’s single-payer system will finish the take-over program you botched.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change whined, “But, but, but…her plan is just like mine. It’s not fair to name it after her instead of me.”
Ezmerelda replied, “To the whinner go the spoils.”
“Oh, and one more thing, Dearie. Plan a private dinner party for your most important democrat Senators. Ply them with artery-clogging steaks, French wines, and Cuban cigars. And for dessert? Their just rewards. Promise to destroy the political future of any one of them who does not support the Obama team distraction strategies on women’s rights, amnesty, and gun control.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change protested. “But, but…they won’t want to come for dinner, or even be seen in the same room with me. Especially the senators coming up for reelection in 2014.”
Ezmerelda gave him a squinty-eyed look. “You need to convince them to go along with what you propose.”
“How can I do that?”
“Make them an offer they can’t refuse.”
The Prince of Hope-N-Change was puzzled. “What would that be?”
Ezmerelda smiled, “Threaten to campaign for them on their home turf.”
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Making It Hurt --- A Thank You Letter To Obama
Hat Tip to Patriot's Corner
This is from a single mother in Texas. I will add nothing to this and thanks to PUMAbydesign's site.
Can you feel this mother's pain and anguish? I am sure most of us can relate in some way shape or form. I know I can and so can my family.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yolanda Vestal, single mom and Texan in an effort to vent her frustration posted a letter to her Facebook page in which she called Barack Obama out on his prize legislation, Obamacare and the fact that he’s so out of touch with the suffering of Americans under his reign.
Clearly, Vestal’s letter hit has a note with tens of thousands of Americans because it has gone viral.
See Vestal’s letter below:
This ‘thank you’ letter to Barack Obama has gone viral.
Read it and share!
I wonder how many more Yolandas are out there and how many voted for Obama twice?
This is from a single mother in Texas. I will add nothing to this and thanks to PUMAbydesign's site.
Can you feel this mother's pain and anguish? I am sure most of us can relate in some way shape or form. I know I can and so can my family.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yolanda Vestal, single mom and Texan in an effort to vent her frustration posted a letter to her Facebook page in which she called Barack Obama out on his prize legislation, Obamacare and the fact that he’s so out of touch with the suffering of Americans under his reign.
Clearly, Vestal’s letter hit has a note with tens of thousands of Americans because it has gone viral.
See Vestal’s letter below:
This ‘thank you’ letter to Barack Obama has gone viral.
Read it and share!
Dear President Obama,I have been where Yolanda is. It isn't easy to live through. It isn't a good place. But with our current President and his wife, it hurts worse every time you see Barack Hussein Obama on the golf course or Michelle Obama talking about her lobster dinner. They are so Out of Touch, so Clueless to what the average American lives with, it is no longer funny.
I wanted to take a moment to say thank you for all you have done and are doing. You see I am a single Mom located in the very small town of Palmer,Texas. I live in a small rental house with my two children. I drive an older car that I pray daily runs just a little longer. I work at a mediocre job bringing home a much lower paycheck than you or your wife could even imagine living on. I have a lot of concerns about the new ‘Obamacare’ along with the taxes being forced on us Americans and debts your are adding to our country. I have a few questions for you Mr. President.
Have you ever struggled to pay your bills? I have.
Have you ever sat and watched your children eat and you eat what was left on their plates when they were done, because there wasn’t enough for you to eat to? I have.
Have you ever had to rob Peter to pay Paul, and it still not be enough? I have.
Have you ever been so sick that you needed to see a doctor and get medicine, but had no health insurance because it was to expensive? I have.
Have you ever had to tell your children no, when they asked for something they needed? I have.
Have you ever patched holes in pants, glued shoes, replaced zippers, because it was cheaper than buying new? I have.
Have you ever had to put an item or two back at the grocery store, because you didn’t have enough money? I have.
Have you ever cried yourself to sleep, because you had no clue how you were going to make ends meet? I have.
My questions could go on and on. I don’t believe you have a clue what Americans are actually going through and honestly, I don’t believe you care. Not everyone lives extravagantly. While your family takes expensive trips that cost more than most of us make in two-four years, there are so many of us that suffer. Yet, you are doing all you can to add to the suffering. I think you are a very selfish and cold hearted man, who does not care what is best for the people he was elected by (not by me) to represent, but more so out for the glory of your name attached to history. So thank you Mr. President, thank you for pushing those of us that are barely staying afloat completely under water and driving America into the ground. You have made your mark in history, as the absolute worst and most hated president of the United States. God have mercy on your soul!
Sincerely,
Yolanda Vestal
Average American
I wonder how many more Yolandas are out there and how many voted for Obama twice?
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Liar, Liar!!!!!
For the last 4 years President Barack Hussein Obama promised the American people that if you liked your doctor, your healthcare plan; you can keep it.
Click here if video fails to load.
Just one of numerous promises Barack Hussein Obama broke to the American people. In fact it has now been revealed that President Obama knew all along that you could not keep your healthcare plan, your doctor, and that the costs of Healthcare will skyrocket.
