UPDATE:
And if the following post does not drive you insane, Nanny-state soon to be former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg wants you to squeeze the trigger for gun control in between turkey and the annoying Obamacare advocate. UGH!
And for me, the lefty libs are, well my entire family, living or dead. Oh, I do have a secret Republican nephew, but he'll probably be working.
And no, I will not be spending Thanksgiving with my family. Part of the reason is the poison of politics. The other part is that in the past we all gather at my retired school teacher brother's home in San Diego. About a 100 mile drive and usually four hours to and fro.
But enough of my family drama.
Many of you will face the same fate Thursday and will, sadly, be unable to avoid having those lefty relatives bring up not just politics that you have no agreement about. But they well specifically bring up the dreaded Obamacare.
No folks, its not just about a website. Its about what an abject failure O-Care is and will be.
So how will these annoying relatives begin conversing with you, you crazy right-winger that they are really embarrassed that you are related?
Well, because they need the assistance, they will get their talking points right from the website Health Care For The Holidays.
I kid you not.
But to remind these robots, they also get this e-mail, provided that they get off Facebook and Twitter. And remember this from the second line of the letter.
"Chances are, folks at the dinner table look to you mostly as a voice of reason on the subject."
Oh, BTW, if you go to Health Care For The Holidays, you have to sign up for the details about conversing with us Neanderthals on the subject. I already get enough junk e-mail so no thank you. I did not sign up.
Now if you are a split gathering, or almost split politically, won't you kind of have a lot of people that do not look to the initiator of O-Care conversation as a "voice of reason" on the subject. I know I would not think that person is a voice of reason.
But if you get corralled by that annoying, probably college-age dim bulb of a relative that is getting in your face, Ace at The Ace Of Spades has some helpful retorts to verbally pummel that relative you won't invite back next Thanksgiving. Its helpful to have the back up, but because most of us knew that this would not work, we could probably do well enough on our own. Oh yeah, when you bring up your concern about the "death panels" that former Alaska governor Sarah Palin brought up, maybe you can steer them over to this from Mark Halperin from Time magazine. NOW the leftywhore media is telling us that it was right there in the legislation. In black and white. And he has the testes to say that the media should have been doing more investigative reporting on the subject. No, these Obama lapdogs were too busy shilling for the bill and in fact mocking Mrs. Palin for bringing the subject up at all. When your O-Care warrior relative stems and stammers, just walk away. Which you probably should have done in the first place.
I don't know. Call me old fashioned but when a family gets together usually for the one time of the year in such a setting, the last thing on my mind is bringing up politics and certainly not O-Care. You have more than likely debated these relatives on Facebook already. Why must people ruin what should be a happy occasion with such crap?
Because as some dude said on the perpetual campaign trail, you have to get in the faces of those that do not fall in line with the Obama agenda.
Oh yeah, why it was the Dear Leader, President Obama, himself and the First Lady, Michelle Obama telling acolytes that. And what better time to get in their faces than Thanksgiving? What better time to shill for O-Care? What better time to impugn your relatives and or friends for having "bad" health care coverage that they were perfectly happy with?
This is the poison of the left. That nothing is sacred or that there can be a truce on a day where there should be fun and happiness. No, they are so hell bent that they are so damn right on any and everything that they have to spout off. And get talking points to do so. Really Obamot, you have nothing else going on in your life that you can talk about with those relatives that you have not seen in a year or longer? You don't have a social life? A girlfriend, boyfriend or even a same-sex relationship that's worth talking about? A job? Anything else than shilling for a dude, a party and an idea that really does not give a crap about you? If that is the case, you lead the most pathetic life I know.
So as Mrs. RVFTLC and I visit friends this Thanksgiving, if there is a lib in the house (probably not because these are pretty conservative folks, but maybe have that lefty interloper), I do NOT want to talk about O-Care with my turkey. Now give me that drumstick!
Showing posts with label Obamacare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obamacare. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
Monday, November 25, 2013
The Democrat "Nuclear Option" In The Senate Is The Straw That Broke The Camel's, Or The Donkey's, Back
Last Thursday, the Democrat-controlled senate under Majority Leader, Sen Harry Dingy Reid (D-Nev.) decided to finally use the long threatened on both sides "nuclear option" and ending the filibuster in regard to certain presidential appointments.
And yes, it is the straw that broke the camel's, or in this case the donkey's back for as even an erstwhile liberal reporter such as the Washington Post's Dana Milbank realizes that gee, the Republicans can use it when they become the majority party in the senate. That should be after the 2014 mid-term elections.
And as I noted the Republicans did threaten this in 2005 when the Democrats blocked quite a few of then President George W. Bush's judicial nominees. The Democrats, led by coinkidink then Senate minority leader Reid and a young first-term Democrat senator named Barack Hussein Obama, fought against the move. The whole threat came to a halt when Sens. John "F--- You" McCain (R-Az) and Lindsay Goober Graham (R-SC) worked out a deal to block the move to get some of the Bush nominees voted on by the whole senate.
Understand that the current filibuster is not the old Mr. Smith Goes To Washington where a senator stands up and says he is going to speak until he or she cannot do it any longer. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky) had one of the lengthier old school filibusters in recent history lasting 12 hours and 52 minutes regarding the confirmation of John Brennan as the current director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
Most filibusters are a senator objecting to a presidential nomination and forcing the senate to come up with 60 votes to break a filibuster. In fact until Sen. Dingy Reid pushed the button on the nuclear option, 60 votes were needed to pretty much pass most legislation in the senate.
So why is this such a big deal?
Well until senators were directly elected in each state starting in 1913, each state legislature elected senators for six-year terms. And before the 17th amendment allowing for the direct election of senators, the senate was a very slow and deliberative body. So the filibuster really made more sense after the direct elections of senators to slow things down legislatively so as to not be like the House of Representatives.
And that is what the Founding Fathers had in mind in creating a bicameral legislature. For the senate to not be a rubber stamp of the house. And to have the final say on such matters as presidential appointments whether it be to a federal court, a cabinet post or any other appointment in which the senate is required to vote on.
To most Americans, this is arcane stuff. Hell, most Americans do not even know what arcane means. But the fact is that in doing what Sen. Dingy Reid and the Democrats did last Thursday, they have created a monster.
Next year are the mid-term national elections. And lets stipulate that the Republicans take control of the senate and keep control of the house. By doing what Sen. Dingy Reid and the Democrats did, the House of Representatives in 2015 passes the bill to repeal Obamacare. Up to now the 40+ votes have been for naught as the senate has not even taken up any of the measures. The new majority leader of the senate, more than likely Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) calls on the new majority to vote to change the rules that it only takes a majority to vote to repeal Obamacare. Oh, you will hear the riot act being read by Sen. Dingy Reid and all the Democrats how unprecedented it is, yada, yada, yada. Sen. McConnell will just refer back to this vote. And because it is about a rule change within the chamber, the minority party, the Democrats, can not do anything to stop it. It passes on a party-line vote and the senate votes for the first time to repeal Obamacare.
Of course the Dear Leader, President Obama will veto it. But that is not the point.
By setting this precedent, the Democrats have to realize that yes, it will come back to bite them and could be big time.
This will create the exact lack of bipartisanship that we see in the house. It will make the senate a glorified house of states or whatever one would want to call it. It will be used to create a rubber stamp for whatever the house should pass.
I know, a lot of people, and I have this in the back of my mind, think that the Republicans will not do such a thing. Because being a conservative party, they would like to go back to the old rules. But the rank and file will not let them. The people that will get elected to the senate, and should that make it a Republican majority, will want to see it happen. It will be a juggernaut that not even Sens. Graham and McCain could stop. Oh, Sen. Goober Graham is up for reelection next year and has some primary challengers. If one can break out of the pack and defeat Sen. Goober, one less to worry about.
And Steven Hayward over at Powerline blog notes that this is a distinct possibility. That because of what the Democrats did in their desperation it will come back to bite them. And he noted the irony of Mr. Milbank thinking this was a bad idea. But it was the lonely voice of retiring Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich) that I leave you with:
“Down the road — we don’t know how far down the road; we never know that in a democracy — but, down the road, the hard-won protections and benefits for our people’s health and welfare will be lost.”
Short sighted thinking for immediate political gain could mean in the end that a Republican senate can and will use this very nuclear weapon to deal with the excesses of liberalism in the United States once and for all.
And yes, it is the straw that broke the camel's, or in this case the donkey's back for as even an erstwhile liberal reporter such as the Washington Post's Dana Milbank realizes that gee, the Republicans can use it when they become the majority party in the senate. That should be after the 2014 mid-term elections.
And as I noted the Republicans did threaten this in 2005 when the Democrats blocked quite a few of then President George W. Bush's judicial nominees. The Democrats, led by coinkidink then Senate minority leader Reid and a young first-term Democrat senator named Barack Hussein Obama, fought against the move. The whole threat came to a halt when Sens. John "F--- You" McCain (R-Az) and Lindsay Goober Graham (R-SC) worked out a deal to block the move to get some of the Bush nominees voted on by the whole senate.
Understand that the current filibuster is not the old Mr. Smith Goes To Washington where a senator stands up and says he is going to speak until he or she cannot do it any longer. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky) had one of the lengthier old school filibusters in recent history lasting 12 hours and 52 minutes regarding the confirmation of John Brennan as the current director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
Most filibusters are a senator objecting to a presidential nomination and forcing the senate to come up with 60 votes to break a filibuster. In fact until Sen. Dingy Reid pushed the button on the nuclear option, 60 votes were needed to pretty much pass most legislation in the senate.
So why is this such a big deal?
Well until senators were directly elected in each state starting in 1913, each state legislature elected senators for six-year terms. And before the 17th amendment allowing for the direct election of senators, the senate was a very slow and deliberative body. So the filibuster really made more sense after the direct elections of senators to slow things down legislatively so as to not be like the House of Representatives.
And that is what the Founding Fathers had in mind in creating a bicameral legislature. For the senate to not be a rubber stamp of the house. And to have the final say on such matters as presidential appointments whether it be to a federal court, a cabinet post or any other appointment in which the senate is required to vote on.
To most Americans, this is arcane stuff. Hell, most Americans do not even know what arcane means. But the fact is that in doing what Sen. Dingy Reid and the Democrats did last Thursday, they have created a monster.
Next year are the mid-term national elections. And lets stipulate that the Republicans take control of the senate and keep control of the house. By doing what Sen. Dingy Reid and the Democrats did, the House of Representatives in 2015 passes the bill to repeal Obamacare. Up to now the 40+ votes have been for naught as the senate has not even taken up any of the measures. The new majority leader of the senate, more than likely Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) calls on the new majority to vote to change the rules that it only takes a majority to vote to repeal Obamacare. Oh, you will hear the riot act being read by Sen. Dingy Reid and all the Democrats how unprecedented it is, yada, yada, yada. Sen. McConnell will just refer back to this vote. And because it is about a rule change within the chamber, the minority party, the Democrats, can not do anything to stop it. It passes on a party-line vote and the senate votes for the first time to repeal Obamacare.