President Obama repeatedly assured Americans that after the Affordable Care Act became law, people who liked their health insurance would be able to keep it. But millions of Americans are getting or are about to get cancellation letters for their health insurance under Obamacare, say experts, and the Obama administration has known that for at least three years.The government has had 3 years to put together a working website and program for this bill. But
Four sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act tell NBC NEWS that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to receive a “cancellation” letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80 percent. And all say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience “sticker shock.”
None of this should come as a shock to the Obama administration. The law states that policies in effect as of March 23, 2010 will be “grandfathered,” meaning consumers can keep those policies even though they don’t meet requirements of the new health care law. But the Department of Health and Human Services then wrote regulations that narrowed that provision, by saying that if any part of a policy was significantly changed since that date -- the deductible, co-pay, or benefits, for example -- the policy would not be grandfathered.
Buried in Obamacare regulations from July 2010 is an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, “40 to 67 percent” of customers will not be able to keep their policy. And because many policies will have been changed since the key date, “the percentage of individual market policies losing grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40 to 67 percent range.”
That means the administration knew that more than 40 to 67 percent of those in the individual market would not be able to keep their plans, even if they liked them.
Yet President Obama, who had promised in 2009, “if you like your health plan, you will be able to keep your health plan,” was still saying in 2012, “If [you] already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.”
“This says that when they made the promise, they knew half the people in this market outright couldn’t keep what they had and then they wrote the rules so that others couldn’t make it either,” said Robert Laszewski, of Health Policy and Strategy Associates, a consultant who works for health industry firms. Laszewski estimates that 80 percent of those in the individual market will not be able to keep their current policies and will have to buy insurance that meets requirements of the new law, which generally requires a richer package of benefits than most policies today.
The White House does not dispute that many in the individual market will lose their current coverage, but argues they will be offered better coverage in its place, and that many will get tax subsidies that would offset any increased costs. “One of the main goals of the law is to ensure that people have insurance they can rely on – that doesn’t discriminate or charge more based on pre-existing conditions. The consumers who are getting notices are in plans that do not provide all these protections – but in the vast majority of cases, those same insurers will automatically shift their enrollees to a plan that provides new consumer protections and, for nearly half of individual market enrollees, discounts through premium tax credits,” said White House spokesperson Jessica Santillo.
Individual insurance plans with low premiums often lack basic benefits, such as prescription drug coverage, or carry high deductibles and out-of-pocket costs. The Affordable Care Act requires all companies to offer more benefits, such as mental health care, and also bars companies from denying coverage for preexisting conditions.
Today, White House spokesman Jay Carney was asked about the president’s promise that consumers would be able to keep their health care. “What the president said and what everybody said all along is that there are going to be changes brought about by the Affordable Care Act to create minimum standards of coverage, minimum services that every insurance plan has to provide,” Carney said. “So it's true that there are existing healthcare plans on the individual market that don't meet those minimum standards and therefore do not qualify for the Affordable Care Act.”
Other experts said that most consumers in the individual market will not be able to keep their policies. Nancy Thompson, senior vice president of CBIZ Benefits, which helps companies manage their employee benefits, says numbers in this market are hard to pin down, but that data from states and carriers suggests “anywhere from 50 to 75 percent” of individual policy holders will get cancellation letters. Kansas Insurance Commissioner Sandy Praeger, who chairs the health committee of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, says that estimate is “probably about right.” She added that a few states are asking insurance companies to cancel and replace policies, rather than just amend them, to avoid confusion.
A spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), an insurance trade association, also said the 50 to 75 percent estimate was consistent with the range they are hearing.
Those getting the cancellation letters are often shocked and unhappy.
George Schwab, 62, of North Carolina, said he was "perfectly happy" with his plan from Blue Cross Blue Shield, which also insured his wife for a $228 monthly premium. But this past September, he was surprised to receive a letter saying his policy was no longer available. The "comparable" plan the insurance company offered him carried a $1,208 monthly premium and a $5,500 deductible.
And the best option he’s found on the exchange so far offered a 415 percent jump in premium, to $948 a month.
"The deductible is less," he said, "But the plan doesn't meet my needs. Its unaffordable."
"I'm sitting here looking at this, thinking we ought to just pay the fine and just get insurance when we're sick," Schwab added. "Everybody's worried about whether the website works or not, but that's fixable. That's just the tip of the iceberg. This stuff isn't fixable."
Heather Goldwater, 38, of South Carolina, is raising a new baby while running her own PR firm. She said she received a letter last July from Cigna, her insurance company, that said the company would no longer offer her individual plan, and promised to send a letter by October offering a comparable option. So far, she hasn't received anything.
"I'm completely overwhelmed with a six-month-old and a business,” said Goldwater. “The last thing I can do is spend hours poring over a website that isn't working, trying to wrap my head around this entire health care overhaul."
Goldwater said she supports the new law and is grateful for provisions helping folks like her with pre-existing conditions, but she worries she won’t be able to afford the new insurance, which is expected to cost more because it has more benefits. "I'm jealous of people who have really good health insurance," she said. "It's people like me who are stuck in the middle who are going to get screwed."
Richard Helgren, a Lansing, Mich., retiree, said he was “irate” when he received a letter informing him that his wife Amy's $559 a month health plan was being changed because of the law. The plan the insurer offered raised his deductible from $0 to $2,500, and the company gave him 17 days to decide.
The higher costs spooked him and his wife, who have painstakingly planned for their retirement years. "Every dollar we didn't plan for erodes our standard of living," Helgren said.
Ulltimately, though Helgren opted not to shop through the ACA exchanges, he was able to apply for a good plan with a slightly lower premium through an insurance agent.
He said he never believed President Obama’s promise that people would be able to keep their current plans.
"I heard him only about a thousand times," he said. "I didn't believe him when he said it though because there was just no way that was going to happen. They wrote the regulations so strictly that none of the old polices can grandfather."
For months, Laszewski has warned that some consumers will face sticker shock. He recently got his own notice that he and his wife cannot keep their current policy, which he described as one of the best, so-called "Cadillac" plans offered for 2013. Now, he said, the best comparable plan he found for 2014 has a smaller doctor network, larger out-of-pocket costs, and a 66 percent premium increase.
“Mr. President, I like the coverage I have," Laszweski said. "It is the best health insurance policy you can buy."
SOURCE
instead of working hard to roll this program out with few glitches, HHS decided to make this as painful and hard as possible. I can only assume that it is to then propose a Single Payer System. A system that will ration healthcare and deny benefits.
What we are seeing is the true face of our Socialist President and his cronies. Spend the money and damn the people.
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
America Hates Obamacare! And The Democrats OWN Obamacare ~~~ By J. D. Longstreet
Hat Tip to Faultline USA
Socialized medicine (Obamacare) may seem like a good thing to you; unless you are sick, even less so if you are chronically ill.
We have been warning of the dangers, and the short comings, of socialized medicine for a very long time and now we have had it rammed down our throats by the democrats. Remember -- NOT A SINGLE REPUBLICAN VOTED FOR OBAMACARE! Nary a one!
Given a choice between healthcare run by the government and keeping my private insurance and paying the premiums and going to see the doctor I want to see, and not some civil servant working for the government healthcare system, I’ll take the latter any day. In fact, the choice for me is a “no-brainer.”
Since 1965 I have been hospitalized over 80 times. I have had numerous surgeries and I must see a doctor every four to six weeks of my life. See, I KNOW the value of a good healthcare system and I know, first hand, the value of having a doctor, in whom I have confidence, treating me. I know what it means to have a rapport with your physician. That, alone, is tremendously important when you are chronically ill.
Unlike a lot of folks, when I think of nationalized healthcare, I perceive a threat to my life. I have no doubt that the introduction of socialized healthcare (Obamacare) in the US will shorten my life and bring it to a termination much sooner than currently expected. In fact, I have no doubt about it. There are millions of Americans, just like me, who will have their lives shortened by Obamacare.
Nevertheless, it IS here.
The start-up problems with Obamacare are, I suspect, diverting attention away from what's really going on.
Look. Obamacare is going to fail. I know, I know. But I assure you, it is not just wishful thinking on my part.
Obamacare was designed to fail. It MUST fail for the complete program of socialized medicine in America to be established.
It was hoped that Obamacare, like a drug, would addict enough Americans that when it crashes there will be a ready made demand for a national healthcare system of some kind to replace it.
The replacement? A single payer national healthcare system. That is the second part of the assault on American's healthcare.
Under a single-payer system, everyone in the country would have health coverage provided by the government, and private insurance largely would cease to exist. Like Medicare, the government would act as the insurer; doctors and hospitals would operate privately, receiving payments from public funds under such a nationalized health insurance system. SOURCE
A single payer healthcare system is what the socialist in the Democratic Party REALLY want.
I came across an excellent article entitled: "The Myths of Single-Payer Health Care" by David Hogberg that I recommend you read. You'll find it here
In his article Mr. Hogberg explains: " Everyone in a single-payer system has health insurance, not necessarily health care.
While the government in a single-payer system will pay for everyone's health care, it limits the access to health care. In a single-payer system, citizens often believe that "the government" is paying for their health care. When people perceive that someone else is paying for something, they tend to over-use it. In a single-payer health care system, people over-use health care. This puts strain on government health care budgets, and to contain costs governments must ration care.
Governments in a single-payer system ration care using waiting lists for surgery and diagnostic procedures and by canceling surgeries. As the Canadian Supreme Court said upon ruling unconstitutional a Quebec law that banned private health care, "access to a waiting list is not access to health care." SOURCE
Just as predicted, Obamacare is a Frankenstein monster and growing uglier every day of its continued existence. Already, it is taking a toll on the democrats. The President's approval rating is down, at this writing, to 37% and expected to fall even more.
Democrats claim Obamacare is "settled Law." I would remind you that Prohibition was settled law, as well. It took us thirteen years to rid ourselves of that albatross. But we did it. And -- we can do it again.
In the meantime, the one political party making an attempt to save America from the excesses of Obamacare is being savaged by Americans for shutting down the government in an attempt rescue America from Obamacare.
At the moment the GOP is being creamed -- but-- I have a hunch that when the smoke settles we are going to see a resurgent GOP as the American electorate FINALLY understands that all this pain was brought to them by the Democratic Party and ONLY the Democratic Party.