Of course the Dear Leader, President Obama will veto it. But that is not the point.
By setting this precedent, the Democrats have to realize that yes, it will come back to bite them and could be big time.
This will create the exact lack of bipartisanship that we see in the house. It will make the senate a glorified house of states or whatever one would want to call it. It will be used to create a rubber stamp for whatever the house should pass.
I know, a lot of people, and I have this in the back of my mind, think that the Republicans will not do such a thing. Because being a conservative party, they would like to go back to the old rules. But the rank and file will not let them. The people that will get elected to the senate, and should that make it a Republican majority, will want to see it happen. It will be a juggernaut that not even Sens. Graham and McCain could stop. Oh, Sen. Goober Graham is up for reelection next year and has some primary challengers. If one can break out of the pack and defeat Sen. Goober, one less to worry about.
And Steven Hayward over at Powerline blog notes that this is a distinct possibility. That because of what the Democrats did in their desperation it will come back to bite them. And he noted the irony of Mr. Milbank thinking this was a bad idea. But it was the lonely voice of retiring Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich) that I leave you with:
“Down the road — we don’t know how far down the road; we never know that in a democracy — but, down the road, the hard-won protections and benefits for our people’s health and welfare will be lost.”
Short sighted thinking for immediate political gain could mean in the end that a Republican senate can and will use this very nuclear weapon to deal with the excesses of liberalism in the United States once and for all.
Thursday, October 24, 2013
Obamacare Imploding Sooner Than Expected
I have been suggesting that Obamacare needed to go full steam ahead for one simple reason.
Because it would implode under the whole scheme of funding and its own unsustainability.
I figured that it would take longer, but I am beginning to think that the implosion has occurred sooner than I expected.
That implosion actually began on October 1, 2013 when the health insurance "marketplace" officially went online.
While I sympathized with Sens. Cruz and Lee wanting to simply defund O-Care, they did not get all on board long before the October deadline in which all Americans could go to www.healthcare.gov and easily plug in some information, compare many different plans and why sign-up with little if any problem. I got their righteous fear that health care in America would be destroyed forever. But sometimes, even when one is right, we have to simply burn it down. Let the law come into being to see just how bad it is.
Once again, I refer you the former House Speaker, Congressman Nancy Pelosi (Dim Wit-Cal) said about the need to pass the so-called Affordable Health Care Act:
“But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.”
I will not torture you once again with video I used in another post. I think that goes against the Geneva convention or something like that.
Yes, the bill passed with not one single Republican vote in either chamber. And what we found out is this.
That they can not even begin and or run a functioning website, what is a huge feature of signing up people to purchase health insurance. We are reduced to seeing our president, the Dear Leader, President Obama, acting worse than a used car salesman all but begging people to get health insurance by phone or that old-fashioned, antiquated way. . .using paper applications!
It's not just an inoperable website. It is that once one goes beyond the home page to provide information, they have no privacy. Now I'm sorry, when I am providing a government website with my personal information, my personal health information, hell fricking yes they better go all out to insure that I have privacy. Which is why I go no further than the home page.
No I totally admit, I am not a computer genius. I can barely get the basics. But I know this much. If you are providing a website such as the "marketplace", I think that the people who operate www.amazon.com would be awesome to bring on to set up the website. Or what about the people at Progressive car insurance? One of their claims is that you can compare policy rates between them and other car insurance companies. Why how do they do that?!
So why should any American that is signing up, some to avoid paying any fines not having health insurance and some because they have not had health insurance for whatever reason, trust that they will even get the insurance that they have signed up for?
Again, while the website is the most pressing issue now, the real issue is the unrealistic basis on how this whole scheme works.
The goal is to sign up 7,000,000 Americans at least by the time that the deadline comes into being. Out of that will be about 2,500,000 healthy, young Americans. The target demographic is 18-34 year olds. A problem is that as part of the original legislation, anyone 18-26 years old can stay on their parents health insurance. Again, I ask the question that if their parents have health insurance and they ask their kids if they want to stay on or get their own, how many are going to turn it down? You are taking a huge chunk of people out of the pool for very few will opt in. After all, why should they? The reality is that the overwhelming majority of those that will sign up, if they can, will be people that have preexisting conditions or the elderly that could not afford the insurance in the first place.
And that my friends will lead to the Death Spiral.
To put it simply, much of the cost of O-Care to implement will be put on the backs of the young and healthy. Many who will not participate unless they absolutely have to. The following is from the Forbes article I linked:
The actuaries make educated estimates and decide on a premium. But they won’t have “experience”—actual utilization rates—for a year or 18 months. If they get a disproportionate number of sick people in the pool, which ObamaCare is designed to do, premiums will rise. That increase usually drives the healthiest people out of the pool, looking for lower rates to match their healthier condition. The pool gets smaller and sicker, forcing up the rates again, driving out the next wave of people, and so on, until the insurance pool is very small, very sick and very expensive.
That’s the death spiral.
And that is pretty much why O-Care will totally implode. The writer, Merrill Matthews, sums it up very nicely:
Summing up, getting the young and healthy to sign up for ObamaCare will only be the first challenge. Getting them to stay, once they find out just how unaffordable the Affordable Care Act is, will be an even bigger hurdle.
But won't many of the young and healthy be subsidized by the federal government in the first place?
Yes, that is correct.
But again, one of the monumental problems with the infamous website is determining the information that will determine the subsidy. There have been reports of how a lot of that information is wrong and thus an accurate subsidy may not materialize.
Let me write it bluntly if I may.
The whole scam was based on rainbows and unicorns.
At least rainbows are real.
With an unworkable website, a plan that bases costs unrealistically on young, healthy people, and just the rank incompetence of those behind O-Care, it is on the road of implosion sooner than expected.
Because it would implode under the whole scheme of funding and its own unsustainability.
I figured that it would take longer, but I am beginning to think that the implosion has occurred sooner than I expected.
That implosion actually began on October 1, 2013 when the health insurance "marketplace" officially went online.
While I sympathized with Sens. Cruz and Lee wanting to simply defund O-Care, they did not get all on board long before the October deadline in which all Americans could go to www.healthcare.gov and easily plug in some information, compare many different plans and why sign-up with little if any problem. I got their righteous fear that health care in America would be destroyed forever. But sometimes, even when one is right, we have to simply burn it down. Let the law come into being to see just how bad it is.
Once again, I refer you the former House Speaker, Congressman Nancy Pelosi (Dim Wit-Cal) said about the need to pass the so-called Affordable Health Care Act:
“But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.”
I will not torture you once again with video I used in another post. I think that goes against the Geneva convention or something like that.
Yes, the bill passed with not one single Republican vote in either chamber. And what we found out is this.
That they can not even begin and or run a functioning website, what is a huge feature of signing up people to purchase health insurance. We are reduced to seeing our president, the Dear Leader, President Obama, acting worse than a used car salesman all but begging people to get health insurance by phone or that old-fashioned, antiquated way. . .using paper applications!
It's not just an inoperable website. It is that once one goes beyond the home page to provide information, they have no privacy. Now I'm sorry, when I am providing a government website with my personal information, my personal health information, hell fricking yes they better go all out to insure that I have privacy. Which is why I go no further than the home page.
No I totally admit, I am not a computer genius. I can barely get the basics. But I know this much. If you are providing a website such as the "marketplace", I think that the people who operate www.amazon.com would be awesome to bring on to set up the website. Or what about the people at Progressive car insurance? One of their claims is that you can compare policy rates between them and other car insurance companies. Why how do they do that?!
So why should any American that is signing up, some to avoid paying any fines not having health insurance and some because they have not had health insurance for whatever reason, trust that they will even get the insurance that they have signed up for?
Again, while the website is the most pressing issue now, the real issue is the unrealistic basis on how this whole scheme works.
The goal is to sign up 7,000,000 Americans at least by the time that the deadline comes into being. Out of that will be about 2,500,000 healthy, young Americans. The target demographic is 18-34 year olds. A problem is that as part of the original legislation, anyone 18-26 years old can stay on their parents health insurance. Again, I ask the question that if their parents have health insurance and they ask their kids if they want to stay on or get their own, how many are going to turn it down? You are taking a huge chunk of people out of the pool for very few will opt in. After all, why should they? The reality is that the overwhelming majority of those that will sign up, if they can, will be people that have preexisting conditions or the elderly that could not afford the insurance in the first place.
And that my friends will lead to the Death Spiral.
To put it simply, much of the cost of O-Care to implement will be put on the backs of the young and healthy. Many who will not participate unless they absolutely have to. The following is from the Forbes article I linked:
The actuaries make educated estimates and decide on a premium. But they won’t have “experience”—actual utilization rates—for a year or 18 months. If they get a disproportionate number of sick people in the pool, which ObamaCare is designed to do, premiums will rise. That increase usually drives the healthiest people out of the pool, looking for lower rates to match their healthier condition. The pool gets smaller and sicker, forcing up the rates again, driving out the next wave of people, and so on, until the insurance pool is very small, very sick and very expensive.
That’s the death spiral.
And that is pretty much why O-Care will totally implode. The writer, Merrill Matthews, sums it up very nicely:
Summing up, getting the young and healthy to sign up for ObamaCare will only be the first challenge. Getting them to stay, once they find out just how unaffordable the Affordable Care Act is, will be an even bigger hurdle.
But won't many of the young and healthy be subsidized by the federal government in the first place?
Yes, that is correct.
But again, one of the monumental problems with the infamous website is determining the information that will determine the subsidy. There have been reports of how a lot of that information is wrong and thus an accurate subsidy may not materialize.
Let me write it bluntly if I may.
The whole scam was based on rainbows and unicorns.
At least rainbows are real.
With an unworkable website, a plan that bases costs unrealistically on young, healthy people, and just the rank incompetence of those behind O-Care, it is on the road of implosion sooner than expected.
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
The Federal Government Shutdown Comes To A Predictable Close
Yes my friends, the long national nightmare (16 days) of a partial government shutdown (roughly about 13% of the federal government) is about to end more or less predictably.
Part of why we got here was an attempt by Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Tx) and Mike Lee (R-Ut.) to force a total defunding of Obamacare.
The problem with that strategy is that they went on their own and figured that all would come to their way of thinking.
That is not how things work.