In a little over a year, Americans will be going to the polls again. By that time, they should be well -- and truly -- fed up with Obamacare and those who foisted it off on them. If the GOP has any spirit left, it will do everything in its power to remind the electorate that the Republican Party stands ready to rid America of the plague of Obamacare.
This will be a two-step solution. Three years hence, the GOP should put forth a conservative candidate, not a moderate, not a RINO, but a CONSERVATIVE candidate for President to have any chance, at all, against Hillary Clinton.
As we said above, it took thirteen years to repeal Prohibition. If the GOP can win in the next two elections they can overturn Obamacare in less time. If not, it will take considerably longer and inflict far more pain on the American people.
Recent polls show that over 80% of Americans are dissatisfied with the way the government is governing the country. Congressional approval is down to only 5%. History teaches us that things happen when Americans get mad -- and they/we are outraged.
In almost 240 years America has had numerous threats to her freedom and liberties. But we have never had a more dangerous threat than Obamacare.
We MUST remove this threat to our once great nation.
Vladimir Lenin: "Socialized Medicine is the Keystone to the Arch of the Socialist State."
Socialized medicine (Obamacare) may seem like a good thing to you; unless you are sick, even less so if you are chronically ill.
We have been warning of the dangers, and the short comings, of socialized medicine for a very long time and now we have had it rammed down our throats by the democrats. Remember -- NOT A SINGLE REPUBLICAN VOTED FOR OBAMACARE! Nary a one!
Given a choice between healthcare run by the government and keeping my private insurance and paying the premiums and going to see the doctor I want to see, and not some civil servant working for the government healthcare system, I’ll take the latter any day. In fact, the choice for me is a “no-brainer.”
Since 1965 I have been hospitalized over 80 times. I have had numerous surgeries and I must see a doctor every four to six weeks of my life. See, I KNOW the value of a good healthcare system and I know, first hand, the value of having a doctor, in whom I have confidence, treating me. I know what it means to have a rapport with your physician. That, alone, is tremendously important when you are chronically ill.
Unlike a lot of folks, when I think of nationalized healthcare, I perceive a threat to my life. I have no doubt that the introduction of socialized healthcare (Obamacare) in the US will shorten my life and bring it to a termination much sooner than currently expected. In fact, I have no doubt about it. There are millions of Americans, just like me, who will have their lives shortened by Obamacare.
Nevertheless, it IS here.
The start-up problems with Obamacare are, I suspect, diverting attention away from what's really going on.
Look. Obamacare is going to fail. I know, I know. But I assure you, it is not just wishful thinking on my part.
Obamacare was designed to fail. It MUST fail for the complete program of socialized medicine in America to be established.
It was hoped that Obamacare, like a drug, would addict enough Americans that when it crashes there will be a ready made demand for a national healthcare system of some kind to replace it.
The replacement? A single payer national healthcare system. That is the second part of the assault on American's healthcare.
Under a single-payer system, everyone in the country would have health coverage provided by the government, and private insurance largely would cease to exist. Like Medicare, the government would act as the insurer; doctors and hospitals would operate privately, receiving payments from public funds under such a nationalized health insurance system. SOURCE
A single payer healthcare system is what the socialist in the Democratic Party REALLY want.
I came across an excellent article entitled: "The Myths of Single-Payer Health Care" by David Hogberg that I recommend you read. You'll find it here
In his article Mr. Hogberg explains: " Everyone in a single-payer system has health insurance, not necessarily health care.
While the government in a single-payer system will pay for everyone's health care, it limits the access to health care. In a single-payer system, citizens often believe that "the government" is paying for their health care. When people perceive that someone else is paying for something, they tend to over-use it. In a single-payer health care system, people over-use health care. This puts strain on government health care budgets, and to contain costs governments must ration care.
Governments in a single-payer system ration care using waiting lists for surgery and diagnostic procedures and by canceling surgeries. As the Canadian Supreme Court said upon ruling unconstitutional a Quebec law that banned private health care, "access to a waiting list is not access to health care." SOURCE
Just as predicted, Obamacare is a Frankenstein monster and growing uglier every day of its continued existence. Already, it is taking a toll on the democrats. The President's approval rating is down, at this writing, to 37% and expected to fall even more.
Democrats claim Obamacare is "settled Law." I would remind you that Prohibition was settled law, as well. It took us thirteen years to rid ourselves of that albatross. But we did it. And -- we can do it again.
In the meantime, the one political party making an attempt to save America from the excesses of Obamacare is being savaged by Americans for shutting down the government in an attempt rescue America from Obamacare.
At the moment the GOP is being creamed -- but-- I have a hunch that when the smoke settles we are going to see a resurgent GOP as the American electorate FINALLY understands that all this pain was brought to them by the Democratic Party and ONLY the Democratic Party.
In a little over a year, Americans will be going to the polls again. By that time, they should be well -- and truly -- fed up with Obamacare and those who foisted it off on them. If the GOP has any spirit left, it will do everything in its power to remind the electorate that the Republican Party stands ready to rid America of the plague of Obamacare.
This will be a two-step solution. Three years hence, the GOP should put forth a conservative candidate, not a moderate, not a RINO, but a CONSERVATIVE candidate for President to have any chance, at all, against Hillary Clinton.
As we said above, it took thirteen years to repeal Prohibition. If the GOP can win in the next two elections they can overturn Obamacare in less time. If not, it will take considerably longer and inflict far more pain on the American people.
Recent polls show that over 80% of Americans are dissatisfied with the way the government is governing the country. Congressional approval is down to only 5%. History teaches us that things happen when Americans get mad -- and they/we are outraged.
In almost 240 years America has had numerous threats to her freedom and liberties. But we have never had a more dangerous threat than Obamacare.
We MUST remove this threat to our once great nation.
Thursday, August 1, 2013
Jim Inhofe Joins Defund ObamaCare Effort - A Look at Both Sides
I received an email yesterday from Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK). He has joined with Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and other Republican Senators to defund ObamaCare. Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) wants "a way to do it that kills it..., " but defunding isn't the way to do it. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) agrees with Coburn and called the Tea Party a "loose political movement." The lines are drawn in fresh concrete. Rush Limbaugh interviewed Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) today and Coburn's position is argued against in that interview below.
Pullout Quote:
Senator Inhofe's commitment:
Coburn also said "they don't have a microphone." That's a miserable excuse, not to mention ridiculous. Every Congressman and Senator can find a microphone - Democrats always find a mic. I've noticed that few Republicans, especially in the Senate, will speak-out about anything that is not the concern of a committee he/she serves on. Maybe it's a Rule - only the Chairmen speak, but if it is, it needs to stop. We need everyone at the mic, we need their opinions on their websites and in editorials. We need their opinions publicly stated - loud and proud and often.
Moving now to Senator Mike Lee who is engineering the defund effort along with Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX). Lee interviewed with Rush Limbaugh today. The following are selected portions of the interview you can read in its entirety here (all emphasis is mine and I moved one paragraph to fit with the same topic elsewhere in the discussion):
What if people actually like ObamaCare once implemented?
Siding with Coburn:
Health Care: We could have put in place the ability to purchase health care across state lines and it we would have had a good first fix, but the plan is single-payer and ObamaCare is the way to get it. As I said above, not one single Republican voted for ObamaCare. There is no one to trust - a huge difference from the Gingrich shutdown.
These are not the 'good old days' when everyone just got along, went for cocktails, returned to the Hill and worked together to write legislation everyone could live by. We’re dealing with full out Marxism.
If we give in, we give in to everything the Constitution warns us about, that hasn't already been given in to. The compromise is too terrible. Doing the right thing is always doing the right thing. We sent some there to do it, now I hope they do.
Jim Inhofe
Pullout Quote:
RUSH: ...Okay... I guess the take-away is the people who were saying that the spending is mandatory and cannot be removed, that's not correct?
LEE: It's not true. As much as they might wish that were the case, it is not.
The Republican Senators who have joined me in signing the pledge are so committed that we will let Democrats shut down the government before we will approve Obamacare to be funded.
People like Senator Cruz and I are serious about making sure that Obamacare is stopped before it is fully enforced. This legislation would only hurt our health care system and our economy, and we will not stand for it.
We have signed the pledge and made the promise to defund Obamacare. Now it’s your turn. Will you join myself, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and other Republican leaders and contribute to defund Obamacare today?
Let’s win this battle to block its funding. Donate $10 today to help guarantee it.I made my donation - to Inhofe.
Let's discuss both sides of this very emotional and divisive issue among Republicans. I believe Tom Coburn does want ObamaCare repeal, but believes it cannot be defunded because most of the funding is mandatory, and it cannot be repealed - the votes are not there, Obama would veto a repeal, and shutting down the government is untenable. Mike Lee asserts there is no plan to 
Tom Coburn
COBURN: I don’t think it’s achievable. A good portion of the health-care law is mandatory spending and repealing that would require two-thirds of the House and 67 votes in the Senate. I don’t see that happening.
I don’t see how you passing a CR [continuing resolution to fund the government] that does this. And let’s say you do, and the President vetoes the CR. Then what happens? How fast do members of Congress who voted for that strategy fold when the government shuts down? I’ve been here when we’ve done that, and it’s not a strategy that works. This is misleading the conservative base because it’s not achievable, and all it will do in the long run is dispirit the base. This is a failed strategy for conservatives.
How many people are going to close down the government over ‘I want to get rid of Obamacare’? I’ve lead the charge against it, and I’m not going to do that. What I do want to do is able to be in a position where we can fix it later. With something like this, you’re setting the base up for an expectation of something that won’t happen.So Senator Coburn's issue is we cannot shutdown the government.
COBURN: ...What we should be doing instead is putting other things on the table, like the individual mandate delay, repealing the medical device tax or putting prohibitions on discretionary spending for Obamacare. Then those all have to be evaluated.
You can’t defend letting rich businesses off and not letting individuals off. Nobody wants the medical device tax. And most of the American public thinks you should have to have the right income to qualify for benefits, and have that verified. Source: Washington PostThe bottom line for Coburn is that shutting down the government is a fine idea, as long as the spines in the House and Senate stay strong, but he believes the collective spines will collapse, and further points to being a Republican in the midst of a government shut-down years ago. He believes it hurt the party. Below you'll see Rush Limbaugh saying only the media thought it hurt Republicans and he offers stats to prove it.