One of the problems with their approach is that it appears they not get anyone in house or senate leadership involved at all. Had either or both made a convincing case to the leadership and had one leader totally on board, a unified front could have gotten more concessions from the Democrats that, while eventually getting the same end game of funding the federal government and increasing the debt ceiling. The two senators tried to stage a revolt from the ground up. And thus it was a a bad strategy to begin with. Now we get nothing tangible and the Democrats can gloat for a while.
But there are silver linings.
One, we know who the spineless Republicans are.
Yes, Congressman Peter King is a leader of the spineless brigade. For some petty reason, he is still smarting from fellow Republicans for not rushing to vote for immediate federal government assistance for people recovering from Hurricane Sandy.
Mr. King, get over it.
Of course there is always Sens. John "F--- You" McCain (R-Az.) and Lindsay Goober Graham (R-SC) and they are just, well losers is the word that comes to mind. Why they could not bear to lose their permanent seats on the Sunday television talk show circuit to use to beat up on fellow Republicans.
Another thing that we have learned is that Obamacare is the disaster that we on the conservative side said that it was.
The roll out of the Exchanges is not nearly the story here. It is the reality that many, many Americans are coming to realize that they were blatantly lied to by the Dear Leader, President Obama, and his Democrat allies.
First, those who think that the federal government shutdown clouded the picture on the roll out of Obamacare do not give the public any credit. Yes, we can chew gum and walk at the same time. We can deal with the federal government debacle and the Obamacare debacle. The reality it only accentuated why Sens. Cruz and Lee were trying what they were doing.
When it was not all the difficulty (still occurring) of actually getting on the website, it was millions of Americans realizing that they were going to lose their doctors and not able to keep their health care plans as promised by the Dear Leader, President Obama, et al. And if they could, their health care costs would rise dramatically, even if they meet the requirements to obtain a subsidy. I highlighted two people right here. The most precious is this lefty from the Daily Kos website realizing that yes HE would have to pay a higher premium. Hey Tigre, don't say that we crazy right-wingers did not try to warn you. Oh yeah, Tigre is from California. As are the other two people in my link. Hmm, are they realizing that welfare comes at a cost? Just askin . . .
And for the rest of you out there, if you are dumped onto an Obamacare exchange and are lucky enough to get that federal government subsidy, most of you will have an unbelievably high deduct able should you actually use your new found affordable (Guffaw! Guffaw! Guffaw!) health care. (Need to sign up for a digital subscription to read the linked article but there is a free option-the story is important to read.)
The reality is that the federal government shutdown did make the Obamawhore media take notice of the multiple pitfalls of Obamacare. Regrettably, long after the fact that the law was passed. They took the former Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal.) at her word about having to pass the bill to see what was in it.
And we learned that there is a rarefied air in Washington, D. C. That the political class cares about themselves and not really the American people as a whole. And throw in the punitive nature of how Team Obama dealt with what they did and did not shutdown and it is really apparent.
But make no mistake, the Republicans did lose on battle points. But I still believe we will win the war in the mid-term elections next year.
And in the end the reason will be Obamacare more than anything. Because people that like the idea of health care for all are beginning to realize that there is a cost to that. Not just in higher hidden taxes but in the quality of health care going down. The long waits not just to see a doctor but in getting a referral to see a specialist. This is the predictable results of health care for all and the government subsidizing it.
At least Sens. Cruz and Lee were willing to fight the predictable effects of Obamacare. However the best way to fight is to adopt the Burn It Down approach. Let Obamacare go full force. And make sure to force the political class to have to take it too. And employee mandates? Vote to have that as well. Sometimes the best approach is to let the damage happen. Yes it is going to be painful, but sometimes people need that cold water in the face to realize what they should have known in the first place.
Yes, the can is kicked down the road and the federal government will be funded and the debt ceiling will be increased. But the war is not over at all. Not by a longshot.
Part of why we got here was an attempt by Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Tx) and Mike Lee (R-Ut.) to force a total defunding of Obamacare.
The problem with that strategy is that they went on their own and figured that all would come to their way of thinking.
That is not how things work.
One of the problems with their approach is that it appears they not get anyone in house or senate leadership involved at all. Had either or both made a convincing case to the leadership and had one leader totally on board, a unified front could have gotten more concessions from the Democrats that, while eventually getting the same end game of funding the federal government and increasing the debt ceiling. The two senators tried to stage a revolt from the ground up. And thus it was a a bad strategy to begin with. Now we get nothing tangible and the Democrats can gloat for a while.
But there are silver linings.
One, we know who the spineless Republicans are.
Yes, Congressman Peter King is a leader of the spineless brigade. For some petty reason, he is still smarting from fellow Republicans for not rushing to vote for immediate federal government assistance for people recovering from Hurricane Sandy.
Mr. King, get over it.
Of course there is always Sens. John "F--- You" McCain (R-Az.) and Lindsay Goober Graham (R-SC) and they are just, well losers is the word that comes to mind. Why they could not bear to lose their permanent seats on the Sunday television talk show circuit to use to beat up on fellow Republicans.
Another thing that we have learned is that Obamacare is the disaster that we on the conservative side said that it was.
The roll out of the Exchanges is not nearly the story here. It is the reality that many, many Americans are coming to realize that they were blatantly lied to by the Dear Leader, President Obama, and his Democrat allies.
First, those who think that the federal government shutdown clouded the picture on the roll out of Obamacare do not give the public any credit. Yes, we can chew gum and walk at the same time. We can deal with the federal government debacle and the Obamacare debacle. The reality it only accentuated why Sens. Cruz and Lee were trying what they were doing.
When it was not all the difficulty (still occurring) of actually getting on the website, it was millions of Americans realizing that they were going to lose their doctors and not able to keep their health care plans as promised by the Dear Leader, President Obama, et al. And if they could, their health care costs would rise dramatically, even if they meet the requirements to obtain a subsidy. I highlighted two people right here. The most precious is this lefty from the Daily Kos website realizing that yes HE would have to pay a higher premium. Hey Tigre, don't say that we crazy right-wingers did not try to warn you. Oh yeah, Tigre is from California. As are the other two people in my link. Hmm, are they realizing that welfare comes at a cost? Just askin . . .
And for the rest of you out there, if you are dumped onto an Obamacare exchange and are lucky enough to get that federal government subsidy, most of you will have an unbelievably high deduct able should you actually use your new found affordable (Guffaw! Guffaw! Guffaw!) health care. (Need to sign up for a digital subscription to read the linked article but there is a free option-the story is important to read.)
The reality is that the federal government shutdown did make the Obamawhore media take notice of the multiple pitfalls of Obamacare. Regrettably, long after the fact that the law was passed. They took the former Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal.) at her word about having to pass the bill to see what was in it.
And we learned that there is a rarefied air in Washington, D. C. That the political class cares about themselves and not really the American people as a whole. And throw in the punitive nature of how Team Obama dealt with what they did and did not shutdown and it is really apparent.
But make no mistake, the Republicans did lose on battle points. But I still believe we will win the war in the mid-term elections next year.
And in the end the reason will be Obamacare more than anything. Because people that like the idea of health care for all are beginning to realize that there is a cost to that. Not just in higher hidden taxes but in the quality of health care going down. The long waits not just to see a doctor but in getting a referral to see a specialist. This is the predictable results of health care for all and the government subsidizing it.
At least Sens. Cruz and Lee were willing to fight the predictable effects of Obamacare. However the best way to fight is to adopt the Burn It Down approach. Let Obamacare go full force. And make sure to force the political class to have to take it too. And employee mandates? Vote to have that as well. Sometimes the best approach is to let the damage happen. Yes it is going to be painful, but sometimes people need that cold water in the face to realize what they should have known in the first place.
Yes, the can is kicked down the road and the federal government will be funded and the debt ceiling will be increased. But the war is not over at all. Not by a longshot.
Tuesday, October 08, 2013
Will O-Care Turn Liberals Into Conservatives?
Well, to the Kool-aid drinking true believers, not in the least.
But to some people that may not be the above yet have a liberal, do-gooder heart, I think that this will be at the same level as the tax-revolt of the 1970s.
Now I read this article yesterday and the reason it has taken so long to extrapolate on it is because I could not stop laughing.
Now to set it up, the San Jose Mercury-News talked with two people that are big supporters of the Dear Leader, President Obama, and are proud that they voted for the Dear Leader, President Obama, not once but twice. Also, they have been huge supporters of the Patient Portability and Affordable Healthcare Act.
Both are high-income earners that earned four times the poverty-level rate. And both buy their own health insurance.
And a funny thing happened when they got their latest bill from their respective insurance companies.
And they were shocked! Shocked I tell you!
Because, surprise! Their rates went up. And waaaay up.
One of those interviewed, Cindy Vinson, is single and self insured and her rate will go up $1,800 a year.
The second interviewed, Tom Waschura, pays insurance for a family of four. And his rate will go up a cool $10,000 a year! Yes, you read that right, $10,000 a year.
Now, do you remember how the Dear Leader, President Obama, on many, many occasions said this, especially as he was running for president:
I think that the video speaks for itself. But in case someone wants to say, but he said about people who have insurance through their employers. No, watch the whole video because really, it all depended on who he was speaking to. The fact is that he sold the public that voted for him that their insurance costs would go down.
Well, maybe Miss Vinson's bill was a typo. Maybe it really should have been a savings of $1,800 a for the year. And Mr. Waschura must be hoping and praying that he is getting a huge savings of $10,000 for his annual premium.
No to both of you. And really, you really should have known you saps.
According to Dana Howard of Covered California, the statewide health exchange why some people's rates are going up and many if not most will not change or even go down. Here is what he said:
"Some people will see an increase who are already on the individual market purchasing insurance, but most people will not."
Dana, that is NOT what the Dear Leader, President Obama said in selling thisscam plan.
Now Covered California is suggesting that 570,000 out of 1,900,000 are eligible for subsidies that could see their rates decrease. OK, that still leaves the overwhelming majority, 1,330,000 to be exact, possibly SOL and see their rates go up.
And you know, people can not be denied health coverage due to a preexisting condition (a good thing and one that at best needs to be kept even after repealing O-Care) and in the case of Marilynn Gray-Raine she also gets a government subsidy that lowered her monthly rate.
Guess who is really paying for that?
Why people like Miss Vinson and Mr. Waschura, of course!
They are apparently healthy people and in the case of Mr. Waschura have a healthy family.
Well, being healthy and buying your own health insurance coverage, taking personal responsibility, gets them the shaft.
It is wealth redistribution, pure plain and simple.
And when people like Miss Vinson and Mr. Waschura come to realize that they, not some magic fairy from the sky, are paying for the federal government subisdy and those with preexisting conditions, well let me have Mr. Waschura explain:
"I was laughing at Boehner (Speaker of the House, John Boehner R-Oh.)-until the mail came today. I really don't like the Republican tactics, but at least now I can understand why they are so pissed about this. When you take $10,000 out of my family's pocket each year, that's otherwise disposable income or retirement savings that will not be going into our local economy."
BINGO!
But if you think that Mr. Waschura is rather now pissed about it, Miss Vinson is even more biting:
"Of course I want people to have health care. I just didn't realize that I would be the one who was going to pay for it personally."
And once again, BINGO! And an OUCH!
I'm sorry for these two people, but again, how did they think that this was going to be paid for? Did they not realize that for the federal government to provide a subsidy for people the money would have to come from somewhere? Did they really think that they would not, because of their own success and financial status would not be touched? While both realized that their premiums would go up, they did not realize quite how much.
This goes to what I believe is the heart of the matter.
I too want to see people have access to decent health care. The problem is that if the government gets involved, it will come at many costs. One, people who pay for their own coverage out of pocket have to pay more because of the complexity of this plan. And do you remember this constant line from the Dear Leader, President Obama:
"First of all, if you've got health insurance, you like your doctor, you like your plan -- you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan. Nobody is talking about taking that away from you."
Neither is true for many people.
Ask those that are seeing their hours cut and fall under the 30 hour threshold at major companies. It automatically puts them in the exchange market. And if they have to choose a plan that their doctor is not part of and a plan different from what they had before, well you know the rest of the story.
The reality is that, as I have been arguing, we need to have O-Care take full effect. We should be fighting for not one exemption, period. We need to show the people that a huge undertaking such as this is unworkable and unfeasible.
In other words, to be blunt, we need to show people like Miss Vinson and Mr. Waschura that while their heart is in the right place, they need to think beyond that. They need to think with their brains. And yes, for their own interests as well.
They will more than likely be part of a next generation of conservatives. And we will be able to thank O-Care for that.
But to some people that may not be the above yet have a liberal, do-gooder heart, I think that this will be at the same level as the tax-revolt of the 1970s.
Now I read this article yesterday and the reason it has taken so long to extrapolate on it is because I could not stop laughing.
Now to set it up, the San Jose Mercury-News talked with two people that are big supporters of the Dear Leader, President Obama, and are proud that they voted for the Dear Leader, President Obama, not once but twice. Also, they have been huge supporters of the Patient Portability and Affordable Healthcare Act.
Both are high-income earners that earned four times the poverty-level rate. And both buy their own health insurance.
And a funny thing happened when they got their latest bill from their respective insurance companies.
And they were shocked! Shocked I tell you!
Because, surprise! Their rates went up. And waaaay up.
One of those interviewed, Cindy Vinson, is single and self insured and her rate will go up $1,800 a year.
The second interviewed, Tom Waschura, pays insurance for a family of four. And his rate will go up a cool $10,000 a year! Yes, you read that right, $10,000 a year.
Now, do you remember how the Dear Leader, President Obama, on many, many occasions said this, especially as he was running for president:
I think that the video speaks for itself. But in case someone wants to say, but he said about people who have insurance through their employers. No, watch the whole video because really, it all depended on who he was speaking to. The fact is that he sold the public that voted for him that their insurance costs would go down.
Well, maybe Miss Vinson's bill was a typo. Maybe it really should have been a savings of $1,800 a for the year. And Mr. Waschura must be hoping and praying that he is getting a huge savings of $10,000 for his annual premium.
No to both of you. And really, you really should have known you saps.
According to Dana Howard of Covered California, the statewide health exchange why some people's rates are going up and many if not most will not change or even go down. Here is what he said:
"Some people will see an increase who are already on the individual market purchasing insurance, but most people will not."
Dana, that is NOT what the Dear Leader, President Obama said in selling this
Now Covered California is suggesting that 570,000 out of 1,900,000 are eligible for subsidies that could see their rates decrease. OK, that still leaves the overwhelming majority, 1,330,000 to be exact, possibly SOL and see their rates go up.
And you know, people can not be denied health coverage due to a preexisting condition (a good thing and one that at best needs to be kept even after repealing O-Care) and in the case of Marilynn Gray-Raine she also gets a government subsidy that lowered her monthly rate.
Guess who is really paying for that?
Why people like Miss Vinson and Mr. Waschura, of course!
They are apparently healthy people and in the case of Mr. Waschura have a healthy family.
Well, being healthy and buying your own health insurance coverage, taking personal responsibility, gets them the shaft.
It is wealth redistribution, pure plain and simple.
And when people like Miss Vinson and Mr. Waschura come to realize that they, not some magic fairy from the sky, are paying for the federal government subisdy and those with preexisting conditions, well let me have Mr. Waschura explain:
"I was laughing at Boehner (Speaker of the House, John Boehner R-Oh.)-until the mail came today. I really don't like the Republican tactics, but at least now I can understand why they are so pissed about this. When you take $10,000 out of my family's pocket each year, that's otherwise disposable income or retirement savings that will not be going into our local economy."
BINGO!
But if you think that Mr. Waschura is rather now pissed about it, Miss Vinson is even more biting:
"Of course I want people to have health care. I just didn't realize that I would be the one who was going to pay for it personally."
And once again, BINGO! And an OUCH!
I'm sorry for these two people, but again, how did they think that this was going to be paid for? Did they not realize that for the federal government to provide a subsidy for people the money would have to come from somewhere? Did they really think that they would not, because of their own success and financial status would not be touched? While both realized that their premiums would go up, they did not realize quite how much.
This goes to what I believe is the heart of the matter.
I too want to see people have access to decent health care. The problem is that if the government gets involved, it will come at many costs. One, people who pay for their own coverage out of pocket have to pay more because of the complexity of this plan. And do you remember this constant line from the Dear Leader, President Obama:
"First of all, if you've got health insurance, you like your doctor, you like your plan -- you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan. Nobody is talking about taking that away from you."
Neither is true for many people.
Ask those that are seeing their hours cut and fall under the 30 hour threshold at major companies. It automatically puts them in the exchange market. And if they have to choose a plan that their doctor is not part of and a plan different from what they had before, well you know the rest of the story.
The reality is that, as I have been arguing, we need to have O-Care take full effect. We should be fighting for not one exemption, period. We need to show the people that a huge undertaking such as this is unworkable and unfeasible.
In other words, to be blunt, we need to show people like Miss Vinson and Mr. Waschura that while their heart is in the right place, they need to think beyond that. They need to think with their brains. And yes, for their own interests as well.
They will more than likely be part of a next generation of conservatives. And we will be able to thank O-Care for that.
Sunday, October 06, 2013
Shutdown Follies And The Real Battle Over The Debt Ceiling
I don't know what to say about the federal government "shutdown" that has not been said already.
What is amazing though is the totally arbitrary nature of what does and does not fit in the "shutdown" category.
OK, it appears that war memorials, most outdoors and not in great need of having a great deal of on site staffing, are cool for "shutting" down.
But Camp David, the presidential retreat, not so much.
In fact, the National Park Service is making damn sure to make in painful for visitors to access our national parks.
According to this in the Washington Times, a park ranger openly expressed his disgust at making things hard for American and international tourists
"It's a cheap way to deal with the situation," an angry Park Service ranger in Washington says of the harassment. "We've been told to make life as difficult for people as we can. Its disgusting."
I know, hard to believe, isn't it?
But nothing says that this whole "shutdown" is nothing but theatre is forcing veterans out of open-air memorials to the wars that they served in.
We know about the World War II memorial and a bunch of late 80 and early 90 year olds basically telling the NPS to take a flying leap. But hey, why not pick on the Vietnam vets?
Yeah, this should be a public relations disaster for the Dear Leader, President Obama.
But he gets a huge assist from the senate majority leader, Sen. Dingy Harry Reid (D-Nev-one thing that you can't blame on California!) and this choice comment he made in a exchange with CNN's reporter Dana Bash:
BASH: “You all talked about children with cancer unable to go to clinical trials, the House is presumably going to pass a bill that funds at least the NIH. Given what you’ve said, will you at least pass that? And if not, aren’t you playing the same political games that Republicans are?”
REID: Listen, Senator Durbin explained that very well, and he did it on the floor earlier. As did Senator Schumer. What right did they have to pick and choose what part of government is going to be funded? It’s obvious what’s going on here. You talk about reckless and irresponsible. Wow. What this is all about is Obamacare. They are obsessed. I don’t know what other word I can use. They’re obsessed with this Obamacare. It’s working now and it will continue to work and people will love it more than they do now by far. So they have no right to pick and choose.
BASH: But if you can help one child who has cancer, why wouldn’t you do it?
SCHUMER: Why pit one against the other?
REID: Why would we want to do that? I have 1,100 people at Nellis Air Force base that are sitting home. They have a few problems of their own. This is — to have someone of your intelligence to suggest such a thing maybe means you’re irresponsible and reckless.
BASH: I’m just asking a question.
Ahh, before we discuss Sen. Dingy Harry's compassion, I suppose that Sen. Chuckie Schumer (D-New York) does make a better attempt at answering the question at first than does Sen. Dingy Harry.
But yes, why care about one child with cancer? How about the multiple people, children and adults, that can benefit from the National Institutes of Health being funded and open to continue clinical trials? The fact is that Sen. Dingy Harry does not really care about the children with cancer any more than the 1,100 people that he cited at Nellis Air Force base that are not working due to the "shutdown".
It's all about who is going to "win" the "shutdown" battle.
Really, no side will "win".
Seriously, at this point some adults are going to have to come out of this and state the obvious.
Hey, knock it off! This has gone on too long and no one wins. So unless each side gives up on something, both sides will lose.
It is painful to write that. Because I do believe that O-Care is truly an abomination. That the vast increase in the size and depth of the federal government goes against all that is American. But we have a real battle coming up in the debt-ceiling negotiation. And that is a way to exact concessions from Team Obama. For no matter how Team Obama spins it, the fact is that if it comes to pass, it will be that under his watch, the Dear Leader, President Obama, the United States will default on loans. If the economy totally tanks, it will be really hard for Team Obama to blame the House Republicans as the culprits.
The "shutdown" is making its point. Yes, the president can just make life miserable for the American people in many needling ways. But a default on our loan obligations will affect every single American, born and unborn. Thus time to end the "Shutdown Follies" and fight an winnable battle for the American people
What is amazing though is the totally arbitrary nature of what does and does not fit in the "shutdown" category.
OK, it appears that war memorials, most outdoors and not in great need of having a great deal of on site staffing, are cool for "shutting" down.
But Camp David, the presidential retreat, not so much.
In fact, the National Park Service is making damn sure to make in painful for visitors to access our national parks.
According to this in the Washington Times, a park ranger openly expressed his disgust at making things hard for American and international tourists
"It's a cheap way to deal with the situation," an angry Park Service ranger in Washington says of the harassment. "We've been told to make life as difficult for people as we can. Its disgusting."