Coburn also said "they don't have a microphone." That's a miserable excuse, not to mention ridiculous. Every Congressman and Senator can find a microphone - Democrats always find a mic. I've noticed that few Republicans, especially in the Senate, will speak-out about anything that is not the concern of a committee he/she serves on. Maybe it's a Rule - only the Chairmen speak, but if it is, it needs to stop. We need everyone at the mic, we need their opinions on their websites and in editorials. We need their opinions publicly stated - loud and proud and often.
Mike Lee
Moving now to Senator Mike Lee who is engineering the defund effort along with Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX). Lee interviewed with Rush Limbaugh today. The following are selected portions of the interview you can read in its entirety here (all emphasis is mine and I moved one paragraph to fit with the same topic elsewhere in the discussion):
RUSH: ...What is being said by the establishment, by Washington...is this. Look, 98, 99% of Obamacare is autopilot spending. It can't be cut. It is just like any entitlement -- Social Security, Medicare -- we can't stop it. But wouldn't that be the truth in a normal budgetary process, but we're talking about continuing resolutions here, and doesn't that make that entirely different?
LEE: Well, those who are saying we can't touch this because it's mandatory spending are simply wrong. They're simply mistaken, or perhaps they've been misinformed. The point is that Congress can decide to pass any kind of spending bill it wants. The fact that you've got mandatory spending that's already been authorized for Obamacare's implementation doesn't mean that can't be cut. We can run this with an amendment -- in fact, an amendment has already been drafted up to make it so that we fund everything else in government but we claw back, we restrict funding for Obamacare, both mandatory and discretionary...
RUSH: What about the argument that there's no way you're ever going to get 51 votes for this?
LEE: Okay. So the argument that we're never going to win so we shouldn't even try overlooks the fact that if every Republican who claims to be against Obamacare simply said, "I'm not going to vote to fund Obamacare," we would win. There would be no way that you could fund Obamacare unless you got some Republicans in the House and some Republicans in the Senate to vote for it. And so that's why we're encouraging people to get behind this effort, to communicate with their congressman and their senators and to say, "Please don't do this."
And people can find out who is where on this position at a website we set up for this purpose. It's dontfundobamacare.com. They can go to dontfundobamacare.com, where they can be directed to the identities of those senators and those representatives who are with us and those who have not yet joined our cause.
Rush Limbaugh
What if people actually like ObamaCare once implemented?
RUSH: ...The subsidies equal Santa Claus and the Republicans don't want to take a stand against it now since it's already the law of the land and they've got enough trouble being perceived as anti- this and anti-poor and anti- you name it, so they don't want to be on record as opposing subsidies or help for people who need it because it isn't gonna help 'em, and they're worried that somewhere down the line public opinion on this is gonna shift and people are gonna end up liking it.
LEE: ...once they're in place, they're almost impossible to get rid of. You got death, you got taxes, and you've got entitlements. So it's better to stop this thing before it kicks in, before it starts, you know, buying some loyalty among those who will never let it go away, than it would be to let it kick in and just hope and expect we can repeal it later. That becomes much more difficult.Remember the illegalities:
LEE: ...this was a law supposedly passed by, you know, a democratically elected Congress [not a single Republican in either Chamber voted for the Affordable Care Act]. Well, in a sense that's true, but we have to remember...that it's been amended now four times. It's been amended four times by people who didn't have the authority. It's been amended twice by the Supreme Court, as I explained in my book, Why John Roberts was Wrong About Healthcare, amended the statute two times in order to make it constitutional, even though they found it wasn't. Two more times by the president who didn't have the power to change it, but still did.Why aren't Republicans more forceful in standing up for this conservative issue:
RUSH: ...A lot of people -- Senator, you might be among them -- think that the country, I don't want to put words in your mouth, that we're hanging by a thread here. That this country's in the midst of a purposeful transformation that makes government not just the center of everybody's life, but essential, and people do not want that to happen. They've always thought the Republican Party stood against that, so why not just stand up, even if you're afraid people might end up liking it, the fact that it's not good for the country to make even more people totally dependent on government for another aspect of their lives. It simply is not good for the country or for them. Why can't that be said and have it said aggressively and compassionately and use that to attract voters and grow the party?
LEE: The biggest single reason why that's not being said at this point is because we don't yet have enough members of Congress, in the House and in the Senate, who have seen the electoral benefits, the political benefits that will come from making the right policy choice.
We see that good politics necessarily flow from good policy. The right policy here is to stop this horrible law before it steps in and makes life worse for nearly all Americans, for the vast majority of Americans. If we undertake the right policy, which is to stop Obamacare by any means possible, then we will benefit as a party, because that's what the American people elected us to do.
By the same token, if we don't do that, we're in huge trouble as a party because we were put into power in the House of Representatives after the 2010 election because of Obamacare. We were put into power to stop Obamacare.