I know, hard to believe, isn't it?
But nothing says that this whole "shutdown" is nothing but theatre is forcing veterans out of open-air memorials to the wars that they served in.
We know about the World War II memorial and a bunch of late 80 and early 90 year olds basically telling the NPS to take a flying leap. But hey, why not pick on the Vietnam vets?
Yeah, this should be a public relations disaster for the Dear Leader, President Obama.
But he gets a huge assist from the senate majority leader, Sen. Dingy Harry Reid (D-Nev-one thing that you can't blame on California!) and this choice comment he made in a exchange with CNN's reporter Dana Bash:
BASH: “You all talked about children with cancer unable to go to clinical trials, the House is presumably going to pass a bill that funds at least the NIH. Given what you’ve said, will you at least pass that? And if not, aren’t you playing the same political games that Republicans are?”
REID: Listen, Senator Durbin explained that very well, and he did it on the floor earlier. As did Senator Schumer. What right did they have to pick and choose what part of government is going to be funded? It’s obvious what’s going on here. You talk about reckless and irresponsible. Wow. What this is all about is Obamacare. They are obsessed. I don’t know what other word I can use. They’re obsessed with this Obamacare. It’s working now and it will continue to work and people will love it more than they do now by far. So they have no right to pick and choose.
BASH: But if you can help one child who has cancer, why wouldn’t you do it?
SCHUMER: Why pit one against the other?
REID: Why would we want to do that? I have 1,100 people at Nellis Air Force base that are sitting home. They have a few problems of their own. This is — to have someone of your intelligence to suggest such a thing maybe means you’re irresponsible and reckless.
BASH: I’m just asking a question.
Ahh, before we discuss Sen. Dingy Harry's compassion, I suppose that Sen. Chuckie Schumer (D-New York) does make a better attempt at answering the question at first than does Sen. Dingy Harry.
But yes, why care about one child with cancer? How about the multiple people, children and adults, that can benefit from the National Institutes of Health being funded and open to continue clinical trials? The fact is that Sen. Dingy Harry does not really care about the children with cancer any more than the 1,100 people that he cited at Nellis Air Force base that are not working due to the "shutdown".
It's all about who is going to "win" the "shutdown" battle.
Really, no side will "win".
Seriously, at this point some adults are going to have to come out of this and state the obvious.
Hey, knock it off! This has gone on too long and no one wins. So unless each side gives up on something, both sides will lose.
It is painful to write that. Because I do believe that O-Care is truly an abomination. That the vast increase in the size and depth of the federal government goes against all that is American. But we have a real battle coming up in the debt-ceiling negotiation. And that is a way to exact concessions from Team Obama. For no matter how Team Obama spins it, the fact is that if it comes to pass, it will be that under his watch, the Dear Leader, President Obama, the United States will default on loans. If the economy totally tanks, it will be really hard for Team Obama to blame the House Republicans as the culprits.
The "shutdown" is making its point. Yes, the president can just make life miserable for the American people in many needling ways. But a default on our loan obligations will affect every single American, born and unborn. Thus time to end the "Shutdown Follies" and fight an winnable battle for the American people
Monday, September 23, 2013
Another Joy Of Obamacare: Primary Care Doctor Shortages
I'm sure that this is an unintended effect of the so-called Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that there would be primary care doctor shortages, right?
I guess so since this article suggests that in the United States there needs to be 40,000 new primary care doctors just to maybe ease a shortage of said doctors as the implementation of Obamacare becomes a reality.
A little lesson in logic before I move on.
Again, you can not expand the pool of people that will be insured, offer supposed quality care without enough PCP (bad acronym, I know) to take care of said newly insured people.
Logic and liberal left Democrats, does not exist.
I guess that people who go to medical school should probably not bother to go into speciality fields where they may actually make money. That is probably what the liberal left Democrats will do next to make sure that there is not a shortage of PCP.
The PCP is the one that we just used to call the family doctor. You know if you are old enough that sometimes back in the day, many would actually come to one's home. Thus the expression about doctors making house calls.
Those days are long gone.
But the PCP today is what they are called. It is who we all go to when we have a medical problem to have an assessment. The PCP will do what he or she can and often refer patients to specialists that will be able to better treat said patients for long-term medical problems.
But there are not enough of these PCPs and one reason is simple.
They do not get good reimbursement from insurance companies and will more than likely get even less under Obamacare.
The PCP in the linked story, Dr. Reed Wilson, points this out.
The average debt for a PCP once they attain the necessary loans and complete their studies is a staggering $170,000 before they see one patient.
Thus a student needs to make a decision before they walk into medical school. And that is what field will they study. And now more than ever they are going into speciality fields because that is where the money is. And where the money is will pay off the loans that they had to take out to go to medical school in the first place.
So what to do about the problem?
Well, leave it to the liberal left Dems to come up with a solution in nurse practitioners being allowed a greater role in patient care.
That is the "solution" put forth by state senator Ed Hernandez, an optometrist.
As Dr. Wilson pointed out NPs are great for the basics. And I agree. Many nurses when it comes to the basics are very good. But for actually diagnosing patients the way that a PCP does, uh not so much.
To state Sen. Hernandez, don't address the real issue. And that is PCP shortages and or compensation, but throw out something that has a less paid, educated and trained person as a nurse practitioner to help, supposedly, ease doctor shortages.
If I went to Dr. Hernandez for eye care, would he let one of his assistants complete an eye exam and determine my eye-care needs?
I don't think so.
One aspect that the article did not address is that there is a growing amount of PCPs that are getting out of the insurance business and not accepting insurance patients. They are essentially seeing patients and only take cash for that. And a lot of people that can afford it are seeing these doctors. Is that a possibility as to why there are real doctor shortages in not just California but the United States as a whole?
So how much does a PCP make in comparison to specialists?
This link, while outdated by a year, illustrates that there is a serious divide.
Here is what the umbrella of PCPs made on average in 2012:
Pediatricians: $173,000 (up from $156,000 a year before)
Family medicine doctors: $175,000 (up from $158,000)
Internal medicine doctors: $185,000 (up from $165,000)
Oh, I know that sounds like a lot of money. But between repaying student loans and medical malpractice insurance and taxes, it is not all that much for someone fresh out of medical school. Remember this is an average and that a rookie PCP probably makes nowhere near this kind of money.
And specialists?
Here are what some specialists make in a year:
Dermatologists: $306,000
Plastic surgeons: $317,000
Urologists: $340,000
Radiologists: $349,000
Cardiologists: $357,000
Orthopedists: $405,000
So if I were thinking of becoming a doctor and looked at who makes what, I would more than likely consider a speciality over being a gatekeeper, which is what a PCP has become.
A PCP does a lot of work and really gets the shaft.
Yet they are the bulwark of the totally misnamed PPACA.
Dr. Wilson makes the obvious point that we will not attract good PCPs if there is not adequate compensation. And another fact that is truly disturbing is that only 30% of PCPs actually own their practice. In other words 70% of PCPs work for insurance companies and or medical groups.
And I let Dr. Wilson explain the obvious:
“I love taking care of patients. I’m in an area where I can take time with my patients. But how do you get the best and brightest if you don’t reward them?”
Yes, how do you do that? And how does Obamacare keep medical costs down while supposedly providing healthcare to all Americans?
It does not and it really counts on the PCP shortage to keep costs down.
And that is a scam if ever there was one.
I guess so since this article suggests that in the United States there needs to be 40,000 new primary care doctors just to maybe ease a shortage of said doctors as the implementation of Obamacare becomes a reality.
A little lesson in logic before I move on.
Again, you can not expand the pool of people that will be insured, offer supposed quality care without enough PCP (bad acronym, I know) to take care of said newly insured people.
Logic and liberal left Democrats, does not exist.
I guess that people who go to medical school should probably not bother to go into speciality fields where they may actually make money. That is probably what the liberal left Democrats will do next to make sure that there is not a shortage of PCP.
The PCP is the one that we just used to call the family doctor. You know if you are old enough that sometimes back in the day, many would actually come to one's home. Thus the expression about doctors making house calls.
Those days are long gone.
But the PCP today is what they are called. It is who we all go to when we have a medical problem to have an assessment. The PCP will do what he or she can and often refer patients to specialists that will be able to better treat said patients for long-term medical problems.
But there are not enough of these PCPs and one reason is simple.
They do not get good reimbursement from insurance companies and will more than likely get even less under Obamacare.
The PCP in the linked story, Dr. Reed Wilson, points this out.
The average debt for a PCP once they attain the necessary loans and complete their studies is a staggering $170,000 before they see one patient.
Thus a student needs to make a decision before they walk into medical school. And that is what field will they study. And now more than ever they are going into speciality fields because that is where the money is. And where the money is will pay off the loans that they had to take out to go to medical school in the first place.
So what to do about the problem?
Well, leave it to the liberal left Dems to come up with a solution in nurse practitioners being allowed a greater role in patient care.
That is the "solution" put forth by state senator Ed Hernandez, an optometrist.
As Dr. Wilson pointed out NPs are great for the basics. And I agree. Many nurses when it comes to the basics are very good. But for actually diagnosing patients the way that a PCP does, uh not so much.
To state Sen. Hernandez, don't address the real issue. And that is PCP shortages and or compensation, but throw out something that has a less paid, educated and trained person as a nurse practitioner to help, supposedly, ease doctor shortages.
If I went to Dr. Hernandez for eye care, would he let one of his assistants complete an eye exam and determine my eye-care needs?
I don't think so.
One aspect that the article did not address is that there is a growing amount of PCPs that are getting out of the insurance business and not accepting insurance patients. They are essentially seeing patients and only take cash for that. And a lot of people that can afford it are seeing these doctors. Is that a possibility as to why there are real doctor shortages in not just California but the United States as a whole?
So how much does a PCP make in comparison to specialists?
This link, while outdated by a year, illustrates that there is a serious divide.
Here is what the umbrella of PCPs made on average in 2012:
Oh, I know that sounds like a lot of money. But between repaying student loans and medical malpractice insurance and taxes, it is not all that much for someone fresh out of medical school. Remember this is an average and that a rookie PCP probably makes nowhere near this kind of money.
And specialists?
Here are what some specialists make in a year:
So if I were thinking of becoming a doctor and looked at who makes what, I would more than likely consider a speciality over being a gatekeeper, which is what a PCP has become.
A PCP does a lot of work and really gets the shaft.
Yet they are the bulwark of the totally misnamed PPACA.
Dr. Wilson makes the obvious point that we will not attract good PCPs if there is not adequate compensation. And another fact that is truly disturbing is that only 30% of PCPs actually own their practice. In other words 70% of PCPs work for insurance companies and or medical groups.
And I let Dr. Wilson explain the obvious:
“I love taking care of patients. I’m in an area where I can take time with my patients. But how do you get the best and brightest if you don’t reward them?”
Yes, how do you do that? And how does Obamacare keep medical costs down while supposedly providing healthcare to all Americans?
It does not and it really counts on the PCP shortage to keep costs down.
And that is a scam if ever there was one.
Sunday, September 22, 2013
October 1, 2013 The Date Of Infamy And The Begining Of Obamacare
October 1, 2013 is the big day for all the fans of socialized medicine, American style.
It it the day that Americans can begin the process of signing up for one of the programs in the exchanges that are supposed to insure all Americans one way or the other.
Remember the former speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-of course-Cal.) telling us that the bill, known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, had to be passed so we can see whats in it?
Well, it has passed and the important milestone will begin on the a fateful Tuesday in October.
Of course this is if there is no funding for Obamacare.
But since it will happen more than likely, today my local fishwrap, the Pasadena Star-News, did a whole comprehensive section on the impact of this monstrosity will have and especially here in California.
In that special section is this chart that explains the four levels of the exchanges that will be offered to uninsured Californians.
Here is the chart:
It it the day that Americans can begin the process of signing up for one of the programs in the exchanges that are supposed to insure all Americans one way or the other.
Remember the former speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-of course-Cal.) telling us that the bill, known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, had to be passed so we can see whats in it?
Well, it has passed and the important milestone will begin on the a fateful Tuesday in October.
Of course this is if there is no funding for Obamacare.
But since it will happen more than likely, today my local fishwrap, the Pasadena Star-News, did a whole comprehensive section on the impact of this monstrosity will have and especially here in California.
In that special section is this chart that explains the four levels of the exchanges that will be offered to uninsured Californians.
Here is the chart:
OK, now we have a chart and it shows four "metals" plans ranging from the low-end Bronze to the high end Platinum.
Here is something neat about these plans.
All still make the insured pay out of pocket costs as high as 40%.
So lets take a peek at this chart I made
- Bronze plan covers 60% of costs and the insured has to pay 40% of expenses.
- Silver plan covers 70% of costs and the insured has to pay 30% of expenses.
- Gold plan covers 80% of costs and the insured has to pay 20% of expenses.
- Platinum plan covers 90% of costs and the insured has to pay 10% of expenses.
Well, I suppose that sounds pretty good. In fact, much of that is what we have had now under different insurance companies and plans.
Look at the first chart because it is important to see what kind of coverage and costs one can attain.
If you are one that ends up with the Bronze, you will have a $5,000 deductible for medical and prescription medicine. And Silver is a little better with a $2,000 deductible. And speaking of medicines, the price of medications will be, after meeting the $5,000 in the Bronze and $250 in the Silver, will be $50 or $75. Oh yeah, and if you are on the low-income scale, you will still have to pay possibly $2,100 or $175 a month. That is after government assistance and or subsidy.
Uh, this is supposed to be affordable health care, right? I mean its not supposed to be quality healthcare for the uninsured or low income, right?
Because quite honestly, it is not.
Note that a lot of large companies are changing many employees hours to part-time status and they will not have to offer any kind of healthcare coverage whatsoever.
So if one works at a retail establishment, their once full-time jobs are now part-time jobs, minus that money is somehow supposed to pay the monthly premiums under even the least amount of coverage?
How does that work?
Well one of the big business making the dump, Trader Joe's market is going to offer a one time assist of about $500 so that part-timers can transition into the government exchange. But after that year and said employee is still part-time and still working for TJ's?
Ever heard the acronyn SOL*?
That will be the case for many employees that will get hours cut and have to pay even after government assistance and or subsidies. And not all companies will be as generous as TJ's dumping their employees in government exchanges. Not all employees will get the kind of deal that TJ's is going to do to assist those part-timers into government exchanges.
The reality is that this whole scam is the bridge to the eventual goal of the statists.
And that, my friends, is going to fundamentally change everything about healthcare in the United States.
Not that this monstrosity will not do so.
Here is a huge problem that the advocates do not explain rationally.
In this article from the Star-News special section, what is being done is the biggest sales job to convince young people, 18 to 34 year-olds to sign up for one of the plans.
Hold the front door!
Under the dreaded PPACA, a young person can be covered under their parents health insurance. So if said persons 26 and under are already covered, why in the hell do they want to sign up for their own healthcare? They can live at home, take their time with college and maybe start working when they are 26. There is no incentive for them to do so. And thus more pressure falls on 27-34 year-olds to fund the whole scam to pay for the old people.
Get the point?
The whole balance is having the young and abled-bodied pay for the old and essentially everyone else. Yet the brain trust behind this abominable legislation set it up for failure by already taking a whole group of the young out of the picture.
It is what happens when government gets so involved in something that it knows not one damn thing about.
You can't ask group A to cover for group B when you take a large portion of group A out of the picture.
The most telling comment in all that I read in this special section today is the last linked article in which the gentleman in charge of selling Obamacare in California, Peter Lee, said this:
“If the Affordable Care Act doesn’t work in California, it won’t work in America.”
And it won't work in California. And it won't work in America.
*-SOL-S**t Out Of Luck
**Single-payer heatlth insurance- Socialized medicine.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Let Obamacare Go Full Steam Ahead
Oh yes fellow conservatives, throw me off and under multiple buses for saying that this "fight" over Obamacare and funding is done for now and to let it all go into effect.
Now I have never and do not now or ever will support this abomination. This is a direct result on not just the free market, but it is and will affect the doctor-patient relationship in ways that no one ever imagined.
And that is just the whole point about Obamacare.
No one really gets the big picture and the fact that the whole program, not just what is currently positive, is an utter disaster.
So, why do people on my side, the conservative side, seem to want to save the Dear Leader, President Obama's rear end on this? By delaying it? By not funding it?
An old saying true as the day is long is this.
Elections have consequences.
The Dear Leader, President Obama, not only won election in 2008 but won reelection in 2012. The Democrat party has been in control of the senate the whole time. The Republicans have been in control of the House of Representatives since the 2010 mid-term elections. And in between all of this, an abomination called the so misnamed Affordable Health Care Act passed both houses and was signed by the president.
To quote the former Speakerette of the House, Congressman Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal.), they had to pass the bill to see what was in it. Here is her now infamous line:
Yes, a Democrat-controlled congress passed the bill and a Democrat president signed it. And did so without one, not one Republican vote. Without any Republican input whatsoever.
Yet the American public, especially the voting public did not like it much then and does not like it now.
Somehow, the current occupant of the White House, the Dear Leader, President Obama, managed to win reelection by barely bringing up this subject. He essentially won reelection by not touting this crowning accomplishment but saying the other dude, Republican nominee Mitt Romney, was going to be worse that he was.
The way the the AHCA was passed and to be phased in is over a period of time and a lot of it is to begin next year, 2014.
So what is happening in preparation for the beginning?
Many large American companies are preparing for it by cutting employee hours. Making full time employees part-timers.
Why you may ask?
So that they do not have to pay for health care coverage.
By making employees part-timers, the part-timers will be forced into the government-funded (primarily) health care exchanges. And said employees better damned well get some kind of health care coverage because if they do not, they will face a fine. Oh and fat chance that the employers will give some money to help those employees that hours get cut to attain health insurance. A big deal was made when the speciality market chain Trader Joe's cut employee hours and not offer them health coverage. They are one of the few companies that will actually assist paying for the new insurance coverage under the exchange system. But what happens after the federal subsidy and the employees trying to keep said insurance coverage?
No one knows.
And that is why so many good thinking people on the conservative side want to short-circuit this abomination now by any means necessary.
Did I mention anywhere in this post that elections have consequences?
Again, I think that this needs to not be stopped but to let go into effect as the Democrat congress passed and a Democrat president signed into law.
Oops! My bad!
Why the Dear Leader, President Obama, himself is kinda sorta allowing delays in full implementation of the abomination, which is actually against the law, right?
While there is the individual mandate, that all Americans must have health coverage or face a fine that many will not be able to afford, what about the employer mandate?
Delay!
And what about capping the patient out-of-pocket costs?
And the magic word is?
DELAY!
Delay again!
Didn't some lady, a former Speaker of the House, glowingly say something about you have to pass the bill to see what's in it?
And once we see what is in it, why are some groups being given a break while the rest of us are going to feel something not quite right?
See, I want to see it all implemented to the letter of the law.
Because only then will we all get to see the joys of Obamacare.
I mean, it might just work, right?
All government programs work just fine as they were written, right?
That is why we need to stop fighting but not helping implement Obamacare.
Let those who want it to be deal with it.
If we conservatives really want to get this abomination changed, we need to win a larger majority in the House and take the senate and by big numbers.
Only then can Obamacare be repealed and replaced. All the talk now is really kind of silly.
In other words, let Obamacare go full steam ahead.
Now I have never and do not now or ever will support this abomination. This is a direct result on not just the free market, but it is and will affect the doctor-patient relationship in ways that no one ever imagined.
And that is just the whole point about Obamacare.
No one really gets the big picture and the fact that the whole program, not just what is currently positive, is an utter disaster.
So, why do people on my side, the conservative side, seem to want to save the Dear Leader, President Obama's rear end on this? By delaying it? By not funding it?
An old saying true as the day is long is this.
Elections have consequences.
The Dear Leader, President Obama, not only won election in 2008 but won reelection in 2012. The Democrat party has been in control of the senate the whole time. The Republicans have been in control of the House of Representatives since the 2010 mid-term elections. And in between all of this, an abomination called the so misnamed Affordable Health Care Act passed both houses and was signed by the president.
To quote the former Speakerette of the House, Congressman Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal.), they had to pass the bill to see what was in it. Here is her now infamous line:
Yet the American public, especially the voting public did not like it much then and does not like it now.
Somehow, the current occupant of the White House, the Dear Leader, President Obama, managed to win reelection by barely bringing up this subject. He essentially won reelection by not touting this crowning accomplishment but saying the other dude, Republican nominee Mitt Romney, was going to be worse that he was.
The way the the AHCA was passed and to be phased in is over a period of time and a lot of it is to begin next year, 2014.
So what is happening in preparation for the beginning?
Many large American companies are preparing for it by cutting employee hours. Making full time employees part-timers.
Why you may ask?
So that they do not have to pay for health care coverage.
By making employees part-timers, the part-timers will be forced into the government-funded (primarily) health care exchanges. And said employees better damned well get some kind of health care coverage because if they do not, they will face a fine. Oh and fat chance that the employers will give some money to help those employees that hours get cut to attain health insurance. A big deal was made when the speciality market chain Trader Joe's cut employee hours and not offer them health coverage. They are one of the few companies that will actually assist paying for the new insurance coverage under the exchange system. But what happens after the federal subsidy and the employees trying to keep said insurance coverage?