RUSH: Exactly! The 2010 midterms, and Obama is out campaigning today trying to sell Obamacare, which is already the law of the land. Why is he doing that? Because he doesn't want a repeat in 2014 of what happened in 2010. They want to win the House. And there's no push-back, Senator, other than you. Can you give me some other names that have joined you in this?Who is supporting Lee? (Jim Inhofe's name is not mentioned, but he is a part of the movement)
LEE: ...the Senate... Marco Rubio, ...Ted Cruz, ...Rand Paul, John Thune, Mike Enzi...Chuck Grassley... Mike Crapo...Mike Enzi...Jeff Chiesa... We've got a total of 13. We've got about 70 in the House that have signed a similar pledge. And we're building these numbers every day. We're building because as people become aware of this effort they will get there. I was just told by my staff that within the last day or so the House of Representatives has risen to the level of about a hundred. There are a hundred members of the House of Representatives that have now joined with us, and these numbers are building every single day because the American people are speaking out.For conservative Oklahomans, it's important to know Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK-4th) is joined at the hip with Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and does not support defunding ObamaCare. What about a government shutdown?
RUSH: ...Senator, another argument that is made is the dreaded government shutdown argument, that you can't get where you want to go in the continuing resolution fight without a government shutdown. And then they say, "Look what happened in '95. We got killed. '95 ruined us."
In reality we only got killed in the media. We picked up two Senate seats after the '95 shutdown. And the House, I don't think there was great damage. Plus, that budget fight arguably could be said to have set the table for great policy that followed, such as welfare reform that Clinton signed, because it involved people taking a stand. But it's looked at as a debacle because of the impact it supposedly had on Newt, but it really wasn't. You're fighting a tremendous obstacle there with this fear if there's a government shutdown, that the Republicans are finished. So what do you say to people who have that obstacle in front of them?
LEE: ...I want to be very clear that what I'm calling for is not a shutdown. I don't want a shutdown. I don't think we need a shutdown. We ought to be able to fund the government responsibly without a shutdown...we ought to fund government, just not Obamacare. We shouldn't have to vote for all of it, including Obamacare, or have none of it.
That's crazy. Secondly, if we signal in advance that no matter what we're going to fund Obamacare, that's the best way to make that happen. And so that's not the signal we should be sending.
Finally, if we get enough people...in the house and...Senate who have expressed concerns about Obamacare and are willing to say "I'm going to vote to fund government, but not Obamacare" you then put Harry Reid in the position, the untenable position of having to say because we didn't get everything we wanted, even though you funded every other program in government, even the programs Republicans hate, we're gonna shut down the government in the Democratic Party because you didn't include funding for Obamacare. That's a terrible position for him to be in. I don't think he wants to fight that fight, and, frankly, I don't think he can win that fight.Are Democrats worried?
RUSH: ...is there some legitimate worry on the Democrat side that you could pull this off?
LEE: Deep down yes, I think there is, and that's one of the reasons why they're more than happy to have fellow Republicans be at the tip of the spear and the attack against this effort.
...I am fully aware of the fact that the Washington establishment is not happy with me about this effort....Meanwhile, the Democrats are thrilled that we've got Republicans doing their bidding on this, fighting against this effort, and you've got Republicans essentially saying "Yeah, no matter what, we're gonna fund Obamacare." That's a problem.
RUSH: Well, that's it.
Okay... I guess the take-away is the people who were saying that the spending is mandatory and cannot be removed, that's not correct?
LEE: It's not true. As much as they might wish that were the case, it is not.END TRANSCRIPT
1. Seven-term Republican Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah said he feared Republicans would look "feckless" in pushing a doomed legislative strategy that some Democrats simply describe as "hostage-taking."
2. [Lindsey] Graham, another senior Republican voice, said the strategy by the Tea Party - a loose political movement that seeks lower taxes and a smaller federal government - was "a bridge too far."
3. "Oh, I think it's a silly effort," Republican Senator Bob Corker told MSNBC on Tuesday. "What people are really saying who are behind that effort is we don't have the courage to roll up our sleeves and deal with real deficit and spending decisions." [no joke - it hasn't happened in 4-1/2 years]
4. Senator John McCain, calling the Obamacare defunding effort a "non-starter," said on Tuesday that the senators behind it were not around for past government shutdown battles. Source: ReutersAs a member of that "loose political movement," the Tea Party, there is no compromise with the other side in either party. There is no way to consider the Rubio, McCain, Graham and Flake immigration bill as a sovereign fix. Had Rubio stuck to his promise to secure the border first, we would have been on our way to a fix, but instead they gave away our sovereignty. We were not asked to compromise. We were told how it it would be.
Friday, July 19, 2013
Oops! Am I Bad?
The Department of Health and Human Services promised Americans that they would be able to keep their doctor, their healthcare, or afford healthcare if Obamacare was passed. President Barack Hussein Obama promised that to the American people too:
Click here if the video fails to load.
As you can see and hear it was a promise that he made. And today it is official. That promise is broken.
Now the roosters are coming home to roost. Even the unions are against Obamacare. Funny how they promoted the beastie.
The Federal Government cannot implement this monstrosity by the 2014 due date, so what did Our Fearless Leader do? He postponed the Employer Mandate part of the bill until 2015. The rest of us will be stuck with the 2014 date.
And if you aren't scared yet try this on for size:
Are you scared? I am. Especially after finding out about this. Do you trust the IRS? Democrats? President?
America was warned all of this would happen under Obama and with Obamacare.
Click here if the video fails to load.
As you can see and hear it was a promise that he made. And today it is official. That promise is broken.
As Obamacare was being pushed through Congress in 2010, the Obama administration and its allies were unequivocal in two claims: If you like your doctor and you like your current health care plan, you can keep them both. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sibelius and then-House speaker Nancy Pelosi backed the president fully in this regard. The White House even went so far as to post a "Health Insurance Reform Reality Check" on its website, where "Linda Douglass of the White House Office of Health Reform debunks the myth that reform will force you out of your current insurance plan or force you to change doctors." President Obama upped the ante, putting the promise in the form of a "guarantee":When Obamacare was proposed thousands of average citizens told America that this would happen. Thousands took to the streets peacefully. Thousands raised their voices. Yet the Democrats rammed the bill down the throats of the people. Rammed it with lies and false promises.
THE PRESIDENT: Here is a guarantee that I've made. If you have insurance that you like, then you will be able to keep that insurance. If you've got a doctor that you like, you will be able to keep your doctor.Nobody is trying to change what works in the system. We are trying to change what doesn't work in the system.
While there has been sniping back and forth between the administration and its detractors about the real-world application and implementation of Obamacare, the new Healthcare.gov website has taken some of the mystery out of the controversy. And President Obama and his administration do not fare well in this latest "reality check." Among the questions that HHS recently added to the website: "Can I keep my own doctor?"
"Depending on the plan you choose in the Marketplace, you may be able to keep your current doctor." The bottom line is that Obamacare guarantees neither. Doctors may be only available through certain networks, just as in the current system. And only plans that existed in their current form on March 23, 2010, are even eligible to be "kept." The vast majority of plans will be new, subject to a raft of new regulations, requirements, and restrictions.
Now that Health and Human Services has confirmed that the suspicions of Obamacare opponents were justified, the Obama administration will have some explaining to do to friends and foes of the law alike. Because now everyone is finding out "what's in it."
Source
Now the roosters are coming home to roost. Even the unions are against Obamacare. Funny how they promoted the beastie.
The Federal Government cannot implement this monstrosity by the 2014 due date, so what did Our Fearless Leader do? He postponed the Employer Mandate part of the bill until 2015. The rest of us will be stuck with the 2014 date.
And if you aren't scared yet try this on for size:
The IRS will be running the show!
Are you scared? I am. Especially after finding out about this. Do you trust the IRS? Democrats? President?
America was warned all of this would happen under Obama and with Obamacare.
We Told You So!
Saturday, June 8, 2013
White House Warns Republicans On Border Security
The White House has a warning to Republican senators who want to add on tougher border security language to the immigration bill: don't mess with the path to citizenship.
Republicans like Sen. Marco Rubio have said that the border security language in the bill he helped write aren't strict enough to pass through Congress. An effort is underway to strengthen the border security provisions on the Senate floor. But President Obama likely will not accept changes that impede a pathway to citizenship, according to Cecilia Muñoz, the White House's immigration point person.
"Any amendment, which in the name of border enforcement actually undercuts or eliminates a pathway to citizenship, strikes at the heart of what the Gang of Eight agreed to and what the president put forward in his principles," Muñoz, director of the White House domestic policy council, said at a briefing for Hispanic media outlets on Thursday.
Muñoz's comments are a warning to Republicans as the bill moves to the Senate floor next week.
Texas Sen. John Cornyn (R) is expected to propose an amendment that essentially rewrites the entire border enforcement section of the bill. His amendment would require that the federal government achieve certain border security goals -- such as 100 percent monitoring of all border sectors and a 90 percent apprehension rate of illegal crossers -- before immigrants legalized immigrants can apply for permanent residency.
The bill as written requires that a plan to accomplish those goals on the border be implemented, before immigrants can adjust their status. But immigrants wouldn't be blocked from seeking permanent legal status after a 10-year wait, even if all of the border metrics are not achieved.
Cornyn has drawn the ire of liberal groups who questioned his willingness to vote yes on the bill, even if his amendment is adopted. But even Rubio, one of the bill's eight authors, has said that he would vote no on the bill unless the border language is strengthened. Rubio has reportedly worked with Cornyn on the amendment.
Muñoz would not comment on the Cornyn amendment specifically. Instead called the existing Gang of Eight bill the "strongest bill with respect to immigration enforcement, certainly in recent memory, possibly ever" and noted that the border language was already strengthened in the Senate Judiciary Committee. She said the White House is open to further debate on border issues, but ultimately, wants a bill that strikes a compromise between security and legalization.
"We know there are some hot-button issues in this debate," she said. "The Senate floor is going to be another test of whether all eight of those members want to get to an agreement."
Despite these thorny issues, Muñoz expressed hope that the Senate can pass its bill before the July 4th recess. And even though immigration could face an even more difficult path in the House, she said the White House wants the lower chamber to act before Congress breaks in August.
Source
The new immigration bill grants amnesty, full welfare benefits, and benefits to Illegals from Obamacare immediately, but does not even begin to secure the border. Perhaps we should secure the border then think very hard for a few years (One or two decades would do.) about granting amnesty to anyone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)