No one knows.
And that is why so many good thinking people on the conservative side want to short-circuit this abomination now by any means necessary.
Did I mention anywhere in this post that elections have consequences?
Again, I think that this needs to not be stopped but to let go into effect as the Democrat congress passed and a Democrat president signed into law.
Oops! My bad!
Why the Dear Leader, President Obama, himself is kinda sorta allowing delays in full implementation of the abomination, which is actually against the law, right?
While there is the individual mandate, that all Americans must have health coverage or face a fine that many will not be able to afford, what about the employer mandate?
Delay!
And what about capping the patient out-of-pocket costs?
And the magic word is?
DELAY!
Delay again!
Didn't some lady, a former Speaker of the House, glowingly say something about you have to pass the bill to see what's in it?
And once we see what is in it, why are some groups being given a break while the rest of us are going to feel something not quite right?
See, I want to see it all implemented to the letter of the law.
Because only then will we all get to see the joys of Obamacare.
I mean, it might just work, right?
All government programs work just fine as they were written, right?
That is why we need to stop fighting but not helping implement Obamacare.
Let those who want it to be deal with it.
If we conservatives really want to get this abomination changed, we need to win a larger majority in the House and take the senate and by big numbers.
Only then can Obamacare be repealed and replaced. All the talk now is really kind of silly.
In other words, let Obamacare go full steam ahead.
Tuesday, July 03, 2012
Sen. Mitch McConnell And With Friends Like This. . .
The senate minority leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) made an unbelievable statement today that essentially said, go ahead and try but we probably won't be able to repeal the monstrosity known as Obamacare.
Good Lord!
What is wrong with this dude?!
I mean, while the irons are still blazing hot, this guy decides hey, maybe I should throw a jug of freezing cold water on those who think that there is really going to be a shot at repeal.
So, here is that jug of freezing cold water to those of us who want to fight for a senate majority and an eventual vote for repeal of Obamacare:
"If you thought it was a good idea for the federal government to go in this direction, I'd say the odds are still on your side. Because it's a lot harder to undo something than it is to stop it in the first place."
Really, Sen. Mitch?!
Well of course it would have been easier if one Barack Hussein Obama did not become president in 2008. And let us not forget it would have been better that Democrat majorities in the House and Senate did not balloon to near super majorities.
But that is the hand that was dealt.
Because of the way the 2,700 page monstrosity passed in the first place, a lot of the more serious aspects of the officially known Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will not begin until after the upcoming election.
So there is time if the Republicans do indeed increase their majority in the House, win the majority in the Senate and Mitt Romney is elected president.
But why is Sen. Mitch saying such things at this point?
Is it possible that Sen. Mitch has had a little too much time inside that Beltway? Because the comment does strike me as such. And one can make the case that Sen. Mitch is being realistic.
But what Sen. Mitch and the mealy-mouthed Republicans are not getting is this.
The American public in poll after poll, after poll, after poll, have given Obamacare a big fat thumbs down.
In fact, even after the supreme court decision that essentially upheld Obamacare when the 5-4 majority found that the mandate was really a tax, the American public did not like the fact that Obamacare was upheld.
Sen. Mitch, dude, get out of the beltway. Realize that the public wants health care reform. And even if some of what is in the current monstrosity is kept after repeal, they do not want what the federal government has to offer.
Sen. Mitch, how can you get a Republican senate majority when you make comments like this?
You can't if Team Dear Leader, Team Obama, gets this out on their communication platforms. Especially the Obamawhore media.
This is not brain surgery.
The public wants a do over. The only way we get a do-over is to get rid of those that forced this abomination on us in the first place. We have the supreme court ruling that the thrust of the funding for this, the mandate, is a tax. That is what we keep driving home. Day after day. Hour after hour. Minute after minute.
I want the senate to be a Republican one. What I don't want is a majority leader in Sen. Mitch that seems to not have a stomach for the fight. If that is the case, the first order of business after the election is to look at a new majority leader. One that will fight for repeal and replace. One that will not be afraid of the Obama/Leftywhore media. One not afraid of the Democrats. One that will not cut a deal but stand his or her ground. No more "nuanced" leadership.
Sen. Mitch, I hope that you clarify the remarks. I hope that you show the fight that you did in the McCain/Feingold so-called campaign finance reform.
The Republicans at all levels need to get this and get it good.
This is a fight for the nation. A fight as to whether we get a total socialist makeover in a, God forbid, second term of the Dear Leader, President Obama. We can not treat this as just another election when it is not.
We Republicans need to heed the words of former Pennsylvania senator, Rick Santorum, who urged supporters to join the fight. It is a fight and we better bring big guns and not a kitchen knife. Team Dear Leader plays for keeps. We conservative Republicans must do that and more.
Because with friends like Sen. Mitch McConnell, well I am not all that confident that he realizes what is at stake.
Good Lord!
What is wrong with this dude?!
I mean, while the irons are still blazing hot, this guy decides hey, maybe I should throw a jug of freezing cold water on those who think that there is really going to be a shot at repeal.
So, here is that jug of freezing cold water to those of us who want to fight for a senate majority and an eventual vote for repeal of Obamacare:
"If you thought it was a good idea for the federal government to go in this direction, I'd say the odds are still on your side. Because it's a lot harder to undo something than it is to stop it in the first place."
Really, Sen. Mitch?!
Well of course it would have been easier if one Barack Hussein Obama did not become president in 2008. And let us not forget it would have been better that Democrat majorities in the House and Senate did not balloon to near super majorities.
But that is the hand that was dealt.
Because of the way the 2,700 page monstrosity passed in the first place, a lot of the more serious aspects of the officially known Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will not begin until after the upcoming election.
So there is time if the Republicans do indeed increase their majority in the House, win the majority in the Senate and Mitt Romney is elected president.
But why is Sen. Mitch saying such things at this point?
Is it possible that Sen. Mitch has had a little too much time inside that Beltway? Because the comment does strike me as such. And one can make the case that Sen. Mitch is being realistic.
But what Sen. Mitch and the mealy-mouthed Republicans are not getting is this.
The American public in poll after poll, after poll, after poll, have given Obamacare a big fat thumbs down.
In fact, even after the supreme court decision that essentially upheld Obamacare when the 5-4 majority found that the mandate was really a tax, the American public did not like the fact that Obamacare was upheld.
Sen. Mitch, dude, get out of the beltway. Realize that the public wants health care reform. And even if some of what is in the current monstrosity is kept after repeal, they do not want what the federal government has to offer.
Sen. Mitch, how can you get a Republican senate majority when you make comments like this?
You can't if Team Dear Leader, Team Obama, gets this out on their communication platforms. Especially the Obamawhore media.
This is not brain surgery.
The public wants a do over. The only way we get a do-over is to get rid of those that forced this abomination on us in the first place. We have the supreme court ruling that the thrust of the funding for this, the mandate, is a tax. That is what we keep driving home. Day after day. Hour after hour. Minute after minute.
I want the senate to be a Republican one. What I don't want is a majority leader in Sen. Mitch that seems to not have a stomach for the fight. If that is the case, the first order of business after the election is to look at a new majority leader. One that will fight for repeal and replace. One that will not be afraid of the Obama/Leftywhore media. One not afraid of the Democrats. One that will not cut a deal but stand his or her ground. No more "nuanced" leadership.
Sen. Mitch, I hope that you clarify the remarks. I hope that you show the fight that you did in the McCain/Feingold so-called campaign finance reform.
The Republicans at all levels need to get this and get it good.
This is a fight for the nation. A fight as to whether we get a total socialist makeover in a, God forbid, second term of the Dear Leader, President Obama. We can not treat this as just another election when it is not.
We Republicans need to heed the words of former Pennsylvania senator, Rick Santorum, who urged supporters to join the fight. It is a fight and we better bring big guns and not a kitchen knife. Team Dear Leader plays for keeps. We conservative Republicans must do that and more.
Because with friends like Sen. Mitch McConnell, well I am not all that confident that he realizes what is at stake.
Saturday, June 30, 2012
When Did Conservatives Suddendly Support Judicial Activism?
The one thing that I think we conservatives should have learned this week is that we should not be like liberals and think it is good for the courts to make our laws.
Yet most of us hoped apearantly against hope that the United States supreme court would rule the four points of contention in Obamacare as unconstitutional. We especially wanted to see the mandate ruled unconstitutional. Oh yeah, what we forget is that it was. But, through the wisdom of the Chief Justice Douchebrain John Roberts, he said well, if we just change the word mandate to tax, well then it is cool.
And thus, the financial mechanism of Obamacare stands. And that means the law can continue to be implemented.
This past week, we conservatives acted like liberals.
We do not like a said law, in this case Obamacare, and we hoped that a court would rule the whole thing unconstitutional. And for us we ended up pretty disapointed. But the lesson is that we can not and should not depend on the courts to remedy such situations.
As I have heard a lot this week, elections have consequences. And in 2006 and 2008, it appeared that the voters of the United States wanted a change in government management. And the culmination was the election of the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Now, throughout the campaign, then Sen. Messiah Barack kept talking about fundamentally changing the United States. He never gave details. One thing that he kept talking about is never, ever raising taxes on the middle class.
Yet once becoming president, the Dear Leader, President Obama, spent one year and a half evenutally passing what is officially known as the Patient Protection and Affordability Act, what the rest of us call Obamacare.
And once 2010 rolled around, once again the adage elections have consequences came home again as the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives and made substantive gains in the senate.
What the supreme court decision did was make those of us opposed to the full implementation of Obamacare realize that now, we have public opinion on our side, we need to put Republicans in firmer control of the house, retake the senate and win the White House. For it will be the only way to end implementation and repeal Obamacare and come in with better solutions than one-size-fits-all.
Conservatives can not and should not depend on the courts to end an unpopular policy or to implement one that is extraconstitutional. That is what liberals do. And they try to stack the courts with sympathetic judges.
Conservatives have correctly railed how that is not what the judiciary should be about. And we were right then. And while we may have deviated regarding Obamacare, once Republicans are victorious in November, we will be able to legislatively end Obamacare. And that is what we should have been talking about all the way through.
Yet most of us hoped apearantly against hope that the United States supreme court would rule the four points of contention in Obamacare as unconstitutional. We especially wanted to see the mandate ruled unconstitutional. Oh yeah, what we forget is that it was. But, through the wisdom of the Chief Justice Douchebrain John Roberts, he said well, if we just change the word mandate to tax, well then it is cool.
And thus, the financial mechanism of Obamacare stands. And that means the law can continue to be implemented.
This past week, we conservatives acted like liberals.
We do not like a said law, in this case Obamacare, and we hoped that a court would rule the whole thing unconstitutional. And for us we ended up pretty disapointed. But the lesson is that we can not and should not depend on the courts to remedy such situations.
As I have heard a lot this week, elections have consequences. And in 2006 and 2008, it appeared that the voters of the United States wanted a change in government management. And the culmination was the election of the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Now, throughout the campaign, then Sen. Messiah Barack kept talking about fundamentally changing the United States. He never gave details. One thing that he kept talking about is never, ever raising taxes on the middle class.
Yet once becoming president, the Dear Leader, President Obama, spent one year and a half evenutally passing what is officially known as the Patient Protection and Affordability Act, what the rest of us call Obamacare.
And once 2010 rolled around, once again the adage elections have consequences came home again as the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives and made substantive gains in the senate.
What the supreme court decision did was make those of us opposed to the full implementation of Obamacare realize that now, we have public opinion on our side, we need to put Republicans in firmer control of the house, retake the senate and win the White House. For it will be the only way to end implementation and repeal Obamacare and come in with better solutions than one-size-fits-all.
Conservatives can not and should not depend on the courts to end an unpopular policy or to implement one that is extraconstitutional. That is what liberals do. And they try to stack the courts with sympathetic judges.
Conservatives have correctly railed how that is not what the judiciary should be about. And we were right then. And while we may have deviated regarding Obamacare, once Republicans are victorious in November, we will be able to legislatively end Obamacare. And that is what we should have been talking about all the way through.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Sooo, The Politics Of The Supreme Court Obamacare Decision
Of course there is politcal fallout from the supreme court decision that essentially upheld Obamacare today.
The Dems are wetting themselves in orgasmic delight that the march to a single-payer health care system, the ultimate goal, can contiue.
Why one of the reactions is from this choice douchebrain, Patrick Gaspard. His tweet:
its constitutional. Bitches. *
Nice. But hey, as noted by Ace, there is another more to the point one.
I will link Ace, but will not write it out here.
Of course the Dear Leader, President Obama, droned on and of course got it wrong by implying the supreme court somehow arrived at its decision so that all Americans can have "affordable" health care.
Wrong, but is not the Dear Leader, President Obama, usually wrong.
Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney succinctly said to insure this abomination does not take full effect, well you have to replace the current occupant of the White House with him.
So, very, very short term it is a pyhrric victory for the Dear Leader, President Obama.
The problem is that the Patient Protection and Affordability Act is still wildly unpopular. And the one thing that the supreme court decision did was state the obvious. That the so-called mandate that all Americans had to purchase health insurance and if not be penalized is in reality a tax.
And guess who suffers in that scenario?
The very middle class that the Dear Leader, President Obama, kept saying he will not raise taxes on.
The reality is that if this abomination is not repealed by a Republican congress and a President Romney, this is how it will indeed become a tax and very primarily on the middle class.
As the link points out, if I am to understand that taxes are only to be raised on the eeeevvvviiiiillll rich fat-cats that make $250,000 a year, that threshold gets a lot lower. If it all happens, $50,000 is the new $250,000.
Say, I fall in that category.
Why damn! Mrs. RVFTLC will be the nouveu-riche in Obamaland.
And as Mr. French points out, the best ad that Team Romney can and should run is the infamous interview between the Dear Leader, President Obama and George Stephanopolous in which four times he says that the mandate is not a tax.
That and pointing out the economy in tatters should be the theme of the Romney campaign.
But more than that is that Mr. Romney must not just say that he and the Republicans will repeal and replace Obamacare. He has to be very clear what the replacement to Obamacare will look like. And he has to address the reality that the lower end of the economic ladder will have to be taken care of in some way.
That is what he has to do.
The gift that the decision gave to the Republicans is that the Democrats have to contort that they will somehow not be raising taxes to pay for Obamacare.
That may be enough to help put the Republicans over the top in November.
The Dems are wetting themselves in orgasmic delight that the march to a single-payer health care system, the ultimate goal, can contiue.
Why one of the reactions is from this choice douchebrain, Patrick Gaspard. His tweet:
its constitutional. Bitches. *
Nice. But hey, as noted by Ace, there is another more to the point one.
I will link Ace, but will not write it out here.
Of course the Dear Leader, President Obama, droned on and of course got it wrong by implying the supreme court somehow arrived at its decision so that all Americans can have "affordable" health care.
Wrong, but is not the Dear Leader, President Obama, usually wrong.
Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney succinctly said to insure this abomination does not take full effect, well you have to replace the current occupant of the White House with him.
So, very, very short term it is a pyhrric victory for the Dear Leader, President Obama.
The problem is that the Patient Protection and Affordability Act is still wildly unpopular. And the one thing that the supreme court decision did was state the obvious. That the so-called mandate that all Americans had to purchase health insurance and if not be penalized is in reality a tax.
And guess who suffers in that scenario?
The very middle class that the Dear Leader, President Obama, kept saying he will not raise taxes on.
The reality is that if this abomination is not repealed by a Republican congress and a President Romney, this is how it will indeed become a tax and very primarily on the middle class.
As the link points out, if I am to understand that taxes are only to be raised on the eeeevvvviiiiillll rich fat-cats that make $250,000 a year, that threshold gets a lot lower. If it all happens, $50,000 is the new $250,000.
Say, I fall in that category.
Why damn! Mrs. RVFTLC will be the nouveu-riche in Obamaland.
And as Mr. French points out, the best ad that Team Romney can and should run is the infamous interview between the Dear Leader, President Obama and George Stephanopolous in which four times he says that the mandate is not a tax.
That and pointing out the economy in tatters should be the theme of the Romney campaign.
But more than that is that Mr. Romney must not just say that he and the Republicans will repeal and replace Obamacare. He has to be very clear what the replacement to Obamacare will look like. And he has to address the reality that the lower end of the economic ladder will have to be taken care of in some way.
That is what he has to do.
The gift that the decision gave to the Republicans is that the Democrats have to contort that they will somehow not be raising taxes to pay for Obamacare.
That may be enough to help put the Republicans over the top in November.
A Bizzare Supreme Court Decision On Obamacare
OK, FWIW, I have written many times that I am not a lawyer and I am not a constitutional expert. That being said, today's supreme court decision regarding Obamacare is a bizzare one to say the least.
Chief Justice John Roberts amazingly saved the Dear Leader, President Obama's, bacon by contorting that the mandate that Americans have to buy health insurance is not cool. But hey, if you call it a tax and I think it is, then its cool and you get to keep the thrust of the abomination known formally as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and move on. And hell, I will join with the four libs to make it happen and it will be a 5-4 decision.
WHOA! Wait a minite! A tax?! But, but, did not our Dear Leader, President Obama, tell former Bill Clinton hack George Stephanopolus not once, not twice, not three but four times the PPACA mandate was NOT a tax? If ye don't believe me, go to this link and see for yourself. And note when Mr. Stephanopolus has to whip out the dictionary to define the word tax, the Dear Leader, President Obama, mocks him.
The Democrat congress that passed this abomination kept saying the same thing. The mandate was not a tax at all.
But when push came to shove in argueing this case before the supreme court, well then the mandate suddendly became. . .a tax.
Again, if ye don't believe me, here it is in the leftywhore media Holy Bible, The New York Times regarding the arguement made before the supreme court in the at the time desperate attempt to save the PPACA.
I guess it turns out it was not so desperate after all.
So let's get to the way ChiefJustice Douchebrain Roberts concluded, yeah, this is a tax and I say so:
3.CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS concluded in Part III–B that the individual mandate must be construed as imposing a tax on those who do not have health insurance, if such a construction is reasonable.
That is directly from the 193 page decision written by ChiefJustice Douchbrain Roberts.
Now why I am calling this dude a douchebrain?
Because he simply did not judge on the merits of the bill, which was 2,700 pages, on the merits as written and passed by congress and signed by the Dear Leader, President Obama. No where in the legislation was the word tax mentioned. Thus, it is how the Democrats kept saying that no, it would not lead to a tax increase on anyone let alone the middle class.
But he simply divined that oh, what is really meant by a penalty is a tax and thus, I'll just make that correction.
Which is not his job.
It is judge on the merits if said legislation is constitutional or not. Not whether the political class lied about some wording.
It was a bad decision by a court that did not want to be seen as blocking the largest government over reach since the New Deal era.
But there is a silver political lining and that is the next post.
Chief Justice John Roberts amazingly saved the Dear Leader, President Obama's, bacon by contorting that the mandate that Americans have to buy health insurance is not cool. But hey, if you call it a tax and I think it is, then its cool and you get to keep the thrust of the abomination known formally as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and move on. And hell, I will join with the four libs to make it happen and it will be a 5-4 decision.
WHOA! Wait a minite! A tax?! But, but, did not our Dear Leader, President Obama, tell former Bill Clinton hack George Stephanopolus not once, not twice, not three but four times the PPACA mandate was NOT a tax? If ye don't believe me, go to this link and see for yourself. And note when Mr. Stephanopolus has to whip out the dictionary to define the word tax, the Dear Leader, President Obama, mocks him.
The Democrat congress that passed this abomination kept saying the same thing. The mandate was not a tax at all.
But when push came to shove in argueing this case before the supreme court, well then the mandate suddendly became. . .a tax.
Again, if ye don't believe me, here it is in the leftywhore media Holy Bible, The New York Times regarding the arguement made before the supreme court in the at the time desperate attempt to save the PPACA.
I guess it turns out it was not so desperate after all.
So let's get to the way Chief
3.CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS concluded in Part III–B that the individual mandate must be construed as imposing a tax on those who do not have health insurance, if such a construction is reasonable.
The most straightforward reading of the individual mandate is thatit commands individuals to purchase insurance. But, for the reasons explained, the Commerce Clause does not give Congress that power.It is therefore necessary to turn to the Government’s alternative argument: that the mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power to "lay and collect Taxes." Art. I, §8, cl. 1. In pressing its taxingpower argument, the Government asks the Court to view the mandate as imposing a tax on those who do not buy that product. Because "every reasonable construction must be resorted to, in order tosave a statute from unconstitutionality,"
Hooper v. California, 155
That is directly from the 193 page decision written by Chief
Now why I am calling this dude a douchebrain?
Because he simply did not judge on the merits of the bill, which was 2,700 pages, on the merits as written and passed by congress and signed by the Dear Leader, President Obama. No where in the legislation was the word tax mentioned. Thus, it is how the Democrats kept saying that no, it would not lead to a tax increase on anyone let alone the middle class.
But he simply divined that oh, what is really meant by a penalty is a tax and thus, I'll just make that correction.
Which is not his job.
It is judge on the merits if said legislation is constitutional or not. Not whether the political class lied about some wording.
It was a bad decision by a court that did not want to be seen as blocking the largest government over reach since the New Deal era.
But there is a silver political lining and that is the next post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)